or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Question from a "rule" in some skis schools...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Question from a "rule" in some skis schools... - Page 2

post #31 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manus
a whipover? what exactly is that?
you beat me to it.
post #32 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manus
a whipover? what exactly is that?
Well, from Wikipedia... "The flick should not be confused with whipover attacks, which occur in saber when an attack is struck with such force that the blade "whips over" the opponent's blade when parried."

But, knowing Rusty, I suspect it might just have something to do with certain self-conscious males' hair "do"...
post #33 of 85
over the guard actually if I remember the saber stuff (i never fenced it myself) You aim to wrap the blade around an opponents guard to hit the arm (target area in saber)

Traditionally wounding a horseman(saber is a cavalry weapon) in the legs etc did not disable him. If you cut the arm tendons he could no longer fight!
post #34 of 85
first of all let me say i just got a buzz because it was either that or a whipover.

it's guys parting their hair an inch from their ear in order to cover their baldspot.

not to be confused with a whiparound which is even more heinous. that is done in a circular, tornadic fashion.

i could cover my baldspot to a diameter of three inches and then had to surrender.
post #35 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy
it's guys parting their hair an inch from their ear in order to cover their baldspot.

Ah, a COMBOVER.
post #36 of 85
Take your pick:

Instructor A: Tatoos showing around the neck, pierced ears, nose and tongue with silver studs in all. Skiing on current year skis and boots. Annunciates well and is articulate. Eyes wide open and alert.

Instructor B: Clean shaven, no body art or piercings. Skiing on equipment from the mid '90s. Every third word is "like" or "dude". Leans to one side and eyes are half open. Doesn't look you in the eye.

Hmmmmmmmm?
post #37 of 85
Neither will get the message across effectively, and isn't that what instruction is about, the message, not the medium?
post #38 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
Take your pick:

Instructor A: Tatoos showing around the neck, pierced ears, nose and tongue with silver studs in all. Skiing on current year skis and boots. Annunciates well and is articulate. Eyes wide open and alert.

Instructor B: Clean shaven, no body art or piercings. Skiing on equipment from the mid '90s. Every third word is "like" or "dude". Leans to one side and eyes are half open. Doesn't look you in the eye.

Hmmmmmmmm?
Third option, take one look and return to ski school desk.
post #39 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky
Third option, take one look and return to ski school desk.
I'll admit it. My first thought was, "Looks like a great day to free ski..."
post #40 of 85
Thread Starter 
I don't know if it might just be a generational thing, or that I am just used to being around people with tattoo's, but to me, reading JohnH's post, I immediately thought to go with option A. I don't see tat's or peircings as really anything distracting or reducing someone's ability.
post #41 of 85
Yeah, but if someone looks like that, are you going to stick around to find out if he can teach? I'm not sure I would. Instantly, I ASSUME that he'll decide I'm some old woman and treat me accordingly, much like many ski shop personnel do unless they know me.
post #42 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
Take your pick:

Instructor A: Tatoos showing around the neck, pierced ears, nose and tongue with silver studs in all. Skiing on current year skis and boots. Annunciates well and is articulate. Eyes wide open and alert.

Instructor B: Clean shaven, no body art or piercings. Skiing on equipment from the mid '90s. Every third word is "like" or "dude". Leans to one side and eyes are half open. Doesn't look you in the eye.

Hmmmmmmmm?
I'd be wondering about the SSD's judgement as I took my business somewhere else.
post #43 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
I'd be wondering about the SSD's judgement as I took my business somewhere else.
Me too. Yes, people in the first category have a right to do whatever they want to their body. Absolutely. But the fact they chose to do that is one of many factors that people will judge them by.

To me it is indicative of an attutude or view of the world that tells me "This person does not want to be a part of mainstream life/business." So why then go out and try to get a job as part of mainstream life/business? Because it pays the bills and/or has a future - something that should have been taken under consideration when they made that decision.
post #44 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wear The Fox Hat
Neither will get the message across effectively, and isn't that what instruction is about, the message, not the medium?
BINGO!

We have a winner. Getting the message across is the entire goal of teaching. The teacher/student partnership is critical. Both the teacher and the student need to be with someone they are comfortable with. Those teachers mentioned will have a following that will be more comfortable with them. I know that some of my students would be.

Hey, I'm a 50 something conservative guy; there are people out there that would not learn as well from me as they would from a 20 something dude or dudette. It is incombent upon me, the teacher, to recognize that and possibly recommend another instructor. My goal is to insure that the student gets the best possible instruction that they can. If it means another instructor, I got no problem with that.
post #45 of 85
Not all instructors are professionals (in *any* sense of the word). It's a plain fact that there are some career instructors and some others who are just finding a fun way to spend a season on snow.

That said general grooming rules are a good thing, I think.
post #46 of 85
Shhhh..., klkaye! Don't blow my cover!
post #47 of 85
I look askance on anyone in a uniformed or professional role with bits of metal in their face, and/or tatoos. There is a punk or alternative feel to it. That's why people get them, isn't it? In western society at any rate.
Rather like purple or green hair.

I think it undermines their credibility
post #48 of 85
Unless you too sport a flesh wound.
post #49 of 85
Some of the best instruction I have recieved has come from people sporting green hair and eyebrow rings.

I really do not understand why it should make a difference. If you are more interested in your instructors face and not their feet, oh well.

Why would an SSD put a "freak", or anybody else, out on lineup? Because the can teach. If they can't, that is a problem.
post #50 of 85

interesting

no ski forum in europe would discuss on piercings, tatoos, hairstyle etc. like you do. uptil the eightees there were skischool directors in austria wich even did not allow hairlenghts more than the army required. but nowadays it's not uncommon to find pierced and tatooed people in all kinds of professions and as long as the appearence is not scruffy most of the employers and clients don't care.

one can observe a common trend over here, lots of people are removing their tatoos and piercings, probably one reason could be, that the provocing appeal does not exist anymore as almost nobody cares about and many young people allready find it rather oldfashioned and uncool.

as far as i know in austria an employment ban caused by outwardnesses would be illegal, exept there are rules for police and justice officers to hide large or seedy underworld tatoos during they are doing their job.
post #51 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manus
I have a question for those of you who take ski lessons. With the popularity of tattoo's and piercings today, would you think less of your instructor if there were visible tattoo's or piercings? Do you feel this would lessen the quality of lesson you would recieve, and if so, why?

Now, similarly, I've noticed this perception does not seem to exist with Snowboard Instructors, but seems to lie strictly with Ski Instructors (from my experiences watching people's reactions), why?

BTW, the "rule" I mentioned is that many ski areas do not allow visible tattoo's on their on snow employees. However, over the years (last 5 at least), the peircing rules have been getting revoked, but the tattoo rule seems to stick.
Manus posed many questions.
1. Do I think less of an instructor who has tattoos or multiple body peircings?
Personally, I could care less what someone does to themselves. However, and this is a big however, if it is against the rules, then YES I think less of a person who continues to willfully break rules! While breaking the rules might seem cool to some, to me it says you are there following your own agenda, not your employers, and certainly not your customers.
2. Most of the schools I know cannot make exceptions based on the equipment on your feet. It becomes a problem when you do so. One rule for everyone is the only way to avoid law suits from your employees.
3. Are these rules changing? Somewhat but as long as parents pay the bill they will have a lot to say about who works with their kids, and with them.
post #52 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wear The Fox Hat
Neither will get the message across effectively, and isn't that what instruction is about, the message, not the medium?
Interesting comment. I agree it's about the message not the medium. Yet you assume, due to the looks of the medium, that the message will be ineffective. Isn't that being hypocritical, to say it's about the message, while in the same statement saying that someone can't teach well because of the way they look?

I'm not saying it's incorrect, just hypocritical.

Also, if you look at the majority of people who take lessons, I don't think the SSD made a totally bad move hiring the "punk" looking guy. He would probably fit in with quite a few students.
post #53 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
Interesting comment. I agree it's about the message not the medium. Yet you assume, due to the looks of the medium, that the message will be ineffective. Isn't that being hypocritical, to say it's about the message, while in the same statement saying that someone can't teach well because of the way they look?

I'm not saying it's incorrect, just hypocritical.
I don't see it as hypocritical (then again, I wouldn't, cause I said it), but what I mean is that if the medium detracts from the message, then it is difficult to hear the message.
I'll try another (more absurd) example:
If a doctor was dressed as a clown, with big shoes, full face paint, red nose, crazy wig etc, and he sat you down in his office to try to explain to you that you needed to go on a diet, or you might have a heart attack, are you going to be able to focus on his message, or are you going to be distracted by the way he is dressed?

Yes, I am shallow. Outward appearance does make a difference to me. Seeing a pilot in full uniform flying a plane makes me feel more comfortable than seeing some guy in t-shirt and shorts.

So, the person may be perfectly capable of delivering the message, but if, due to how they look, I am distracted from learning, then the message that leaves their lips will not be the message I hear, so they won't be effectively teaching me.
post #54 of 85
Tattoos make you ski faster especially if they have flames in the design and eyebrow piercings reduce goggle fogging. Don't you know.

Take a number...:

Ski and be Mary
post #55 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by tief schnee
Why would an SSD put a "freak", or anybody else, out on lineup? Because the can teach. If they can't, that is a problem.
Whatever happened to GCT?

I don't care if the guy with the snake on his face is as eloquent a teacher as I'll ever meet. That snake will give *me* the creeps, and *I* won't have a good lesson.

I don't have to *accept* the lifestyles of others. I merely have to *tolerate* them. That's what the law says.

And guess what? I have as much right to dislike such body art as the wearer has to put it on themselves. But no one has the right to tell me I am wrong for not liking that sort of art. Should I be shunned for not liking expressionism too? I guess expressionists could be disappointed.
post #56 of 85
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Whatever happened to GCT?

I don't care if the guy with the snake on his face is as eloquent a teacher as I'll ever meet. That snake will give *me* the creeps, and *I* won't have a good lesson.

I don't have to *accept* the lifestyles of others. I merely have to *tolerate* them. That's what the law says.

And guess what? I have as much right to dislike such body art as the wearer has to put it on themselves. But no one has the right to tell me I am wrong for not liking that sort of art. Should I be shunned for not liking expressionism too? I guess expressionists could be disappointed.
This is an interesting comment because yes the customer always has choices. However, you have no idea who your instructor is in a group lesson, but yet people purchase them. A group lesson is often a crap shoot (unless its high level) because a lower level lesson may be taught by a new, uncertified instructor, or a very experienced Level III or higher.

I have seen very "instructor looking" instructors give horrible lessons, and I have seen instructors who looking nothing of the part put out great lessons. When it comes to personal preferences and choices, that is what private lessons are for. Afterall, from a business perspective, group lessons are for getting people on the hill and getting them skiing hopefully dropping more money for more lessons and hopefully convincing them to purchase private lessons, not always about great lessons with individualized feedback (but that is not saying that individualized feedback should be neglected).

And, WTFH, just a thought that popped into my head with your Clown Suit Doctor comment, what about Patch Adams (a person brought to many people's attention by the Robin Williams movie).
post #57 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Whatever happened to GCT? ............
My ability to identify and facilitate motivational, understanding and movement needs was strangely unaffected by the length of my sideburns.

If *you* can't, then *you* shouldn't. People often ask for a certain type instructor, male/female, young/old.......*you* may miss out on a great lesson though.

I would hazard a guess that most people with facial tattoos and aggressive facial piercings are aware of the effect it has on their employment situation.
post #58 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by tief schnee
If *you* can't, then *you* shouldn't. People often ask for a certain type instructor, male/female, young/old.......*you* may miss out on a great lesson though.
ask all you want.....at the private desk.

at adult groups instructors are assigned.
post #59 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy
ask all you want.....at the private desk.

at adult groups instructors are assigned.
You can always ask, it might not get you anywhere, but you can ask.

At everyplace I have worked, several times a season I saw classes assigned to females or older instructors based on guests preferences. Of course on busy days, not so much.
post #60 of 85
RG,
There are a lot of requests that happen in group lessons. Matching a pro to the students is part of the job of assigning lessons. So many instructors get territorial about "their lessons" because they forget it is the customer's lesson, not theirs. Fail to give a customer what they want and they will ask for their money back. As it should be.
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 › Question from a "rule" in some skis schools...