These 2 items seem hot buttons and I’ve been thinking about them as well.
Stance width and cross under vs cross over.
I’m with bud, in that I’ve been a fan of the narrower stance, cross under style for some time now. I tested for my 3 back when retraction/extension was the big buzzword in the psia (10 years or so ago) and that was the image they wanted as well.
A diagonal cross over move is back in favor right now, and that is what the demo guys are showing in these clips. In skiing with Chris Fellow a couple of weeks ago (demo team) he wanted me to move more over the top and create more activity and angles with the hip instead of leading and focusing so much on my feet and lower leg. A drill we did to get me to exaggerate this was baiscally tall banked and rotated pure carves. It reminded me of things I’ve tried to eliminate, but was expanding my repertoire to in a way that allowed me to resist higher forces. Some time a year or 2 ago, Pierre also wanted me to play with a cross over move to add after watching a clip of my turns (similar in my opinion to what Max has posted in his first couple clips) Pierre felt I could get farther inside and across the hill quicker in the pure carves with the cross over.
Stance width wise…
I skied with Nick Herrin a couple weeks ago for a day as well and commented on his narrower stance. He said he had consciously made it wider over the years to meet the image the psia wanted and one day at tryouts, they said he looked bowlegged. He said he was just the opposite but was trying to create the image they wanted. After that he let his stance come back to what was more comfortable for him, and that was narrower. Not so narrow as to disallow independent action within the hip sockets, but narrower.
Since I teach for Eric D and have a version of pmts background, I also asked Nick his view was of the psia/pmts controversy. He said he knew that some people had strong feelings about HH because he had bad mouthed the psia, but he had followed him around one day in Montana and told his peers that the guy rips so he must know something. He said he had no problems with listening to the ideas of a guy who skied so well…
My point is that HH has one movement he prefers, PSIA flip flops the image they like…
For us skiers, it think having a larger bag of tricks can be good. We have our “go to” move, but should be able to use other movements if the mood, terrain and snow ask for it.
Regarding release moves,
I may not be a good enough skier to know for sure, but I do believe as Rick has suggested that using the retraction and tipping of the old outside ski as the sole release move may have some liabilities at the highest levels. HH has found a way to alleviate it, maybe with that pivot as Rick states. I just know that at my level (a level 3 good skier, but no HH, nick herrin or chris fellows), with the relax and role as my go to move, I tend to get my hips back at that moment and then have to pull the skis back in a catch up move. I also feel I get less energy out the turn than guys that aren’t absorbing that rebound with the relaxtion or retraction. So, I’m playing with it.
to the last question: the psia has a national demo team and that's what people have referred to. it's a reference because in theory they are skiing in the ideal image of the psia, while harald harb would be the ideal image of pmts.