EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Is carving really the secret?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is carving really the secret? - Page 2

post #31 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
what happened to sliding?
Oops. Edit in progress
post #32 of 59
Ah better now...
post #33 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
That's exactly what I thought too, but I'm in the middle of having one of my beliefs about skiing change, which usually leads to a major breakthrough for me.

I'm seeking more perspective on it. This is why I am asking questions. I could elaborate with the perspective I have now, but it is incomplete... so...

what would allow a skier to follow the same path as another, but with lower overall edge angles, and less overall time in a pressured, carved arc?

or,

what would allow a skier who "carves less" of the arc to travel the same path faster than a skier who "carves more" of the arc?
The physics is simple....if you have a Ph.D. in Mechanical or Civil Engineering. Basically the integration of stress over time and area of the ski snow contact gives you the impulse which affects a change in momentum. You can brake it down into components if you like, as friction opposes motion, and the pressure acts in the normal direction, but really, the cleanest carve gets you the most force from the ski. The key is in being efficient in how you use that force so that you don't need to develop more force from the edge than the minimum needed to accomplish the turn.

The most efficient technique is a carve. Any advance over that will come not from pivoting or skidding instead of carving; it will come from proper internal (as in within the body of the skier) management of the stresses generated.

Basically if your body is doing the correct things, it is not working against itself. If it is working against itself you have to start with more force from the snow to accomplish your goal than you do if your body is being efficient in its movements.

For example skiing does not simply involve a change of linear momentum. There is also rotational inertia to consider. As a small example consider the fact that if you are turning right your right knee and foot have to be ahead of your left one. To put it there required you to generate some counter clockwise rotational inertia in your lower body. A Simple way to do that is to do the counter rotation with the upper boddy thing, in effect store the rotational momentum in the upper body for the next turn. Nothing truly exciting yet, and it requres the corners to be synchronized. MORE INTERESTING, is how you can use a force generated at the ski to rotate the body.

Please be patient, I really never really thought much about the math behind my skiing until quite recently. BTW, A falcon knows nothing about aerodynamics, but it can sure fly.

To get your counterclockwise (front to the left) rotation you can push sideways with the front of the inside ski. This also slows you down. Is there a better place to push, a push that speeds you up. Much like a GOOD fighter can use the hip rotation (which can generated by a push off the ground) of a nice hook or turn it 90 degrees and deliver an upper cut. A good skier can transfer the right pushes into the right rotations. Picture a gear set in a differential of a rear wheel car, or better yet the three dimensional interplay of turbulent eddies. Of course the net (sum total) effect of the turn is a clockwise rotation of the whole body, so the above is just a small part of the whole picture, but I hope it makes the point.

Try the omnibus er I mean waiststeering skiing thread for more info.
post #34 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
what happened to sliding?
Or leaping and a'hiding?
post #35 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
Is skidding the only other option?
Levitation
post #36 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisInSeattle
Levitation
Actually I don't think you are too far off with that jest. Skiing is all about breaking the mundane rules of the earthbound bipedal world, after all

If you make your moves right you can sort of leviatate through the turn entry, with the choice to pressure, or not pressure the skis. If you have made well timed moves in the right direction your body mass is already headed where it needs to go and you can steer or guide a slightly edged ski to the fall line. Because the body mass direction is not working against ski direction there is a somewhat weightless feeling to it all. Unless you choose to pressure the ski.

You can also sort of levitate through the turn exit. During the pressured arc, in, or just after the fall line, flex forward from the ankles while extending through the knees & hips for a brief time. Once your body mass has been 'tossed' forward in the right direction the skis don't need so much pressure and edge to complete whatever turn shape remains, they can be steered or guided onto lower edges through the rest of the turn.

The thing is, this makes skiing so much simpler. Edging, pressure control and rotary almost become a result of directional (balancing) movements. All you really have to do is move forward, move in the direction you want to go.

thinking about it this way has changed a couple things in my mind

The pressured arc of the turn can be more about giving the skier the platform to move in the new direction than it is about the carved arc.

Extension & flexion movements can be more about propelling the skier in the desired direction and continuing that movement than pressure control

ankles can flex while knees & hips extend.

since the platform is moving, the ankles can flex forward indefinitely without bottoming out. Forward movement from the ankles is possible in all phases of the turn.
post #37 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
A flat ski is generally faster than an edged ski.
Not when you're turning it's not.
post #38 of 59
Thread Starter 
Time to say thanks for the participation. Yesterday was a busy day (my son's 8th Bday) so I found little time to check in & less time to read etc.

these are some quotes that really are turning some lights on and feeding some direction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
The key is in being efficient in how you use that force so that you don't need to develop more force from the edge than the minimum needed to accomplish the turn.

it will come from proper internal (as in within the body of the skier) management of the stresses generated.

Basically if your body is doing the correct things, it is not working against itself. If it is working against itself you have to start with more force from the snow to accomplish your goal than you do if your body is being efficient in its movements.
good perspective to consider timing & direction of body movements to take advantage

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjjohnston
you can generate speed with your legs and edges
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjjohnston
Look at photo-montages of racers: they often do a significant pivot while unweighted, engage their edges with the ski at a significant angle to their direction of travel, then carve a tight arc from there (as carved as possible, anyway: there's going to be some sideways movement when they engage the edge). It's a noticeable characteristic of Bode Miller's style.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir turnalot
Realistically, you need both a blend of both carve and skid to achieve the turn demands in real slalom and giant slalom race situations. And actually USSA even now defines carving as having a component of skidding. The pure carve is referred to as arcing.
I can see the ankle flex accompanied by knee & hip extension (pics 1, 2 & maybe 3) which directs the cm & minimizes the deceleration of pivoting which he does while 'levitating.' (heh)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sjjohnston
If you want to accelerate your center of mass in some direction (other than straight down the fall-line), you still need to push against something. That's what you do with the edges: push against the snow.
Great food for considering other purposes for edging(besides simply carving), since many people can carve, but not necessarily move in the direction they might actually need to in order to be faster or more efficient.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
The increased pressure of only using one ski slows it down, as does the resulting deeper depression that it leaves in the snow. Putting a ski on edge also makes a deeper trench, which is slower.

Once you need to devaite from the fall line, (let's talk race course, since the subjest is "what's faster"), it is not necessarily faster to make a sharp turn then run a flat ski to the next gate, because the speed you'll lose in to be able to make that sharp turn is more than you'll gain running a flat ski. A smooth, round line in which you can keep your speed up is usually the fastest way there.
remember I'm not really looking to ski a straighter line, just the same line a bit faster or more efficiently (depending on the situation)
Great food for figuring what timing and movements may allow a shallower trench over the same line. It brings to mind the possibility that other options besides edge & pressure can serve to create the same direction change/ path with less applied pressure against the snow and more force exerted in the direction the skier is heading, i.e. a different purpose for flexion/extension than simply bending the ski to pressure the arc, whichmay indeed NOT move the skier where they need to go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomB
People skiing rather fast, when they do not have early edge engagement in the turn and they don't bother to complete the turn. They guys usually have long(er) skis and are comfortable at speed. It is frustrating (and often impossible) to keep up with them. But I simply don't feel confident to let them slide like that.
Thanks for the thoughts & input, but just to clarify, the guys who kicked my ass were doing it AND finishing their turns. Argh. just to reiterate, this discussion (on my end) isn't initially about a straighter line, though the result may end up being able to ski one .

Which is why the question "Is carving really the secret?" since carving itself isn't necessarily fast or efficient depending on how it is accomplished.
post #39 of 59
Roto, sounds like you are looking at a straighter line - but for your CM, not your skis.

Would it be an accurate picture to say you're trying to shorten the path of your CM while manipulating your skis into position(s) that support the current, or planned future location of your CM? And with as little friction as possible?

In that case one -could- use Turn-Exit to launch their CM straight at its next preferred location, then keep the skis off the snow (highly unweighted or flat) while pivoting to a new edge-set orientation.

Of course, if the skis are in a converging-angle to your CM on re-engagement you'd have to engage those edges with extended (but collapsing) legs to absorb the resulting 'impact' while the skis re-establish a platform from which to re-launch.

Or if your sudden edge-set were at a diverging-angle to the current path of your CM, you'd have to be properly prepared for the resulting acceleration forward (and temporarily away from you) by the skis. Probably not to tough though. Tipped & edged properly, they'd come back pretty quick.

.ma
post #40 of 59
On a simpler note, sometimes the shortest line is not the quickest line.

The sooner you build speed the faster your average speed over the course. Sometimes it's better to go straight down, build speed and then turn while carrying more speed a little latter, than the straightest shortest line.

If you've ever seen the physics demonstration with a marble traveling the shortest route down an incline and another tracing a concave-up parabola, falling a lot first then travelling horizontally to finish the race first, you will know what I mean.
post #41 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA
Roto, sounds like you are looking at a straighter line - but for your CM, not your skis.

Would it be an accurate picture to say you're trying to shorten the path of your CM while manipulating your skis into position(s) that support the current, or planned future location of your CM? And with as little friction as possible?
Hmmm! Sounds interesting

Quote:
In that case one -could- use Turn-Exit to launch their CM straight at its next preferred location, then keep the skis off the snow (highly unweighted or flat) while pivoting to a new edge-set orientation.
This is close to what I have been feeling/trying for, except for the pivoting part. I am working with guiding or steering the skis to the edges instead of simply edging and pressuring. The difference is slight but important (I think) in that guiding/steering is a result of balancing/directional movements(the direction the body is moving), and involves components of Edging, Controlling Pressure and Rotating, rather than just Edge & Pressure movements as the primary cause for edge angles etc.

I guess I have to print a correction here now and admit to seeking a straighter line, since I am figuring out that the skis can travel a path closer to that of the CM this way than if the skis are edged & pressured as much as possible in the first moments of the turn.

But the big difference isn't in the steering vs edging, it's in the directional nature of flexion/ extension movements and the difference in the timing of them that allows for more choices thoroughout the entire turn than I have ever had before. It doesn't really end up being about racing and being fast, it ends up being about skiing well and being able to make the best of any situation (including racing).



Quote:
Of course, if the skis are in a converging-angle to your CM on re-engagement you'd have to engage those edges with extended (but collapsing) legs to absorb the resulting 'impact' while the skis re-establish a platform from which to re-launch.
Unless the impact were redirected through directional body movements instead of absorbed by pressure controlling movements.
post #42 of 59
Quote:
...Of course, if the skis are in a converging-angle to your CM on re-engagement you'd have to engage those edges with extended (but collapsing) legs to absorb the resulting 'impact' while the skis re-establish a platform from which to re-launch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
Unless the impact were redirected through directional body movements instead of absorbed by pressure controlling movements.
Interesting. How does one 'redirect' such an impact? To my knowledge, once we launch our body mass into a given direction with no real ski engagement our body movements alone cannot affect its trajectory.

Even if we allow the edges to partially re-engage at the moment of initial firm contact, we only have upward support (by pushing vertically downward on them) and 'backward' support (up the hill - by pushing in a 'base-ward' direction). (3 MMBs awarded for new word )

And there would also be a forward-thrust at the skis along the direction of the current edge set - until the front of the ski decambers and comes around sufficiently - right?

About all we could do in this situation is to first 'catch' our decending mass momentarily (supported laterally by edge friction or upward against the ski base) and guide a progressive CM direction change over time.

I don't see how we could avoid absorbing some of the ski-CM distance in the process by bending our legs more. Firm, straight legs on impact would certainly forcefully redirect our CM, but with converging tips & CM path the skis would receive a forward impulse - and potentially squirt out from under us while our CM is hindered.

Since I'm pretty certain you don't mean this... could you more fully describe the directional body movements you mean? I get the sense you're up to something interesting here but I can't quite detect what it is.

.ma
post #43 of 59
That a flat ski is faster than an edged one need not be true.
And one ski might be faster that two.
I was running a short speedski race once and tried a monoski in the second run..
It was about 8% faster than my wellwaxed GS skis. One ski kan be faster than two.

But the mono also had a slower preparation on the base than my GS skis. Luckily it was a Duret Powder Machine with no sidecut so when I tilted it up in one edge it still pointed straight down, and it also went faster on the edge that flat on the snow.

Under certain snow conditions a carved ski can be faster going from start to end of the fall-line if you make giga-radious turns crossing over the fall-line a couple of times.

Is the carved ski the faster than a flat one? No, not always, not even always in a turn. Look at the dowhill race in Kitzbuhl, the last right turn round Hausbergskante into the finishing straight. The racers use flat skis and lets the weight pull then thru the curve and into the fall-line down the schuss.

Everything depends on different circumstances.
post #44 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA
Interesting. How does one 'redirect' such an impact? To my knowledge, once we launch our body mass into a given direction with no real ski engagement our body movements alone cannot affect its trajectory.
I certainly agree. That is why it's important to point out that unwieghting isn't the real purpose of the 'levitating' turn entry. It is balance in motion, allowing the skier to choose how much , how little and when pressured engagement occurs and how mch time it takes. If you look at rick's link below and scroll through the images (scroll buttons at top of image) you may see the variation in amounts & timing of engagement, but similarities in flex/extension patterns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
It doesn't get any faster than this.

http://ronlemaster.com/images/2003-2...e-pc-gs-1.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA
Even if we allow the edges to partially re-engage at the moment of initial firm contact, we only have upward support (by pushing vertically downward on them) and 'backward' support (up the hill - by pushing in a 'base-ward' direction). (3 MMBs awarded for new word
There are options to pushing against the base of support, such as carrying tension in the muscles, an attempt to maintain stance against forces, as opposed to pushing with the muscles, an attempt to change stance. Initially the body's inertia would indeed be aimed base-ward. When flexion occurs, there are ways (I believe) to get the body mass to "accept" the direction of the moving platform instead of absorbing the direction of the moving platform. Right now I am mostly thinking that if flexion begins in the ankles and is minimized in the knees & hips this equals a forward movement of our core.

So good, or great skiing is starting to look like an interchange of the skis & core alternately directing each other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA
And there would also be a forward-thrust at the skis along the direction of the current edge set
This is the critical moment, the thrust can either be absorbed or accepted by the core. If the core does not move forward at this point balance in the future has not been acheived, balance in the present, maybe, but that is slower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA
I don't see how we could avoid absorbing some of the ski-CM distance in the process by bending our legs more. Firm, straight legs on impact would certainly forcefully redirect our CM, but with converging tips & CM path the skis would receive a forward impulse - and potentially squirt out from under us while our CM is hindered.
Firm (not straight)legs can still absorb. If bending begins in the ankles force can be directed instead of absorbed. (to some degree)
post #45 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
Initially the body's inertia would indeed be aimed base-ward. When flexion occurs, there are ways (I believe) to get the body mass to "accept" the direction of the moving platform instead of absorbing the direction of the moving platform. Right now I am mostly thinking that if flexion begins in the ankles and is minimized in the knees & hips this equals a forward movement of our core.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
...the thrust can either be absorbed or accepted by the core.
I think I know where you're going with this (if I correctly interpret what you're trying to describe).

Rather than using flexion & then re-directing the CM with active muscle use, you're 'blocking' collapse of the CM with firm legs while the CM is out of alignment from its Base-of-Support against the edge-set 'impulse'.

By only permitting/activating ankle-flex forward with firm legs torque is created because the CM is out of alignment with BoS in relation to the impulse from the edge-set. The firm legs act like a pole-vaulting mechanism. Aligned properly, Gravity would also assist the redirection of CM since it would add to the torque.

A while back I tried to communicate something similar when describing a ...er, different kind of turn. An issue arises with firm, relatively straight legs during that turn's transition - the CM vaults over the legs unless we flex at the ankles such that the 'decending' CM not only further flexes the ankles, it also slows down the feet by pushing them back - thus inclining the CM forward in relation to the feet.

Here is a link to the post.
http://forums.epicski.com/showpost.p...&postcount=224

Is this similar to the idea you're going for? For the CM to be 'directed' off its current trajectory (even by vaulting) an equal and opposite something-or-other must take place. So I'm curious where you're putting that something-or-other... ?

.ma
post #46 of 59
Looking at the Bode link, I'd would interpret his collective motion as re-locating his feet rather than his CM.

It looks like he's rotating his entire body mass around a ballistic CM while his feet/skis are unweighted such that they end up properly positioned for re-engagement.

I suspect he just guided/launched his CM into the desired ballistic path, then used his last remaining edge-thrust to initiate some whole-body rotations (initially on the sagittal axis, though partially frontal, and partially vertical) that causes him to land properly oriented for his next intent rather than redirecting his CM much during landing.

The barely-bent skis, perpendicular to where he still needs to get (in that last image) suggest he intends to lightly skid the remaining distance while permitting his CM to continue on its path droping still lower before full edge engagement. His CM is able to drop lower without flexion because his legs are being pushed out further away from him as he inclines further.

The images show a continuing complex rotation where his initial backward rotation (in the frontal plane) is translated into sagittal rotation by that last shot due to his initially induced vertical-axis rotation... . Gee, this is turning into a fun exploration.

With the upper body so much more massive than the feet & ski gear, it makes more sense to quickly reposition the feet around the body-mass than it does to reposition the body-mass around the feet.

Admittedly, I'm not very good at interpreting distance & accelerations from telescopic still pictures.

.ma
post #47 of 59
sorry wrong thread.
post #48 of 59
Thread Starter 
....scanners....
post #49 of 59
Check out this clip of two good skiers taking very different lines thru a course at the same speed.
post #50 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcmeister
Check out this clip of two good skiers taking very different lines thru a course at the same speed.
Arc! Where you been, man?!

...and I don't see a link or a clip? :
post #51 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
....scanners....
Apologies for the sarcasm, communicating all this with words makes something simple confusing!

Quote:
I suspect he just guided/launched his CM into the desired ballistic path, that causes him to land properly oriented for his next intent

he intends to lightly skid the remaining distance while permitting his CM to continue on its path
That is what I am talking about

Quote:
With the upper body so much more massive than the feet & ski gear, it makes more sense to quickly reposition the feet around the body-mass than it does to reposition the body-mass around the feet.
Right you are, and this is also what I am talking about.

Quote:
that causes him to land properly oriented for his next intent
Here is where some CM redirection has to happen, near & through the fall line.

Of course, if it's done a bit more over time, like some of the other images in the link it doesn't have to be so sudden, which does lead to carving.

But I see tons of people trying to carve (or carving)who aren't showing movement even though they are in motion. Throw a couple of skiers in their way, or some terrain changes or some gates and they would either have to quit carving or risk hitting something.

Which is why I asked the original question. Since a lot of people seem to think carving is the 'secret' these days. Or does carving as a goal, because it's fun and feels good, because it can be readily 'attained,' obscure the real secret; something more fun and better that still offers carving among many other options (it's just harder to see)?

Forgive me for trying to revive a dead horse, but I think I have been beating a different one altogether. I've been getting lost in the details and losing the concept. Something I notice Bob doesn't do!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
What Uncle Louie didn't tell you was the run where I realized this. We were ripping down a Breck groomer at mach schnell. I'm carving clean lines and really feeling the dance. But, I realize something... Skiing a similar line, I'm actually skiing slower than Louie! The smile spreads across my face and then I start to giggle and laugh. He pulls up, and I carve a sweeping turn around him and stop. I'm laughing. "Dude! I was carving slower than you!"

What a kick. What a revelation!

Thanks, Nolo, Greg, Weems, Ric, and all of the participants in this thread. You have changed my skiing. Just ask Uncle Louie...
What is the secret ssh??
post #52 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
What is the secret ssh??
I haven't a clue.

But, I am moving more into the turn ahead of my skis rather than riding them--and thus effectively allowing them to get ahead of me (Weems does a great job of outlining this in one of his newly-released tips). As a result, the skis engage earlier, I'm in better balance, I can adjust radius through pressure choices, and use line for managing my speed.

I also have a sense of progressive but active retraction through the transition. This--according to educated observers--as smoothed out the "hitch in my giddy-up" that I've been working on over the summer (through visualization and study).
post #53 of 59

You've lost me...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto

....scanners....


Apologies for the sarcasm, communicating all this with words makes something simple confusing!

Quote:
I suspect he just guided/launched his CM into the desired ballistic path, that causes him to land properly oriented for his next intent

he intends to lightly skid the remaining distance while permitting his CM to continue on its path
That is what I am talking about

Quote:
With the upper body so much more massive than the feet & ski gear, it makes more sense to quickly reposition the feet around the body-mass than it does to reposition the body-mass around the feet.
Right you are, and this is also what I am talking about.

Quote:
that causes him to land properly oriented for his next intent
Here is where some CM redirection has to happen, near & through the fall line.

Of course, if it's done a bit more over time, like some of the other images in the link it doesn't have to be so sudden, which does lead to carving.

But I see tons of people trying to carve (or carving)who aren't showing movement even though they are in motion. Throw a couple of skiers in their way, or some terrain changes or some gates and they would either have to quit carving or risk hitting something.

Which is why I asked the original question. Since a lot of people seem to think carving is the 'secret' these days. Or does carving as a goal, because it's fun and feels good, because it can be readily 'attained,' obscure the real secret; something more fun and better that still offers carving among many other options (it's just harder to see)?

Forgive me for trying to revive a dead horse, but I think I have been beating a different one altogether. I've been getting lost in the details and losing the concept. Something I notice Bob doesn't do!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
What Uncle Louie didn't tell you was the run where I realized this. We were ripping down a Breck groomer at mach schnell. I'm carving clean lines and really feeling the dance. But, I realize something... Skiing a similar line, I'm actually skiing slower than Louie! The smile spreads across my face and then I start to giggle and laugh. He pulls up, and I carve a sweeping turn around him and stop. I'm laughing. "Dude! I was carving slower than you!"

What a kick. What a revelation!

Thanks, Nolo, Greg, Weems, Ric, and all of the participants in this thread. You have changed my skiing. Just ask Uncle Louie...

What is the secret ssh??
Roto:

Bob who??

This last post sounds a lot like "intent dictates technique" and line selection. I guess I don't see the connection to the orginal query:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roto
A flat ski is generally faster than an edged ski.

How does this fit into the notion that carving is fast (or fastest)?
What am I missing?

Chris
post #54 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
...I am moving ... ahead of my skis rather than riding them--and ...allowing them to get ahead of me
Sorry, ssh. When I read your post I was able to clearly imagine you tumbling down the hill:

I like Weems "more than you thinks". There was a discussion on them after the last Snowbird ESA here: http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...ght=lean+front
post #55 of 59
I'm missing it, cgeib... Help me out here? What I'm thinking is that I'm moving my torso into the turn just a little ahead of my skis... :
post #56 of 59
Yes, I know.

Been a long day. Never mind my insanity....
post #57 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
I haven't a clue.

But, I am moving more into the turn ahead of my skis rather than riding them--and thus effectively allowing them to get ahead of me (Weems does a great job of outlining this in one of his newly-released tips). As a result, the skis engage earlier, I'm in better balance, I can adjust radius through pressure choices, and use line for managing my speed.

I also have a sense of progressive but active retraction through the transition. This--according to educated observers--as smoothed out the "hitch in my giddy-up" that I've been working on over the summer (through visualization and study).
Thanks ssh. A couple things you mention here; Moving ahead, better balanced, progressive retraction thru transition are all things I have realized are more important than 'trying to carve,' Though they result in the ability to "carve better" among many other things. Way to go. I read the entire thread relating to your journey. Great stuff. Thanks for the links to Weems' stuff too. A lot of reading ahead for me there.
post #58 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib
Roto:

Bob who??

This last post sounds a lot like "intent dictates technique" and line selection. I guess I don't see the connection to the orginal query:

What am I missing?

Chris


Barnes/Colorado

A poorly chosen question, the one about a flat ski etc. I Should have left the question as the name of the thread. I did get what I was looking for in a roundabout way, though I think the conversation could have been more valuable had it taken a different path.

I am thinking that 'trying to carve' may cause (in many cases) people to use movement patterns that lead to a skiing 'dead end' of sorts. There are many other goals that help develop skills that lead to great skiing (including carving) without the dead end. That was the conversation I was hoping for.

Why didn't I ask a better question?

I'm learning...

Have great weekend, see y'all on Sunday night.
post #59 of 59
Gotcha ...I'm learning too.

You don't happen to own a copy of Skiing An Art...A Technique by Georges Joubert? I was reading a bit earlier and stumbled across some sections in there that reminded me of your post: "How to improve the ability to ride a fast, flat ski?" How to improve flat ski leg action." These are in the back of the book (page 225) and refer to where in the book to find more info.

Another related statement is on the following page and might apply to the discussion you were looking for:

Quote:
Don't try to work on carving with your pupils very early, particularly if they seem talented in this direction. An ability to ride a fast ski must be mastered first and the concept of gliding must continue to be developed as you improve carving. This is easy: on soft snows and in deep snow develop the use of a flat ski and flat ski leg action as well, whereas on hard snow and ice you should develop carving and carved edge-sets...
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 › Is carving really the secret?