New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Flex and Extend - Page 4

post #91 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501
Its rather pointless to pick on the 250lbs guys trying to learn how to ski. I have alot of respect for larger people that get out there and try it.

My training (off and on season) consists of weight training, cardio work, bike riding, the skiers edge, harb carvers, combined with the
Alexander Technique for proper use of the body.

I was not picking on them - just pointing out they NEED do nothing to go skiing.... you're the one obssessed with the NEED thing...

A regular fitness guru hey... well you should find it simple to EXTEND the hips.... (which actually many high level athletes struggle to do as it is easier to use the legs than extend the hips for many people)

Also should be a cinch to activate muscles - to use functional tension then! .... it will be much easier than "pulling the foot back"...
post #92 of 112
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
In every flexed image, I can barely see the tails of the skis from the snow that's getting kicked up. Monitors just fine.
I didn't make any effort to capture the float in the first montage (I think its pretty obvious they are prefloat from the edges and body position).

Check the 2nd image of the 2nd montage.
post #93 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si
Similarly, Big E's preference for "functional tension" over "kinetic chain" seems to me to be just a personal choice. To me functional tension relates to activation of agonist/antagonist. I don't find it to be nearly as meaningful as the concept of a kinetic chain which infers a linkage and sequencing of movements.
Si,

The Kinetic Chain does not work without functional tension. They are not equivalent notions.
post #94 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501
I didn't make any effort to capture the float in the first montage (I think its pretty obvious they are prefloat from the edges and body position).

Check the 2nd image of the 2nd montage.
Ok,you tell me. What's good float vs bad float?
post #95 of 112
Thread Starter 
Lets forget about any MA (I get plenty of that from HH) and get back to the purpose of the thread which is a discussion of this type of release. Based on my observations I see releasing with a flex used mainly by racers and relatively few recreational skiers. Why is that?
post #96 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski

Me? I think i prefer yoga in many ways... but it is all much the same re core stability and activation... and I still wish to try tai chi - it has always had more appeal to me than the comparable alternatives....
Disski, check this site out. http://www.gilmanstudio.com later, RicB.
post #97 of 112

mortor and concrete

Anybody here ever work with mortor or concrete, or stucco? Ever use a trowel? I have. It's very interesting how different trowels flex differently, and how the trowel flexes and shapes the work. It's also interesting how the path the trowel follows in concret can be altered by applying forces, bending it and pushing it every which way.

A ski is like a trowel.

Flex and extend are simply a means of applying forces to the ski. I've never described body mechanics of bending the flexing or extending the elbow, shoulder etc. to work a trowel, but appearently it's helpful to some in skiing. I will accept that, but the ski's the thing, and the forces we apply to it govern it's motion are all that really matter. It's a little trickier skiing, because we have to control our movements as well as the skis.
post #98 of 112
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
Flex and extend are simply a means of applying forces to the ski. I've never described body mechanics of bending the flexing or extending the elbow, shoulder etc. to work a trowel, but appearently it's helpful to some in skiing. I will accept that, but the ski's the thing, and the forces we apply to it govern it's motion are all that really matter. It's a little trickier skiing, because we have to control our movements as well as the skis.
Interesting point on bending of the ski. To continue with my observations I rarely see recreational skiers (I'm excluding racers here) bend a ski enough so that they are skiing in a radius tighter then the radius cut into the ski.
post #99 of 112
Hogwash
post #100 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB
Disski, check this site out. http://www.gilmanstudio.com later, RicB.

thanks Ric
post #101 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si
Ric,
I appreciate and enjoy your ability to relate skiing terms with anatomy and function. I think it is important to realize, however, that some of the stated preferences for terminology are often based on personal interpretation and preference. For example, pulling the foot back (perhaps better stated as pulling back on the foot) doesn't necessarily imply moving the foot but rather just exerting a force to keep it from sliding forward (it does for me anyway). My own guess is that a simple cue like this will work for more people than the cue of resisting forward movement. My own preference certainly is to talk about pulling back on the foot. Whether I'm right or wrong on which might be more commonly effective, I think that it is still a matter of personal interpretation.

Similarly, Big E's preference for "functional tension" over "kinetic chain" seems to me to be just a personal choice. To me functional tension relates to activation of agonist/antagonist. I don't find it to be nearly as meaningful as the concept of a kinetic chain which infers a linkage and sequencing of movements. I find using the concept of a kinetic chain to be one of the most effective ways for me to visualize and model my movements in skiing (as well as tennis). Also, I believe that including a movement (whether actual or "virtual") in a description is very effective for most people in terms of trying to produce either the movement or a "tensioning," whereas just describing a tensioning is not (perhaps what Max was saying?).

What I see happening is that people are putting down one expression and promoting another based on personal interpretation and preference. Nothing wrong with that as perhaps it will lead to a more effective visualization for some. At best, I think there may be a more generally effective term that works for more people more of the time. I am just wary (and think others should be as well) of claiming any one person's interpretation as the only or best way to describe things.
Sure SI, but just as often it is a very literal world, and pulling the foot means just that ot someone. Then the questions start, how far back, what do I do when I get the foot pulled back enough, do I pull behind the outside foot, ect. ect.

So if pulling the foot back really means something different than pulling it back, then we aren't being accurate in our discription are we. I'm all for recognizing personal interpretations and using what clicks with a student, but on the other hand I'm all for recogniziing what is really happening biomechnicaly too and keeping true for general conversation about what works, why it works and how it works.

So really what you are talking about from a physiological standpoint SI is functional ellastic tension keeping the inside ski and foot where you want it. I still say that from a literal interpretation there is a difference in the muscle recruitment between "pulling the foot back" and "resisting excess forward movement of the foot".

Literal students are a dime a dozen in my neck of the woods, so I don't know if it so easily understood. If tipping means actually tipping the foot, why would pulling the foot back not mean actualy pulling the foot back to a student? I like to be able to tell them what is really happening and why, and help them work through it. Later, RicB.
post #102 of 112
RicB: That's exactly correct.

To activate the kinetic chain, some sort of muscular recruitment is required above and beyond the literal instruction. Some sort of internal cue often helps--"do you feel the hip opening as you move forwards"? Have you "activated the core"? The sequence of muscular movement as they rise throught the kinetic chain does not "just happen" -- they are directed.
post #103 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Si,

The Kinetic Chain does not work without functional tension. They are not equivalent notions.
I agree. I was just referring to your comment below in relating them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
IMO, the movements of the feet initiate the movements of the upper body via the "Kinetic Chain". Ugh what a term. How about:

Movements of the feet are transmitted to the upper body via functional tension.
I just think that the while the term "kinetic chain" includes functional tension it also describes much more. Thus IMHO it is much more effective for talking about transmittal of movements.
post #104 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB
Sure SI, but just as often it is a very literal world, and pulling the foot means just that ot someone. Then the questions start, how far back, what do I do when I get the foot pulled back enough, do I pull behind the outside foot, ect. ect.

So if pulling the foot back really means something different than pulling it back, then we aren't being accurate in our discription are we. I'm all for recognizing personal interpretations and using what clicks with a student, but on the other hand I'm all for recogniziing what is really happening biomechnicaly too and keeping true for general conversation about what works, why it works and how it works.

So really what you are talking about from a physiological standpoint SI is functional ellastic tension keeping the inside ski and foot where you want it. I still say that from a literal interpretation there is a difference in the muscle recruitment between "pulling the foot back" and "resisting excess forward movement of the foot".

Literal students are a dime a dozen in my neck of the woods, so I don't know if it so easily understood. If tipping means actually tipping the foot, why would pulling the foot back not mean actualy pulling the foot back to a student? I like to be able to tell them what is really happening and why, and help them work through it. Later, RicB.
In my experience, literal interpretation is not necessarily accurate or effective interpretation. I just don't think that many people can build movements (or just functional tension) based on an understanding of what muscles to contract. I have observed a lot of manual muscle testing. Some physicians and PT's will give the direction to the patient to resist their attempt to pull or push on a limb. Others will say to the patient to pull or push on a limb and try to overcome their resistance. It would be interesting to do a little study to find out which of these is generally more effective. It seems we would bet on different sides.
post #105 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si
I just think that the while the term "kinetic chain" includes
functional tension it also describes much more. Thus IMHO it is much more effective for talking about transmittal of movements.
It's been said that the kinetic chain works best when you are not consciously controlling the sequence of the actions. Just letting them happen, while the kinetic chain manages the sequence(outcome).

What is often left unsaid is that the forces that propogate need certain muscular tensions to be effective. What you can detect is the tension within your own body when you're moving really well.

That's why I like to talk about something that the student can control effectively. The sequencing of the actions through the kinetic chain is not effecitively controllable, but the tensions within the body are.

Also, there is a notion afloat that if movement of the appendages is initiated by primary movements/tensions of the core, then the movements will be safer; eg. they are less injurious than moving the foot and then having the core dragged along in response....
post #106 of 112
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
What you can detect is the tension within your own body when you're moving really well.

That's why I like to talk about something that the student can control effectively. The sequencing of the actions through the kinetic chain is not effecitively controllable, but the tensions within the body are.
Is it your experience that the average student has a stong kinesthetic sense? The average modern posture (helped along by hours upon hours in classroom desks and then at work desks) would seem to suggest otherwise.
post #107 of 112
It varies from student to student.

There is no hard and fast rule -- the more experienced skier has movements ingrained into their neural pathways that can be hard to modify, so small deviations for them feel huge.

The less experience student may be struggling with balance skills -- the struggle can get in the way of any sensation, even foot pressure.

Sensations from the newbie couch-potato can be confused by the new equipment.

But regardless, they can all feel it when they've done it "right". It's the job of the instructor to guide them to that feeling.
post #108 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si
In my experience, literal interpretation is not necessarily accurate or effective interpretation. I just don't think that many people can build movements (or just functional tension) based on an understanding of what muscles to contract. I have observed a lot of manual muscle testing. Some physicians and PT's will give the direction to the patient to resist their attempt to pull or push on a limb. Others will say to the patient to pull or push on a limb and try to overcome their resistance. It would be interesting to do a little study to find out which of these is generally more effective. It seems we would bet on different sides.
Pushing and pulling use different muscles. I would assume that they are testing for strength in different muscle groups.

Do I tell students which muscles to use? rarely if ever. But I do use the terms functional tension when appropriate, aloong with resisting forces, resistance to the foot moving to far forward, pulling the foot back, pulling both feet back, ect. ect. My guess is we aren't so far apart Si, until someone asks, how, how far, or why. Then maybe we part paths some.

For me these conversations here are not really what to teach, but more on what we need to know to teach effectively. There is nothing wrong with utilizing whatever cue works for an individual a long there is a clear understanding of why, how, and when, along with what is really happening, such as,,,,well you don't really pull the foot back, you just control where it is. then follow this with a short resonable explantion of where it needs to be.

On whether literal interpretation is accurate or effective, all I can say is that it is not my choice, it is not up to me, it is the student who brings literal interpretation into the equation. It is then my job to work with it and through it. Later, RicB.
post #109 of 112
RicB,

Do you ever tell them to "activate the core"?
post #110 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
RicB,

Do you ever tell them to "activate the core"?
You bet.This one thing alone can make a huge difference. My favorite ways to get there are sucking the belly button towards the spine, using a gentle crunch tension and holding it while skiing, and deep (abdominal) rhythmic breathing timed to turn shape or a number of turns. All three of these create functional tension in the core and pelvic girdle, creating stability and a foundation to get mobile from. the breathing goes great with getting long and short in a turn also. How bout you BigE, What cues do you use?

Truth is, there is no end of the ways I'll try to get a student to move in a new more fucntional way. Later, Ricb.
post #111 of 112
For little kids, I really like "hug the teddy bear" and so do they! As they grow up, teenagers love to "carry the case of beer". The core stability just happens as they pretend to do their assigned task.

Everyone gets to put their arms around a huge beach ball and round their shoulders using a bit of an ab crunch. Telling them to pull their belly botton/waist to the spine has a similar effect.

As far as finding when in the turn to hug/grip or squeeze more, I ask them to find out what is the best time to start squeezing a bit tighter, and when to relax a bit more.

That focusses them directly on their core and we can continue towards learning some skills.
post #112 of 112
Ric B
One instructor had a "stick head out of jacket" like "turtle extending head from shell" ... thingy for core activation.... (i dunno did not much for me i just use the pilates idea)....

Same guy describes activating inner thigh by simply telling you to do so..."make muscle ready to work" "not tense" he suggested that the snow (very heavy and cut up) was going to want to knock the ski around so I should think "activate this muscle"(hand on muscle required) to stop snow knocking the ski around (he only knows the muscle name in german)

My physio often uses me pushing against her but specifically instructs to NOT overpower her.... she will usually be assessing muscle activation etc while doing this (eg I will have foot on shoulder and she will have hand on thigh sensing muscle activation) I know she adjusts her resistance to get required result...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching