or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# A Tale of Three Turns

Hey, I have an idea--let's talk about skiing (for a change around here)! Here's something to test your eyes and your understanding.

Here are three turn sequences, demonstrating three distinct movement patterns. Can you spot the differences?

#1

#2

#3

I don't intend this as a discussion of "right or wrong." It's all skiing, and I contend that any expert skier will have the skills to do all these moves and more, as well as the ability to use any without bias as the need or desire arises. You will certainly see all three movement patterns in just about any single run on the World Cup.

Have at it, gang!

Best regards,
Bob Barnes
Hint: The transition is the key....
May 19, 2007

Hi, Bob:

Hope you had as good a season as I've had. Being in your group at the ESA Stowe event, let me be the first to take a stab, although, I don't have a good eye and not being trained as an analytical observer.

(1) Up un-weighting
(2) Down un-weighting
(3) tipping the skis to carve and maintaining a "high" stance (in comparison with (1)).

CharlieP
I get sooooooooooooo stiff staying dynamic that I need to stretch out and take a rest between turns?

!st one he extends through the fall line and flexes after
2nd one he flexes as he finishes his turn and the biginning of the next. He gradually extends through the shaping phase and back in to flexion to finish it.
3rd one he passes through the fall line flexing and then extends as he finishes his turn and into the next.

He moves his flexion and extension to differant parts of the turn cycle.
The first sequence is combining equal doses of ILE and OLR during transition.

The second sequence is an OLR dominant transition.

The third is a very ILE dominant transition, to the point of being a pop extension.

ILE = Inside Leg Extension
OLR = Outside Leg Release

Nice job isolating these.
Hi Bob,

I think Annie would approve of the color choices for video/photo ...though, undoubtedly, the pants would be too plain!

Frame rate looks faster than your camera, so I assume these are from video? Is the spacing for a uniform amount of time between frames? Sequence #2 looks like Jerry's movements and if the time between frames is the same, sure is telling compared to sequence #1.

As to the comparison, I hate to stick my neck out, but what the heck...

#1 looks like up and over to the "hips in front of" the feet and standing tall at the top of the turn. Not that the skier actively rises, but rather allows the core to rise as it comes across and forward.

#2, again, looks like Bergy's flow when he wants everything from the last turn rocketed into the next. I suppose this would be a retraction turn, though I don't see the redirection of the feet normally associated with a retraction turn, rather I see the retraction being made to allow the path of the core to be unfettered as it comes across into the new turn; and additionally to have the legs coiled and ready to extend/reach into the new turn.

#3 probably be an unpopular choice, but I feel there's a bit of rotary with a little platform and unweighting to make it all happy.

Best,

Chris
A short summary of the three for consideration.

#1 Cross through. The legs are both partially flexed at transition as a result of the inside leg getting longer as the outside leg gets shorter. You see the constant long leg (outside leg lengthening), and short leg (inside leg shortening) happening throughout the turn. The Com rises slightly through transition but is directed into the new turn a very deliberate, controlled, progressive way. Lots of options to manage pressure and edge angle through transition.

#2 Cross under. Both legs are at maximum flex through transition. This happens from a retraction or flexing movement of both legs to release the turn. Com stays low and is released into the new turn with rate and timing of flexing of the legs being the main controlling factor directing the Com into the new turn. Even the inside leg is extending some into the middle of the turn. Easy to manage edge angles through transition but leaves the pressure control momentarily absent. Allows for easy redirecting of the skis if wanted or needed.

#3 Cross over. Both legs are at maximum extension at transition. Very traditional turn. Outside leg stays long and strong, while the inside leg flexes as the hips move inside the turn. Slowest to develop high edge angles.
What RicB says.

Chris G, is this Bergie? I thought it was BB.
Nice job, RicB.

(I need to give Ric props: he was recently selected to the clinician roster for the Northern Rocky Mountain PSIA. Hip-Hip-Hooray!!!)
I think you're right, Weems. Looks like Bob to me too.

Jerry was beating me up a bit on #2 though, and I've probably got his image stuck at the moment, sorry!
Congrats, RicB
Cross through, new term for me. I've know cross over and cross under, nice to have a new one for the tool kit. Makes lots of sense. It provides a term for describing a transition that is not at the extremes of cross over and cross under.

Thanks for the explanation.
All arc to arc carving, with only subtle differences in the amount of extension taking place, or not, through the transitions, done for the purpose of demonstration, but which otherwise have very little impact on the nature, rate of edge angle development, or shape of the turn.

All 3 are very slow to develop, with long drawn out transitions. Most likely for the purpose of exaggerating the demonstration of the transition contrasts. I'd like to see a stronger move forward upon turn initiation, for a stronger engagement of the front of the skis to start the turn, but again, this may be counter productive to the intended drawn out nature of the transitions.

The retracted transition (#2) shows a definite aft turn initiation balance position, and this is typical of retracted arc to arc transitions (see Max's skiing), as there is no pivot to realign fore/aft balance. With arc to arc, the fore recovery has to be accomplished via a manual forward pull. As of the final image, it has not happened.

BornToSki, ILE/OLR is very hard to distinguish clearly. We would have to ask Bob what mechanism he was using to release the CM, to be sure. At first I suspected some ILE going on, but then upon closer inspection my guess would be that he was OLR'ing both 1 and 3 as the very initial release mechanism, but then extending the old inside leg very quickly there after, to the degree needed to display the amount of pre neutral extension he wished to display.

Also, heavy following of the skis rotationally. OK for arc to arc. Would need to get more rotationally divergent for higher edge angles, for faster transitions and for PET's. I'm guessing these turns were done on quite shapely skis as they allow for these positions.
Rick, some interesting observations. I hope we will hear from Bob about the intention of the sequences.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Rick The retracted transition (#2) shows a definite aft turn initiation balance position, and this is typical of retracted arc to arc transitions (see Max's skiing), as there is no pivot to realign fore/aft balance. With arc to arc, the fore recovery has to be accomplished via a manual forward pull. As of the final image, it has not happened.
I guess in sequence #2, he's floating both skis through the transition in a retraction, which cuts short opportunities to stand on the old outside ski and also delays the opportunity to stand on the new outside ski...ie, creates a longer period of time where both skis are unweighted. While the skis are unweighted, he can't pull himself forward. The only thing I can think of that would possibly help that particular sequence while still retaining the long float period would be to just make darn well sure that before going into float his hips are ahead of his feet. In particular it looks to me that his inside foot could be tucked underneath him just a little bit better before retracting into float. But I suspect, that while trying to amplify a long drawn out retraction turn, it would be very difficult not to find oneself in the backseat coming out of it.

Quote:
 BornToSki, ILE/OLR is very hard to distinguish clearly.
Granted I oversimplified, trying to guess at the intention.

Quote:
 We would have to ask Bob what mechanism he was using to release the CM, to be sure. At first I suspected some ILE going on, but then upon closer inspection my guess would be that he was OLR'ing both 1 and 3 as the very initial release mechanism, but then extending the old inside leg very quickly there after, to the degree needed to display the amount of pre neutral extension he wished to display.
I didn't notice that first time through, but I see it now. Thanks for pointing it out. I would like to hear from Bob if that was intentional or not if so, what the reason for relaxing the outside leg is right at the end of each turn in #3. I'm ok with #1.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by borntoski683 I guess in sequence #2, he's floating both skis through the transition in a retraction, which cuts short opportunities to stand on the old outside ski and also delays the opportunity to stand on the new outside ski...ie, creates a longer period of time where both skis are unweighted. While the skis are unweighted, he can't pull himself forward. The only thing I can think of that would possibly help that particular sequence while still retaining the long float period would be to just make darn well sure that before going into float his hips are ahead of his feet. In particular it looks to me that his inside foot could be tucked underneath him just a little bit better before retracting into float. But I suspect, that while trying to amplify a long drawn out retraction turn, it would be very difficult not to find oneself in the backseat coming out of it.
BTS, I wish I had the luxury of video to explain this. The plan is to have a library of it over on our site by next year to refer to.

But in lieu of that, I think you will be able to visualize this. Imagine Bob executing the retracted transition he is, but instead of just hanging in the back seat as CM and skis cross, he uses the back of the ski boots to leverage against to aggressively pull his CM forward at the same time it's moving laterally.

That is what needs to be done if one wants to do an arc to arc retracted transition, and not come out of it in a toilet stance, but rather diving onto the front of the ski.
I knew those lean-against-the-back-of-my-boots turns I used to do a hundred years ago would come in handy someday!
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Rick The retracted transition (#2) shows a definite aft turn initiation balance position, and this is typical of retracted arc to arc transitions (see Max's skiing), as there is no pivot to realign fore/aft balance. With arc to arc, the fore recovery has to be accomplished via a manual forward pull. As of the final image, it has not happened.
Rick, couldn't the DIRECTIONAL DIVERGENCE /convergence (you introduced in the other thread) account for this as well - without the need for a manual pull or pivot.
Sounds pretty labor intensive, doesn't it? It is. But the choice when doing arc to arc retractions is either include it, or ski as Bob is doing, in a less than efficient state of fore/aft balance at the start of the turn.

Final point: every good skier should be able to ski in that less than efficient state of balance, just as Bob is doing.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by cgeib Rick, couldn't the DIRECTIONAL DIVERGENCE /convergence (you introduced in the other thread) account for this as well - without the need for a manual pull or pivot.
You're onto it, Chris. A pivot would constitue a DIRECTIONAL DIVERGENCE, and would eliminate much of the need for a forward pull. What Bob is doing here is a 0 DD.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by borntoski683 I knew those lean-against-the-back-of-my-boots turns I used to do a hundred years ago would come in handy someday!
Hey, if they're the same ones I used to do, it aint the same thing.
As I questioned in the other thread: How'd he get to the other side of the ski's if he has -0- divergence between the path of the core and that of the ski's?:
Quote:
 Originally Posted by cgeib As I questioned in the other thread: How'd he get to the other side of the ski's if he has -0- divergence between the path of the core and that of the ski's?:

Ahhhh,,, OK, now I get it. You're thinking about a different "DIVERGENCE". I was not referring to the core (or CM). I was referring to the relationship between the direction the SKIS are 1)pointing, and 2)traveling.

When you bring the CM into it, yes, it can travel a separate (up to a point) line to the skis. It's a good point, but for here, unless in regard to the movement of the CM in a fore/aft sense (as I was addressing, not really an influence of the balance issue I was speaking about. Way to think though, you keep me on my toes.
Let's assume you're carving a perfect arc. resultant force vector pulling on your CoM is "OUT", but your CoM is traveling the same direction as your skis and there is 0 DD. When you're ready to transition its simply a matter of changing your Base of support through a variety of means so that your CoM begins to diverge from the direction your skis are moving and moves across into the new turn.

If you are skidding a turn with say 30 degrees DD. Your Com is still traveling on exactly the same path as your skis. but they are pointed 30 degrees off from the path that your skis and CoM are traveling. When you're ready to transition you do something to upset your BOS and again your CoM will change direction and move out, over your skis into the new turn.
Quote:
That's excellent, BTS. Right on.

OK, pretty hard to figure out such an open-ended question with still images even if they are in sequence. I'd much prefer to see three video clips to better gage momentum and get a better idea of balance positioning vs. speed and acceleration...

Still, I'll toss out a guess and go with:

1) A turn initiated with balance remaining over the Old Outside-Ski as it becomes the New Inside-Ski

2) A turn initiated while essentially balanced over both skis

3) A turn initiated with an early weight-transfer to the New Outside-Ski early in transition.

.ma
Quote:
 Originally Posted by borntoski683 I guess in sequence #2, he's floating both skis through the transition in a retraction, which cuts short opportunities to stand on the old outside ski and also delays the opportunity to stand on the new outside ski...ie, creates a longer period of time where both skis are unweighted. While the skis are unweighted, he can't pull himself forward. The only thing I can think of that would possibly help that particular sequence while still retaining the long float period would be to just make darn well sure that before going into float his hips are ahead of his feet. In particular it looks to me that his inside foot could be tucked underneath him just a little bit better before retracting into float. But I suspect, that while trying to amplify a long drawn out retraction turn, it would be very difficult not to find oneself in the backseat coming out of it.
Why? Can't he pull his skis back under him (e.g., flex knee and ankle)? Can't he pull back with respect to his CoM while the skis float?
A few comments from the peanut gallery to entertain you experts. First of all I agree with what Rick said.

Also:

I like #2 best, except for the rearward weight bias. Cross under just looks better. Did you use photoshop to remove the kitchen chair he is sitting on? Perhaps a little more forward lean in the boots would help.

Hard to tell (for me) from the pics, but it looks like in # 1 besides the extension prior to turn (cross over?) there appears to be an effort to lead the turn with the shoulder and drag the skis around. (applied rotary for sure, not quite pivoting, perhaps some steering, which is ok in some schools, but I don't think the shoulder should lead. Of course I could be right out to lunch here.

#2 looks like there is a little steering going on too, but better than steering than in #1.
1. Extend one leg and flex one leg to change edge.
2. Flex both legs to change edge.
3. Extend both legs to change edge.
Ursula
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Little Bear Extend one leg and flex one leg to change edge. Flex both legs to change edge. Extend both legs to change edge. Ursula
I didn't notice this til you stated it so succinctly. Now it is very evident. What I was seeing is the varying timing of the extension and flexion.

This explains the purpose of these movements.

Thanks Ursula
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching