EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Help get my hips forward - I think
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Help get my hips forward - I think - Page 3

post #61 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro
Nice post Disski.
That is exactly what I mean about moving past the theories. To reach the next level it is important that you are willfully invested in the performance aspect. To be conciously competent you need to know what you are doing and you need to actually do it. When "doing it" is the primary focus you transcend the all the mental constipation.
I'm with disski. I want to know what I am doing and why, but I don't want the full physics lesson, and once you've told me and I have expressed that I at least sort of understand what I am supposed to be doing. . . then let's ski. I want to see it and feel it.

That said, as far as the bumps go, one more thing that worked for me as far as watching and learning and keeping my eyes a few bumps ahead and my body out of the backseat:

Skied following a terrific instructor through the bumps. (Great mogul skier, btw, so I was learning a lot just by following his line and his skiing.) Every few seconds, he'd yell, "how many fingers?" and hold up his hand. So I was following him, watching him, not looking at my feet, having to stay alert, but also having to do something that kept my mind off of obessessing about my own feelings of incompetence in the bumps, which, yes, I sometimes have, especially in the presence of a great bump skier. . .

We'd talked about line beforehand, and also about a few more technical things (like making quick directional changes on a flat ski), but I was in the moment, trying to follow his line and watch his hands.

Mollmeister
post #62 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by mollmeister
I'm with disski. I want to know what I am doing and why, but I don't want the full physics lesson, and once you've told me and I have expressed that I at least sort of understand what I am supposed to be doing. . . then let's ski. I want to see it and feel it.

That said, as far as the bumps go, one more thing that worked for me as far as watching and learning and keeping my eyes a few bumps ahead and my body out of the backseat:

Skied following a terrific instructor through the bumps. (Great mogul skier, btw, so I was learning a lot just by following his line and his skiing.) Every few seconds, he'd yell, "how many fingers?" and hold up his hand. So I was following him, watching him, not looking at my feet, having to stay alert, but also having to do something that kept my mind off of obessessing about my own feelings of incompetence in the bumps, which, yes, I sometimes have, especially in the presence of a great bump skier. . .

We'd talked about line beforehand, and also about a few more technical things (like making quick directional changes on a flat ski), but I was in the moment, trying to follow his line and watch his hands.

Mollmeister

like so many posters, here, you've got to lose the 1980s back seat phobia.
in bumps, the sobriqueted "back seat" is often the correct seat.
I've skied with many amazing world-class bumpers who do the entire field
in a near-sitting position.
the desire to get one's hips forward in the bumps is probably the thread-starter's biggets obstacle that's impeding his bumping.
post #63 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlad
like so many posters, here, you've got to lose the 1980s back seat phobia.
in bumps, the sobriqueted "back seat" is often the correct seat.
I've skied with many amazing world-class bumpers who do the entire field
in a near-sitting position.
the desire to get one's hips forward in the bumps is probably the thread-starter's biggets obstacle that's impeding his bumping.
So I probably wouldn't have jumped back into this thread had I not been TUI last night. I'm no card-carrying expert. . . heck, half the time I don't even understand the answers to questions on this particular section of the boards! I am much less a technician than a *touch* skier. I know it when I see it. I know it when I feel it. And I don't spend a lot of time intellectualizing or putting into words that which I can better see and feel on skis. I'd probably never pass the instructor tests most of you have aced, because I have very little talent for using highly technical language to describe that which makes more sense for me in terms of muscle memory.

For me personally, being in the back seat in the bumps is a disaster. I'm not talking about being low to the ground, because I agree, I have seen some people ski bumps very well in a less-than-upright stance. When I say "back seat," though, I am talking about where my balance and center of gravity are. Being a woman, my center of gravity is already lower and farther back than a man's. When it gets too low and too far back in the bumps. . . oy vey! My skis shoot out from under me as soon as I get tentative or hit something wrong. It's not a very stable position for recovery. So for me, eyes down the hill several bumps, keeping hands forward and reaching, and yes, "thinking about doing something untoward to the turn," on occasion , keeps me in a stable, recoverable stance. Following someone lots better than I and keeping my eyes on him/her? Even better. Standing like *The King* or crouching a bit? No matter. Upright or crouched, as long as I am balanced over the right part of my skis, I'm OK, and for me that balance has a lot to do with where the *junk in the trunk* is hanging out. Too far back? Bad. Nicely centered over the skis? Gooood.

Mollmeister
post #64 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlad
like so many posters, here, you've got to lose the 1980s back seat phobia.
in bumps, the sobriqueted "back seat" is often the correct seat.
I've skied with many amazing world-class bumpers who do the entire field
in a near-sitting position.
the desire to get one's hips forward in the bumps is probably the thread-starter's biggets obstacle that's impeding his bumping.
Disagree.

How do you propose that the recreational mogul skier pressure the shovels from the back seat or is that also an obstacle to good bumping?

If the back seat is where it's at for world class bumpers, then they must have different needs than us mere mortals.
post #65 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Disagree.

How do you propose that the recreational mogul skier pressure the shovels from the back seat or is that also an obstacle to good bumping?

If the back seat is where it's at for world class bumpers, then they must have different needs than us mere mortals.

or maybe you mere mortals' own refusal to join the 21st century and maybe take a clue form pro bumpers is what's holding you back in that intermediate rut.
watch pro bumpers...hell, ride with some...I've skied with glen plake, and that bastard sits so far back, i fear he'll pinch a loaf right in his trousers.
watch him, and get back to me.
the only barrier between world-class technique and your own is a line of your own device which you've created, call stubbornness or close-mindedness.
post #66 of 77
consider this point which i cite extensively to lessons: skiing, like most sports, requires the athlete's stanc eot be perpindicular to that of the athlete's surface medium....
unlike most oother sports, however, the surface medium in skiing varies considerably from an attitude of gravitational perpendiculis, that is, we are on inclines.
when our pupils assume the normal attitude that they'd assume when walking down an incline, they 'sit back' to keep themselves perpendicular to the horizon, so to speak, as opposed to the surface; that is, they align theimselves to the gravitational axis, which is where skiing (and boarding) diverge from most sports: we stay perpendicular to our surface medium.
this is why we teach beginning students to get forward- theyw ould lean back if walking down a hill, but when skiing, they needs be 'centered', and getting them forward (from their back-sitting attitude) gets them centered.
I avoid this whole debate by spending a LOT of time on the flats in the first lesson, so their unconscious minds are already 'getting' the concept of being 'centered', then, later, on the inclline, they 'just do it'...but that's just me)
now, then: a bumper is on a wildly varying surface medium of constant flux.
sometimes (top of bump, unlike the hills we ski on) flat w/horizon, sometimes inclined (face of bump, which bumper really isn't spending much time on...starting to get it?)
when he/she is performing the bulk of his/her snow-contact work, he/she is on the back and top of the bump (parallel to the gravitational axis/horizon) as opposed to the face of the bump, which follows more closely the pitch of the hill.
what happens, then, is that in order to pressure the shovels, the athlete does little at all, as the shovels are making contact by merely moving into the back of the bump, and the skier, standing perpendicular to the surface of the bump, is standing, in relation to the overall incline of the hill, parallel to the horizon (just like standing on flat ground) which, on an incline, is
"sitting back"
*
* does that explain why worldcup bumpers, and glen plake, seem to be sitting back?
i gotta go shvel some more snow, now, and maybe go hike the mountain.....
post #67 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlad
what happens, then, is that in order to pressure the shovels, the athlete does little at all, as the shovels are making contact by merely moving into the back of the bump, and the skier, standing perpendicular to the surface of the bump, is standing, in relation to the overall incline of the hill, parallel to the horizon (just like standing on flat ground) which, on an incline, is
"sitting back"
*
* does that explain why worldcup bumpers, and glen plake, seem to be sitting back?
This is far different than the picture you painted in your previous post, where they don't seem to be in the back seat.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlad
I've skied with many amazing world-class bumpers who do the entire field in a near-sitting position.
Even you have to admit that's a tad misleading.

Anyway, thanks for clearing that up -- "back" is really about what you take the frame of reference to be. "sitting back" could be entirely correct, assuming the skier is changing their balance point in anticipation of the next terrain feature . At that point, it is a means to an end, not a skiing style.

Cheers!
post #68 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
This is far different than the picture you painted in your previous post, where they don't seem to be in the back seat.....



Even you have to admit that's a tad misleading.

Anyway, thanks for clearing that up -- "back" is really about what you take the frame of reference to be. "sitting back" could be entirely correct, assuming the skier is changing their balance point in anticipation of the next terrain feature . At that point, it is a means to an end, not a skiing style.

Cheers!

you're joking, right? i said in that post they wer ein 'near-sitting' positions, which is entirely consistent with the other post you quoted.
further, being abumper is, technically, on flat ground for much of the time, she/he is going to be standing perpendicular to the horizon/gravitational axis, which, when viewing the overall incline of the piste, is, in fact, sitting back....
where's the confusion, WHERE did I contradict myself, and WHERE can i score some of that bud you're puffing at the keyboard, there, Chong??
post #69 of 77
"
This is far different than the picture you painted in your previous post, where they don't seem to be in the back seat.....


Quote:
Originally Posted by vlad
I've skied with many amazing world-class bumpers who do the entire field in a near-sitting position.

"


ummmm....in the universe where I live, a "near-sitting position" is, indeed, the 'back seat'....
: : :
seriously...can I just get a roach?


( a"sitting position" would have their ass resting on the tails....)
post #70 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlad
like so many posters, here, you've got to lose the 1980s back seat phobia.
in bumps, the sobriqueted "back seat" is often the correct seat.

I've skied with many amazing world-class bumpers who do the entire field
in a near-sitting position.
So you are now saying that the final sentence the "near-sitting" position should not be confused with the previous senetences reference to the "back seat"?

And you're calling ME high?:
post #71 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
So you are now saying that the final sentence the "near-sitting" position should not be confused with the previous senetences reference to the "back seat"?

And you're calling ME high?:

???? same thing.
'near -sitting' means his ass was inches from being on his tails...you know...'sitting'
?????
think of a ski hill with the skier, always at perpendicular to the surface, a right-angle to the surface of the snow, sliding down.
now, think of a staircase. a skier coming down a staircase of bumps, making contact on the flat of each bump/step, is perpendicular to a surface which is parallel to the horizon.
on the overall staircase, the skier is 'back', because the skier is remaining perpendicular to the surface on which he or she is skiing. the skier is centered oon the level surface of each bump, which, lookinmg at the whole hill, is relatively 'back' from being centered on the same incline without 'steps'/bumps.

it's really wildly simple, and will change any good skier to a great bumper, once they tackle that a bump field is a series of flatsteps which need sbe an upright stance on. from the sides, that's the backseat.
as each is absorbed, the skis come up in retraction with the feet, and the 'chair is pushed in' for the bumper.
pretty simple sh*t, really.
post #72 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladthe skier is 'back', because the skier [B
is remaining perpendicular to the surface on which he or she is skiing.[/b] the skier is centered oon the level surface of each bump, which, lookinmg at the whole hill, is relatively 'back' from being centered on the same incline without 'steps'/bumps.

it's really wildly simple
I know.

It's all about frames of reference.

It's one thing to say that the viewer sees the skier in the back seat in reference to the whole hill (the "wide view"). It's another to suggest to the skier that they ought to ski moguls in the back seat -- the skier is aware of their immediate surroundings -- the "local view". Back seat means two entirely different things to the viewer and to the skier.

The skier ought to ski "in balance", and damn how that appears to the viewer.
post #73 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
I know.

It's all about frames of reference.

It's one thing to say that the viewer sees the skier in the back seat in reference to the whole hill (the "wide view"). It's another to suggest to the skier that they ought to ski moguls in the back seat -- the skier is aware of their immediate surroundings -- the "local view". Back seat means two entirely different things to the viewer and to the skier.

The skier ought to ski "in balance", and damn how that appears to the viewer.

agreed, as most always- the 'backseat phobia' kicks in with most skiers when they find themselves 'back', ie paralel to the trees along the hill.
trees grow straight up, regardless of the incline.

that's how you can tell when they exaggerate inlclines in movies- the trees all seem to lean downhill.
on the flats, we keep our bodies parallel with the trees. when we walk down any incline, our bodies are parallel to the trees.
when we ski, however, our bodies are angled forward to stay at a right angle to the surface of snow we're on, but in bumps, we stay more-or-less parallel to the trees, as the primary contact points on the bumps are essentially flat steps.
post #74 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by vlad
agreed, as most always- the 'backseat phobia' kicks in with most skiers when they find themselves 'back', ie paralel to the trees along the hill.
trees grow straight up, regardless of the incline.

that's how you can tell when they exaggerate inlclines in movies- the trees all seem to lean downhill.
on the flats, we keep our bodies parallel with the trees. when we walk down any incline, our bodies are parallel to the trees.
when we ski, however, our bodies are angled forward to stay at a right angle to the surface of snow we're on, but in bumps, we stay more-or-less parallel to the trees, as the primary contact points on the bumps are essentially flat steps.
Pretty interesting post here. Vlad, I agree with some of what you’re saying and some I would find difficult for the average recreational skier to do in the bumps. But for the most part, what I believe you are referring to is someone that is skiing in the zip line only, with very little turn shape. I’ve been teaching folks to ski in the bumps for a very long time and the biggest problem that I run into with my students is to try and get them out of the back seat. They can’t start a new turn effectively from that position and get hung up on their tails and cannot turn. Getting these folks up over their skis and moving towards the next turn is a much better stance for these NON WORLD CUP bump skiers, and for the first time in their skiing live, they can negotiate a bump field with relative ease. My two cents worth.-------Wigs
post #75 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigs
I’ve been teaching folks to ski in the bumps for a very long time and the biggest problem that I run into with my students is to try and get them out of the back seat.
yep- that IS a problem.
maybe it lies with the teacher to stop trying to change this, and, rather, to find a new way to integrate it, if it is, in fact, something positive for their later skiing.

with ski instruction, as with so many other things:

"if something isn't to your liking
don't change the 'thing',
change your 'liking' "
post #76 of 77
I agree with Wigs and BigE.

Bump skiing is a big topic; competitive bump skiing is a small, rather esoteric niche that has relatively little in common with how good skiers negotiate a field of bumps created by ordinary skier/boarder traffic.
post #77 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
I agree with Wigs and BigE.

Bump skiing is a big topic; competitive bump skiing is a small, rather esoteric niche that has relatively little in common with how good skiers negotiate a field of bumps created by ordinary skier/boarder traffic.
Right on Nolo! I watched the Olympic bump skiers last night and it’s funny, I ride the chair most everyday up a run that has intermediate bumps on it and I almost never see anybody skiing down it like the guys I saw on TV last night. I’m sure part of the reason is that the bumps are naturally made and not built in a consistent pattern like the bump competition in the Olympics. I also think that it would be very difficult to teach a forty five year old person or older and out of shape, here on vacation to ski at 40 MPH straight down a bump run pumping their legs up and down into their chest and maybe if they get that, we can throw in a back flip. Yeah! That’s the ticket!

Vlad, I think you should stick with something you know something about, (designer anesthesiologist) which isn’t being a professional ski instructor. Also take a look at the bump skiers on TV. They are not really in the back seat. Their hips are right over their feet for the most part and it just appears that they are back. There’s no way they could push the tips of their skis down into the holes if they were in the back seat. The back seat IMHO, is the worst place one can be when skiing and I will do my best to help folks move out of that position as long as I’m teaching the sport.-----Wigs
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 › Help get my hips forward - I think