EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Nice turn at Aspen Highlands
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nice turn at Aspen Highlands - Page 2

post #31 of 48

What do you like/dislike about the skiing of Geoffda's model, Hisaya Sato?

 

post #32 of 48

What's not to like?

 

However, I've been coached to have a more upright stance, and I find it less tiring than the stance that I used to ski with.

post #33 of 48

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MidwestPete View Post

 

 

Hisaya Sato

Holy cow - I watched the video -- that guy does rip!

 

I guess so! I was particularly entranced by the smooth feet in the short section between the 0:25 and 0:30 second marks. Disclaimer: I'm not an instructor or anything; just another jamoke working on my improving my turns.

post #34 of 48

Agreed:  what's not to like?

 

Sato-san shows finesse, balance, elegance, and extraordinary fore-aft control.  He owns the mountain.  The clip closes with the caption "master of ski technique" and in his case this is no exaggeration (imo).

 

If Weems' question had referenced this skier instead, my answer would have been I'll take all of his technique that I can get.  Of course, not all skiers share my aspirations and some will prefer the style of Mr. Sciarrone, a 2-decade industry veteran.

post #35 of 48
Thread Starter 

I saw that Iranian princess, Farah Diba, in Switzerland once.  She was incredibly beautiful.  

 

And, yes, the national technical wars were very interesting.  In Europe, they had to do with tourism economics. The national organizations would try to draw people to their respective countries with their superior ski techniques.  I remember as a child, there were technical wars between Arapahoe Basin and Winter Park.  WP had adopted the "reverse shoulder" of the early fifties, while AB had maintained it's interest in Arlberg.  (Interestingly also, WP had grooming earlier than AB.  I'm not sure if the two were related, but they could have been.)  I remember our instructors being appalled when they would see that we had been to their rival area and gotten our techniques all messed up! 

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoffda View Post

 

Elegance == Style?  Sure, I think so.  Or to put it plainly "looking good".  All subjective of course.  I know what I want to look like, which may well be different from what you want to look like. 

 

Do you remember a movie called "Wild Skis" that came out in the 70's?  They sent some skiers to Dizin in Iran (this was during the time of the Shah) and they were skiing with a princess.  She said something to the effect of "she'd been criticized in France for skiing too much like an Austrian, then criticized in Austria for skiing with too much of a French style."  I always liked that story because it is so true.  We all have our own prism through which we evaluate skiing and absent being provided any framework to the contrary, that is what we'll use.  That is why it is so important for both student and instructor to have a mutually agreed upon framework for evaluating good skiing. 

 



 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by weems View Post

 

This is a very good post that needs more attentiion.  And I will give it that, but in the meantime, I just want to say that it would be hard for me to agree with you more on the thought quoted above.  It speaks to my belief that habits are choices--solutions--so the key is to find out what's gained and what's given up with any move.

 



 

post #36 of 48
Thread Starter 

1.  You are exactly correct, in my mind, about the disconnect above.  This is part of what has driven me to propose the Purpose resource of the Diamond.  So often I hear critiques that have nothing to do with the skier's understanding of the goal.

2.  As for your inside had drop, I almost always approach something like this from the point of view of function.  What does this move "offer" me?  What does it resolve?  Can I achieve the same goal in another way?  Is this goal worthwhile?   What would be the advantage (other than "the look") of doing it another way.  Again, I return to the relationship between function and form--Purpose and Power.

3.  Why would you angulate and counter more?  I'm not suggesting that you don't, but I'd be interested to know what it would offer (right there in that turn) that would be an advantage.  What are your "equally valid reasons for choosing a different style"?  Again, I appreciate them.  I just would like to know them.  And there is no wrong answer here.  The responses to your answer (from me) could be:

a) Interesting, or

b) I see!  I think I will choose something else, or

c) I see.  I think I will try your way!

It is unlikely that I would say, "Wrong!  You suck!" 

4.  Again....I really agree with your comparison to your business!  This is excellent.

 

Looking forward to Arapahoe on Friday and Saturday.

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoffda View Post

Perhaps what we are seeing is not an abundance of unnecessary criticism, but rather subtle (or not so subtle) disconnects between the reviewer's and the reviewee's image of great skiing.  For example, I drop my inside hands a bit when I ski.  It isn't because I don't angulate enough; its purely in the shoulders.  It doesn't affect my ability to hold, but it drives me nuts because I just don't like the way it looks and I want it gone from my skiing.  So I appreciate it when my training buddy points out that I'm dropping my hand because that is pushing me to work towards where he knows I want to go.

 

OTOH, if you put me in that Highlands sequence above (PLEASE--conditions looked awesome ) you would see me making (I hope) turns with lots of hip angulation and counter.  If you didn't know what I was trying to accomplish with my skiing, you might suggest I relax, angulate only as much as I need to and ski into counter.  And that would be a perfectly valid thing to say.  You can ski that way effectively, efficiently, and elegantly in those conditions (as Eddie demonstrates).  Except that I want to ski differently and I have my own equally valid reasons for choosing a different style.  So if you gave me that feedback, I would regard it as nit-picky, unwarranted criticism whereas a skier with different goals could be far more receptive to those comments.

 

I am a software developer by trade, so instead of seeing things in right or wrong, I try to see things in terms of trade-offs.  We decide which trade-offs to make based on more core values.  For example, we might decide to trade time for quality.  We might decide that something is so important to get right for our customers that we are willing to take the pain of shipping late.  Or vice-versa.  Sometimes getting a working solution out there as soon as possible is more important than having it work perfectly.

 

Skiing is the same way.  What some folks tend to see in terms of right and wrong are far better viewed in terms of trade-offs and outcomes.  Just because different people would make different trade-offs in the same situation doesn't mean that either of them are wrong. 

 

Can you tell from the length of my response that the weather is bad at A-Basin today?



 

post #37 of 48

Hah!  I knew you'd get my "Wild Skis" reference.  Actually, my real model for skiing is "The Nervous Itch"

 

Personally, I would angulate and counter more, not because it is necessary there, but because I am trying to ingrain movements that work for me regardless of snow conditions and are consistent with what I will use on a race course if I can ever find the time to get out there again.  So for me its all about mastery of the fundamentals and making them automatic. 

 

Ironically, when I was first trying to teach myself how to arc, I actually started with turns that looked fairly similar and they worked pretty well and felt good in soft snow.  But then I got in hard snow and nothing worked.  I realized I was going to have to use hip angulation and counter more.  Then I was involved in a thread with SimplyFast who is an Austrian Coach and he basically said, "quit trying to mimic all of the crap you see on the World Cup and learn the fundamentals."  That really resonated with me because I realized that he was right & that I really had some work to do there.  So that has been my focus--solid, fundamental skiing.  It has also convinced me that there are probably a lot of skiers who are chasing some style or another, without recognizing that they can't get there without first mastering some level of fundamental movements (and perhaps looking very different in the process)

post #38 of 48
Thread Starter 

I agree.  Sato is a wonderful skier. 

 

Again, though, I would ask the same questions:  What works for him?  What would I like to pick up from him?  What would I do differently?

 

I'm the most impressed with his sense of Purpose (and as the clip says: "Imagination").  He can get the skis to do wonderful magic stuff. 

His Will is just amazing--attacking with huge commitment ALL THE TIME, EVERY TURN.  This is availabe to him from so many places--his training, his athleticism, his discipline 

His quick smooth mastery of pressure and release is really exciting and shows a TOUCH of the snow that is very subtle and dynamic.  There is also a sense of joy in the skiing--using the speed to create the dance.

Technically (Power), there are many interesting parts to watch.  I think he is beautifully aligned with his skis in such a resilient way that he can really manage pressure, angle, and crank at will in any direction.  As for Bob Binder's comment, if you look at the middle of his long turns, you can see that he is, in fact quite tall with the outside part of his body--the outside leg.  Often observers can easily misread the "apparently" crouched stance of a really strong skier as a "low position", when dynamically they're quite elongated.  On the other hand, in the short turns, there just simply isn't enough time to "relax tall", and this is where his strength and athleticism support him.  I'm neither that strong nor that athletic, and so this would not likely be my choice--at least for a long time!  (I remember taking a run with this sort of stance on a heli trip.  And I thought, "Well that was nice.  And now I'm so exhausted, I'm finished for the week!  Maybe I better stand up a bit and be 'gravity aggressive' rather than 'muscle aggressive'".)  So ultimately, I agree with Bob.  In the bumps and in the sort turns, I'll probably stand up a bit taller.  HOWEVER, and this is huge to me, even when he is quite low, he doesn't fold excessively at the hip without also folding at the waist and tightening the abdomen.   When he folds at the waist he can keep his pelvis"vertical" enough so that the muscles and tendons can move more freely and give him the resliency he needs to pull this off.

 

Also, he's going a lot faster than Eddie!  And, although Eddie is a stronger skier than I, I don't think either of us quibble with Sato's virtuosity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharpedges View Post

Agreed:  what's not to like?

 

Sato-san shows finesse, balance, elegance, and extraordinary fore-aft control.  He owns the mountain.  The clip closes with the caption "master of ski technique" and in his case this is no exaggeration (imo).

 

If Weems' question had referenced this skier instead, my answer would have been I'll take all of his technique that I can get.  Of course, not all skiers share my aspirations and some will prefer the style of Mr. Sciarrone, a 2-decade industry veteran.



 

post #39 of 48
Thread Starter 

All well said.  And fair enough.  The only caution I would give others  (and not you, because I believe you have this in balance) is to not take one part of a fundamental and overuse it to the exclusion of others.

 

Also, I seem to have added a lot more counter to my skiing this season.  Interesting. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by geoffda View Post

Hah!  I knew you'd get my "Wild Skis" reference.  Actually, my real model for skiing is "The Nervous Itch"

 

Personally, I would angulate and counter more, not because it is necessary there, but because I am trying to ingrain movements that work for me regardless of snow conditions and are consistent with what I will use on a race course if I can ever find the time to get out there again.  So for me its all about mastery of the fundamentals and making them automatic. 

 

Ironically, when I was first trying to teach myself how to arc, I actually started with turns that looked fairly similar and they worked pretty well and felt good in soft snow.  But then I got in hard snow and nothing worked.  I realized I was going to have to use hip angulation and counter more.  Then I was involved in a thread with SimplyFast who is an Austrian Coach and he basically said, "quit trying to mimic all of the crap you see on the World Cup and learn the fundamentals."  That really resonated with me because I realized that he was right & that I really had some work to do there.  So that has been my focus--solid, fundamental skiing.  It has also convinced me that there are probably a lot of skiers who are chasing some style or another, without recognizing that they can't get there without first mastering some level of fundamental movements (and perhaps looking very different in the process)



 

post #40 of 48
Thread Starter 

 Perfect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

   There's no best answer for all situations, that's why it's beneficial to develop the ability to apply different choices to different situations.  Or, efficiency be damned, make choices based solely on the personal fun factor.   

 

I'll also add that great skiers can make "wrong" look elegant. 

 

 

www.YourSkiCoach.com



 

post #41 of 48

Sorry missed your #2.  The shoulder drop is annoying to me only because I don't like the way it looks.  It doesn't affect function (my angles are good), so I can live with it, but I don't have to like it .  Oddly enough, I think I finally figured out the answer last night.  I was watching Sato some more (since he's now handy in this post) and I was trying to mimic his arm position.  What I realized is that he has a shoulder roll that creates tension.  When I started doing that, I realized that I was no longer dropping my shoulder.  I played around with it in the mirror last night and it seemed to do wonders.  There was a clear difference between my normal position (no tension, weak shoulder position) and rolled shoulders (strong tension, strong position).  Can't wait to try it tomorrow (still socked in at the Basin & snowing hard!).


Edited by geoffda - 5/4/2009 at 03:46 pm GMT
post #42 of 48

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by weems View Post

1.  You are exactly correct, in my mind, about the disconnect above.  This is part of what has driven me to propose the Purpose resource of the Diamond.  So often I hear critiques that have nothing to do with the skier's understanding of the goal.

2.  As for your inside had drop, I almost always approach something like this from the point of view of function.  What does this move "offer" me?  What does it resolve?  Can I achieve the same goal in another way?  Is this goal worthwhile?   What would be the advantage (other than "the look") of doing it another way.  Again, I return to the relationship between function and form--Purpose and Power.

3.  Why would you angulate and counter more?  I'm not suggesting that you don't, but I'd be interested to know what it would offer (right there in that turn) that would be an advantage.  What are your "equally valid reasons for choosing a different style"?  Again, I appreciate them.  I just would like to know them.  And there is no wrong answer here.  The responses to your answer (from me) could be:

a) Interesting, or

b) I see!  I think I will choose something else, or

c) I see.  I think I will try your way!

It is unlikely that I would say, "Wrong!  You suck!" 

4.  Again....I really agree with your comparison to your business!  This is excellent.

 

Looking forward to Arapahoe on Friday and Saturday.



 


What I like about your approach Weems is that it seems to be about positive re-enforcement. I have a friend who is a level 2 instructor and I think he has the view that if you aren't skiing his way then it is wrong.
 

 

I am a self taught skier of 34 years -- it might be due to the lack of formal training but I think your friend's skiing looks pretty darn good.

post #43 of 48
Thread Starter 

No! No!  Your friend's skiing is wrong!  Mine is the only one that is right!! 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MidwestPete View Post

 


What I like about your approach Weems is that it seems to be about positive re-enforcement. I have a friend who is a level 2 instructor and I think he has the view that if you aren't skiing his way then it is wrong.
 

 

I am a self taught skier of 34 years -- it might be due to the lack of formal training but I think your friend's skiing looks pretty darn good.



 

post #44 of 48

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by weems View Post

1.  You are exactly correct, in my mind, about the disconnect above.  This is part of what has driven me to propose the Purpose resource of the Diamond.  So often I hear critiques that have nothing to do with the skier's understanding of the goal.

2.  As for your inside had drop, I almost always approach something like this from the point of view of function.  What does this move "offer" me?  What does it resolve?  Can I achieve the same goal in another way?  Is this goal worthwhile?   What would be the advantage (other than "the look") of doing it another way.  Again, I return to the relationship between function and form--Purpose and Power.

3.  Why would you angulate and counter more?  I'm not suggesting that you don't, but I'd be interested to know what it would offer (right there in that turn) that would be an advantage.  What are your "equally valid reasons for choosing a different style"?  Again, I appreciate them.  I just would like to know them.  And there is no wrong answer here.  The responses to your answer (from me) could be:

a) Interesting, or

b) I see!  I think I will choose something else, or

c) I see.  I think I will try your way!

It is unlikely that I would say, "Wrong!  You suck!" 

4.  Again....I really agree with your comparison to your business!  This is excellent.

 

Looking forward to Arapahoe on Friday and Saturday.



 

 


 

Asking "what do other techniques offer/resolve" as opposed to what is going on here presents another disconnect from purpose.  I've read through the thread, and have not seen a  "purpose" other than utilizing this particular technique.  So, asking "if there any other ways to achieve my goals"  is an empty question.

 

What do I want to take away from such skiing?  I'll say that the skiing is "effortless".  Not to mean that "effortless" as a replacement for beautiful, or stylish, but with very little effort to drive the skis or control the shape of the turn.  The effortlessness that says: "You don't have to work so hard".

post #45 of 48

Exactly! 

post #46 of 48

Sato is a good example of what skiing looks like at the very top. This guy ripps all over the mountain be it groomed, un-groomed bumps or powder. What is there not to like. Dont even dream of doing stuff like this without proper technique.

 

Back to the original topic. IMO its all about what happens between ski and snow. Dropping inside shoulders and square stance are just examples of issues that hurt your performance factor. In the case of the skier in the opening posting he gets away with all flaws since he does not need more gripp or shorter turn radius or whatever one could be whishing for. Maybe he would have lifted his inside shoulder and countered and angulated more if he was forced to or just wanted to carve tighter. Since hip rotation is the opposite of angulation one must understand that they accomplish the exact opposite. One accomplishes higher edge angles the other less. One makes you more voulnerable for skidding other for edge lock carving.

post #47 of 48
Thread Starter 

 Asking for some clarification of your thoughts below. Thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6 View Post

1. square stance --examples of issues that hurt your performance factor.

 

Please explain how.

 

2.In the case of the skier in the opening posting he gets away with all flaws 

 

Which movements are flaws in your opinion?

 

3.Since hip rotation is the opposite of angulation one must understand that they accomplish the exact opposite.

 

Hip rotation is the opposite of angulation?  How ?  Is it not also true that hip rotation is the opposite of hip counter-rotation?  Is it not true that inclination of the body axes inward is not the opposite of angulation?

 

4. One accomplishes higher edge angles the other less. One makes you more voulnerable for skidding other for edge lock carving.

Which does which?



 

post #48 of 48
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post

 

 


 

Asking "what do other techniques offer/resolve" as opposed to what is going on here presents another disconnect from purpose.  I've read through the thread, and have not seen a  "purpose" other than utilizing this particular technique.  So, asking "if there any other ways to achieve my goals"  is an empty question.

 

What do I want to take away from such skiing?  I'll say that the skiing is "effortless".  Not to mean that "effortless" as a replacement for beautiful, or stylish, but with very little effort to drive the skis or control the shape of the turn.  The effortlessness that says: "You don't have to work so hard".

These are good thoughts, E.  My intention of my question is that, if people see flaws in the skiing as it presents itself, then what would be less flawed in their eyes.  Perhaps I didn't ask the question well.

 

I agree that effortless is definitely there.  Thanks, E.

 

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 › Nice turn at Aspen Highlands