or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Let's talk about PSIA - Page 4

post #91 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
Nolo, it's too bad that PSIA has not put together a quality video production to show off their best with knock your socks off skiing,
Agreed, emphasizing the final product may be of great benefit to the organization. With constant critical analysis of progressions--one can lose focus of the end result.
post #92 of 365
I actually think PSIA d-teamers could be made to look a lot better with some real pro camara work and editing. And they should have done that a long time ago. Why they aren't working with Warren Miller or Greg Stump or someone like that to produce some marketing video is totally beyond me. And I don't mean to produe extreme skiing footage. I mean only to work with serious professional film makers that know how to film skiers and make it look beautiful.

Add up all the money that is spent on ski lessons around the country and they couldn't afford to spend the money, time and effort to create dazzling ski footage to reel in more skiers? Big marketing mistake if you ask me. They should shoot that footage and have it on the web for free.

When I lived in Whistler, I can tell you that the ski school was the number one revenue stream for the entire resort(the parts owned by the corporation). More than hotels, more than lift passes, more than everything else. They have something like 1200 instructors at Whistler. They have to call people in town who aren't actively teaching anymore all the time to ask them to come fill in during the busy periods. MASSIVE revenue. No wonder CSIA realizes the importance of spending the time and money on higher quality videos. It boosts public image, boosts lesson attendance, boosts education between their instructors, which boosts lesson quality and ultimately boosts revenue, which boosts job opportunities, etc..

Seems like PSIA is dropping the ball a little bit in this regard.
post #93 of 365
If you are a member of PSIA, write to your board representative and indicate in whatever manner you choose how you want the board to spend your dues dollars.
post #94 of 365
Well that's a good idea, but frankly there are other ways that PSIA could fund film making besides spending dues dollars. And that takes proactive management by PSIA and active partnerships with resorts around the country.
post #95 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
Well that's a good idea, but frankly there are other ways that PSIA could fund film making besides spending dues dollars. And that takes proactive management by PSIA and active partnerships with resorts around the country.

It seems to me that if the resorts are making more money from ski lessons than the instructors are, it would be well worth their while to pony up for some decent video. Then they need to get it out where people that are not already committed will see it. In addition to "viral marketing" on the internet, they could play it on that boring cable channel full of restaurant ads that most ski area hotels have. Maybe even get it into rotation with the Weather Channel and the ski porn on the TV sets in the bars.

Now that I think of it, it is probably more important to make exciting, watchable video of intermediate skiing than advanced (though you should have that too). Make it attractive to take another lesson. It ties in with that "I've skied once" thread.
post #96 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo View Post
DD, I have what you have not and that's experience.
.....
Here's a newsflash: Nobody skis perfectly. Not even you.

First off, let me say that my opinion of what good/ideal skiing is has nothing to do with my opinion of my own skiing. I would never claim to be perfect or anywhere close to it. There are some 14-year olds that can embarrass me on a course, much less in bumps or powder, along with plenty here on epic.

I obviously can't dispute the fact that you have a lot of experience, however experience in general is really moot if one can't see a fundamental difference between this (earlier psia example) and this (same ussa one). There's nothing wrong with the skiing in the first video, and it's far better than the majority of people on the mountain, but it really isn't a model of what one should aspire to, in my opinion.

I may be young, and I make no claims of being an expert, but I do have an eye developed through years of racing that gives me a different perspective than most PSIA instructors on here.
post #97 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublediamond223 View Post

I may be young, and I make no claims of being an expert, but I do have an eye developed through years of racing that gives me a different perspective than most PSIA instructors on here.
PSIA Instructors are not teaching racing. We have USST and CUSSA and others for that. Herein lies your dilemma with PSIA.
However I applaud you on your honing a keen eye for racing! Stick with it, I am sure HH will guide you through it well.
post #98 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublediamond223 View Post

I obviously can't dispute the fact that you have a lot of experience, however experience in general is really moot if one can't see a fundamental difference between this (earlier psia example) and this (same ussa one). There's nothing wrong with the skiing in the first video, and it's far better than the majority of people on the mountain, but it really isn't a model of what one should aspire to, in my opinion.
There's no "fundamental difference" between the skiers on those two videos. The second shows more speed and far higher edge angles, but the movement patterns are the same. I'm with Nolo here. You shouldn't expect instructors to show the same level of intensity in their demos as racers do.
BTW, I'm a member of both PSIA and USSA, and I can assure you that there is not much technical difference between the two organizations, although the level of intensity that competitors bring to the mountain is amazing.

BK
post #99 of 365
DD, the important thing is that you recognize the kind of skier you want to become.
post #100 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bode Klammer View Post
The second shows more speed...
It does? I would suggest that you compare the skiers at the beginning of both videos when they are nearly in sync with each other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bode Klammer View Post
...but the movement patterns are the same.
They are? All of them? Could there be a reason that the PSIA skier does not deviate from the fall line very much? [Intent is not a valid answer, sorry] Did anyone ever answer the question about how you initiate a turn when you follow your skis and bank too much (I may have missed it)?

Also, I don't think anyone is debating intensity here. These videos show many more differences than intensity. If you want to talk about intensity - watch Herrin ski - it doesn't get much more intense than that for the average all-mountain expert skier. There is a definite difference between technique and intensity. We should be careful not to confuse the two. However, would you expect the best skiers/instructors within the PSIA to ski at a higher intensity than most - or am I aiming too high again?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Wormer
Stick with it, I am sure HH will guide you through it well.
What does HH have to do with DD's racing career and interest? Nothing?

BTW, this only loosely applies to this topic because it is not PSIA, but it shares the same fault - but did anyone happen to take note of the CSIA instructors when they were skiing the course in the CSIA L4 video? http://www.snowpro.com/photogallery/videogallery_e.html
Gates show the true colors of even the best skiers, as well as what works and what just plain doesn't.

Later

GREG
post #101 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post



What does HH have to do with DD's racing career and interest? Nothing?
doublediamond223

First of all, a huge thanks to HH for that MA, it was unbelievable. I've read it 4 times and am still trying to digest it, since you gave me so much information.

I have some questions regarding your terminology, as I am not familiar with PMTS (or any other instruction standard for that matter). What do you mean by upside down? I would wager that you mean my upper body is countered during transition, facing down the fall line. Feel free to correct if I am wrong.

Your comment about me losing pressure after initiation is huge, and I think is my biggest problem. I have a banking problem on my right turns, and I can see what you mean about losing energy to the stance leg as a result.

As far as the boots, I had them set up by Greg Hoffmann at GMOL Vail during my recent trip. I was 3 degrees out of alignment on my right leg, something which he fixed with a sole plane. I think any problem I have is technique, rather than alignment-related, given this.

Thanks again.


(Violao- Go ahead and post the stills, I don't mind)


Nothing against HH. In fact if the time is right I would love to rip some turns with him, one day.

Later

JD
post #102 of 365
Dean, I think that thread (from real skiers?) was just to get a different perspective on his skiing from what he was getting here just as an attempt to get two opinions (which is never a bad thing IMO). I will let him confirm that for you though in case i am off base. I do know however from my dealings with him at EpicSki, that DD's actual experience is with USSA and highschool ski racing.

IMO, Harb and PMTS have little to do with this discussion... but I don't perscribe to that POV - which makes me a little biased.

Later

GREG
post #103 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
Did anyone ever answer the question about how you initiate a turn when you follow your skis and bank too much (I may have missed it)?
This was in a response you made to me, that I chose to ignore following your decision to couch my skiing as rhetorical, so it is likely others did not see it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
It does? I would suggest that you compare the skiers at the beginning of both videos when they are nearly in sync with each other.

They are? All of them? Could there be a reason that the PSIA skier does not deviate from the fall line very much? [Intent is not a valid answer, sorry] Did anyone ever answer the question about how you initiate a turn when you follow your skis and bank too much (I may have missed it)?

Also, I don't think anyone is debating intensity here. These videos show many more differences than intensity. If you want to talk about intensity - watch Herrin ski - it doesn't get much more intense than that for the average all-mountain expert skier. There is a definite difference between technique and intensity. We should be careful not to confuse the two. However, would you expect the best skiers/instructors within the PSIA to ski at a higher intensity than most - or am I aiming too high again?

BTW, this only loosely applies to this topic because it is not PSIA, but it shares the same fault - but did anyone happen to take note of the CSIA instructors when they were skiing the course in the CSIA L4 video? http://www.snowpro.com/photogallery/videogallery_e.html
Gates show the true colors of even the best skiers, as well as what works and what just plain doesn't.

Later

GREG
Kindly drop the attitude and questions, and just start enlightening the rest of us clueless idiots already, Greg!

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
- which makes me a little biased.
Is this a rhetorical or redundant statement?

Will you be at the Stowe event?
post #104 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
BTW, this only loosely applies to this topic because it is not PSIA, but it shares the same fault - but did anyone happen to take note of the CSIA instructors when they were skiing the course in the CSIA L4 video? http://www.snowpro.com/photogallery/videogallery_e.html
Gates show the true colors of even the best skiers, as well as what works and what just plain doesn't.

Later

GREG

Greg,

This is a better link:

http://www.snowproab.com/skipro/course_materials.htm
post #105 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
Dean, I think that thread (from real skiers?) was just to get a different perspective on his skiing from what he was getting here just as an attempt to get two opinions (which is never a bad thing IMO). I will let him confirm that for you though in case i am off base. I do know however from my dealings with him at EpicSki, that DD's actual experience is with USSA and highschool ski racing.

IMO, Harb and PMTS have little to do with this discussion... but I don't perscribe to that POV - which makes me a little biased.

Later

GREG

No problem. I just got stuck on his quote of his eye for racing. ( Which is good) , and the connection to PSIA. Which in my perspective is more geared towards teaching skiing, and not racing.

Later


JD
post #106 of 365

unending refinement

PSIA is in the unfortunate/impossible situation of "blending" water and oil. (IMO) Since 1996 PSIA mind set is that the refinement of the skidded Christy will evolve into the arc. The concepts/training paper shows this perfectly as does the L3 maneuver descriptions. Not differentiating between the two (carve versus arc) is the reason for the ambiguous and vague descriptions and wording of both documents. Movement patterns of skidded turns are not the same as the movements required to arc.
But at the same time you know that these docs are attempting to conceptualize (put into words) the notion that there are a thousand different ways to ski. That is a noble effort but it is at the expense of clarity. And in this attempt we baffle and frustrate our membership.
post #107 of 365

gone skiing, be back when your money is gone

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo View Post
If you are a member of PSIA, write to your board representative and indicate in whatever manner you choose how you want the board to spend your dues dollars.
They need to be told that a video is needed? Like they don't know. WTF!
post #108 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
PSIA is in the unfortunate/impossible situation of "blending" water and oil. (IMO) Since 1996 PSIA mind set is that the refinement of the skidded Christy will evolve into the arc. The concepts/training paper shows this perfectly as does the L3 maneuver descriptions. Not differentiating between the two (carve versus arc) is the reason for the ambiguous and vague descriptions and wording of both documents. Movement patterns of skidded turns are not the same as the movements required to arc.
But at the same time you know that these docs are attempting to conceptualize (put into words) the notion that there are a thousand different ways to ski. That is a noble effort but it is at the expense of clarity. And in this attempt we baffle and frustrate our membership.
1. Is this true:?
Nothing personal Bolter, but extraordinary assertions require extraordinary proof. In this case I'll settle for confirmation from others with knowledge of PSIA. Using an edge to force the ski to go forward and using it to scrape off speed in a sideways direction are two vastly different things in my mind.

2. If true could this go back to the fundamental first turns. ie. is it related to the view that the snowplow turn with deliberate weighting and angulation on the outside edge is defensive (scraping), as opposed to offensive (Move in the direction THIS ski is pointing).

Just wondering.
post #109 of 365
I think that overemphasis on drills and perfection of subsets of our skiing in drills rather than the entirety of our skiing can make our skiing look uninspired, boring and artificial. To all of us in PSIA, I ask, what about your skiing, or your lesson, makes the guy in the chairlift say "I want to be in that guy's class"? I know that when I have my class skiing down the hill playing "foxes and hounds" the kids explore a wide range of ways to ski and turn better (with a little friendly tip from me here and there on small ways to improve their skiing), they are laughing and joking (and barking for real, fellow bears) and I hear a lot of folks say "I want to be in that class." I don't think there is anything wrong with our skiing model or teaching model or service model. What gets us into trouble is trying too hard to be working all the time. We need to be playing all the time, and helping just a little bit. We know what the students have to do- our greatest challenge is to make it look like we did very little teaching while the class is playing. We have to work as hard as Jay Leno does to look spontaneous, When a class goes really well, I have put in a great deal of preparation, and have made very brief comments, while introducing "games" that really help the students discover the real lesson. Their skiing then takes on a spontanaiety that I don't think repetitive drills would give them.
post #110 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
This was in a response you made to me, that I chose to ignore following your decision to couch my skiing as rhetorical, so it is likely others did not see it.
I am actually posing the questions for anyone who wants to investigate the answers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
Kindly drop the attitude and questions, and just start enlightening the rest of us clueless idiots already, Greg!
Most of this was in my very first post in this thread. The enlightening comes from what those reading choose to do with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
Is this a rhetorical or redundant statement?

Will you be at the Stowe event?
Rhetorical or redundant? Probably both - the point being that I have little use for Harb/PMTS being applied to this discussion - but it is likely because I do not agree with that crowd's general disposition toward other skiing. Having someone piggy-back on this discussion to get there own views on PMTS across (positive or negative) is a little weak in my opinion.

I will probably not be at the Stowe event. My inabiliy to get vacation time then and financial reasons will probably keep me from attending. My coaching will likely come from it's usual sources this season. I assume you will be in attendance? BTW, where do you usually ski when you are skiing in the east/locally?

Later

GREG
post #111 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOG View Post
I think that overemphasis on drills and perfection of subsets of our skiing in drills rather than the entirety of our skiing can make our skiing look uninspired, boring and artificial. To all of us in PSIA, I ask, what about your skiing, or your lesson, makes the guy in the chairlift say "I want to be in that guy's class"? I know that when I have my class skiing down the hill playing "foxes and hounds" the kids explore a wide range of ways to ski and turn better (with a little friendly tip from me here and there on small ways to improve their skiing), they are laughing and joking (and barking for real, fellow bears) and I hear a lot of folks say "I want to be in that class." I don't think there is anything wrong with our skiing model or teaching model or service model. What gets us into trouble is trying too hard to be working all the time. We need to be playing all the time, and helping just a little bit...
post #112 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
They are? All of them? Could there be a reason that the PSIA skier does not deviate from the fall line very much? [Intent is not a valid answer, sorry]
You're losing a ton of credibility with this comment, Greg. If you don't know the intent of someone (and, in this case, I'm pretty sure you don't), how can you judge what they are able to do?

I think you have a pretty narrow view of "good skiing" and your myopia is showing. How much do you really know about the skills of skiing? Are you sure that your perspective is objective and accurate?

If so, why would Deb Armstrong say that she is a much better skier now than she was when she won the Gold in Sarajevo?
post #113 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
If so, why would Deb Armstrong say that she is a much better skier now than she was when she won the Gold in Sarajevo?
That would be a very interesting discussion to hear more details about specifically WHY she feels she is a better skier now then she was when racing in the Olympics.
post #114 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
That would be a very interesting discussion to hear more details about specifically WHY she feels she is a better skier now then she was when racing in the Olympics.
Well, if the pain in the neck responsible for the EpicSki Podcast would get the editing done, ya'll would know! :

Oh yea. That's me.
post #115 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
That would be a very interesting discussion to hear more details about specifically WHY she feels she is a better skier now then she was when racing in the Olympics.
Maybe she sucked at moguls:
post #116 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
You're losing a ton of credibility with this comment, Greg. If you don't know the intent of someone (and, in this case, I'm pretty sure you don't), how can you judge what they are able to do?
Steve, if my goal was gaining credibility around here I would be reviewing for pins #1 through #3 right now. Intent doesn't matter. How a person skis - is how a person skis. Whether they are dumbing down their turns or not. A skier giving a demo or trying for a specific outcome is going to demonstrate the same basic skills as they would when skiing at their limits. Think of the best skiers you know - do they not still look like excellent skiers when they are demoing a low level drill or maneuver?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
I think you have a pretty narrow view of "good skiing" and your myopia is showing. How much do you really know about the skills of skiing?
Do you want this in essay format? Come on... you know I respect you, please don't do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
Are you sure that your perspective is objective and accurate?
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
If so, why would Deb Armstrong say that she is a much better skier now than she was when she won the Gold in Sarajevo?
Deb, (IMO) is an interesting case. I agree that she probably knows more about skiing as a whole than she did when she won the olympics. Racers, espcially at her level, grow up knowing one thing - and that is racing. They are excellent skiers, but have exposure to only very few other areas of skiing. While we would all agree that building a well rounded racer is the goal of most coahes, that does not always happen.

Let us consider however, the changes that took place in skiing between when she was a gold medalist and where she is now. Skiing has changed a lot. Yes the basic movements and fundamentals are still the same, but much has changed. The interesting factor for Deb is where she developed her new skills (skills brought about by shaped skis) from - racing or PSIA... And, when in PSIA history - now or in the 1996 forefront of change? If you review this thread I think you will find a discrepancy between what exists now and what existed then in terms of the ideas that are driving the organization.

If Deb considered herself a worse skier than she was when she was racing I would be even more worried about the state of ski instruction in the US. A skier who is truly at the level we are discussing should never regress in ability or knowledge of the sport. Staying current is posisbly the most important factor of all. Even since I started into ski racing in 2001 huge changes have occurred in the sport. Imagine the adaptations that someone like Deb has had to go through - Especially if she has gone in one direction and is now revisiting ski racing of the 1980's in order to shed a better light on skiing that is being done now.

And... as for being laterally out of balance - something I believe she has covered recently in her presentations - is that not what we are talking about here, or is it just that everyone gets defensive when someone finally steps up and hits too close to home?

Later

GREG
post #117 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
If so, why would Deb Armstrong say that she is a much better skier now than she was when she won the Gold in Sarajevo?
Hell, Steve, everybody thinks they're better skiers since they've switched to shape skis.

And come on now,,, you know you think highly of Gregs technical knowledge. Coooome ooooooonnnnn,,, shake hands.
post #118 of 365
A few bullet points:

Here's a bit of background on this demo team that may enlarge your view: http://www.skipressworld.com/us/en/d...%20Competition

Let me throw out the name of another USST star, AJ Kitt, who considered his Level 3 pin an accomplishment that required that he broaden as a skier.

Another little known factoid is that the immediate past president of PSIA, John Armstrong, is one of a handful of race coaches in the U.S. with a Level IV rating from USSCA (that is the highest level coaching accreditation in the U.S.).

Why is one of the benefits of USSCA membership a subscription to The Professional Skier?

Finally, a question for Greg. How can you so thoroughly reject PSIA when you have never given it a try?
post #119 of 365

Howjadodat?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
1. Is this true:?
Nothing personal Bolter, but extraordinary assertions require extraordinary proof. In this case I'll settle for confirmation from others with knowledge of PSIA. Using an edge to force the ski to go forward and using it to scrape off speed in a sideways direction are two vastly different things in my mind.

2. If true could this go back to the fundamental first turns. ie. is it related to the view that the snowplow turn with deliberate weighting and angulation on the outside edge is defensive (scraping), as opposed to offensive (Move in the direction THIS ski is pointing).

Just wondering.
I hope that others do speak up. In the past few weeks in the L3 standards thread and other places response to my observations/critique about the 2006 standards from its author is zero.
(FWIW) Certainly not proof but... During the the last years of my tenure @ Breckenridge I spent a lot of time coaching Jim Banks, Franz (when he was ready), Randy Brooks and basically the entire SS on "How to arc." All these people watched me daily trying to "get it." I was the ski schools connection to Breck Tech. Head coach, John Leffler was the source, although a difficult man to deal with, was "in with" the top World Cup coaches. Trust me when I tell you that these high level very good skiers (examiners) where all ears when it came to the tech of arcing. And they worked on it every day in (my) video arena.
Did Bomber or anyone else put forward these techniques to the Ed board or wherever? Maybe, but it did not surface and become a part of any written material I have ever seen. Have you?

Terry Barbour (former DTeam member, who I worked for @ Greek Peak as his Tech Director) was also interested in the Breck Tech info that I (started) to give him at Keystone early season in ‘97 or 98, I forget. He saw that my skiing had changed (big time) and that he "could see everywhere I went." He wanted to know how. Don’t misunderstand, he was laying down arcs also. In particular he wanted to know how to "tighten it up like that." He is one of the best skiers I know and during my eleven years working with him at Greek Peak we would "go rutting" all the time. That was our MX term for arcing. I can guarantee that Terry never held any tech/info back from me, EVER! He is a giving, honest man. What you see is what you get, then he will give even more.
I know that some will say that Warren Witherall (spelling?) And others had arc2arc all spelled out years ago, even before shapes. BULL! Deep shapes gave us more freedom and demanded more at the same time. If this is not true then why has course setting changed so much since then?
Passive/active, no it is before that and more fundamental.
Think of it... The innate base of support in arcing is sliding skis. In all PSIA progression that you know of, I bet the skis are slipping, skidding or shaping (aside from the Traverse which is used as an exercise and then usually abandoned). Speed control and the confidence that it builds from the wedge on up is a necessity to our guests. What the heck, that's how we make our money, without a "Customer Christy" you'd go broke!
Please show me the PSIA teaching progression for arc2arc? If it is out there, I wanna know!
IMO we should consider a parallel progression. Is that the answer? Probably not, but it would be a start.
post #120 of 365
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
Steve, if my goal was gaining credibility around here I would be reviewing for pins #1 through #3 right now. Intent doesn't matter. How a person skis - is how a person skis. Whether they are dumbing down their turns or not. A skier giving a demo or trying for a specific outcome is going to demonstrate the same basic skills as they would when skiing at their limits. Think of the best skiers you know - do they not still look like excellent skiers when they are demoing a low level drill or maneuver?
Are you sure about this? I mean really sure? Can I take one of your videos and judge all of your skiing? Can you judge my carving from my pivot slips?

If you don't care about your credibility, then don't bother posting. Credibility is the character trait that allows others to hear what you have to say. Without it, they will ignore you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dictionary.com
1.capable of being believed; believable: a credible statement. 2.worthy of belief or confidence; trustworthy: a credible witness.
I find the doctrinal absolutes to belie an underlying need to be "right." Most efforts to be "right" signal the end of learning. I'd rather keep learning.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching