Bullet Proof Short Turns - PMTS - Video - Page 17

This is just really more of a result of what naturally happens as skill level increases. There is more of a desire to understand what is behind the movements because there is an actual ability to change them.

And I won't disagree with that. But I think that there is also a level beyond "simple" conscious understanding and performing the maneuvers. I think there is a level where skiing becomes UN-conscious, a zone where it's automatic (in reality I think that zone exists for all of us at some level weather it's the bunny hill or Corberts Couloir...) If you're having to think the movements, and trying to process what move to make, it's too slow for REALLY high level skiing. If you've ever watched truly high level skiers, you know what I mean. Things just happen. It's Magic. Do you think Harbs thinking when he's skiing? (I don't). I think it 2nd nature to him...

This is why I'm trying to stop being a thinker and trying to become a feeler....

EDIT: AND to take this thread back on track this is why SR turns are so hard. It's the time it takes us to do them. If we think about them, were done. I can think about specific movements all day long when I'm demoing Medium Radius turns. They are really quite slow. But for Short radius, nope. I once heard an examiner (one that coaches WC racers on the side) say SL is easy, you have a whole 0.7 of a second to make a turn...

But what do I know, I'm only a level II....

I have followed this thread fairly carefully though not post by post and have a clarifying question. Are any of the contributors to this thread PMTS instructors? I have a couple of Mr. Harb's books, including his newest one, and just wondered if anyone on this thread is a PMTS instructor. Thank you!

I'm with Lonnie here. The whole point of practice is to drill movements into muscle memory, so they are a "subroutine" your conscious mind can call without going into the details.

For those of us who are "thinkers" it is a lot easier to do this if we have a consistent mental model to keep our brain happy and quiet. If you don't have time to think in short turns, you really don't have time to change your mind!

On the other hand, note that I said "consistent" not "correct". A somewhat inaccurate model can serve the same purpose of keeping the brain happy. And minor inaccuracies get "tuned away" as the feedback loop gets adjusted, so long as they are constant.

Hmmm - now that I think about it in a control theory way, all you need is observability and controllability -- accuracy doesnt matter!

So I'm going to press you here. What is (in your mind) the difference between controllability and accuracy?

Why? This isn't the PMTS board and we shouldn't be limited by the constraints of that board. That dog won't hunt here. If you want to only talk about PMTS, great. I'm free to talk about other stuff so long as I feel it's related and it's not offensive....

If you want exclusivity, you can go to that other site. While you are posting here, house rules.

Quite possibly. I imagine from my own experience that Harald's view of traditional instruction appeals to thinkers who are frustrated with a lack of explanation from instructors who don't know much theory themselves. There must be a decent number of such people, as thinkers are quite rare in the population as a whole, and so present an unusual situation to instructors.

Ski camps are a pretty niche market anyway, and each one needs a unique selling point of some kind. As my girlfriend said the other day when I suggested she might enjoy the green/light blue camp "it seems like an awful lot of money to spend on a passtime" :

That sounds to me like a model for good instruction, very like my limited experience of PMTS coaching. One of the sad things about this whole ongoing PMTS v the world conversation is that to some extent we're talking past each other. Instructors who post on Epic are not usually the people I see out there trying to teach bemused students in braking wedges to rotate their legs, and the PMTS students who post here are not the arrogant frustrated novices some people assume we are.

Ahh, don't listen to me, I'm only a level II....

That's as may be, but I'd take a lesson from you.

My geekiest post to date

I'm being a little facetious here, but I do think that small inaccuracies get washed out in the practic loop: try something; observe results; try something a little different; observe.... repeat till convergence. (It ties in with the perception vs reality differences ssh has discussed on occaision.)

So I may think I'm doing thing A to get the results I want, but I'm really doing B. I tweak to improve results, thinking I'm doing A1, but really doing B1, and so on. Eventually, say on A235, I get the results I want, but I'm really doing B235. Now I'm set. To get the same results again, I just have to try to do thing A235 again - I will acually do B235, and get the results I want.

Controllability is a technical term in control theory -- it means that the full range of desired outcomes (dynamic, not just static) can be created from the range of available control inputs.

Observability is the flip side, meaning that the full range of system states (again, dynamic) can be distinguished from each other using the set of available sensors.

One of the techniques for designing a control system is "model based control" where the controller incorporates a mathematical model of the system. It turns out that in many cases, a pretty crude internal model can give acceptable results.

To make the example concrete - suppose I consistently overestimate how much I have my ankle flexed. If the optimal amount is X at some point, I'll find my turns work better if I flex it by one-and-one-half X (because in reality, it is only flexing by X).

Ques Max.....does PMTS hold first day (never skied before) beginner classes?

If so, do you know the return rate?

Yes. There are green/light blue camps that include a never-ever group. I assume that the (few) PMTS resort ski schools also offer never-ever classes.

I don't know, but the overall return rate for the camps is reported to be around 70%.

I'll bet 70% is pretty typical for camps as a whole (PMTS, ESA, Steep and Deep, Str8Line, NASTC).
They are self-selected groups -- if they got what they expected, most of them will be happy and want to return.

sidenote, this just in......(ah....I see Mr. Harb has more or less invited me to drop by at Realskiers) sorry for the hijack.

This really makes me laugh, so thank you. Through tears of laughter, I do feel a little sorrow for you. Bolter

Thanks. That means alot...

How about we just go ski???

Methinks you missed the entire point, Bolter. And trust me when I say that Uncle Louie has far more insight into skiing than you are giving him credit for having.

A closed mind seldom learns.

Nothing to post, just wanted to be #500 in this now ridiculous thread! hahahahahahahahaahahahahaha

501....

Nope

You couldn't be more mistaken about my take on his post. Do you think I have a closed mind? I think I am open to innovation and look closely. I see "off the wall" viewpoints as a reality check. I am open to PMTS, ATS is my foundation of experience and I embraced the shape ski revolution from its beginning. If I am closed, of what significance is it ?

501

You stole 501 from Max

then we'll promote him to MAX_502....

with these sorts of numbers you would think colorado resorts would be climbing all over themselves to hire/recruit pmts instructors.

where do harald or diana teach private lessons?

max........where do you take pmts lessons from harald?

So... a serious question....


Smooth or crunchy peanut butter.....?

I think the correct number sequence is

501, 505, 517, 527, 550, 560 ...

Smooth you can spread with a brushed carve .The crunchy will take some active rotary to get er done.

So I would say this is all about smooth turns

Hobbit- good to know someone who knows their Levi's!