I want to learn "this" and am not sure what to call it:

You will want to find a copy of the book "Distinctive Skiing" by Bill West. It has been out of print for a while but you should be able to turn it up somewhere.

Skiing "old school" is tons of fun. I would suggest a narrower ski that is less that 70mm under foot that has shape but not tons of it. A GS carver type ski would work nicely. An open minded instructor should be able to help you out if you are looking for a lesson, I've taught a few of these and they were lots of fun.
Have fun.

Or consider competitive moguls...

Try here: http://www.realskiers.com/pmtsforum/

(just kidding )


Welcome back HavardTiger.

Skiing with our skis tight together is not only cool and retro, it is allso very functional. Top of the line pro bump skiers have their leggs glued together and if you ski offpist the old fascion way submurged to your waist in powder a close stance is preferable. In the old days a good skier was judged by how close his skis were but nowadays a wide stance has become acceptable much because of carving were we have World Cup skiing as the guiding star, new wide powder skis with which you can float ontop of powder with skis in a wide stance and park skiing where kids have no clue how to turn.


I think its great that someone has self confidence enough to look like a geek .

HT,

I grew up skiing like that. Stein is still a cool skier in my book, but even he adapted his style as the gear changed. For fun, we skied with our feet together as an exercise in a clinic last year with Michael Rogan (PSIA Demo Team). It feels ugly on shapes because the tips and the tails keep knocking into each other, but it can be done. I've got a pair of pre-shaped solomons sitting in a closet somewhere that would be perfect for the job.

Ott, where are you?

He'd be a pretty darn good source, Tiger!

Not only do shapes knock together, but if you ski that way for an extended period of time, you'll shave right through the tip protector and top edge of the shovel down to the metal edge. Personal experience from my first pair of Atomic SL 9.16 (?) in the late 90's. Just like using a vegetable peeler to shave a carrot.

A relatively inexpensive ski to use would be the retro Hart Javelin $100 ( http://www.hartskis.com/us/ski/6/ ) or I'm sure there are still a boat load of "straight" skis hanging around that you could pick up for free. I've still got my 200+ "Tomba" Rossi 9Ss from the mid 90's in my locker and wouldn't part with them. When I want to remember what it's like to have to REALLY work a ski, I pull them out and take a few runs.

Have fun HT!

I don't do the reversed shoulder (Stein), but I ski old school parallel. You can PM me with questions if you like.

Best skis for this are straight.

SHH, as you can see in the wedeln you posted I had to widen my stance from the old straight ski days for the very reason mentioned by others, namely the ski tips would chomp at each other at every edge change. I'll attach some shots of me in the early 60s and early 70s and my ski wall where I can pick out any retro pair I want.

It's fun to go back once in a while. And for good measure I include a price sheet of Aspen when we skied it in the olden days.

....Ott

Well done, Ott!

Spademans on your 650s? That was a surprise; I expected Looks. Doesn't look like your 550s are ready to ski, tho...

It's also a miracle that the bindings are still in those Hexcels. Proof that you skied gently!

HarvardTiger,

More info is needed about your intent. And I just have to ask, why wouldn't you buy some new skis and try a better way?

"Better"?

The first Breakthrough on Skis book and video should give you what you want.
http://www.amazon.com/Breakthrough-O...sporting-goods

HarvardTiger. I am not now, nor ever was an authority on skis, I just skied whatever was given to me or what I acquired on a pro-form and that depended on which rep was handy when I wanted a new pair of skis. I have always mounted my own bindings and still do and tune my skis myself.

In sixty plus years I've owned and skied every brand imaginable, Hart, lots of Heads, Kneissls, Kaestle, Sohler, Rossis, Dynastar. Dynamic, Blizzard, TrueTemper, Hexel, Atomic, and on and on.

You know what? After skiing on any pair for a day they worked just as well as any other pair I owned, I just needed to adjust to their idiosyncrasies.

You asked privately if you could salvage an old pair of Rossi S3's with rusty edges. Sharpen them yourself if you know how, and even if you don't you can't lose much by learning on this old pair. If some rust remains it will ski off.
Or you could take them to a shop to do it for you. The shop will most likely refuse to fool with setting your old bindings but if you changed boots they need to be set right or a little loose for your safety.

Finally, to ski with elegance you don't need an old pair of skis, you just need to learn how on the skis you presently ski.

....Ott

HT,

Ignore some of the tongue-in-cheek responses you got about older styles of skiing. Generally speaking, skiing with your feet glued together is not good, however some people do advocate a narrower stance(myself included). Some others have recommended Harald Harbs books and he certainly advocates a narrower stance and as well his method seems to do wonders for many.

I guess I just wanted to make sure to tell you, don't get obsessed with the idea of your skiis being locked together. 6-8 inches apart is considered a narrow stance and actually it may go wider at times. skiers that ski with their feet locked together are actually poor skiers who *THINK* it looks good. I got in a small fight with my girlfriend about 15 years when she tried to claim that the best skiers skied with their feet together. Her father had taught her that this was the ideal as did many people in the 80's and early 90's. Its not. Your feet need to be separate and independent. However, close together is a good thing.

ps - Some new skiis will help a lot too. Something to consider. They have made us all better skiers.

OK - mind if I totally derail the thread now?

How many instructors would be embarassed to be seen teaching this lesson?

How many people would be horrified to see an instructor teaching this lesson (without knowing it was a specific request)?

I can just see someone coming on ths forum after seeing this lesson and posting "You won't believe what I saw on the hill today. These PSIA guys don't know their ass from a hole in the ground."

Tiger, Just want to go on record to let you know my comments to you were sincere. I think "good skiers" can slide on snow any way they want to. It's fun to try different styles and different equipment. I refuse to look at any part of skiing as good vs. bad. That said, there is certainly more/less efficient and effective.

For average recreational skiing, locked feet, straight skis, and old school technique is not going to "cost" you anything of any real value. I skied that way for years in all sorts of terrain - fast and slow - rarely falling down or having difficulty. I also was a one of the last players using a traditional wood racquet in my competitive tennis days. I liked (and still do) the feel and touch of a Davis TAD, Dunlop, or Bancroft Borg racquet. But there is virtually no way to be competitive at higher levels of tennis with this equipment and older stroke styles. Even I moved to composites and a larger sweet spot.

If you're planning on skiing competitively, the technique and equipment you're seeking to master would make it virtually impossible for you to compete against your peers and win. Since that isn't one of your goals … have at it.

There are some exhilarating sensations that you will never know by not taking advantage of newer technology. Good or bad is for you to decide. Do what makes you happy and don't look back.

I've been told this year that I'll never really "make it" in skiing. This is probably one reason why... I think it would be a kick to teach this lesson, and I'd jump at the chance. And I wouldn't feel the least bit defensive if someone wanted to whine about it. I'm already clear that I can't tell the difference. I've been a senior executive. :

The reason we skied with our feet and skis touching on long straight skis was as follows:

To manufacture skis with adequate torsional stiffness they were also very stiff lengthwise and when standing on both of them they would barely flatten out.

....which meant to make then turn, one had to put ALL/FULL weight on the outside ski which left the inside ski vulnerable to wander or cross since it was just hanging there...

...consequently we had to control that ski without putting any weight on it...

...by advancing the inside ski about six inches and pressing it sideways against the outside ski and boot the tip couldn't cross because the shovel of the outside ski prevented it and the tail couldn't cross because the boot of the inside ski was ahead of the the weighted boot...

....and like magic we could keep the weightless ski from wandering without having to put any weight on it.

It was true one ski skiing,. For carving we pressured the front of the boot hard and if both the inner boot and outer boot were laced well enough it would transfer the pressure and bend the ski from forward of the toe piece to the shovel and carve nicely. The tails of the skis were too narrow to follow as the shaped skis do so they just brushed or chattered along.

As the French made softer skis one could carry a little weight on the inside ski but we still kept skiing with skis touching in the parallel christy. Eventually ski manufacturing advanced as did skiing technique and the advantage of having independent leg action was explored.

After that everything went haywire...


Again, to ski with elegance you don't need long straight skis nor do they need to be glued together, it's the movements (or lack thereof ---don't move anything more than absolutely necessary to make the turn because you just have to move it back to make the next one) done smoothly and effortlessly in balance that makes them look that way.

Most people you see on those blues skiing with high edge angles whacking their pole plants are way overskiing the terrain, they are bruisers. You should want to emulate the dancers.

....Ott

Well done Ott!!

That was a very elegant and efficient way of summing up the "why" behind past technique/equipment.

So Tiger .. if you're going to go back to older technology, you now have a grounding in the why behind what you seek.

Well Jim, you are still skiing on rented skis, I hope you at least have your own well-fitting boots! Buy a nice intermediate ski about 160cm or so and get used to them, the brand doesn't matter, they are all good.

Forgive me, though I haven't seen the skiers you admire I wonder if at your stage you can really judge what good skiing is. Obviously you know what you want to look like but don't keep obsessing on a 'locked' stance, those skiers may well just had a very narrow stance still with independent leg action and since they were smooth you never may have known this. Just want to caution you that with shaped skis it is very unlikely that experienced skiers would lock their knees.

Any high level instructor could demonstrate to you and you could learn to ski like that. Smooth arm/hand/pole swing discipline is as important to elegant skiing as the tall posture most dancers exhibit.

....Ott

I will never understand this.

To me, this is like wanting to drive a horse and carriage down the freeway, just because.

Maybe just try and see which techniques will let you ski the fastest/most in control/most fluidly?

Harvard, listen to this /\/\/\/\.

HT, what you are describing there I would call "modern high-performance skiing". Perhaps something like this?

HT,

Do you see anything like what you're after in the montage found: here