Since I was responsible for prompting the creation of this topic I suppose I should comment. I'm not entirely sure where to start. I find it shocking that an instructor (coach?) who has been out of skiing for 10 years is now inventing technique (that by the looks of the video is antiquated by 15+ years) and preaching what is or is not a carved turn... especially when by his own admission he does not have this new carving thing "figured out". Rick's first post stating that the turns are a pivot, smear, and edge set are right on. In addition to Rick's analysis I would also add that there is a violent (beyond noticeable) push off the outside ski (into upward unweighting)... many times into a wedge entry. Combined with the initial comments by Nail about "pushing", "twisting", and "stomping" I think we can safely say that this is NOT a carved turn by any stretch of the definition - regardless of how liberal your definition might be.
That said, I am not one that defines carved turns as only arc-to-arc railroad track turns. I think that the ability to use the full spectrum of "carving" is what creates the best skiers - those who can ski arc-to-arc and in smeared/brushed/scarved turns equally well. So, carving movements can still be used for a non-RR track turn - however, they don't look like what is presented in Nailbender's video at all. Further, aren't we talking about bump skiing here? Flexing? Extending? Isn't terrain absorption important in that arena? It seems to be important for the bump competitors that everyone is linking to. Nailbender's skiing doesn't look like that either. From the looks of the base mechanics of his turn, the only option for terrain absorption is prior to and during the hard edge set and subsequent explosive extension in transition - which is opposite of how I ski bumps... and opposite of what I see in most of the WC bump skiing videos that have been posted in this thread.
My advice [to Nail] would be to do some serious
research, not only on modern technique, but also on what modern skis are capable of and how they are designed to be skied (talk to racers, not instructors). The skiing that is demonstrated in Nailbender's video is not anything I would ever emulate, or teach anyone to emulate. Sure, the skiing is very athletic and might be difficult for those not already comfortable on skis to manage, but that is about it. Low level skiers might be enamored by this kind of skiing, but those who know better [a lot of the ski teaching industry] won't be. Basing a teaching system/method on this kind of skiing would be like basing commercial air travel on the successes of the Hindenburg. Disaster.
Nailbender, I envy opening up more of the mountain to other skiers by teaching them to handle variable terrain with a short turn that can be applied to any situation [that may or may not be penetrable by bullets (attempt at humor)]. I think that you are overlooking many important aspects of all mountain skiing, as well as introducing movements to skiers that will ultimately hurt their progress more than it will help. Things like the hard edge sets, the gross push off, the lack of any direction change or edge engagement pre-fall line, the lack of terrain absorption opportunity (even you get tossed around a few times in your video shot on International, imagine a novice trying to use this technique), the lack of use of the side cut of the ski (we could put you on straight skis and not notice a difference in your turns...), the WEDGE ENTRY to the turn, rotation that looks more like a heel push as opposed to coming from the center of the foot [had to appease the PSIA guys], the lack of any evidence of edge use until the hard edge set at the very end of the turn, and almost no evidence of actively tipping the skis onto edge are all extreme weaknesses of teaching people to ski like this.Here is a compilation of bump skiing
that you might find of interest and use (your skiing doesn't look like this either). I think it is one of the best examples of all mountain bump skiing on the web. You are clearly a skilled, very athletic skier. People who are learning do not have those advantages. Changing your approach shouldn't be difficult for you as long as you are willing to see what needs to change and then make the effort to implement those changes. I think that it would serve your skiing and your teaching very well (my opinion of course).