Its all good
Originally Posted by tdk6
Garry, great post. Glad to see someone as qualified as you jumping at my "outrageous proposal" and showing all the different systems such respect. I too do not have time nor do I have the knowledge to compare systems to each other but thats why I was thinking that each one of the reps for their systems could step forward and write shortly the general guidlines for each category. Bolter speaking for PMTS was first to go and seemed to cover it all in just a few words. I guess thats the kind of humble attitude PMTS adepts are famous here at epic for but lets not hack down on HH and his system just because of one posting
because the system is really good and covers a wide spectrum of skiing. But there is more.... the world is not enough!
For example, one question that has been asked here lots of times is if its bad to take lessons at a different resort or country featuring a different system without screwing up ones skiing for good. With my suggested documentation it would be possible to quickly figure out what the new ski school or systems building blocks are made off and do they approve of the skills learned at other schools or systems.
Thanks TDK! I try to be impartial and fair and do see merits in all the systems out there to the extent of what I have read myself, not what I've seen represented by third parties.
I hope Bolter was jesting and knowing him to be a level-headed forward thinking guy I tend to believe he was - if I'm wrong, well, 'nuff said, still like Arc-Tech and how he delved into "Gait Mechanics", a very important bio-mechanical aspect of efficient ski technique, especially with regards to transitions.
To suggest that anyone system is the end all is, well, just plain silly or worse, unfortunate. If that was the case PSIA, CSIA and all other National system would be overwhelmed by the "ultimate system". The inventor of the system should copyright, trademark and seek venture capitalists to secure a stranglehold on the market - I know I would.
The plain truth is all the system are based on similar principles of building logical skill sets enabling the practitioner to expand their capability in ever expanding situations and environments.
Past the rank beginner, and there is legitimate cart before the horse debate on whether teaching a rank beginner edging skills first to the point of early rudimentary carved (or for the really anal, brushed carved turns) rather than purely speed control skidded turns, the systems quickly blur into a matter of emphasis, not anything truly revolutionary, IMHO.
The penultimate practitioner of any school will be a top notch high performance skier and as pointed out above, unless we are dealing with specific disciplines like racing, bumps or SuperPipe, they movement patterns will be all pretty close other than some small style variances.And then comes Byggmark.
I bring this up as the comment was made, and correctly so, watch 100 FIS racers come down the course and not only are the top guys 1/100th of second apart (usually) but they all look pretty darn similar. Physique plays a more important factor on how a skier "looks" than technique. A taller skier bigger mass skier will ski a bit differently than the diminutive smaller quicker skier, at least in the race course, possibly elsewhere. That boils down to bio mechanics and physics, not what system they've come out of. Yes, a few years back there was a pretty marked difference between an Norwegian Team vs. Austrian Team member vs. an American Team member (when hip counter was hugely prevalent) but recently, especially in the last two seasons those lines have been blurred from watching 100s of hours of videos. All one has to do is look at the evolution of Hermann's technique from 2001 to last season, he is much more square than much earlier.
Then come the Iconoclasts, first Bode and now Byggmark. Watch Byggmark ski slalom and please tell me you aren't seeing almost wild rotational employment of the upper body as he transitions from turn to turn. His style is new, it isn't a product of any system, its similar to Bode's development, the raw talent and athleticism transcends the system and something new is invented. Ligety also falls into this category in IMHO.
So I used ski racing, easiest format to look at one skier to the next and truly analyze what's going on with the addition of the clock telling you what's been most efficient or, is it just fastest?
The same is true of Joe Public skier who wants to take his skiing to its fullest potential. Something or more specifically, someone, or even better a bunch of someones have to give him a base to launch from. I don't care if its this dogma or WS or arcing or Pivoting his butt down a green slope as long as the technical thread he is following leads to self exploration and efficient movement patterns. If he/she gets blocked, he can go back to anyone of that bunch of someones and get a key to unlock the door to great vistas in his skiing imagination and physical execution.
More is better, its been said up here a thousand times but having said it one time is enough IMO, having to say it a thousand times is a problem.
No doubt, that a child is formed with incredible impact in its formative years of life. So is the beginning skier. If the skier is giving a faulty foundation he/she will be stunted but not hopeless. But to assume that any highly successful system (such as PSIA) is built on completely faulty premises and can't produce that magically creative skier is folly.
And as said, it really comes down to the child's parents or in the case of the skier, his/her teachers. As pointed out by Heluva, no matter what pin is stuck on the jacket the true professional teacher, even better, the truly creative and passionate teacher, regardless of system, will send the skier on a life long adventure of learning that can only be positively impacted by every other truly creative and passionate teacher he then encounters along his path.
There is no one way, never was and never will be. The Byggmarks, Millers and Ligetys of the world prove that, undeniably.
Just me 0.02 worth