or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Max's answer to Skidude's questions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Max's answer to Skidude's questions

post #1 of 232
Thread Starter 
I'd like to offer an apology to the mods, Epicski management, and any Bears that are sick of hearing about PMTS. There are a couple of vocal Bears that have put me in a position where I find the need to reference some PMTS stuff. I purposely broke this out of the thread it was in to stop the hijack that has occurred there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post
I have always advocated the use of pivoting when required...Max insists it is not necessary...EVER....so here is a case where he acknowledges he cannot ski the run with pure arc to arc carving....no issue with that....but it begs the obvious question...then how do you get down the hill?
I'm more than willing to get into the specifics of how I (and any other PMTS student) would get down a slope I can't carve arc to arc, but have been refraining because of the management's request that I limit my PMTS discussion. However, I'm finding it very difficult to keep my mouth shut with the nonstop challenges to my writing and my skiing style.

So, for starters...A search of the forums for "bullet proof short turn" and/or BPST would turn up much additional info as this has been discussed in detail over the years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post
Max repeatedly insists that arc to arc skiing is not limiting, and can be done anywhere, on any terrain, with any conditions....
I have never, not once, said any such thing. That is an outright fabrication.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post
...however he has now clearly gone back on that statement acknowledging he cannot do it on steep groomed runs with hard snow...I would suggest this also means he cannot do it on steep runs with moguls, or crud...or other adverse conditions...again, these limitations on arc to arc skiing is what has always been suggested on this board...but Max501 has always refuted it...until now....it appears Max501 is now openly and publicly acknowledging that what he has professed for so long is actually a very limited way of skiing.
Again, not once have I ever suggested that arc to arc skiing can be used everywhere, and certainly I've never said I can do it. PMTS allows for a passive redirection of the skis as well as soft edges. PMTS is about getting on the edges as smoothly and quickly as possible while limiting as much active rotary (what I think of as a pivot) as you can.

Sample skiing using PMTS technique:



Plenty of info about that video in this old thread on the subject:

http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=55170

Some higher level PMTS skiing:







With regards to your question about racers carving steep hard snow terrain. I have seen it done and bending the front of the ski and completing the turn is a big part of arc to arc speed control on steeper runs. Racers have a tool that has a fast part (the tail) and a slow part (the forebody) and they know how to use each to its advantages to get to the finish as fast as possible while staying in the course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post
Peacepipe? I do not beleive there is, or ever has been any ill will between us....
I'd ask that you refrain from pulling my skiing (PMTS) into unrelated discussions. It takes the focus off of the original post and is frowned upon by the management of this site. The problem is that you leave open questions and challenges that should be answered, yet if I get drawn into the debate I'm doing exactly what the mods have asked me to stop doing.
post #2 of 232
Thread Starter 
Edit, removed partial quote from Lonnie (at his request).

In response to: http://forums.epicski.com/report.php?p=863529

This shows a complete misunderstanding of PMTS and also certain styles of expert skiing. The post above addresses this to some degree. But Lonnie, we've been down this path before, why are you going down it again?

Directly steering the skis is often unnecessary and more importantly often produces an undesirable outcome (from a PMTS point of view). I'm saying that in relation to why we take this approach in PMTS. I'm not suggesting you or anyone else shouldn't use steering.
post #3 of 232
Thread Starter 
Rather than hijack threads, if someone has a PMTS related comment, criticism, or whatever, this thread should be a good spot for it.

I'd guess that nearly any comment could be addressed with the forum search as much of this has been gone over many times in the past.
post #4 of 232
I've not really read your post carefully. I have perused some of the threads in which the PMTS vs PSIA debates have raged. And I'm certainly not qualified to evaluate the merits of the arguments. But, as someone who is trying to improve, I would say I find most of the threads on technique completely useless. In part I think it's a function of the medium; I simply don't think text based messaging is a very good way to either 1) diagnose technique problems or 2) provide effective instruction. Additionally many of the threads use a lot of jargon that is not clearly defined, and it seems that many folks have different "definitions" of what some of the terminology means. And finally, the threads often seem to degenerate into a PMTS vs PSIA pi**ing contest.
post #5 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
I'd like to offer an apology to the mods, Epicski management, and any Bears that are sick of hearing about PMTS. There are a couple of vocal Bears that have put me in a position where I find the need to reference some PMTS stuff. I purposely broke this out of the thread it was in to stop the hijack that has occurred there. .
Not sure what you mean....I think you misinterpreted the Mods intentions. This is an open board where all skiing styles, techniques etc can be discussed....your "spanner in the works" post seemed to suggest you had something of value to offer the OP about carving on steeps. I and am sure the rest of the Bears/Mods and Epic Ski Management would still like you to offer that up.



Quote:
Again, not once have I ever suggested that arc to arc skiing can be used everywhere, and certainly I've never said I can do it. PMTS allows for a passive redirection of the skis as well as soft edges. PMTS is about getting on the edges as smoothly and quickly as possible while limiting as much active rotary (what I think of as a pivot) as you can.
Excellant this is exactley what every other teaching body on the planet teaches as well....carve as much as you can, when you can...but utilise all skills...namely pivoting....when reqiured.

What exercies does PMTS use to teach pivoting?

Quote:
With regards to your question about racers carving steep hard snow terrain. I have seen it done and bending the front of the ski and completing the turn is a big part of arc to arc speed control on steeper runs. Racers have a tool that has a fast part (the tail) and a slow part (the forebody) and they know how to use each to its advantages to get to the finish as fast as possible while staying in the course.
Interesting....sounds wild actually...any video, or pics of a ski racer skiing uphill to control speed as you suggest? From my experience which is everything from new racers upto the odd WC racer they tend to fight to keep as much speed as possible, but if they have too much speed, or not enought room to arc to arc...they cut the top off the turn with a pivot entry...seems to work, Bode and those guys use it.

Your idea would make transistions very slow....and well, I just cant get my head around how it would work....I mean we all know the ski needs to bend right? So what is pushing the ski to bend it...in a normal turn, you are using inertia of your upper body and leg extension to get it started...as correctly pointed out...light touch...but to do what you suggest seems well wild...have an video?

Quote:
I'd ask that you refrain from pulling my skiing (PMTS) into unrelated discussions. It takes the focus off of the original post and is frowned upon by the management of this site. The problem is that you leave open questions and challenges that should be answered, yet if I get drawn into the debate I'm doing exactly what the mods have asked me to stop doing
I think if you just say "this what I think" rather then...this is what PMTS says, you should be ok. So care then to answer the question...how YOU get down the hill? I read the other threads...but they dont seem to really deal with this exact scenario.
post #6 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by RISkier View Post
I've not really read your post carefully. I have perused some of the threads in which the PMTS vs PSIA debates have raged. And I'm certainly not qualified to evaluate the merits of the arguments. But, as someone who is trying to improve, I would say I find most of the threads on technique completely useless. In part I think it's a function of the medium; I simply don't think text based messaging is a very good way to either 1) diagnose technique problems or 2) provide effective instruction. Additionally many of the threads use a lot of jargon that is not clearly defined, and it seems that many folks have different "definitions" of what some of the terminology means. And finally, the threads often seem to degenerate into a PMTS vs PSIA pi**ing contest.
Totally agree....this forum is not really intended for students to learn how to improve...rather more for giving instructors a place to hash out their ideas. The "ski teaching" board is more for helping students.

Having said that thou, feel free to join the kaos here, it can be pretty enteraining at times!
post #7 of 232
Max,

First of all I'd say I'm very impressed by your ability to stay calm in some of those discussions. You are good skier and good teacher as well as evident by Dr. Rick's thread. Kudos for that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
PMTS allows for a passive redirection of the skis as well as soft edges. PMTS is about getting on the edges as smoothly and quickly as possible while limiting as much active rotary (what I think of as a pivot) as you can.
Here is my maybe naive question. Is "redirection" vs. "pivot" vs. "rotary" just a semantic? What is principal difference between those terms, is it all black and white? Does "redirection" include any "rotary", will "pivot" mean that skis are "redirected"?

I believe that "passive redirection" implies that there are some other then rotary forces initiated by skier that make skis rotate (sorry, redirect). What are those forces that make ski "passively redirect"? Have skier anything to do with creating/initiating those "redirection" forces or they just happen on it's own?

I'm not trying to poke a holes in either theory, just trying to understand.
Sorry if this is not intended direction of this thread. Please point me to appropriate explanation if one exists. So far I've read quite a lot on on both epic and pmts forum but could not find clear answer.
post #8 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Max,

First of all I'd say I'm very impressed by your ability to stay calm in some of those discussions. You are good skier and good teacher as well as evident by Dr. Rick's thread. Kudos for that



Here is my maybe naive question. Is "redirection" vs. "pivot" vs. "rotary" just a semantic? What is principal difference between those terms, is it all black and white? Does "redirection" include any "rotary", will "pivot" mean that skis are "redirected"?

I believe that "passive redirection" implies that there are some other then rotary forces initiated by skier that make skis rotate (sorry, redirect). What are those forces that make ski "passively redirect"?

Can a skier control these forces? And if so, how?



I'm not trying to poke a holes in either theory, just trying to understand.
Sorry if this is not intended direction of this thread. Please point me to appropriate explanation if one exists. So far I've read quite a lot on on both epic and pmts forum but could not find clear answer.


Great post Stevensman.....I too would like to know the answer to these questions...especially the bold ones...(NOTE: I added the second and third bold one) Hope you dont mind Stevensman.
post #9 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
...I believe that "passive redirection" implies that there are some other then rotary forces initiated by skier that make skis rotate (sorry, redirect). What are those forces that make ski "passively redirect"? Have skier anything to do with creating/initiating those "redirection" forces or they just happen on it's own?... So far I've read quite a lot on on both epic and pmts forum but could not find clear answer...
In addition to muscular input from the skier, another torque capable of rotating a skidding ski around an axis perpendicular to the snow surface comes from the difference in sideways drag between the front and the back of the ski.

For a simple example, imagine you are stopped perpendicular to the fall line and release your edges. In your frame of reference, the snow is moving sideways under your skis. This creates a sideways drag force on each part of your skis. If you are centered fore-aft, and if the total sideways drag on the front of the ski is greater than the total sideways drag on the rear of the ski, the tip will be forced uphill from the tail and visa versa.

The sideways drag is primarily controlled by the sidecut of the skis (wider tips dig in more than a narrow tail), and the fore-aft distribution of the pressure of the snow on the ski. If there is more pressure from the snow on the ski in some region of the ski, and if everything else is held constant, that region of the ski will experience more sideways drag. Thus, if you pressure your tips, they will experience increased sideways drag.

However (and, this is a very BIG however), sideways drag alone is not the issue. Redirection of the ski comes from a torque acting on it, and this requires consideration of the two lever arms involved.

The way skiers increase the pressure on the forebody of the ski is to move their CM forward. This makes the lever arm for the forebody sideways drag force shorter and increases the lever arm for the aft sideways drag forces. Move your CM all the way over the tip of the ski and there will be zero lever arm for the forebody sideways drag (ie, zero torque from the forebody), and a huge lever arm (and a large torque) from the part of the ski behind your CM. Thus, even with a wide tip, your tip will drift downhill faster than your tails.

Exactly the same phenomena occurs when forward motion is added.

I hope this helps explain the non-muscular torques acting on the ski that tend to rotate a skidding ski in the plane of the snow.

BTW, you are 100% correct in that this mechanism for rotation-while-skidding is rarely discussed in any detail. Almost all discussions of skiing mechanics makes the assumption of pure carving. The only time I have seen this mechanism discussed before is in one of my earliest posts on Epic, many years ago.

Cheers,

Tom / PM
post #10 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhysicsMan View Post
In addition to muscular input from the skier, another torque capable of rotating a skidding ski around an axis perpendicular to the snow surface comes from the difference in sideways drag between the front and the back of the ski.
Tom,

Thank you, this makes sense. So there will be muscular input from skier by pressing forward but not generating torque by rotating the feet.

Max, is this an accurate explanation for "passive redirection". Is the force explained by Tom a primary mean of redirecting ski in non-carved turn?
post #11 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
So there will be muscular input from skier by pressing forward but not generating torque by rotating the feet.
Or, are you simply rotating the ski around another axis (which is resisted by the snow surface? (ie friction))
post #12 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Here is my maybe naive question. Is "redirection" vs. "pivot" vs. "rotary" just a semantic? What is principal difference between those terms, is it all black and white? Does "redirection" include any "rotary", will "pivot" mean that skis are "redirected"?
I believe there is a great deal of confusion in this area, most of it due to different people using the same words to mean different things. I find it helpful to go back to things that are obvious and avoid ski-jargon. There are only really three variables to consider:

1. The direction of the skis and the position of the skier relative to them.
2. The forces exerted on the skis by the snow, gravity and the skier's momentum (which are big)
3. The forces exerted on the skis by the skier's muscles (which are small).

Skiing comes down to using the small forces (3), to manipulate the direction and position of the skis(1), in such a way as to use the big forces (2), to accomplish what you want. You generally try to avoid setting the small forces in opposition to the big ones, for that way lies tiredness and injury.

Redirection is a pretty general term for anything that changes the direction the skis are pointing in, or the direction of the skier's momentum. In this context I think people are using it to mean specifically redirecting the skis while their edges are not locked into a groove in the snow, using one of the small forces, so the skier's momentum, which is big, is not redirected until the edges reengage and the pressure on the snow can act against it. When they do, obviously a skid results unless the skiers momentum is very small.

A pivot can simply be another name for the same thing (redirecting the skis without redirecting the skier), in which case you can accomplish it in any number of ways, but to some people it specifically means deliberately rotating the legs around the femur-to-hip joints in order to turn the skis. Pivots (in the first sense) or redirections of some kind are clearly used by all skiers, including PMTS skiers (although they don't use the term) and racers, since the only alternative is arc to arc skiing and that doesn't always work. Pivots in the latter sense are taught by some ski instructors as a way of turning the skis.

So far we only have 5 possible meanings for 2 words and only a moderate amount of scope for miscommunication ... The situation becomes much worse when we come to "rotary". It can simply mean any force, small or large, that turns the ski, but to different people it means different subsets of those forces. Ways of turning skis include (but are probably not limited to):

0. Rotating the body and one leg using the other locked ski edge as a fulcrum
1. Rotating the body or one or both legs using some body part or a pole as a fulcrum.
2. Rotating the legs in the hip joint, as in the second definition of pivoting above.
3. Rotating the skis through the rotational momentum of some body part that isn't stopped before it reaches them.
4. Letting the legs unwind out of a countered position
5. Letting the ski turn itself using its sidecut and bend
6. Letting the ski turn down hill because the CoM of the skier is in front of the centre of lateral resistance from the ski

Note that all of these expect 5 and 6 rely on small, muscular forces to turn the skis. Nearly everyone agrees that 0-1 are not necessary on modern equipment, although most beginners end up doing them anyway and a great many skiers resort to them when pressured. PMTS teaches that all deliberate active rotational movements (0-2 above) are to be avoided, and that even rotation due to muscle movement in the direction of the turn that happens as a consequence of something else (3) is to be limited as much as possible (it cannot be eliminated because of human physiology). 4-6 are okay because the muscles are not turning the skis or anything else in the direction of the turn and they therefore don't disrupt the ski/skier position and relationship you're trying to accomplish with the big forces of gravity, snow and momentum. PMTS people usually refer to 4-6 as passive and 0-3 as active rotation, or just "rotatary".

A lot of people seem to see (2) above whenever they see skis turning in anything other than a perfect edge locked carve, whereas other people never see (2) in good skiing at all. Since skiers usually ski wearing quite a lot of clothing, I'm not sure how anyone can tell, but clearly their movement analysis skills are far greater than mine ... This, combined with a misunderstanding of just what PMTS people mean when they say rotary (0-3, not necessarily 4-6), contributes about 1kwords/month to EpicSki's instruction forums ...

In spite of what people occasionally say, its not obvious to me that the PMTS position is ridiculous or that it limits what you can do. I think quite a lot of this is based on a misunderstanding that when PMTS says "no rotary" what is really meant is "edge locked carving only", omitting options 4, 6 and more moderate forms of 5. In my own skiing, certainly, I seem to be able to make very tight turns without any deliberate rotation, and when I do try to use it as an experiment I find it disrupts my balance, but I'm vary aware that other people's experiences differ.
post #13 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Is "redirection" vs. "pivot" vs. "rotary" just a semantic? What is principal difference between those terms, is it all black and white? Does "redirection" include any "rotary", will "pivot" mean that skis are "redirected"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
I believe that "passive redirection" implies that there are some other then rotary forces initiated by skier that make skis rotate (sorry, redirect). What are those forces that make ski "passively redirect"? Have skier anything to do with creating/initiating those "redirection" forces or they just happen on it's own?
Check out the last couple of pages of the following thread:

http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...=56089&page=11

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Max, is this an accurate explanation for "passive redirection". Is the force explained by Tom a primary mean of redirecting ski in non-carved turn?
It's an interesting point and must play some role as Tom points out. But I don't know how much it contributes.
post #14 of 232
Thread Starter 
Skidude, all of your questions have been answered in the past and can be found using the forum search.
post #15 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhysicsMan View Post
Almost all discussions of skiing mechanics makes the assumption of pure carving.
Great post Tom..... let me add that almost no skiing done out on the hill is pure carving.

Tom
post #16 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post
Excellant this is exactley what every other teaching body on the planet teaches as well....carve as much as you can, when you can...but utilise all skills...namely pivoting....when reqiured.
I've been thinking about this...is it really the case the all teaching systems teach carving as the goal with pivoting as the fall back? I've seen many instructors giving lessons here in the US and those lessons do not support that concept.

Perhaps in Canada this is true (any other CSIA instructors reading that could confirm that)?

Also, I often feel like we are talking apples and oranges even though you suggest we are talking about the same things. Can you put up some video that shows your skiing so I have a visual reference of how your ideas and theories relate to the final product? It would be helpful as we compare notes.
post #17 of 232
Max,

where is HH skiing in the last video (that is HH, right?)? Just wondering on the pitch, etc. The entrance looks like (as far as my 2 dimensional display reveals anyway) it has some pitch to it. Is it A-Basin somewhere?

And I'm not questioning the terrain-just curious-frankly, whatever one thinks of his system or personality-his skiing is flawless and great fun to watch. And, it does 'appear' (to my untrained eye) to be be different from other styles of high-level skiing posted elsewhere on epic.

Liam
post #18 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liam View Post
where is HH skiing in the last video (that is HH, right?)? Just wondering on the pitch, etc. The entrance looks like (as far as my 2 dimensional display reveals anyway) it has some pitch to it. Is it A-Basin somewhere?
Yes, Pallavicini, at A-Basin. Not sure which run specifically.
post #19 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Yes, Pallavicini, at A-Basin. Not sure which run specifically.
It looks like the middle of the main face near the outcropping of rocks right at the top.
post #20 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan
Is "redirection" vs. "pivot" vs. "rotary" just a semantic? What is principal difference between those terms, is it all black and white? Does "redirection" include any "rotary", will "pivot" mean that skis are "redirected"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan
I believe that "passive redirection" implies that there are some other then rotary forces initiated by skier that make skis rotate (sorry, redirect). What are those forces that make ski "passively redirect"? Have skier anything to do with creating/initiating those "redirection" forces or they just happen on it's own?
Check out the last couple of pages of the following thread:

http://forums.epicski.com/showthread...=56089&page=11
Max,

I checked (and re-checked) the thread you suggested but I really could not find a clear answer. There are lot of opinions from different people on the subject. I do not know exactly who represents what camp and I do not really care. I know that you are PMTS skier and that is why I'm asking you to answer the question. I promise I'm not going to try to disprove or attack PMTS point of view, I'm just curious to know what it is.

Let me summarize what I understand as PMTS point of view of this question:
1. There could an active pivoting of the skis that is caused by skier rotating his shoulders/hips/foot (some or all of the above) and this is always bad in high level (or any level) skiing.
2. There is also passive redirection of the skis that happens as a result of forces created in previous turn.

This is just my interpretation of PMTS point of view. Can you please give more accurate description? I'm not that interested in #1, please correct it only if there is some gross misrepresentation. I really want to know more details about #2. It is really not clear to me how "passive redirection" should happen, what forces play role there, how to make sure it happens correctly. Please summarize your or PMTS point of view, specifically how "passive redirection" happens and how to make sure it happens correctly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
It's an interesting point and must play some role as Tom points out. But I don't know how much it contributes.
Thank you for direct answer
post #21 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Please summarize your or PMTS point of view, specifically how "passive redirection" happens and how to make sure it happens correctly.
To start you don't 'make' passive redirection happen, rather you 'allow' it to happen. I point that out because 'making' redirection happen is likely to result in some sort of active twisting of the skis which is what we try to avoid.

This write up has good info:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ESki
Well...the missing link was in the relaxation move. The key here is this: (Bob...you mentioned the forces in the turn) the turning forces of the turn come from us standing on our skis through the body/belly of each turn, it is not some random gravitational influence which pushes against us. It is us resisting the G's until we release these G's. By relaxing or giving in to these forces it starts the edge change AND at the same time pulls the CM into the next turn. Without having to push against the forces which is a lot more effort.

Then the smooth continuation is to simply lead the edge change with the same foot coming in nice and light as the new inside ski. This is the LINK which came up a couple days ago.

The only other really important point (for this note) is that the upper body(CM) always faces in your direction of travel. This is especially important when finishing a turn to have it already facing the middle of the next turn. This upper/lower body separation provides all the rotation force needed to facilitate the skis natural tendency to seek the falline through the neutral phase of transition.So that as the skis change edges and, simultaneously, the CM flows into the new turn and skis are passing through neutral and flat on or above the snow surface, the skis draw into the falline and then you are in the turn and G's build again. Just this little bit of rotary loading combined with the shape of modern skis and the cutting of the skis through the snow, makes the turn happens SO much more easily then with old skis. In addittion, in other words, you do not need to steer the skis for linked, parrallel skiing.
post #22 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonnie
Or, are you simply rotating the ski around another axis (which is resisted by the snow surface? (ie friction))
Do I understand it correctly, you suggest that applying pressure to the tip of the ski could be called rotation around axis that goes through the ski boots and perpendicular to direction where ski is pointing ? Yes, technically it could be called a rotation but I do not think term "rotation" help with anything..


Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Kinahan View Post
I believe there is a great deal of confusion in this area, most of it due to different people using the same words to mean different things
....
0. Rotating the body and one leg using the other locked ski edge as a fulcrum
1. Rotating the body or one or both legs using some body part or a pole as a fulcrum.
2. Rotating the legs in the hip joint, as in the second definition of pivoting above.
3. Rotating the skis through the rotational momentum of some body part that isn't stopped before it reaches them.
4. Letting the legs unwind out of a countered position
5. Letting the ski turn itself using its sidecut and bend
6. Letting the ski turn down hill because the CoM of the skier is in front of the centre of lateral resistance from the ski
....
PMTS people usually refer to 4-6 as passive and 0-3 as active rotation, or just "rotatary".
Simon,

Thank you for your explanation. "PMTS people" - is this accurate?
Specivically 4-6, I'd say 4-5 happens in clear carved turn and therefore should have nothing to do with "passive redirection"?
post #23 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
"PMTS people" - is this accurate?
I think its a good list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Specivically 4-6, I'd say 4-5 happens in clear carved turn and therefore should have nothing to do with "passive redirection"?
They all contribute.
post #24 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
To start you don't 'make' passive redirection happen, rather you 'allow' it to happen. I point that out because 'making' redirection happen is likely to result in some sort of active twisting of the skis which is what we try to avoid.
Please note, I did not say "make passive redirection happen", I said "make sure it happens". So, still not very clear for me how to "allow it happen".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
This write up has good info:
Agree, it is good. However, in my mind we talk about redirection when for some reason we can not make pure carved turns (steeps, bumps, etc). So in my understanding of PMTS turns could be either purely carved or have some redirection thrown in. I believe the writeup you suggest applies to ideal carved turn. Where is "redirection" there?
post #25 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Please note, I did not say "make passive redirection happen", I said "make sure it happens". So, still not very clear for me how to "allow it happen".
All you do it release from one turn to the next while tipping. You don't do anything to actively twist or otherwise point the skis in a new direction, you just let them come around on their own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
I believe the writeup you suggest applies to ideal carved turn. Where is "redirection" there?
Take another look at that text, and this time think of it as applying to the bullet proof short turns I demo in the video above.
post #26 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
All you do it release from one turn to the next while tipping. You don't do anything to actively twist or otherwise point the skis in a new direction, you just let them come around on their own.
Right, I do that and it produces clear carved turns (I wish of course ). There will be no redirection, ski come around because of sidecut.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Take another look at that text, and this time think of it as applying to the bullet proof short turns I demo in the video above.
I think the text you quoted generally applies to any good skiing. Your demo shows good skiing and text applies there, no questions.

In your demo first turns are somewhat different from turns you are doing at 0:40. It looks like in both type of turns you released while tipping but result is not the same... Are you doing something differently there or it just happened on it's own and skis re-directed more in opening exercise?
post #27 of 232
Max,

What is wrong with twisting?

My interpretation of your comments is that you let the skis come passively to the fall line. This will occur when the skis are flat, in the float portion of the turn.

Why should an active redirection during the float be avoided? I like and apply your school of skiing, but it would seem to me that along with pulling the feet back, actively redirecting the skis would not result in a loss of speed. I think it probably is a good tool for a racer to have in his bag of tricks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
All you do it release from one turn to the next while tipping. You don't do anything to actively twist or otherwise point the skis in a new direction, you just let them come around on their own.



Take another look at that text, and this time think of it as applying to the bullet proof short turns I demo in the video above.
post #28 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
Right, I do that and it produces clear carved turns (I wish of course ). There will be no redirection, ski come around because of sidecut.
Have you tried the 1 or 2 footed release drills?
post #29 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Have you tried the 1 or 2 footed release drills?
If you are talking about drills described in HH books, yes, have tried those drills. I have no idea if I performed them correctly though. Please do not tell me that "passive redirection" caused by the force (or allowed to be there) as in 1-2 footed release drill, that is not good enough explanation for me.

Can you please answer the question I asked above? If you can not or do not want to answer here because of some reason that is fine too.
post #30 of 232
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fischermh View Post
What is wrong with twisting?
I'd ask, what is good about twisting? Why twist if you don't need to? Why add additional muscle effort if not required? There are other reasons like a decrease in balance and over rotation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fischermh View Post
My interpretation of your comments is that you let the skis come passively to the fall line. This will occur when the skis are flat, in the float portion of the turn.
Oh no, not at all. The movements I'm demonstrating are not a classic pivot where the redirection is done with a flat ski.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fischermh View Post
Why should an active redirection during the float be avoided? I like and apply your school of skiing, but it would seem to me that along with pulling the feet back, actively redirecting the skis would not result in a loss of speed. I think it probably is a good tool for a racer to have in his bag of tricks.
Its simply not required for most cases. Sure, a racer may need to throw his skis around because he got late. Not a big deal. But its probably not a technique he's using as the primary method of staying in the course (unless he's late on every gate).

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensMan View Post
If you are talking about drills described in HH books, yes, have tried those drills. I have no idea if I performed them correctly though. Please do not tell me that "passive redirection" caused by the force (or allowed to be there) as in 1-2 footed release drill, that is not good enough explanation for me.

Can you please answer the question I asked above? If you can not or do not want to answer here because of some reason that is fine too.
The quoted text explains those forces better than I can. I'm sorry, but I just don't know how else to say it.
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 › Max's answer to Skidude's questions