or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Lingo clarification on Narrow stance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lingo clarification on Narrow stance

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 
Here's animations of Harald Harb skiing, courtesy of your pal, SCSA.

What I want to know is that do gang members and leaders here call this a narrow stance.
<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SCSA (edited September 04, 2001).]</FONT>
post #2 of 46
Harald monoskis? Just kidding! Nice turns. Yes, narrow. Skiing the zipper, his tactic is narrow, but turn one, a slight push to a check, gets late in the line, second turn, craftily turns on inside foot, over the top of the bump. Hey, the guy can turn. Disciplined upper torso, hands etc....great steering too! Oops, was I supposed to notice that?
Second set...nice single turn...how come it ends with a traverse?....still traversing...trouble moving to the next turn?...wonder why? Where is that quick narrow footed, CM move? Musta run out of tape. I like my phot montages with more than one posed turn.
Spanky, Alfalfa over to you.<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Robin (edited September 04, 2001).]</FONT>
post #3 of 46
Yes it is narrow.
Yes it looks functional in it's narrowness

Funny how he starts by 'pushing off' the uphill leg in the second animation(before that Phantom(tm)move).
post #4 of 46
ScSa, Harold has gotten angry if we post material of his that is copyrighted.
I would say that is a very narrow stance. No offense, but given the width of his hips, it looks, I don't know, sort of silly.

Again, I am not really an advanced enough skier to really comment, so I'd like some feedback from the "pros" on my observations.

My first thought: With all his talk about the kinetic chain, it looks as if he is iniated his turns by a lateral thrust of his hips. It could be the way the sequence was photographed, but it looks like he is muscling his turns. {I do that, so I notice it}
And in some sequences, isn't one pole a bit too far behind his body?<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Lisamarie (edited September 04, 2001).]</FONT>
post #5 of 46
Thread Starter 
I'll wait till more posts come in, but I did want to get to yours.

I didn't ask him, but knowing HH the way I do, I'm sure he won't mind - in this case.
post #6 of 46
Thread Starter 
And, I should get to Robin too.

Robin, he's not ending in a traverse, it just looks like he is, because of the size of the animation.
post #7 of 46
Sorry, saw some technical difficulty...didn't know it was the camera's.

edit:bad grammar<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Robin (edited September 04, 2001).]</FONT>
post #8 of 46
Thread Starter 

Have you watched the "2" video?
post #9 of 46
HH looks just the same in double black bumps. I have had the pleasure of watching HH and John Clendenin (former world bump champion) ski some bump runs together. The only thing that I could tell them apart was the jackets.

post #10 of 46
Thread Starter 

Start getting ready now. There will be an SCSA invasion on Fernie.<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SCSA (edited September 05, 2001).]</FONT>
post #11 of 46
Short turns- Notice the open and closing of the legs getting into the turn, Needs to release some of the pinched together legs to allow them to steer effectively especially allow the inside leg to continue steering it he appears to have a dead spot towards the end of the turn. Some of the pinched leg could be caused by some collapsing at the waist. The right pole swing is blocking which also helps to cause the open and close stance and the upper body rotation. The left pole is much more a swing and release.

Large turns- Once again the tightness of the thighs limits his ability to turn the legs this cause a drift into the top of the turn and alot of pressure and edge at the end. He could get more at the top of his turn by opening up his stance (a little)

Pix don't tell the whole story like speed, conditions, slope. Overall great skiing. Large turns I feel have to much hip into the turn. (a topic I mean to start).
post #12 of 46

The opening and closing of the legs is two things: releasing the old stance ski by tipping to the little toe edge and bringing the new free foot back under the hips.

To all:

If you "experts" could ski as well as HH, you would be on the D-Team also. Also you all should brush up on MA. He is not steering with the inside ski. He can take the ski completely off the snow and the outcome would be the same. He is using the design of the ski to turn,

I won't be answering any posts for a few days. Off to LA LA land and the to Yellowstone.

BTW, there is snow in the forecast for NW Colorado tomorrow night above 9000 feet.

post #13 of 46
Rick H- that is the problem he IS not steering the inside leg enough! I don't know but I have a hard time thinking he would say he could pick up the inside ski and it would have no effect, I also doubt he would say he does not steer and continue to tip the inside leg. I would also add you would have much more success doing nothing with the outside leg and only tipping and steering the inside leg.
post #14 of 46
Does PMTS have a demo team? Went to trials one season...scary quantity of talent there. HH is a fine skier, and deserved his spot on the team, no doubt.
By the way Rick, when you get back (since I need a brush up apparently) please share PMTS's MA model. It would be compelling I'm sure.
post #15 of 46
Pierre eh! I'm not so sure he wouldn't make the D-Team now if he were so inclined and politics were not involved. I have had two D-Teamers at my ski school and while they are both great skiers I don't think they have anything on Harald unless his skiing has deteriorated since I last skied (90's) with him.

Bob B, at slower speeds and in larger radius turns wouldn't just tipping the inside ski more (with light pressure on it)allow it to match the outside ski?
post #16 of 46
Thread Starter 
From now on, I will no longer refer to the cult as the cult. I have observed a lot by watching, and I have decided that we have too many members, official and unofficial, to be called a cult.

We cannot be called a gang because we have; documentation, a purpose, and a leader. And, we're much better looking.

We are now, "The Movement".
post #17 of 46
Much better looking? By whose standards??? I've met a couple of "gang members" and they don't get much better looking than that!

Oh, you were talking about their skiing style!

I hope you never fear those mountains in the
Never settle for the path of least resistance

I hope you dance........<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Lisamarie (edited September 05, 2001).]</FONT>
post #18 of 46
I think we've all had similar movements...it's the coffee.
post #19 of 46
Though we've never really "defined" narrow/wide, this is certainly a narrow stance though turn 2 is variable width.

Well I don't doubt that Rick H is right in that I'd be lucky to ski as well as HH. Since we only have that very small animation to look at these comments might not be appropriate if given a longer clip of real skiing.
Looking at turn 2 though, I certainly wouldn't aspire to imitate this technique.
Why the dead spot at the end of that turn and why bring the legs together?

At the end of that turn there seems to be an abrupt rising of the body to vertical. Then it stays there. Is this just the video clip's distortion or is there this "dead spot" in his turns? Certainly in racing this "move" or rather lack of movement towards the new turn would be very slow. In recreational skiing based on this clip it seems a little contrived and unnecessary. I don't know that there's anything "wrong" with it other than aesthetically I dislike it because it disrupts the smoooth flow of the body down the hill.

RickH says:
>>The opening and closing of the legs is two things: releasing the old stance ski by tipping to the little toe edge and bringing the new free foot back under the hips.<<

I don't get the point of bringing the new free foot back under the hips. Why not just leave it where it is and release from there?
To do that the body would be moving "into the future" and would flow down the hill while the skis are being released. In the demonstrated turn though there's an abrupt stop to the flow of the body as the foot comes under the hip. This seems a totally unnecessary movement and I believe the reason Pierre says it would not make the D-team today. (correct me if this is wrong Pierre)

I don't really get why HH chooses to ski this way other than perhaps he has to to demonstrate his method.
post #20 of 46
If the new free foot is "pulled" under the hips during release, narrows the stance up a bit during this moment, and the CM drops downhill (into the future).

No other effort, tweak, or movement needed, release happens, and ZIP, you go into the new turn. One of the things that made me giggle whan I was coached through it.

Tho I may be into the "Movement", I am also getting older, fatter, uglier, and balder, every day!

As a reminder to those who do not understand these things, and are struggling with the concepts, I did not "get-it" either, till I was trained. Trained, not "brain-washed". I can still ski with the other "model", at will. Like the new model better.

It is simply more fun. Like carving is more fun than skidding, but these movements are teachable from beginner to advanced-expert. This is the real power of the "Movement".

These discussions cannot convey all that is happening. You Gotta Ski For Yourself!

Visit me here &gt;&gt;&gt;SnoKarver
post #21 of 46
Thread Starter 

Yeah, but you're still cute as a button
post #22 of 46
>>At the end of that turn there seems to be an abrupt rising of the body to vertical. Then it stays there.<<

I definitely see that in the 2nd sequence too. The thing is he DOESN'T release the edge and flow into the next one, he has to pick it up slightly to release, THEN he tips in for the next. You can see light under the inside ski as he enters that 2nd turn.

Sharp eye Tog, good MA and eye for what works and what works better.

I remember discovering that when a stance widens or narrows between turns it is often a symptom that movement into the next is being delayed. Picking up the next inside ski, or moving it uphill toward the other one is a movement away from the turn, one that won't need to occur if CM goes first. Nitpicking? No. Just recognizing some things work better than others.

No. It isn't wrong, or right.
post #23 of 46
Thread Starter 
Wrong. His upper body never moves. That's his legs flexing.
post #24 of 46

I am trying to understand this statement of yours.

<If the new free foot is "pulled" under the hips during release, narrows the stance up a bit during this moment, and the CM drops downhill (into the future).>

Please see if my example demonstrates my understanding of your statement.

If I am in a left turn with a heavily weighted right ski (Stance Ski?) and I am releasing my edges to make a right turn and transferring my weight to the new (Stance Ski?) or downhill ski (here the left ski in a right hand turn), It is my understanding of your statement above that I am pulling the right foot under my hips which initiates the movement of my CM downhill and through my next turn.

Is this description correct?? And it would seem to me that the pulling of the new “free” foot actually happens before full weighting of the new downhill ski (New Stance Ski?).

Do I get it??? I don’t know my minds eye is having trouble seeing it.


post #25 of 46
Well, no, it's only part of it Tog... Pulling the new free foot/old stance foot closer to the new stance/old free foot(we are in the grey zone, one turn ending, another beginning) helps a skiers balance.

It is the lightening/tipping/narrowing-of-stance with the new free foot (at the same time) that combines to send the CM down the hill. The combination of all three is key.

The release, with the move of the CM to the new inside of the turn... strong and clean... This really feels good...

Sorry, I am no master of words and dissertation. Far more visual... and a "Concrete Random" type of learner/doer/thinker...

But I keep trying...

Visit me here >>>SnoKarver

<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SnoKarver (edited September 05, 2001).]</FONT>
post #26 of 46
My reacton to the posts in this thread is that our experts (mostly those who argue against PMTS as anything signifcantly different or new) don't always get it right and that what they see is heavily tainted by their own predispositions. In this case I have skied next to Harb while he demonstrates and instructs and I have seen and had demonstrated first hand for myself what's going on in his skiing.

People can talk about ACTIVE rotary movements (I exclude the reference made sometimes to the femur PASSIVELY rotating as a rotary movement) and steering being present to a great extent but I disagree. If that's how one does it themselves then perhpaps it is understandable to assume that Harb is doing the same thing to produce these results. Having watched this close up in person I clearly understand how there is very little if any active rotary and steering needed for Harb to ski like this. SnoKarver's explanations in this respect provide a fine explanation of what is going on. With all due respect to Bob, Robin, Pierre, and others, Harb's skis are doing a whole lot more and his legs a whole lot less than they understand or attribute.

I will admit that without the experiences I have had I might be much more inclined to concur with the analyses that some not of "the movement" have offered here. But given that experience it is quite easy to understand the fallacy of their interpretations. I have tried to imitate (certainly not able to copy to the extent I aspire to) this style of skiing by either using mostly active rotary and steering movements or by tippping and turning and letting the ski dynamics do a much larger percentage of the work. At least based upon feedback from outside observers, I can produce similar looking results using either approach (although Harb can readily discern which technique I am using). Most important to me is that the use of active rotary and steering requires a lot more strengh and energy and does not allow me to find the comfort and balance a simpler approach of tipping and turning (for lack of a better moniker) does.

It's a nice opportunity to get a little closer here to reality and away from the theoretical. It let's me understand more clearly how one's bias can lead to misinterpretation. At times I am swayed by the arguments of some here that PMTS does not produce any different results from what they do. The analyses presented here kind of sends me in the other direction.<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by skier-x (edited September 05, 2001).]</FONT>
post #27 of 46
#2 has a very pronounced up and down motion. My definition of efficiency is to keep the CM moving as near to a straight line as possible in both the horizontal and vertical planes. It appears that the closed up feet and knees prevent lateral motion across the skis making "up" the only option(I failed my full exam once because of this opinion. The examiner thought up was they ONLY way in 1985).
This skiing I'm sure is very stylish but when form follows function I find that more pleasing.
I beleive the Beach Boys have a song on the Little Duece Coupe album called "If'n it Don't Go Chrome It".<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SLATZ (edited September 05, 2001).]</FONT>
post #28 of 46
I understand it quite well Pierre, eh!. Can still do it, when asked to. Can vary it from braquage to carving, and scarving in-between. However... I refer you (and others, Tog, SLATZ, etc.) to my early AM post, page 3: http://www.epic-ski.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000491-3.html

skier-x, thanks. I appreciate your awareness. Agree with your comment "heavily tainted by their own predispositions"

Ski For Yourself. What is, is.

Visit me here >>>SnoKarver

<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SnoKarver (edited September 06, 2001).]</FONT>
post #29 of 46
All this rotary stuff is making my head spin..

in the lessons I have taken over the past few years, (Now that I think about it) I don't think the word rotary ever came up. It was always steering, active or passive but more along the lines of steering or "pointing the big toe". usually gently. It seems to me that both sides have a different idea of what the correct word is for the movement and that with different frames of reference, there is conflict. If it works for you and makes better skiers using PMTS terminolgy great. If PSIA/TTS instructors can get the same results via their teaching/training that's great too. Me, I'll just keep taking lessons, learning and experimenting. When something works for me I'll add it to my ever growing set of skills. If it doesn't work for me, it will go into my ever growing set of "here try this" for my friends. Then "lets ski"
post #30 of 46
Harb's stance is very narrow and I suspect that HH has a case of narrow and not very flexible hips. Once you "got em" there's nothing that you can do to spread em.

I have tried splits and stretches and even invested in a mechanical stretcher. Six times a week for six years till I finally gave up with no gain.

I have stayed (red faced) away from these wide/narrow threads. One variable may be the legnth of the ski. On a 188 GS my stance tends toward the very narrow..... akin to HH's. When I went over to a 170 SL I did notice that my stance had widened by several inches.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Lingo clarification on Narrow stance