MA for Dawgcatching - Page 2

I was the same way when I got filmed many years ago in a college ski camp. The coaches gave me hell for skiing too "seriously" in front of the camera.

lol. I hear ya Dawg. I would start with the supporters section of Epic. It was discussed to death by some of the best minds there. But unfortunately I can't think of a single thread that will give you a quick summary. You're just gonna have to dig and pay attention to threads on here over time that discuss it. FWIW, OLR is one area where PMTS really shines, I'm surprised Max didn't offer any info to you about it when you were out skiing with him, but sounds like Max was a little in awe.

You more or less have the right idea about OLR. By relaxing/releasing the old outside leg, that causes your balance to be upset which starts a movement of your CoM across. Basically, before that moment, there are G forces acting on you which you are holding back with your outside leg and when you relax that leg sufficiently(which causes you to stand on the other leg I might add), then the G forces are released and your CoM still start to topple right across, sometimes quite dramatically and it really doesn't take any ILE at all to make it happen. ILE has its place, not to push across, but for other reasons.

Yes OLR can be combined with a bit of ILE, but be careful that the ILE does not become an up unweight or a push across. You should focus on OLR for a while IMHO. focus on getting your body parts OUT OF THE WAY so that the laws of physics take you right where you want to be with no effort on your own. You are an instinctual skier with a natural feel...I know you gotta just feel it and than it will snap on like a light bulb for you.

my local hill has 250 vert, so its easy to be jealous.
we often say "michigan powder, all the way up to your edges". sadly, that is often ice shavings, not new snow....

on the other hand, skiing bad conditions well (as you did) is a sign of a strong/adaptable skier

Great skiing Scott!!!

One thing that I see missing from most definitions of the OLR, is the tipping effort at the feet. Without this effort, the OLR is presented simply as a way to get the hip inside to make edge angles.

IMO, this is "cart before the horse" territory. To my thinking, the body moves inside to balance against a turning ski. That means the ski is already turning, so, it's already on edge and pressured.

The way that OLR is described as a "toppling" necessarily makes the pressue decrease in the upper half of the turn. But, isn't the goal to maintain or create pressue in the upper half of the turn? This can be done if you can linger at neutral for a moment.

Perhaps just the time it takes you to recenter? That brief foray into neutral will provide the pressure at the top of the turn that OLR as I've seen described does not. Again, simply relaxing the outside leg is NOT enough. To me, that is a drill, and just one part of the movements at transition.

BTW: Nice skiing Dawg! BTS made all the points I thought necessary, except for perhaps establishing a solid neutral. (This got sidetracked into making a longer transition.) IMO, Making neutral a stronger and more evident part of the turn will give much of the improvent BTS is after.

BTS, please correct me if I'm wrong here.

Cheers!

I don't know about you guys, but I find that OLR without ILE is a bit like jelly without the peanut butter. It just don't stick.

I tend to agree somewhat Nolo. I prefer to combine them. However, pure OLR is certainly a possibility as well and does work. I feel that many skiers are unfamiliar with the feeling of OLR. They use ILE or even stronger, pushing movements to transition and don't utilize enough OLR or even know how to use it. That is one reason why its such an important skill to develop.

Its important to understand that ILE is not about pushing yourself across. ILE is about slightly nudging yourself just a enough to get the balance point to change. Most of the CoM movement across should ideally come from G forces...NOT from pushing with your legs. One benefit of focusing on the OLR skill development is that you avoid pushing yourself across and are forced to harness the G forces to do it.

The reason I like to combine a little bit of ILE for more of an up and over transition, is because it allows me to remain in a bit more of a standing up stance instead of having my legs so bent at neutral. To me, that is just easier on the legs throughout the day. I also feel that the new stance ski remains a bit more connected with the snow by using a bit of ILE in combo with OLR. Extension also drives pronation. But using too much ILE can easily destroy the transition. It can also be confused with up unweighting and often is.

Now when I am going for more of a cross-under technique, then its almost all OLR.

Extension does drive pronation, but this notion does not imply that the extension ought to be the motive force of the transition.

nolo, OLR without momentum is substandard. ILE is a movement that can help provide the missing momentum, but is my no means required.

I'm not saying peanut butter and jelly is an absolute must, just saying that if you want to stick the turn use them both together.

While we are on the topic why use acronyms anyway? It's a military convention, and Soviet military at that. Why not just say "progressively unload your inside leg, suck it up, and tip it over" and "progressively extend your outside leg so it's longest at the apex of the turn." I always thought the O and the I were mixed up too. I think it makes better sense to say the inside leg relaxes and the outside leg extends. Just my pecadillo, I suppose.

Did Ericreally tell you to lift your foot to help initiate the new turn?

As BigE rightly stated, the large leg extension you are referring to above is AFTER transition, not during. That large movement of extension is not used as a force to move your CoM across. My bad for mentioning pronation, which is more relevant after the transition is pretty much over. But during transition, which is what we're talking about with Dawg, ILE is used as a means to tilt the balance.

Likewise, above you described a gradual flexing of the new inside leg as your turn progresses. That's fine, but that is not the transition. The transition is what we're talking about with Dawg.

I agree, BTS, that Dawg needs to get out of the old turn and into the new in a simpler fashion than he does in this video clip. There are a few turns where his outside ski is hanging onto the old turn while his inside ski is tipping toward the new turn. A more active release of his old outside ski would serve him well, as would a more linear pole swing toward the new turn, to get his upper body moving toward the new turn as well. As it is, with a circular pole swing and outside ski hanging onto the inside edge, he is blocking entry to the new turn by delaying transitional movements.

EricD lifts his inside ski and Dan Egan throws in a little stem--so what? They can ski anything really, really well, and really, really fast. It's really something to see. (As I guess we all can if we can snag an old Warren Miller vid...)

It is not required to use both to stick a turn. A turn can be "stuck" with pure OLR just as it can with pure ILE.

IMO, using acronyms like OLR and ILE takes less typing and is more accurate.... YMMV.

I see that OLR and ILE are being misunderstood. Those releases are used at turn "completion";"completion" means "the CM is released from it's arc".

OLR does not refer to any arbitrary shortening of the outside leg, while ILE does not refer to any arbitraty lengthening of the inside leg. What you wrote as a progressive unloading and progressing extension is neither OLR nor ILE., because while progressively flexing and extending the legs, the CM is not being released.

I understand what you are saying, BigE. However, movements that start the transition culminate later, and that's where I see communication problems arising regarding the O and the I, similar to when we talked about the skis being uphill and downhill.

YMMV? We're trying to communicate here. Acronyms do not help unless you first establish the acronym in the context of a discussion. I think that the use of insider jargon is a source of heartburn for many more than just myself around here. (I assume you are saying "your mileage may vary" as an analogy for "your understanding may differ" but I submit it does not lend clarity to the message.)

I should have stuck in a smiley after YMMV. Acronyms are pervasive on internet forums. I think they do help to make shortcuts, when the terms are understood.

I really thought OLR and ILE were well established movement patterns.

Am I mistaken?

They are fairly well known among long time members of epicski, but we get thousands of new visitors every day who may be puzzled by the notion of extending the inside leg and or relaxing the outside leg to start a new turn without the tutorial to support the nomenclature. We are talking about a new turn and old roles (inside/outside), which is a kind of diction problem as I see it.

The same holds true for any jargon. The problem is impossible to rectify without a glossary. Unfortunately, the past attempt could not even decide on the definition of a single word.

I think that presents a bigger problem. The new visitor would be hard pressed to understand a LOT of words given their meanings are so plastic.

There is no easy fix here. The OLR/ILE concepts cannot really be bottled up into a simple buzzword. There is a lot to them that require study. I used the acronym of OLR precisely so that Dawg could search the forum and find loads of info regarding this topic.

IMHO, almost everyone does. we tend to over analyze what we are doing to ski our best but the when the fluidity is loss, the skiing doesn't look as smooth or relaxed. I know that happens to me.