New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WC coach's perspective - Page 5

post #121 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post
In the 'real world' a clean line that doesn't scrub speed will be faster than a shorter, more direct line that causes mistakes and recoveries.
And, making contact with the gate too close to the snow is slow. "Boot topping" tangles the feet, but even when going arc to arc it is slower due to the dramatic flex resistance of the gate when contacting the gate on the boot tongues.

So no, I do not think the rule in SL is to get as close to the gates as you dare.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post
The discussion started talking about WC skiers technique, it's a subject that has zero connection to what normal skiers SHOULD do. What they do to gain .001 sec. doesn't have a connection to recreational skiing.
Well put.
post #122 of 138
A-man, definately what happens between the gates makes more difference than how close you pass to the gate. But all things being equal, generally, the shorter distance the CM travels out of the falline, the faster the racer will go. I think we're all in agreement with that basic idea.

A-man's original point in bringing up the slalom issue is that the body can move inside the gate in that event, so the feet close to the gate can be an advantage there. Right on.

Whiteroom, you nailed the crux of trying to get tight on the pole. It opens the door for greater risk of mistake, and time loss or DNF (hooking, etc.) because of it.

Whygimf you make a reasonable observation too,,, that the gate is more resistant when trying to clear it at boot level. Watch little guys clearing gates, and you can sometimes actually see them slow down at impact, even with arm clearing. So yeah, that has to be considered too. Though some of that negative can be overcome by starting the clearing process with the hand before the boot reaches the gate.

http://ronlemaster.com/images/2006-2007-B/slides/stiegler-aare-2006-sl-2.html

The other related issue is stance width, and how that can affect CM travel, and thus speed through the course. Anyone feel free to explain that. Then perhaps we can see if we can pull this back to how all this relates to the thread.
post #123 of 138
I'm not sure where you're going with the stance width question as it relates to the recent discussion about fastest line. I give up.
post #124 of 138
Suspect Rick is talking about horizontal separation vs. vertical separation. Excessive horizontal separation limits how far CoM can be inside of a turn, thus forcing it to travel a longer path. i.e. impacts inclination
post #125 of 138
Great thread. I wish that I came in earlier. Getting back to going fast in SL. Watching a FIS with their ski team Jr. athletes, the coaches really stress initiating the SL turns early. Getting late on SL is very hard to recover. Getting tight to the gate is a great idea, but it can lead to complications. Initiating early turns and getting on the inside ski is something that j3 + racers work on.

Most recreational skiers do not have the muscle memory, technique, and clear mental picture to make such aggressive turns. I guess recreational skiers might want to concentrate on initiating the turn at the fall-line (getting on the inside edge) and carving at the apex of the turn. Still, this is harder than it appears. cmr
post #126 of 138
Wouldn't that wide stance allow a quicker move to the new edge because the hips don't need to move as far to get inside the new outside ski's inside edge? Or should we say that the outside ski doesn't need to travel as far away from the skiers mass. Look how straight a line Resi's CoM travels in the photo sequence moving towards the second gate versus the first gate in Ricks last post. then compare the width of her feet in both transitions. I could be all wet, but then again maybe not.
post #127 of 138
Wider stance combined with properly executed inclination allows to get more edge, thus potentially speeding up the skier.

cfr
post #128 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfr View Post
Wider stance combined with properly executed inclination allows to get more edge, thus potentially speeding up the skier.

cfr
Higher edge angle = smaller radius turn. Too much edge is slower not faster.
post #129 of 138
My guess is that a stance of proper width allows more inclination earlier in the turn allowing a straighter path of CoM. too narrow with inclination causes leaning in.
post #130 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB View Post
Wouldn't that wide stance allow a quicker move to the new edge because the hips don't need to move as far to get inside the new outside ski's inside edge? Or should we say that the outside ski doesn't need to travel as far away from the skiers mass. Look how straight a line Resi's CoM travels in the photo sequence moving towards the second gate versus the first gate in Ricks last post. then compare the width of her feet in both transitions. I could be all wet, but then again maybe not.
Probably important to differentiate between SL and GS. Resi's transition in Rick's last post is more of a stepped wide stance to gain a much needed higher line on the second gate. Her line on the first gate was carrying her too low for the second.

If I recall correctly, Rick initiated this line of logic with a specific reference to GS, where transitons and gate pass are significantly different than SL. Also GS involves greater course speeds and greater offset in gates - i.e. greater need for CoM to be further inside (generally) than SL to counteract forces. If the transition is ILE, then the distance the CoM has to move over the old outside leg ingreases or is impeeded f the stance is exceptionally wide. However, if the transition is cross-under and the stance a little wider, then yes the CoM travels less.

Not really sure where Rick is going with this .. just guessing.
post #131 of 138
The only thing I can think of at the moment is that if the stance is narrower, then Com has to pendulum up and over with ILE, and even with OLR, the outside leg has to be completey relaxed in order to get out of the way of the COM and allow it to keep falling down the hill. If the stance is wider, then the COM is already at the top of the pendulum more or less and only has to keep falling down the hill.
post #132 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
Higher edge angle = smaller radius turn. Too much edge is slower not faster.
Not always Keep in mind, A-man, we are not talking about tucking straight line, it is about GS with gates that are offset and skier needs to clear them all and not only 2 or 3 of them :. Keeping edges low will result in turn initiation delay and eventually skier will be late to clear the gate.

Another advantage of the higher edge angle is acceleration of the ski - skis travel longer pass than COM (with appropriate to the pitch/speed/turn radius inclination), thus skis have to go faster to keep up with COM. This results in "sitting on the tails" effect at the end of the phase III, which with proper fore/aft re-balancing gives the skier an advantage.

Please do not get me wrong - the above is not true for all gates/pitches combination and needs to be taken in a contest.

However for majority of offset gates we want to let our COM travel straighter line than the skis as much as possible. This requires inclination - angulation, or inclination with angulation for that matter will make COM to travel longer line since COM will move towards outside ski. In order to achieve maximum inclination (for a given speed/pitch/radius) stance needs to be wider.

I think modern WC skiers demonstrate it very well - in old times with straighter skis and great deal of angulation the stance was much narrower than we see it today.

Great thread so far!

Cheers,

cfr.
post #133 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfr View Post
Not always Keep in mind, A-man, we are not talking about tucking straight line, it is about GS with gates that are offset and skier needs to clear them all and not only 2 or 3 of them :. Keeping edges low will result in turn initiation delay and eventually skier will be late to clear the gate.

Another advantage of the higher edge angle is acceleration of the ski - skis travel longer pass than COM (with appropriate to the pitch/speed/turn radius inclination), thus skis have to go faster to keep up with COM. This results in "sitting on the tails" effect at the end of the phase III, which with proper fore/aft re-balancing gives the skier an advantage.

Please do not get me wrong - the above is not true for all gates/pitches combination and needs to be taken in a contest.

However for majority of offset gates we want to let our COM travel straighter line than the skis as much as possible. This requires inclination - angulation, or inclination with angulation for that matter will make COM to travel longer line since COM will move towards outside ski. In order to achieve maximum inclination (for a given speed/pitch/radius) stance needs to be wider.

I think modern WC skiers demonstrate it very well - in old times with straighter skis and great deal of angulation the stance was much narrower than we see it today.

Great thread so far!

Cheers,
cfr.
The key is " with appropriate to the pitch/speed/turn radius inclination" I said TOO much edge is slower.

And: " In order to achieve maximum inclination (for a given speed/pitch/radius) stance needs to be wider."
post #134 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
The key is " with appropriate to the pitch/speed/turn radius inclination" I said TOO much edge is slower.

And: " In order to achieve maximum inclination (for a given speed/pitch/radius) stance needs to be wider."
Right on! Did not see your later post...
post #135 of 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfr View Post
Right on! Did not see your later post...
No, I was quoting your post except where i said, too much edge
post #136 of 138
Can we please differentiate between "stance" and "track width"? There is a huge difference. If you are saying a wide stance due to vertical separation, that is not what some of us consider a wide stance, it is merely wide ski track width due to vertical separation.

A wide "stance", particularly during transition, has nothing to do with inclination or vertical separation. In my view, "stance" should refer to how far apart your legs are from each other.
post #137 of 138
Yes, Medmarco, I was talking about horizontal stance width. Distance the feet are apart on the snow. In outside foot dominant skiing, balance is a relationship between the outside foot and the CM. The closer the outside foot is to the gate, the more the CM moves inside the gate, and the more direct route the CM can take down the slope.

Now that said, a minimum amount of horizontal separation is needed to allow for tipping,,, we only have a certain amount of control over this. The more you tip, the more separation required.

I'm sure some of you guys know and understand this. For those of you thinking, "what the **** is he talking about?",,, try the pencil demo. Stand two pencils on end on a table, side by side and touching each other. They represent your legs when skiing. Tip them to the side, keeping them together. Notice the outside pencil lifts off the table as you do. Slide that pencil down the other until it touches the table again. Notice how the points where they touch the table has now separated. The more you tip the farther the tips separate. That is the minimum separation needed to tip.

Now, with the pencils tipped, slide the outside one away from the inside one, while keeping them parallel to each other. This is a wide stance. The tip angle stays the same, but the pencils (legs) and the table contact points (feet) separate more. The more you move the outside pencil away from the inside pencil, the more the CM moves outside and lengthens it's route of travel down the slope.

I'll let that much settle in for now.
post #138 of 138
Back when the Mahres were racing Joubert wrote an article in SKI about how the inside ski has to clear the gate and the more horizontal separation the farther the outside ski was from the gate (increasing the distance it travels).
I like to talk about horizontal vs vertical separation as "daylight between the legs". Vertical has minimun daylight.
Obviously if there's vertical separation and lots of edge angle the tracks will be quite aways apart. (not much daylight though)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching