or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Proper ski stance - Page 4

post #91 of 191
I gave up on it. 6 of one half dozen of the other....They don't get it...or just use wide stance interchangeably with vertical seperation. Whatever. Is that Ligety in the picture? Either way both he and bode use a stance which coudnt get much narrower most of the time. This picture is an example of what a narrow stance looks like at high velocity and g force. If he stands up straight from this point his legs may be rather far apart but this is only to facilitate that narrow stance more easily, hence the wider stance in the transitions...but hes not edging the ski during that brief transition period. Chances are even if you think youre skiing a wide stance when you at high g's during the apex of the turn you will be in a narrow one because it is easier and more natural feeling that way. Also it appears that very little weight is on the inside ski. Doesnt exactly look like he's phantom edging it but it doesnt look like theres much more than 10% on the inside. So if very little weight is on the inside ski what is the benefit of a wide stance anyway? If there is one at all of course
post #92 of 191
You can see the inside ski is neither bent, nor spraying a rooster tail like the outside ski.
post #93 of 191
exactly!
post #94 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSOcean10
So if very little weight is on the inside ski what is the benefit of a wide stance anyway?
Balance. It's amazing what just a little contact with that inside ski will do for you. Close your eyes and balance on one foot. How long can you do it. Now do the same thing touching just the big toe of your raised foot. How long you stand like that? Try the same thing touching just your index finger to the wall or to somebody elses finger. How long can you go?
That extrat point of refrence makes all the difference.

Dewd, Take that same pic and rotate the skier so the skis are flat to the snow. That's a fairly wide stance, vertical speration or otherwise. Better yet, lean up against a wall and put for feet in the same position as the photo. Push yourself up to vertical without moving your feet. How wide apart are your feet? It that a narrow stance?

L
post #95 of 191
That wide stance is only an intermediate position between turns and in a race format saves time but is not necessarily more efficient. A more proper stance for a recreational skier is a more upright one which is more of a natural standing position, and therefore your legs will be about as wide apart as when you are standing. For most people this doesnt leave much space between the boots. We are not talking about jamming our feet together. Basically this is a comfortable, natural position which facilitates efficient edging of the skis
This is basically the same thing thats going on in my bode picture only at slower speeds and therefore more vertical seperation. You can call that old school or whatever. I just say the guy has got style!
post #96 of 191
He does have style! And that's my point on other threads. It's about style, not about right or wrong. Skiing is a fluid constantly changing activity, not a static one.

THERE IS NO RIGHT AND WRONG.
post #97 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiMangoJazz
..... Skiing is a fluid constantly changing activity, not a static one......
.
I could not agree more.
post #98 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewdman42
The 2nd video of the Canadian guy practicing turns on a groomer...ok.. his stance is a little wider than lots of other WC guys we see on TV, but frankly I don't like it and have no plan to ski that way. I have no idea who he is, maybe he's a winner. Good for him. Looks really to me like it requires MORE athleticism to ski that way than with a more narrow stance. Not the other way around. Perhaps there is some speed benefit so its worth the extra effort for him. Honestly I don't know what he's trying to accomplish, but I do think that video is not representative of what the vast majority of WC racers are currently doing.
That's Thomas Grandi. He happened to win two consequetive GS races on the WC tour this year.

He's trying to be as fast as possible -- he is a racer. What else would you have him do? Change his stance so YOU like it?

Look at the this page, photos of many skiers being wide:

http://www.youcanski.com/en/coaching/gs2free_skiing.htm

There is a section on stance and weight distribution. Under that heading there are two photos. The man on the right in the white jacket and red pants is Greg Gurshman. He is the former Russian Nat'l team coach , a former coach on the Austrian mens nat'l team and the former coach of the Canadian Nat'l womens team. He has written articles on that site.

With 15 years of WC coaching experience at the Nat'l team level, I think his comments and those of others writting for that site should carry more weight than anyone posting here or even realskiers.

The author of the linked article is Georg Capaul (U.S. Women's Ski Team head coach for slalom and giant slalom since 1998). I think he may know a bit about what "the vast majority of WC racers are currently doing."
post #99 of 191
ok, I give up too. Ski wide like cowboys if you want. No sweat off my back.. How does the saying go...pearls before swine?
post #100 of 191
hahaha yea....I guess you guys tuck to be like wc guys when you are recreationally skiing as well right? The question was what is proper form...not how do racers ski to be fastest...though I still disagree about the width issue...I don't care anymore. There are so few parallels between recreational skiing and racing so why bother. In racing you must be aggressive etc. and if you are aggressive whilst recreationally skiing you accomplish nothing. Just because racing slicks work in nascar doesnt mean I want them on my honda. 'Nuff said.
post #101 of 191
C'mon, you guys are claiming "better efficiency", "better movement", all sorts of "better" skiing from narrow stances. Then when confronted with real facts about efficiency and movement patterns from WC coaches, you say, but we don't want to ski like that and then infer that the technique is not even "proper form".

Pearls before swine indeed.

As vlad says: Say hello to your intermediate rut.
post #102 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
C'mon, you guys are claiming "better efficiency", "better movement", all sorts of "better" skiing from narrow stances. Then when confronted with real facts about efficiency and movement patterns from WC coaches, you say, but we don't want to ski like that and then infer that the technique is not even "proper form".

Pearls before swine indeed.

As vlad says: Say hello to your intermediate rut.
hey - I offered them direct from a WC racer (well last raced WC about 2-3 years ago from memory)..... they swear that is wrong too.... they say he cannot ski smoothly that way or some such crap....

I suggested they try actually skiing with someone like this instead of offering their interpretation of what WC racers are trying to do from looking at a few pictures... then come back and tell us the results... no takers there either...

I'm giving up.... as Rick said... you can lead horse to water but....
post #103 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
I needed the slightly wider stance to do what he then wanted done.... I dunno - I just did as told and it all felt better.... I want to go back and do some more to get it more concreted into brain - because i did the absolutely most solid short turns i have EVER done by a country mile- at the end of those lessons on the last run back to base, great speed control... and about half an hour before that i was skiing waaaaay faster long turns and feeling solid and safe doing it.....
Sounds like you had a wonderful time learning something new!
post #104 of 191
http://www.breakthroughonskis.com/Pa...ruction05.html I suggest you two read this conversation between harold hard and lito. Also you seem to be failing to differentiate between what is effective at gs speeds and what is effective during regular skiing. Even the foolish instructors teaching wide stance generally ski with a narrow stance. There is less movement required for the weight shift...no awkward upper body motions necessary. The reason those racers have so much vertical seperation is to get the inside ski out of the way, enabling the angulation required at high speed. Just read the conversation....or skim through the psia bashing until you hit the part about wide stance vs. narrow stance. Maybe it will clear things up for you.
post #105 of 191
Read the whole thing if you would like. It is quite interesting....but here is the quote:

Excited, I try to summarize his point. “So the wide stance isn’t really a separate problem, is it, Harald? it’s just another aspect of that same problem we’ve been talking about, the excessive rotary movement that keeps most skiers from carving good modern turns. Seems to me that a wide stance and excessive pivoting and twisting go hand in hand–to mix a metaphor. But over the years, the notion of a wide or open stance, has become almost a religion in official ski teaching circles. Something nobody dares to question. In fact, I think a whole generation of ski writers and commentators and gurus have made a false interpretation of how far apart top racers’ feet are. If you are skiing at 30 miles per hour, or faster, your body will be tilted way in, to the inside of your turn. So naturally, you’ll pull the light foot up, out of the way, so it doesn’t hang up on the snow. People see this and say: Look, there’s Stenmark, or Tomba, with his feet way apart. But in terms of lateral spread from the center-line of the body–that is to say, measured perpendicular to the body’s main axis–well actually, they’re really still skiing in a narrow stance. Right?”
post #106 of 191
ay yay yay...I wish we could all ski together. All bullshit would be tossed out the window...
post #107 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSOcean10
http://www.breakthroughonskis.com/Pa...ruction05.html I suggest you two read this conversation between harold hard and lito. Also you seem to be failing to differentiate between what is effective at gs speeds and what is effective during regular skiing. Even the foolish instructors teaching wide stance generally ski with a narrow stance. There is less movement required for the weight shift...no awkward upper body motions necessary. The reason those racers have so much vertical seperation is to get the inside ski out of the way, enabling the angulation required at high speed. Just read the conversation....or skim through the psia bashing until you hit the part about wide stance vs. narrow stance. Maybe it will clear things up for you.

no - you are failing to understand that I was skiing with an ex-WC racer and he was skiing WIDE stance - and we were NOT racing.... he was also teaching ME to ski WIDE STANCE... what part of that is so tricky for you poor little brain to wrap around? and even worse IT WORKED BETTER than the narrower stance i started with!
OK - is that simple enough?
or will I reduce it more

ME - not WC-Racer
HIM - WC-racer
Skiing - WIDE STANCE
Speeds - MY COMFORT ZONE...
Results - better than my previous more narrow stance

OK or do you wantit in 1 syllable words
post #108 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Sounds like you had a wonderful time learning something new!
Brilliant time - excellent instruction and I am quite determined to return.... I was told by the guy that made my coffee each day though that it is unusual for this guy to teach adults other than instructors... not sure how I managed it (I think the other 2 instructors I skied with pulled strings for me) Anyway - they know me now so hopefully I can get him again...
post #109 of 191
Hey Disski..if its working for you and you're smiling....keep doing it. Have fun.
post #110 of 191
But please refrain from these childish personal insults.
post #111 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewdman42
Hey Disski..if its working for you and you're smiling....keep doing it. Have fun.

hey - if I did NOT do that I would not be skiing...
remember the resort doctor tried hard to have me stopped from skiing!

I have never skied for anything other than my own satisfaction.... I had enough ski instructors, "expert skiers" etc poke fun at me or run me down over the years... especially the early years.....

These days the instructors at my home resort that used to poke fun at me suddenly got all friendly a few years back.... they suddenly want to teach me now! to them....

Meanwhile the instructors that don't teach me keep telling my instructors how well i ski these days and I have been described as a walking(skiing) business card for the main instructors that work with me...

I love to ski and to learn to ski better....

and the rest of the world can go to hell! - especially instructors that like to ridicule those who are trying to learn the best way they know how!
post #112 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSOcean10
Even the foolish instructors teaching wide stance generally ski with a narrow stance. .

and what is this? an insult to the ex-WC racer who was teaching me a wide stance....

YOU cut the insults out
post #113 of 191
Thanks for the post. I read it a long time ago, and as a result, I confess I became such a "narrow stance" promoter.

Then I changed to being a "functional stance" promoter -- feet under hips as the base-line. Which is what I teach, but quickly add that it is not to be considered a fixed position -- wider or narrower as appropriate.

I too once thought that skiing wide was "for racers only".... Now I've grown to realize that it is not. The movements in racing are quite effective in "regular" skiing. Going fast/slow is just a matter of degree of their application and LINE.

You can choose to ski at whatever speed you like, even slowly, with whatever stance you like. But I have a problem in avoiding a technique because one thinks "it's too fast". A technique is nothing without corresponding tactics.

A very respected epic coach once wrote that the path to good skiing was to "ski the slow line fast" -- I think Warren Witherall coined the term.

This directive means to ski a slow line, but to extract as much speed as humanly possible; always be seeking speed. No negative movements or inefficient styles are to get in the way. In this regard, speed control is a matter of turn size and shape.

A suggestion that we don't wan't to ski "aggressively" is contrary to what is commonly perceived at epic as very good advice.

IMO, if there is any single quote that would sum up the epic ski philosophy, I would vote for "ski the slow line fast". Others may say "ski without negative movements", "ski with intent" or simple "go there".

None would intentionally ski with a technique that does not allow maximum results when trying to "ski the slow line fast".

Besides, things like short radius turns using cross-over are a really fun!
post #114 of 191

having seen him ski i was in no doubt this guy was holding it all in check for me... but he was still skiing wonderfully... just VERY finished turns.... just every so often he would "zip off down the hill" to watch me ski down and there would be no-one there and you could see him open the line just a touch more (not too much because he wanted good demos for me still)... and you KNEW he could do that as much as he wanted whenever he wanted....

as I said - best lessons in a while and I'm a fuss pot about my instructors... sooooo clear about cause and effect... and so clear about what he wanted you to be INTENDING.... because he saw that as important!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Thanks for the post. I read it a long time ago, and as a result, I confess I became such a "narrow stance" promoter.

Then I changed to being a "functional stance" promoter -- feet under hips as the base-line. Which is what I teach, but quickly add that it is not to be considered a fixed position -- wider or narrower as appropriate.

I too once thought that skiing wide was "for racers only".... Now I've grown to realize that it is not. The movements in racing are quite effective in "regular" skiing. Going fast/slow is just a matter of degree of their application and LINE.

You can choose to ski at whatever speed you like, even slowly, with whatever stance you like. But I have a problem in avoiding a technique because one thinks "it's too fast". A technique is nothing without corresponding tactics.

A very respected epic coach once wrote that the path to good skiing was to "ski the slow line fast" -- I think Warren Witherall coined the term.

This directive means to ski a slow line, but to extract as much speed as humanly possible; always be seeking speed. No negative movements or inefficient styles are to get in the way. In this regard, speed control is a matter of turn size and shape.

A suggestion that we don't wan't to ski "aggressively" is contrary to what is commonly perceived at epic as very good advice.

IMO, if there is any single quote that would sum up the epic ski philosophy, I would vote for "ski the slow line fast". Others may say "ski without negative movements", "ski with intent" or simple "go there".

None would intentionally ski with a technique that does not allow maximum results when trying to "ski the slow line fast".

Besides, things like short radius turns using cross-over are a really fun!
post #115 of 191
That's exactly what a good coach does for his charges:

Say it, Show it and Do it.

You are very very lucky, and I am very very envious of your experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
you could see him open the line just a touch more (not too much because he wanted good demos for me still)... and you KNEW he could do that as much as he wanted whenever he wanted....
You mean he could use the same stance width and ski however he wanted? Why.. why that's unheard of!
post #116 of 191
Ok well you can be aggressive and pulverize the mountain. I hope if I ever take another lesson my instructor is a little more insightful than you, though I am sure you are very skilled. I prefer to collaborate with the mountain and my skis...not attack them. A narrow stance enables use of subtle actions to produce great results in terms of carving zero skid turns at any radii. Its not a matter of WC technique being "too fast." its that that much vertical seperation is only necessary at those speeds. You don't need all that excess stuff to do at moderate speed. That is why I say it is more efficient to ski a narrow stance. No upper body motions necessary. With simple relaxation of the inside leg the outside ski is weight, arced, the turn initiates, and you angulate at a varying amount relative to your speed. Try angulating like bode or ligety with that much v.s. below 40mph! You will fall. There arent enough g's to keep you there. I'm not preaching "keep those boots together regardless" philosophy. Narrow stance, as in normal walking position(which is closer than many assume) is the most widely used stance by expert skiers. Even the ones touting wider stance. I dont know disski's ex wc instructor and I certainly do not know his/her physiology in regards to skiing. Frankly though I havn't heard one benefit to skiing a wider than walking position stance yet other than balance, and that racers allegedly do it. Thats not enough for me. The fact is that most people stink at skiing....and most people are taught wide stance. I know that I was. When I abandoned wide stance for a more efficient natural one I progressed into the realm of advanced skiing. (I say advanced and not "expert" as I tend to avoid chutes, couloirs, cornices, and cliffs) Flame away...but how many good skiers do you see with wide stance? I would expect tons considering the emphasis that is placed on it in ski school....but there are few. I'm sure now you will merely tell me how I am an idiot and that I don't understand multisyllabic words. Fine. I don't really care.I'm just pointing out that though wide stance skiing may work very well for some people and in certain circumstances it has been a relative failure for most. The majority of the people on the mountain will take lesson and ski for years and never break out of their intermediate rut. Why can't I carve? Why can't I ski bumps? Hmm....let me count the reasons.....
post #117 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
That's exactly what a good coach does for his charges:

Say it, Show it and Do it.

You are very very lucky, and I am very very envious of your experience.



You mean he could use the same stance width and ski however he wanted? Why.. why that's unheard of!

yeah - freaky hey? :
post #118 of 191
CSOcean10,

What ever you find good enough is fine by me. Sorry to say I've read your last post and disagree with almost everything in it. Naturally, I will give up this topic here.

It's dawning on me now why people have stopped posting responses, civil or otherwise. In the face of such stubborness there is just no point in further describing my position.

But I must say there is one thing that I do agree with in your post. Most people do suck at skiing -- and from my observations, most people are skiing with exactly the stance you describe. Some do manage to get "good" at it, whatever "good" might mean, but most don't- they plateau.

IMO, it is not because they were taught a "wide stance" first, it's because they have stopped moving and are mistaking that for efficiency.

I do not mean to offend anyone. I actually thought posting may make a difference. Sorry for wasting your time.

Good luck, and good skiing.
post #119 of 191
The stubborness you speak of is rampant on this forum and goes in all directions. I actually agree more with COcean than you, but I got tired of trying to convince DisSki and everyone else. Its just too tiring. So we all think we're right. Great. Go have fun everyone. I don't really need to convince anyone if its going to be like pulling nails. That's why intelligent people get tired of posting on this forum.
post #120 of 191
My last post here: Last time I checked all those crappy skiers i.e. 90% of people I see are not even carving....most are simply pivoting their skis....pushing them around. You can use any stance you want and that still is bad skiing. Most of these people have a narrow stance because it was "cool" back when they were hotshots and they continue to wedel their way around the mountain even on shaped skis. Or their instructors simply never clearly explained to them how to make their skis turn without turning them. Either way stance has nothing to do with people hopelessly lost in a world of stem christies, scarves, and wedels. The issue is not with the stance its with the technique essentially. But frankly I hope the psia keeps churning out terminal intermediates as this is less of a failure for them than cranking out a bunch of wedgers....so bravo. Basically you've said that everyone with a narrow stance sucks but some have gotten good at sucking. So I guess the two people in the pictures on the epic ski home page, lito and harald, almost all ski patrol and instructors, and the majority of advanced skiers have really been practicing their sucking. Good for them(and me as well). If you see me on the mountain I'll be the one effortlessly gliding in complete control of my turn radii....and I'll recognize you I'm sure....chaps, holster, and six shooter, you cowboy you! And really the only people who have been posting responses have been you and disski as far as the gung ho wide stancers go. The others have given up. I on the other hand am never one to not have the last word....character flaw I guess. But frankly I keep bringing more and more to the table and you too just keep repeatign the same rhetoric. So goodbye.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching