or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PMTS Discussions - Page 2

post #31 of 136
JohnH: I don't want to sound harsh, but from your post it's pretty clear you really don't know much about PMTS. So those reading it should not take any comparisons you make or conclusions you've drawn very seriously.
post #32 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH View Post
...the same way PMTS dictates a single progression. There is both good and bad in both approaches. A very good and creative teacher gets stifled, but a rookie gets their lesson plan handed to him and isn't allowed the room to grow, be creative and determine better ways to teach their students.

The PSIA system (ATS) allows the lesson to be student based (teach what the student needs, the way they will learn it), as opposed to PMTS which is instructor based (This is what I'm going to teach you and how I'm going to teach it). PMTS is pre-determined before the lesson starts, while ATS says to evaluate the student first, then teach what they need in a way that they will learn it.
John

I hear you and I understand where you're coming from, but as often as we hear the "inconsistent" complaint from former students, there's obviously an issue that needs to be addressed.

Personally, I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle where there is a more standard lesson plan for new ski students (especially when being taught by new instructors, which seems to be the norm), and a broader lesson plan for more experienced students being taught by more experienced instructors. I'll agree that even in beginner lessons there has to be room for instructors to vary their approach to take into account the different ways that different people learn, but there still should be some consistency as to what's being taught.
post #33 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsather View Post
JohnH: I don't want to sound harsh, but from your post it's pretty clear you really don't know much about PMTS. So those reading it should not take any comparisons you make or conclusions you've drawn very seriously.
I'd agree that I don't know a whole heck of a lot. I read the first instructor manual a few years ago, but nothing since. I also have been completely turned off by HH's incessant personal and political attacks, so I have no desire to pursue his teachings too seriously.
post #34 of 136
[quote=Ott Gangl;630310Si, excellent post. I don't think HH's ranting is a strategy, he just loses his cool when PSIA is mentioned. I suspect, but don't really know that something happened when he was still associated with PSIA and he wrote even some PSIA papers, he is a very strong personality and most likely was pushed out or sidelined by the PSIA committee and his ego was hurt. Again I only suspect, I don't know.
[/quote]

I've heard a story about HH's stint on the demo team. I won't repeat it because I've not verified it, but the gist of it was that there was conflict during his team tenure and that his views did not win out. His handling of PMTS suggests that he prefers situations where he is in control. There are pros and cons to this style of leadership. From his descriptions of these times, his ego was definitely NOT hurt. He simply decided to move on to a situation where he could work on the things that he believed were important.

His remarks about Dale Carnegie's book "How to Win Friends and Influence People" tells me that he knows exactly what he is doing when he is ranting. He clearly understands that his rants are in dramatic conflict with the recommendations of the book. He has stated that he sees no need to win friends and no desire to influence certain people. He has also said that he believes that his critiques are truthful and accurate. I believe that this is an honest statement from his frame of reference. Finally, he has stated that if people get offended by his criticisms, then they are simply demonstrating that they have problems accepting the truth. Like the recent centrifugal force thread, the problem here is that there are multiple frames of reference to be considered. What is true in one frame is not necessarily true in another frame. Trying to argue without agreement on the frame of reference is pointless. Harald believes that PMTS is winning in the market because it works and because of the technical strengths of the system and that that is all that matters. His attitude is that skiers should either get on board with his approach or get left behind, that there are no other alternatives and therefore that no special effort to sell his system is required. While it may be true that rants are not an official part of the PMTS business strategy, it is most certain that polite behaviour is not.

Like spam, when your percentage of the market is small, a rant only needs to be successful a small percentage of the time to serve it's purpose well. Whether Harald's rants are intended or not, he is aware of them, they are part of the business, they are working and they continue to be issued on a regular basis. By default, that means that they are intended.
post #35 of 136

yes and no

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCJIM View Post
On what do you base your opinion?

I completely disagree with you. "The Phantom Move" is the dominant concept of PMTS. And that is done by the lifting and tipping.
I think what SI was saying was that many critics of PMTS say or think that all it's about is lift and tip. I've been to many camps of HH's and once you get past the first camp and own the phantom move, other things become the limiting factor on your skiing.

But, even the lighten and tip, remains and is never unlearned. At the PMTS race camp on Mt Hood, I was not tipping the free foot agreesively enough as the turn progressed. So, it's not unlearned either. I don't know of a single tool in PMTS that is discarded or unlearned later.

Oh, and they do use a wedge in PMTS and we still use it almost every day. In PMTS that's called a LMD or a line manuverying device. However, it's not used as a learning tool or as a platform for learning other movements (such as some people use a gliding wedge for).

Also, it's not been my experience that PMTS uses anything like a single progression. It may appear this way from the books, but it's not that way at the camps. At the camps, the focus is on determining what movement pattern is holding a student back (incorrect movement pattern - like at my first camp - throwing my shoulder into a turn) or what correct movement pattern can be added to help that individual student most. Thus, the 'progression' is student based from where that individual's strength and weaknesses are. Any good ski instructor or common sense trainer of sports in any sports field (the good ones anyway) will take that type of individual approach.

Eric and Rob's book has the quote/unquote 'standard PMTS progression' in their appendix in their book "Ski the Whole Mountain". But that has little to do with a student's real experience at a camp or with a good PMTS instructor.

I've also never seen the supposed battle lines. PSIA is an organization without a single approach to teaching skiing. There is no 'PSIA' method. On the other hand, the cert tests and levels imply a progression in spite of their not being an official one and only method withing PSIA. PMTS being a small business has not political constraints. They can be as dogmatic as they wish.

The PSIA has no such flexibility being the '800lb' gorrilla.

As for why HH goes out of his way to attack PSIA, I don't have a good explaination for that. Obviously there is a history and a past to that relationship that caused him to be disgusted and strike out on his own.

But, PSIA is a big umbrella and so is this site. Most all PMTS instructors I know are also PSIA certs.
post #36 of 136
Thanks Si, for your insightful post. I pretty much stayed out of the last discussion, because it was denigrating into an all out war.

Arc, you hit it right on the nose: Learning it is not about instructors, it is all about student. We should all keep that in mind when we are discussing teaching approaches. And that is what PMTS is: Primary Movements TEACHING System. PSIA, or Professional Ski INSTRUCTORS Association is a certifying body that sets standards for insrtuctor certification. Not approaches to teaching. That is left up to individual ski school directors. In my veiw this has been an apple and orange situation. Or round hole and square peg. I am sure that I will get comments on this!

Phantom Move: Lifting an tipping is for learning. Harb says it and I have to say it. Personally, I just tip and let the lightening take care of itself. I have been to at least eight instructor clinics since I started with PMTS in 1998. Very rarely was "Phantom Move" mentioned. Super PM was looked at for some length at one clinic. But mostly secondary movements were explored. A lot of time was spent on teaching. This is where, I think, PMTS is different than PSIA. Why is the student here? What does the student want to learn? How does this student learn?

I have known HH for many years. I don't always see eye-to-eye with him. Some days he is cranky, but so am I! Many of you know his history, so I won't go into it. But he was on the Demo Team. From what I understand, he presented some things to the team and his ideas were rejected. He quit the team and started to develop PMTS.

Instructor certification is quite different than PSIA. Ski proficiency is ongoing through the 2 day event. Most of the time is taken up in teaching scenarios. The canditate is graded on determination and fulfillment in three areas:motivation, understanding and movement. This is for yellow and Green pins. Blue pin adds blue bumps in the fall line, exhibiting clean releases and engagement. Sliding not acceptable Black pin adds showing the abtlity to teach four students individual "private" lessons at the same time and ski black bumps doing weighted release in the fall line. Black is not easy. Most that try end up with Blue. Teaching multiple lessons and the bump skiing are the main hurdles. Unless you can ski and teach like John Clendenon, go for the Blue!

As Si said, there is much confusion as to what PMTS actually is. I hope I have cleared up some of the misunderstandings. I have tried to keep values out of this post and talked only of fact. If I have screwed up anywhere let me know

Rick H (older than Weems)
post #37 of 136
>>>From his descriptions of these times, his ego was definitely NOT hurt.<<<

Thanks for clearing that up for me, I said I didn't know, I was just trying to understand what it possibly could be that made him condemn PSIA in writing in his books and on his web site, it looks like a crusade and may have turned off some potential customers. Again, I don't know.

...Ott
post #38 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick H View Post
Instructor certification is quite different than PSIA. Ski proficiency is ongoing through the 2 day event. Most of the time is taken up in teaching scenarios. The canditate is graded on determination and fulfillment in three areas:motivation, understanding and movement. This is for yellow and Green pins. Blue pin adds blue bumps in the fall line, exhibiting clean releases and engagement. Sliding not acceptable Black pin adds showing the abtlity to teach four students individual "private" lessons at the same time and ski black bumps doing weighted release in the fall line. Black is not easy. Most that try end up with Blue. Teaching multiple lessons and the bump skiing are the main hurdles. Unless you can ski and teach like John Clendenon, go for the Blue!
Not that I've been to a PMTS sertification clinic, but it sounds very similar to PSIA to me....
post #39 of 136

Similarities

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonnie View Post
Not that I've been to a PMTS sertification clinic, but it sounds very similar to PSIA to me....
I don't know if anyone has taken the time to do a proper scientific analysis between how students from a PSIA program and a PMTS program progress. It could only be based on outcomes over time. Also, any study must be peer reviewed. And that is the catch; where are you going to find 10-12 unbiased instructors??

As to instructors, from what I saw at the fisrt ESA, the approach is pretty much the same. the terminology is different. "Lift your big toe." "Tip to your little toe." I had to explain that to a student that was confused. Tipping cleared it up. The message in that statement is that we as instructors, have to be certain that we are understood by the student. Consequently, we need to be able to broaden our vocabulary to be able to reach all students.

Rick H
post #40 of 136

really?

Rick H - are you really older than Weems? I thought no one was older than Weems.

NYCjim, when you take a look at his newest book, you get what I've been getting at the camps for the last 2 years. Very little mention of the phantom move, and much more emphasis on counter-acting, counter balance and other 'secondary' movements that support the 'primary' movements.

I think you have to take the good from either source and ignore the distracting crap. PSIA is the recognized professional ski organization for this country and going up in the cert levels gives many better pay grades where they choose to ski instruct. PMTS is a small and successful small business that has created a comprehensive set of tools useful for both students and instructors.

I've learned a lot from PMTS but also from the Atomic Race Camps on Mt Hood and from John Clendenon's ski-docs. I'll take what works from whatever source. I do wish that the ESA events would let you select your coach though. At a PMTS camp regardless of who the instructor is I know what the product is going to be.

One of the purposes of the 'level's and certification process in PSIA from my understanding is that - like McDonalds - you'll know what you are going to get no matter what golden arches you go to. I think that's where the PMTS approach has been more successful than PSIA in that as a student there is much more variation in the lesson you'll get in a PSIA ski school setting vs a PMTS lesson. In this regard, PSIA being the big tent has worked against it's own 'Mcdonalds' goal, to the detrement of their students. I don't have any expectation of this changing though.

For instance, I am taking my wife up to a ski resort in Northern Michigan for a first timer lesson at Saturday at 9am. She had had a lesson in Breckenridge from a PSIA instructor almost 4 years ago and swore off skiing as a result. I'm going their specifically because of their PMTS certified instructors so my wife has a chance of getting a productive lesson and not being one of the 82 percent never ski again statistic for the PSIA ski schools. At Breckenridge she was given a wedge based lesson. Going in the wedge even a little bit hurt her knees, made her feel like she was fighting the skis, and made her feel out of control. There may be many schools that I could find that might teach some form of DTP approach, but unlilke McDonald's I have little way of telling if a particullar DTP approach is a flunky GLM method or exactly what the DTP approach will be. With the PMTS cert I know what type of lesson she will be presented with. Yet, this instructor also, like most PMTS instructors are also PSIA certs and members of both organizations.


This dropout rate and lack of consistency is the type of thing that gets HH so mad at the PSIA as an indictment of failure of the reasons for such an organization. I know most people here feel HH's anger is a marketing ploy. I think that view ignores the shared anger many here have at the overall failure of PSIA in achieving better student retention rates, or offering a consistent product wherever their pin is worn.
post #41 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason View Post
I've also never seen the supposed battle lines. PSIA is an organization without a single approach to teaching skiing. There is no 'PSIA' method. On the other hand, the cert tests and levels imply a progression in spite of their not being an official one and only method withing PSIA.
A clarification here. PSIA does have a single approach to teaching skiing. It is called the American Teaching System. PSIA also has a model for learning skiing. It is called Stepping Stones. The primary idea behind stepping stones is that there is more than one possible path (i.e. progression) between beginning and advanced skiing. Certification levels reflect the level of skiing, technical knowledge and teaching skills posessed by the instructor. They do not reflect a specific learning progression.
post #42 of 136
So what exactly are these stones (or centre-lines, or other possibly outdated steps)? Is there any on-line material for teaching never-evers to all-mountain skiers, that one doesn't have to shell out for? Every system seems to be saying "buy our manual", but I'm not buying 'till I see the goods.
post #43 of 136
PSIA, the organization, does not directly interact with the skiing public as far as teaching is concerned, they just franchise the instructors. To get on-line material for teaching for free just read epicsski or realskier and you will get plenty of free advice from instructors holding such franchise (certification). As for a PSIA manual, no one is trying to sell one though there is a web site.

...Ott
post #44 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH View Post
But with PMTS, you start with a strong movement to lift the inside ski, then have to weaken it to keep the ski on the ground. This means that in PMTS, you do actually have to unlearn a learned movement pattern to achieve a higher level of competance, but when you use a wedge properly, you only have to continually strengthen a skill learned at the early stages, to achieve the higher levels.
I don’t think you have to “unlearn” in PMTS. The lifting is because it’s easier to transfer weight this way for beginners. As you get more comfortable you are able to transfer with merely the lightening of the ski, not needing a full lift. This is not “unlearning” anything.
post #45 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
So what exactly are these stones (or centre-lines, or other possibly outdated steps)? Is there any on-line material for teaching never-evers to all-mountain skiers, that one doesn't have to shell out for? Every system seems to be saying "buy our manual", but I'm not buying 'till I see the goods.
Ghost,

Possibly an outdated step would be to go to the PSIA Internet Learning Center. Mind you that Harald has written 3 books that have yet to cover everything for alpine skiing and this PSIA resource covers multiple disciplines. Like skiing, learning to teach never-evers to all mountain skiers is not something that can be done solely from a book and one single resource is hardly sufficient for the task. However, this resource does give you a taste of what the system is all about (including information about stepping stones). The ILC used to require a member log in, but I was able to access it today without doing so. I assume I will hear relatively quickly if this is not the case.
post #46 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCJIM View Post
I don’t think you have to “unlearn” in PMTS. The lifting is because it’s easier to transfer weight this way for beginners. As you get more comfortable you are able to transfer with merely the lightening of the ski, not needing a full lift. This is not “unlearning” anything.
Has Harald copyrighted "lift and tip"? If so, PSIA is in trouble. I just saw exactly those instructions as part of an exercise to teach parallel skiing while I was browsing through the Internet Learning Center to check on my last post. Who knew?

This issue is another example of the frame of reference problem. Every exercise that I know of has both good points and bad points. Although in general we don't like to teach things that have to be unlearned later, every exercise, by definition, is not "just skiing" and therefore has to have something that must be unlearned if you choose to get picky about it.
post #47 of 136
I don't know if he has anything copywrited. If PSIA is doing similar things, more power to both.

I don't see PSIA as the enemy.
post #48 of 136
Thanks, Therusty
post #49 of 136

Si, Nice points and good thread

I just read through this thread and am pretty sure I've never seen such a civilized discussion of this topic. Very nice work Si, and thanks everyone for such a good discussion.

When I first started posting here at epic (seems like quite a few years ago now), PMTS was the new kid on the block. I had my level 3 PSIA cert and was teaching for Eric DesLauriers All Mountain Ski Pros. I has passes my level 3 using many of lito's progressions and i was a fan of his teaching. pmts ideas were a natural for me as Eric and Litos teaching had many similiarities.

from Litos progressions to all mountain ski pros, though the focus was different, I didn't feel i was teaching anti PSIA material.

I feel that pmts and All Mountain Ski Pros fit under the umbrella of psia, but some psia ideas don't mesh with pmts.

IMO the biggest differences are focus based. Also, stance width, which i still feel is one of the big differences.
As I'm back teaching 1 day a week at Northstar (a very psia school), i notice stance width is a definite difference. Eric and i ski with a fairly narrow stance and the psia guys definitely ski wider. I was skiing with a couple of western tech teamers now that i'm back and they asked me about pmts (it's not the hot button issue here in the west, as these guys had never hear of Harald...)
My quick answer was the key differences were focusing more on the inside half and inside leg(ie.. ligthening and tipping), more one footed balance and hence a narrower stance. OH, and minimizing the rotary. Yeah, pretty simple and maybe not totally accurate, but i tend to try to simplify everything...

since i ski some 90% off piste and the focus of my lessons for many years now has been off piste, I feel these points become less seperated. if you check out Mike Rogan's photos in his SKI instructional pieces, you see narrower stances off piste, wider stances on.

anyway, it's great to see such thoughtfull balanced posts. to see such some of the posters that have been very agressive at times in the past write so cleanly is encouraging. now if i could just write more cleanly.

hope this makes some since. i was rushed.

cheers,
holiday
post #50 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo View Post
Skiing is sensual. At the highest levels of performance, skiing cues are instantaneously felt, not processed mentally through verbal feedback. The cues are physical, and are received by the kinesthetic neural pathways, not the cognitive ones.
Only for the touchy feely cumbaya garbage people like me. nolo I like so much following you down the slopes cuz it just shines through
post #51 of 136
Rusty,
Thanks for the link to the PSIA Internet Learning Center. I also had no trouble accessing it. I have several comments: First, I have been trying for four years to find out what the "Official" PSIA teaching system looks like. Finally, this site gave me a complete picture (why in the world this is kept such a secret is still a mystery to me). Second, the DESIGN of this site is brilliant! (IMHO) Third, is this site up-to-date? While I loved the design, I found some of the material to be less than dazzling (especially,some of the material under Rotary and Edging). I don't think these sections reflect what we know about: shaped skis, "High C" carved turns, or modern racing technique. Finally, I liked the "Stepping Stones" concept (while still disagreeing with the necessity of some of the steps)
post #52 of 136

Move Over PSIA & PMTS. It's Time for SITS!

Geez! I woke up here in the East on January 5th. It was 60 degrees outside. I went to the driving range. Hit a bunch of three woods, three irons and few nine irons off the turf. I came home, read this civil and mutually respectful thread and realized, given the laws of probability, this all had to be a dream. None of this could be real. Then a friend called and told me that PSIA and PMTS are passe. It's all about SITS: http://www.weekendwarriorsguide.com/index.htm.

What is going on here?
post #53 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by boardboy View Post
Then a friend called and told me that PSIA and PMTS are passe. It's all about SITS: http://www.weekendwarriorsguide.com/index.htm.
According to Weekend Warrior, Instead of the 'Scholpy Drill', it's actually called the 'Disco Nights Move.' Cool!

From the webite. Retro baby!
post #54 of 136
To all those Instructors and skiers out there whom are turned off by Harald's marketing. LOOK BEYOND IT. By staying put in hard feeling and partisan thoughts the only thing you are doing is closing your eyes. He has converts, are you ignoring that fact or are you trying to convert to take business away from HH.

I will say this about HH. He knows full well that I do not like his marketing strategy yet he understands that I will look beyond that. HH has been gracious to me and helpful and to that end I do not harbor any ill will towards HH the man.

About 40 percent of the population prefers to learn by a step by step approach and does not really like confusion and discussions when learning something new. Just give me the facts mam. To this end PMTS has been a blessing. In case you have not listened the Harbineastas are not Koolaid drinkers but in most cases, folks who have found their step by step approach they have so desperately sought.

While PSIA certainly does not preclude any step by step approaches and any and all of us could develop our own, PSIA is conceptual in nature. To my thinking this is good for the other 60 percent but falls short on the other 40. That 40 percent would include many instructors. Yes I am a conceptual rainbow type thinker but realize there are many who are not.

Want to find out how difficult it is to put together a program like PMTS. Just start some threads here on what we collectively think of as good step by step progressions at the different PSIA levels. You will quickly find out how conceptual PSIA is and how difficult it is to put it in writing.

Epicski would do well to have a section as an alternative to PMTS but until that fight ends 40 percent will still find PMTS a welcome site and I don’t blame them.
post #55 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by patprof66 View Post
Rusty,
Thanks for the link
...
(why in the world this is kept such a secret is still a mystery to me).
...
Third, is this site up-to-date? While I loved the design, I found some of the material to be less than dazzling (especially,some of the material under Rotary and Edging). I don't think these sections reflect what we know about: shaped skis, "High C" carved turns, or modern racing technique.
Pat,

You're most welcome. I can only guess as to why this info is such a secret. My guess is that the feeling is that anyone who would be interested would find about it through their local ski school. We're slowly getting better. The ILC used to be private. The video part of the Go with a Pro campaign ought to be making the PSIA.org site more visible to the public. The new forum software is really cool, but PSIA has to learn about how to do community management.

The material is up to date. But it does represent only a small fraction of what is involved in learning to teach. The visual cues stuff has better info on edging and rotary than in the earlier sections. There's also more info available on other parts of the PSIA.org site, but the new site design is not yet complete, some of the navigation is still brutally painful and there is more info that is only available to members.

Despite claims to the contrary, PSIA is fully up to speed on shaped skis. However, "high c" is PMTS terminology. Crudely put (as I understand it), PSIA simply calls the same thing carving the top part of the turns. PSIA is closely involved with modern racing, but that is mostly handled separately like powder and bumps are handled separately. The movements in specific racing techniques like waiststeering and pivot entry turns are covered generically under the skills concept, similar to how retraction and absorption for the bumps are covered by pressure management in the skills concept.

It took me 4 years before I could find a free description of what the Phantom Move was. Harald's response of "you can't understand the issue until you read my book" used to bug the heck out of me. But my response above is not much different. Such is life. Epic has been a wonderful resource for filling in the gaps. I was so impressed I became a supporter. I got so addicted, they put me to work.:
post #56 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH View Post
By strengthening the inside ski movement the skis start to turn in parallel. But with PMTS, you start with a strong movement to lift the inside ski, then have to weaken it to keep the ski on the ground. This means that in PMTS, you do actually have to unlearn a learned movement pattern to achieve a higher level of competance, but when you use a wedge properly, you only have to continually strengthen a skill learned at the early stages, to achieve the higher levels.
In PMTS lifting and tipping is used at the highest levels (as I pointed out in another post) whenever you want a quick high energy release. Obviously you don't unlearn that movement if you are going to use it. Once you have learned how to transfer weight and establish balance then lightening (rather than lifting) is a trivial modification. The movement pattern is the same but at a lower intensity.
post #57 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH View Post
Caution: actual PMTS vs PSIA (ATS) technical discussion ahead. Proceed at your own risk!

I find it interesting that PMTS is so harsh on PSIA regarding the wedge as a dead-end movement that must be unlearned (although I very much understand HH's original beef with PSIA was that he wanted to go the DTP route and eliminate the wedge), yet PMTS promotes a lift and tip to beginners that must be unlearned as you become more accomplished. When you boil the movements down, a wedge is (okay, SHOULD BE) just a weaker move of the inside ski steering into the new turn. As in outside ski moves into the turn first, the skis form a wedge. By strengthening the inside ski movement the skis start to turn in parallel. But with PMTS, you start with a strong movement to lift the inside ski, then have to weaken it to keep the ski on the ground. This means that in PMTS, you do actually have to unlearn a learned movement pattern to achieve a higher level of competance, but when you use a wedge properly, you only have to continually strengthen a skill learned at the early stages, to achieve the higher levels.

I guess it could be debated that it's easier to unlearn the movement of lifting the inside ski than it is to learn to steer the inside ski more, but that's a moot point in this debate, because HH has always busted on PSIA/ATS for promoting "dead-end" movements. From a purely technical standpoint, it seems that PMTS is the system that is promoting a dead-end movement pattern.

Eeeeenteresting, no?
Based on extensive experience exploring and experimenting with aspects of both systems over several decades, I feel the need to attempt to clarify what appear to be key misconceptions about both sides of the comparison.

Skiers using a wedge, wedge-christy, stem-christy, 1-2-step whatever almost but not quite wanna-be parallel do so NOT because they do not steer the new inside ski well enough, but BECAUSE they do not first release that ski’s inside edge! The simple reason they struggle to guide the new inside ski into the turn is because they never learned to release the edge of that ski.

What is lacking is not stronger steering skills, but any releasing skills, and the understanding the both their difference and their relationship by both the instructors and consequently the students.

PSIA’s general population instructors (while maybe not their elite) are still struggling to gain awareness of the fact that the solution is not to create a bigger problem (a bigger dominant rotary bias) by the traditional approach of ramping up the rotary effort of both skis until the inside edge is negated by external rotation of the femur in the inside hip socket. This get a bigger hammer approach is a marginally effective and very inefficient way to get the edge released when contrasted to learning efficient releasing movements such as inversion of that new inside foot, as PMTS teaches from the get-go.

New skiers introduced to the lift/tip release movement exercise (stepping-stone, not technique) never develop the need to ramp up bulldozing rotary habits with the outside ski. Skiers who already have the dominant outside ski rotary habit can successfully mitigate it by using the lift/tip to both eliminate the fulcrum against which they would over steer the outside ski, and create the release that precludes the need to do so. Contrary to common miss-conception they willingly and readily give up the lifting of the new inside ski for an easier lightening as their release and balance transfer skills evolve.

This approach of learning of motor skill acquisition by progressing from gross (lift/tip) to refined (releasing), vs. from weak (rotary) to more gross (bigger rotary) is also a more consistent reflection of the evolvution of skill refinement and blending demonstrated by expert skiers.
post #58 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by patprof66 View Post
Finally, I liked the "Stepping Stones" concept (while still disagreeing with the necessity of some of the steps)
Well then you're more than welcome to skip the ones you don't like....
post #59 of 136

Online source to steppable stones

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
So what exactly are these stones (or centre-lines, or other possibly outdated steps)? Is there any on-line material for teaching never-evers to all-mountain skiers, that one doesn't have to shell out for? Every system seems to be saying "buy our manual", but I'm not buying 'till I see the goods.
You can download the new PSIA-C's Level-I Study Guide which is a contemporary representation of various stepping-stones pathways avaliable as options for teaching new skiers.

http://www.psia-c.org/Education/PSIA...nFlyer2006.pdf

Send me a PM with an email address and I will also sent you the current version of the 'Pathways 2 Parallel' document I wrote back in 2000 that was the genisus of the above document (which I co-authored with others on the PSIA-C Education Staff).
post #60 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcmeister View Post
PSIA’s general population instructors (while maybe not their elite) are still struggling to gain awareness of the fact that the solution is not to create a bigger problem (a bigger dominant rotary bias) by the traditional approach of ramping up the rotary effort of both skis until the inside edge is negated by external rotation of the femur in the inside hip socket. This get a bigger hammer approach is a marginally effective and very inefficient way to get the edge released when contrasted to learning efficient releasing movements such as inversion of that new inside foot, as PMTS teaches from the get-go.
Arc,

I'm far far away from being an elite PSIA instructor. Here on the ice coast, at my home resort and in PSIA clinics I can't remember a single clinic where we've discussed wedge turns where we did not hammer a slight movement into the new turn (to release the new inside ski). We may not emphasize the terminology of "release", but we do emphasize the movements required for a release to occur and we do it from day 1 skiers through the advanced levels. We may not be perfect in our demos, but we are most certainly not being taught to use the bigger hammer.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching