Rotary, active vs. passive - Page 5

You are right that some stuff is covered in PSIA that is not covered in PMTS. However, I don't think you are right that PSIA covers everything PMTS covers. That shows a lack of experience really trying out the PMTS to a deep enough level to know the difference. For example, I have never seen anyone in PSIA demonstrate or explain anything remotely similar to the BPST if done correctly. Listen, I am not a complete PMTS freak here, but I appreciate the good from everywhere, just trying to keep it real. There is stuff you could learn there Lonnie, you should check it out.

Not everything. A comprehensive method to teach arc-to-arc skiing is not present. In fact, no comprehensive method to teach anything is present. All progressions are left to the instructors "keen" insight.

Spare me the retribution, it's no different up here either. 16 yr old kids get their level 1 instructor or level 1 coach and they are now "qualified". So you get these kids teaching little kids, and trying to get the little ones to ski like mini-adults. It's pretty tragic.

Oh, contraire, but it is. Based on the skills concept, there is NOTHING that Harald does that is in someway prohibited by PSIA. So you've taken lessons from all of the 30,000 certified pros? You know that NONE of them have a method to teach arc to arc? Please. So when Harald was in PSIA, developing PMTS, how did that work? PSIA is a BIG tent. Can you say a la carte???

So, My toolbox is bigger than yours!!! yes, I'm just poking fun!!!

I'm not speaking of qualifications, I'm speaking of methodology.

I agree. Its a huge, heavy, unwieldy toolbox and its weighing you down!

But I don't have to use those tools, just the ones I need!

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail!!!

I think it's been established elsewhere around here that there is no arc-to-arc manifesto. I never said they don't teach it. I said it is up to the instructor to figure out how to do that. That's a pretty tall order to get right.

As far as "the skills concept" goes I think it's horrible. Let's see, map the movements you are watching into a bunch of skills. Then from the drills that address these skills, select one to ingrain a movement pattern. Who's fooling who? PMTS might be "tricking" you into makiing rotary movements ( BTW: it is not ) but PSIA/CSIA is certainly fooling you that you are developing skills when movement patterns get ingrained.

You are actually developing a range of movements and (hopefully) teaching students when they may/may not be applicable.

Do you REALLY think that? Damn, that must be some strong coolaid. In my opinion, the skills concept is VERY powerful. In fact, I would say it's the most powerful tool in ski teaching. I can address ANY problem my students have with the skills concept. I can even address MULTIPLE problems various students are have in a single lesson with the skills concepts. Three skills, three planes of motion, they are one in the same. How is that horrible? It's genus. It's also why I say EVERYTHING in PMTS is covered under the skills concept and that my tool box is bigger. I have a freedom of movement in a plane (rotation) that your chosen system doesn't allow and at one time says doesn't exist. EVERY movement in skiing, weather it's PMTS or any other system, can be viewed in the realm of Balance, Pressure Control, Rotary Movements, and Edging Movements. Because you've been brain washed on "how bad it is", you just don't understand now POWERFUL a concept it is.

Three planes of rotation, Three skills.

Damn Lonnie. Who is drinking koolaid? Koolaid comes in many flavors. Let's see, how does your current ranting have to do with the original question from Bud?

Yes Lonnie, I do think that, and I did think that before PMTS.

The skills concept merely gives you a way to discuss someone's skiing. It is a useful analytical tool. It is not what I teach. I know no better way to turn off a class than mention what skill we'll be working on, of that we'll be "blending" skills. Ugh, even my brain locks up and eyes glaze over when I hear that.

I know no better way of teaching that having them feel the forces from the movements they are performing, and become aware of the timing/coordination of those movements.

And here I think this is a good point to move back to the discussion.

Are we as aware of passive/intrinsic movements as we are aware of active/extrinsic movements?

I have a serious question for you. Do you feel that the skills concept has taught you the MA skills required to identify movement problems adequately?

Yes. 100%. In fact, I'd say it makes MA much, much easier. Why? Because all I have to do is look at what the skis are doing in three planes, and by finding the "deficient" plane, it helps me direct what I need to work on with my students.

And much to the chagrin of the hardcore PMTS folks here, I think Harald uses the skills concept everyday, and used it to develop PMTS. Here is his genus in the whole thing. Harald correctly identified that the strongest skill most skiers have is rotary movements. Most skiers correctly identify early on in their skiing careers that getting the skis to "the slow zone" will reduce. Therefore, most skiers are really good at getting their skis there. In fact, I'd say too good. With the advent of shaped skis 10 or more years ago, and the much reduced turning radii that they offered, Harald saw a way to tune out the much maligned rotary and get folks carving very quickly. If we tip the skis enough and don't rotate the feet, they'll "carve" almost every time. Since at that time, carving was considered an expert skill, Bing, bang boom, a teaching methodology is born and you are now an expert skier right off the bat.

But the same genus that got folks carving, also, as many of us have argued and many of us disagreed, limits our functionality. You are removing a plane of rotation from your skiing, at least in an active sense. I'm not willing to go there as I think the same outcomes can be achieved while leaving them in.

The MA of my turns would suggest otherwise.

According to this, everything is based on rotary. Rotary: the mother of all movements. Yiikes!

Well that's a matter of opinion now isn't it?

Sure, but my money is on HH and your MA was quite a bit different. The question is why? Is it because you are so focused on skills that are not needed in skiing? Is it because you don't understand the movements used in PMTS skiing? I don't know, but something has to account for the difference.

Max,

I think we both know that others gave here you the same feedback as I did (overflexed with insufficent extension of the ankle and knee), and you chose to ignore it. I wasn't looking at things from a rigid, PMTS perspective. I was looking at things from a bigger, in my view more functional, picture. Now if that makes me wrong, them I'm wrong.

So you can take my advice for what it's worth. I learned long ago in ski teaching that I'm only 1/2 the equation. Have you had any peanut butter lately?

Do you want to know the difference in my MA and HH's MA? I'm not trying to sell you anything....

You know, now that this thread has essentially merged with MAX's other thread, if we had kept them together, we'd have over 1000 posts, setting a new all time record for the number of posts on a single thread.

But instead, the other thread has slowed... (darn it)

Well, maybe we can get to 500 out of this one?

Yep. You've neglected to identify lateral balance in flexion/extension, but the whole thing does not work.

Take number 4 for example. The meaning of the movement of counterbalance is clear.

It is unclear how to blend pressure control, edging and balance to arrive at counterbalance.

The skills realm is a generalization. The movement realm is much more specific.

In that bigger picture of yours, how would you prefer to see Max ski? Rise between turns? Just don't flex so much, and leave everything else as is? Stay centered throughout the turn?

I ask that about your picture, since if there is no one model of skiing in the PSIA world and all PSIA teachings are interpretted by each instructor's vision, then each instructor has his own way to ski that he teaches....his "big picture" if you will.

My answer would be I would like to see him not crouched so much. It looks contrived. Edit: I think the skis are moving well, but I would hate to have to ski like that all day. I think others would agree.

But your comment is fair.

Yes.

It's their nature

However you'd like to label them, they are rotary. The intent of the labelling is to create a division between their types and try to determine if a passive/intrinsic rotary movement is substantially different from an active/extrinsic movement.

I think they are of a different class and I do think that they set up different tensions in the body. IMO, the effects of intrinsic rotary movements may either be harnessed or quenched. The effects of extrinsic rotary are much harder to modulate.

In the same manner that the intrinsic movments have rotary "side effects" the extrinsic movements do also. When we twist the skis, we do not alter the direction of travel so much, but we do change the way that the snow reaction forces operate at the ski. This change is sudden. It may be difficult to manage the side effects/changes in balance.

When you contrast that to intrinsic rotary, the development of the rotary component is in correlation to the intensity and duration of the primary movement. *Not meant in a PMTS sense. It's just the best word.

This correlation makes the intrinsic rotary easier to manage.

As I see it....

Thanks Lonnie.

It's late. Goodnight.

Are you referring to the carving clips again?

Really? I don't think that of the skills concept at all. I think it's has very specific movements. To apply rotary movements to the ski, you simply piviot it aound an axis that extends through the shaft of your lower leg. To edge the ski you tip it (rotate it) along it's long axis by moving your ankle/knee left or right. It maintain fore aft Pressure control, you rotate the ski forwards or backwards along an axis under the ball of your foot. How can you get more specific than that? Shoot I have level 3,4,5,6 skiers that figure that out every day I teach.

Mainly the BPST ones....

We are in the wrong thread for this (sorry for the hijack Bud) but...

So, when you look at the first clip you a hunched over skier?

Max, I was "looking" at the image of the skiing as a whole. I was more of a generalized impression of the entire montage that I could sum up in a few words. Without looking at them again, which I didn't do, I can't tell you what was happening in any specific clip. My memory isn't that good.