or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A Tale of Three Turns - Page 8

post #211 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
BB says...
As we learn to carve better, our steering movements can become less and less active, as the skis do more and more of the work. But all turns, no matter how dynamic, START with nearly flat skis and little pressure (much of the pressure on skis in carved turns comes from resisting centrifugal force. Since there is no centrifugal force at the moment of transition, there will be little pressure as well.) So, unless we just want to make a completely passive "patience turn," we usually need to steer the skis actively into the new turn at first. As the edge angle and pressure increase, the skis start carving more effectively, and muscular steering effort can decrease.


This is where BB gets silly. IMO The arc entry to begin deflection has nothing to do with active leg rotation, steering angle or any movement that applies a rotary force to the skis.
From my first look at the three turns thread fairy-tale... what stood out the most was a lack of balance on the outside ski and the lack of counter acting and counterbalance movements (HH terms) or PREPARATION in my speak, at the top of the arc. SLATZ also pointed out the excessive tip lead at the bottom of the arc and that is very interesting also.
Right, let's get back on track.

When skiing arc-to-arc there is no need to actively steer the skis prior to edge engagement. To suggest that we usually steer first is simply incorrect.
It is also plausible to interpret Bob's "START with nearly flat skis..." as indicating that the skis have in fact engaged.

In reading Bob's entire post, he also discusses active and passive rotary, along with discussing carves without active steering at all. But you wont find that post in this thread, it can be found in the thread: Independent Leg Steering and High Edge Angles...

Imagine the nerve of that guy, discussing steering in such a thread, when the point is clearly arc-to-arc. Hang him, hang him high!
post #212 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
Please, keep em comin guys. Love the comic relief.
Well ...lookey there... lured him right back in. All it took was a danglin a wee bit of tasty bait.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whygimf
Tight carves are not limited to large turns. High edge angles of world-class skiers dictates the need for 'inside leg flexion'. Only turns with very minimal direction change (in the fall line) will display non-distinct leg length differences.

Please share what 'ramp angle' has to do with Martin's comment.
On the turn radius thing I simply mean that a skier can still 'carve' at minimal edge angles in large radius turns - and thereby have no need for Inside-Leg flex nor tip lead - tilting the pelvis is more than sufficient.

On the ramp thing - I was smiley-facing ya just a bit… still, a skier with a large forward-ramp angle under their boot (or considerable forward lean of the cuff) can get away with quite a lot less tip lead in a short radius turn by using a wide stance (an A-frame stance).

Yep, I was really reaching here but again emphasizing that context (even when it's a stretch) is everything. And sorry, I thought it was obviously the posing of a facetious context. Figured all you fellows would get that ...you did …didn't you?

.ma
post #213 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
On the ramp thing - a skier with a large forward-ramp angle under their boot (or considerable forward lean of the cuff) can get away with quite a lot less tip lead in a short radius turn by using a wide stance (an A-frame stance). .ma
Still confused.

Please elaborate how boot ramp angle and forward lean of the cuff are synonymous. And how each of these respectively affect tip lead?

Since when is a wide stance the same as an A-Frame stance? Please clarify how a wide stance affects tip lead?
post #214 of 566
What the ramp angle deal is about is how far back the shin angle allows the foot to be when the knee is flexed. Flexing the thigh with the hip flexors moves the knee out in front. Flexing the knee with the hamstring brings the foot back under the hip. The rigid boot limits this so more ramp and shaft angle allow it to come farther back before the ski tip pressure stops it.
In many of thos WC turns the skier appears to be almost sitting on his heel on the inside leg.
post #215 of 566
I suppose I could have avoided a lot of confusion by drawing a picture or finding one on the Lemaster site. I should also have been less hasty and typed 'and' rather than 'or' within the parenthesis to avoid your 'synonymous' issue with it. 'Course, my imprecision couldn't have been too bad since Slatz figured it out so easily.

Slatz statement that, "In many of those WC turns the skier appears to be almost sitting on his heel on the inside leg." ...is exactly what I was envisioning. Poked briefly around the LeMaster site but I simply haven't the bandwidth for it - and there's grass to be mowed.

I did find an image with the inside leg pulled way back (below the rump) while the outside ski was far out to the side showing a a big 'A' formation of the legs (from a frontal view) but figure that if I post it I'll have to pointlessly defend my observations all day long (meaning no offense to whygimf who seems to have posed a legitimate curiosity).

.ma
post #216 of 566
I have to ask too MA, how does "ramp angle" affect your senerio??

Possibly, by Bob's definition of rotary, the application of tip pressure (sideways) at the beginning of the arc, when the ski is at higher edge angles in an arc to arc turn, there is in fact a rotary movement, even though it is not a historical understanding of the term???

Why so negative Rick? don't like to have your perspective challenged from time to time?? Welcome back, I knew you would be lurking because there is nothing else worth reading at the moment.

bud
post #217 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Possibly, by Bob's definition of rotary, the application of tip pressure (sideways) at the beginning of the arc, when the ski is at higher edge angles in an arc to arc turn, there is in fact a rotary movement, even though it is not a historical understanding of the term???

bud
So is there a "new" definition of rotary that in some way is more complete or different? If so, Bud or someone please tell me about it. Be careful in your choice of words, this is sacred ground and historically, a thread closer.

From my reading this "new" rotary concept being espoused causes additional tip pressure at high edge angles which would not be in place at the beginning of the arc. I am confused, where does this (non-historical) rotary role of arc tightening through additional tip pressure come into play?
post #218 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
So is there a "new" definition of rotary that in some way is more complete or different? If so, Bud or someone please tell me about it. Be careful in your choice of words, this is sacred ground and historically, a thread closer.
Maybe if Bud would have phrased this differently like, "a non traditional application of lower body rotary movements" there would be some talking points to consider.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
From my reading this "new" rotary concept being espoused causes additional tip pressure at high edge angles which would not be in place at the beginning of the arc. I am confused, where does this (non-historical) rotary role of arc tightening through additional tip pressure come into play?
I too was confused by the idea of "steering to start" an arc to arc turn. The idea of "resist the twist" (a term from one of my peers at BBowl) is applicable to the initiation of a carved turn. However, in all the different situations we find ourselves in, one can certainly find a use for a pivoted entry to a turn, or maybe this is something that helps if the skier has their butt well behind their feet as they move into their new turn. When the pressure is aft on the skis a steering torque will in effect pivot the tips in the direction of the new turn and increase tip contact with the snow. Making the tipping more effective. Not advocating anything in this explanation, just exploring the possibilities.
post #219 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
From my reading this "new" rotary concept being espoused causes additional tip pressure at high edge angles which would not be in place at the beginning of the arc. I am confused, where does this (non-historical) rotary role of arc tightening through additional tip pressure come into play?
Bolter,

It's not a new concept. It's even been discussed in the past on Epic. It's just another one of the things that CAN be done on skis. Although it can be used to tighten an arc, in my experience it ruins arc to arc turns. I have played with this experimenting with Waiststeering and have played with it using foot steering. It was fun to play with, but in my opinion has limited usefulness. However, anything that works is potentially useful.
post #220 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB View Post
or maybe this is something that helps if the skier has their butt well behind their feet as they move into their new turn. When the pressure is aft on the skis a steering torque will in effect pivot the tips in the direction of the new turn and increase tip contact with the snow.
At the 2005 Stowe ESA Michael Rogan had our group observe other recreational skiers at Stowe who were making turns with their weight aft during edge change. His contention was that the skis must pivot when this is the case (and that is why our group was working on getting centered before the edge change). One could argue that there are racing situations where this is desireable. The common argument for recreational skiing is that this is inefficient (i.e. it works, but is not generally helpful).
post #221 of 566
Bud,
I’m outside weed-whacking a tunnel thru the grass to find my shed today. Must be within 50 feet of it by now. Perhaps poking thru the grass an avalanche probing-pole will speed things up. I’ll try to glue some words together later tonight.


RicB,
I really like that last sentence. I wish more participants were interested in exploring potentially new ideas rather than being so adamant about old ones. Every time I change some aspect of my skis or boots it changes my skiing to some small (or large) degree - and I love to experiment. Dang I wish I had those robot toys to work with!

.ma
post #222 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
...From my reading this "new" rotary concept being espoused causes additional tip pressure at high edge angles which would not be in place at the beginning of the arc. I am confused, where does this (non-historical) rotary role of arc tightening through additional tip pressure come into play?
The idea is that the edge is at a sufficiently high angle early in the turn so that the rotary force is not around an axis perpendicular to the snow, but an axis closer to parallel to the surface. It's a way to compensate for the fact that alpine boots put you in the backseat in a cross-under transition. The role of arc-tightening is closely related to the traditional method of moving forward through the transition to weight the ski tips.

Be careful. it is easy to get tips too engaged especially in new man-made snow, the skis will indeed decamber, to the point that they come to a stop as your body keeps moving at speed. Possibly resulting in boot top fracture.

I'm not sure the percieved performance enhancement gained from alpine gear offsets the inherent limitations. Seated transitions and the dreaded tip lead, easily fixed with telemark boots/bindings.
post #223 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by therusty View Post
At the 2005 Stowe ESA Michael Rogan had our group observe other recreational skiers at Stowe who were making turns with their weight aft during edge change. His contention was that the skis must pivot when this is the case (and that is why our group was working on getting centered before the edge change). One could argue that there are racing situations where this is desirable. The common argument for recreational skiing is that this is inefficient (i.e. it works, but is not generally helpful).
I totally agree, there are better ways generally speaking. This has been my contention all along, about the way BB executed his cross under turn. And this must have been what he was getting at with the reference Bolter has produced.

Yeah, we always strive to have that perfect combination of alignment coupled with muscle effort happening in skiing don't we? Though when the pendulum swings too far towards the muscle end of the spectrum, we quickly become inefficient, even if what we are doing is effective, or gets the job done. Sound like it was a good clinic TR.
post #224 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
Bud,
I’m outside weed-whacking a tunnel thru the grass to find my shed today. Must be within 50 feet of it by now. Perhaps poking thru the grass an avalanche probing-pole will speed things up. I’ll try to glue some words together later tonight.


RicB,
I really like that last sentence. I wish more participants were interested in exploring potentially new ideas rather than being so adamant about old ones. Every time I change some aspect of my skis or boots it changes my skiing to some small (or large) degree - and I love to experiment. Dang I wish I had those robot toys to work with!

.ma
Most of us get pretty heavily vested in our view points don't we. I know I do. Yet I do find that the best learning environment is when the subject is out there to explore with little thought to my previous positions, real learning is enhanced. As we say in tai chi bring your mind and leave your opinions at the door. Sometimes I fall short.
post #225 of 566
You guys are clutching at straws here. The point is that we do NOT usually start an arc'd turn with a steering motion.

If I were to defend the erroneous BB statement it would be by defining it's context:

Most skiers usually start a turn with some steering action. As they get better, they learn that they can decrease the amount of active steering they apply and let the skis do the work. When one learns to ski arc-to-arc, the rotary force they generate is actually opposed to the direction of travel. ie. rotate to the left when turning right. This "counter-rotation" takes place to nullify the rotation of the skis into the turn that "most" skiers erroneously find themselves practicing.

The goal of counter-rotation is to ensure that the skis are not displaced from the arcs they are scribing, as would otherwise occur with the application of direct rotation in the direction of the turn. The only exception is when the skis are already locked on edge.

Once locked on edge, a mantra "steer the skis" has been proposed as providing a mechanism to tighten the turn. What happens when you continue to steer an edge locked ski?

Since the ski does not move when the femur rotates in it's hip socket, the edge angle increases. This is nothing other than knee angulation.

It has been suggested that a pivot is very often required to position the skis onto the intended arc prior to full edge engagement. Unfortunately, "most" skiers will never create an arc from this move. That "most" skiers will continue to skid through the entire turn is virtually assured by the skidded initiation.

While a fully linked set of carved turns has been hailed as the hallmark of expert skiing, it is far more difficult to re-enage a clean arc once skidding has begun. To suggest that "most" skiers do this is quite untrue.

So how have some skiers learned to ski arc-to-arc? They were introduced to RR tracks and figured out that steering will not produce the intended results.

It's not magic.
post #226 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
I really like that last sentence. I wish more participants were interested in exploring potentially new ideas rather than being so adamant about old ones. Every time I change some aspect of my skis or boots it changes my skiing to some small (or large) degree - and I love to experiment. Dang I wish I had those robot toys to work with!
This, to be blunt and as clear as I can be, is the point of this forum. Thanks for saying it so well. And to all who are willing to explore and seek to understand. Well done.
post #227 of 566
Once skidding has been introduced it takes some greater event to stop it. A pivot entry on a bump, a complete skidded turn and another chance to enter an arc in the other direction. When a skid begins a turn you would have to enter the fall line , recover some edging and try to finish the last half in an arced turn. Either way the majority of the turn is either in a skid or recovering from one.
If your objective is an arced turn any skid sure kills most of that option.
post #228 of 566
Umm... Why? It depends on the direction of the skid, the purpose of the skid movement, and what else is going on in the turn.

An average move? No, probably not. But exceptionally difficult? I don't think so, actually. A bit of edge angle, moving with the skis, and you're arcing.

Of course, that's not the only use of rotary movements at the beginning of the arc, either. But, I don't suppose that's of interest to many...
post #229 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
An average move? No, probably not. But exceptionally difficult? I don't think so, actually. A bit of edge angle, moving with the skis, and you're arcing.
You forgot the smiley.
post #230 of 566

In the spirit of exploring...

Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB View Post
...The idea of "resist the twist" (a term from one of my peers at BBowl) is applicable to the initiation of a carved turn.
Interesting idea! How do you see executing "resist the twist", RicB (or anyone!)? If you're tipping and that automatically creates rotation, what do you do to resist it? We hear a lot about the knee and femur rotation in these discussions. There's lots of movement available in the lower leg too. Any chance a movement pattern there could exist that would allow the femur rotation to take place without imparting that rotation to the ski?

I recall Si relating his time with Wigs recently where he shared their exploration of tipping. As I recall, he indicated that he was able to tip quite easily without the ski turning. Wonder how he does that? Maybe his hip replacements included an extra joint

Now if you were able to tip without imparting rotation to the ski, might it be possible to actually want to add some in on your own terms at some point?
post #231 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
Interesting idea! How do you see executing "resist the twist", RicB (or anyone!)? If you're tipping and that automatically creates rotation, what do you do to resist it? We hear a lot about the knee and femur rotation in these discussions. There's lots of movement available in the lower leg too. Any chance a movement pattern there could exist that would allow the femur rotation to take place without imparting that rotation to the ski?

I recall Si relating his time with Wigs recently where he shared their exploration of tipping. As I recall, he indicated that he was able to tip quite easily without the ski turning. Wonder how he does that? Maybe his hip replacements included an extra joint

Now if you were able to tip without imparting rotation to the ski, might it be possible to actually want to add some in on your own terms at some point?
It is a little catch phrase to help people remember what it is they want to do with the ski. Resist the temptation or habit of initially overpowering the edge at the start of the turn by steering. Do they want to pivot and steer the ski or do they want to tip the ski on edge? More specific to your question I would ask you one in return. What is it you want to rotate, your feet or your femurs? They are not the same thing and have very different outcomes. Both involve rotation of the femur, rotary skills so to speak, but only one involves twisting of the feet parallel to the transverse plane (foot steering). Tipping the feet is a movement parallel to the frontal plane. No special joint needed, we are all born with what we need.
post #232 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
Now if you were able to tip without imparting rotation to the ski, might it be possible to actually want to add some in on your own terms at some point?
I think so. I know that I like doing that sometimes. Feels cool...

...I seem to recall playing around with moves like that with some guy from Ohio at A Basin... :





post #233 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolter View Post
So is there a "new" definition of rotary that in some way is more complete or different? If so, Bud or someone please tell me about it. Be careful in your choice of words, this is sacred ground and historically, a thread closer.

From my reading this "new" rotary concept being espoused causes additional tip pressure at high edge angles which would not be in place at the beginning of the arc. I am confused, where does this (non-historical) rotary role of arc tightening through additional tip pressure come into play?
I would invite you to read Bob Barnes' post on this topic again S L O W L Y and you should be able to grasp the concept more clearly than I could ever explain it but my feable brain could understand it.

I don't think there is a new definition of rotary. I DO think that many here have not yet explored the rotary skill past "pivoting" and tend to consider the two synymous. I think of the rotary skill as any twisting movements generated internally around an axis to create a torque. I think that this can apply to a highly edged ski too, though there would be very little visual evidence of this internal tension in the legs. It can also apply to "pivoting" a flat ski, or "steering" or "guiding" or "scarving" or "brushing" a ski that is moderately edged, or anything in between. This muscular effort to twist the ski can occur any edge angle.


Bob explaining, the higher the edge angle the more reversed rotary movements and pressure control movements become, was enlightening to me. I had never thought of it that way but it makes perfect sense. Imparting a rotary power at a high edge angle does not have the same meaning as pivoting but they are still both muscular efforts that impart a twisting torque on the skis. Granted at the higher edge angles any rotary efforts are difficult to see and the sensation may be very similar to levering forward onto the shovel but I would bet that we could ski a series of turns and experiment with the two methods of increasing tip pressure and be able to tell a subtle difference intrinsically.


Continually hearing the argument that there is no need, or merit, for rotary movements in skiing just demonstrates to me a limited understanding of what mechanics are really at work in a turn.

But then some here believe I am in the twilight zone or haven't got a clue what expert skiing is, so take what I think with grain of salt.

b
post #234 of 566
RicB,

Well, I guess my answer would be: my feet! However, I don't know that I have ever consciously set out to rotate my femurs. By the frontal plane you mean lateral plane, correct? I think I would want to be able to choose to rotate in one, the other, or both of the planes you refer to, with rotating in the lateral plane my choice for arc-to-arc transitions - at least from edge release to edge engagement.

My question back would be: If there is no special joint needed, do you feel compensatory movements are then required to complete this lateral tipping without steering (or otherwise rotating the ski parallel to the transverse plane)?

Best,

Chris
post #235 of 566
ARRrrrrggggg....!!!

Sorry Bud,
...the EpicEditor just ate my homework.

Only intended a short, concise reply but it continued to grow. When the EpicEditor realized I'd not been saving my work it froze up and stopped working. I heard an evil sounding wav file play in the background so I know it was deliberate.

I'll try again tomorrow - but in my other text app!

In the meantime you might want to go try on some Lady's High-Heeled Shoes and try an experiment. Try "tipping" strictly to the side and see how you end up 'moving'.

.ma
post #236 of 566
Just as an fyi people, once I've invested more than 10 minutes in typing a response I hit control-A and control-C before I click the submit reply button. That will save your work to the clipboard so you can paste it back in if you have to start over. SSH recently lengthened the timeout to help reduce the occurrence of this problem, but it can happen for other unavoidable reasons as well.
post #237 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
ARRrrrrggggg....!!!

Sorry Bud,
...the EpicEditor just ate my homework.

Only intended a short, concise reply but it continued to grow. When the EpicEditor realized I'd not been saving my work it froze up and stopped working. I heard an evil sounding wav file play in the background so I know it was deliberate.

I'll try again tomorrow - but in my other text app!

In the meantime you might want to go try on some Lady's High-Heeled Shoes and try an experiment. Try "tipping" strictly to the side and see how you end up 'moving'.

.ma
Bud, everyone, this is our chance of a lifetime. We now are free to engage in cross dressing with impunity. Special dispensation is granted by MichaelA. HA! Sorry just kidding.
post #238 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
Since the ski does not move when the femur rotates in it's hip socket, the edge angle increases. This is nothing other than knee angulation.
This is not the mechanism I have experienced when playing with this concept. We're talking about applying torque to the ski without changing edge angle. Similar to using a screwdriver to turn a tight screw, there is no movement as torque builds up. As the screw loosens and starts to turn, the elbow does not have to bend. The arm can rotate on axis to keep the screw turning. On edged skis, the leg can turn without knee angulation being involved. The trick here is to consider what the upper body is doing relative to the lower body versus what the skis are doing relative to the lower body.
post #239 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
RicB,

Well, I guess my answer would be: my feet! However, I don't know that I have ever consciously set out to rotate my femurs.
I'm not saying you should or shouldn't. My point is that when someone talks about any rotary movement involved in tipping of the feet, resulting hip/leg rotation is probably what is being talked about. Personally I think conscious femur rotation has a role to play at time, and awareness of femur rotation is something I cultivate in myself. In other words I like to know and feel how my body is moving in all parts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
By the frontal plane you mean lateral plane, correct? I think I would want to be able to choose to rotate in one, the other, or both of the planes you refer to, with rotating in the lateral plane my choice for arc-to-arc transitions - at least from edge release to edge engagement.
Yes, lateral movements (ab/adduction) happen parallel to the frontal plane. though all joint actions have an axis of rotation, they are categorized by what plane their respective rotation is happening parallel to. The hip/leg joint can move in all three planes simultaneously, circumduction, so you do have all these movements available. This lies at the heart of the whole passive versus active rotation IMO. When straight, the legs can very easily add/abduct without rotation, but when we have leg flex/extension happening at the same time then the femur has to rotate in the hip socket some as we add/abduct the leg laterally, or tip the feet. I personally wouldn't call this compensatory, I think it is more appropriate to call it subordinately supportive.

So in my book we need to know the difference between twisting the feet and tipping the feet, and when and how to apply both effectively. Truth is though, more people come into a lesson knowing how to twist rather than tip. Hence the "resist the twist".

Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post
My question back would be: If there is no special joint needed, do you feel compensatory movements are then required to complete this lateral tipping without steering (or otherwise rotating the ski parallel to the transverse plane)?

Best,

Chris
Hopefully I shed some light on how I see all this. But really Chris, it doesn't need to be so complicated. Complexity adds nothing unless it is fully understood.
post #240 of 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post

Continually hearing the argument that there is no need, or merit, for rotary movements in skiing just demonstrates to me a limited understanding of what mechanics are really at work in a turn.

b
I have not made this claim, EVER! This statement is not helpful at all. My ski teaching experience as a full timer since 1980 has been highlighted with successes and failures. I know that my knowledge of skiing mechanics is limited- but to the extent of (differentiating) the basic effects of RM, I am aware of the merits and needs.
This (relatively low) level of awareness is exactly why I protest (kick and scream) when I hear of RM being misapplied in skiing situations that demand a different focus to produce a specific outcome.
BTW, my wife doesn't have any high heels so please let me know what happens when you try MichaelA's "experiment."
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching