Originally Posted by vail snopro
I do not argue in the slightest with your definition of 'management'. Nor have I ever advocated that any action in that realm be "allowed" to happen randomly.
I'm glad to hear that, Ric. If I'm reading the wind right, this is the next pop theme coming down the PSIA pipe, and it rates right up there with the wide stance, 50-50 pressue, and no counter themes of old. It needs to be held to a reality check while it's still a baby.
|I concur with many of your ideas, but I still take exception to one. The idea of actively twisting/rotating the torso toward the outside of the turn, as compared to the ski turning below a stable torso is where you and I differ. As I stated in my earlier post, if the skier is in trouble, then we may see that type of active movement, but it is not the standard technique.
Ric,,, we're not that far apart. We're seeing the same thing, just defining how it happens differently. You see the development of counter in a turn as a "stable torso"
because it appears to you to remain orientated in the same compass direction while the direction of the skis change through the turn.
I see a stable pelvis and torso
as one that is static,,, remaining in rotational alignment with the feet,,, not rotating away from the direction of the feet (something I call following). In my definition of "stable
" the pelvis/torso would follow the changing direction of the feet/skis,,, would remain in rotational alignment,,, would not articulate rotationally within the joints.
I think it's important to focus on that articulation because it must "be actively done
", and in doing it problems can arise if not done properly. I explained this a few posts back, but I'll cover it again in a later post.
|That you are working with this movement conveys to me that you are still working from the skis up to the CM (core), rather than from the CM outwards.
Actually I am very core focused, core centric if you will, as some may remember from reading my earlier posts on such skiing from the core vs skiing from the feet topics. I'm very much about the relationship of the core to the feet, and keeping the relationship friendly. If you're a core guy too, we're on the same page.
|You refer to an active movement of the torso to create the initial counter, where as I believe the position is already achieved by proper position at the end of the previous turn. And that is what's missing in the Maier montage. (from the post to Bud Heishman)
Between frames 1 + 2, the skis have continued to change direction. Being stacked as accurately as he is, the torso would continue to come around with the skis.
OK,,, this is good. You've isolated the very place were the rotational shift is launched. Yes you are right,,, between image 1 and 2 his skis do continue to turn (change direction). http://www.ronlemaster.com/images/2005-2006/slides/maier-bc-2005-gs-2-web.html
And yes, if there were no rotational realignment taking place one would expect the pelvis/torso to follow suit (change direction in harmony).
But look closer. You don't need photo shop to do this, you can do it by eye. In image 1 see the direction his skis are pointing (across the page, approx. 4:30 o'clock), and project that line forward. Now project a line straight out of his navel, in the same direction his pelvis/torso is pointing (toward the bottom of the page, almost 6 o'clock). Doing the clock to degrees conversion, you have about 35 degrees of counter.
Now do the same in image 2. Project the ski and navel lines again. Skis are about 3;30 o'clock, and navel is about 4 o'clock. That gives you about 15 degrees of counter.
So, as it's clear to see, it was not just a matter of the torso following the direction change of the skis. He actually (at the same time the skis were turning) reduced the amount of counter significantly, by about 25 degrees. That is the rotational shift I'm talking about,,, moving back to rotational neutral,,, and it's something he's doing actively and intentionally. And by the time he gets to neutral that remaining 15 degrees will be eliminated too. You can see that in image 3, which was taken just a cat hair past edge angle neutral.
|The image of the bib is not moving rotationally any significant amount from frames 2-5. In fact, the bib doesn't really move at all until between frames 5 + 6! And that, only because he is now restacked and is moving his torso with the skis as they turn.
You are right, Ric, the bib hardly moves from it's compass direction at all from images 2-5. But in relation to the skis and there changing direciton it has countered tremendously. From square in image 3, to about, ahhh, you guys to the math for image 5. Pretty high, isn't it? (hint, about 80 degrees) http://www.ronlemaster.com/images/2005-2006/slides/maier-bc-2005-gs-2-web.html
A big rotational articulation in the joints had to take place for this countered position to come to be. This was not a random happening. It was an intention rotational application chosen for the turn shape and edge angle of that particular turn. Had he been making a lower edge angle turn, he would not have introduced that amount of joint rotation (counter) because it would not have been needed.