New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mogul skiing - Page 13

post #361 of 387
Lars wrote:

 

Quote:
 Edgebiter, Telling a 3 time world champion how to ski moguls is kind of funny.

 

Although I have disagreed some with cvj and nail over the months about their teaching methods and terminology, there's no disputing that the guy cvj has probably forgotten more about moguls than any of us will ever learn.

 

cvj=Joey Cordeau for what it's worth. 

 http://www.amazon.com/Hot-Dog-Skiing-Bob-Mann/dp/0393086909/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1296179935&sr=1-2#reader_0393086909  I wrote a longer reply but when I went to preview it I somehow lost it. I wrote

I wrote a longer reply but think I lost it when I tried to preview it.

I'm not critisizing CVJ he is obviousl very talented, so much the more being 56 years old. I was mearly making some suggestions of ways he could go faster. Had he applied them 30 years ago he wouldn't have been the mogul champion but he would have skied faster.

 

If the link below works look at Floyd Wilkie on the cover (showing the extreme form of what I was suggesting is a way to ski moguls faster) and then scroll down to the picture between the forward and part one. That is Sid Ericksen in a basid ready position I'm describing. He won the Sun Valley mogul event in 1972 and made only about 7 turns coming down Exhibition skipping off the tops of moguls. I timed the 1973 event and if I recall correctly Sid's time was 35 second, about 5 seconds faster than next best time. Most top competitors finished between 42 and 48 seconds. Won top name who did well with the judges using many quick little turns on each mogul took 52 seconds. It wasn't long before knees together and little wiggle turns were what the judges (somethines ski school heads of the area where the contest was held) found best fitted what they considered "good technique" like they taught.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Hot-Dog-Skiing-Bob-Mann/dp/0393086909/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1296179935&sr=1-2#reader_0393086909 

 

If the link doesn't work look up the book on Amazon and click look inside to find the picture of Sid.

post #362 of 387

 

Quote:
Nailbender wrote: 

I'm advocating turning into the mogul face then linking a turn on the backside of the mogul,  I find that's the softest snow on the slope.  You sound like you are describing the scraped shoulder of the backside, not the top. 

 I call the pile of scrapings often found on the top face of the mogul the top. It is the most consistently good place in moguls to make a hard edge check and absorb some speed (with little risk of your edges slipping or skiiding sideways. When going really fast you want to hit the terrain head on. The sides of the moguls can often be used reliably as a place to momentarily edge for balance and turns but if the moguls are steep they don't offer much in the way of speed control.

 

 

Quote:
Nailbender wrote:  

I hear you regarding the turns judging in today's mogul competitions.  In other threads we've discussed how it's more of a "body form" critique, blended with a "bobble counting" tally.  The judges could really care less how the skier uses the ski.  There is no difference if the skier consistently pivot/slips with the tails wiping back and forth with the tips never leaving the fall line or skiers that are carving round turns with their tips following their tails and exhibiting definitive cross under at the turn finish, as long as the knees don't come apart and the skier maintains a straight back.

 

I do think there are advantages to having the knees and feet close together, more so the knees, but neither locked together,  As far as contest judging goes, "form" should be a distant secondary critique as the primary focus should be on the turn, what the skis are doing and the roundness of the turn, how far the feet get laterally away from the body.  Turns judging in a man made zipperline course is really limited to this.  Since the introduction of the perfect zipperline competition course, the line a skier challenges has been removed from the equation and the sport for that matter.  The skier taking more risk and displaying technical skills by skiing OVER the mogul has not been seen in mogul competitions for over 20 years.  There is literally an entire generation of competitors that have never seen mogul skiing like CVJ's. 

 

To my mind, there never should have been judges for the mogul contests at all. Form follows function. Let's find out what form is the fastest at getting someone through the moguls with some control. Why prejudge what that is supposed to look like? My plan (never adopted), set up a dual elimination mogul race with a finish gate that must be entered from below. Qualify the competitors with a solo run and pick the best 16 or 32 times to compete in the dual elimination finals. The reverse finish gate proves the skier was in control enough to get slowed down at the finish (or not have to hike too far back up to it to finish ahead of the other skier). the winner will have made 5 or 6 runs (counting the qualifying run). This proves his technique (no matter how wild and out-of-control it might look to the judges) is a functional technique he can repeat over and over again and is faster than each of those other skiers he competed against. Use real moguls for the course, not the man made zipper line moguls that mainly judge the competitors nerve reaction time with his knees tied together to please the almighty judges, rather how well he can free ski real moguls.  Two reasonably wide lanes marked in the snow, set so the courses are equal and so there is no easy route off to the side around the worst moguls (and to have some run-out to the side between the competitors and the crowd for safety), might be desirable. The four competitors eliminated who had the next fastest runs could have an elimination round (or the best times could determine the place order for the remaining competitors). No jumps/billboard would be needed to spice up this competition for the crowd and therefore the most functional mogul skier that day would likely win, not a great aerialist who can also run the zipper fast and look like the judges think a skiers should look in the process. This kind of event would evolve the best mogul techniques rather quickly not rely on the opinions of the "chosen few" to decide.

 

 

Quote:

I'm not sure you fully understand the technique required to ski the technical line or what the technical line is for that matter, but I could be wrong.  I suggest you read the entire thread if you haven't.  It would be great if you could post some video displaying the small technique tweaks that you describe above, it would help clarify the discussion. 

  

I've never heard of the technical line before, I gather that is something SVMM made up. While irrelevant, if we are talking about finding functional techniques, I think I pretty much agree with you about what the most functional line will evolve to be (if evolution is allowed to occur). Personally, I think it will be using the slush piles for speed control, but you will find the tip drops, wiggle turns on the backside, putting the uphill ski ahead, shifting weight to the downhill ski, and anything else not funtional to the task (especially if it takes time, effort, or concentration away from the task) will soon be eliminated from the fastest skier's "functional" repertoire.

 

 

Quote:
 CVJ wrote:
Look slow go fast, look fast go slow is what we believe 

 I agree that the most efficient method will be trimmed of all extranious motions be they up, down or sideways (or the flailing of any body parts). They also, however, won't involve the holding, or trying to hold any body positions. In fact, they won't involve thought at all. Concious thought nearly always trips up the body when it is performing any physicall act. That is why instruction is so dangerous. Experimentation is what the body needs, not judgement. Right, wrong and proper are impediments to learning and so-called "instructors" should try to avoid them and warn their students against adopting any "correct" way to do things. leave the body free to learn, don't load it up with shoulds and technical analysis. They will only freeze up the body as you mind's processing power will be diverted from the task at hand by thinking. Most likely the student will find that even if helpful now any belief they adopt will later become an impediment to improvement and will later result in a plateau in the progress of the learner. When I'm helping a friend with there skiing. the first thing I want to know is what they believe and are trying to do. I suggest they try the opposite for awhile and free themselves from the straight jacket they have placed on thier bodies ability to learn by trying to do the "correct" thing. I call it Skistyle Freeing (TM).

 

post #363 of 387
Thread Starter 

Edge, My theory on mogul skiing has always been this, "if it isn't fun for you and you don't finnish the run with a hoot and a smile on your face, stay the hell on the groomers."

 

In the everyday world, skiing moguls isn't about skiing the line you choose as fast as you can. It's about having a good time with a bunch of friends laughing  off the spills and delivering faceshots to those who fall in your line as you ski over or by them.

 

It's about using different methods and skills you've learned to adapt to the conditions of the run and the size, shape and spaces of the moguls, as well as the steepness factor. To me, this doesn't mean using one method. It usually means using a variety of techniques and lines to master it, or just survive it.

 

Me and the guys emulated Joey Cordeau and his style when we first got into mogul skiing. He was the best. We watched him, skied the same runs with him and tried to be him every run.

 

It's about the fun, not the speed. I've never agreed with World Cup judging. I'm old school. It's always been about the turns, not the speed. To me, the downfall of mogul competition has been the speed factor. That said though, if you want to compete on the W.C. the fastest way is the zipperline. Which isn't always the  way to ski in our everyday world. If it's there, go for it.

 

It's about the smile and the size of it, not the way you get it.

post #364 of 387

Speed is derived from the COM diving for the fall line along with every move the skier makes is down the mt. Skied with Wilkie in the day. Once again what you see is smooth skiing that looks slow but is not just look slow go fast look fast go slow.

 

Edgebyter When going to any ski event a race, mogul contest, big mt. event, or even half pipe you can see the skier who will win by watching how the skiers are diving for the fall line with every movement. In short the skier who is racing there skis with there body movements and wants the COM to beat the skis to the bottom of the run will more than likely be the winner in most cases.

 

Challenge you to get your pole plants more down the hill and lead with your COM by moving forward into the turns.

 

Yesterday asked one of the kids how long he has skied that way and not improved he new the answer 3 years. Sad because if the skiers don't have the right or correct ideas about basic skiing they will not improve at the same rate as the skier who has worked on proper or correct basics. The skier was using more of a mogul specific technique instead of basic skiing technique. Another kid that bought into basic skiing technique has improved at a rapid rate and knows now how he will be improving there is no stopping him and he can be his own coach. John Wooden said it all at UCLA be quick but don't hurry. His teams where not better basketball players then the others but better at the basics.

 

When we competed in moguls it was always duals so speed was a major factor. Turns and speed could win. With the better turn being the skier who had more angulation.  This was the way I skied faster then most or all the skiers on expert runs that where steeper than the runs that the World Cup skis today. Most runs that zipper line WC comps are on today are flat or green runs with Deer Valley being the steepest and hardest course to ski today.

post #365 of 387

 

Quote:
EB wrote:
 
I've never heard of the technical line before, I gather that is something SVMM made up. While irrelevant, if we are talking about finding functional techniques, I think I pretty much agree with you about what the most functional line will evolve to be (if evolution is allowed to occur).

 

EB, I coined the descriptive "Technical Line" to describe and differentiate the resulting fall line when the skier navigates the route over the tops of the moguls from the easily seen and most often skied zipperline.  In order to hold the technical line and carry speed, a skier needs to have developed technically sound carving/edging skills that are required to execute brush carved turns in steep terrain which not only gain speed control, but the ability for the skier to dictate the location and cadence of the turns they make, as opposed to letting the mountain dictate the rhythm in a pre-determined turn location (the rut).  A skier cannot pivot/slip/skid down the technical line, a skier cannot skid sideways up and over the mogul face, they must carve a round turn into it.  There is no faking it down the technical line as opposed to the zipperline where today a majority of WC competitors simply TT (twist to turn) and very quickly pivot/slip/skid the man made course, seldom initiating a turn with shovel edge pressure.

 

 

Quote:
EB wrote:
 
To my mind, there never should have been judges for the mogul contests at all. Form follows function. Let's find out what form is the fastest at getting someone through the moguls with some control. Why prejudge what that is supposed to look like? My plan (never adopted), set up a dual elimination mogul race with a finish gate that must be entered from below. Qualify the competitors with a solo run and pick the best 16 or 32 times to compete in the dual elimination finals. The reverse finish gate proves the skier was in control enough to get slowed down at the finish (or not have to hike too far back up to it to finish ahead of the other skier). the winner will have made 5 or 6 runs (counting the qualifying run).

 

I like speed, not only does it make a statement, it is the ONLY component of judged mogul skiing that the judges cannot take away from the skier.  Today's mogul competitions do not promote advanced skiing skills IMO.  Again most competitors use a very refined pivot/slip/skid to navigate the course, the "chosen few" are obviously very impressed with this proficient intermediate skiing skill.  It is fast, consistent and gains the skier very controllable speed control, the downfall of the technique is the laterally impact the skier repeatedly submits themselves to gain this stability and does nothing to promote developing advanced technical skiing skills to ski natural terrain.

 

I really like your idea of "mogul racing", as I have been thinking along the same lines for awhile.  No judges, No air, just fast in control skiing with the skier challenging the mountain, judged only by the clock.  I don't think it is a replacement for today's mogul skiing competitions that could better promote solid natural terrain skiing by reverting back to natural moguls and penalizing the pivot/slip/skid, but an entirely new mogul/racing format which would actually take racing BACK closer to it's roots of racing gates down natural terrain, retro in a way, pre-grooming machines and artificially prepared slopes/terrain.

 

Unlike your vision of an open slope with a single control gate at the bottom, my course would have more gates that would require a skier to develop the skills required to defy the rut and turn into the mogul face, stuff the tips.  I have coined my version of mogul racing, "Technical Line Racing / TLR" and would promote the competitors develop advanced skiing skills.

 

A version of TLR would place a series of 6 gates at random intervals down a 300 meter course.  The racer would have to navigate the 6 gates/turns around the gates and then be free to ski the next section of terrain in what ever fashion they determined most efficient and then have to enter the next 6 gate flush in control in order to hold the technical line section...repeat a couple more times down the coarse.  This mogul racing format would bring racers and mogul competitors into the same arena on steep natural terrain would determine the best "All Mountain Racer".

 

Here's a couple of pics showing TLR gate placement and how the gates would be skied.

 

SVMM-Mogul-Racing-Series.jpg

 

TLRgate1.jpg

 

TLRgate2.jpg

 

post #366 of 387

 

 

 

Quote:
Nailbender wrote:

Unlike your vision of an open slope with a single control gate at the bottom, my course would have more gates that would require a skier to develop the skills required to defy the rut and turn into the mogul face, stuff the tips.  I have coined my version of mogul racing, "Technical Line Racing / TLR" and would promote the competitors develop advanced skiing skills.

 

A version of TLR would place a series of 6 gates at random intervals down a 300 meter course.  The racer would have to navigate the 6 gates/turns around the gates and then be free to ski the next section of terrain in what ever fashion they determined most efficient and then have to enter the next 6 gate flush in control in order to hold the technical line section...repeat a couple more times down the coarse.  This mogul racing format would bring racers and mogul competitors into the same arena on steep natural terrain would determine the best "All Mountain Racer".

 

Here's a couple of pics showing TLR gate placement and how the gates would be skied. 

 

Your gates and your proposed gate placement foster a predetermined result, namely directing the skier to follow your technical line that has been made into the predetermined winning line. It might be a teaching tool for the SVMM system, but any gates on the hill (other than a very wide starting gate--giving the skier a bigger choice of lines from the start) and a finish gate to be entered from below, even if they are widely separated, are likely to create the problems of forcing the competitors into certain routes between them and creating racing ruts especially around the gates. Best to only have that racing ruts happen once--at the sides of the finish gate that must be entered from below. Another problem with the tight gate placement you propose will be the deterioration of the tight technical line as the competition progresses. the same problem ski racers have now. Are we going to ice the moguls like a race course to minimize it?

 

Freestyle competitors in the early 1970's used to complain about the moguls they had to ski through that were made by novice skiers. On most of the slopes the contests were held on, like Exhibition in Sun Valley, that wasn't much of a problem because those who would make a bunch of traverse ruts back and forth across the hill stayed off that slope anyway (since they weren't forced to go down it--as they are in some ski areas). The competitors quit complaining after the Jackson Hole contest in 1974. The ski area had roped off the hill to all skiers for the week prior to the event, and plenty of new snow fell that week). In other words the competitors formed all the moguls on that course themselves starting from a smooth white snowfield. What resulted were the most vicious moguls I think I ever saw. Since most top competitors edged on the soft mogul faces in roughly the same place using very hard (no skid, edge jams) they soon had dug deep holes into those mogul tops. Once in the hole you were surrounded on three sides by steep walls needing to be climbed over (the forth side was back up the hill where you came from) before flying out and then landing in the next deep freestyler dug hole. I heard no more complaints about the novices ruining the moguls after that experience. Your gates in the moguls would concentrate that problem and offer no escape routes for the later competitors (other choices of line).

  

post #367 of 387

 

 

Quote:
CVJ wrote: 

Edgebyter When going to any ski event a race, mogul contest, big mt. event, or even half pipe you can see the skier who will win by watching how the skiers are diving for the fall line with every movement. In short the skier who is racing there skis with there body movements and wants the COM to beat the skis to the bottom of the run will more than likely be the winner in most cases.

 

Challenge you to get your pole plants more down the hill and lead with your COM by moving forward into the turns.  

 

That is because you are thinking like the judges, A very good way to think if you want to win a judged contest, I might add. You appear to have done that very well. However, if you want to go really fast through rough terrain you need to get your feet out front to fend of that oncoming terrain. If you are forward over your skis like the ski schools and judges dictate (an artifact from about a century ago now--Hannes Schneider's Arlberg System of teaching that begins with the Snowplow/Wedge--or whatever they have decided to rename it now to upgrade the image--you must be forward for the snowplw, stem, stem christie turns to work and most parallel skiers remain forward in, what I call, a parallel wedgy--and their tails slide/brush around at the end of the turn as a result). If you are well forward on your skis and diving downhill all the time, all it takes is something that slows your skis a little too much and you are on your face in the snow. If your feet are out in front of you the same terrain just brings you back into balance. Skiing moguls fast is about anticipating the effects of the terrain on you and your skis and compensating for the results in advance, not holding some proscribed position the judges like to see (that essentially puts your body in a straight jacket--preventing it from learning what it needs to do to go faster).

 

By the mid-1970's the "free" was gone from Freestyle and things just went further downhill from there. These days I relate more to Racers and Extreme skiers, where back in the late 60's and early 1970's Freestyle/Hot Dogging was the reaction/revolution to the tight assed out-dated old man's ski instruction bureaucracy that ruled at the time (and was free of the course setters gates as well). As usual, the entrenched bureaucracy won out and is still with us, Freestyle was sanitized into Slavestyle (but they co-opted the old name anyway) once they got hold of the freestyle judging (although many of those who gravitated to judging who had formerly been competitors had preconcieved notions themselves that the best skiers should look like them, and that wild, free, and fast runs were just skiers out-of-control (since they didn't hold their knees together and lean forward like the BASICS or FunDEMENTEDiles proscribed they should look like) and needed to be marked down as much as possible even though they were who was pushing the edge and had created the excitement that made Freestyle popular with crowds and TV viewers in the first place. When you are rally pushing the envelope it is the ability to recover that makes the difference. Staying in a proscribed much smaller envelope teaches you to conform. That is Slavestyle, not Freestyle.

 

Try giving your students a goal that is not form related and the place and the means to try to achieve that goal and I'll bet they will improve rapidly. How about teaching moguls by starting at near the bottom and asking them to get to that nice safe snow on the flats as quickly as possible. Start from a little higher up the hill next time. Leave it to there own bodies as to how to deal with the moguls between them and the flats but make the goal to get there faster than the guy next to them. Avoid the strong tendency you will have to correct them. I'll bet they will work out what works best themselves and given equal natural abilities will get better at it than those you spent as much time with teaching them the fundementediles on the easy slopes.

 

Lars, I have no disagreement with anyone skiing exactly how they want to. Whatever works for you is okay with me. Personally, I like a challenge so I tend to take things more to the extreme. In advocating skiing moguls faster I'm talking to the younger person who's goal is to be the fastest skier among his friends. Being the smoothest, the quickest turning, the flashiest, or any other extemes are all legitimate goals to my mind. Pick whatever you want and then try to improve in that realm. I developed my own "phantom turn" in the 1960's by pushing my limits on how little I could move my body from a ridgid standing position and still make parallel turns. 

post #368 of 387

 

Quote:
EB wrote:
 
Your gates in the moguls would concentrate that problem and offer no escape routes for the later competitors (other choices of line).

 

I've thought about that.  Since it's never been done before, I'm not sure how fast the ruts would form before the mogul face was cut in half or quartered actually as the skier could enter the gates from either the left or right side of the top gate on the mogul face.  I've set up pine cones as gates and skied the section several times and hardly put a mark in the mogul face or the backside, the bumps were very firm as we haven't had snow for a month and we've had a freeze thaw cycle.  I don't have any idea how the course would hold up after 100 skiers, or how soon the 6 gate sections  would degrade.  The only way to really find out is to set up a course and get a pack of skiers to make laps on it in and observe what happens.

 

I was actually surprised how easily the section could be skied using the pine cone gates, it was very natural and I didn't have to ski differently or force any movements.  I think it only makes sense to use short gates,  as I wouldn't want to introduce or require any unnatural "blocking" or hand/arm movements.  They would certainly have to be taller than pine cones though. :)

 

I can see how the "hike up gate" has some merit, but don't see how a single gate at the bottom promotes fall line skiing where turning technique must be used to gain speed control.  There are to many ways to get to the bottom quickly that don't promote fall line skiing or advanced turning skills.  I do like the concept that the "hike up gate" plays to the advantage of a skier that can basically stop on a dime at a given spot, but there are ways to skid to that point also.  I can also see how side stepping skills are very valuable, but don't really see the relationship to couple them with turning skills.

 

Don't get me wrong EB, I like the creativity and thinking outside the box in your suggestion and don't really care for "opinion" to determine an events outcome.  This is why mogul skiing had to be "made for TV", because the Olympic committee didn't want to introduce another "judged" event, but big air sells advertising and that's what mogul skiing, slope style and 1/2 pipe are really all about, the skis are only used to get to the jump.  I think we agree that they are aerialist competitions, not really skiing competitions and is why we both think a mogul race (judged by the clock) could be a successful format.  Just getting to the bottom of a mogul field as quickly as possible regardless of how speed control is gained or the requirement of holding at least sections of a  tight fall line is not going to promote the advantages of developing advanced technical turning skills that build on basic solid skiing skills though.  I can see the challenge of racing gates in natural terrain, or some variation of gate placement, as a way to demonstrate and promote the advantages and development of advanced skiing skills. 

 

BTW, I skied Exhibition, from the very top to the bottom, in about 12 turns once.  It was an amazing day, the patrols opened the run for the first time of the season with about 40"'s of virgin thigh deep powder.  It was surreal, we were at the bottom way to quick, I told my wife that's probably the easiest run on Exhibition I will ever make in my lifetime and it has yet to be matched yet.  This was about 12 years ago. :(

post #369 of 387

 

Quote:
 Nailbender wrote:

I can see how the "hike up gate" has some merit, but don't see how a single gate at the bottom promotes fall line skiing where turning technique must be used to gain speed control.  There are to many ways to get to the bottom quickly that don't promote fall line skiing or advanced turning skills.  I do like the concept that the "hike up gate" plays to the advantage of a skier that can basically stop on a dime at a given spot, but there are ways to skid to that point also.  I can also see how side stepping skills are very valuable, but don't really see the relationship to couple them with turning skills.

 

Don't get me wrong EB, I like the creativity and thinking outside the box in your suggestion and don't really care for "opinion" to determine an events outcome.  This is why mogul skiing had to be "made for TV", because the Olympic committee didn't want to introduce another "judged" event, but big air sells advertising and that's what mogul skiing, slope style and 1/2 pipe are really all about, the skis are only used to get to the jump.  I think we agree that they are aerialist competitions, not really skiing competitions and is why we both think a mogul race (judged by the clock) could be a successful format.  Just getting to the bottom of a mogul field as quickly as possible regardless of how speed control is gained or the requirement of holding at least sections of a  tight fall line is not going to promote the advantages of developing advanced technical turning skills that build on basic solid skiing skills though.  I can see the challenge of racing gates in natural terrain, or some variation of gate placement, as a way to demonstrate and promote the advantages and development of advanced skiing skills.  

 Please give me some examples of ways to get down a boundried mogul field, like I suggested, quickly that don't promote fall line skiing or advanced turning skills. Your concern assumes that advanced turning skills have already been defined by someone and need promoting. I'd say if it works to make you faster and it works to get your speed under control to stop on one of the steeper sections of the hill  (or better still, carve a turn so well you turn up the hill through the finish gate with good speed), that the best at doing so will redefine what advanced turning skills are (at least for high speed in moguls). Advanced turning skills for moguls will likely be a little different than what works best on a slalom course. I'll bet they will turn out to be not that much different though.

 

Back in the 70's the best aerialists were already high divers and trampoline artists. Some were also hot skiers too, but some could do little more than run straight down the hill and snow plow. Some adopted aerials because the kickers gave them more air time so they could do additional rotations not possible on a trampoline.

 

I don't see the advantages of gates in the moguls, but some wide across hill gates that forced the skiers out of the zipper line straight down the mountain might have some merit if it didn't turn out that they rut up the hill. Why not try everything to see what works best. That is my motto already. I'm not locked into a format, I'd just like to get rid of judges whereever that is possible. Imagine what would happen if there were judges determining 50% of a slalom skiers score. Imagine this first happened in the stem turn era. We'd probably right now be seeing some of the fastest stem turners that could ever be developed winning the races.

 

If basic solid skiing skills is how to best train a mogul racer, mogul racing will end up promote those selling that kind of instruction. If learning by doing, or some other system, produces the fastest mogul skiers then those winners, when interviewed on TV, will probably promote whatever they thought they did to learn to be so fast. Sort of like free market competition vs. a government controlled economy. There, I've just equated predetermined advanced turning skills with communism. Since even a free market needs some rules to keep the competition fair, we will ban parachutes and other stopping devices besides skis and poles.

post #370 of 387

Edge byter  The skiing you talk about sounds like the faster or straighter the skier goes you think they are better skiers? 

 

IMO The skier with more angulation in the turn is better. The further the skis go from the center of the turn is what the skiers should strive for. Skiing like most things has a formula that all skiers need to strive for to become better. Not just do it. Skis are made with camber, side cut, edges,  for a reason so they will turn with proper pressure applied or letting the pressure build up on the skis as the skis go downhill with speed when but on edge or tipped on there side.

 

Basic Basics Basics...................................................................................................... FYI in the 80's there were gates put in the moguls so the skiers could not just zipper line to the bottom. Skiers had to change lines in two places in the course to show there turning skills were not limited to skiing the zipper line. Bring turning back to moguls.

 

The sterile mogul events of today with man made moguls is where the system failed. Because now the skiers don't need to ski any bumps only a zipper line with nothing like a mogul in there path so they don't make many mistakes and turns are not 50% of the skiers score. Every turn is the same and judges only look at what the body position is not how the ski is working> Big problem.

 

Propose with technical line racing that they put a mogul in the zipper line and see what skiers can negotiate that mogul by skiing over it as the skier can no longer avoid skiing over a mogul made by skiers skiing not by hand or machine.

 

If speed is what turns you on you have missed the point speed is useless with no angulation in the turn. It is just going straight with a small edge sets and some fictitious body position. Instead of imitating the body position of a good skier suggest that you go back to the drawing board and learn to be a good skier instead with basic skiing skills.

 

 What's a Chinese Downhill? Maybe this is what edgebyter wants to see get to the bottom any way you want.

post #371 of 387
Thread Starter 

Skied some nice moguls yesterday at Holimont. Ice bumps with about 6" of fluff in them. First couple runs through them made for easy zipperline turns and what I call wiggle turns mainly because the snow helped speed control. Later on it became moguls with piles of snow on top of the bumps and scraped ice in the troughs. Where would you ski these moguls now? Exactly, so I changedd technique and skied more over the tops, yes, with tips bashing the tops where the snow was the best, avoiding the ice in the troughs and turning on the back/downhill side of the moguls where the snow was being pushed.

 

Proving to me at least that my theory of using different technique and methods of attack do to the changing conditions of the moguls and snow surface. Also proving that knowing enough skills to be able to adapt is critical to being sucessful and enjoying the day.

 

also proving that my 60 year old legs don't ski as many runs as they did last year or the year before. LOL.

 

Also, the run of the day for me was poaching the ropped off section of the mogul race course that had over a foot of nice light pow covering it. Manmade evenly spaced bumps that reminded me of the "Hero Snow" 4" of fluff over the groomed. There is no doubt that manmade hero bump runs can be zipperlined by almost anyone with some kind of basic knowledge and athletic ability being in good physical condition. Turn, burn and plant poles see ya later. Much easier than the other runs that were made by a conglomeration of skiers and snowboarders with varrying techniques.

 

Food for thought, remember when mogul runs were signed at the top stating that to ski the run, you must be on 195's or longer skis? I do. I actually rememberr one ski day at Park City when I came upon a Ski Patroller escourting a young man off a nice bump run cause he was skiing on 175's and was hacking them up. Imagine what they would have said to boarders? wow!

 

But, the moguls were more uniform and rounded then. Made for some great bump skiing it did. The old Pre's, Dynastar V9's, K2 KVC Comps, Rossi 4S's God, I think I was on 205's most of the time.

 

Anyhow, I understand where edgebyter is coming from. If you want to compete on the WC circuit, you've got to be fast and zipperline. Which in my book is ok if you can and are good at it, healthy and all. (at least for the time being) But from a technical standpoint, mastering basic and technical skiing fundamentals, in other words, learn to be a great skier before you jump right into mogul skiing. Especially at an early age. I think from the standpoint of longevity, this person would be a much better skier overall. Did that come out right?

 

When I think back over the 50 some years i've been skiing, all the changes in equipment, having to adapt to new technology and learn new techniques and new uses of thee tools we now use, it has almost come full circle for me. I am much better for this. At a point in life when other factors such as age and health come into play, I still feel good about my skiing. the fact that I was a good skier before I was a good mogul skier only made things easier to adapt.

 

It's a thrill for me to ski bumps and ride lifts back up with people 1/3 my age and see the looks on their faces when I tell them how old I am. You don't see many 60 year old bumpers. Especially here where the snow is hard and the ice harder. Shit, if I lived in Colorado, I might have another 10 years of mogul skiing left. Soft snow and all.

 

I can't believe this thread has gone on this long. It's been fun. Especially conversing with an old Idol of mine. Never been to Idaho.

 

Hey, it's still snowing here. weve had well over 150" so far and I'm taking my tired legs to HV tomorrow. Going to Colorado on  the 18th for some good snow. Got to get them in shape for Pali and Mustang etc.

post #372 of 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvj View Post

Edge byter  The skiing you talk about sounds like the faster or straighter the skier goes you think they are better skiers? 

 

IMO The skier with more angulation in the turn is better. The further the skis go from the center of the turn is what the skiers should strive for. Skiing like most things has a formula that all skiers need to strive for to become better. Not just do it. Skis are made with camber, side cut, edges,  for a reason so they will turn with proper pressure applied or letting the pressure build up on the skis as the skis go downhill with speed when but on edge or tipped on there side.

 

Basic Basics Basics...................................................................................................... FYI in the 80's there were gates put in the moguls so the skiers could not just zipper line to the bottom. Skiers had to change lines in two places in the course to show there turning skills were not limited to skiing the zipper line. Bring turning back to moguls.

 

The sterile mogul events of today with man made moguls is where the system failed. Because now the skiers don't need to ski any bumps only a zipper line with nothing like a mogul in there path so they don't make many mistakes and turns are not 50% of the skiers score. Every turn is the same and judges only look at what the body position is not how the ski is working> Big problem.

 

Propose with technical line racing that they put a mogul in the zipper line and see what skiers can negotiate that mogul by skiing over it as the skier can no longer avoid skiing over a mogul made by skiers skiing not by hand or machine.

 

If speed is what turns you on you have missed the point speed is useless with no angulation in the turn. It is just going straight with a small edge sets and some fictitious body position. Instead of imitating the body position of a good skier suggest that you go back to the drawing board and learn to be a good skier instead with basic skiing skills.

 

 What's a Chinese Downhill? Maybe this is what edgebyter wants to see get to the bottom any way you want.


If you use a course on a steep mogul section like Exhibition and end the course in a section equally as steep I don't think you will have any problem with skiers just skiing straight down. A really great high speed skier with really long skis (in short ski made moguls) might be able to ski straight down without falling if he got very super lucky as well. I've gotten away with this on some shorter sections of steep moguls a couple of times myself.  The first time I entering the moguls at too high a speed and lost speed control but doidn't want to fall hard in those icy moguls. I sucked up the bumps and then saw the three novice travers gullies angling across the slope just ahead. Mouthing an epithet about excretment I managed to prejump the first to ruts but landed square into the third one. that flung me high into the air and too far forward. I managed to get one foot on the ground facing straight ahead but my other ski had to be thrown back into the Royal Christie position to get the other ski on the ground. I got a break and landed on the back of a mogul and had a short stretch where I didn't run directly into any bumps and managed to get my other ski back around and down on the snow to finish making it through a couple of more bumps and on to the flats beyond. I so wish that someone had filmed that run. That was a long time ago in the 1960's but with such an intense experience it is still very memorable. I even remember I was on, what I think were the first fiberglass skis made, Toni Sailors. I had broken my 215cm Head GS's and was trying out some shop demos that seemed kind of short to me then at 205cm. My point is that, there is no way (short of a parachute) this skier going straight down steep moguls is going to get his speed under control again to enter the finish gate from below on a steep section of the course even if he can run it straight until there every time.

 

I agree that the best skiers are those that can keep their head moving is a nearly straight line down the slopes and through the bumps and can angulate the furthest side to side, reaching for the best places to get a solid edge set and turn. This requires stong edge sets and carved turns (and good quick carving skis) to pull off. Further, I think the best skiers are those that can ski in the most radical fore and aft body positions over their skis as well as side to side extremes, giving them a wider range of body positions they can control their skis from and thereby maintain the ability to recover from those positions when they find themselves in them by accident. Putting yourself in a lot of odd positions practicing ballet tricks on skis also teaches you the way back out of those awkward positions, like the Royal Christie I found myself in, described above that I was glad I knew, when they happen to you by accident. To my mind, it is the ability to take it to the edge of control, combined with a great ability to recover when you've gone beyond that edge, that will make for the fastest skiers in moguls and other rough terrain. This is not something you can learn from a book, or even from a great instructor. It takes years of experience. That said, there is nothing wrong with learning good basic fundementals skills as long as you don't make them your religion. However, you need to be willing to go beyond them when something else will work better in the terrain you are in and at the speed you are going. The trouble with most of what is taught as basic fundementals is that they are very limiting and don't lead directly to better skiing but rather require unlearning before one can advance. They usually only work at slow speeds and on groomed slopes and get in the skiers way in rough terrain. I liked what you and Nailbender were saying in this thread, because I thought that much of what your were proposing were much better fundementals than what is normally taught in PNSIA ski schools (and most other ski schools). I still think you are too hung up on having your knees together and weight always forward though and think skiers willing to doubt their religion, and explore realms beyond it will be able to learn to ski faster than they already do. Why not try an experiment, starting on groomed slopes see how far you can sit back and still control your skis. You might find you can carve them even better back there from the back seat. Later, when your find yourself accidentally in the back seat and are able to recover from it, you can thank me for the tip. You might find you are more free to go there to glance off some terrain wall ahead if youv'e been there before and know you will have a reasonable chance to recover once your skis have cleared the wall.

 

I didn't pay much attention to Freestyle in the 1980's, I had moved on to other pursuits by then. Were there gates as well as jumps in the mogul run then or had they gotten rid of the jumps (that started appearing in the mid 1970's--I think the first jumps in the mogul course I remember were at the Park City contest in 1974 or 1975)? This Park City contest was where Freestyle Skiing rules and courses started to go very wrong, for my tastes anyway (much as you think it went downhill after you competed--I just think the decay and rigidity started a lot earlier).

 

A Chinese Downhill? Besides being racist, this sounds like an event from the movie "Hot Dog". Sort of a mass Skier-Cross in the moguls maybe. I want to compete in Skier Cross,do you think they will they let us old farts use hip, forearm, and shoulder pads (like I already do when free skiing now)? In moguls, the fatality rate in such a race, would probably be too high (except for the fastest skiers who could get out ahead of the crowd, stay there to the finish, and never fall). Survival of the fittest in action! In 1934, the first Silver Skis race on Mt. Rainier (from about 10,000' to 5,000' had a "geschmozzel" (mass) start, and I undestand, a few crashes. " "" sta...,    ,

 

 

post #373 of 387

Edge byter Look again as you missed that we are moving fore and aft and propose that all skiers do this but quicker faster is what skiers should be working on not just point the skis downhill and take a ride. This starts with an up and down motion then becomes fore and aft.

 

There is a formula to get to this expert level. It is not just going straight, fast, and just reacting. Skill development is what we strive for with movements and feeling what the  skis do rather than some useless drills.

 

Racist this is totally wrong just because we mention a nationality does not mean we are degrading them or any one else. Don't take it personal we did not invent skiing or the Chinese Downhill but it is fun to do try it with your friends some time we do it all the time to keep things fun.

 

There is no skill involved in going fast or straight without being in control.

post #374 of 387

:) 

post #375 of 387

Sounds like FUN Lars, I'm glad someone is getting the good!

post #376 of 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars View Post

Skied some nice moguls yesterday at Holimont.

 

Also, the run of the day for me was poaching the ropped off section of the mogul race course that had over a foot of nice light pow covering it. Manmade evenly spaced bumps that reminded me of the "Hero Snow" 4" of fluff over the groomed.


That line over on Cascade is going to be $$ after this week's snow. I hope you get over there to enjoy it. I would have been there, but working a real job gets in the way.

 

I watched them build the man-made bumps the other day. I think that in a few weeks that line will be a really great course. It's fun to watch some of those kids ski and jump. You should swing by on a weekend sometime - it's about the same as during the week - just more crock pots.

 

beercheer.gif

post #377 of 387
Thread Starter 

Cascade it was Greg. Couple of nice lines but not much in length.

 

The line of moguls in front of the main lodge were fun but icey.

 

Skied the Valley Sunday and their moguls sucked. Chute was mounds with death cookies in the middle of them. Looks like they were mowed last week and had new blown in snow on top. Made one run there and left. Yoedler had a few but not good. The best bumps were on Morningstar which were nice and really evenly spaced. Too flat of a pitch but perfect for those who wanted to practice of just to learn.

 

Holimont is so much better.

post #378 of 387



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cvj View Post

Edge byter Look again as you missed that we are moving fore and aft and propose that all skiers do this but quicker faster is what skiers should be working on not just point the skis downhill and take a ride. This starts with an up and down motion then becomes fore and aft.

 

There is a formula to get to this expert level. It is not just going straight, fast, and just reacting. Skill development is what we strive for with movements and feeling what the  skis do rather than some useless drills.

 

Racist this is totally wrong just because we mention a nationality does not mean we are degrading them or any one else. Don't take it personal we did not invent skiing or the Chinese Downhill but it is fun to do try it with your friends some time we do it all the time to keep things fun.

 

There is no skill involved in going fast or straight without being in control.



All the best skiers move fore and aft but very few instructors recognize that, while most are urging there students to push COG more forward and to always stay out of the back seat. I say learn to ski extremely far forward and extremely far aft. When my skis were a little longer and I didn't wear three layers of hip padding (the outer being hockey hip pads) I would sometimes bend over forward until I grabbed my ski tips and then ski in that position. I called it the DOG and even learned to do DOG 360's. I also learned to ski while also sitting back and down on my ski tails and would even lay right back on the tails at times and then bring myself back upright again. My suggestion is to push back your limits in as many directions as you can think of because it will make you a better skier and also excellent at recoveries to avoiding falling. Pointing them downhill and taking a ride is just pushing another extreme that will improve your skiing skills if you've got the guts to try it. I don't see anything wrong with that, but wouldn't ever advise someone it was the only way to learn or to ski.

 

I'm all for feeling what is going on at your feet. That is a big part of what great skiing is all about. Feeling is good because the body learns to feel what works for it. Thinking about feeling is likely to trip one up though. Most instruction just makes the student too self conscious about what they are trying to do and that gets in the way of their bodies natural ability to learn on its own.

 

The next time you want to use an ethnic word to describe something I suggest you substitute your own ethnicity in place of it. Personally, I think most folks are oversensitive about such things, but I try not to offend them just the same. I suspect Chinese Downhill was derived from Chinese Fire Drill, a term used for the practice of a group in a car all jumping out at a stoplight and running around it before jumping back in. If I'm correct about that, and also was of Chinese background I might consider the term Chinese Downhill for a mass start offensive.

 

No skill in going fast straight downhill the first time maybe, but if they survive and do it more they will learn to go even faster and steeper. If nothing else it takes a lot of guts and taking a few risks can lead one into new and unfamiliar areas where some new learning can occur. Personally, I think that not much learning occurs unless you are pushing the envelope and thereby getting at least a little out of control. What your body learns there leads to being able to go even further to the extreme and by doing so naturally learning more control in those realms. The best skiers didn't get there by following a set of rules.

 

You seem to want to shape the student into doing things just like you do, essentially putting him or her into a little box of correct and proper according to CVJ, Should we call it a CVJ Downhill if all your best students ski exactly like you? I'm sure your skills are far beyond what you yourself recognize, much less what you try to get your students to imitate. The result will be to promote the imitation of competence and the "shoulds", "always", "nevers" and "proper techniques" will eventually hold many of them back because they are focusing on a few limiting rules rather than broadening their experience. Personally, I want to help expand the student's possibilities, broaden their abilities, and give them the tools to learn on there own in a much freer, more personal, and exploratory way.

 

I'm sorry if that seems to step on your lively-hood. I only signed on to this forum because I saw a lot more value in the techniques you and Nailbender were advocating compared to what is more widely "taught". I've looked at over three dozen skiing text books and a lot of instructional videos lately to see if I thought anyone was "getting it right". IMO, most are simply horrible, but I liked a lot of what Harald Harb has evolved to teaching over the years, but I certainly don't agree with all of it. Again, like with SVMM, I just agree with a lot more of it than I do with most teaching systems, especially those that are still teaching the wedge, stem, stem christie, lift inside ski/tail hop parallel progression that embeds a lot of learning in their students that will take years of instruction trying to get over to become truly excellent skiers (and thereby benefits the $ki $chool $ystem far more than their students). During all those skiing years some skiers will be able to learn things for themselves in spite of the rules and eventually their bodies may come to ignore what their mind is telling them (and probably telling their own students by then too) and have, through experience, rather than instruction, developed some excellent techniques. Most will reach a certain level of imitative success but never get really good. The main $ki $chool $ystem operates sort of like a parasite, weakening their host, but not enough to kill it and end the parasitic relationship, and it has thereby evolved into a very successful entity. Think about it, if someone had a system that could teach anyone to be an expert skier in a day, or a week, or even one season, they would probably put themselves out of business rather quickly compared to a ski school who could keep their students coming back year after year trying to get over the bad habits they were taught earlier by the same regimented system.

 

My contention is that one learns by experience. The best a teacher can do is to get them to do things that broaden their experience. Trying to mold or shape the skier too much or make them think too much about what they are doing is counterproductive.

post #379 of 387

Edge byter NUTS sorry to inform you that there is some basics that all expert skiers do alike. To think that going out 0f control and not following some formula to turn the skier will get better is why the pivot skid turn is done in the zipper line. This skiing reaches a plateau for skiers who concentrate on this technique. We push our limits more by not skiing the zipper and going straight into the moguls and blow them to pieces is the goal.

 

SVMM with skiing 100 days a year for 3 years will bring you to be an expert skier that is there own coach is what I preach. The doors are wide open the skier can do any discipline the desire.

 

What feeling the skis do carving turns by applying downward pressure between the ski and the snow. Don't spread the butter, cut the bread. Use your ski like a knife that cuts.

 

To think that every skier will look the same after skiing SVMM is wrong. Skiers will have there own style on how to make this happen as every ones body is different.

 

Your statement about every one looking the same is true about zipper line skiers. They want to be in a compressed little ball, with there arms and elbows in, with very little pressure on the skis and only setting an edge with no angulation in the turns. 

 

Will be posting video of last weeks Sun Valley USSA Mogul event and show some of the different ways that our skiers look with there own style. As with the skis doing the work the skiers have knowledge that will allow them to take mogul skiing turns to the next level. BTW the skiing was rock hard and icy this weekend. SV is a hard pack mt.

 

Save the race card for some other day. Feel the skis drills are over rated.

post #380 of 387

Here is some video look at and see that not every skier looks the same. They have there own style on how they make the skis work. But they don't depend on the mogul to make the turn.

 

The last skier is more zipper line technique. glued together at the legs and body.

 

post #381 of 387

post #382 of 387
post #383 of 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvj View Post

Edge byter NUTS sorry to inform you that there is some basics that all expert skiers do alike. To think that going out 0f control and not following some formula to turn the skier will get better is why the pivot skid turn is done in the zipper line. This skiing reaches a plateau for skiers who concentrate on this technique. We push our limits more by not skiing the zipper and going straight into the moguls and blow them to pieces is the goal.

 

SVMM with skiing 100 days a year for 3 years will bring you to be an expert skier that is there own coach is what I preach. The doors are wide open the skier can do any discipline the desire.

 

What feeling the skis do carving turns by applying downward pressure between the ski and the snow. Don't spread the butter, cut the bread. Use your ski like a knife that cuts.

 

To think that every skier will look the same after skiing SVMM is wrong. Skiers will have there own style on how to make this happen as every ones body is different.

 

Your statement about every one looking the same is true about zipper line skiers. They want to be in a compressed little ball, with there arms and elbows in, with very little pressure on the skis and only setting an edge with no angulation in the turns. 

 

Will be posting video of last weeks Sun Valley USSA Mogul event and show some of the different ways that our skiers look with there own style. As with the skis doing the work the skiers have knowledge that will allow them to take mogul skiing turns to the next level. BTW the skiing was rock hard and icy this weekend. SV is a hard pack mt.

 

Save the race card for some other day. Feel the skis drills are over rated.


Hit the snow pile on the mogul top hard (exploding it), jamming your edges hard with strong angulation and high downward pressure  on the skis (why on the spur of the moment when joining this group I chose Edgebyter), thus bending the skis with the pressure of absorbing some of your momentum in your legs for a split second (for speed control), while slicing the skis forward from the knees to help prevent them from skidding out at the tails (slicing rather than buttering the bread) but instead carving the skis in a tight radius turn (QCT--that the ski bend helped even with straight skis) that then jet the skis out over the mogul top. These all appear to be techniques I think we can agree upon for skiing natural moguls anyway (except maybe the last one of jetting the skis forward as you clear the mogul--where do you stand on that?) I don't think it took me nearly 300 times skiing to get to learn that though. I'm entirely self taught in moguls and  don't think I ever skied more than 40 days a season. I learned what I learned by pushing the limits of how fast I could ski through the moguls. Those seeming points of agreement above are the things I liked when reading about the SVMM as well.

 

All those things above are not in conflict with what my techique used to be. Resembling Floyd Wilkies (on the cover of Bob Mann's Hot Dog Skiing book) or the picture (pause 9 to 14 seconds into this video) of Karen Huntoon exploding a mogul http://vimeo.com/11348059

 

I think we differ on knees together, dropping the tips over the mogul and turning on its backside, and where you want your center of mass most of the time.You seem to advocate being forward and I'd get further into the back seat the faster I'd go. I suspect you also mainly use inside edges and I used the full range from occasionally only inside edges to mainly outside edges but mostly some combination of the two (during the small part of the time both my skis were on the snow at the same time--which is somewhat more now in my dotage). I liked using outside edges more than inside edges because when your most weighted ski was overedged you were thrown towards the center of your wide apart skis (if you jammed the outside edge). Then a recovery is relatively easy to accomplish by simply skiing off on the other ski, rather than to be thrown to the outside where recovery is very difficult if you over jam your inside edge.

 

No two skiers are going to look exactly alike (except maybe those on the national demonstration teams--not my cup of tea, but whatever floats your boat). My point was that your formula focuses on certain techniques and tries to shape the skier into imitating what you think you are doing so they can imitate you as closely as they can, to do it right. Of course, they are not going to completely succeed at that, but that is the goal. I say learn buy doing and by pushing your limits so you can learn even more while out of your comfort zone, A few tips, like suddenly jamming your edges so you slice (rather than spread the bread) and carve so the tails follow the tips at the end of the turn are probably going to help a skier learn, but getting too technical will just confuse the student and leave them with too much to think about.

 

BTW, are you going to be in SV at the end of March for the early Freestyler's reunion (as part of SV's 75th anniversary celebration).

I see you had bib #11 in the Waterville Valley Chevy contest way back in 1974 (at the age of around 20).

 

I don't know what "feel your skis drills" are, but I think learning to feel the subtleties of the edge pressures along both skis is an important ability that the body will learn for itself with lots of skiing experience. At least if the mind isn't getting in the way of body learning by always focusing on what it is commanding the body to do for it.

 

Is NUTS an acronym for something, or just an exclaimation of disagreement? 

post #384 of 387
Thread Starter 

Hey Edge, it took me 13 pages of back and forth with Nail and cvj to finally fidure out that what they are doing is basically skiing moguls the same way many of us have been doing for years. With minor technical changes and tweaks in there that once explained made complete sense to me.

 

I don't think it flies in competition moguls because of the rules as judged. Turns are more quality, speed is not. And unfortunatly, speed is the most important factor. Which I totally dissagree with.

 

I only ever argued with these guys because when they broke on the scene, it seemed they were claiming to have a new system of skiing moguls. My claim was, I've been using those techniques and skiing that style for many years. Go figure, I fashioned my technique from emulating joey Cordeau, whom I used to follow skiing moguls. So, my claim that I skied like them was true. It wasn't new to me. Maybe others. But, I still zipperline sometimes when the conditions are right.

 

What they're saying works.

post #385 of 387
Thread Starter 

http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20110205/NEWS/110209881/1078&ParentProfile=1055

 

The above link relates to some excellent reading on some mogul skiing clinics and ideas provided by the other Bob Barnes,( Winter Park) and Karpy Karp (Copper Mtn.) both great bump instructors and also gives some insight from some people who have been to their camps as well as some camp dates coming up.

 

Good reading and good advice.

 

BTW, the bumps at the Valley this morning were murder. The little amount of rain we got yesterday afternoon turned what were ice piles into some of the most bullet proof moguls i've ever skied. And I didn't ski them for very long.

 

Changed skis and spent the day carving GS down the blues. Well, Holiday thinks they're Blacks but there's nothing there that relates to Western Blacks.

post #386 of 387

Another reason to stay out of the troughs -- that's where the rocks are.

post #387 of 387

 

Quote:

Compare videos and tell us that it is all the same.

 

1st SVMM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cyq7yoQVV3Y

 

2nd MST http://vimeo.com/3067901

 

I bought the SVMM videos and the Mogul Logic Video series, so I hope that qualifies me to comment.

I think the SV material is probably lighthearted and tongue-in-cheek (I hope that's not a banned turn of phrase in some American states).

 

I viewed both these quoted links and the Zermatt stuff in the comp bumps looked as if the guy in the red-stripe pants was turning and scraping into the shoulder too much.

However SVMM has this NoSAB sticker.  (No Skidding and Banging I think it means)

For me, I prefer the Mogul Logic performances of Chuck Martin.  I do not think he is trying to brand and own mogul skiing.

I look to Chuck Martin as my technical model.  His Mogul Logic series strikes me as perfect bump skiing as I would aspire to ski them.

A great mogul skier doesn't need to say anything.  Everyone can see the performance. There's no discussion required.  Everyone wants to learn how that's done.

I'd say the bumps nowadays are ruined by short carving skis.

(BTW, I've been skiing bumps since 1966 too!).

I don't understand the animosity here on this thread as it seem to me the two sides have been around for 30 or 40 years.

:-)

SkiPresto with Davey

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