or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Ugli Pupferknick, and "reaching" turns
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ugli Pupferknick, and "reaching" turns - Page 5

post #121 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If we take the terminology exactly as selected I don't think we'll find "the term" in much use among racing circles.
Hi Roto--

I suppose it depends on the definition of "much" (more jargon?). It would be a rare and uninformed race coach, at least in this country, who would not have a credible reply to someone who asked, "I've been hearing this term 'reaching turn' occasionally--do you know what they might be talking about?"

From any half-decent race coach, the answer would very likely be something like, "well, that's a fairly new term that denotes the cleaner, more carved round short turns of modern slalom, as opposed to the more abrupt, "float and sting" movements of classic slalom."

They might go on, as I probably would, to say, "I don't particularly care for the term myself, but that's what it usually refers to." Personally, I NEVER use the term, unless someone else brings it up. I really do NOT like it, because it is NOT self-descriptive, and it DOES need explanation. But because people often do use it these days (and let's not forget who brought it up this time), it's my job, and my interest, to explore how it's commonly used. Ugly is right that, defined the way he did--like "reaching for the remote control" (perhaps that's the problem, although he insists he skis now and then too), it doesn't describe many recognized movements of good skiing.

But if we simply ALLOW that it refers--to most who use it--to the turns Laure Pequegnot made in the sequence I posted earlier, then we've gained a little understanding. Then we can choose to use it, or not. If two people both understand that it describes Laure's turns, then they can communicate effectively with the term, if they choose. If only one understands it that way, they can't. That's true of any word in the dictionary, whether you call it "jargon" or not!
</font>[/quote]Well, Bob. I do agree 100% with your statements about race coaches familiarity with reaching terms. And I wholeheartedly back your opinion of it's currentness etc...Even your relatively lukewarm opinion of it, though I am gladly learning to ski it and experience what it has to offer. However, the flavor of this argument and Ugli's requests for info elsewhere point strongly to this issue being limited to "CLEAN CARVED ROUND REACHING SHORT TURNS" or some such thing....not simply 'reaching turns.'

I would expect any coach or instructor for that matter to at least raise an eyebrow sarcasitcally if someone asked for verification of that ...sentence.... as a ubiquitous term. That is why gave the defenders of the faith the advice I did. Because the deck is stacked.. purposefully.. against any real resolution.. and for a continued and escalating face-off.

Very little, if any, real communication can actually occur in this setting. So, like I do with people who are there 'against their will' and 'for credit' (I'm sure you know what I mean) I accept what they have to offer and step away from the confines of dogmatism that organized standardization sometimes looks like (to some people) in order to communicate. (Otherwise I would get bad assessments Heh heh). Whether I tow the 'party line' approach, or back door the 'alternative approach' the goal tends to be the same since it's all just skiin' (read FUN) in the end.

You know, it's funny. For many years I have worked for ski schools ands race programs at the same time on the same mountains. In nearly every case the leaders of both 'factions' were at each other's throats about this or that he's wrong she's wrong don't ski like them etc. etc. It is with great irony I usually see the very same people, within three seasons, coaching the very same concepts to their staffs after they have gained ownership of the ideas for themselves. I have to say everything I have learned from both camps has been exceedingly valuable to me, equally so, and were it not for the people involved the techniques and ideas would be easily seen (if anyone actually stopped to look) to ski down the hill hand in hand complementing each other to create a much better skier than either one offers by itself.

And, finally. I don't get why so many people fail to even look at the idea that PSIA is simply a bunch of people working on skiing. And that there is no PSIA way. It's just skiing, and PSIA "knowledge" and "technique" is more similar to than different from any other "technique" or "knowledge."

I have to laugh at some folks in here stipulating that you 'create the jargon'. I'm sure it's more accurate that you simply record it. Not to diminish what you are doing in any way. I find it ultimately respectable, especially of the hard work you put into doing it. I may edit this post upon later perusal. I am out of time at the moment to really do a good proof.

Lata!!

[ August 29, 2003, 06:45 PM: Message edited by: Roto ]
post #122 of 188
to continue on the jargon creation thing...

The notion that any one person or organization creates jargon is ...inaccurate at best. While certain people may coin terms, it's usually pretty difficult to really determine who and when.

all languages are in constant states of change. The growth, of skiing terminology and sking technique is organic to the skiscape. It just grows out of it, affected by any change or individual that comes into play. For sure the ones that catch o and stay around are simply the really relevant ones of the time.
post #123 of 188
Please everyone, I have gone back and typed this line cuz this is meant to be funny as just an observation by me. In the re-read I realized that some might take it as my whinning rather than my actually still laughing and the humor of this thread and my equally rediculous attempts at a coverup. I'll post it cuz there ain't no frikin snow.

Roto said:
Quote:
Whether I tow the 'party line' approach, or back door the 'alternative approach' the goal tends to be the same since it's all just skiin' (read FUN) in the end.
Ain't that the truth. If you respond to quickly to a thread because it is new or you haven't really taken the time to contemplate the answer, or haven't absorbed the mood, you run the risk of setting yourself up for a whammy.

Instead of typing two or three paragraphs to describe a very particular kind of turn that I had in mind I shortened it to "Clean Carved Round Reaching Short Turn". Bingo, I walked into that one. Someone didn't understand. My fault, usually happens when I am busy and just check in once in a while. Slap me in the head on that one, I should have typed the whole thing or immediately clarified it but Oh No, gotts to cover it up with a very weak pathetic " But I like jargon" defense [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img]

Alas, all who join the fray after me are then free to, as Roto states, "take the party line approach and provide backup or take the high road and elevate themselves above the blunder.

I am not complaining, I enjoy seeing all the different types of high roads people will take. I enjoy it even when the blunder was committed in the first place by me.

Do I take the high road? OH you bet I do, especially when some of the regulars here slip up. I can just imagine them going "Huhhh" when you leave them hanging by their thumbs with a smug high road comment. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] Yahh, one step over the jargon line is one of the classic slip ups.

Lets see, there is the "This is certainly not the way I would teach that out on the snow" high road and "I think I agree with (insert god here) in that their approach is also what I would do" high road and the "shut up and ski" high road. There are many more classic high roads but you get the drift.

I'm sitting here laughing trying to type this as it all plays out so well in the end and winds up as fun just like Roto says. Of the regulars here I think I have seen just about everyone here hanging by their thumbs on the racks in threads and everyone taking the classic high roads in other threads. Even some switching in the middle of a thread.

Lets see, in this one Ugli Pierre zippo, everyone else points to one degree or another. Fur crissake, everybody took the high road leavin me and Ugli in the swamp. I bombed on this one, Ryan separates me out again like I'm in a shell game.

Ok time I take the high road. The "Pierre is too busy working on his boat and therefore made a minor slip-up, big deal." defense. I can't type that without laughing either, that's pathetic too.
This is the kind of nonsense some of us will resort to when the lack of snow is peaked. Never mind that I'm waiting for the child unit to walk in the door after driving home from the dance. Its the lack of snow [img]tongue.gif[/img]
post #124 of 188
I read this whole thread, and now I wish I hadn't. ...Ott
post #125 of 188
Ok Roto:
Quote:
The notion that any one person or organization creates jargon is ...inaccurate at best
It is quite obvious that you misunderstood what was in my head that didn't come out right on the keyboard. You should have been able to read what was in my mind . Of course what you said is what I meant any idiot including me could see that. (Works for my wife and daughter, figured I'd give it a try) [img]tongue.gif[/img] :

Roto my man, if this didn't come off to you right it was definitely meant as a poor attempt at humor. Man it better snow soon. I'm getting way too punchy.
post #126 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Pierre:
Ok Roto: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The notion that any one person or organization creates jargon is ...inaccurate at best
It is quite obvious that you misunderstood what was in my head that didn't come out right on the keyboard. You should have been able to read what was in my mind . Of course what you said is what I meant any idiot including me could see that. (Works for my wife and daughter, figured I'd give it a try) [img]tongue.gif[/img] :

Roto my man, if this didn't come off to you right it was definitely meant as a poor attempt at humor. Man it better snow soon. I'm getting way too punchy.
</font>[/quote]well, that statement wasn't really aimed directly at you just partially. And I must admit to skimming thru some of those post, so it's no wonder I missed it.

sry
post #127 of 188
Why don't I just fire of a quick e-mail to SCSA and invite him in as "guest speaker" [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img]
post #128 of 188
He would make it a party, for sure, Oz.

I have to tell Ugli that semiotic is a great word and I respect him for being able to use it like an insider's touche. I could go on. I enjoyed his ripostes very much and hope he'll stay on patrol for more killer logarrhea.

I know it may seem unlikely, but having seen BB in action with students, I can say that he is not at all ponderous or technical. I'd say he's methodical, thorough, and provides useful illustrations--sort of what you'd expect of a guy who writes Encyclopedia. He's a great instructor and a great resource for skiers.

Powder and EpicSki appeal to different crowds--vive la difference--but we really should consider a joint Gathering. Oz, see if SCSA will sponsor the dry martinis.

[ August 29, 2003, 10:55 PM: Message edited by: nolo ]
post #129 of 188
Bob
[quote]Originally posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado:
Quote:
The "reaching turn" has been discussed in skiing magazines, coaching journals, and instructor journals, yes, including PSIA's professional journal.
I am interested in reading these articles could you please provide sources of theses articles? Like magazine/journal name, date, and article title.

Thanks
Nord
post #130 of 188
Groan....I can't believe I read the whole thing! Belllllch.

Excuse me.

Ferris Bueller : ...you're my hero!
post #131 of 188
Yep - must be summer over there - 6 pages of crap!
post #132 of 188
I'm lazy and didn't read what is evidently a fight. Someone posted on an Oz forum about reaching short turns some years back. During my first season teaching at Mt Snow, I asked our trainer about them, and off we went, doing these muscular, gougy-feeling turns for a few runs. They were fun, but I felt a bit "locked in" and they seemed more for form than function. I do like doing reaching long and medium turns sometimes though.
post #133 of 188
Quote:
I am interested in reading these articles could you please provide sources of theses articles?
Hi Nord--

You're going to have to do some research yourself, I'm afraid.

The only article I can immediately put my finger on, but also one of the best on the subject that I've come across, is Scotty Mathers' article in TPS, previously linked to in this forum. Here's the link again:
"The Evolution of Short-Radius Turns"

Other than that, most magazines don't last long in my house, so I don't have archives to look back through. Do a Google search, and look back through the EpicSki archives as well for some pretty good discussions of the topic. Check the various regional Masters racing associations and the articles in the publications they produce.

If you really want to learn about modern race technique, take a race camp, or a high level ski camp like the EpicSki Academy! Join a masters racing club. And, most of all, watch World Cup racing. There is no better way to learn about the techniques of the current world's best skiers than to actually watch them ski. Or come on out to Summit County, Colorado, in November, when many national teams train daily at Copper Mountain, Keystone, and Breckenridge. Especially at Breckenridge, they train directly under one of the chairlifts--the best skiers in the world, and their coaches, right there for your viewing pleasure! Ride the lifts with them--if you can speak their language, or they yours, they are always interesting to talk with.

Let us know when you come across more good articles--I'm sure others are interested as well.

Best regards,
Bob Barnes
post #134 of 188
I think that was the article that must have provoked the thread on the aussie forum. The original poster posted a potted version, wherin he said there was 3 levels of short turn: the skidded edge-set hockey stop turn, the carved short turn, and finally the reaching short turn. Which is why I was intrigued to try them.
post #135 of 188
Quote:
I'm curious what efforts an Examiner like yourself makes to stay current on race technique. I know it's not your main focus, but do you read any journals and newspapers? Do you ever work for a day or two here and there with coaches and racers? Does PSIA occasionally cover what's going on in the racing world in their publications?
U.P.--

That's a good question too. First, remember that race technique is just good ski technique, applied to a highly specific and narrowly defined situation. Race technique is a subset of ski technique. Race technique and free skiing are not different, except that free skiing tends to encounter a much broader range of conditions, speeds, turn sizes, intents, and terrain--and of course, you don't want to shin a pine tree. The best all-mountain skiers usually have a pretty sound foundation of disciplined alpine race training. It's all skiing.

So it IS my main focus. While I don't spend as much time in the gates as I used to, especially when I worked with the Mahre Training Center at Keystone, I ski them when the mood strikes. Running gates was once part of becoming certified by PSIA, but various time, money, and liability constraints have eliminated the gate runs for most exams. That's too bad, and we're working on ways to get it back here in the Rocky Mountain Division. Personally, I love running gates, but I HATE the usual long standing-around downtime that racing inevitably involves.

But ski teaching and race coaching are not as big a community as many people probably think they are. Not only do I read most articles I come across--I often know the author, and have discussed and debated the ideas with him/her already. (Several current skiing gurus and authors post here at EpicSki, so you "know" them too. And you can ski with some of them at the EpicSki Academy, if you choose!) It's a small world in skiing. We're all just exploring the possibilities of ski technique--race coach and ski instructor alike. No one has all the answers, and we all learn from each other.

Unfortunately, though, really good, accurate, and enlightening articles are rare, and much of what is out there in ski publications--even our professional journal--just makes me shake my head at the mistruths and myths they propound. Read everything, and think about it, but beware what you believe!

To answer your actual question, I learn by watching, by doing, by experimenting, by reading, by asking questions and bouncing ideas off others--race coaches, ski instructors, racers, and skiers. When the World Cup teams ski locally--training or racing--I watch them, and I talk to them. And I play with their movements and their ideas.

Of all these things, perhaps the most important to me, as far as increasing my understanding, is observing--and experimenting. If you want to see what the best racers are doing, WATCH them! Of course, then you have to understand which movements are fundamental, which are personal stylistic anomalies, which movements are unique to the specific speed and turn radius and physique of a particular skier in a particular turn (and that would not be appropriate if any variable were different), and which movements are actually mistakes! Even the best skiers in the world have only made their best turns once, so you do have to be careful which things you take away from watching a ski race.

But overall, if you want to understand contemporary skiing, watch the skiers who are best at it. That's what I do. Watch them, seek to understand their movements, talk to them if you can, experiment with the movements yourself, try to teach them to others.... The outcome: YOU will learn! Experimenting means almost never unconsciously "just skiing," especially on the easy sections. I learn a lot from my own skis, and my own body. Follow any great skier, racer, or instructor down a cat track, and you'll almost always see them "working" on something, doing some little drill, feeling, experimenting, practicing, ... learning!

One thing that I'm afraid I do NOT pay much attention to when it comes to technique is (most) race coaches. (Yes, of course, there are exceptions.) While full-time race coaches have a lot more experience than I at coaching race tactics, I am constantly amazed at some of the really, really poor technical understanding many of them possess. And it's not limited to small time, low-level coaches--I've heard and observed some incredibly questionable things from even very top level coaches.

So I don't know if that answers your question. Learning is a constant thing, and for me, it often comes when I least expect it, when I'm not actually aware that I'm learning, or consciously trying to learn. I learn as much from students as I do from colleagues! And I have learned a great deal through discussions here at EpicSki.

Perhaps you were looking for a simpler answer--"I learned everything I know from 'xxxx book'" or "I subscribe to Ski Racing Monthly and read it like the Bible"--but that is far from the case!

Quote:
Does PSIA occasionally cover what's going on in the racing world in their publications?
Naturally, it does! Sometimes well, sometimes not. Remember that "PSIA" does not write ANYTHING--people do. Many articles in our professional journal--"TPS" (THE PROFESSIONAL SKIER)--are written by non-ski-instructors. Some are written by race coaches, some by lay people with particular areas of expertise (or not). But you can be sure that the ski instruction world as a whole is HIGHLY attuned to what is going on in the "racing world." It's a constant exploration of a continuously changing target. Sometimes we hit it on the mark, sometimes we don't, but we are always trying. And it is often interesting to hear the perspectives of racers who become instructors--Deb Armstrong and A.J. Kitt come to mind--suggesting that they've learned a lot from instructing that they wish they'd known when they were competing!

Knowledge is a process!

Best regards,
Bob Barnes

"Ancora imparo"--"I am still learning"--Michelangelo

[ August 30, 2003, 07:44 PM: Message edited by: Bob Barnes/Colorado ]
post #136 of 188
I have to quibble with you, Bob. Knowledge is not a process. Learning is a process. Information can become knowledge through a learning process, but there are more people holding information than are holding knowledge.

In short, learning is not knowledge. One is a verb that may or may not get there and the other is a noun that has more people claiming it than actually owning it.
post #137 of 188
Nolo,

Are you trying to bring sense to this thread?

Knowledge is "reaching". Goes back to when Eve "reached" into that Tree of Knowledge." So, is reaching good or bad?

(Please read this with tongue in cheek)
post #138 of 188
Hi Nolo--

Quibbling is good! In fact, that's a big part of the process we're discussing, eh?

You're right, of course. In one sense, learning is something we DO, and knowledge is something we HAVE (or don't have). But I'll quibble some more, because I think that there is something dynamic even about knowledge. Those "eureka" moments we've all experienced now and then often don't arise from more LEARNING--they arise from new connections, new processing, or new perspectives, on our current state of knowledge. Yes, that too is learning, but I like to think of it also as knowledge sort of changing its state. Of course, we are talking very subtle nuances of what is really just terminology here. In other words, we're debating jargon!

But that is why I chose those words "knowledge is a process" carefully and intentionally. It doesn't sound quite right, but it makes you think, doesn't it?

Think of the well-known "Bloom's Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain"--the "Levels of Cognition." When we learn something new, a process begins in which that new knowledge evolves from "knowledge" to "comprehension" to "application," "analysis," "synthesis," and "evaluation." Yes, you could call it all learning--and I would agree. But after the initial new information is absorbed, the rest of the process is largely internal, the result of the brain taking that new "knowledge" and processing it to an ever higher state. To me, it is better described as knowledge in a dynamic state. The "process" of knowledge!

We're seeing this process, whether you call it knowledge or learning, in this very thread. When you first hear the word "reaching" applied to skiing, you gain new "knowledge." But you don't have any idea what it means, until you begin to comprehend it. Then you can apply it. Then you can analyze it, and synthesize new ideas from it--which helps to describe it and teach it to others. And finally, you can put it all into perspective, and evaluate when "reaching" is appropriate, when it is not, and how it fits into the grand scheme of skiing--and of life. All because you just learned one little word! (This is still not to suggest that this particular word was well-chosen!)

Ah, the things we think about when the snow isn't flying!

Best regards,
Bob

[ August 31, 2003, 09:44 AM: Message edited by: Bob Barnes/Colorado ]
post #139 of 188
Quote:
When you first hear the word "reaching" applied to skiing, you gain new "knowledge." But you don't have any idea what it means, until you begin to comprehend it.
Ah, here's the rub! When you first hear something it is
information. It has no value plus or minus, if the person does not have any preconceived biases (often about the person delivering the information). There is information and there is information. Some is false. Some may be true. Anyway, information sits at the lowest level of Bloom's learning hierarchy.

Learning more about the information--particularly applying the information through practical experience and thereby placing it in a personal context (application, synthesis)--adds value to it (evaluation), which may eventually result in knowledge.

I would love to have a dialogue on learning, in a different thread of course, if anyone is game for it. Because I consider what I do teaching people how to learn, not teaching people how to ski. The skis and the mountain and observation of self and others teach people how to ski.
post #140 of 188
Aha Nolo,
You elude to the differance between reciting as a parrot,
and having working knowledge, based upon ones own experience.

hope to see you in my new thread.
[img]smile.gif[/img]
post #141 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by ryan:
Pete,

you seem to exert quite a bit of effort yourself. To what end is anyone's guess.


Oddly, I feel quite well rested. I'll let you keep guessing.

Quote:


You remind me of someone who can't stop bitching about the taste of the soup but also can't stop eating it. Or the guy who makes fun of the stupid little ski hill but for some reason he keeps showing up everyday to catch that first chair.


You remind me of the same, tired-old type that inhabits this place and thinks they know more than they do.
Quote:


You probably are not chained to epicski. Are you? Make no mistake, though; I get a kick out of seeing someone who seemingly can find nothing of worth here right there at the head of the Who's In The Forums Now list, everyday. In fact, even after your "see ya back over there," I notice you're still here.

Why?

- Little Man
No chains on me.
Didn't realize I was listed on the 'Forums Now list'(?), but maybe you could figure out how that might happen when I'm not actually 'here'.
This is the first time I've looked here since my last post--I had no idea you guys had become obsessed with this.
post #142 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by ryan:
By the way (again), I challenge anyone who posts to this thread to stick to skiing and the topics at hand - it can't be that hard to do - and leave the personal stuff out.

You go first.
Hypocrite.
post #143 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Pierre:
In case you didn't get it the first time Ugli. Bob Barnes is the leading authority in skiing for setting the standards for jargon.


Well, now that you've settled that, we don't need to discuss anything anymore. We'll just allow God--uh, Bob--to set the terms for us.

Quote:

This forum is where the standards are essentially set for jargon. Bob transfers those to the rest of the industry. What he says when we are all done arguing is what the rest of the north american skiing industry is going to use.


Said without even a hint of irony. Well done!

Quote:

I am sure slaping Bob Barnes with your original attitude was like slapping Bode Miller or Herman Maier in person and saying they knew nothing about racing and should get a life.


Not content with merely appearing stupid, now he's trying to convince us that he is actually stupid.

Quote:
Much of the flavor and criticism of Epicski is its attention to detail that will be transfered on into the ski industry. Epicski is what PSIA's forum was suppose to be. You just hit a raw nerve with you're accusations.

You have admitted that other professions are free to use jargon that is well accepted yet you tell the leading authority in this industry that he hasn't got a clue and wonder why he cops and attitude. I'll bet Bode Miller or Jerremy Nobis would cop a similar attitude if you said they knew zilch about racing.
If any of those guys who actually matter in skiing were to use an esoteric term and insult those who were unfamiliar with it, they would deserve a virtual slap.
But somehow, they're not as arrogant as some people who believe that their corner of the internet has the final say on everything.
Funny, but sad.
Lemme know what else Epic transfers to the rest of the industry, I'll let them know they should start wearing body condoms full-time.
post #144 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Notorious Spag:
1.... Boom!
Nice post Cheap Shot. I mean Sheep Seats. My old man used to say "look for ANYTHING hard enough, and you'll find it." If you look for elitism and closed-mindedness in our ranks and nothing else, by gum you'll come across it Good on ya then!

Spag :
Maybe you're imagining that it's tougher to find than you think it is.
Ready to be let off the hook yet? You still might be able to pick up some good stuff from us...
post #145 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado:
Hey Ugly Pupf*k--

You're absolutely right. I was wrong. What I should have said was,

"Ignorance is SOMETIMES curable."
Very good. When those who are ignorant are firmly convinced they're infallible then it's probably not.
But you are THE authority on skiing terminology, so I'll just wait for you to inform what this week's term for a turn placed far across the hill is.
post #146 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Pete Zehut:
You still might be able to pick up some good stuff from us...
I certainly hope so, but a question: Who is this "us" that you represent, and how does one become a member?
post #147 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Notorious Spag:
Nah. Loosen the drag and let him run a few more times. Pulling in Pete was no fun. Like reefing in a 12-inch northern... all winch and no play. Ugli's all tooth and bone. Makes for a better fishin' story if the quarry turns the boat.

Spag
When the hunters become the hunted...Shall we cut 'em loose, Ugli?
post #148 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Pete Zehut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado:
I was wrong.
Very good. When those who are ignorant are firmly convinced they're infallible then it's probably not.</font>[/quote]How can someone who, in your words, is convinced they are infallible, then turn round and say that they are wrong?
post #149 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Wear the fox hat:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pete Zehut:
You still might be able to pick up some good stuff from us...
I certainly hope so, but a question: Who is this "us" that you represent, and how does one become a member?</font>[/quote]It's quite grueling and involves power tools and p-tex fumes.

edit: to acknowledge I'm unfamiliar with this year's terminology for p-tex fumes.

[ August 31, 2003, 12:12 PM: Message edited by: Pete Zehut ]
post #150 of 188
Quote:
Originally posted by Wear the fox hat:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pete Zehut:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bob Barnes/Colorado:
I was wrong.
Very good. When those who are ignorant are firmly convinced they're infallible then it's probably not.</font>[/quote]How can someone who, in your words, is convinced they are infallible, then turn round and say that they are wrong?</font>[/quote]That's the problem, isn't it, and it's not going to happen. Bob assumed that a term he knew was in wide use, and it turned out to be untrue.
But there's no arguing with the religious followers of Bob.
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 › Ugli Pupferknick, and "reaching" turns