or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Isolated movements? - Page 2

post #31 of 78
I think kids can learn the skills concept without drowning them in nomenclature. They may be learning the skills concepts but probably won't know exactly how to name them but will know what they feel like. We can teach using all the senses. Hearing the name of a concept is overrated if they can deploy them when they need to.

We're teachers. It's our job to describe and help our students learn  using all our means and all their senses. You'll see it in their movements if you are helping them understand.
post #32 of 78
Garry is right, skills training does not have to be drowning in terminology and technical analysis and explanation.  The language of skiing is useful for communication, but it can be consumed and digested in small bites.  Skills are learned in small, progressive steps, and the simpler skills require only simple language. 

Take balance as an example.  Earliest learning will involve moving the balance point from front to back.  All that's needed to be learned is that moving forward on the skis is SKIING FORE and moving back on the skis is SKIING AFT.  Then once students self discover how moving to those states changes how the skis perform, how easy it is to turn, how if affects how tired you get, the lesson and the term is locked in for life. 

The same learning process can take place all the way up the terminology ladder.  Terminology overload is to be avoided.  Some use it as a crutch, or a means to impress.  But we shouldn't shy away from it completely in an attempt to avoid misuse.  It's our responsibility to not only teach the skills of the sport, but also how to communicate effectively.  It makes the learning process much easier, and much more efficient.  It will also be very necessary to know later on in the learning process, when more complicated tasks require simple means of explaining/describing them. 
post #33 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

The same learning process can take place all the way up the terminology ladder.  Terminology overload is to be avoided.  Some use it as a crutch, or a means to impress.  But we shouldn't shy away from it completely in an attempt to avoid misuse.  It's our responsibility to not only teach the skills of the sport, but also how to communicate effectively.  It makes the learning process much easier, and much more efficient.  It will also be very necessary to know later on in the learning process, when more complicated tasks require simple means of explaining/describing them. 
I completely agree, Rick. It's one of the concerns I have in observing some teachers, and so it's something that I am very sensitive to. It's one reason I ask for word-pictures that occur independent of the technical terms. That is one of the things that I respect so much about my favorite coaches (many of who are here in EpicSki... including you!): they get this and work very hard at coming up with language that works for everyday people. I think it is one of the most important skills of teaching any topic. 
post #34 of 78
Skills based is about teaching independent skills, where as Skidude72 says, a "good skier" can independently apply any skill at any time at will, independently of others.  eg.  more edge without rotation. In real skiing all the skills are being controlled at all times, whether or not those skills are highly developed.  

 The point I am trying to make, is that a particular blend of skills with a DIRT for each results in a particular movement pattern.  

Sure I teach movements, but in the confines of working on a single skill at a time, not as a combination of skills to produce a "desired outcome" which to me, sounds like" movement pattern".

You know the way  this works - too much detail and the student becomes a skiing robot. Less is more in that sense.
post #35 of 78
Thread Starter 
E, Once you conclude the isolated skills activities is that the end of the lesson? I doubt it. You help them incorporate those new skills and the movements used to express those skills into their skiing. So the bottom line here is that the final product includes new movement patterns. Not in a rigid cookie cutter approach but within a range of possible of movement options that will produce the intended outcome. 
post #36 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by loki1 View Post

 When the knee is flexed, as in sitting position, The foot can be rotated under the knee joint in conjunction with the tib/fib twisting.  There is no rotation of the femur at all.

Very true.  The knee does have to be bent at 90+ degrees however for that to be true.  So for skiing not a very practical way of applying rotation.

 
I don't believe it does need to be at a 90 degree angle? at least not my foot and leg.  Your results may vary however I invite you to experiment.
post #37 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Not sure about the anti part since you are still pivoting the ski. How about a 360 in the air, Jelly roll, Mute grab, etc...Park and pipe skiers do a lot of this type of stuff. So do the freeriders when they are negotiating a cliff face and hop / pivot turns are a matter of survival.

To characterize freestyle air and spins as being an example of isolated movements is highly inaccurate. On the contrary, airing off of a kicker or out of the pipe is a fairly complex blending of skills. What many people don't realize is that once a skier's skis have left the snow, all of the torque to complete whatever spin or invert he is attempting has already been applied to the skier and his skis. Therefore, a good takeoff will utilize a great deal of pressure control, as the skier loads his skis going into the kicker or up the transition of the pipe, and then an explosive amount of extension and release of that pressure as the skier unloads his skis and launches off the lip of the terrain feature. While doing that, the skier has to be using very slight edging to gain leverage for his torquing movement. Some freeskiers try to launch off of completely flat skis, and still others go their entire skiing career thinking that is exactly what they are doing. However, they are actually initiating a very slight edge at the last moment. If they don't, their spin will start by the skis scrubbing on the lip of the jump or the pipe. One thing that the skier never wants to do is initiate any type of significant rotary movement while he initiates his jump. By that, I mean that he is not steering his feet through the rotation of any body part. On the contrary, he is attempting to isolate his feet and keep them going straight as the rest of his body torques in one direction, then releases that torque in the opposite direction. This may actually be a more accurate portrayal of the 'anti-rotary' movement that was talked about before. It really is the dead opposite of the upper/lower separation that we all teach. Instead of the feet turning under the skier's quiet shoulders, the skier's shoulders twist above the quiet feet.
post #38 of 78
Thread Starter 
Thank you for that clarification. My point of this thread is that even though to a casual observer we might see a specific and seemingly isolated result, the mechanics and the body movements used to produce that outcome are not so simple or isolated. As far as labeling rotary movements I would offer that a javelin turn uses an external to the turn pivot of the inside ski. Like e pointed out the pelvis is also rotating this way. What you described is still upper / lower  body seperated, all that changed is the anchor which in your example are the feet. Although I wouldn't call it counter rotary either. It's really upper body rotary since the feet are an anchor and don't move. Wind up is what it was called back in the day.
post #39 of 78
 JASP,

I prefer to think about it as simply seeing more of a certain deficient skill in their turns, rather than the outcome being a specific skill blend.  
 
post #40 of 78
Thread Starter 
Agreed, If they have a skill deficiency we can say we "see" it. However, we don't really "see" skills, we "see" movements and result of those movements is the outcome we "see" down at the snow / ski level. The skills are a mental construct to help us break those movements down into component parts but we are still describing how we see the skier move and how that affects what the skis are doing.
post #41 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Agreed, If they have a skill deficiency we can say we "see" it. However, we don't really "see" skills, we "see" movements and result of those movements is the outcome we "see" down at the snow / ski level. The skills are a mental construct to help us break those movements down into component parts but we are still describing how we see the skier move and how that affects what the skis are doing.


That's pretty well stated JASP.  Trying to distinquish and separate skills from movements is hard yakka.  They are completely interdependant    It takes very creative defining to portray them as separate entities.  One thinks the motivation to do so lies more in the desire to distinquish one teaching organization from another. 
post #42 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

That's pretty well stated JASP.  Trying to distinquish and separate skills from movements is hard yakka.  They are completely interdependant    It takes very creative defining to portray them as separate entities.  One thinks the motivation to do so lies more in the desire to distinquish one teaching organization from another. 
Or simply in distinguishing oneself from others.
post #43 of 78
One can distinguish skills from movements fairly easily.  Let's proceed assuming that the skier has the physical/mental capacity to make the desired movement:

A movement is the outcome of applying a skill.  Whether or not that skill is deficient, is measured success/failure of the movement.  While the success/failure of the movement is ultimately determined by the physical interaction of skis and snow, the relationship between CM and base of support during the movement is also critical.  eg. Suppose we ask an intermediate skier for higher edge. They do it with more inclination. Suppose instead, they show more angulation.  We'll see the same edge angles on the snow, but a more dynamic posture.  In both cases, the interaction of ski and snow says the edge angles have increased - the outcome was met.

It is not so simple to suggest that interaction with snow is the sole judge skill level.

Anyway, this sort of "cause and effect" between skill level and "quality" of movement is what makes movements and skill somewhat separate.
post #44 of 78
Thread Starter 
So you suggest I need more edge angle. Why?
post #45 of 78

Does that really matter?
 

post #46 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post



I don't believe it does need to be at a 90 degree angle? at least not my foot and leg.  Your results may vary however I invite you to experiment.

 
You can get some rotation out of the foot, but the tib/fib doesn't rotate until the knee is flexed at 90 degrees or less like when sitting in a chair.  The ligaments and alignment of the knee and tib/fib don't allow for rotation until there is that amount of flexion. 
post #47 of 78
 I don't agree.  As I sit here at my desk, I seem to be able to demonstrate differently.
post #48 of 78
 How are your legs flexed?  What movements are you seeing or feeling?  
post #49 of 78
 less than 90 and more than 180.
post #50 of 78
 So i think we are getting confused with our degrees.  90 or less would be flex at a right angle or more, so sitting to your heel touching your butt. 90 -180 would be sitting to standing straight up.  180+ would be hyper extended as in the end of a kicking motion.  Are we thinking the same or opposite?
post #51 of 78
 straight leg = 180 or zero if you prefer and tib/fib at a right angle to thigh = 90.
post #52 of 78
Thread Starter 
I'm wondering if you misunderstood me E. I understand you pulled the intermediate skier out of thin air but even then there isn't any connection between their present skiing and the need for more tipping. I'm sure you would agree that the connection is what their skis are doing as they ski. The body movements are irrelevent without relating them to what the ski are doing.
post #53 of 78
I don't see the body movements as irrelevant.  ( In the example, they were related to the ski -- the task was to produce high edge angles, and identical angles were created.)

Body movements are strong visual indications of the level of skill of the skier.  If they were irrelevant, track analysis would be enough. 
post #54 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post

 straight leg = 180 or zero if you prefer and tib/fib at a right angle to thigh = 90.

I'll use a straight leg as zero for reference.

Sitting in my chair, lower leg 90 degrees to thigh, it's pretty easy to rotate my foot about the tib/fib axis without introducing movement of my femur in my hip joint.  If I flex my lower leg to more than 90 degrees, it remains easy to rotate my foot.

As I extend my lower leg, tending towards a straight leg, I can still rotate my foot without a corresponding movement in the hip joint, but it gets progressively more difficult as I approach a straight leg.  If I move very slowly and deliberately, I can get the isolated foot rotation up to about 15 degrees flexion at the knee.  From here to when my leg is fully straight, I have to block the hip joint to get an isolated foot rotation below the knee (and more accurate measurements might indicate that there was some femur rotation introduced).  Similar results when standing.

This says to me that it's biomechanically possible to achieve this isolated movement, but it's not always a natural movement.  The compensations required at certain points would indicate to me that the isolated movements may have limited practical value.
post #55 of 78
Wondering if that isolated movement has the purpose of stabilizing ?
post #56 of 78
Mogulmuncher,  I believe you and I see this the same way except for the limited value part.

I believe there is very practical application for this "limited practical value" movement in skiing?!  Don't you?  

I know I turn my feet when I ski.  Do my femurs turn sure.  Do I care if these movements are independant or linked some how?...

Not really.
post #57 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post    Can you twist your foot left or right without tipping it (inversion/eversion)?  Don't rotate your femur, just turn your foot.

Or....Can you invert or evert your foot without it twisting/rotating?

Can these two movements be separated?  Is this a good thing for skiing?  How can these two simultaneous movements benefit a skier?

 

My original point is that we cannot twist our foot without inversion/eversion occurring and we cannot invert/evert it without it rotating.  This is very pertinent to skiing at the edge change if you think about it.  How many skiers think their first move at edge change should be to twist their skis into the fall line?  This mindset creates pivoted turn entries.  If pivoted turn entries are the skier's intent this is fine, however when skiers are trying to break out of this type of turn entry it becomes very relevant to understand that to carve a turn entry the skier needs to use counterintuitive movements.  Rather than twist the feet toward the fall line the skier must twist the feet the opposite direction which will simultaneously cause the feet/skis to tip onto edges, allowing a carved turn entry.

Hope this makes sense?

Think "pivot slips" vs. "thousand steps"?
Edited by bud heishman - 10/9/09 at 7:38am
post #58 of 78
So are you now saying that you can produce inversion/eversion without pivotting?
post #59 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post

Mogulmuncher,  I believe you and I see this the same way except for the limited value part.

I believe there is very practical application for this "limited practical value" movement in skiing?!  Don't you?  

I know I turn my feet when I ski.  Do my femurs turn sure.  Do I care if these movements are independant or linked some how?...

Not really.
 

Let's see if I can narrow the gap...

I could isolate the foot movement below the knee, or conversely, isolate a femur movement in the hip joint too.  However, I felt that what I had to do to achieve those movements in isolation was sometimes quite different than the blended movement that I would use skiing. 

The overall movements are absolutely important, but I couldn't see the benefit of trying to consciously isolate the movement when actually skiing.  I think I can see benefits in a biomechanical assessment though, evaluating joint function and range of motion for example.

Any closer?
post #60 of 78

biomechanically there are 3 planes of motion none of which are at right angles to one another.  we have rotation or abduction/adduction, plantar/dorsiflexion and inversion/eversion.the complex collection of joints called the ankle operates in all 3 planes of motion all of the time.  this combined movement results in pronation/supination of the foot and internal/external rotation of the leg.

having said that, the percentages of each direction can vary widely but they all have to exist for the gross articulation to work.  during boot alignment work this is how the best boot fitters are able to "see" or visualize what is happening in the boot by observing the rotation of the lower leg particularly the or tibia.  These motions  works very nicely in the goal of rolling a ski from edge to edge and with modern shaped skis we encourage this movement with more compliant footbeds than we did with long straight skis where the unweighted pivot was much more prevalent and then an agressive edge set was required to reconnect with the snow requiring a more rigid footbed that would block lateral motion to apply pressure to the edge more rapidly.

the skier need not really know this at all and should focus on the combined movement patterns that acheive the basic fundamentals of skiing. and this is achievable provided nothing that interfers excessively with these motions has been introduced by the boot/footbed/alignment package.

hope this helps

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