Originally Posted by RicB
Rick your rotational alignment is just another way of saying both femurs are rotating together isn't it?
This one is tricky to answer, Ric, as it depends on the frame of reference. Specifically, we must define what the rotation of the femur is in relation to. Is the rotation in relation to the hip socket? In relation to space? In relation to the skis? Etc. Each frame of reference could demand a different answer.
If your asking from a spatial reference point, as I think you are, my answer is yes (if you'll grant me a little wiggle room). As a turn is being carved the outside ski is dictating the nature of the arc, and therefor is ever altering the spatial orientation of the femurs (the direction they're facing at any particular point in time). While the relation between the femur, hip and ski may not be changing much during the riding of a specific edge angle, the femurs are rotating through space as the outside ski rides it's sidecut.
The goal is to keep the path of the inside ski in directional harmony with the arcing outside ski. My rotational tension
is nothing more than a means of doing that when the edge angle of the inside ski does not allow for the production of an inside ski carve that would provide that necessary harmony. By simply tensioning (freezing) the inside leg/femur into a rotational orientation that's harmonic with the outside leg through the entirety of a carved turn, the inside ski is forced to breach its faulty carve and follow the directional lead of the carving outside ski.
This is in contrast to the achievement of inside/outside ski harmony through an active steering of the inside foot. Rotational tensioning
is typically accompanied by a slight convergence of the inside and outside skis throughout the arc, which is seen in many WC shots. It's due to a lag effect in the tensioning; a bit of play in the inside ski before the tensioning overcomes its desire to track of course and drives it into compliance with the lead of the outside ski. This is why I asked for some wiggle room earlier.
|Steering the inside femur more than the outside so that the inside ski moves into a tighter radius, separating the feet, would mean that theyt are not rotating at the same rate wouldn't it? Where is the rotational alignment here? Not sure I understand this.
Yes, Ric, it would mean they're not rotating at the same rate (from any point of reference). The reason it doesn't make sense to you is because were talking about two separate concepts; one of keeping the skis in directional harmony through rotational tension
while on a consistent edge angle,,,, and one of exploring how we vary lateral foot separation while changing edge angles.
This active steering of the inside foot I speak of, which changes the arc of the inside ski and gains additional foot separation, does indeed rule out rotational alignment
while the active steering of the inside foot is taking place. It also disallows rotational tensioning
, as that is non compatible with active foot steering. Rotational alignment and rotational tensioning
come into existence later in the turn, once the desired edge angle and necessary foot separation to support that edge angle has been achieved.
|I still contend that one leg getting longer and one leg getting shorter is what creates and allows the on snow separation between the feet.
What's in question here in this discussion is the nature of how that flexion/extension and lateral foot separation comes to be. Is the leg of a parallel inside ski flexed so as to pull the inside ski away from the outside ski,,, or does the inside foot steer the inside ski to track away from the outside ski and force the inside leg into a state of flexion?
|Is there some inside leg steering going on? there is always directional control going on, and is required as there gets to be less equal edge angle as the angle of inclination increases.
Ric, you're right on about the increased amount of directional compensation input required on the inside ski as edge angles increase.
Then the question becomes, what's the nature of that input as the edge angle is increasing, and does it vary from the input that occurs for the duration of the turn after the desired edge angle has been achieved?
It's complicated stuff, but my theory is that when edge angles are consistent, lateral foot separation is consistent, and rotational tension takes precedence. When edge angles are changing, so is lateral foot separation, and active foot steering plays a bigger role.
|Rick I'll certainly agree that we have a blending of things that happen just like in all skiing we do. Inside leg activty included of course, but I'm still not convinced that rotational alignment and/or inside leg steering is the only answer. Both of these can be done and the skier will still not get their hips down low to the snow effectively getting a high edge angle. Add in effective long leg short leg, and then it happens.
You bet Ric. I agree. There are multiple ingredients that go into the cake. Take out long leg/short leg and the CM will never get where it needs to be for big angle turns.