New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cross Under?

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
I've been seeing the term cross under used quite a bit and read somewhere it works well in the bumps. How is this technique defined?
post #2 of 26
How about this...
While the body continues in a line (e.g. the fall line) the skis go from being on one side of the body to the other. It might look something like this...

. IB
. BI
. B II
. B II
. BI
. IB



P.S. Is this right anyone???

[ January 09, 2003, 10:57 AM: Message edited by: Wear the fox hat ]
post #3 of 26
Fox, Yeah, nice keyboard pix.

Most dynamic ski turns combine some degree of both cross-under and cross-over. In short turns show more cross-under, as in bumps, where the body line is more dominant (down the falline) and the feet/skiis cross-under from side to side as legs retract under body and extend to each side. Longer turns, where the skis line is more dominant, shows the body cross-over from the inside of one turn to the inside of the next. Medium to long radius carved turns with extension thru the edge change are mostly a cross-over. But, if the edge change is done with flexion some cross-under may occur as well as the cross-over. It is all about varying the blend to get the effect you want.
post #4 of 26
Ahhh, now I understand but is there anything "new" about this?
post #5 of 26
There is nothing new under the sun.

i.e. No, it's been around for ages, just technology has moved on far enough that even skiers like me can do this occassionally.

post #6 of 26
Fox, good job, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Here is another something to think about, in respect to cross over.

Oh, before I continue understand that I do not differentiate between cross over and cross under. I use the term cross over for both those occurances (the skis passing under the body and the body crossing over the skis) to define that moment at the end of the turn when when the skier allows the skis to continue across the falline while at the same time the skier releases his resistance to centrifugal force and gravity causing his center of mass to cross over the top of his skis and down the falline. Not directly down the falline of coarse or you would fall right on your nose, it's just how the sensation feels, as though your diving down the falline with you upper body. Actually you have just allowed your body to procede in a line closer to the direction of the falline then that which the skis are traveling, placing the CM inside the skis for the start of the next turn. Long radius or short I define it the same, the difference lieing in how long you ride the arc before you do your release move

Now for my interesting point. (sorry about the 1000 words fox!) With experimenting with this you may find that applying a little heel pressure during the completions phase of the turn encourages the skis to come through more readily and seems to release the potential energy you have stored in the reverse camber very efficiently into the new direction of travel. (dont over do the aft if you try this, keep it subtle guys) Now the interesting part. You might think that riding the tail at the end of the turn would put you in the back seat for the start of the next turn, but stop a second and think about it, if you do the cross over move and allow the body to go down the falline while the skis are still moving across the falline the CM will quickly catch up to the skis and put you in a position to be able to load the tip for the start of the next turn. Feels good when you get the feel of it.
post #7 of 26
Thread Starter 
Okay- that all seems to make sense. What is the technique for making cross under turns?
post #8 of 26

I've been doing this for a year now and I think it's cross-under, or is it?

post #9 of 26
Originally posted by Ott Gangl:
I've been doing this for a year now and I think it's cross-under, or is it?

My vote: It is!
post #10 of 26
That's simply poetry in motion.
post #11 of 26
You know let's talk about that Ott. I'm going to have to say neither. I was there. I saw it. I'll open a can of worms and say a wedel is braquage. So when you wedel does that create Wedeln?
post #12 of 26
I think Wedeln pre-dates the coining of cross-over/under concepts.
I've always thought of them more in refrence to carved turns, or at least ones with minimal re-direction of skis during edge change. Had not considered backdating the concept to Wedeln before. Wedeln has the dominant body path with feet moving under from side to side aspects of cross-under, so if it isn't cross-under, what "-under" would you call it? displace-under? pivot-under? wedel-under? wiggle-under? slither-under? wonder-under? [img]tongue.gif[/img]
post #13 of 26
Originally posted by Arcmeister:
I think Wedeln pre-dates the coining of cross-over/under concepts.
I disagree.

I only heard cross-over/under - "terminology" - after finding this forum recently.

The concept was not new to me though.
post #14 of 26
This may have nothing to do with cross under/over...

It looks like the guy in that image isn't using his ski's edges at all. It appears that all he's doing is making quick skidded turns.

Anyway, just my observation of the image. I guess you don't NEED to engage your edges to "cross under".
post #15 of 26

I guess I simply felt that Ott's wonderful display was to a large degree rotary. It's important to point out the guy did it on a shaped ski. That takes talent!

Yes, the skis move a little laterally, but not a whole lot.Focus on the ski tips.

I don't speak German, however, doesn't Wedeln mean something like "wagging the tail"?

I guess I still would like to lead people to think in a slightly different way. I do believe we experience "crossunder" in bumps,windslab, etc. I think "crossover" will screw up more people than we realize. Yes crossover is the final product of a COG going from slightly inside the line of one turn to the other. I simply prefer suggesting to people we complete a turn "neutral" and then begin the next turn with a movement at the very bottom of the kinetic chain, below the ankle, in the sub talon of the new inside foot, a little inversion or supination!

Is it all blended and does it look like one simultaneous movement? You bet!

Avoid the huckover!

[ January 10, 2003, 06:40 AM: Message edited by: Rusty Guy ]
post #16 of 26
I agree with Rusty Guy. As a teaching concept, I prefer the term "cross under" for one specific and perhaps non-technical reason.

"Cross over" implies that the turn is initiated with the upper body. "Cross under" has the turn happening as a result of the feet and legs.

[ January 10, 2003, 06:32 AM: Message edited by: David7 ]
post #17 of 26

Amen.....well said!
post #18 of 26
Arc, I like the term pivoting for Ott's demonstration of Wedeln. To me, I have always related the meaning of "cross-under" with retraction of the lower limbs (bringing the skis towards the pelvis).

I remember skiing off-piste (off the high traverse at Alta) just before my hip replacment and having a very difficult time intitiating turns. I felt like my skiing was really going to pot. Then I remembered the feeling of cross-under (don't think I knew the term then), bit the bullet, and skied a run with what I would call retraction (requiring both hip flexion and internal rotation - exactly the things my hip rebelled against). It hurt like hell but I could ski the crud again (for at least the one run)!
post #19 of 26
Originally posted by cgeib:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Arcmeister:
I think Wedeln pre-dates the coining of cross-over/under concepts.
I disagree.

I only heard cross-over/under - "terminology" - after finding this forum recently.

The concept was not new to me though.
</font>[/quote]I was refering to when the ski instruction community attached a definitioon to the term and adopted it as teaching jargon. I've known it's use in this context since early '70's.

Wedlen goes back at least to early '50's, probably earlier.

Babble Fish translates "wedlen" to "wag" as above, wag the tails.

I like the "huckover" image,
I've called it "pole vaulting with the outside leg"
post #20 of 26

I can feel a difference that separates two turn types into Cross under and Cross over. And I greatly enjoy the difference!

In the cross over case, I must resist against the inertia of the turn. On longer turns, this often produces a pinched down hill rib cage and a "carry the suitcase" sort of posture. When the stance leg is relaxed, the sensation of the head and upper self being released and extended into the fall line is exhilarating, if not a bit uncertain. "will the ski come around to catch me?". The committment to the fall line insures that the edges change and the carve begins in the new turn.
Gravity does it all, my only requirement is to resist enough to build forces, then release.
This turn type really opened my eyes to the possibilities of riding a carving ski!
A check turn, or pedal turn in the steeps, may be an extreme example of this sensation.

I have crashed a few times, usually on "too gentle terrain" in the embrace of this sensation, as I enjoy the feeling of "hang time".

Cross under turns, short or long, have the body compactly loading the carving ski. As the turn is initiated by rolling the lower self, releasing the ski from the grip of the snow and allow a smooth direction change of the ski, body mass flows without significant resistance up and down the fall line. The ski may generate large lateral forces, as when running gates or bumps. These forces are neutralized in maintainance of the path followed by the CoM.
Very short swing turns embody this sensation for me every time. The lateral accelerations generated by the last turn are resisted and redirected in the next.

Having just written this:
I can summarize that forces and accelerations felt in the fall line tend to give me a "cross over" sensation.

Forces reacted more across the fall line tend to provide "cross under" impressions.

There is a whole system of turns, where I seem to simply ride the ski, mostly when in a fast cruising mode.

Your impressions may be very much different from these.

post #21 of 26
Thread Starter 
I like David7's description the best (assuming he's correct):

"Cross over" implies that the turn is initiated with the upper body. "Cross under" has the turn happening as a result of the feet and legs.

It appears that one can not truly carve using the cross under technique. Or am I wrong?

The cross under technique looks as if it would be most effective in skiing the fall line/zipper line of bumps.
post #22 of 26
Strong carves make for strong cross under sensations!

The ski drives under the skier!

post #23 of 26
>>>It looks like the guy in that image isn't using his ski's edges at all. It appears that all he's doing is making quick skidded turns.<<<

Exactly. That's what wedeln is. It is used on mostly flat terrain where a heavier edge set would slow forward speed too much. As the terrain gets steeper we set the edge as hard as needed and we call this short swing. The body still faces downhill and doesn't appreciably deflect from a straigh shot down the fall line.

When it gets steeper yet, the hard edge set affords a rebound and is used as Si mentioned, using rebound enough to lighten but not bounce you up and then retracting the skis, moving them underneath the body to the other side. In space deprived corridors this is really useful.

On the other hand, staying with the edge set a fraction longer wil carve the ski farther to the outside and the body mass will now leave the straight downhill path weaving from side to side, and as the the carves get longer in medium to long turns, cross-under or cross-over can be used.

If a check with rebound is used at the end of the turn and the skis are retracted and moved to the other side quickly I would call it a cross-under since the path of the body is not influenced, but if at the edge set at the end of the turn the lower leg is relaxed allowing the body to flow across the anchored skis I would call it a cross-over.

But who cares what it is called, you use whatevr you need or want [img]smile.gif[/img]

BTW, pa_twoplanker, wedeln on almost flat skis is harder to do than you imagine, try it sometime

post #24 of 26
Rusty and Arcmeister, you are right, wedeln means wagging the tail and it is rooted in the 50s. Noteworthy though is that it was the first time in ski technique that the turning was done from the hip down without necessitating upper body input.

As outdated as it seems today, the technique allowed the Austrians to dominate ski racing because they could get around a pole with leg action alone while other racers still used a lot of body motion.

The principle is that what you don't move one way in a turn you wont have to move back the other way in the next turn. In present day skiing doing as little as possible and only as much as needed to make an efficient turn, which means to me not moving any body parts that are not needed to make the turn or to keep balance, and edging just enough and no more, is, or should be the norm.

And believe me, at my age I appreciate that very much [img]smile.gif[/img]

post #25 of 26

Thanks for explanation of Wedeln. I didn't want to come out and ask in case I was the only one who had no clue what you were talking about [img]smile.gif[/img]

I just bought a pair of Fischer SCENEO S500s. I would try Wedeln as you suggested, but these things hate being flat [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
post #26 of 26
Skis are these dumb inert planks that await input from the driver. Your Fischers will wedel just fine as will any other ski, I am on Atomic 11.20 that have quite a bit of sidecut and they smeared fine on flats.

In my view, edge control is the paramount skill in higher level skiing, I see many, if not most skier using way too much edge for the situations and terrain they are skiing, I don't know if it is the fear of catching an edge or just habit.

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