or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Can Rotary Movements improve turn completions?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Can Rotary Movements improve turn completions? - Page 2

post #31 of 214
Thread Starter 
Max501,

I agree, my analogy was a bit inaccurate.

I believe your statement, "the application of rotary movements to the ski generally displace the tail in a skidding movement" is also very inaccurate. Should you read carefully what Bob Barnes has talked about regarding independant leg steering, and the turns I am trying to describe, and look a deeper into the mechanics, I think you will discover that the blanket statements of, "rotary equals skidding" and "all rotary is bad" and "rotary = pivoting" are not at all accurate. As Bob's exercise of placing the ball of your foot against a door jamb and pushing demonstrates clearly rotary power and the tension felt in the muscles is the same feeling when applying this movement to the skis. If they are flat they will pivot, however, if they are edged to any degree this effort proportionately affects what the ski is doing on the snow. You might want to question for yourself what these effects are and how they could be harnessed for positive outcomes???

I realize you have been taught differently. Your perception is yours to hold or possibly expand. I will not try to change your convictions, that is up to you. If you are happy where you are, I am happy for you.

I want to continue to think about and evaluate for myself any new ideas people may have about skiing and weigh for myself their effectiveness based on my prejudices as well as allowing myself to break down those prejudices to reshape my understanding of skiing.

b
post #32 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson View Post
Take a look at this crude drawing of turn shape:


If we use tipping movements alone, the turn shape we get is defined solely by the sidecut of the ski. On the other hand, if we want to modify the turn shape to different arc we must use an active rotary movement.

IMO, rotary movement is a definite skill required for good skiing.

Mike
If we use tipping movements alone, the turn shape we get is defined solely by the sidecut of the ski - true, if we make some simplifying assumptions, like fixing the edge angle relative to the snow, so that the amount a given ski decambers is then also fixed. We must also assume the snow has only enough compliance to allow sufficient edge engagement to decamber the ski, but not enough to allow any other variability as the ski travels through it. Etc., etc. There are many other variables that will affect the turn shape, even if only tipping movements are being used (IMHO). At the very least, the turn shape will be a function of both sidecut and how much the skier tips the ski. In good skiing, edge angle (and thus turn shape) varies continuously.

Like Bolter, I also would suggest that these sketches of turn shape appear to show a traverse or straight run between arcs, but maybe I'm being nitpicky.

FWIW, I also believe rotary is an essential skill for good skiing. I also believe that using too much of it does not constitute effective use or control of it. Take this opinion with a grain of salt, though, since I am, after all, the Village Idiot!
post #33 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
I believe your statement, "the application of rotary movements to the ski generally displace the tail in a skidding movement" is also very inaccurate. Should you read carefully what Bob Barnes has talked about regarding independant leg steering, and the turns I am trying to describe, and look a deeper into the mechanics, I think you will discover that the blanket statements of, "rotary equals skidding" and "all rotary is bad" and "rotary = pivoting" are not at all accurate.
Bob's description of the turn is a bit different than yours in that his application is in a heavily engaged and edge locked ski while you are talking about applying it as the edge angles are decreased (at least that's what I got from the description). I certainly could have misunderstood.

I read what BB wrote and thought it was off base as applied to carving in general and WC turns in specific. I did ask a bunch of race coaches about Bob's idea and not one of them uses the idea in their coaching.
post #34 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Are you sure your not into a chicken and egg argument?

I rotate to keep an arc vs. I rotate to create an arc?

What I mean to ask is if the active rotation you describe is responsible for maintaining the arc or if the active rotation is responsible for creating an arc?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
I would say by your two definition choices that we are talking more about "maintaining" or continuing the arc a bit longer with the path of the feet without interrupting the flow of the cm.
I like BigE's question and bud's response.

Yesterday morning, in another thread, I wrote:
Quote:
Could a skilled skier manage the forces on the skis so that they don't wash out even as the skis are being flattened?

Could the skier "pull" the skis into a bit more arc with an active inside foot near the end of the turn even as the CoM is moving toward the new turn?

Could this be added after increasing edge angle to achieve a tighter arc? I.e., crank 'em over toward the end of the turn, just as BTS sez, and then, as the skis flatten a bit ('cause the CoM has moved too far toward the new turn to let our superstar skier maintain the edge angle), balance just right to prevent the wash out and add a just enough steering to encourage the skis to follow their arc a little longer - but just a little.

Clearly the skis will tend to straighten their line of travel as they are flattened. Could the skier add just enough of the dreaded rotary to persuade the skis to continue the arc for another meter or two before they are allowed to straighten their path?

Is this possible, or am I in Fantasyland?

How does one add a bit of a round "fish hook" to the end of a turn, if one chooses to do so?

Is there more than one way to do this?
Maybe I should have asked those questions on this thread.

I hope the questions make it clear that I am asking about continuing the arc, rather than creating it.

I am still curious, especially since I can't actually attempt to do any of this right now, even assuming I have the necessary skill, which I may not.

Anyway, the questions remain. Do I understand what Bud is talking about? Is it possible to do it? Do I have my index finger jammed firmly up my nose?
post #35 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_501
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson
If we use tipping movements alone, the turn shape we get is defined solely by the sidecut of the ski.
Turn shape is the result many variables including the the forces of the previous turn combined with tipping, counter balance, counter action, flexion, extension, CM location, and speed.
Actually, I'm pretty sure mmckimson got it exactly correct in the context he obviously meant.

If we "...use tipping movements alone..." (as he clearly stated) then the turn radius of the ski is pinned down strictly by the sidecut of the ski.

Since his basic premise was on the path of a 'tipped ski' vs. a 'ski guided by rotation' any "forces of the previous turn" that Max mentions would have no bearing whatsoever on the accuracy of his statement, nor on the issue of guiding vs. not-guiding a ski during a turn. Likewise, "...counter balance, counter action, flexion, extension, CM location, and speed" also have no bearing whatsoever on the idea that the tipping angle of a ski defines its turning radius.

Can we modify that defined turn radius with other inputs? Sure! Can we deliberately twist or skid the skis? Sure! - But that was obviously not his point and I think it very unhelpful when we twist the context in which others present ideas to undermine their point because it suggests rotation might be an appropriate means to modify turn shape.


---
Bud,

I like what you're trying to explore and think I may be able to clarify something biomechanical about it.

The technique you describe, very 'snake-like' short radius turns where the skis/feet seem to go directly from one highly-completed turn into the next turn at with a continuous carve... *do* require a good deal of extra foot rotation right at the finish of the turn.

Specifically, as the skier finishes the existing turn they continue to rotate both feet in the direction of the existing turn while the upper body moves toward the new turn. This continuation of Foot Steering does more than just permit the skis to continue in the same direction - it actually tips the feet and therefor the skis helping with new-turn engagement of our edges.

What happens is that our feet have a limited range of rotation beyond that of the leg - and cannot continue to rotate further without automatically tipping.

Try it right now: Just max out your leg rotation to one side, and try to 'continue' that rotation with your foot. When the foot gets beyond a certain point it will begin to evert/invert (depending on the foot & direction you are rotating the leg) thus tipping the foot. No leg tipping is necessary for this to work.

This 'extra finish' of our turn using extra rotation of our feet (a little extra Independant Leg Steering) helps the skier engage their new edges early on.

So yes: a rotary finish of the feet does indeed help with early engagement of our edges into the next turn. Independant Leg Steering is also a critical component when turn radius gets small.

.ma
post #36 of 214
Bud,

I like the concept of "continuing" your arc. I don't like the notion that you can "create" arc-age using muscle rotary, but let's not get into that debate again. But I think its interesting to consider that during that short little moment you are referring to, as someone begins to transition, it might be possible for them to LOSE some of their previous arc too soon. This could happen as they are in a rush to get the skis to flat. In a rush to get to the float period. In a rush to get to the other edges. As such, as they begin to release their old edges and begin rolling towards flat, it might be somewhat easy for them to destroy the last little bit of carv-age, or J hook you are seeking.

I think the skis are still perfectly well capable of carving out that J hook you are talking about and generally speaking I do not think you can create carve by spinning your feet, but that seems to be general point of debate among many. However, if conceptually, that prevents you from destroying the carve that already exists, but actively making sure to keep rotating your feet and specifically not beginning to rotate your feet the other way.

And I would have to say that in a highly anticipated turn finish, it may actually require some muscle effort to push against the muscle tension that is starting to build as well. In other words, in order to allow the skis to continue arcing on the path they are already on while fighting against a body that is beginning to become anticpated and wound up, perhaps some muscle activation of the lower body is needed. Again, this is not CREATING arcing in my view, it is just preventing your body from destroying it.

That's my take...
post #37 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhcooley
Clearly the skis will tend to straighten their line of travel as they are flattened. Could the skier add just enough of the dreaded rotary to persuade the skis to continue the arc for another meter or two before they are allowed to straighten their path?
Now this is interesting... For all you rotary buffs, it's another rotary concept that assists the skis - but does not displace them.

It also harkens back to the fledgling idea that Rigid Bodies are not necessarily accurate models to work from to describe skiing.

Consider the skier's upper-body as it begins to move into the new turn while the skis continue to arc with the old turn. In this case, the skier must activly rotate their feet & legs in relation to their upper body just to "disassociate" the two (since both are now on different trajectories). Note that such 'rotation' merely keeps the skis on one path while the body takes another and therefor needn't cause any displacement of the skis against the snow surface.


And BTW; in answer to the question 'is it possible to do it' my answer is yes. With sufficient ski width underfoot I can get (and stay) quite low to the snow in very short radius turns (maybe 6' - 7') using this technique. Doing so requires a good deal of retraction thru transition so as to keep the flow going. It takes far too long to go upright, then back down into deep angulation each time in very short radius turns. This also requires Independant Leg Steering.


"Staying low" does demonstrate the 'seated' position for a brief moment during transition, though as was discussed in the Three-Turns thread this can be made *not* to matter so long as my momentum/trajectory carries me thru that moment.

.ma
post #38 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683
And I would have to say that in a highly anticipated turn finish, it may actually require some muscle effort to push against the muscle tension that is starting to build as well. In other words, in order to allow the skis to continue arcing on the path they are already on while fighting against a body that is beginning to become anticpated and wound up, perhaps some muscle activation of the lower body is needed. Again, this is not CREATING arcing in my view, it is just preventing your body from destroying it.
...And I think... that's actually quite a good perspective. Well stated and very much to the point.

Active Rotation need not be directed only to displacing skis. It has a huge variety of guidance and control functions.

.ma
post #39 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
Actually, I'm pretty sure mmckimson got it exactly correct in the context he obviously meant.
Maybe, maybe not. Let's examine what he said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson View Post
If we use tipping movements alone, the turn shape we get is defined solely by the sidecut of the ski. On the other hand, if we want to modify the turn shape to different arc we must use an active rotary movement.
and then I said

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Turn shape is the result many variables including the the forces of the previous turn combined with tipping, counter balance, counter action, flexion, extension, CM location, and speed.
None of the things I mention above are an active rotary movement yet they can be used to change the shape of the turn.
post #40 of 214
The fundamental problem is one of skills vs movements. Movements already contain the blended skills. Movements are the words and phrases that use the aphabet of skills.

While dissection of a turn into this gory detail can be fun, at the end of the day, the questions are :

What movements do you make to create this pre-turn?

Clearly, they are a blend of edge/pressure/rotary. Where does the rotation come from? Can it be passive or must it be active?
post #41 of 214
Well Max, I'll agree with the essence of your unrelated statement that "many things can affect turn radius". That's pretty much a given. But I'll state again that your earlier statement and your followup appear to be deliberate misinterpretations of his intended context and appear directed at detracting from the potential relevance of rotation in the turning of skis.

Since you suggest examining the text more closely...
Your earlier statement appears to be a clever form of Lateral Logic - which is not really Logic at all. It is a method concerned with changing concepts and perception from one area of thinking into another similar-seeming but not logically related train of thought. Such techniques are generally used to confuse listeners/readers and to undermine or re-direct the interpretation of ideas that were otherwise properly presented for fair consideration.

There are a great many Lateral Logic puzzels on the internet which demonstrate the idea. Like;
"A man is found dead in a snow-covered Cabin on a Mountain - how did he die?"

When the reader attempts to envision the clear concept of a 'Cabin on a Mountain' they think 'suffocation under avalanche' - but they are deliberately bamboozled because this premise was actually a crafty misrepresentation of an Airplane's Cabin and the question was actually about an airplane that had crashed on a Mountain.

"Lateral Logic" is a technique of diverting logic while seemingly following a logical extrapolation.

---
It's certainly possible to misinterpret a writers intent accidentally but when we see the same person accidentally misinterpreting the same ideas about rotation into the same kind of misrepresentations time and time again, one might conclude an air of deliberate defiant obstinance is actually at work and meant to undermine fair consideration and discussion of the original presentor's ideas.

I think such tactics detract from forum participation because potential participants choose not to post information as they've come to expect that their posted material will be unfairly re-framed and misrepresented to make them look 'wrong'. Such tactics make for a very uninviting conversational space, but then, if it's our intent to drive away any who disagree with us... that might just be ok with us.


---
Interestingly, PSIA recognizes and encourages what are called 'Lateral Thinking' and 'Lateral Learning' - neither of which should be confused with 'Lateral Logic'.

Lateral Thinking is about reaching for understanding thru the shifting of thinking patterns rather than trying to confuse issues by deliberatly switching thinking patterns out of the explored context in order to derail or discredit such exploration.

Lateral Learning is about seeking understanding thru analogous activities and ideas.


.ma
post #42 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
But I'll state again that your earlier statement and your followup appear to be deliberate misinterpretations of his intended context and appear directed at detracting from the potential relevance of rotation in the turning of skis.
I just reread the original post and my response. I do not understand why you think something is being misinterpreted. The original post clearly states that applying an active rotary movement is the only method of achieving a tighter arc and my post pointed out that there are other factors involved. At no point have I said that using active rotary to get the tighter arc is bad. But it is not the only way.
post #43 of 214
Max,

I have to agree with michaelA here. Where exactly did I say that rotary is the only method that one can use to achieve a shorter turn radius?

I don't believe I said that at all. The only point I was attempting to make with my drawing and earlier post is that a ski tipped on its edge will turn. A popular exercise that I would bet every instructor that posts on Epic uses is the RR track exercise where we get the student to try and tip the skis on their edges and allow the skis to follow the arc that the sidecut of the ski will generate for them.

Clearly, even in this exercise a number of factors will impact the actual arc that such tipping generates (sidecut, snow conditions, pressure control movements, etc.), but so what? The premise that a tipped ski will turn without imposing any rotary movement to the skis is still a valid premise.

The second part of my point was to simply address the basic premise framed in the original question "Can Rotary Movements improve turn completions?"

Of course they can, if properly applied. Can other factors? Yes, but once again that wasn't my point.

Mike
post #44 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson View Post

The second part of my point was to simply address the basic premise framed in the original question "Can Rotary Movements improve turn completions?"

Of course they can, if properly applied. Can other factors? Yes, but once again that wasn't my point.

Mike
Could say a bit more about your vision of rotary that is "properly applied" to improve turn completion?
post #45 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson View Post
Where exactly did I say that rotary is the only method that one can use to achieve a shorter turn radius?
Well lets take a quick look.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson View Post
If we use tipping movements alone, the turn shape we get is defined solely by the sidecut of the ski. On the other hand, if we want to modify the turn shape to different arc we must use an active rotary movement.
As I stated earlier, I don't see where I'm misinterpreting what you wrote. In addition, to further clarify your intent you finished with this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson View Post
IMO, rotary movement is a definite skill required for good skiing.
post #46 of 214
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Bob's description of the turn is a bit different than yours in that his application is in a heavily engaged and edge locked ski while you are talking about applying it as the edge angles are decreased (at least that's what I got from the description). I certainly could have misunderstood.

I read what BB wrote and thought it was off base as applied to carving in general and WC turns in specific. I did ask a bunch of race coaches about Bob's idea and not one of them uses the idea in their coaching.
Max501,

Let's clarify a few things.

First, There is a segment in every single turn you and I make that goes from the highest edge angle created to flat during the edge change. Can we agree on this? Now, if you read my posts carefully, you will notice I have been talking about this portion of the turn where the edge angle is decreasing or de edging. It is during this period, which occurs in every turn we make, that we can employ more active rotary rather than just move across to the other set of edges. This period or phase is the part we are elluding to that can be used to more actively complete the turns. As stated in another post of mine, there is little tendancy for skidding or loosing the edge grip during this phase if the skier is moving over the feet as the rotary is applied because the lateral forces are relatively negligible when the hips and feet are more perpendicular to the slope during cross over. This kind of turn actually improves edge grip and control on steep hard snow.

Secondly, I am not talking about racing turns or running a define course down the mountain. I am talking about free skiing. There are obvious tactical and intention differences that change the style of turns. My world does not revolve around only racing though I do enjoy the competition and skiing fast and carving fast turns. I also enjoy skiing steeps and making round controlled fluid turns on firm snow which requires a different tactic and tools. I believe Bob Barnes too is talking about free skiing though I am sure he could easily and competently discuss racing technique if that was his intent. Please understand, we recognize the difference.

b
post #47 of 214
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
Can we modify that defined turn radius with other inputs? Sure! Can we deliberately twist or skid the skis? Sure! - But that was obviously not his point and I think it very unhelpful when we twist the context in which others present ideas to undermine their point because it suggests rotation might be an appropriate means to modify turn shape.


---
Bud,

I like what you're trying to explore and think I may be able to clarify something biomechanical about it.

The technique you describe, very 'snake-like' short radius turns where the skis/feet seem to go directly from one highly-completed turn into the next turn at with a continuous carve... *do* require a good deal of extra foot rotation right at the finish of the turn.

Specifically, as the skier finishes the existing turn they continue to rotate both feet in the direction of the existing turn while the upper body moves toward the new turn. This continuation of Foot Steering does more than just permit the skis to continue in the same direction - it actually tips the feet and therefor the skis helping with new-turn engagement of our edges.

What happens is that our feet have a limited range of rotation beyond that of the leg - and cannot continue to rotate further without automatically tipping.

Try it right now: Just max out your leg rotation to one side, and try to 'continue' that rotation with your foot. When the foot gets beyond a certain point it will begin to evert/invert (depending on the foot & direction you are rotating the leg) thus tipping the foot. No leg tipping is necessary for this to work.

This 'extra finish' of our turn using extra rotation of our feet (a little extra Independant Leg Steering) helps the skier engage their new edges early on.

So yes: a rotary finish of the feet does indeed help with early engagement of our edges into the next turn. Independant Leg Steering is also a critical component when turn radius gets small.

.ma
Thanks MA! I think you are understanding my focus! and your description is very accurate to my point.

b
post #48 of 214
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
Bud,

I like the concept of "continuing" your arc. I don't like the notion that you can "create" arc-age using muscle rotary, but let's not get into that debate again. But I think its interesting to consider that during that short little moment you are referring to, as someone begins to transition, it might be possible for them to LOSE some of their previous arc too soon. This could happen as they are in a rush to get the skis to flat. In a rush to get to the float period. In a rush to get to the other edges. As such, as they begin to release their old edges and begin rolling towards flat, it might be somewhat easy for them to destroy the last little bit of carv-age, or J hook you are seeking.

I think the skis are still perfectly well capable of carving out that J hook you are talking about and generally speaking I do not think you can create carve by spinning your feet, but that seems to be general point of debate among many. However, if conceptually, that prevents you from destroying the carve that already exists, but actively making sure to keep rotating your feet and specifically not beginning to rotate your feet the other way.

And I would have to say that in a highly anticipated turn finish, it may actually require some muscle effort to push against the muscle tension that is starting to build as well. In other words, in order to allow the skis to continue arcing on the path they are already on while fighting against a body that is beginning to become anticpated and wound up, perhaps some muscle activation of the lower body is needed. Again, this is not CREATING arcing in my view, it is just preventing your body from destroying it.

That's my take...
I agree with your post but think I notice where maybe a slight switch in your thinking might help you understand my point of view? Imagine finishing a turn just as you suggest however, finishing it with your feet as your hips have already begun the new turn. In other words assume the cm is a little farther along it's path to cross over the feet than it is in the turns you described and imagine what your feet and legs would be doing to remain engaged in the old turn...?

b
post #49 of 214
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
Now this is interesting... For all you rotary buffs, it's another rotary concept that assists the skis - but does not displace them.

Consider the skier's upper-body as it begins to move into the new turn while the skis continue to arc with the old turn. In this case, the skier must activly rotate their feet & legs in relation to their upper body just to "disassociate" the two (since both are now on different trajectories). Note that such 'rotation' merely keeps the skis on one path while the body takes another and therefor needn't cause any displacement of the skis against the snow surface.
well said! EXACTLY! This rotary effort does not displace the tails or cause any pivoting of the skis. It simply continues the turn while the mass moves toward the new turn.


Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
And BTW; in answer to the question 'is it possible to do it' my answer is yes. With sufficient ski width underfoot I can get (and stay) quite low to the snow in very short radius turns (maybe 6' - 7') using this technique. Doing so requires a good deal of retraction thru transition so as to keep the flow going. It takes far too long to go upright, then back down into deep angulation each time in very short radius turns. This also requires Independant Leg Steering.


"Staying low" does demonstrate the 'seated' position for a brief moment during transition, though as was discussed in the Three-Turns thread this can be made *not* to matter so long as my momentum/trajectory carries me thru that moment.

.ma
I don't neccessarily agree that one must "stay low" to do these turns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
Active Rotation need not be directed only to displacing skis. It has a huge variety of guidance and control functions.

.ma
post #50 of 214
Heh Max, you are so funny sometimes.

Even when mmckimson's original intent was clear, even when he responds with an affirmation of what he intended - you still insist on reinterpreting his intent and providing 'evidence' outside his context to justify your mis-representation. Well, OK.

I suppose that I only saw his actual meaning because I was genuinely interested in his viewpoint and his perspective and sought to understand the idea he intended to present. Had I instead only a desire to elevate and advertise my own opinion I suppose I might also have 'misinterpreted' his intended meaning. Doing so would certainly be a clever way of getting my own adamant opinion out there time and again in the guise of conversational participation. Of course, it would also be a sad use of my cleverness.

---
On a perhaps related thought I find it unfortunate that when people develop emotional and egotistical investments in any ideology it tends to leave them 'stuck with it' and all its flaws. Once firmly identified with a given hard-line ideology we inadvertantly also invest our self-esteem in that ideology. When the adopted ideology starts to prove faulty we're left with no other choice but to continue defending our now-faltering ideology to the bitter end.

Guess we can expect just such a visceral reaction since we interpret 'harm to our ideology' as being 'harm to us' - and because we've associated ourselves so firmly with it, this may actually be true in the sense that it destroys our credibility. The more we invest ourselves in an idea the more adamantly we're forced to defend it or lose face when the idea fails under scrutiny. I suspect this may be responsible for much of the otherwise unnecessary conversational and behavioral mayhem on these forums. Kind of a bummer.

Gives one pause when considering how strongly we should attach ourselves to the 'rightness' of a preferential belief.


But Hey! Good ideas keep sneaking through anyway.

(Sorry Bud, didn't mean to sidetrack your exploration of Turn Finishing technique again. I just got lured back into the Art of Clever Communications and Unfortunate 'Idea Vestments' like a curious cat spotting a sneaky mouse slinking along the baseboards. Perhaps I just need a nap attack.)

.ma
post #51 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bud Heishman
I don't neccessarily agree that one must "stay low" to do these turns.
Agreed - the foot rotation works as described in virtually any turn.

I was just referring to my own very-short-radius fast carved-turn example where the turns are 'very completed' across the hill.

.ma
post #52 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Imagine finishing a turn just as you suggest however, finishing it with your feet as your hips have already begun the new turn. In other words assume the cm is a little farther along it's path to cross over the feet than it is in the turns you described and imagine what your feet and legs would be doing to remain engaged in the old turn...?
Unfortunately I guess you'll have to be a lot more detailed and specific for me to say yay or nay to "finishing it with your feet". There are a lot of open questions.

As I said earlier, I can see how using some active muscle rotary "efforts" in that little tiny segment of the turn can help PREVENT the skis from running straight prematurely, particularly if there is some anticipation beginning as I described earlier.

But unlike some others, I do not accept that you can arc your skis by turning your feet. In my world, turning your feet will make the tails wash out. I do not feel that you can pivot the tips up the hill at that point of the turn either while the ski is still edged. If the skis is edged then either its (A) carving or (B) the tails are displacing more than the tips to make it turn(ie, washing out).

Note that a little bit of tail washout at the very very end of a non-race turn is not necessarily a bad thing, if it helps you to get that last little J hook, helps you attain more anticipation, check speed, setup the next turn, etc.

At any rate, I really quite firmly do not think you can de-edge your ski and simultaneously make the skis continue to carve through rotary. But are you sure the skis are actually flattening at the moment you are talking about? If your CoM is crossing over and at the same time you are simultaneously rotating your femurs in(ie, knee angulation), then you could be simply maintaining the edge angle just a little extra bit longer as your CoM starts to move across your feet. Basically maintaining the edge angle driven carve for as long as possible. See what I mean? That would be a carved finish for sure, not a wash out.

Its also possible that as you transition, edging requirements are reduced since you're losing centripetal forces the instant you release and start transitioning. Therefore, the reduced edge angle may still provide plenty of critical edge angle to maintain your carve. However as the edge angle reduces, the radius definitely does widen, UNLESS you do something as you are suggesting.

However I feel rather strongly that if the actual edge angle is reduced, you cannot make the skis carve smaller radius. They will carve wider unless you can bend the ski more, but since at that moment you are releasing, most likely the skis are losing decamber bend, not gaining. That leaves only one other possibility which is a smeared turn finish....which is yes....tails skidding. but like I said, I see no problem with skidding your skis in certain kinds of ways, at the very highest levels of non-race skiing. Knowing how to smear your skis the right way is in fact a mark of a true all mountain expert in my book. But so is holding on to that carve for as long as you need to...even if it means that last little bit of knee angulation.
post #53 of 214
Bud,

I'm trying to get my head around this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
I agree with your post but think I notice where maybe a slight switch in your thinking might help you understand my point of view? Imagine finishing a turn just as you suggest however, finishing it with your feet as your hips have already begun the new turn. In other words assume the cm is a little farther along it's path to cross over the feet than it is in the turns you described and imagine what your feet and legs would be doing to remain engaged in the old turn...?

b
Are you really talking about the concept of using rotary movements to maintain "tension" to allow the skis to continue moving in one direction while the CM begins traveling in the direction of the new turn?

If so, would this tension best be maintained through active steering of the feet, or by thinking of rotating the femur in the hip socket?

Mike
post #54 of 214
IMO, BTS has it correct.

The rotation that you experience at the turn completion is best described as allowing the legs to rotate by an increase in edge angle and decrease in pressure (ie, a release of the CM from it's arc). Since the edge is already locked, and you want to continue or even tighten the arc, any rotation will manifest as knee angulation. This is ok here because the CM has already been released from it's arc and pressure is low. The skis continue on their arc as the femurs rotate in support of the increased edge, and a tremendous wind-up occurs.

This rotation is a secondary effect to the tipping effort ( although some may rotate to drive their tipping ) and the windup an effect of the edge increase and upper/lower body separation. Note also that the decrease in pressure will reduce critical angle....

Look at it this way.... once the CM is released from it's arc, it can have an effect on the edge angle or not. If it effects the edge angle to the point that the edges are released (ie under critical angle), rotation will pivot the feet, and the carve will not be maintained.

If on the otherhand, you have sufficieint upper and lower body separation, you can allow the skis to continue their arc, but you need to maintain an edge angle greater than critical angle to do so.

As the CM crosses over, maintaining this angle may feel a lot like active rotation, but it is rotation that is in support of a tipping effort. It is a necessary secondary effect, not a prime mover.

If you are considering that rotation MUST be active in this move, AND no tail wash occurs, they I will say you are no longer arcing the ski -- it is running straight, and you need to apply rotary for it's direction to be maintained. The applied rotation would be just enough to maintain the straight run of the ski at release, but it will not tighten the turn. I would describe this as a "reach and twist your legs" movement.
post #55 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelA View Post
Even when mmckimson's original intent was clear, even when he responds with an affirmation of what he intended - you still insist on reinterpreting his intent and providing 'evidence' outside his context to justify your mis-representation.
I do not understand how you can continue with this train of thought. He said what he said and I simply quoted it. I did not rewrite anything or put it in a different context.

This POST clearly states that rotary is a skill needed for good skiing (it says it at the beginning and then again at the end). I do not see how you can continue to claim that I am misinterpreting his intention when the wording is so direct and clear. There is nothing to misinterpret about his writing, in fact, its one of the most direct and easy to understand posts on this forum.

mmckimson says a skier must use active rotary to tighten the turn as shown in the picture included in his post. All I have done it point out that there are other options to tighten that arc. That's it. I fail to see why you are so invested in knocking me down for pointing out that there are other options available for tightening the arc. Could it be because you are so heavily invested in your own flawed system as you so eloquently and cleverly implied that I am?
post #56 of 214
Max,

Can we let this rest? I agree with you... other skills besides rotary movements can also help a skier tighten the arc of a turn, On the other hand, I would still argue that understanding and applying rotary skills in the correct manner are a fundamental element of good skiing.

Mike
post #57 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmckimson View Post
..On the other hand, I would still argue that understanding and applying rotary skills in the correct manner are a fundamental element of good skiing.
Of course you would, after all you were very clear about that point. Guess I won't be able to demonstrate good skiing until I embrace the rotary movement skill set.
post #58 of 214
OK, is that you two agreed? Can we now move on?
post #59 of 214
Please, let's do!

Mike
post #60 of 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Turn shape is the result many variables including the the forces of the previous turn combined with tipping, counter balance, counter action, flexion, extension, CM location, and speed.
IMO Max is right. When I read his post I thought it was obvious. MichaelA is this the Max post that is bothering you?
I see that mmckimson has acquiesced somewhat. Good.
MicaealA, your 1:55 post does not help matters, not even one tiny little bit. We don't want a MOD GOD to punish us and stop all the fun and education.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Can Rotary Movements improve turn completions?