or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Moguls SHOULDNT make your legs burn
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Moguls SHOULDNT make your legs burn - Page 2

post #31 of 63

I think  to a certain extent, yes it will help. The stronger your quads are in general will give you more stamina and make it easier to recover, as well as stay in balance. Both in moguls and powder.

post #32 of 63

BW,

I would say in general the title is an overstatement. It overlooks the fact that any athletic activity done at a high intensity level requires a minimum level of fitness and fatigue happens at some point. Even to the best conditioned athletes. So while I agree that we need to use our core a lot, everything needs to work in concert to produce the desired outcome. If either fails the movements break down. A well designed training regimine would include strengthening both beyond the demands of the activity. In a perfect world both would reach fatigue simultaneously but that wouldn't happen out on the hill.

 

If I may BW, think about your model for a minute. Pulling the feet up is certainly happening but there is pressure coming up through the feet as well. So a more accurate model would need to include this as well. The walking down stairs model is a closer approximation to what is happening while skiing moguls. Lean backwards or squat lower as you walk down stairs and you will immediately notice the increased muscle usage in the legs, back, and abdominals. Not to mention how hard it is to get the body to move forward to the next stair. Imagine doing this on a 100 story stairway. Compare that to standing taller and allowing the body to move forward (down the stairs) as we walk down the stairs. Everything is working together to produce the movement and our effort is reduced because we aren't trying to stop our momentum on each stair.It's not an exact model but IMO the only model that would be exact is actually skiing moguls.

 

I would also say what we feel colors our perception and both concepts are just that our own unique perceptions of what's happening.

post #33 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars View Post

 

I think  to a certain extent, yes it will help. The stronger your quads are in general will give you more stamina and make it easier to recover, as well as stay in balance. Both in moguls and powder.

Leads me to ask what is core.  Some people mean abs when they say core.
 

 

Strong quads need strong hams and strength/fitness is best when it's broad in nature.  Aren't the quads really part of core strength, same with hams?

post #34 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post

 


 

Leads me to ask what is core.  Some people mean abs when they say core.
 

 

Strong quads need strong hams and strength/fitness is best when it's broad in nature.  Aren't the quads really part of core strength, same with hams?


 

Not really.  The "core" in sports medicine terms is comprised of basically all the muscles in your torso that stabilize the spine, hips and shoulders.  Movement sports that work your legs generally will work the "core" to varying degrees as well (same for exercises like squats).  The hamstrings do interact with the hips and back, but aren't really core muscles. 

 

And for most people the idea of focusing specifically on any of those muscles versus simply learning how to move is questionable at best. Though to compensate for bad technique like the "cuff neutral" advice often given out I can see why people feel the need to try something. 

 

post #35 of 63

I think so Paul. What is core anyhow? The major muscle groups that make up the basis of powerful skiing/ Or the major muscle groups that basically make up a healthy body?

 

sucessful mogul skiers need to be in very good condition. a big belly or top heavy body will most definitly show up in poor technique or at the very least, poor stamina. which is needed to link more than a dozen moguls and then pull up and rest. More often than not, it's not poor technique that makes a poor mogul skier. It's the out of shape body that prohibits them from advancing to the next level of comfort and technique. It's the same with tennis and most other recreational sports. Good skiing starts with good conditioning.

 

But, it all depends on how you perceive yourself as a mogul skier and the way you want to ski moguls. Do you just want to be able to ski moguls? Or do you want to ski them like a world cup competitor? I  also think a low center of gravity helps. Most real good mogul skiers are short. 5'9" and shorter. With the exception of a few. why? I don't know but it's a fact.

 

Core strength is key to all good atheletes. You can't be a slob and become the skier you wish to be.

post #36 of 63

^^^^^

 

I'm no anatomy expert, but I do believe the gluds and quads are connected to the pelvis.  All meet at or very near the base of the spine (aka core).  I don't really know, I just ski sometimes..

post #37 of 63

For any innocents reading this, I'd urge them to google core strength and core muscles to get  good workable definitions, since it seems we are in the midst of some Epic redefinitions on here that don't relate to the rest of the world and would hinder comprehension of these terms the way the rest of the world uses them.   

 

 

post #38 of 63

Ok "Doc"

 

Top of list for "core strength" according to mr google:

 

Core Training - Good Core Training Takes More Than Ab Exercises

Building core muscle strength requires more than just ab exercises

What are the Core Muscles?

 

Gluts and hamstrings appear included

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/abdominalcorestrength1/a/NewCore.htm

post #39 of 63

Click on the definition of "hamstring group" in that list, it links to a wiki itself.  Basically you'll see that some (not all) of the hamstring muscles interact with the hip, which I already noted in my prior post.  The wikipedia entry for core muscle you likewise might find helpful, it includes glutes along with a couple other muscles as "minor" core muscles, but not hamstrings.  If after looking at it you think hams are "true" core muscles, fine (the back of the knee also interacts indirectly with the hip, but "core?"...not really)  but I wouldn't tell people they're the secret to core training though because in common usage that would be very misleading.  "Minor" core? As I noted, they do interact with hips, to each their own.

 

But google away, knowledge is good.  (BTW, I never said anything about glutes, one way or the other; in point of fact they're in a half-way point since you, not me, are raising them as an issue.)

 

In the same spirit, people interested in actual good mogul skiing should google for mogul skiing info and forums.  They'll get some good data points to reflect on along with the cuff-neutral advice on here.


Edited by CTKook - 3/14/2009 at 02:35 am
post #40 of 63

You know, after all the years of mogul skiing discussions here at Epic Ski, and there's been some great ones, it really doesn't matter how much you know or understand about proper technique and how to relate what you know to what you're doing on skis while trying to negotiate a mogul field. Or whether you ski the zipperline or criss/cross through them carving or skidding them. It takes alot of practice and trial and error, much frustration, falls and embarassment before you can ski them and feel like you can ski them.

 

and the bottom line is, if you aren't in shape, it doesn't matter what you know, or what kind of skis are on your feet. Cause it ain't gonna happen. If you're out of shape, you won't be able to hide it.

post #41 of 63
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars View Post

 

You know, after all the years of mogul skiing discussions here at Epic Ski, and there's been some great ones, it really doesn't matter how much you know or understand about proper technique and how to relate what you know to what you're doing on skis while trying to negotiate a mogul field. Or whether you ski the zipperline or criss/cross through them carving or skidding them. It takes alot of practice and trial and error, much frustration, falls and embarassment before you can ski them and feel like you can ski them.

 

and the bottom line is, if you aren't in shape, it doesn't matter what you know, or what kind of skis are on your feet. Cause it ain't gonna happen. If you're out of shape, you won't be able to hide it.

 

 

quoted for truth well except for Pasucks he is quite out of shape and cna still ski bumps better than alot of people. He would agree with that as well.

 

and to be honest I want this discussion to keep going but Ill be up front with the original post. Its was a half lie to try to a tell a greater truth.

 

its still great in theory and as lars can tell you I can ski moguls so I might have a slight clue on what it really takes.

post #42 of 63

Lots of good bump skiers out there I wouldn't really want to see in a bathing suit.  Just like there are lots of good tennis players who smoke and are generally in lousy shape.  But they're still good players at the local club because they can play. 

 

It's a technique sport.  If you can't link more than a dozen turns, you know which way to look. 

 

 

post #43 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

 

 

 

 

...well except for Pasucks he is quite out of shape and cna still ski bumps better than alot of people....


 

Exactly, technique.  There are pro tennis players who smoke, same principles (and sometimes behavior) apply.  (They'd be better if they didn't smoke, obviously, it's not darts either.)

post #44 of 63

Interesting perspective here that shifts me the other way a bit.  I'll take a somewhat out of shape skier that used to be a very good bump skier over a level 7-8 skier in fantastic shape every time. It would be the skiing version of the tortuis (guy in shape) and the hare (guy that used to be but still knows how to ski bumps).  Old guy skis halfway down and rests while the young guy hacks along, catches up and passes him.  Then old guy pushes off and zips on by to be waiting for young guy at the lift.

 

I'm with Lars where when learning, being in shape helps a bit more than having the greatest coach in the world, though the greatest coach in the world will first make sure his kids are in shape before fine tuning the techniques.

post #45 of 63

I'll vouch for BW in PA as a fine bumper as I'm sure he will return the favor. Although, I'll admit to being 58 years old and not being the slammer I used to be. I can still hang with the best but just not as long. But here's a fact. I'm actually skiing better than I was a few years ago because I weigh about 25 lbs. less. The older I get the more important it is for me to keep the weight off and maintain muscle mass. It goes a long way to as I say keep up with kids like BWIPA. as we had a blast this past January. My lower body has always been solid. I attribute that to years of Semi Pro Hockey.

 

I do know some guys who are overweight and not in the best of condition that still rip bumps. Technique does count for some compensation factor as far as looking like you belong in the moguls. As much as they say they still got it, while sucking for air, imagine how much better they'd be if they were in shape? A big upper body just adds to fatigue reguardless of how smooth you are. Skiers with a low center of gravity make it look easier no doubt. You don't see many really tall good bump skiers. They're mostly little guys with big thighs, strong gluts and abs of steel. There are a few exceptions.

 

Flawless technique will get you by most of the time, but being out of shape and in poor condition will handicap you reguardless whether it's mogul skiing, golf, tennis, and just walking to the mail box. That's a fact.

post #46 of 63


 

Quote:
 

its still great in theory and as lars can tell you I can ski moguls so I might have a slight clue on what it really takes.


 

omg, bwpa, Skiing well and understanding it do not necessarily go hand in hand.

 

post #47 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook View Post

 

The wikipedia entry for core muscle you likewise might find helpful, it includes glutes along with a couple other muscles as "minor" core muscles, but not hamstrings.  If after looking at it you think hams are "true" core muscles, fine (the back of the knee also interacts indirectly with the hip, but "core?"...not really)  but I wouldn't tell people they're the secret to core training though because in common usage that would be very misleading.  "Minor" core? As I noted, they do interact with hips, to each their own.

 

I am no expert, but there is no doubt that the quads attach to the hips, do a sit up (not a crunch) and you will be able to feel them.  And the Gluts stabilize the hips in the back.  These two powerful muscle are, again in my opinion, a big part of core strength.  I don't care what Wikipedia says.  As a matter of fact, you can't have effective (functional) core strength without quads and hams.  This is especially true for skiers.

 

As far as good skiing is concerned.  I have noticed that many a good bumper could be categorized as not  great skiers.  Good bump technique can let a skier get away with a lot.  That's not to say that I wouldn't want, what some of them have.  Of course my judgment is from a different mind set.  Wiper blades are not my idea of skiing, but then again, these guys fly down the nasty lines, wide spaced bumps, ice and everything else.  They must have something going.

post #48 of 63

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

 



If I may BW, think about your model for a minute. Pulling the feet up is certainly happening but there is pressure coming up through the feet as well. So a more accurate model would need to include this as well. The walking down stairs model is a closer approximation to what is happening while skiing moguls. Lean backwards or squat lower as you walk down stairs and you will immediately notice the increased muscle usage in the legs, back, and abdominals. Not to mention how hard it is to get the body to move forward to the next stair. Imagine doing this on a 100 story stairway. Compare that to standing taller and allowing the body to move forward (down the stairs) as we walk down the stairs. Everything is working together to produce the movement and our effort is reduced because we aren't trying to stop our momentum on each stair.It's not an exact model but IMO the only model that would be exact is actually skiing moguls.

 

I would also say what we feel colors our perception and both concepts are just that our own unique perceptions of what's happening.

So if you perfectly timed your retraction/absorption for each bump, would it then be almost effortless?

That would assume your retraction is happening at the exact rate that the bump is pushing the feet up.

Thus, for non - leg burning bump skiing timing is everything.

For timing, the eyes are very important - seeing the next turn/s , planing and timing them.

Therefore, your legs shouldn't burn if you've got good 'eyes', timing and skills.

It's unlikely you'd develop all of the above without strong quads and core.

All of this is also not including the muscle effort to steer the skis.  I suppose if that's perfectly timed it shouldn't take that much energy either as the bumps will push them.

 

The problem is that most of this assumes consistent bumps - or the amazing ability to see the shapes of the bumps ahead and coordinate the muscular response.

So now we're back to the eyes and brain.

post #49 of 63

edit:  this was replying to Paul Jones, didn't realize Tog had posted in-between:

 

Dude, check your anatomy.  "A" quad attaches to the hips and is involved in hip flexion, the rest attach to the femur.  So, even on the list attached by crgildart, which if you read it is aiming to show both "major" core muscles and also "minor" muscles that have anything to do with the hips, etc., only one of the quads is listed.  That part of the quads, in common usage, is generally not considered part of the "core," and in fact overworking it during hip flexion is considered one sign of "core" problems.  Does that mean the "About" list was incorrect?  No.  You just need to understand the context.  (I actually had meant to insert the link to it along with the wikipedia and a couple others in the post where I suggested people google on this point, but the new site currently isn't letting me link anymore.) 

 

Now: bump skiing.  Who here thought people were referring to situps or front planks when they were talking about training the quads to deal better with bumps, or powder?  I sure didn't think so.  Maybe I'm stupid, but I thought they meant squats, leg extensions, maybe bike riding, maybe wall-sits, to help deal with being backseat.  So they're not even targeting the one aspect of the quads that does interact with the hips. 

 

Bumps again:  is hip flexion a major problem in bumps?  Barring some skier-specific physical issues, no.  There is this thing called the bump that helps a lot in generating flexion if you absorb it.  Most people on here don't absorb in bumps, but that's a technique issue.  Do your abs, back, even lats and traps, get worked in bumps?  You bet. 

 

Functional strength: the more I here that term the less I know what it is.  You are totally correct that without quads and hams you're sit-skiing (though you'll still be using your core to ski, and some of those athletes have impressive cores).  If you said those two are a big part of most types of "athletic performance," you'd be 100% correct. 

 

"Good bump technique can let a skier get away with a lot."  Well, bumps are a very forgiving environment, that's true.  Much less likely to demand good fundamentals than groomers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

post #50 of 63

Got to dissagree with your last paragraph CT. In fact, I think it's just the opposite. Bumps are less forgiving. Unlike free skiing or free carving, bumps are more like a race course. They demand you to turn. They demand you to pole plant. They demand you to absorb and extend. They demand you to make many, many more turns in a much shorter space. They demand you to chose a line of attack. They demand you to use a variety of pivots, edge sets, carves, scarves. They demand you to be in perfect position over your skis. Any one break down and you'll need to pull out your bag of tricks to recover or go over the handle bars, runnawaytruckin, or have to bail out and pull up. If you're lucky, the later will happen.

 

Even hackers can survive a groomer without face planting.

 

I do agree with you take on muscles though.

post #51 of 63

Hey, you want to know what's forgiving? skiing moguls this time of year. It was 50 degrees here yesterday and the slush bumps at the Valley were fantastic.

 

nothing like skiing moguls in a long sleeve shirt and fleece vest. The bumps just exploded when you hit them.

 

The beer was good too.

post #52 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook View Post

 

 

 That part of the quads, in common usage, is generally not considered part of the "core," and in fact overworking it during hip flexion is considered one sign of "core" problems.  

 

 

What ever, so lets see you muscle out of the backseat with your quads detached from the hip.  No matter how you look at it, core and legs blend when it comes to skiing.  To suggest that the quads role in hip flexion is minor would be false, IMHO, when it comes to skiing.  My point, the relationship between gluts, hip flexors, quads, hams and "core" (as you define) - they rely on each other.  That is part of functional strength, avoiding imbalance and developing the full muscle group.
 

 

Back to OP:  BWPA's point is that the core should do the work of the quads (as I understand it), the core's main role is to stabilize and correct when needed.  It's an important role that holds your technique together.  It helps with upper body alignment.  But at the end of the day, whats going to feel the pain? 

post #53 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

 

 

So if you perfectly timed your retraction/absorption for each bump, would it then be almost effortless?

That would assume your retraction is happening at the exact rate that the bump is pushing the feet up.

Thus, for non - leg burning bump skiing timing is everything.

For timing, the eyes are very important - seeing the next turn/s , planing and timing them.

Therefore, your legs shouldn't burn if you've got good 'eyes', timing and skills.

It's unlikely you'd develop all of the above without strong quads and core.

All of this is also not including the muscle effort to steer the skis.  I suppose if that's perfectly timed it shouldn't take that much energy either as the bumps will push them.

 

The problem is that most of this assumes consistent bumps - or the amazing ability to see the shapes of the bumps ahead and coordinate the muscular response.

So now we're back to the eyes and brain.

The problem with theoretical "perfection" is that it doesn't exist anywhere but in a theoretical situation. Like Lars pointed out the constantly changing snow surface and the size and shape of the moguls is so variable that our ability to be so exact in that environment is questionable. Even the best in the world cannot predict exactly how the snow-pack will react to us skiing across it. This is why we need to be capable of adjusting our technique on the fly. It really is the same as a race course, I coached my kids to approach the course with the idea that whoever made the fewest mistakes (had the cleanest run) would win. Telling them to go out and have a perfect run is just setting them up for disappointment and failure because they cannot achieve that goal. Perfection and the idea of absolutes don't apply in most real world athletic situations like skiing moguls. Minor mistakes and corrective adjustments are a large part of skiing moguls. The ability to make those adjustments is what seperates the good from the not so good.
 


Edited by justanotherskipro - 3/15/2009 at 01:20 pm
post #54 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars View Post

 

Got to dissagree with your last paragraph CT. In fact, I think it's just the opposite. Bumps are less forgiving. Unlike free skiing or free carving, bumps are more like a race course. They demand you to turn. They demand you to pole plant. They demand you to absorb and extend. They demand you to make many, many more turns in a much shorter space. They demand you to chose a line of attack. They demand you to use a variety of pivots, edge sets, carves, scarves. They demand you to be in perfect position over your skis. Any one break down and you'll need to pull out your bag of tricks to recover or go over the handle bars, runnawaytruckin, or have to bail out and pull up. If you're lucky, the later will happen.

 

Even hackers can survive a groomer without face planting.

 

I do agree with you take on muscles though.

 Absolutley!  I have often preached that the ability to ski icy moguls is the true test of great ski technique, one of the most difficult conditions to ski well.
 

Pierre, where are you?

JF

post #55 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars View Post

 

Even hackers can survive a groomer without face planting.

 

 


 

When I go to Killington, I see a lot of bumpers who slip/slid their way down - fast.  They look like hackers, but they can ski bumps.  Not my style but seriously... ski flat, bump to bump and let 'em rip.  I doubt they even know the ski has an edge.

post #56 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post

 


 


 

When I go to Killington, I see a lot of bumpers who slip/slid their way down - fast.  They look like hackers, but they can ski bumps.  Not my style but seriously... ski flat, bump to bump and let 'em rip.  I doubt they even know the ski has an edge.

I have seen the same thing, but it doesn't work too well when they are icy.
 

JF

post #57 of 63

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post
 

The problem with theoretical "perfection" is that it doesn't exist anywhere but in a theoretical situation. Like Lars pointed out the constantly changing snow surface and the size and shape of the moguls is so variable that our ability to be so exact in that environment is questionable. Even the best in the world cannot predict exactly how the snow-pack will react to us skiing across it. This is why we need to be capable of adjusting our technique on the fly.

 

It really is the same as a race course, I coached my kids to approach the course with the idea that whoever made the fewest mistakes (had the cleanest run) would win. Telling them to go out and have a perfect run is just setting them up for disappointment and failure because they cannot achieve that goal. Perfection and the idea of absolutes don't apply in most real world athletic situations like skiing moguls. Minor mistakes and corrective adjustments are a large part of skiing moguls. The ability to make those adjustments is what seperates the good from the not so good.

I was trying to make that point to some people today as they often would get upset for really very minor errors.  Besides the many tips about mogul skiing people pick up are the myths like if you're good in moguls every turn is great or at least what you want.  The thing is in moguls if you're still thinking about the turn you just made, you've already blown the next one.

 

Back to the OP and question:

If one sits on a counter and lifts their legs with 15 pound weights on each foot to represent the ski/boot how long would it take before the legs are burning?  Then you've actually got to steer the skis where you want which takes muscular force too.

post #58 of 63


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

 

 

I was trying to make that point to some people today as they often would get upset for really very minor errors.  Besides the many tips about mogul skiing people pick up are the myths like if you're good in moguls every turn is great or at least what you want.  The thing is in moguls if you're still thinking about the turn you just made, you've already blown the next one.

 

Back to the OP and question:

If one sits on a counter and lifts their legs with 15 pound weights on each foot to represent the ski/boot how long would it take before the legs are burning?  Then you've actually got to steer the skis where you want which takes muscular force too.

It's always been my opinion that boots and skis don't weigh anything when you're skiing on them. Weight only counts when you are carrying them to the locker room.
 

 

And, I'm sorry, but after pounding slush bumps for the past two days, my thighs do burn. So that theory's out. My legs didn't have much spring in them walking up the stairs to the parking lot today. And it wasn't because of poor technique. Or because I'm 58. It's because I had a freakin blast the past two days with the crazy canucks.

 

Ok, a point here. If you have to think about what you're doing every turn whether it's mogul skiing, or carving, you're lost. Unless you are in the early learning phase. In that case even then you can be over thinking, and the need is to just ski. Know what I mean? And every turn in moguls isn't great. Cause every turn is different unless you happen to be in competition mogul courses.

 

the bump lines today were changed so much from yesterday it wasn't funny. And they continued to change throughout the day. As all ski runs do no matter if they are moguls or grroomers. Much as 12" of powder does the more it's skied over the course of a few hours. Tody, the nice handicap for us was the bumps were so soft and forgiving and slow. It seemed like all you had to do was keep your tips pointed down the hill and keep them on the snow and speed was not a factor. You could reach max speed after ten bumps and never go any faster. Hero bumps they were.

 

Ya, you do need the full bag of tricks and the knowledge/experience to understand that conditions and lines change. Hell, the same line will change every run. It has to with twenty people skiing it. You might have had the perfect run last time and if you don't realize on the lift ride back up that your next run isn't going to be the same, and that you might have to even change your line. Your next run might not be as successful or as smooth.

 

We don't ski perfect moguls folks. We got to ski what we got though. gnarly, unevenly spaced, snowboard scraped piles of ice. So why would you expect to ski them perfectly every time? It's not possible. All these tips and these discussions are really good for the inspiring bump skiers. As well as for all of us who like to see our sport excell. To me, bumps are it. It's the challenge for the sport. Just keep skiing them. You'll get better. There's nothing more gratifying to me than ripping a line of bumps and hearing the hoots from the lift above, or the heavy breathing and air sucking at the bottom as you smile on the way to the back of the lift line with your buddies laughing. To me, this is what skiing is all about.

post #59 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars View Post

 


 

It's always been my opinion that boots and skis don't weigh anything when you're skiing on them. Weight only counts when you are carrying them to the locker room.
 

 

And, I'm sorry, but after pounding slush bumps for the past two days, my thighs do burn. So that theory's out. My legs didn't have much spring in them walking up the stairs to the parking lot today. And it wasn't because of poor technique. Or because I'm 58. It's because I had a freakin blast the past two days with the crazy canucks.

I think that when it comes to moguls that theory is incorrect but really I'm not sure.  If you're skis/boots were 50 percent lighter your thighs might be 10 percent less tired ? Really have no idea, but you're moving the skis and changing their direction often.  The bump does a lot of the work yes, but our timing is often off and we do a lot of the work.  Certainly in the air weight makes a difference.

 

Either way you slice it, this is some work here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvHV36K7IGs&feature=related

 

 

or:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9i1Mj_VjTg&feature=related



Edited:    can't get the embed to work! wtf!!!-


Edited by Tog - 3/16/2009 at 12:32 am


Edited by Tog - 3/16/2009 at 03:33 am
post #60 of 63

Back to BW's idea, it was erroneous by his own admission but was meant to point out that the core needs to be involved. Cudos for that BW. Fatigue happens sooner when we use inefficient technique and we all seem to agree with that premise. Training and conditioning can minimize it but it will occur both in the legs and the core. All we can hope for is that at the end of the day we had fun getting that tired. Sounds like Lars had a blast and in the end that's what it's all about.

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 › Moguls SHOULDNT make your legs burn