EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › stance and the rest of the body
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

stance and the rest of the body

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
In golf instruction stance generally refers to the position of the feet relative to each other. The position of the rest of the body when standing over the ball is referred to as posture. For example bending forward at the hips so that your arms hang straight down from your shoulders is part of a good golf posture. It seems that in skiing we use stance to mean more than just the relative position of the feet. eg. We might describe a skiing student whose upper body is always quite vertical (with the point on the shoulder lining up with the back of the foot all the time) as having a stance problem even if the foot position is OK.

Not a big issue, I grant you, but it is something I've wondered about. And since there is no skiing yet in Ontario I thought I'd use up some time checking out the thoughts of the bears.

Comments?

cdnguy
post #2 of 22
You are perfectly correct cdnguy. I think this could be well incorporated into our skiing vocabulary.
post #3 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnguy View Post
In golf instruction stance generally refers to the position of the feet relative to each other. The position of the rest of the body when standing over the ball is referred to as posture. For example bending forward at the hips so that your arms hang straight down from your shoulders is part of a good golf posture. It seems that in skiing we use stance to mean more than just the relative position of the feet. eg. We might describe a skiing student whose upper body is always quite vertical (with the point on the shoulder lining up with the back of the foot all the time) as having a stance problem even if the foot position is OK.

Not a big issue, I grant you, but it is something I've wondered about. And since there is no skiing yet in Ontario I thought I'd use up some time checking out the thoughts of the bears.

Comments?

cdnguy

As a PGA teaching professional I might disagree slightly with the definitions. However, since we all interpet words differently that's not the key point.

What is more important is how "stance", "posture", etc. allow our body to operate in an efficient manner without extraneous compensating motions. A good golf "stance"/"posture" or whatever, permits you to rotate the upper body around a relatively fixed lower body with the arms being free to swing the club without interference. Many times you can view skiing as the opposite-a relatively stable upper body while the legs rotate freely below that "base".
post #4 of 22
If we take cdngys stance/posture terminology borrowed from golf and apply it to skiing, stance would apply to how wide apart our skis are and posture to how much we counter, lean forward, bend our knees, hold our arms, angulate etc.
post #5 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikewil View Post
As a PGA teaching professional I might disagree slightly with the definitions. However, since we all interpet words differently that's not the key point.

What is more important is how "stance", "posture", etc. allow our body to operate in an efficient manner without extraneous compensating motions. A good golf "stance"/"posture" or whatever, permits you to rotate the upper body around a relatively fixed lower body with the arms being free to swing the club without interference. Many times you can view skiing as the opposite-a relatively stable upper body while the legs rotate freely below that "base".
I have often thought the same thing about skiing and golf: in golf upper body rotates; in skiing the lower body rotates.

Your point about the stance (or posture) needing to "permit" efficient movements: truer words were never spoken.

cdnguy
post #6 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnguy View Post
I have often thought the same thing about skiing and golf: in golf upper body rotates; in skiing the lower body rotates.

Your point about the stance (or posture) needing to "permit" efficient movements: truer words were never spoken.

cdnguy
While I have to agree with what you guys are saying that it might clarify things, but the issue is not only with Skiing and Golf. Afterall, I heard about "athletic stance" while playing baseball when I was 10 years old, and didn't hear it in skiing until I was about 17 and thinking about going for my Level I Cert.

I believe often times in skiing, we refer to stance the way we do because of the generally accepted "athletic stance" refering to full body, ready to move where-ever, when ever needed and in balance.

So while I agree with what you guys are saying, my question, do we really need more terms in skiing? God knows people have trouble with the amount there already are.
post #7 of 22
However you look at it, it's too bad we don't have a better word for whatever it is we usually mean when we say "stance." That word, to me, just doesn't imply the movement so important to skiing. Call it "stance," "posture," "basic position," or whatever, it's not something we're ever really "in." At best, a good stance is an attitude, a moment in time, something still only when you snap a photograph at a particular moment.

We could certainly use a better word!

Best regards,
Bob
post #8 of 22
Thread Starter 

stance, posture , athletic stance, etc. etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manus View Post
So while I agree with what you guys are saying, my question, do we really need more terms in skiing? God knows people have trouble with the amount there already are.
Good point Manus.

For me, words are important because they help me understand things. The distinction that I have learned to make between stance (as in the relative position of the feet) and posture (as in the relative position of other body parts ) is useful to me in understanding things in a more precise way. That doesn't mean that all my students need to make the same distinction. When I teach I avoid telling people everything I know and focus more on what they need to know at the time. For those students who are more cognitive learners however, I can hopefully flesh out their understanding if and when they ask. Something I try to encourage but limit to times when we are riding up the chair.

As far as teaching stance (or whatever we want to call it) the thing our students need to hear is that stance is important because it helps us move. We don't have a magic word that really does this. So I guess we need to be consciencious in repeating this message frequently.

cdnguy
post #9 of 22
The last few years I have started refering to this with my students as our "home base". That nice balanced athletic posture. No matter how far we travel away in our movements, we always want to come back home. I try to get it across that we should try to visit our home base posture at some point in every turn. this can lead to a dialogue about when to come home in every turn, and how far we will venture away from home in different types of turns. Anyway this is how I approach it for what it is worth. later, RicB.
post #10 of 22
Ricb,

Conversation: When do we come home?....

good topic!
post #11 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB View Post
The last few years I have started refering to this with my students as our "home base". That nice balanced athletic posture. No matter how far we travel away in our movements, we always want to come back home. I try to get it across that we should try to visit our home base posture at some point in every turn. this can lead to a dialogue about when to come home in every turn, and how far we will venture away from home in different types of turns. Anyway this is how I approach it for what it is worth. later, RicB.
Yeah, I kinda like that. Particularly the notion of travelling away from "home base" which suggests movement.

Perhaps the point in the turn when we more or less return to that home base position is when we release the edges of our skis at the finish of the old turn/start of the new turn. In CSIA speak this is called Phase One. At that point the skier's feet have returned to a position vertically under the center of mass (ie. skier has lost inclination), skis are "flat" on the snow, and the ankles, knees, and hips are all flexed, ( stance is "compact"), hands out in front.

This is analagous to the "impact" position in golf. The moment that the club strikes the ball the body is close to its original posture at the address position. Not exactly, but probably as close as it gets at any other point in the swing, er turn! Sorry for the mixing of metaphors. Non golfers, disregard this paragraph!

Anyway,-- home base, travelling away from and returning-- good stuff.

cdnguy
post #12 of 22
As I see it, when depends on the type of turn. I think we visit home base at different times, such as in our modern reaching turns, we visit home more in the falline when we are long, strong, and centered in our posture, not when we are "crossing under" through transition. Falline to falline turns really. While in a slower open parallel turn we visit home more at transition as Cndguy said. The point I try to stress is that as long as we know what our home base feels like and that we need to visit there regulary, then we are free to explore our range of motions and movements as needed, but we are always grounded by the idea that we are always moving from or to home base. When we visit then becomes flexable and up to us and what we are intending to do in the moment.

Like everything else in skiing nothing is absolute, but we do need this "stable safe zone" at some point in our turns. Just my take. Later, RicB.
post #13 of 22

Stance, home base? Neutral maybe?

How about: posture is the alignment silhouette of the body above our base of support. What the heck, call it stance and be done with it!
Why not identify (use descriptions, word pictures) the characteristics of body posture/stance (including the relationship of the feet) of each phase of the turn? Are there identifiable postures associated to each phase? If so, what are the changes in body alignment (movements) and relationships of body parts to one another that connect each phase? (Verb; STANCING)
Were the phases of the turn conceived based on what the skis are doing? or what the body does above them? or a combination? Maybe we should rethink the phases? Would that help clarify the circumstances in which the stances arise and evolve? Do we establish a base line for each posture? Accurate descriptions of posture and specifying (one after the other) the movements that connect adjacent phases/postures of the turn should tell us the WHAT and the HOW. Thats what we all want, isn't it?
Sorry, more questions than answers from me. If you want to see my answers (a work in progress) look in the supporter area. Boltergeist
post #14 of 22
Wasn't "Home Base" referred to as "Traverse Position" back in the day? it was the position you assumed any time your were just standing on the hill on your skis. it was also the position you assumed any time you were traversing the hill between turns. the instructors ingrained this into your as the basis of learning to ski. If you learned to assume an elegant traverse postion, you were thought to have good form. Of course after snoplow turns the next step was stem christies which were two traverse positions connected by a snowplow.

Traverse Position, was a relaxed postion with almost all of your weight on your downhill ski, hands 1 foot out, 2 feet forward, kness and ankles slightly bent, your uphill ski slightly ahead of your downhill ski along with your uphill foot, knee, hip and shoulder slightly ahead of their downhill counterparts.

I took so many lessons when I was younger (7 years worth and went to them all rather skipping out and smoking behind the lodge like many of my friends)that I still automatically assume traverse position when i stand on my skis.

I still think it applies when crossing the falline just before and just after transiton and/or coming neutral. In more direct falline turns this may be only for a split second.

I have watched many racers & skiers doing cross hill drills & they assume what I was taught is Traverse Positon.
post #15 of 22
I don't know Aman, I never took lessons when I was younger. Never really took lessons until I started teaching. Home base was something I came up with in trying to communicate the concept of a our posture always changing yet we always need to return to a functional balanced stance over our feet at some point in every turn. It seems to work with my students. They understand the idea of a home base that we are always moving away from or returning to. Later, RicB.

P.S. Bolter, I think it is different than neutral for me because we can use our home base posture as we are turning. Sometimes neutral is a time where we really are not in funtional balanced position over our feet even though the skis may be going through a neutral edge angle. For me Home base is a posture with a very recognizable connection to the snow structuraly down through our feet.
post #16 of 22
Some further thoughts. I think it is really very confining to think that we will be in the same posture, at the same place, in every turn, no matter what type of turn we are making. We have to be able to move our home base posture to different parts of the turn or will have only one turn we can make. Just like moving our extension and flexion to different parts of a turn. Versatility in our movements and variety in our turn types along with D.I.R. and Timing are where it is at for me. Later, RicB.
post #17 of 22

Neutral, Uside down Traverse then deflection

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
Traverse Position, was a relaxed position with almost all of your weight on your downhill ski, hands 1 foot out, 2 feet forward, kness and ankles slightly bent, your uphill ski slightly ahead of your downhill ski along with your uphill foot, knee, hip and shoulder slightly ahead of their downhill counterparts.

I took so many lessons when I was younger (7 years worth and went to them all rather skipping out and smoking behind the lodge like many of my friends)that I still automatically assume traverse position when i stand on my skis.

I still think it applies when crossing the falline just before and just after transiton and/or coming neutral. In more direct falline turns this may be only for a split second.

I have watched many racers & skiers doing cross hill drills & they assume what I was taught is Traverse Positon.
You made a good move not "smokin'n the boys room." The traverse stance turns out to be the "turning stance." That posture with a few minor adjustments allows the skis to deflect (turn) without us doing much else other than standing on them. It is the fundamental body alignment to produce railroad tracks. Add some movements from a pool of options to further decamber the skis and you are on your way to linking medium radius carved (arced) turns. BTW I think carved and arced are two totally different beasts. The origins of carve is shaped turns (slipping/skidding/shaping skis refinement) while the origin of arc is sliding decambered skis, as in your traverse. Bolter
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB View Post
in our modern reaching turns, we visit home more in the falline when we are long, strong, and centered in our posture, not when we are "crossing under" through transition. Falline to falline turns really. While in a slower open parallel turn we visit home more at transition as Cndguy said.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter
BTW I think carved and arced are two totally different beasts. The origins of carve is shaped turns (slipping/skidding/shaping skis refinement) while the origin of arc is sliding decambered skis
post #19 of 22

Miles Davis could blow but i don't know if he skied

Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB View Post
Some further thoughts. I think it is really very confining to think that we will be in the same posture, at the same place, in every turn, no matter what type of turn we are making. We have to be able to move our home base posture to different parts of the turn or will have only one turn we can make. Just like moving our extension and flexion to different parts of a turn. Versatility in our movements and variety in our turn types along with D.I.R. and Timing are where it is at for me. Later, RicB.
Confinement will last only untill... we identify, then we are free!
Ultimately we must recognize the inability of skiers to absorb the content of the variations before they grasp the core movements and stances. BTW that is applied easily to arc2arc skiing. IMO your advocating that variations of movements should be taught in optional progression paths. This problem is reminiscent of the (need) origin of the skills concept. Don't we have to start somewhere?
Jazz is the variations of a stated theme. You can stretch out from the agreed starting point. Jam is a slang that hints at a jumble of thems-not always so good. I want to "blow" over the changes. Bolter
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
Confinement will last only untill... we identify, then we are free!
Ultimately we must recognize the inability of skiers to absorb the content of the variations before they grasp the core movements and stances. BTW that is applied easily to arc2arc skiing. IMO your advocating that variations of movements should be taught in optional progression paths. This problem is reminiscent of the (need) origin of the skills concept. Don't we have to start somewhere?
Jazz is the variations of a stated theme. You can stretch out from the agreed starting point. Jam is a slang that hints at a jumble of thems-not always so good. I want to "blow" over the changes. Bolter
Yeah Bolter, we start with the fundamentals. I'm not advocating anything other than we have a home base posture. How and when to talk to the student about varitions in timing ect. are as varied as my students. Many are advanced enough to understand the variations. You are making many assumptions. Besides, I may have a number of different students in "My Band", some may want to jam, some may to improvise on one theme, some may want to strictly follow the notes of a particualr song. It is all good if basic fundamentals are being honored. I teach what my students want in conjuction with what I see that they need. Later, RicB.
post #21 of 22

Bolter blunder

Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB View Post
Yeah Bolter, we start with the fundamentals. I'm not advocating anything other than we have a home base posture. How and when to talk to the student about varitions in timing ect. are as varied as my students. Many are advanced enough to understand the variations. You are making many assumptions. Besides, I may have a number of different students in "My Band", some may want to jam, some may to improvise on one theme, some may want to strictly follow the notes of a particualr song. It is all good if basic fundamentals are being honored. I teach what my students want in conjuction with what I see that they need. Later, RicB.
You are right I made some assumptions that were not based on much. That is my bad. I am thinking but not always making my point without strings attached. Your input is always of value and I do not want to degrade it in any way. Bolter
post #22 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
Confinement will last only untill... we identify, then we are free!
Ultimately we must recognize the inability of skiers to absorb the content of the variations before they grasp the core movements and stances. BTW that is applied easily to arc2arc skiing. IMO your advocating that variations of movements should be taught in optional progression paths. This problem is reminiscent of the (need) origin of the skills concept. Don't we have to start somewhere?
Jazz is the variations of a stated theme. You can stretch out from the agreed starting point. Jam is a slang that hints at a jumble of thems-not always so good. I want to "blow" over the changes. Bolter
You play horn????
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 › stance and the rest of the body