or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Effective Transitions - Page 3

post #61 of 114
Agreed! Counter action is the direct rotation of the torso into a countered/angulated position, categorized by parallel toe pieces, hips and shoulders.

It's too hard for most to 'ski into counter' because it is a "let" category of move. You have to "let" or "allow" the counter to develop passively, purely as a result of the change in the steering angle of the edged skiis.

It is made even tougher, when you are asking that the inside ski be "pulled back". That requires zen-like control which most skiers simply do not have. While the muscular control or body awareness to "let" this happen passively is not present, most should be able to actively re-orient their upper body against the force of the turn. (Provided of course they are balanced.)
post #62 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
Agreed! Counter action is the direct rotation of the torso into a countered/angulated position, categorized by parallel toe pieces, hips and shoulders.

It's too hard for most to 'ski into counter' because it is a "let" category of move. You have to "let" or "allow" the counter to develop passively, purely as a result of the change in the steering angle of the edged skiis.

It is made even tougher, when you are asking that the inside ski be "pulled back". That requires zen-like control which most skiers simply do not have. While the muscular control or body awareness to "let" this happen passively is not present, most should be able to actively re-orient their upper body against the force of the turn. (Provided of course they are balanced.)
I'm glad I wasn't entirely confused!

I don't know where I fit on the spectrum of skilled skiers that we're discussing, but I find it easier to ski into counter and allow it to develop as a result of my need to balance along the ski edge rather than try to figure it out and find it ahead of time.

I don't usually spend a lot of time on pulling back the inside ski; I tend to keep it in a balanced position under my body throughout the turn, instead.
post #63 of 114
The pmts language is coufusing to me and a bit convoluted in it's meanings. I'm not following.

RW
post #64 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
There is no way on earth that you can balance over the downhill ski and show your bases uphill without using knee angulation.
If you are stationary I agree. Once you add motion to the equation I disagree.

After you pass the point of float and you begin tipping your feet you can begin countering balancing to offset the tipping. It starts off small and gets larger as you move down into the arc. Its a simple matter of crunching your oblique muscles to pull your upper body uphill while your hips are downhill.
post #65 of 114
Thread Starter 
I was working on the upside down turn today. I must say it felt like I was falling into the center of the turn almost touching my inside hip. Cool sensation. Technically correct prolly not. But still way fun.
post #66 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
If you are stationary I agree. Once you add motion to the equation I disagree.

After you pass the point of float and you begin tipping your feet you can begin countering balancing to offset the tipping. It starts off small and gets larger as you move down into the arc. Its a simple matter of crunching your oblique muscles to pull your upper body uphill while your hips are downhill.
Don't know about the "crunching" (I'm too old and tired) but otherwise:
post #67 of 114
I mostly balance against the outside ski in the turn. Sometimes that's the downhill ski, sometimes it's the uphill ski. During transition I allow my cm to translate across the skis, sometimes helping it along. It may well be "balanced over the downhill ski" at some point during transition. Unless I goof up, I am in dynamic balance. The amount of weight on either ski depends on where I want my cm to go elevation-wise and how I want my body to rotate in the vertical plane containing my two feet.

I avoid knee angulation in a turn; it is not needed and my knees have had enough abuse. However, sometimes when I want to continue the skis uphill in transition while my cm comes across, I use knee angulation while bearing little or no weight through the knee. I have no trouble balancing against the outside ski while showing my bases uphill without using knee angulation.
post #68 of 114
I think of balancing along my outside ski rather than against. The difference may seem subtle, but balancing against can lead to bracing, which we all know we don't want to do. Balancing along tends to reinforce the idea of moving with the skis, I think.
post #69 of 114
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
I think of balancing along my outside ski rather than against. The difference may seem subtle, but balancing against can lead to bracing, which we all know we don't want to do. Balancing along tends to reinforce the idea of moving with the skis, I think.
I like it. Myself, think about using my whole foot like a little ski. The Arch flexing like the camber of the ski in unison with my ankle. The Toes guiding the tips of the skis on their intended line of travel and more.
post #70 of 114
When skiing, to my mind, my skis ARE my feet. In the line of thinking and dynamic balance, I usually stay "on top of" my feet and keep my feet "under" me, where "on top of" and "under" are not defined by up and down in the conventional gravitational sense, but using down as the direction of the net force I am exerting on the snow (= conventional down if standing still) and up being opposite.

EDIT: I like "along", a nice sense of movement. I bet the movement is forward too.
post #71 of 114
Thread Starter 
Cool Ghost. Sort of like Line of Action. Question? I notice in my skiing that when I get aggressive in my turns that I start almost stomping (for a better term) into my outside ski and become very outside ski orientated in the turn. Only 1 ski rut in the snow. Is this a bad thing?
post #72 of 114
The main purpose of counteracting is to allow more counterbalancing. This is why we attempt to start counteracting immediately at the start of a turn. Also, a skier that is only bending sideways at the waist at the start of a turn can end up in the backseat, the counteraction keeps everything moving forwards. The amount and timing varies, but it's generally just enough to allow for proper counterbalancing. Aggressive skiing will require more than that, but it is possible to overdo it.
post #73 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post
Cool Ghost. Sort of like Line of Action. Question? I notice in my skiing that when I get aggressive in my turns that I start almost stomping (for a better term) into my outside ski and become very outside ski orientated in the turn. Only 1 ski rut in the snow. Is this a bad thing?
Perhaps you are asking the wrong guy; I'm not an expert, and no instructor.

FWIW, IMHO though, outside ski dominance is fine, but the inside ski can only be ignored if it is behaving properly. With few exceptions behaving properly means that it is carving along in its proper place with parallel shins a strong inside half and all that (I'll let the experts speak to this). The exceptions are when you have to take drastic immediate actions because you messed up or for some other reason and there isn't time to do things the usual way. What concerns me more is your use of the word stomp. This implies to me that you are using extreme effort. This happens to me too when I push the envelope too far. Power is nothing without control. When we try to put to much into a movement our control suffers. At the limit of our strength, unless we are extremely well disciplined we are loosing control. A movement that is not well controlled is not effective. We try to do it with more power, but it ends up being less effective, and often having less power too. Perhaps this loss of control is manifesting itself in the loss of your inside half. All movements should be smooth and controlled, even sudden ones.
post #74 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB View Post
The main purpose of counteracting is to allow more counterbalancing. This is why we attempt to start counteracting immediately at the start of a turn. Also, a skier that is only bending sideways at the waist at the start of a turn can end up in the backseat, the counteraction keeps everything moving forwards. The amount and timing varies, but it's generally just enough to allow for proper counterbalancing. Aggressive skiing will require more than that, but it is possible to overdo it.
That's as I understand it, as well. It's a rotation of the torso around the spine. However, note this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essentials, page 17
You may see some skiers "skiing into a counter," essentially delaying the counteracting movements until the middle or end of the arc. To do this and still achieve solid balance and edge grip through the bottom of the arc is difficult. I don't recommend trying this approach, especially if you tend to rotate. Generally, it takes a well-trained athlete who can understand and perform the full-spectrum of movements...
Seems that skiing into and out of counter is something to be sought as skiers move up the skill ladder. I don't find it to be exceptionally difficult, but that's been my approach for a while, and that may be why.
post #75 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post
Cool Ghost. Sort of like Line of Action. Question? I notice in my skiing that when I get aggressive in my turns that I start almost stomping (for a better term) into my outside ski and become very outside ski orientated in the turn. Only 1 ski rut in the snow. Is this a bad thing?
I am no expert, either, but I think that this can be a less-than-optimal approach, depending on exactly what you mean.

I aim for progressive movements at all times, either increasing or decreasing constantly. No stopping. The basic reason is so that I don't have to restart momentum in any direction of force. If this results in getting 100% of my weight on the outside ski in the turn, great, but I'm going to begin moving back the other way and towards a new transition at that point. If I'm skiing very short, these movements are going to be rapid and short-lived, but they'll still be progressive.

As I read your comments, I was thinking very short turns, but you don't say that. You say "aggressive." So, as long as you're being progressive, I don't think there's a problem getting "all in" on that outside ski. But you likely won't be there for very long.
post #76 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
...Seems that skiing into and out of counter is something to be sought as skiers move up the skill ladder. I don't find it to be exceptionally difficult, but that's been my approach for a while, and that may be why.
Remember the extremely high standards Harald has when he says things like: Generally, it takes a well-trained athlete who can understand and perform the full-spectrum of movements...
post #77 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
That's as I understand it, as well. It's a rotation of the torso around the spine. However, note this:Seems that skiing into and out of counter is something to be sought as skiers move up the skill ladder. I don't find it to be exceptionally difficult, but that's been my approach for a while, and that may be why.
Yes, but keep in mind that the pelvis is included for this movement.
post #78 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Yes, but keep in mind that the pelvis is included for this movement.
I don't understand the point you're making here. Can you expand it, please?
post #79 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB View Post
Remember the extremely high standards Harald has when he says things like: Generally, it takes a well-trained athlete who can understand and perform the full-spectrum of movements...
I'm not sure I understand your point, either, MilesB. Are you suggesting that it's not worth anyone trying to learn unless you're already doing it on the World Cup?
post #80 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
I don't understand the point you're making here. Can you expand it, please?
The pelvis rotates with the rest of the upper body. Its not uncommon to see people try to rotate from the waist.
post #81 of 114
Steve, just a polite way of saying that Harald probably didn't have a PSIA silver pin guy in mind when he wrote that.
post #82 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB View Post
Steve, just a polite way of saying that Harald probably didn't have a PSIA silver pin guy in mind when he wrote that.
Nice slam, MilesB. Thanks. :

What about a guy who's been skiing for 36 seasons, raced for a few relatively early on, holds a recent NASTAR Gold (pre-Platinum), and according to observers from multiple schools of thought regularly and at-will skis arc-to-arc?

...and why not? Please explain to me what skill I need to develop to be able to do that... especially since I regularly do.
post #83 of 114
Steve, more power to you if you feel you are one of the skiers in Harald's description. Why not ask him, I don't think you've been banned.
As far as why or what skills, I have no idea. You may be straining for gnats while swallowing a camel. When I read that, I thought "I'll just stick with what Harald recommends". And then I had another sip of koolaid and all was well.
post #84 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
If you are stationary I agree. Once you add motion to the equation I disagree.

After you pass the point of float and you begin tipping your feet you can begin countering balancing to offset the tipping. It starts off small and gets larger as you move down into the arc. Its a simple matter of crunching your oblique muscles to pull your upper body uphill while your hips are downhill.
Exactly! They are not over the downhill ski, yet didn't showing the bases uphill happen in transition before the hips went downhill?

The tipping of the feet during initiation is accompanied by the knee angulation HH shows in his dryland exercise. The feet tip, the knees move in and the hips follow, as per maintenance of balance via movement through the kinetic chain. This is the real nugget.

Also, at the end of the turn the skier flexes to release, and counterbalances more to show more of the bases to the bottom of the hill which adds the windup/anticipation to load the body so that during the float phase, unwinding can redirect the skis further into the fall-line. That counterbalance is knee angulation too.

Remember, he says it is a movement that can be used at two points in the turn: initiation and release. It is initiated by the skier. Call it whatever you want, it's still rotation. But it's OK, and not injurious because it occurs during periods when low forces are being exerted on the skier -- release and initiation.

It is a commendable thing to focus on how balance is affected during the usage of this move. Angulation of any sort is usually met by the skier as introducing balance problems. Casting knee and hip angulation movements together with counter as a special sort of balance is a very good idea, since it focusses the skier on what is really important: balance.
post #85 of 114
MilesB: Steve, just a polite way of saying that Harald probably didn't have a PSIA silver pin guy in mind when he wrote that.

And you think all those PMTS skiers meet the "extremely high standards set by Harald"? You think a pair of Supershapes and a couple of books creates miracles?
post #86 of 114
I would guess that Steve's thought about WC racers is closer to what was meant by that phrase. It amazes me that with all the great things in that book, someone can get stuck on that. Especially when Harald says he doesn't recommend it.
post #87 of 114
I'm not "stuck on it", MilesB. I'm curious, given that it's a contrast to some of the coaching that I've received that seems to work for me ("ski into and out of counter"). You were the one who made it about my credentials.

I'd rather not make a rotary movement during transition in most of my turns. That's why I'm trying to understand why it is imperative to "counter act" according to Mr. Harb.
post #88 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
Exactly! They are not over the downhill ski, yet didn't showing the bases uphill happen in transition before the hips went downhill?
No. The hips move downhill as a function of tipping. The heel, knee, and hip stay in a straight line when skiing. The angulation you are focusing on is just for the static drills. Just look at HH's montages in the new book where he is in motion. There is no knee angulation in those. Its only in the static drills.
post #89 of 114
Thread Starter 
I do not defend or reject any matter of technique, ok there is one, TC skiing : So weather it is PMTS or PSIA who cares. If it works for me then it works for me,get it.
post #90 of 114
Nice post Max. Although I question the need to actually move the shoulders uphill as opposed to letting angles happen because the hip is moving faster downhill than the shoulders during the first half of the turn. Then it reverses during the second half of the turn and the angles are further developed by allowing the shoulders to move downhill faster than the hips.
In either case it would seem any part of the body moving back up the hill would reduce the "flow" between turns.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching