or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

One-legged skiing

post #1 of 52
Thread Starter 
I started off skiing couple years ago following Harald Harb's books. Now, I can ski down groomed black or double-black diamond (east coast) without any problem.

I would like to try bump this season. Harald advocates one-legged (the other free leg close to the stance leg) skiing even on bump. I read so many threads here and most people were talking about a close 2-feet skiing with 50-50 pressure (or 60-40). Since I am so used to the one-legged skiing, it would be difficult for me to re-adjust to 50-50 or even 60-40 2-legged skiing.

Currently with about 80-20 (or 90-10) pressure, can I still apply the skidding technique to check speed in bump? Or should I re-adjust to 50-50 2-legged skiing?

Thanks
post #2 of 52
It seems like skiing with all your weight on one foot in bumps would be akin to doing one-legged squats. I don't think I'd last more then three bumps before my legs would be killing me!
post #3 of 52
Thread Starter 

One-legged skiing

I do not feel tired on the groom with the one-legged skiing. In fact it is quite the opposite. Since you apply 90% of the pressure on the stance (downhill) ski, it bends and form the arc easily to carve.

However, my concern is the one-legged technique may not be good in bump, since skidding to check speed with 2 edges would be a lot more efficient and stable (I think) than 1 edge.

Thanks.
post #4 of 52
Wow - this one is hard to figure out! HH's Anyone Can Be An Expert Skier (ACBAES) books cover bump technique. HH advises the use of the Phantom Move in the bumps. This is advocating what he calls a carved turn. Although this will temporarily transfer most weight onto one foot, it is not what most people would consider to be one legged skiing in the bumps. He also advises use of a relatively close stance width versus a "traditional" wide stance width for bump skiing (although I'm not sure if there is anyone who actually teaches a wide stance width for bump skiing).

There are several ways to learn how to ski bumps. For a book that is very different from PMTS, try Dan DiPiro's book on Mogul Skiing. There are also many threads on mogul technique here on Epic where you'll find a wide range of opinions on technique. Although the differing opinions may be confusing, you may find some comments that "click" and work for you. In this sense, Epic may be even more valuable than a book that covers just one method of learning to ski bumps.

To specifically answer your question on pressure, one rule of thumb that I've found to be particularly useful is to let pressure distribution happen instead of trying to force something to happen. Although I will often task my students with forcing a certain pressure in order to widen their experience base, not forcing pressure usually is a smoother and more efficient technique. In general in the moguls, because your feet are closer together than when you're on the groomers, your pressure distribution is closer to 50-50 than on the groomers. There are 3 main ways that you can control speed in the bumps:
1) absorption/extension
2) turning your line of travel uphill (note that in a mogul field "uphill" can sometimes be straight "down" the hill)
3) turning your skis in a direction outside of the line of travel (i.e. skidding)
(oh - and a fourth - falling)
How you blend these 3 (or 4 if you prefer ) methods will determine your "style".
post #5 of 52
You can ask Harald that question here: http://www.realskiers.com/pmtsforum/...b1e2da60 0905

A tip: you are misinterpreting it somewhat, also, be polite.
post #6 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by loba222 View Post
the other free leg close to the stance leg
The other free leg? Just how many free legs do you have??
post #7 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB View Post
...also, be polite.
or else.
post #8 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by loba222 View Post
I started off skiing couple years ago following Harald Harb's books. Now, I can ski down groomed black or double-black diamond (east coast) without any problem.

I would like to try bump this season. Harald advocates one-legged (the other free leg close to the stance leg) skiing even on bump. I read so many threads here and most people were talking about a close 2-feet skiing with 50-50 pressure (or 60-40). Since I am so used to the one-legged skiing, it would be difficult for me to re-adjust to 50-50 or even 60-40 2-legged skiing.

Currently with about 80-20 (or 90-10) pressure, can I still apply the skidding technique to check speed in bump? Or should I re-adjust to 50-50 2-legged skiing?

Thanks
Not expert advice, but my opinion and experience. Just like powder skiing, I was always told to keep the skis together to "build a platform". You also want to keep both skis working the same and on the same bump, but one problem with 50-50 that I have, is when I skid the back of the bump for speed control, the inside edge grabs and forces my legs apart. not bad on control, but it looks like hell. So when I'm skiing that technique, I have to consciously cthink about lightening up the pressure on the inside ski.
post #9 of 52
Welcome to EpicSki, Loba222!

If I may, your question illustrates the major problem with any "technique-focused" approach to learning, as opposed to a skill-focused approach. While there certainly are some vital, fundamental movement patterns common to virtually all good skiing, truly expert skiing is not about "a technique." It's about having the skills, perception, experience, versatility and courage to adapt and improvise, letting your body find the best technique at any moment, for any intent or purpose.

My suggestion is to recognize that all the practice skiing on one foot has done you a lot of good. It's developed essential skills and balancing reflexes that will always help you, in any situation. Keep practicing those drills, too, because you can always improve. Good skiing certainly does require the ability to balance exclusively on one foot.

But it is absolutely a mistake to think that you must always stand on one foot. Skiing on one foot--especially if the other foot is lifted off the snow--limits some important options. Particularly relevant to bump skiing, it prevents you from being able to turn the ski you're standing on with your leg, requiring you to use your upper body.

It's easy to see why, if you would like to participate in a little experiment: Stand up, balanced on both feet, with a natural space between them. Now rotate your right foot left and right, keeping some weight on it. Keep your upper body and hips still, and turn only the leg. Got it? Pay attention to the muscles you use, the sensations you feel, and the movements that happen (specifically, feel your femur rotating in the hip socket). It's a powerful movement that allows you great precision--you can turn the foot quickly or slowly, and you can turn it and stop it at any moment, pointing it exactly any direction you choose. Obviously, you can turn the left foot the same way, and you can turn them both at the same time--whatever you need!

Now balance entirely on that right foot, lifting your left foot off the floor. Try turning the right foot again and notice that now you have FAR fewer options, and that your upper body must get involved. You can "jerk" it left and right, countering with your upper body, or can rotate your upper body and then yank the foot around. But try turning the foot slowly, smoothly, continuously, and precisely. It's more than obvious, isn't it, how much control you've sacrificed by lifting that foot!

By the way, standing on both feet with too narrow a stance causes the same problems--try it, with your feet pulled tightly together. Never take my word for anything--convince yourself!

So continue to practice your one-footed drills. But also practice skiing on both feet, equally weighted. And skiing on the other foot, too. Great skiers, from World Cup racers, to bump skiers, to extreme mountain skiers, use all these options skillfully and appropriately, without bias.

Practice drills, focusing on specific techniques. But remember that skiing and practicing are two different things. When skiing, you have to free your mind to think about tactics and outcomes--where you want to go, rather than how--and allow your body to blend techniques and movements as needed. One of the worst mistakes you can make--in skiing or anywhere else--is to force your body into the straight jacket of one way of moving.

Enjoy. It's a beautiful thing!

Best regards,
Bob
post #10 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado View Post
Skiing on one foot--especially if the other foot is lifted off the snow--limits some important options. Particularly relevant to bump skiing, it prevents you from being able to turn the ski you're standing on with your leg, requiring you to use your upper body.
Only if you plan on pivoting or otherwise actively steering the skis. If you plan on having the skis turn as a RESULT of edge engagement from tipping and flexing the inside leg then the light inside foot helps rather than hinders.
post #11 of 52
I agree with Rusty and Bob. This forum has many posts related to moguls. Read them all. There are a lot of conflicting theories, but just keep your filter goggles on and read them all and spend some time with it. Another pretty good book which has some good coverage related to bump skiing is Mark Elling's book, "The All Mountain Skier".

I have watched HH's videos and read his books also. My feeling right now is that he makes a lot of very good points about skiing, particularly groomed skiing and race oriented technique. But I particularly feel that his demonstrations of bump skiing are weak and not representative of high performance bump skiing. He makes a valiant effort to apply his PMTS techinque to bumps and it sorta works if you wind your way down through them a certain way, or if the bumps are nice big, well spaced bumps that you can make nice full turns in. But if you are interested in skiing the zipper line or skiing in tighter bumps in general, then I feel the PMTS mental model is not where you want to be. As Bob pointed out, in the bumps it is not so taboo to use some pivoting, which in the PMTS world is strictly verboten. Its difficult to discuss bump techniques and progress if from the beginning you are strictly not allowed to pivot your skiis.

I am also not a huge fan of Dan DiPiro's book, which I read completely. I am suprised Dan has not contributed to this thread yet. If you want to ski the bumps the way he claims that mogul competitors everywhere ski the bumps, then that is probably the only book I know of to cover that topic. Myself, I am not interested in skiing them that way.

I will say this, I would never teach a student to adopt a wide stance in the bumps nor would I teach them to ski on one stance ski at any point.

If you do go for a ski lesson, make sure to research ahead of time and find out who is the local mogul guru and request them for your instructor. That being said, almost any higher level instructor could give you insights about the skiing in general which will HELP your bump skiing and help you get there eventually..even if they themselves are not rippin' bump skiers. But for you, my opinion is that in order to really rip the bumps you will need to free yourself from some of the PMTS hardline rules and try some new things.

or........

Go back to pmts all mountain camp and see if they can get you rippin' the bumps the PMTS way. The people that have gone to HH's camps say he rips in the bumps and can take you there. I just haven't personally observed that in his videos.
post #12 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB View Post
You can ask Harald that question here: http://www.realskiers.com/pmtsforum/...b1e2da60 0905

A tip: you are misinterpreting it somewhat, also, be polite.
i have great respect for HH...i think a lot of what he teaches makes sense. but his stauch refusal to accept ANY rotary in bumps is one point that doesn't make a lot of sense. HH loves to use WC GS/SL technique as justification for his carving methodology. the problem is...in the case of bump skiing, the WC guys ARE using rotary. if HH's pure carving were a more effective (read: "faster") technique in bumps, the WC bumpers would be doing it that way!!
post #13 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
He makes a valiant effort to apply his PMTS techinque to bumps and it sorta works if you wind your way down through them a certain way, or if the bumps are nice big, well spaced bumps that you can make nice full turns in. ...Its difficult to discuss bump techniques and progress if from the beginning you are strictly not allowed to pivot your skiis.
This is incorrect and caused by a misunderstanding of how to apply PMTS movements in bumps. If you can ski a tight flush with PMTS you can ski tight bumps with PMTS.
post #14 of 52
ok. if you say so. I suggest that the PMTS forum is probably the best place to discuss PMTS technique. From what I've seen in this forum this type of discussion usually turns into a heated debate that never goes anywhere. I'm only commenting on what I've seen in the videos. I hear down the grapevine that PMTS can go down the zipperline and that there are shotshots doing it, but I haven't seen it in the official videos. That is my impression and I don't want to engage in any debates further than that about whether I think PMTS is a sound theoretical approach for approaching the bumps or not.

For me, its not the best approach, mainly because of the all-compassing rules about no pivoting..."our way or the highway" approach to hitting the bumps. PMTS has some good points that all skiers can learn from, but sometimes it becomes a little overbearing and limiting in some situations, bumps being one of them. That is only my opinion.
post #15 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by loba222 View Post

Currently with about 80-20 (or 90-10) pressure, can I still apply the skidding technique to check speed in bump? Or should I re-adjust to 50-50 2-legged skiing?

Thanks
Loba,

I think the one of the most important thing for skier is to learn all different techniques and apply them in different conditions. Can one ski bumps well with 90-10 weight distribution - absolutely. 50-50 - yes (well, I think 50-50 maybe not that good, it should be at least 55-45). So no matter how you learn to ski you may try to learn being versatile, it will help a lot in a long run. So try your 90-10 in bumps, if does not work try more even weight distribution and see if it feels better. If it does not work at all go to smaller bumps or groomers and try again. Get Dan DePiro's book and try his suggestions. This book BTW has very good groomed snow exersices in preparation for bump skiing. So try everything and learn to ski with 100-0 to 0-100 (skiing only on iside ski) weight distribution and you'll become a better skier.

As for "one legged skiing" in bumps I think it has one good benefit for beginner bump skier. In bumps pitch changes very fast and often skiers got caught with too much weight inside. If person is in a backseat when it happens it quickly leads to the crash. If you ski with your legs closer and more weight on outside ski chances of this happening become less. Another thing - in bumps lead change is essential and it seems to be when you constantly changing weight distribution it is easier to do a quick lead change as oppose to the situation when you deliberately trying keeping both skis equally weighted. But again, there are many good ways to ski bumps, try them all.
post #16 of 52

Regarding Rotary, and skill vs. technique

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado
Skiing on one foot--especially if the other foot is lifted off the snow--limits some important options. Particularly relevant to bump skiing, it prevents you from being able to turn the ski you're standing on with your leg, requiring you to use your upper body.

Only if you plan on pivoting or otherwise actively steering the skis. If you plan on having the skis turn as a RESULT of edge engagement from tipping and flexing the inside leg then the light inside foot helps rather than hinders.
With all respect, Max, whether you "plan on having skis turn as a result of edge engagement" or not, rotary is an extremely important skill in skiing. Harb's arguments to the contrary suggest an enormous lack of understanding of basic skiing principles, and cause the exact problems and confusion that lead to honest questions like that of the original poster here. You can plan all you want, but on the convex surface of a bump, or in the air, or whenever you're unweighted intentionally or otherwise, or whenever your skis "plan" to go a different direction than you need, you're going to suffer if you lack rotary skills. Skill is ALWAYS better than a lack of it!

I would like to debunk, once and for all, a few myths about the rotary skill that Harb and a few others continue to propagate. I realize it's wishful thinking when it comes to some people, but I'll give it a try.

Harb's own materials clearly underscore his misunderstanding, and demonstrate the problems as well (as others have pointed out). He himself struggles in difficult bumps because of a lack of rotary skills, causing him to rely exclusively on upper body rotation and a powerfully planted pole (another upper body-related rotary mechanism). You can easily see this problem (if you look for it, as opposed to turning a blind eye) throughout his "Expert 2" video and the photographs and sequences in his books. If you think that "edge engagement" is what is about to turn his airborne skis on the cover photograph of "Expert 2," as opposed to that pole planted way out to the side and that left arm he's thrown forward, you're not paying attention!

Note that I am not discounting the importance of pole plants or upper body movements here, either--all skills are good--but if that's all you've got, expand your options! Whenever the upper body gets involved in turning the skis, the result is skidding, whether you want it or not--which you can see throughout "Expert" 2. For example, look at Harb's skis from behind in the gold suit segment beginning about 3 minutes into the video--he's got his feet clamped together and lifts his inside ski at the start of each turn. And his tails wash out every time.

(To Harb's credit, he does speak at one point of the importance of "balance" as opposed to "technique"--even stating that he spends a lot more time teaching balance than technique--and he demonstrates some very good standard balance exercises. I'm baffled at his claims that this is a unique feature of his teaching alone, since those exercises are basic repertoire for every instructor I've ever known, but I approve of his focus on balance at the beginning of his video. He shows and talks about many balance variations--from outside foot to inside foot to what he calls the "Von Grunigen move"--more commonly known as the "White Pass Turn" in honor of Phil and Steve Mahre--which starts on the inside ski and shifts balance only much later to the outside ski. But he quickly muddies his point when he starts to talk about exclusively early weight transfers, lifting [or lightening] the downhill ski as fundamental to good turn initiations, and so on. And then confusion descends again when he talks about all sorts of different techniques for initiating turns. Which one should you choose? Answer: you shouldn't! Let your body do it!)

Anyway, the next section about "releasing" really makes my point. One footed or two, he speaks (accurately) about first releasing the edge(s), then getting the tips to go down the hill. But the rotary input that moves the tips down the hill (you didn't think the edges did that, did you?--remember, they're released) comes entirely from his upper body--largely from that pole, which he repeatedly emphasizes MUST be planted firmly, transmitting torque through his outstretched arm, torso, and abdomen. Much rotary input also comes from rotating his upper body--note how his downhill arm always ends up ahead of his uphill arm. Note also that the moment he lifts that inside ski and pulls the foot out toward the outside boot (which he verbally emphasizes), the tail of the outside ski increases its skid. Every time. Watch later as he links these releases together--see how the pole plant pulls back on his arm and shoulder every time? That's torque, pure and simple, wrenching his skis around from the upper body, because he cannot do it with his legs (or his released edges, obviously).

I'm also astonished by the continued emphasis on pulling the inside boot toward the outside boot--a "negative" movement toward the outside of the turn--which contributes unquestionably to unwanted skidding of the outside ski. "Squeeze a ball," "squeeze a sponge," "press against someone else's pole," and so on--these exercises all develop the same negative movement, virtually ensuring that the inside leg isn't able to act independently, and that the upper body is the only way to turn the skis. The inevitable outcome on the snow is easy to see. If you look for it.

In spite of Harb's stubborn refusal to discuss leg steering movements, he still does show them--clearly--in many situations. Watch his "wall" exercise, for example, and tell me how his legs get turned a different direction from his pelvis, and then turn the opposite direction, while his butt remains glued to that wall. And tell me too how he could make these turning movements with a ball or sponge clamped between his boots. He can't. This exercise shows good leg steering movements. The only step remaining is to recognize and accept it! (By the way, Harb's oft-repeated assertions that leg rotation results in a square stance are further evidence of a fundamental lack of understanding. And his assertion that PSIA emphasizes a square stance not only reflects a technical misunderstanding, it is pure bunk.)

Anyway, none of this discussion suggests that Harb's exercises aren't worth doing--they are--or that his video isn't worth watching--all videos are. But recognize the critical difference between exercises and drills on one hand, and skiing on the other. And don't be fooled by Harb's assertions that rotary movements don't exist in good skiing--or in his skiing. Practice every technique you can imagine. Just don't confuse the drills, or the techniques involved, with the skills they develop.

I realize that it sounds confusing and vague to some people, this emphasis on skills as opposed to technqiue. After all, I'm definitely NOT telling you exactly how you should ski. Perhaps you prefer linear, clear directions like "do it exactly [this] way." Perhaps it's frightening to let go of conscious control as you let your body choose the exact technique to suit the moment. I understand that--it's not uncommon, but it is, ultimately, very limiting. (Helping overcome this fear is a common job for instructors, and there are some good books that address it as well--like the classic "Inner Skiing" by Bob Kriegel and Tim Gallwey.)

Once you let go of the need to consciously tell your body how to ski, you will enter a whole new zone of performance. It's not always easy, but it is always exciting and rewarding. It's simpler, too. Suddenly you no longer have to consciously decide whether to weight one foot or two, or to do a weighted release or lift and tip, a von Grunigen move, or a Phantom move, or a Super Phantom, or whatever else names Harb has come up with. You can focus on the experience, enjoy the freedom, and thrill in the amazing ability of your body to play, adapt, and move in harmony with the earth. Save the conscious, technique-focused instructions for drills and exercises. Then shut off that voice in your head and let your body do what it does best--move, freely, and skillfully!

Best regards,
Bob Barnes
post #17 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado View Post
Harb's arguments to the contrary suggest an enormous lack of understanding of basic skiing principles...
With all due respect, that statement is one of the funniest I have seen on Epic so far.
post #18 of 52
YES!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado View Post
Once you let go of the need to consciously tell your body how to ski, you will enter a whole new zone of performance. It's not always easy, but it is always exciting and rewarding.
...
You can focus on the experience, enjoy the freedom, and thrill in the amazing ability of your body to play, adapt, and move in harmony with the earth. Save the conscious, technique-focused instructions for drills and exercises. Then shut off that voice in your head and let your body do what it does best--move, freely, and skillfully!
post #19 of 52
Loba,

You're probably learning more about the sociology of professional ski instructors in this thread than about bumps. From PMTS you should have a narrow stance, a very good starting point for bumps. From there, keep it simple, get out and ski some bumps starting smaller, working up, would be my advice.
post #20 of 52
Very good post, Bob. Broadening the skill base, it's a crucial element of high level skiing.

And to address your skill vs technique theme; TECHNIQUE IS JUST A OCHESTRATED BLEND OF MULTIPLE SKILLS. THE LARGER THE SKILL BASE, THE MORE VAST THE POSSIBLE BLENDS.
post #21 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
With all due respect, that statement is one of the funniest I have seen on Epic so far.
HH's approach has been to turn rotary into a "sin", verboten, taboo, never to be thought about by skiers deliberately. Tipping the free foot aggressively is his approach for how to coax the body to do a long list of things which PMTS skiers are not even aware they are doing..hopefully the right things. In some ways, the PMTS system is a bag of "tricks". A simple way for skiers to think about something that is actually VERY complex. I think just about anyone could benefit from trying out the PMTS "tricks" in order to experience some new sensations perhaps or gain some insight. But my opinion is that it does not represent an all-encompassing technique.

True high level all-mountain skiing will only come from reaching a much deeper level of understanding about what those moves...such as the phantom move, etc.. are coaxing your body to actually do. True high level skiing does not use one turn for all conditions either. There are infinite variations based upon various skills. And true high level skiing knows that some of these verboten skills, such as rotary, are appropriate. It is not simple. You will not learn this level of skiing in one year or ten.

Whether there is secretly some Rotary happening without PMTS skiers thinking about it is debateable, and would depend on the conditions. Certainly if HH is using a blocking pole plant for bump demos(as bob noticed), then there is at least some rotary happening..

BUMPS

Personally, I feel the smoothest and best bump skiing blends some rotary skills with strong edging skills throughout the entire turn. If, your approach is to pivot your skiis on the top of the bump and then skid sideways down to the next bump and do a hard edge set on the top of the next bump when you slam into it, well that is quite obviously a terrible extreme of bad bump skiing. But acheiving a pure PMTS style turn down the zipperline is unrealistic as well. Blocking pole plants can be helpful to induce some rotary, but I know for my part when I'm skiing the smoothest in the bumps I hardly have any hard firm pole plants happening at all, so I do not think that using a blocking pole plant for every turn is the best way. Certainly a good "trick" if you suddenly need to turn a bit faster or sharper than normal.

In order to make more use of edging throughout the entire turn, EXTEND down the backside of each bump. As you extend, initiate your turn. Yes, dont be afraid to use rotary if you have to, but don't use pure rotary either. If your turn is initiated and your edges on pressing into the snow as you go down the backside/outside of the bump, you will effectively make a high-C. Don't bother with stance foot/free foot thinking here. Focus more on extending both of your legs to keep both of your edges on the snow, pointing your toes down. Reach down and grab onto that snow on tipped edges. If you do this early, the second half of the turn will be way easier. But mind you, if you are skiing the zipper, you are absolutely going to have times when either (A) your skis don't stay on the snow or (B) the next bump is closer than you thought and you have to make a sharper turn...or (C) something I'm not thinking of. In these cases you will fundamentally *HAVE* to use rotary skills to assist your turn shape before you hit the next bump.

In bumps...rotary is not so verboten.

ps - I like what HH has to say about groomed snow skiing generally.
post #22 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
With all due respect, that statement is one of the funniest I have seen on Epic so far.
Just out of curiosity and an honest desire to increase my personal understanding, which of the comments that Bob made about skiing and how it works did you find incorrect or "off"? I found his analysis quite interesting. Did you? Why or why not?
post #23 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
With all due respect, that statement is one of the funniest I have seen on Epic so far.
If you showed him all his due respect you would explain ,in your opinion,the error in his thinking. I think this post shows no respect. But Bob has a thick skin . From my observations of his posts.
You however do not.
post #24 of 52
I believe Max was defending HH against the following statement from Bob:
Quote:
Harb's arguments to the contrary suggest an enormous lack of understanding of basic skiing principles...


By the way, I really got a lot out of Bob's comments also.
post #25 of 52
True, but Bob went on to explain why he thinks that is so. If it is not so, then some of the explanations that Bob made need to be countered. I find the analysis interesting, and yes, I did refer to my Harb materials...
post #26 of 52
Well, I agree Max made an emotional post based on his sincere desire to protect his master.

I will add my two cents here about HH. After reading his books, watching his videos and reading a bunch of his forum threads; I am pretty convinced that he is a very knowledgable guy with a deep understanding of skiing. IMHO he is right up there with the best of them in the country. There are many different opinions out there and there is no reason to say that his opinions are any less valid then Bob's or anyone else's... His background and experience is vast. The MA I've seen him do is VERY impressive. That man definitely has coaching talent and does in my opinion deserve a little more professional respect than Bob gave him in this thread.

That being said, HH disses on just about everyone almost non-stop. He can hardly seem to make a post of any value without 90% of it being a tirade against Epic and PSIA and half the race coaches in the world. I actually like a lot of the technical information that I see him write, but that is only about 10% of what he writes. The other 90% is combative BS that quickly becomes tiresome to read through and distracting.

As far as analyzing PMTS. It is my opinion from reading many posts on his forum and elsewhere that what he is trying to do is to get skiers to ski better without them knowing how or why. He's trying to come up with a system that will enable skiers to think about a few simple steps and acheive impressive carve performance. To a certain degree I do think he has acheived that. I personally think that true high level all mountain skiing has to go beyond that and blend back skills which HH has marked as verboten, and that's where PMTS falls short in my view.

But I totally get where he's coming from in terms of trying to cure the world of the stem. I just think he takes a few of his rules a bit too far and remains stubborn about them. Until such time that I see a PMTS skier ripping all-mountain using pure PMTS technique as described in the books, then I myself have to agree with Bob about PMTS. I still think PMTS is quite useful for recreational skiers because many of them truly are stuck in a rotary rut...and stemming too...and a different mental model can perhaps help them to experience new sensations and get to the next plane. PMTS has in fact done this for a lot of skiers like Max. However where Max is making a big mistake now is to hide himself in a PMTS hole and believe every word that comes from HH's mouth as if it were gospel. He is missing out on many opportunities to expand his knowledge and understanding of skiing and to expand his skiing skillset to include other skills that can be blended together with skills he learned through his PMTS experience. Max's response to this will be that PMTS can do it all. But that is not an open minded response, it is the response of someone who is scared to look outside of their own sphere to try something new and rather latches on to what is safe and comfortable.
post #27 of 52
Well, you didn't address Bob's points, borntoski. I can't see it that way if what Bob posted is true. For example, this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado View Post
Harb's own materials clearly underscore his misunderstanding, and demonstrate the problems as well (as others have pointed out). He himself struggles in difficult bumps because of a lack of rotary skills, causing him to rely exclusively on upper body rotation and a powerfully planted pole (another upper body-related rotary mechanism). You can easily see this problem (if you look for it, as opposed to turning a blind eye) throughout his "Expert 2" video and the photographs and sequences in his books. If you think that "edge engagement" is what is about to turn his airborne skis on the cover photograph of "Expert 2," as opposed to that pole planted way out to the side and that left arm he's thrown forward, you're not paying attention!
Now, these statements are either true or false. Which are they? If true, then QED. If false, then what is false about them and why? For a seeker of truth, these are important questions. When I read it, I pulled E2 out from the bookcase next to my chair and looked at the cover. I completely got Bob's point from that shot. Now, I'll spend some more time with the DVD, etc., but it's pretty clear to me from the photo what's happening there. If you disagree with Bob's assessment of it, then what's yours? (Note: this is not directed at anyone in particular, but everyone in general.)

Again, for a seeker of truth, this is an important question. For those without an interest in the truth (of whatever bias), "there's nothing to see here... move along..."
post #28 of 52
Well believe me, I have no desire to defend HH. I just don't think its completely fair to make a blanket statement that HH misunderstands skiing, simply because you don't agree with his approach. His undestanding is quite deep from what I have observed, though I do not particularly agree with all of his teaching approaches.

Anyway, that's all that I'm going to say about it because I don't want to defend the guy. He has to sleep in the bed he has made for himself with his loose lips.

By the way, as I said before, I got a lot out of Bob's comments also and I think his assessment of HH's bump skiing in particular looks good to me. And as I've said before, that is where I think HH falls short. I think Max's gut reaction was to Bob's somewhat blanket statement that HH does not understand skiing...which of course will put Max on the defensive since he has invested nearly his entire skiing education into HH.
post #29 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
Now, I'll spend some more time with the DVD, etc., but it's pretty clear to me from the photo what's happening there. If you disagree with Bob's assessment of it, then what's yours? (Note: this is not directed at anyone in particular, but everyone in general.)
Personally, I don't think there is much positive to gain by studying the bump or all-mountain sections of the PMTS videos. The videos demonstrate sub-par skiing in those situations. The problem is that he is a race oriented coach trying to ski in the bumps. watch that video of Bode in the bumps. He sucks even worse then Harb. Learning specifically what is wrong with them might be instructive from an MA perspective but wrought with peril in terms of antagonizing an already bad synergy between Epic and HH. Better to glean the good and useful information from the PMTS videos and move on IMHO.

In my opinion, there are a whole slew of things that causes PMTS to fall short in bumps and perhaps some other off-piste skiing. Bob pointed out some excellent things. In my mind, similar as Bob, PMTS breaks down in two main areas, (1) their insistence on not allowing any rotary and (2) insistance on constant stance leg dominance. In bumps and pow, those two rules fundamentally need to be relaxed for higher performance skiing than what HH has demonstrated in his videos.

so....... maybe I am saying that I agree with Bob that HH misunderstands bump and off-piste skiing... haha.. But honestly, I don't really want to go there. I just don't pay attention to PMTS concepts at all when I'm thinking about bumps and offpiste.
post #30 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
Well believe me, I have no desire to defend HH. I just don't think its completely fair to make a blanket statement that HH misunderstands skiing, simply because you don't agree with his approach.
Not fair? Why not? He does that to everyone else. BTW I did find the comment to be funny and had no trouble understanding the joke.

As much as I love his chutzpah, hate his dogma, and respect his skiing, my 2 cents is that a lot of this particular disagreement boils down to semantics. His comments on rotary have had the unique effect of painting him to be the village idiot when you read the condensed version, but are a perfectly debateable position to take after you've weeded through the crap (i.e. what PSIA calls rotary movements are an essential part of high end skiing, but that these movements are an automatic byproduct of other intentional movements and that intentional twisting of the feet is a common cause of terminal intermediates).

Despite Bob's well constructed argument, I've found that HH's ACBAES series to be logically constructed, theoretically consistent and demonstrative evidence of a complex level of technical opinions about the sport. While one may choose to disagree with these opinions, one should at least give him his due at least for the level of detail that he's gone to. ESPECIALLY because he does NOT do the same for members of PSIA. The big problem with HH's ascerbic approach is that he tends to drag people down to that level of discussion. People do themselves a disservice when they take the bait. I've been there (see the opening paragraph of this post and imagine what the post would be like without it). It's not pretty. I'm not proud of it. So, you are absolutely right BornToSki - it's not fair to say that the man has an "enormous lack of understanding of basic skiing principles". It's much more appropriate to say that the man has an enormous talent for getting people to insult him.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching