EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Ski Instruction vs Race Coaching
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski Instruction vs Race Coaching - Page 2

post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
Back on topic.....

The flexion at the end of the CSIA turns is pressure control at it's most versatile.

A rec skier can take that turn onto the steepest of pitches.

Not so for the turn that is focussed on getting maximum performance from the ski.
That pretty much nails it. The primary focus of CSIA instruction is control under varied conditions for recreational skiers. The focus of CSCF is to develop performance, i.e. control at speed and conservation of momentum.

Contrary to the first post, there are not three possible outcomes to a turn, there are only two; 1) conservation of speed and 2) reduction of speed. Back when I was racing and coaching, Gord Brown, the chief examiner of the CSCF told us "there is no such thing as creating acceleration in a turn". Acceleration can only occur as a result of gravity in combination with proper race tactics. You cannot exit a turn faster than you entered it based on technique and/or ski performance. At the most what you can do is minimize your loss of 'potential' speed. While striving to minimize loss of potential speed through the turn, racers must try to capitalize on the opportunities to accelerate that the terrain presents through the use of sound tactics. As Gord told us, when people refer to "acceleration" what they're really referring to is the "feeling" of releasing the energy build-up in the ski at the end of a properly carved racing turn, on a clean, fast edge. It means they have minimized speed lost in the turn and have allowed gravity and tactics to play out to their maximum potential.
post #32 of 43
post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
Interesting thread, but irrelevant and erroneous when applied to ski racing. It applies only if you're moving at extremely slow speed on flat or near flat terrain and ceases to come into play once you're moving faster than a couple of mph at best. I think I'll listen to the national team coaches rather than some boarder when it comes to this topic.
post #34 of 43
Definitely listen to your coach.
post #35 of 43
Thread Starter 
exracer: Back when I was racing and coaching, Gord Brown, the chief examiner of the CSCF told us "there is no such thing as creating acceleration in a turn".

Back to school for Gord Brown in that case. In a turn you are by default accelerating as there is a net force (centripetal acceleration) on you. And yes, it can increase.
post #36 of 43
TomB,

from what mystery energy source are you gaining any more acceleration then what gravity can provide? This needs to be a new thread BTW.
post #37 of 43
Acceleration is change in velocity, that is change in speed OR change in direction or both, so technically acceleration exists in every turn.

The energy source is muscular. You are, in effect skating, skating with parallel skis like a hockey player skates backwards, it is not as efficient as regular skating, but you can skate that way without needing to be going downhill. Racers skate at the start, using the more efficient normal forward skating motion, but beyond a certain point skating doesn't help them. Trying to do this movement instead of concentrating other important details while racing at speed will more than likely slow you down. That doesn't mean that all other things being good, this force cannot be added to increase you're speed; it can.
post #38 of 43
Ghost, we've been down this road before. Aside from the very start of a course where of course people are skating, creating acceleration from energy in the legs is the wrong tree to bark up. As you pointed out, after a point the movements slow you down more than they add to your acceleration down the hill so its entirely a moot point. Let's talk about skiing here, not hypothetical physics. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work.

The original poster who quoted his coach was right on target with the remark as was his CSCF coach. They are harnessing gravity and reducing as much as possible anything related to friction while also taking the shortest possible line through the course that does not compromise the first thing, as well as other tactical decisions which optimize to the max the amount of gravity they are converting into velocity down the hill.

The point is that ski instructors generally teach how to control speed by increasing friction and/or lengthening the DOT relative to the fall line, or other tactics designed to REDUCE the effectiveness of gravity. Ski racers instead try to reduce to a minimum these effects and INCREASE the effectiveness of gravity.
post #39 of 43
Quote:
The point is that ski instructors generally teach how to control speed by increasing friction and/or lengthening the DOT relative to the fall line, or other tactics designed to REDUCE the effectiveness of gravity. Ski racers instead try to reduce to a minimum these effects and INCREASE the effectiveness of gravity.
I like to think that I teach how to play with and harness gravity, not reduce it's effect. Even though I understand your point BTS, I think it is simply a question of tactics over increasing or reducing. Gravity is the only constant in skiing. We control speed by lengthening or shortening the DoT as we harness gravities effect by choosing our line, the same as racers do as they choose the more direct route. Increasing friction is only one way to control speed, line choice is the other huge choice that we need to embrace most of the time.

Skiing is playing with gravity and working it's effect continuously by using it through our movements to create forces, and release forces when we move to the next turn. The real difference seems to me to be the clock. Free skiing has no clock thank god.

Kinda nit picking your word choices BTS, sorry.
post #40 of 43
oh indeed, no question line choice is also a method of controlling speed. I thought I said that in a roundabout way. Anyway, the point is, ski instructors are generally dealing with students who want to control their speed in a fun way. Racers are generally trying to remove any and all speed inhibitors. It is two completely different focuses. There are a lot of overlapping skills, but having two different intents does have a profound effect on the techniques employed.
post #41 of 43
One of the features of the British and French Instruction systems is that the top level requires the passing of the Eurotest. This is a FIS standard gs where candidates must ski to +18/% of 0 FIS points (circa 110 -150 Points). Ex WC skiers genereally set the base times.

Anyway, the point is that ski instructors over here will have a fair bit of racing nous and be able to demonstrate it in their skiing and bring it into lessons.
post #42 of 43

My take on it

Ski Instruction for me often has the unappealing aspect of seeing "them" once and they are gone. Coaching means they will be back throughout the season or will be there for a week or so for a camp. Lesson plans for an hour and a half or a full day pale in comparison to a preseason/season long program. Where has the ski week gone? It used to be the best gig you could be assigned. Now they are practically none existent.

In 1980 it took my level 1 USSA from Horst Webber at the Training center at Lake Placid. On our first run we FLEW down Excelsior and lost a participant. I pointed it out to him that Mrs. Lipshits was missing. While loading the lift he said "Ah! Un this is why we have the Ski Patrol!" From that moment on I knew that coaching was for me and was way cooler than teaching lessons. Bolter
post #43 of 43

long ago

OOPs i think it was '83, sorry
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 › Ski Instruction vs Race Coaching