or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Opinions / Analysis wanted - Page 2

KISS.
He has too much weight on his inside ski.
He needs to balance along the outside ski (or the inside edge of the outside ski depending on snow/ice conditions).  Thinking about balancing along the outside ski will do it for him.

Now for the sake of our discussion, inclination and angulation are not mutually exclusive.  Inclination is position of centre of mass relative to base of support.  Angulation is adjusting the tipping angle independently of angle of inclination.  Some see it as tipping the skis more without changing the position of cm; others see it as decreasing the amount of inclination without decreasing the tipping angle of the skis.  How you see it depends on if you learned to ski fast and then learned how to adjust to slower turns, or learned to ski like a golf cart first..   Skiing too slow is a common cause of too much weight on the inside ski.

A key element in cross-under versus cross-over awareness is the amount of apparent Independence between the upper body and path of the skis just before and during transition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost

KISS.
He has too much weight on his inside ski.
He needs to balance along the outside ski (or the inside edge of the outside ski depending on snow/ice conditions).  Thinking about balancing along the outside ski will do it for him.

BigE: Crossover: The movement of the CM over the skis is responsible for the change in orientation between feet and CM. In short, the CM is moving downhill faster than the skis are moving under the body.

Crossunder: the movement of the feet under the Cm is responsible for the change in orietation between feet and CM. In short, the skis are moving faster across the hill than the CM is moving downhill.

What happend to the old definition? Crossover means that your feet are the center of the arc created by the CM as it moves over the feet. Crossunder means that the CM is the center of the arc created by the feet as they move (via strong retraction) under the CM. It used to be simple.

Yes, you can interchange these definitions if you use the theory of relativity (those who know the theory would understand what I mean, but let's not go there).
How about cross-over includes an upwards acceleration of the cm?
Those are the definitions that I use.  Definitions of "outcomes" do no have to tell you how to obtain those outcomes.

As far as moving the CM, the CM is moves by inertia/momentum.  Once released, the CM begins to move, it is that simple. Which release you use does not really matter.  What really matters is the relationship between your skis and the CM.  If the skis have a lot of impulse, and they "jet across" under you, you've done a cross-under. If your CM floats downhill and skis/CM share the cross-hill component, you have a cross-over.

TomB,

According to your definitions, they have the same result as mine.  The difference is that mine you an external frame of reference.  That means there is nothing subjective about them.

No upward movement is necessary.

The 60/40 split is referred to as one example of "cross-through".
TDK,
Let's back up a minute. Angulation allows us a greater range of lateral motion but it is not an inherently strong body position. In fact, it is a weak position. We simply cannot bear a lot of weight while bending sideways. The body isn't designed that way.

Secondly, Considering the fact that he learned to freecarve first explains why he is so comfortable using a huge range of motion.  What he lacks is the near flat skills of finesse and patience. Especially through the transition from one turn to the next. If he doesn't start the turn so strongly he doesn't need to arrest all the excessive momentum creates with that strong initiation. It also means he doesn't he need to hang onto the high edge so late into the transition. the more direct path suggestions really are suggesting more disciplined body movements start to finish, not just during the middle of the turn.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 10/24/09 at 11:08am
jasp - its interesting that you consider angulation to be such a week body position. Check out Bennie Reich here below for some angulation. Pay close attention to where he uses angulation and where not.

http://www.ronlemaster.com/images/2006-2007-B/slides/raich-aare-2006-gs-2.html

Thats the strongest you can get. Thats why they use it. If you go back and check out OP in his video you can see that when he angulates he makes good turns. When he is not he is not.

You are right, he is not patient enough but that has been pointed out several times here alredy. He needs to be patient through the transition and wait for his skis to hook up and start turning. Funcarving looks cool but it brings on some very bad habbits it seems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

jasp - its interesting that you consider angulation to be such a week body position. Check out Bennie Reich here below for some angulation. Pay close attention to where he uses angulation and where not.

http://www.ronlemaster.com/images/2006-2007-B/slides/raich-aare-2006-gs-2.html

Thats the strongest you can get. Thats why they use it. If you go back and check out OP in his video you can see that when he angulates he makes good turns. When he is not he is not.

You are right, he is not patient enough but that has been pointed out several times here alredy. He needs to be patient through the transition and wait for his skis to hook up and start turning. Funcarving looks cool but it brings on some very bad habbits it seems.

+1

Angulation is a strong skiing position.

MR
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE

Those are the definitions that I use.  Definitions of "outcomes" do no have to tell you how to obtain those outcomes.

As far as moving the CM, the CM is moves by inertia/momentum.  Once released, the CM begins to move, it is that simple. Which release you use does not really matter.  What really matters is the relationship between your skis and the CM.  If the skis have a lot of impulse, and they "jet across" under you, you've done a cross-under. If your CM floats downhill and skis/CM share the cross-hill component, you have a cross-over.

TomB,

According to your definitions, they have the same result as mine.  The difference is that mine you an external frame of reference.  That means there is nothing subjective about them.

No upward movement is necessary.

The 60/40 split is referred to as one example of "cross-through".

I dont really understand. Take two examples from ronlemasters site and point me to the differences.
TDK, An Angulated stance is a bio-mechanically weak stance. If it was stronger you would see weight lifters using it instead of a symmetrical stance. Which you never will never see. That fact doesn't change when you put skis on your feet. The body simply cannot resist as much force when it is bent sideways.
Angulation is still useful though because it allows us to focus weight and the vector of the resultant system of forces through the ski edge. In other words, it is a wonderful lateral balancing activity. When we get it right that force vector passes through our CoM and the ski edge, which produces a lot of edge purchase and a nice stable edge platform. That is what you guys are feeling and mistakenly calling a bio mechanically strong body position.
OMG E, do we actually agree that regardless of the chosen release, it is the release that allows the CoM to change directions?
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro

TDK, An Angulated stance is a bio-mechanically weak stance. If it was stronger you would see weight lifters using it instead of a symmetrical stance. Which you never will never see. That fact doesn't change when you put skis on your feet. The body simply cannot resist as much force when it is bent sideways.
Angulation is still useful though because it allows us to focus weight and the vector of the resultant system of forces through the ski edge. In other words, it is a wonderful lateral balancing activity. When we get it right that force vector passes through our CoM and the ski edge, which produces a lot of edge purchase and a nice stable edge platform. That is what you guys are feeling and mistakenly calling a bio mechanically strong body position.

Skiers aren't trying to lift weights and weight lifters aren't trying to balance lateral forces.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro

TDK, An Angulated stance is a bio-mechanically weak stance. If it was stronger you would see weight lifters using it instead of a symmetrical stance. Which you never will never see. That fact doesn't change when you put skis on your feet. The body simply cannot resist as much force when it is bent sideways.
Angulation is still useful though because it allows us to focus weight and the vector of the resultant system of forces through the ski edge. In other words, it is a wonderful lateral balancing activity. When we get it right that force vector passes through our CoM and the ski edge, which produces a lot of edge purchase and a nice stable edge platform. That is what you guys are feeling and mistakenly calling a bio mechanically strong body position.

LOL jasp - sorry but I have to dissagree with you here. We are talking about alpine skiing and not weight lifting. Two completely different sports. We are trying to give some feedback to the OP on his video. Not give him a lesson in general bio-mechanics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastersRacer

Skiers aren't trying to lift weights and weight lifters aren't trying to balance lateral forces.

+2
Here's a quote from my new TRANSITIONS DVD I just released:

"Cross over, cross under, and cross through are terms used pervasively in the world of ski instruction.  Unfortunately, there are many inconsistencies in the ways they're used by individual instructors."

Thanks for the confirmation, guys!

As to angulation (also just released) and the strength of the stance it provides: there is more than one form of angulation.  Some forms provide a stronger stance than others.  Of course.  How much we angulate (if at all) is not up to us, it's governed by the forces of the turn and the state of lateral balance we desire to occupy.  What IS up to us is the form of angulation we use to get the job done.
Oh, and to the OP:  about angulation,,, you could use some more of it.  It appears to me that your quest for big edge angles is causing you to incline too much and loose outside ski balance in the second half of the turn on occasion.

Pretty decent skiing overall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro

TDK, An Angulated stance is a bio-mechanically weak stance. If it was stronger you would see weight lifters using it instead of a symmetrical stance. Which you never will never see. That fact doesn't change when you put skis on your feet. The body simply cannot resist as much force when it is bent sideways.

False analogy.  What's relevant to skiing is what weight lifters would do lifting weights on a steep hillside or inside one of those amusement park rides that spins around generating centrifugal force to make kids walk crooked paths or even pin them to the walls.  I don't think anyone advocates strong angulation for skiing straight on the flats; instead we ski vertically much as weight lifters do in a gymn on flat ground.

My point is the human machine is designed the way it is designed. Changing the activity doesn't change that design. An angulated stance simply isn't a strong body position for humans. I've read all the supporting opinions about how engaging the glutes and the rest of the big muscles of the hip creates a very strong leg. That sensation comes from the stable edge platform but it does not increase the body's load bearing capacity, it decreases it. Plain and simple. That is why I am objecting to all the erroneous claims being offered here. I don't use the term "wrong" very often but in this case suggesting the sideways bent body is stronger is so very untrue that I feel compelled to say what I've said.
Angulation is a nothing more than one of several lateral balance options that when used properly helps us expand the lateral range of motion we can move through while still focusing the resultant sum of the multiple forces we are encountering through the engaged edge of the support ski. When used improperly it locks us up in a very contrived and bio mechanically weak position and actually disrupts our ability to focus the forces I mentioned earlier through the ski's engaged edge.

jasp - Pressure is only about 1250N in SL. Pressure starts to builld up when leg is extended. Unlike a weight lifter that needs to lift the weights from floor up. Its not about different activities. Its about skiing. In the photomontage I provided of Bennie Reich he was angulated at evey single gate. He would not have been if it was a week position.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick

Thanks for the confirmation, guys!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick

...there is more than one form of angulation.

This was what really struck me when I saw the Ron Lemaster montage put up to illustrate a point (about angulation, among other things) in another thread.  The first time I read the post, the picture didn't display.  Later, I realized the picture did not match my expectations at all.

Here's how it looks to me.  Racers mostly angulate at the leg-pelvis joint, keeping their trunk (torso) vertical.  The classical recreational skier angulation involves bending the torso sideways.  In one case the pelvis aligns with the upper body, in the other it aligns with the legs.  (If I've been misinterpreting classical angulation all these years, somebody tell me gently..)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdf

TDK, I'm not sure I follow your logic. Raich uses movements not because they are strong but because in that specific situation they are appropriate. Like I've pointed out several times angulation and inclination are balancing options but will not control the excessive momentum created by the big body movements J3rry is using to thrust his body into the new turn. I keep coming back to  WHY J3rry uses such strong body movements in the first place. He uses brute force to overwhelm that edge platform that he hasn't released. That unreleased ski is a road block and all the up moves and the excessively strong "over" moves are how he goes around that road block.
It is far more effective to wait to start the new turn until he has released the last turn. This approach would immediately eliminate the need for the big movements he uses to overpower the unreleased edge platform and all the subsequent momentum created by those big movements that carry him so far inside the new turn. Like E pointed out when we release the old turn gravity and momentum will immediately cause a  direction change. So why resist this direction change while simultaneously trying to get the body to move exactly where these forces would take you if you just stopped resisting these forces in the first place. That's just working at crossed purposes and perpetuating the problem.
My thinking on this.

An angulated stance is not as strong as an unangulated stance.  The straighter the body, the more force it can hold.  It's simple physics.  Any body who has portaged a heavy load on a rough portage trail knows this.

The fact that the stance is heavily angulated near the transition and not as strong doesn't matter, because at that point the load is less and the forces being applied to the body are lower.  In order to keep your edge tipped and your skis carving at the end of the turn as your body starts to come through you have to angulate; the hip bone is connected to the leg bone etc. and the angles are what they are.  In the belly of the turn where forces are greater, less angulation is used provided the skier is skiing fast.

If you are in a purely inclined stance with no angulation you are, however, right at the limit with not room for adjustment in balance in the outside direction - pretty risky.  There is a balance point for every turn.

You can only incline so much sideways at the hip.  To get more angulation you need to be in a more countered position; you can bend forwards a lot more than you can bend sideways.

Above golf-cart speeds momentum alone is sufficient, no big body movements are required to link turns.  No overpowering of edges is used in good skiing; the edges direct the skis where the skier wants them to go until they are released.  However, in good skiing the skis are often not released at the same time as the body is released.  The CM's path and the ski's path diverge.  An unreleased ski and released body can tolerate a heavily angulated position, not because the position is strong, but because forces acting between body and ski are low (relatively speaking).
jasp - IMO its quite simple. J3erry is banking his turns keeping too much weight on the inside foot. Because of this when he comes out of the turn his outside ski washes out and he STEPS onto his inside foot. What happens when you put weight on a foot that is flexed? You extend it offcourse. Thats why J3erry is extending so abruptly. IMO you start from the wrong end. You need to start correcting the movements earlier in the turn. There is nothing to relese as he comes through apex and the 3 phase of the turn. If you go back and look at his right turn after he was airborn from which I captured this frame:

You can see that J3erry carves nicely with outside ski pressure and pulls off a very nice relese. No washing of outside ski. No abrupt up-move. My analysis of this is that when J3erry doesent think too much of what he is dooing then he skis much better. In this case he was airborn and for a moment he forgot that image he has in his head of what its supposed to look like: huge edge anles, inside fist touching the snow, flying into the air at transition like a WC skier in the freeskiing videos. Difference is that J3erry has very little momentum to relese and to use for getting airborn. Just my opinion. Same happens later on in the video here:

After J3rry learns what movements he should use for maintaining outside ski pressure he can start to think about the relese and the transition. IMO there is nothing wrong with a ILE relese when starting to arc GS type of turns on easy flat gromers. Like the freeskiing canadians. Very good image to have in your head and replicate. J3erry knows how to do this only needs to be more patient in the transitions and particulary the upper C. In contrast to funcarving you dont have the negative impact of gravity that is pulling your body towards the snow in the upper C because of abrupt and massive projection. Insted you need to be much more patient. J3rry is also not familiar with the different consepts. Nobody told him what they are and what they do.

BTW, Raich uses movements that are optimized and appropriate for each specific situation that is correct. At the gate its not inclination. In that specific situation angulation is strong enough (edit).
Edited by tdk6 - 10/25/09 at 5:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

BTW, Raich uses movements that are optimized and appropriate for each specific situation that is correct. At the gate its not inclination. In that specific situation angulation is strong enough.
Fixed it for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost

My thinking on this.

An angulated stance is not as strong as an unangulated stance.  The straighter the body, the more force it can hold.  It's simple physics.  Any body who has portaged a heavy load on a rough portage trail knows this.

The fact that the stance is heavily angulated near the transition and not as strong doesn't matter, because at that point the load is less and the forces being applied to the body are lower.  In order to keep your edge tipped and your skis carving at the end of the turn as your body starts to come through you have to angulate; the hip bone is connected to the leg bone etc. and the angles are what they are.  In the belly of the turn where forces are greater, less angulation is used provided the skier is skiing fast.

If you are in a purely inclined stance with no angulation you are, however, right at the limit with not room for adjustment in balance in the outside direction - pretty risky.  There is a balance point for every turn.

You can only incline so much sideways at the hip.  To get more angulation you need to be in a more countered position; you can bend forwards a lot more than you can bend sideways.

Above golf-cart speeds momentum alone is sufficient, no big body movements are required to link turns.  No overpowering of edges is used in good skiing; the edges direct the skis where the skier wants them to go until they are released.  However, in good skiing the skis are often not released at the same time as the body is released.  The CM's path and the ski's path diverge.  An unreleased ski and released body can tolerate a heavily angulated position, not because the position is strong, but because forces acting between body and ski are low (relatively speaking).

Well writen.

Its important IMO that one realizes that being "strong" is a matter of right technique.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost

Fixed it for you.

Thanks, thats what I ment .
TDK what is J3rry doing to start the turn?
That defines what he needs to do through the rest of the turn. Getting off one set of edges smoothly before getting onto the next set of edges is what I'm talking about. Thrusting the body up is a tell tale sign of hanging onto the previous turn a bit too long. It's not a necessary ingredient in the transition though and he would be much smoother if he eliminated the staccatto pop and upward move which is pretty obvious, especially when he encounters a terrain roll and it launches him.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 10/25/09 at 8:42am
jasp - could J3rry use ILE to relese the turn?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching