Thanks, Rusty guy, for a honest assessment of a person who probably doesn't deserve as much.
And now I must once again point out where the logic stopped when Wacko began his posts. Wacko threw down a challenge, which most (including myself) took as an insult, that, "...the teaching method used has allowed him to learn in only a few years what it takes most people far more time to learn".
I didn't take it so well because it's hard to swallow that cutting corners CAN in fact get you ahead. Others, Instructors (and wannabes), didn't take it so well because the way he learned wasn't in accordance to their accepted method of education, and so they discounted his claims as contrived and delusional.
But now... Rusty Guy confirms his claims!!!
I, for one have learned that not only are there people out there who are highly coodinated and can learn complex technical movements at a much higher rate than the norm, but... also that many instructors on this forum, especially Gravity, Pierre and John H, are so blinded by their 'tried and true' methods that they're completely unable to admit that other forms of teaching not only have a value, but may be superior to their own methods in certain situations.
Wacko has remained ignorant or apparently oblivious to many of the 'tried and true' methods of teaching and techniques simply because it has helped perpetuate this ongoing debate - HE"S GREAT AT IT! What I want to know is, what are the instructors excuses for continually making light of, or discounting an alternative teaching method for beginners to intermediates when it has been evidenced here on this forum that it works... and works rapidly? Has any instructor here had as much success in bringing a student from scratch to possible level 8 in just - two years?
And while i'm back ragging on Instructors again... why is it that some of you feel you must continually build yourself up and point out your 'incredible' skiing abilities here on this forum when you already seem to have plenty of credibility as it is? Can't you take a cue from Bob Barnes and give humble, straightforward explanations to peoples queries without having to impress them first just how good you really are? Maybe I'm the only one annoyed by it, and perhaps I just have a problem of feeling inferior next to such greatness, but for the life of me I can not understand what purpose it serves other than to reaffirm and 'stroke' ones ...
Is this what makes a good teacher??