New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

These skis worthwhile? - Page 4

post #91 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
The problems I saw were in limited foundational skills (tipping, turning, pressure), not tactical challenges.
Mr. Straightskis you should not roll your eyes at that. Steve knows what he is talking about, and was actually pretty generous in his assessment of your skiing. Without any modern skills or at least being semi-technically adept at those skills there is no way you are a level 8 or a level 9 skier. We could do a movement analysis on your skiing, but since you have no desire to improve it or change it there is no point in doing so. Skier type is determined by the skills you have on skis, and has nothing to do with the terrain that you ski on. Just because you can survive a difficult run does not make you an expert. A true expert can cruise the type of run that you were on with the ease of skiing down the bunny hill and not skip a beat regarding the technicality of their skiing.

Later

GREG
post #92 of 119

OK, that's settled.

Now let's move on to those obstinate telemarkers. That stuff's been disproved since the 1940s. The Arlberg technique killed it.

When they have those telemark races I understand they have rules that require that they not stand up and ski with what works. It's over, stick a fork in it guys!
post #93 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier
Mr. Straightskis you should not roll your eyes at that. Steve knows what he is talking about, and was actually pretty generous in his assessment of your skiing. Without any modern skills or at least being semi-technically adept at those skills there is no way you are a level 8 or a level 9 skier. We could do a movement analysis on your skiing, but since you have no desire to improve it or change it there is no point in doing so. Skier type is determined by the skills you have on skis, and has nothing to do with the terrain that you ski on. Just because you can survive a difficult run does not make you an expert. A true expert can cruise the type of run that you were on with the ease of skiing down the bunny hill and not skip a beat regarding the technicality of their skiing.

Later

GREG
nothing to do with terrain? really?

http://www.amenta.com/ski/skiknow.htm

it seems that the breckenridge ski school disagrees. but i'm sure you know more than the breckenridge ski learning program. in fact, searching google, it seems that most places recognize skier ability level based on terrain.

your definition of "modern skills" is very narrow. i don't care to carve... this doesn't make me a crappy skier. something in your head can't understand this, though. today's "modern skills" will become "tomorrow's skills" when new skis and techniques are developed; does that mean that all current level 9 skiers then turn into crappy skiers?

level 7, 3, 0, 25... whatever you want to call it, it doesn't really matter. when it comes down to it, i can handle myself in a safe and fun manner. am i going to win any olympic medals? nope... but neither are you.
post #94 of 119
Thanks for the video Glen.

I'm feeling very agreable today.

I agree with Glen, that according to various descriptions posted on various web sites you are a level 9. I (very highly qualified skier that I am: - I've had three lessons in my life) also agree with SSH, that you are really a level 8 skier. Though it is hard to tell from that video; I can't tell if you would be skiing at a higher level if you had any need to. The run is a fairly easy run. I agree that for doing what you show in the video you can do it on the $30 dollar skis, with a lot of enjoyment and without any problem.

I also agree that for someone strapped for cash deciding wether to spend 30 dollars on skis and 500 dollars on lift tickets and go skiing 10 times or spend 500 dollars on new skis and go skiing once, they would likely be better off with the 10 ski days. You really don't need the latest gear to enjoy yourself. Still if you have the change, get the good stuff.

I agree with SSH that you, Glen, would benefit by expanding your skills. The more you know the better it gets. What you have works for you, and you feel no need for more, but trust me, when you learn more you enjoy more. The feeling of power and control from a top-line carving ski is truly joyful.

On the other hand, I have to dissagree as to qualifications needed to make an opinion valuable (maybe because I value my own opinion too much: ). I appreciate all opinions from all skiers, any level skiers. Your thread shows that even a level 8 skier can have a good time on old $30 skis, and you don't have to be a 300 day per year expert to be able to enjoy them. I had been thinking, and getting a swelled head, that some very high level of skill was required to be able to enjoy straight skis. Now, I've been humbled, perhaps I'm not so good after all, and anybody can be a straight ski skier (if not an expert ).

Please try to understand that what has irked your fellow skiers is that your posts could be convincing people who would be far better served by new skis not to buy them.

PS. I'll believe there is a better highspeed ski than my 50-m sidecut radius 208-cm Kästle National Team SG racing skis when I demo some. Funny thing, I don't see a lot of DH or SG skis at the demo tents around here: .
post #95 of 119
That's not from the Breck school, but from an instructor who teaches there.

The old PSIA levels had to do with a combination of skills and terrain, but are intended for instructors, not students. Most students are unable to accurately self-appraise, so they start with comfort level on terrain and the instructor does an analysis from there.

The current PSIA Alpine Technical Manual approaches this a bit differently (but will be augmented this year, and I haven't seen the updates). The definition of an Intermediate Zone skier gaining confidence on blue terrain includes these skills: "They use a pole plant in every turn and ski parallel turns on all comfortable terrain. They are using the sidecut of the skis effectively and are beginning to explore carving more than skidding.

However, the Advanced Zone Masters of Black Terrain skiers include these skills: "They can make dynamic carved turns on most slopes and adapt to most situations that a mountain offers."

Between these two are "Comfortable on all blue and easy black terrain" skiers with these skills: "They can make long and short turns consistently and are carving more than skidding on comfortable terrain but revert to skidding when they get onto terrain that challenges them."
post #96 of 119
Ghost, I agree. And you hit upon my only concern: that folks who would be better served by a higher level of enjoyment on modern equipment will think that there's really very little difference and for them the old straights will be "just fine" or "just as good". When that's not the case at all.

Modern skis have made skiing much easier to learn and much easier for a typical skier to become proficient. There's still a lot to learn, but the learning curve is shorter and the enjoyment ramp-up faster than ever before. It is a disservice to those skiers to suggest otherwise.
post #97 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenPlake
your definition of "modern skills" is very narrow. i don't care to carve... this doesn't make me a crappy skier. something in your head can't understand this, though. today's "modern skills" will become "tomorrow's skills" when new skis and techniques are developed; does that mean that all current level 9 skiers then turn into crappy skiers?
There are only three skill areas in skiing. Makes it pretty simple. They haven't changed from traditional skis to modern equipment. They are these:

Tipping (also called Edging)
Turning (also called Rotary)
Flex/extend (also called Pressure Control)

The blending of these skills on skis are what allow us to direct ourselves where we want to go on-snow. The refinement of these skills allows us to perform anything from a pure-carved turn to a pure skidded (or drifted) turn and everything in-between. If one is unable to do any of these types of turns, the skills are lacking and can stand improvement. As mentioned in a thread on the technique forum earlier this year, assessment really requires objective analysis (which your video begins to provide, but it still requires expert analysis).

I would say that your grasp of each of these skill areas shows some time on-snow, but each needs additional development in order for you to become truly accomplished. The blending of the skills requires additional work, as well.

I don't expect that you'll pay any attention to this, but it's kindly meant. You really could become much more accomplished if you wanted to, but you can also certainly continue to enjoy skiing just the way you do for as long as your physical conditioning will allow you. Just understand that you do not know nearly as much about the sport (or the equipment) as you think you do.
post #98 of 119
Is it possible to ski well on straight skis, answer is yes, but your technique will be dated. Straight skis today are best suited for mogul skiing , but mogul competitors are skiing a mogul ski with a little more sidecut than the skis from 10 years ago.

Today all the big mountain free skiers that were using straight skis years back have stayed current with modern ski design and use today's skis. They no doubt could still ski extremely well on the older skis, but like most of us prefer, enjoy , and capture more performacne using today's ski technology.

I've had dozen of pairs of straight skis over the years. As others have stated, in their time I felt I was experiencing skiing "as good as it gets". Its all relative, and the best equipment from seasons ago becomes antiquated while delivering sub par comparison performance to the latest and greatest. This opinion is even more exacerbated if you have the inclination to try and improve your carving capability . If you're hucking off rocks, cliffs, etc, I must admit I have no shared field of experience and more than likely a shaped ski isn't going to amp up those sensations.

As skiers we all have different skiing goals . I'll be honest I wish I was less gear obsessed. However, my experience has been , modern ski equipment has improved both my skiing and my enjoyment.
post #99 of 119
I like how the real skiers ski reviews gives levels 1 to 10 and has the additional levels "6/7 and 8/9 traditional technique".

I guess I'm below the intermediate level ; I'm not a very big fan of the pole plant. But then again, not using pole plants didn't stop Podborski and Read from winning Downhills .
post #100 of 119
Ghost, the pole plants were one area where I disagree with the descriptions, myself. Although folks coming up through that level probably do (and may discontinue their use at higher-level skiing, especially longer-radius, high-speed turns).

You ain't no intermediate, boy!
post #101 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
Modern skis have made skiing much easier to learn and much easier for a typical skier to become proficient. There's still a lot to learn, but the learning curve is shorter and the enjoyment ramp-up faster than ever before. It is a disservice to those skiers to suggest otherwise.
I'd add one more to this list.

Our, now fully retired and non-skiing , ski school director enjoyed at least an additional decade of skiing on a body that just could not handle the effort of skiing straight skis any longer.

As I remember, his hips and knees would hurt so badly that more than a few hours at a time was more than he could handle.

Then he tried "parabolics"---I don't remember when that was, early 90's maybe??, but I do remember that he was by far the earliest convert to more shape at my particular hill---and he caught a lot of grief for it in the beginning.

Thing was, he could ski almost all day, almost every day and actually teach if he wanted to.

That lasted until an unfortunate collision broke his already pinned femur when he was nearing 80 year old.

Without new ski technology, he'd have been done 10 years earlier.
post #102 of 119
skier_j, right on! I implied that with my comment about physical conditioning, but ain't it the truth?

As I've been guiding for the OHG, I've had the blessing of skiing with octogenerians who rip. Trees, pow, crud, groomers, but limited bumps for most of them. Some are just amazing. Others are just out to have fun. But, for all of them, shaped skis have meant a new life for their skiing.
post #103 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
That's not from the Breck school, but from an instructor who teaches there.

The old PSIA levels had to do with a combination of skills and terrain, but are intended for instructors, not students. Most students are unable to accurately self-appraise, so they start with comfort level on terrain and the instructor does an analysis from there.

The current PSIA Alpine Technical Manual approaches this a bit differently (but will be augmented this year, and I haven't seen the updates). The definition of an Intermediate Zone skier gaining confidence on blue terrain includes these skills: "They use a pole plant in every turn and ski parallel turns on all comfortable terrain. They are using the sidecut of the skis effectively and are beginning to explore carving more than skidding.

However, the Advanced Zone Masters of Black Terrain skiers include these skills: "They can make dynamic carved turns on most slopes and adapt to most situations that a mountain offers."

Between these two are "Comfortable on all blue and easy black terrain" skiers with these skills: "They can make long and short turns consistently and are carving more than skidding on comfortable terrain but revert to skidding when they get onto terrain that challenges them."
The current criteria aren't even applicable to the older skis unless they want me barrelling down the groomers, dodging the ski schoolers. and last time i was watching olympic mogul runs, i don't see too much carving going on.

as i said earlier, though, skiing level is a stupid term. as a recreational skier, you can call me whatever you'd like and it wouldn't really matter. i'm sure that i could improve my skiing as even bode miller could improve... and i'm certain that more modern skis would improve my skiing ability... but what is my goal? my goal is to someday ski like glen plake and push my limits so as to keep things challenging; it doesn't take a set of super carvers or groomers or some ability scale to accomplish this.
post #104 of 119
Glen and Hattrup both carve sweet turns in Blizzard. In bumps.
post #105 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
skier_j, right on! I implied that with my comment about physical conditioning, but ain't it the truth?

As I've been guiding for the OHG, I've had the blessing of skiing with octogenerians who rip. Trees, pow, crud, groomers, but limited bumps for most of them. Some are just amazing. Others are just out to have fun. But, for all of them, shaped skis have meant a new life for their skiing.
i think it's great that the newer skis are easier, but easy != better. better is a qualitative term because for me, the day skiing becomes easy is the day that i'll hang up my boards.

maybe for Heluvaskier his challenge is trying to shave those extra tenths of a second from his race time. maybe for the octagenerians their challenge is putting in a great day of skiing like they did 40 years ago.

old race cars couldn't hold a candle to the modern formula cars... but does that mean older race cars aren't any fun?
post #106 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
Glen and Hattrup both carve sweet turns in Blizzard. In bumps.
was that right after the part when they were doing figure eights on teh groomers?

here's phil mahre's gold medal olympic run. as the best skier in the world at that time, those carves look silly compared to modern carves. judging straight skis by modern criteria isn't possible.
http://www.mahretrainingcenter.com/g...68k_8.67mb.wmv
post #107 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenPlake
old race cars couldn't hold a candle to the modern formula cars... but does that mean older race cars aren't any fun?
Not at all! Let's be clear: no one here begrudges you your fun on straight skis. Have a great time! Knock yourself out! Improve or not! It's all your life and do whatever you want as long as it doesn't negatively impact others.

Just please don't give advice about ski equipment based on your personal preferences and limited knowledge. That's the only concern I've had all along. Most skiers do not ski in order to have it be more difficult. But, some do. That's why some switched to tele. That's why Glen tried the barrel staves (and 2x4s!).

Again, my only concern is when you start to imply that straight skis are, "just fine" or "just as good" as modern skis. They aren't either. That is not to say that people don't enjoy skiing on them. The concepts are completely unconnected.
post #108 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenPlake
was that right after the part when they were doing figure eights on teh groomers?

here's phil mahre's gold medal olympic run. as the best skier in the world at that time, those carves look silly compared to modern carves. judging straight skis by modern criteria isn't possible.
http://www.mahretrainingcenter.com/g...68k_8.67mb.wmv
They rip carves in the bumps a number of times. On groomers, too.

Thanks for that memory lane jaunt! I remember watching that run. They actually don't look that silly to me. I'd like to see Greg's thoughts on that, but I would say that there are some pretty nice carves there, certainly the same skills as would be used today. Pivots early in the turn to direct the skis, and the classic White Pass style that has melded into modern carving. But, I don't see the silliness, myself.

Lots more energy than he'd need to use today, but he'd still be able to do it on modern gear because he has the skills.
post #109 of 119
We could take a MA thread for that run over to the instruction section and compare it to modern SL skiing (maybe you beat me to it as you often do).
Later
GREG
post #110 of 119
That Mahre video is great, I can watch that over and over. As good as the Mahres were (and I assume still are), they would be toasted by todays skiers skiing 162cm in a race.

Example: When Bjorn Borg got back into tennis with his wooden racquet, he got smoked by the current technology. You are taking a sword to a gun fight.
post #111 of 119
post #112 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenPlake/
btw.. do you have any pointers on how to perfect the 80's technique?
I remember when being taught in Austria in the 80's (as a small boy) that the instructor would make you clench your wooly hat between the knees! After having perfected that he would give you a ten shilling coin to clench!!

So there you have my tips from way back when..
post #113 of 119
Whew! This is like an argument with someone from the flat earth society!
Glenplake-I'd advise placing WTB advertisements around the country for any and all straight skis. You could probably fill a warehouse for $1000.
If you'll pay shipping I'll grab all the pairs I see out at the curb on trash day and send 'em to you-no sense letting them go to waste!
post #114 of 119
I actually have at least one, maybe two pair... 205cm Atomic SLs (teal green) circa 1988 and 210cm Elan GSs (gray) circa 1986. The Elans are mint. The Atomics are in good-to-excellent condition. If you want 'em, make me an offer.
post #115 of 119
First, I'll give you some credit. You look very good from this recreational non-instructors standpoint if you're really only skiing one day a year. I'd agree with your assesment that regardless of PSIA level, you could probably get down (not necessarily ski) any sort of inbounds terrain. On the other hand, that bump run looked really easy - small, soft and gentle gradient. Maybe the camera was playing tricks on the gradient but it looked like a low to mid steepness intermediate hill. Judging by your balance - you almost lost it a couple of times - you wouldn't be looking like that (whatever "that" is ) if any one of the three factors (small, soft and gentle, especially the last two) were turned up a notch.

Second, please, for you own good, but a pair of 3 year old slightly used shaped skis. It's not just about the extra second on a slalom course. They really are much more fun. Have you ever experienced carving? I doubt it based on your gear.

P.S. I could rip through that bump run on my Metron 11's
post #116 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenPlake
not a 15-20 foot drop... 15-20 foot off of a buttermilk kicker at their park. and i've probably skied more than 150 days total... easily enough time to become a level 9 skier. here's just a short clip from when i goofing around in utah over christmas... excuse the poor quality.


http://media.putfile.com/ski2

EDIT: here's the criteria for "expert": You can ski black diamond bumps, steeps and varied snow conditions comfortably

I don't think it's even questionable.
Holy crap! How did I miss this thread?

Dude, the headband, combined with the fartbag, combined with the fact that you suck....priceless!

This is great. Oh man. Thanks for the laughs!
post #117 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
Ok, GlenPlake, I've looked at your video. Thank you for posting it. It will give those reading this thread insight into your skills (both strengths and weaknesses). With my PSIA training, I would place you as an aggressive higher level 7/lower level 8 ("advanced intermediate") skier, and I would recommend you take instruction from a Level III cert. Given your skill level evidenced by that video, however, you are unqualified to pass judgment on equipment as you have been attempting to do.
I call bullshit.

6-7 on a "goodness" scale at best (I have no clue what the psia thing is all about)
post #118 of 119
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed Peters
Holy crap! How did I miss this thread?

Dude, the headband, combined with the fartbag, combined with the fact that you suck....priceless!

This is great. Oh man. Thanks for the laughs!
post up your clip, jed.
post #119 of 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenPlake
post up your clip, jed.
Don't have one.

PS: You crack me up. Thanks for the laughs today.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion