EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Peceptions on the effectiveness of PMTS
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Peceptions on the effectiveness of PMTS - Page 2

post #31 of 202
10/19/05 at 7:48am

I don't look at it as one turn Ott

Though the basic mechanics of removing pressure and tipping are similar, the variety of turns created are endless from an almost in place hockey stop to a pure carve gs turn.

But, Ott, I've also done pivot slips the traditional active steering way as well as the non-traditional John Clendenon way by just altering for/aft balance. I've done step turns (can't get more non-pmts than that) and most other types of turns you can imagine. Every time I ski with friends that unlike me have skied for years and years I learn and play with their style and I show them what I've been doing to. So I can unweight and twist em, step em, knee point them, drop shoulder them, and emulate most skiing styles out there. It's very fun to do and play with it all. But, the turn style that maintains balance and control best from what I've played with is what I choose to do most of the time.

Even to dodge that snowboarder I don't just twist them, but I drop the leg the direction I want to go while tipping it and do a right angle turn if need be. That works better than just twisting them as it pulls my body into the correct bank before the turn actually occurs.

The excellent "ski the whole mountain book" shows the variety of situations this turn style can be applied to without much limitation at all.

In the structured PMTS environment you learn 3 types of releases that are all completely different ways of ending the turn and starting the new one, and once you can do these three extremes these are blended for whatever turn effect you need. These are called in PMTS the two footed release, super phantom, and the weighted release. What you end up with is a complete variety of turns and weight bias from one ski to both skis to the oppisite one ski as well as turns that passively start to ones that aggressively carve the top of the arc.

I'm looking forward at the ESA to having someone show me the waiststeering stuff too. I like to try it all and play with it all as a smorgesboard then select what works well.
Reply
post #32 of 202
10/19/05 at 7:56am

I've got to say - what a silly statement

Quote:
Originally Posted by therusty
I was absolutely floored by the amount of "wedge progression" stuff in HH's book (hmm kind of conflicts a little with the 'wedge ruins skiers' rhetoric?).
Why would you be floored?

PMTS does not teach a wedge progression or use the wedge. But, the reality is that many people coming to PMTS ski in a wedge or are steming their turns. The "wedge progression" that "floored you" is a progression to take a student that is in some style of terminal wedge or stemming and break them out of it.

I shared a private lesson with one of my clients with Harald and this client of mine had skiied for years and was still stuck in a wedge. He had had many lessons with a well regarded instructor at Breckenridge (in fact based on his recommendation when I was first learning to ski I had a private with this same Breckenridge instructor). It took Harald about 1/2 hour using the tools you found in his book to get him out of the wedge and to ski parallel. This is not a "wedge progression" but a "wedge elimination". Had my cilent started with PMTS he would have had nothing to unlearn. There is no wedge progression in PMTS.

His wife skied with us the next day and was quite surprised that her husband (my client) was now skiing parallel with no problem.
Reply
post #33 of 202
10/19/05 at 8:55am
John, ESA is not the venue to learn more about waisteering. Try the MSR Camp for that. ESA East's program and that for ESA West are both explained in the relevant threads in the Instructional Camps forum. Ditto the MSR camp.

I just gotta say, all this brouhaha over the years about the wedge turn is a non-starter for me. I see no critical technical differences between my training in ATS and what I know about PMTS, or what Eric and Rob D. advocate, or what the Swiss teach, etc. The rest is, as skierman says, political and marketing differentiation.
Reply
post #34 of 202
10/19/05 at 8:58am
John,

Indulge me for a moment. How many different Breckenridge instructors have you had a lesson with?
Reply
post #35 of 202
10/19/05 at 9:00am
John,

I was floored because, after all of the rhetoric about teaching the wedge, there in his book were (how many? more than one - the book is at home) progressions that included wedges in them. I did not disagreee with what was presented. I just did not expect to find these drills in his book. Rereading your post, I see I've made a faux pas. Just because the example in the book starts in a wedge, does not make it a wedge progression. Hmm - well ok. I'll just say To-Mah-toe.
Reply
post #36 of 202
10/19/05 at 9:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
I just gotta say, all this brouhaha over the years about the wedge turn is a non-starter for me. I see no critical technical differences between my training in ATS and what I know about PMTS, or what Eric and Rob D. advocate, or what the Swiss teach, etc. The rest is, as skierman says, political and marketing differentiation.
This should be the last word, but it won't be...tho I will admit I find all this ranting fascinating to read....

I had one question, perhaps a better topic for another thread but just curious.

I am a big fan of Lito and I used his breakthrough on skis video in the 90's to assist many of my students in breaking through to parallel skiing. What is the relationship presently between Lito and HH? Lito's emphasis on early weight shift, anticipation and crossover was really not much of a deviation from centerline. HH (PMTS) of course is something else...yet they had a working relationship for several years....I see no recent mention of HH on Lito's web site....any comments....?
Reply
post #37 of 202
10/19/05 at 9:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason
So I can unweight and twist em, step em, knee point them, drop shoulder them, and emulate most skiing styles out there. It's very fun to do and play with it all. But, the turn style that maintains balance and control best from what I've played with is what I choose to do most of the time.

Even to dodge that snowboarder I don't just twist them, but I drop the leg the direction I want to go while tipping it and do a right angle turn if need be. That works better than just twisting them as it pulls my body into the correct bank before the turn actually occurs.
Pure BS Mr. Mason.

I hate to be harsh but you posted the same drivel about how you do this move and that move then at Loveland and Copper you demonstrated none of the moves you so ardently espouse. Last fall you demonstrated a very marginal Level 5 skiing ability. Any stress situation and you froze like a deer in the headlights. Pivot and push were your turn mechanisms-PERIOD. When called on it last year you posted how you you were just doing "drills". Sorry but BS is BS.

If you want to come over and reguritate the dogma according to Harald-fine. I'm glad he has raised the awareness of alignment and boot fitting. I've found a few interesting ideas in his books and web site.

But as for the continued arrogance about TTS and my way or the highway attitude seen in his posts on his web site, he created his own bed-if you want to limit yourself by sleeping with him-sweet dreams.

PS: It was truly interesting watching an individual free skiing at Loveland the other day wearing a Harb Systems jacket ripping some beautiful, two footed, wide track, TTS turns the other day. Do as I say, not as I do-eh John
Reply
post #38 of 202
10/19/05 at 9:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikewil
Pure BS Mr. Mason.

I hate to be harsh but you posted the same drivel about how you do this move and that move then at Loveland and Copper you demonstrated none of the moves you so ardently espouse. Last fall you demonstrated a very marginal Level 5 skiing ability...
Let's not be harsh. JM is hardly the first enthusiastic intermediate who ever overstated his ability or thought that he knew it all. And I'm sure you know that it is totally beyond the pale of the ATS Teaching Model to point it out to him.

BK
Reply
post #39 of 202
10/19/05 at 9:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo

I just gotta say, all this brouhaha over the years about the wedge turn is a non-starter for me. I see no critical technical differences between my training in ATS and what I know about PMTS, or what Eric and Rob D. advocate, or what the Swiss teach, etc. The rest is, as skierman says, political and marketing differentiation.
I agree with that. I've done almost all my ski training with PSIA-E Ed. Staff, and I've done all the PMTS Phantom Foot things along the way. I think the difference is that ATS, at least as practiced by the Ed. Staff, is more comprehensive. The PMTS denial about rotary, for example, is probably helpful for people with the ingrained habit of twist and skid, but it is ridiculous as a technical description of effective skiing.
Aside from all the PSIA bashng, my issue with PMTS is its emphasis on movements, rather than sensations. The movements required for skiing are simple and intuitive, but the sensations are unfamiliar and intimidating. The problem of learning to ski comes down to learning that these unfamiliar sensations can have a good outcome, and that we can control those outcomes. If I learn to explore the sensations of skiing, I can use an infinite number of movements to do do that. If I restrict myself to a few "correct" movements, I will have the desired outcome sometimes (mostly on the groomed), but what do I do in variable conditions when those movements no longer have the desired effect? I have no choice but to resort to movements that are beyond the defined movements of the system.
The PSIA Skiing Model is descriptive, and it includes all the possible movements a skier can perform. Any "effective" movement is good skiing in PSIA terms, and "effective" is defined in terms of the skier's intent. PMTS, on the other hand, seems to describe good skiing as carving, in a narrow stance, with no rotary or skidding. That works on the blue squares, but it's a pretty limited view of high level skiing.

BK
Reply
post #40 of 202
10/19/05 at 10:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikewil
Pure BS Mr. Mason.

I hate to be harsh but you posted the same drivel about how you do this move and that move then at Loveland and Copper you demonstrated none of the moves you so ardently espouse. Last fall you demonstrated a very marginal Level 5 skiing ability. Any stress situation and you froze like a deer in the headlights. Pivot and push were your turn mechanisms-PERIOD. When called on it last year you posted how you you were just doing "drills". Sorry but BS is BS.

If you want to come over and reguritate the dogma according to Harald-fine. I'm glad he has raised the awareness of alignment and boot fitting. I've found a few interesting ideas in his books and web site.

But as for the continued arrogance about TTS and my way or the highway attitude seen in his posts on his web site, he created his own bed-if you want to limit yourself by sleeping with him-sweet dreams.

PS: It was truly interesting watching an individual free skiing at Loveland the other day wearing a Harb Systems jacket ripping some beautiful, two footed, wide track, TTS turns the other day. Do as I say, not as I do-eh John
John, don't be surprised when you receive sentiments like this. I haven't seen you ski (yet), but I wouldn't be surprised that as a skier with only a couple of seasons under his belt Mike's assessment of your skiing last fall was close to accurate.

Your not being personally criticized for your current technical shortcomings, no one here would expect different from such a new to the sport skier. But what puts people off is when you come here, very much still a neophyte, and seeming to profess to be all knowing, your purpose appearing to be more missionary than learning, and your message being that guys with a lifetime in the sport are misguided, ineffective, and technically limited. Doesn't make what you have to offer of value very openly received. To bad, because I'm sure there are some worthwhile ideas contained in PMTS, just like any other system.

Talked to SCSA on the phone a couple nights ago. Turns out he's a pretty decent guy, and very enthusiastic about the sport and learning. We're planning to ski together this winter so I'll get a good intro to what PMTS is all about on snow. Should be fun. Don't anyone misunderstand my position here. Because I point out shortcomings doesn't suggest that I rule out the possibility that value may coexist. This is the fun in skiing for my, always searching for new ideas, and expanding the base. Thus my venture this season into Waist Steering.
Reply
post #41 of 202
10/19/05 at 1:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
Talked to SCSA on the phone a couple nights ago. Turns out he's a pretty decent guy, and very enthusiastic about the sport and learning.
Rick, you will immensely enjoy being with Paul. Boundless energy and enthusiasm and damn athletic. And it was so nice to hear him say at the Loveland gathering last April lets cut the BS attacks and just ski. Amen-and I said so on the other web site when he repeated it there.

And John is a nice guy too. I enjoyed skiing with hime at Copper and watching him at Loveland. But you hit it right on the head. Don't denigrate those with years in the educational side of this industry-listen and learn. Take a little here, take a little there and understand there is no RIGHT WAY-just your way and my way. And if that way gets you safely down the hill with a big smile on your face-more powder to you. Modifying a line I consistently use in golf instruction-"it's just skiing, not world hunger."
Reply
post #42 of 202
10/19/05 at 1:14pm
Wrong message, sorry.
Reply
post #43 of 202
10/19/05 at 2:48pm

Mikewil - we all have things we are working on

Mike - I continue to get better every day I ski.

Please come ski with Paul and I on Nov 16th if you'd like when I come back out. I would hope you have trouble recognizing my skiing as compared to the year before.

I was at the start of year 2 of my skiing when you saw me last year. This will be my 3rd season.

SCSA just sent me an e-mail regarding your post - which I found accurate btw.

"John, I watched you last summer. You were making nice turns and doing fine. Way better, then when I saw you last at the Beav."

Last ski year - of which you saw me on day one - was a very good improvment year for me. When you ski with Paul next he'll probably tell you that the improvement was pretty extreme because when I see my own videos it sure was a big difference from November 2004 to June 2005.
Reply
post #44 of 202
10/19/05 at 2:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcat
I think both Rick and TheRusty have each made an expert's evaluation of Harb and PMTS. I know two WC level coaches who have concluded similarly. They also point out that Harb is quite insistent that his system is the only one. This is a turn off. Skiing is filled with a lot of talented teachers and coaches who are not PMTS guys. We don't see PMTS touted at the WC level because advanced skiing is more than the Phantom Move.

From my POV as a non-coach, the one factor that enables PMTS to be effective is that it helps the struggling intermediate align him/herself kinetically by lifting and tipping the inside foot while keeping the ankles in the frontal plane. This aligns and centers the body, which improves skiing for a lot of people. But there is a lot more to skiing than this move. The real laboratory for skiing is racing, and race coaches know best.
Quote:
Wrong message, sorry.
Not completely, Nightcat. I highlighted one of the parts of your post that I agree with. There are many very good teachers of skiing out there, as good or better than Harb I'm sure, and his tendency to be a wee bit arrogant and condescending at times can cause people to turn off to the entirety of his message and methodologies, even the parts of value.

Consider this response I received from him over on his site when I challenged his premise that no rotary should exist in upper level skiing, stated that it's used by World Cup racers all the time, and suggested that if he provided a video of Diana racing on the steeps I would point out her usage of it also.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Harb
Where did this guy come from a time capsule, this post demonstrates why PMTS exists? I got sick of this level of incompetence in ski instruction. This guy is a typical PSIA instructor, with no understanding and clear limitations in his skiing. This guest is such a sniveling coward he can’t even present an identity. He has complete misunderstanding of skiing and that’s clear by the post. Just look at the dribble demonstrated in the comments.

Go ahead use leg steering, leg rotary we don’t care. You will ski like you write, poorly. We saw first hand from the video of one of your lead Demo Team members what rotary does to skiers. You like it, you use it.

As SCSA says, if you had the B-lls to come on the mountain we would have some respect, but you are a sniveling coward hiding behind the “Guest” heading.

Not one of our PMTS campers would fall for these misdirected comments. Our PMTS skiers who are sometimes skiing only ten to fifteen days a season not only understand skiing better than this “Guest”, but they would never listen to such poor advice. They would teach a better lesson than this guy and I know most of them ski better than he does.

Hey dude, your useless attempt to display skiing is wasted here; these people see though your garbage, despite that fact, we are impressed by your ignorance.

PMTS’ers know what skiing really looks like, it doesn’t look like this Guest’s skiing image, or description.

Do you think Diana learned from this guy or with these ideas? She saw the same ideas and approaches for years as a PSIA member.

They tried to push these PSIA convoluted ideas like steering, leg rotary and moving the Cm to the falline down her throat.

Diana is smarter than these guys, but because they were the authority (examiners and trainers) she had to listen to keep her status. All it did was ruin her skiing. Why was she frustrated with her skiing and progress? When Diana was a PSIA member they tried to fill her with their garbage and all it did was ruin her skiing. The way PSIA dictates to the poor trainees they freeze them at a lower level, so they can look like heroes. . The smart instructors see through it. But most get brainwashed like this guy is.

Now Diana can out ski and teach everyone on the PSIA Demo Team, on any day. Did she learn how to ski the way she does now from PSIA methods, did she learn her skiing from the Demo Team or PSIA trainers? No, she learned by stopping steering and rotary, just as the rest of the world cup does.

We know what PSIA teaching does to skiing. It freezes your progress and you become a golf cart skier, it makes you ski the way they do, yuck!!!

I changed Diana’s skiing in three years and now she skis better than any PSIA instructor at any level.

This guy is just trying to get your goat; he’s another lurker who’s losing the battle. He’s another PSIA instructor seeing his antiquated method slip away.

This “Guest” is trying to justify his own poor skiing performance. This guest has no realization of what real skiing is. He is living in that imaginary, artificial PSIA world where they have convinced themselves they can ski. He can’t even see how poorly they ski, that tells you all you need to know.

Do you think they would like to ski like Diana, of course they would, but they will never achieve that level. Diana beat a former PSIA Demo Team member by 3 seconds, in a race yesterday. She is getting better every year. They are not.

And don’t try to come back with “Oh Harald, you are so nasty to PSIA and ski instructors, Ott.” I don’t say anything about instructors until some idiot like this comes to this forum and makes a total ass of himself.
Perhaps you guys now understand my tongue in cheek reference to myself as an idiot in my first post. It's a demeanor like this that does not ingratiate HH and PMTS with people, and clouds the value of his systems. It's too bad, because I have seen many things he says that I agree with, and have heard from many who have participated in the system that seem very pleased with it, so it must possess a level of effectiveness.

As for a final opinion, Cat, I'll reserve that till I have an opportunity to explore it deeper.

*********************

Slatz, I'm glad to hear that when HH doesn't have his Internet face on his position on rotary is more flexible and realistic. Perhaps in his desire to differentiate himself he rotated himself into a technical corner and his above response to my calling him on it was just a result of frustration and panic.
Reply
post #45 of 202
10/19/05 at 3:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason
Mike - I continue to get better every day I ski.

Please come ski with Paul and I on Nov 16th if you'd like when I come back out. I would hope you have trouble recognizing my skiing as compared to the year before.

I was at the start of year 2 of my skiing when you saw me last year. This will be my 3rd season.

SCSA just sent me an e-mail regarding your post - which I found accurate btw.

"John, I watched you last summer. You were making nice turns and doing fine. Way better, then when I saw you last at the Beav."

Last ski year - of which you saw me on day one - was a very good improvment year for me. When you ski with Paul next he'll probably tell you that the improvement was pretty extreme because when I see my own videos it sure was a big difference from November 2004 to June 2005.
Let me know where you guys are and I'll try to make it happen. I'm taking the 10th thru the 14th off from Copper to do a little tour of northern NM and southwest CO with a Michigan friend(s) so I'll have to be judicious on time off.

I'm sure you've improved-you've put in a lot of time and effort.
Reply
post #46 of 202
10/19/05 at 7:05pm
Here is what sweetpea had to say about........ PSIA and a particular PSIA examiner's skiing;

Quote:
Originally Posted by HH
“Modern skiing is not PSIA skiing and they will never be able to achieve cutting edge performance using their standards. They can't make turns the way high end racers do because their movement progression and understanding doesn't produce modern ski turns.”


“The skiing demonstrated in those videos, posted here, was pitiful and terrible. The movements were so poor that skiers with even a small amount of good experience and correct understanding see huge flaws.”



“We don't need PSIA's convoluted mix of random movements and maneuvers that lead skiers down the frustrating path to mediocre skiing.”



nice fella:

i think it speaks volumes. to think we ponder where his myrmidon get their first dose.
Reply
post #47 of 202
10/19/05 at 11:35pm
Wow, this sure is constructive! Harold said this or that and wasn't very nice. John Mason can't ski as well as me so he is stupid. My Tai Chi is better than yours and my teacher can kick your butt! We must have expended the serious topics.

I guess I'm a little selfish, but in my quest for better skiing I could'nt give 2 rips about someones personality. If they have something to offer, I'm going to take it and run. If Harold Harb invented arrogance, particularly in the ski instruction ranks, then it must be as contageous as the Bird Flu, because it's all over the place. I've managed to learn a few things from just about everyone, many times in spite of them.
Reply
post #48 of 202
10/20/05 at 1:49am
Mike, the thread is about perceptions. Perceptions do not always reflect reality, can have many origins, and can mislead and betray both sides in a debate. Perceptions can be influenced by emotion, by what one desires to see, by a lack of a broad base of knowledge, or by misinformation.

I think this thread illuminates those principles in action quite clearly, and in that respect may ultimately prove worthwhile. Mike, you say you like looking past the emotion and cherry picking the value that exists in things? Try to overcome your own and do that here. There are a few gems to be found, the most precious of which reside behind the vale of our own mental baggage.
Reply
post #49 of 202
10/20/05 at 5:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman
Money and pride are involved far more than rational thought.
The "systems" are all pyramid schemes. I bought into the PSIA one for credentials because they now have market cornered. Wish I could go back in time and derail the whole thing.

Turnalot
Reply
post #50 of 202
10/20/05 at 5:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
I think this thread illuminates those principles in action quite clearly, and in that respect may ultimately prove worthwhile. Mike, you say you like looking past the emotion and cherry picking the value that exists in things?
I had two odd experiences this week.

I skiied with a guy that I've known for a year. He worked in the shop at Loveland last year and competed as an extreme skier. A bunch of us joke about something he said to me last year. After much urging he got me on a 110mm waisted ski. I asked after one run, "How do you turn these things?" In front of a large crowd he said, "why turn?". So anyhow, we skiied monday and he was bemoaning "the crowd" at Loveland. He said non of the kids had respect.

I found it interesting a 24 year old complaining about eighteen year olds.

Last night I was in the gym talking to Max Bervey. He is the producer for Warren Miller's annual movie. A thread here got me asking about old film, old hot dog skiers, etc. He was neat. He knows where everyone lives and what they are doing. BTW Wayne Wong is featured in a brief interview in this years film. Max asked me to ski a little with his kids this winter and the conversation turned to children and skiers. The gist?

A general lack of respect among young skiers.

I posted my quotes because it answers for me how many of these discussions got started. I didn't follow the waiststeering discussion very closely. I did have the occasion to speak to Gary and found him to be a gentleman. I gather his approach to presenting something unique has been well received. Perhaps this is the way to approach such matters.

This site has had a history of new skiers coming to it and taking on long standing PSIA ed staff. What in the world would possess someone to do something so silly.

KOOL-AID
Reply
post #51 of 202
10/20/05 at 6:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy
This site has had a history of new skiers coming to it and taking on long standing PSIA ed staff. What in the world would possess someone to do something so silly.
Outside of the wee-mindedness that is endemic in what most skiers see when they have contact with PSIA, there are lots of other ways to enjoy skiing.

An excerpt of Bode's new book in this month's Powder says it best. All that really matters is that you get the skis down the hill and achieve your goals.

Some of the absurd comments I see written on EpicSki from "long standing ed. staff" are about as devoid of thought as whatever comes out of Tanner Hall's mouth. Note recent thread where highly respected PSIAers suggested mounting points shouldn't ever be changed, despite evidence from other experienced skiers that the practice is widely used at all levels of the ski industry for good cause. This kind of blind-faith KOOL-AID thinking isn't good.

Those are thankfully the exceptions rather than the rule here at EpicSki. Its not that way in "real life" however. I would like to note that during my lifetime, PSIA taught me a bunch of bullshit they never should have that I've since had to unlearn. The PSIA members I've dealt with in real life have often been geezin' geezers with questionable capabilities. This is probably because all of my PSIA experiences were at Northeastern mountains. The only good PSIA instructors I ever had the pleasure of dealing with quickly went off to Colorado, med school, etc. That sucked.

One of the reasons race programs are so popular at local hills is because kids/parents both realize that success will be more forthcoming than it would if they stuck with the local PSIA program. I've actually heard those words come out of the mouths of many parents who put their J5/J6's into a race program. This doesn't say much for PSIA, since those local race programs often don't have all of the official structure and ideology of a PSIA school. Maybe thats part of their success.

I can think of one successful skier in my age group that learned a majority of their skiing from PSIA. Circa 1996. I kept attending PSIA taught programs at various mountains until about 1996, at which point I had no choice but to give up. Uh, it was kinda hard to learn how to use my new cool Elans from people on what could pass for SG skis today. Some of the things I learned are as valid as ever and help me to this day, but I definitely regret a lot of the time and resources I spent on those lessons.

Of the other highly successful skiers I know, most learned from their parents followed by race programs. When I say "highly successful", I mean people that might be considered excellent skiers with a lifelong passion for the sport.

Summary:
-Lots of long-standing PSIA members here on EpicSki have it together. Great.
-The PSIA product, in general, ain't that good, or at least wasn't when a lot of us dealt with it, and lots of people have a distaste for it. It is the nature of the internet that these people will show up here and assume you are on the same level as PSIA-East Podunk.
Reply
post #52 of 202
10/20/05 at 6:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman
One of the reasons race programs are so popular at local hills is because kids/parents both realize that their kids will become better skiers than they would if they stuck with the local PSIA program. I've actually heard those words come out of the mouths of many parents who put their J5/J6's into a race program. This doesn't say much for PSIA, since those local race programs often don't have all of the official structure and ideology of a PSIA school. Maybe thats part of their success.
That's exactly part of their success. Ski fundamentals are taught, but as skill progresses it is expected for individuals to individualize their technique. Last year I sat and listened while A.J. Kitt spoke, saying, "lots of people over-complicate skiing". That is abundantly evident.

PSIA lessons and race programs have almost nothing in common. Putting a kid in a race program, I believe, is done so that the kid learns to compete as well as ski. Not only that, but the kids are with same aged kids and developing relationships with the other kids.

Turnalot
Reply
post #53 of 202
10/20/05 at 6:49am
Quote:
Note recent thread where highly respected PSIAers suggested mounting points shouldn't ever be changed, despite evidence from other experienced skiers that the practice is widely used at all levels of the ski industry for good cause.
Skiingman, I'm pretty sure you are referring to the "Heel Lifts" thread (http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=30176). You need to read more closely if that's what you think I said, or any of my peers from the PSIA Gang said regarding women-specific generalizations. I said, fairly unequivocally, that blanket advice that begins with "all women should" is bull-pucky. I agree with Lou Rosenberg's retort to you in that thread:
Quote:
By applying these absolute rules you completely eliminate personal preference or anything to do with the individual requirements of the person being fitted. It is exactly these rules that everyone is arguing against.
I am sorry that your experience with PSIA instructors has been so disappointing to you. I actually coached in a junior race program for 10 years wearing a gold shield--for some reason the team organizers felt it an advantage to have a full cert leading the development program and giving private instruction to the upper level racers. Strangely enough, some of those kids grew up and became certified ski instructors, which I take as an affirmation.
Reply
post #54 of 202
10/20/05 at 7:03am
I'd like to think that PSIA is fine for getting kids started, then they can switch to Race Programs (or Bump Programs, or Freeride Programs, or whatever) when they advance in their abilities.

As far as "kids today have no respect" - What the hell is that? Of course they don't have any respect! They're kids! Respect is earned and LEARNED. Eventually, people pick up the fact that if they treat people with a certain degree of class, people will respond in kind. But to expect some kids to get on the ski slope and automatically become sophisticated, well-mannered adults is ridiculous.

Even Tanner Hall, who's as big a douchebag as anyone, is (finally) coming around to see that maybe he's not as gangsta as 50 cent. He even took back that stupid line about how he could race World Cup (or some such nonsense). Give kids time to grow up, and eventually they will.

- Matt
Reply
post #55 of 202
10/20/05 at 7:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman
Outside of the wee-mindedness that is endemic in what most skiers see when they have contact with PSIA, there are lots of other ways to enjoy skiing...
I would like to note that during my lifetime, PSIA taught me a bunch of bullshit they never should have that I've since had to unlearn. The PSIA members I've dealt with in real life have often been geezin' geezers with questionable capabilities. This is probably because all of my PSIA experiences were at Northeastern mountains. The only good PSIA instructors I ever had the pleasure of dealing with quickly went off to Colorado, med school, etc. That sucked...

...One of the reasons race programs are so popular at local hills is because kids/parents both realize that their kids will become better skiers than they would if they stuck with the local PSIA program. I've actually heard those words come out of the mouths of many parents who put their J5/J6's into a race program. This doesn't say much for PSIA, since those local race programs often don't have all of the official structure and ideology of a PSIA school. Maybe thats part of their success...

I can think of one successful skier in my age group that learned a majority of their skiing from PSIA. Circa 1996. I kept attending PSIA taught programs at various mountains until about 1996, at which point I had no choice but to give up. Uh, it was kinda hard to learn how to use my new cool Elans from people on what could pass for SG skis today. Some of the things I learned are as valid as ever and help me to this day, but I definitely regret a lot of the time and resources I spent on those lessons.

Of the other highly successful skiers I know, most learned from their parents followed by race programs. When I say "highly successful", I mean people that might be considered excellent skiers with a lifelong passion for the sport.

Summary:
-Lots of long-standing PSIA members here on EpicSki have it together. Great.
-The PSIA product, in general, ain't that good, or at least wasn't when a lot of us dealt with it, and lots of people have a distaste for it. It is the nature of the internet that these people will show up here and assume you are on the same level as PSIA-East Podunk.
That hasn't been my experience with PSIA-E since 1994. Among the Ed Staff, most of the DCLs are excellent coaches, the Examiners are better, and the National Demo Team guys are amazing. They must know something because they seem to be able to identify and promote the best instructors pretty consistently, and most of them stay in the East because they would need to re-qualify as Examiners if they moved West. But PSIA-E has 22,000 members, so it's not surprising that there is some variability, and that not everyone is always on the same page.
At least at my mountain, the Junior Race Program is mostly coached by coaches with both PSIA and USSA membership. (Actually, it's more PSIA, and there was a lot of grumbling when they required us all to join USSA a couple of years ago.) The USSA stuff is simpler than PSIA, but it doesn't contradict it. PSIA focuses on teaching new skiers to manage speed with becoming overly defensive. The USSA approach assumes that skiers have pretty good basic skills to begin with. PSIA also places far more emphasis 5 to 12 year olds than USSA does. I have never seen anything from USSA about childens' development, but PSIA has lots of stuff about that, including an Advanced Childrens Educator program in the Ed Staff.
I think the issues people have with PSIA mostly have to do with the difficulty of maintaining standards in such a large organization of mostly part-timers. HH has so few PMTS instructors that he probably knows them all by name, so he can easily control what they present. It's pretty obvious that if PMTS expanded to be large enough to provide 25% or 50% of the total market, the PMTS experience would become pretty variable as well.
That's why ski instruction is increasingly going to different "brands" like PMTS, Breakthrough on Skis, Phil Mahre camps, etc. The PSIA brand doesn't have enough recognition or acceptance in the market.
One ironic thing is that some here accuse PSIA of being rigid or dogmatic, or having an "official structure and ideology," while the opposite is true. It's so loosey-goosey that customers never know what to expect from a lesson. The independent groups, like PMTS and others, are controlled enough that you can at least expect a consistent product.

BK
Reply
post #56 of 202
10/20/05 at 7:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
Skiingman, I'm pretty sure you are referring to the "Heel Lifts" thread (http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=30176). You need to read more closely if that's what you think I said, or any of my peers from the PSIA Gang said regarding women-specific generalizations. I said, fairly unequivocally, that blanket advice that begins with "all women should" is bull-pucky.
First, I'd like to state I'm not attempting by any means to single you out. It was just a recent thought in my head...and it was certainly not just you, in fact it was mostly two other posters who's affiliations I'm not sure of...perhaps the more frustrating matter was the post from SSH asserting that the laws of physics take a break for professional ski instruction. The CM issue.

I would of course agree that any blanket advice is bull-pucky. However, you went further than that, and stated that the advice was always implicitly bad. Thats what I took issue with.
Quote:
That is also a bandaid. Forward binding mount puts the sweet spot closer to the heel pivot point of backseat skiers, enabling them to continue skiing in the backseat.
...
Lots and lots of evidence exists to suggest this isn't always the case. The following post is much more argumentative and uh, wrong. Of course its not yours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bklyntrayc
I doubt that these changes help women to move up to expert level skiers.
The heel lift and forward mounting setup is a crippled one which is inherently less responsive as terrain becomes more difficult. Instead it serves to keep women terminal intermediates as the skier is less confident in their ability to control the skis in challenging conditions. Once you're off greens and blues, any increase in the tail of the ski combined with poorly fitting boots is a recipe for knee injury.
You wanna talk about bull-puckey, there it is. Lou thankfully went on to state what apparently isn't obvious; mounting points are always a compromise.

Thats the point I hope people could take away. Very few things in skiing actually have a Right Way. There are plenty of wrong ways, but the singular Right Way I so often heard preached is unfortunate. Especially when the Right Way is ostensibly wrong....see PSIA circa the mid 1990's, or "Center of Mass" concepts that disobey Newton.
Quote:
I agree with Lou Rosenberg's retort to you in that thread:
So did I. See http://forums.epicski.com/showpost.p...5&postcount=35
Quote:
I am sorry that your experience with PSIA instructors has been so disappointing to you.
Well, not all of it. There is epicski of course. Also, like I mentioned, they didn't all suck....the good ones just got outta dodge in a hurry.
Quote:
I actually coached in a junior race program for 10 years wearing a gold shield--for some reason the team organizers felt it an advantage to have a full cert leading the development program and giving private instruction to the upper level racers. Strangely enough, some of those kids grew up and became certified ski instructors, which I take as an affirmation.
As you know the certification and standardization of race programs and their employees is becoming more and more widespread. I wouldn't mean to imply that this is bad. However I think what sir turnalot says about the openness to individuality past a certain point is utterly key to these programs relative success.

A big problem with PSIA is that it becomes more than a bit pyarmid scheme-like toward the upper levels of skiing. Since upper level skiers are such a minority, and since skiing is so wide in breadth, it seems there is little interest in high-level PSIA thinking and doing outside of PSIA members.

I can (barely) afford to go take a group lesson, but I won't because I'm fairly sure I'll be disappointed with the results. Outside of some excellent one-off type programs from groups like epicski and forward thinking mountains, there really isn't much I've found PSIA can offer me. I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling this way.

I think thats really unfortunate, because I'd love to learn and become a better skier.
Reply
post #57 of 202
10/20/05 at 7:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sir turnalot
That's exactly part of [race program] success. Ski fundamentals are taught, but as skill progresses it is expected for individuals to individualize their technique. Last year I sat and listened while A.J. Kitt spoke, saying, "lots of people over-complicate skiing". That is abundantly evident.

PSIA lessons and race programs have almost nothing in common. Putting a kid in a race program, I believe, is done so that the kid learns to compete as well as ski. Not only that, but the kids are with same aged kids and developing relationships with the other kids.

Turnalot
I don't know what you mean by "individualize technique." Effective movements are the same for everyone, allowing for differences in strength, flexility, atheletic ability, etc.
As far as the difference between "PSIA lessons" and race programs, you are right if you are referring to the difference between a kid who makes a commitment to ski every weekend and a guy who comes to the mountain for one group lessona nd expects to be told he he can ski the whole mountain. The difference is not in the coaching principles, it's in the attitude and commitment of the skier. I bet most race programs (like ours) are coached by PSIA instructors. I'm not sure I would want to expose a six or seven year old kid to hyper-competitive athletes typical of high level racing an a weekly basis anyway.

BK
Reply
post #58 of 202
10/20/05 at 7:39am
Bode's right, PSIA is a victim of its success. PSIA and its divisions arguably run the largest ski school in the world. They do it by offering a product priced lower than its competition, tying it to an evaluation with badges of achievement, giving members access to special deals and offers from manufacturers, and having the Demonstration teams, who both exemplify the end result of PSIA training (the professional image that we members strive for) and conduct training clinics for members (if you need any convincing these people are great, spend a day in a small group with one of them--incomparable!). It's really a killer business model.

Again and again, when recreational skiers ask, "What's the surest, fastest, and cheapest way to improve my skiing?" I hear this answer: Become a ski instructor and join the PSIA.

PSIA has its shortcomings, no doubt. But it gets extremely consistent results across the country at Level II and Level III. Why? Because of standardization. I think standards have gone up, at least in the NRM division, as a long-term result of Level I coming into being in the early '90s and the organization putting a lot more emphasis in this area since the late '90s with special task forces and the like.

It's not perfect by any means, but I'd have to say that PSIA's gotten better over the years.
Reply
post #59 of 202
10/20/05 at 7:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bode Klammer
I think the issues people have with PSIA mostly have to do with the difficulty of maintaining standards in such a large organization of mostly part-timers.
Sure. Like you said, tens of thousands of members. If ski instructing is to be the highly respected full-time profession it should be, you can't have 1000 people that are tight and on top of it and another 10k that aren't. Obviously a lot of the difficulties in achieving a high level across the board aren't completely in PSIA's control. However, the entire point of such a group is maintain such standards and image.
Quote:
The PSIA brand doesn't have enough recognition or acceptance in the market.
Why do you suppose that is? What went wrong?
Quote:
One ironic thing is that some here accuse PSIA of being rigid or dogmatic, or having an "official structure and ideology," while the opposite is true.
I think its more like Do What The Popular Kid Does. If someone with "credentials" says the Center of Mass is at the Center of the skier, absolve oneself from rational thought and believe.
Reply
post #60 of 202
10/20/05 at 7:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman

Some of the absurd comments I see written on EpicSki from "long standing ed. staff" are about as devoid of thought as whatever comes out of Tanner Hall's mouth. Note recent thread where highly respected PSIAers suggested mounting points shouldn't ever be changed, despite evidence from other experienced skiers that the practice is widely used at all levels of the ski industry for good cause. This kind of blind-faith KOOL-AID thinking isn't good.
save me some time. who said changing mounting points should never be changed?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Peceptions on the effectiveness of PMTS