or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Parallel tracks? - Page 3

Quote:
 Particularly for those who do not have the skill to manage their skis this accurately. Can you?
Really, Whygimf--what brought that on? Is there a point you're trying to make?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Rick Unless you're maintaining equidiistant track separation from apex to apex, and through the transition,,, then something is being done to widen the separation from transition to apex, and narrow it from apex to transition. You can ski into it, by letting the skis diverge and converge on non-parallel tracks,,, or you can keep the skis parallel and drag and push the inside ski laterallyto where you need it or want it to be. Question: Which one do great skiers do? A) Diverge/Converge B) Drag/Push Answer: Yes.
Correct me if Im wrong but is there not two main ways to diverge/converge ski trax. One would be to diverge trax as a result of inclination and tipping allowing for high edge angles and then converge them when de-tipping while skis placed firmly on the snow. The other would be to diverg the ski trax through out the turn so that maximum distance between skis on snow would be at transition. The outside ski whould then be picked up off the snow when relesed and placed back on snow closed to the other ski at slight angle ready for diverging through the next turn. In the first case diverging/converging would be used in order to reach higher edge angles. In the second case diverging/converging would be used in order to make the inside ski turn tighter due to shorter r and less pressure.

Indeed.

The narrowing and widening of tracks (as a result of both arcs being identical) are not brought about necessarily by and intentional diverging nor converging of the skiers feet/boots/skis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Rick Unless you're maintaining equidiistant track separation from apex to apex, and through the transition,,, then something is being done to widen the separation from transition to apex, and narrow it from apex to transition. You can ski into it, by letting the skis diverge and converge on non-parallel tracks,,, or you can keep the skis parallel and drag and push the inside ski laterallyto where you need it or want it to be. Question: Which one do great skiers do? A) Diverge/Converge B) Drag/Push Answer: Yes.
Correct me if Im wrong but is there not two main ways to diverge/converge ski trax. One would be to diverge trax as a result of inclination and tipping allowing for high edge angles and then converge them when de-tipping while skis placed firmly on the snow. The other would be to diverg the ski trax through out the turn so that maximum distance between skis on snow would be at transition. The outside ski whould then be picked up off the snow when relesed and placed back on snow closed to the other ski at slight angle ready for diverging through the next turn. In the first case diverging/converging would be used in order to reach higher edge angles. In the second case diverging/converging would be used in order to make the inside ski turn tighter due to shorter r and less pressure.

Yeah, there are a number of ways by which divergence/convergence can occur.  One way it can't is via simltaneous foot tipping starting from parallel skis during the transition, when both skis are carving cleanly.  That only gets you convergence and crossing.

If the legs are contorted such that they become bow legged during the transition, and the inside ski begins arcing first, then it can track into a clean divergence/convergence.  This would be divergence by means of sequencial tipping, and it's not the norm of how it's accomplished.  Manual adjustment at transition is more common.

Edited by Rick - Sun, 01 Feb 09 01:23:05 GMT

I think we have to be very careful here when we use the terms "diverging" and "converging".

Do we mean tracks that are going wider and narrower,

or do we mean that both skis are diverging (ie: both skis are pointing in different directions relative to each other), sometimes known as "scissoring".

These two scenarios are completely different.

Rick,

Divergence can be caused just by putting too much weight on the inside ski.  Or, not enough weight on the outside ski.  That way, the outside ski tracks straighter than the inside ski.

Huh? How do the tracks stay parallel if the skis don't? The term is being taken too literally when we need to add modifiers like almost, or exactly. As was demonstrated earlier the tracks get wider and narrower. For that to happen they are not staying parallel, neither are the skis.

Edited by justanotherskipro - Tue, 03 Feb 09 13:45:55 GMT

IMO the term "skiing parallel" means not wedging or stemming.  It has nothing at all to do with the tracks you leave when skiing parallel.

What do you call skidding turns with the feet glued together holding the skis parallel if not "skiing parallel"?

BigE, I think my definition of skiing parallel would be any time the skier is NOT using both BTE's at the same time.

E, my point exactly. Those who take things beyond that simple idea are overthinking the idea.

Let's get down to it....   WWBD?  WWHD?  WWSD? ( Bode, Hermann, Svindal)

Do you think the top guys and gals on the WC really worry about whether they hold parallel tracks?

Sure it looks pretty to leave these tracks, and no doubt it impresses the neophytes on the chairlift. But this whole concept also has begun to perpetuate another myth upon the skiing public. That skiing this two footed is a real goal to be acheived.

Other than as a means by which to judge specific manuevers being evaluated at an exam or such, then what is the purpose of this discussion??

This is merely an indicator of some characteristics of some turns, but it should not become the overriding goal in a persons skiing. I think you guys are making way too much of this idea!

Parallel tracks are merely one of the evaluative tools which can be used to determine whether OTHER aspects of your technique is working, By themselves, they do not truly nor fully indicate whether you are skiing well.

Edited by vail snopro - Thu, 05 Feb 09 12:47:04 GMT
Quote:
Originally Posted by vail snopro

Other than as a means by which to judge specific manuevers being evaluated at an exam or such, then what is the purpose of this discussion?

Do you look at that in an exam?

I would definitely be interested in knowing which specific manuevers, particularly in an exam, need to show equidistant ski tracks as a sign of competency.

Duuuh!

Medium Radius Carved Turns (in Rky Mtn)

But again, I ask- Why do so many skiers seem to think this is important?  Learn to ski well, then you can make the inside ski track look like anything you want!

Quote:
Originally Posted by vail snopro

Do you think the top guys and gals on the WC really worry about whether they hold parallel tracks?

If they are most of them are dropping the ball

The more you are pushing the turn radius of your skis while cranking out RR-trax the more difficult it becomes to keep them parallel even if you try your best. Narrowing your stance and keeping the turn radius kind of large makes it easier. What is quite shocking is that when you look back at your own tracks they look much more narrow than what you expected.

vail nopro, is there any exam where trax have to diverg and converg?

deleted

Edited by BigE - Fri, 06 Feb 09 20:06:24 GMT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
Quote:
Originally Posted by vail snopro

Do you think the top guys and gals on the WC really worry about whether they hold parallel tracks?

If they are most of them are dropping the ball

You mean the one they are holding between their boots?

Golly, let's see...

If I were to stand heavily on my tipped inside ski (railed) while wedging and bracing against my skidding outside ski ... so long as the smeared track left by that outside ski was essentially parallel to the track of my inside ski... I'd be skiing really good, right.?

.ma

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching