or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Blending Movements - Page 4

This is Cookie again. PJ busy doing an estimate, but I keep interrupting him...  This is going to be long... I apologize in advance, but not too sure how to shorten it!

It's all come down to a question of different models and I think we are actually getting to the bottom of it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

TDK6 response - green

PJ Jones response - blue

Originally Posted by tdk6

Second picture.

After apex. Beginning to flex to manage turn forces. Beginning to transfer more pressure to his inside ski - the new outside ski. Driving his shins into turn, going with it.

Beginning to flex in order to extend.

What? Beginning to flex to absorb the pressures of the turn and release the edges. The momentum will continue to take the skis in the direction they are traveling. I am already moving to the new turn.

Inside leg is flexed more than in previous photo and that is logical since the slope pitch swung arround and he is resisting maximum load in this part of the turn.

No. The slope pitch has nothing to do with it. I am flexed more not because I am resisting the maximum load at this part of the turn. I am starting to yield to it and manage it.

I think it has a lot to do with the pitch of the slope swinging arround. Also that here turn forces and gravity start pulling in the same direction. You have more pressure under your skis now than in the previous frame.

At the apex of the turn, the skis are going with the pull of gravity, the falline. However, only for a fleeting moment. The forces of momentum are always trying to keep us going straight in the direction we were the instance before.

So regarding the forces of momentum, we are always having to resist and re-direct when we make a turn. Regarding the force of gravity (which helped to create the momentum in the first place), once we leave the fall line and start to head arcoss the hill, we now have to deal with re-directing and managing that force. I think we agree on this point.

So, in this frame, there are more turn forces that we have to manage. They are adding up as you say. We agree on this too.

It is true that PJ flexing due to these forces. However, he is not resisting them, he is beginning to yield to them to control the total pressure on the skis. At this same time he is already beginning to transfer more and more of this total pressure to what will be his new outside ski. All this starts to happen right after the apex of the turn.

The inside knee bending is directly related to the ammount of inclination and or angulation.

The inside knee bending is directly related to managing the turn forces - to the flexing to reduce the total pressure of the turn forces on the skis, as well as beginning to put more of the weight on that inside leg.

The amount of inclination/angulation is related to how much edge is needed to maintain the arc of the turn. The amount of inclination is directly related to the amount of the total turn forces and the direction that the axis of the body needs to be aligned with in order to be able to stack the bones to the turn forces.

The angulation of the body to the legs is related to the fact that PJ is already starting to set up for the next turn. The inside knee bending is not due to this.

You can both incline and angulate without bending the inside knee. The knee bending is flexion and pressure management mainly, not directly related to the amount of inclination or angulation as you suggested - at least not in our model it isn't...

He is still inclined with outside arm up high and inside arm down low. Shoulders not levelled. He is following through with his upper body. Staying square. Very little angulation and counter.

First off, the goal in the turn is not to counter more than necessary, but to anticipate and move in the direction of the new turn. I want to stay inside the forces of the turn, not outside them. I do not want to "pinch" at the hip or waist and create a false angulation and countered position. I aim my zipper of my coat at the apex of the up coming turn. Once again, I don't need level shoulders, I don't need to pinch. I need to stack.

We use the term anticipation differently. We use it here to describe the upper body being turned into the fall line through and after the transition. Squaring up at apex or slightly before. Why do you need to stack? You are not traweling at DH speeds or on hard icy injected snow.

Inside ski still not properly on edge. NOTE, there is no NEW outside or OLD inside ski yet. Its still outside and inside ski. We are very far from transition so its very easy to make a separation.

Transition lasts a long time. It is not one-two. Your turns are a continuous transition to make them smooth and strong. Skiing is a continuum, turns are linked, but not a one point, but continuously.

For the sake of talking about the same things there is a need to be more specific. In such a discussion we need to pinnpoint where and when the transition starts. Or you need to define it. Note that turns do not need to be linked. They can end up in a traverse. Or the lift line.

I guess we are not communicating here. To be specific, PJ did define transition as a long time period, not one instant in the turn. There is a point you can define for edge change. However, if one decides to ski a flat ski for a while there, even that point is not a pin point.

Thus, transition for edging actually is a long and progressive movement, even though edge change may be a pin point in some turns.

Transiton for weight transfer is also long and progressive movement, a continuum, with the legs getting longer and shorter and the body getting further away from the feet or closer to the feet which is not necessarily up and down. The direction of the flexion and extension depends on the turn shape, intensity, speed etc.

There is a point however where you stop extending and start flexing. This point is not necessarily the same as the fleeting edge change point, or duration.

Transition for the guiding and steering movements are also a progressive and continuous. I see two different ways of looking at where the guiding movements change direction. One location is regarding the arcs or curves and is close to where edge change is. The other is looking at it from the perspective of going right across the hill and then going left across the hill, at the apex.

Note that turns do not need to be linked. They can end up in a traverse. Or the lift line.

Normally when you discuss transition between turns, you discuss transition between linked turns that are similar. I didn't think the discussion was about ending in a traverse or in a lift line.

I am still on my old edges, but I'm past the point where those edges were maximum for this turn and they are beginning to decrease and move towards engaging the other edges, even though we are a long ways from that. Transition lasts a long time.

There is no confusion wether your right ski is the outside ski in the photo or not. We only use the term old/new in cases where it is not that clear. Like in the frame where your skis are almost flat on the snow.

In PJ's mind, how he is communicating with his body, his inside ski is already becoming his outside ski. This is significant in how he is moving. So, in the frame, maybe in your own ski technique model, your inside ski is still your inside ski for a long time. However, in this frame, it is already becoming his outside ski and that is why he talked about it this way, not to point out right or left ski. What you call a ski is illustrative of what you are doing with that ski at that time. This is quite significant in communicating.

I don't understand why you would only use the words inside and outside where you think there is confusion, because there never is confusion. If you know where the slope is and then look which way the skis are heading, you will always know what is the inside ski and what is the outside ski. When the skis are flat, in relation to the direction you are hading, the downhill ski is always going to be the old outside/new inside ski.

I have now much closer to 60.33/39.67   in foot-to-foot weight transfer. I started transferring weight to my new outside ski, prior to this point - this movement started just after the apex of the turn, see previous photo.

Why do you not say "I started to transfer weight ot my inside ski"? Call it what you want, your left ski is your inside ski.

I think your issues with people calling skis inside or outside, illustrates a point that I'm not sure you are understanding. That point is that PJ, and myself, and many others, especially racers, like to start to transfer the weight to our new outside ski, very early and very actively. The process begins just after the apex of the turn, reaches about 50:50 by edge change and then continues until the apex of the next turn, when it reverses the direction of the flow - off one leg and onto the other leg.

Back to where you wanted to name transition points to be specific. Just around or after the apex of the turn is the transition point for this weight transfer or flow, as I prefer to think of it. Then it starts to flow the other way right after edge change - but that location depends a lot on the intensity, shape, size, speed etc. of the turn.

Next Picture - next post to keep them not that long.... sorry Bud....

Cookie, great postings. Let me try to change the format a bit and answere in a stand alone posting.

There has been a lot of discussion regarding inclination during the last few years. Is good to understand that during the turn many things change. Most notable change is that there is not as much pressure build up under our skis in the high-C part of the turn as there is in the low-C. The reason for this is that in the high-C you are turning in the direction where gravity is pulling you but in the low-C part of the turn you are turning away from the direction where gravity is pulling you. A good visual is the ammount of snow spraying from your skis. Like we can see in PJ's photomontage. Also you may accelerate as you head into apex so your speed is faster after apex than directly after transition directly adding to pressure build up. In other words, in the high-C you need not to be as efficient as at or after apex. I think we can agree on this. Here is a diagram I did a few years ago:

Now we come to the big question of what is better, stacking or angulating. If one was superior to annother then only one of these techniques would be used. Therefore I make the gross conclusion that both have their time and place. Pros with inclination is stacking of the bones favorably. Pros with angulation is that it increases the tipping angle and it helps you balance over the outside ski. This is highly simplified offcourse.

If we look at the above diagram its easy to make the conclusion that stacking would be most efficient when forces are greatest but we have to take in consideration many things. In SL for instance we want to keep the mooving mass to a minimum. In GS we need to keep our weight forward. I like to think of the high-C as a part of the turn where we set up the gross parameters of the turn. We make a quick estimate of how much inclination is needed. Too little we loose edge hold and drift into a skidd, too much and we fall to the inside. We need to stay in the sweetspot. Tweeking and fine adjustments are then done by such movements as angulation and upper body counter.

You are saying that angulation causes the femures to rotate outwards and that it decreases edge angles. If they do this then they are doing it wrong. Its not possible to de-crease edge angles if you angulate from the hip but its possible to counter rotate your body so that your femures (knees) point outwards. This is however upper body counter done the falcely. If you do it correclty then you turn your hips into the turn using your lower leg as the axis arround which you are turning insted of placing the axis in the middle of your hips. The wrong way of fixing this is by teaching inclination insted. Thats why I allways work on the basics with all my stundents no matter what level they are.

My wedging video focus is on pressure controll. There is a lot they have to learn before they carve efficiently. Its easier to teach sombody stacking than to unlearn them banking.

I have absolutely no gripes with movements being continuous. On the contrary. The reason we sound a bit digital 0/1 here is that we need to be able to pinnpoint the exact moment when we do things. It makes our discussion easier. The skiing is still the same. Nothing changes that. We only need to make sure we talk the same language. It seems that we are here at epic debating less and less when a transition starts. Less arguments over semantics in general.

I agree that the inside ski needs not to be carving 100% all the time. I watched a wc skier parctise last winter and after her run I took a look at the tracks. Inside ski was skidding many times. Outside ski was carving all of the time. There is a lot of talk about how to keep your inside ski carving and adding to your performance. One way of doing it is to start out your turn with your skis closer together in the snow but increasing this separation towards apex and then closing up the tracks towards the next transition. This way your inside ski will be able to maintain its carving, adding edge hold and causing less dragg. Here is a video of my tracks carving down a easy slope. I have been trying to analyse my tracks all winter filming them as often as I have had the opportunity since I notissed that on my turns right, I think, my inside ski was skidding more often. I think that there is a lot to learn about looking at the tracks. Its kind of the blue print of your skiing. I allways tell my students to look at their tracks and then compare them to some one that is much better. Most of the times there is a big difference. Here is the clip:

Im out of time.... untill later....

tdk

TDK6 - I prepared replies for all the previous comments, so I'll first upload those and then get to your pictures and different format. However, I have a limited time now and will get back this evening.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdk6

Third picture:

Still driving, but beginning to move his upper body in the direction of the new turn.

Still driving, but beginning to move his upper body in the direction of the new turn.

Nothing much happening here compared to earlier frames except for starting outside arm swing for pole plant.

The momentum of the skis is what is taking them across the hill - taking the energy of the turn in the direction they are pointed.  I am about 52/48 here. My body is already well anticipated towards the new turn.

The skis have little momentum. You have a lot.

The skis in and of themselves do not have much momentum because they do not weigh much. However, they are hooked to the feet, so the momentum of the body is transferred to the skis giving them a lot of momentum.

Like I said before, we use the term anticipation to describe the upper body in feference to the fall line. You are staying very square to your skis through out the whole turn. Facing in the direction the skis are pointing. Nothing wrong with it, just an observation.

In reference to anticipation and counter: You say it's just an observation, however, why did you think it important to observe that? Are you perhaps observing things that may differ from your normal model? That is normal too.

However, PJ is not square, but slightly countered. I think that what you call counter, we would call overly countered.

PJ aims the zipper of his jacket towards where he is going next. That is not square and directly across the hill, but slightly down the hill at the apex of the next turn.

At this point in the turn, you do want to keep your hips still going with the legs and skis in order to edge and stay balanced. If you were to counter with your hips also, then your knees would start to point more down hill and it would be harder to drive your shins over, edging into the turn.

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdk6

TDK6 response - green

PJ Jones response - blue

Fourth picture:

Right before edge change. Crossing over/under. He is back and he shouldn't be. He is not trying to work the tail of the ski. He got late and popped by the rebound. It is not on purpose, but he didn't start to move soon enough, so he is a bit late and got back.

Now he untipped and is standing straight up preparing for pole plant and weight transfer.

The weight transfer is already half complete. The weight shift is a continuous thing, not a one-two deal.

My explanation is muddy, sorry. I can see you prepare to extend as you plant your pole, tap it sorry....

No need for "sorry", we just have different models and are trying to understand each others.

The main point is the weight shift has already been going on for af long time. The pole swing is timed to pull or draw you into the new turn and it's part of the whole extension movement pattern.

Unless you are going very very slow, the extension is not up, but it is foragonally into the new turn, more to the inside and down the hill. In shorter turns, it's more of a reaching with your legs out to the side around the arc.

There is no pole plant. There is a minor pole touch. This is another part of the continuous movement and I began that near the apex of the turn.

You are nitpicking in the wrong places. BTW, you are stressing "continuosu movements". You should be able to isolate the movements. I tell my students to make the pole plant quick and independent from other movements to avoid one move being coupled to annother. You should for instance be able to ski without pole plants entirily.

I think you just struck the nail on the head! Bingo! Skiing is about continuous movements, about blending all the skills and movements, always flowing and not stopping. It is about how they all work together.

Even though there are various independent movements regarding the "skills", they are also all inter-dependent and work together. Synergy sort of stuff.

I do not understand why you want to isolate a movement. By itself, one movement does exist unless it is in concert with all the movements.

Why would you want to make the pole plant quick and independent of the other movements? Is skiing not like dancing where everything moves together to maintain dynamic balance.

Usually when a person does not swing the pole with the wrist, but rather jabs it out with the arm, but not that far, it causes a glitch in their flexing movement pattern.

Of course, you can ski without poles. However, when you have poles, why would you not want to use them in concert with everything else? Why would you want them to be disjointed?

He did not swing his arm very far forward since he continued the pole swing by a wrist movement.

Correct. You don't swing your arm, you use your wrist, but the pole kept swinging, not your arm, but the pole.

You are not precise about how you kept your pole swinging. By following through with your wrist or letting the pole swing by itself.

Okay, more precisely, the wrist is aiding the momentum, the momentum of the tip of the pole, with the muscles in your forearm, using at your wrist joint.

Once you start it swinging, it will tend to keep swing in the direction you started it swinging, until you stop it. So, you start it with your wrist and then you help the momentum of the pole itself with your wrist - guiding it just enough to help it keep swinging until you want it to come back. It touches the snow on the way back, not at the furthest point of the swing.

He is planting his pole straight forward close to the tip of his outside ski.

No I'm not. I swing the pole out there in the direction I am going. It touches on the way back as I pass by it - closer to the next frame. It doesn't touch near the tip of my skis.

Yes you are. You are planting the pole in the direction you are going. Just like you said. Where are you going? Where your skis are going. Same direction. If you plant your pole in the same direction your skis are going its going to be in the same direction... am I repeting myself??? My bet its close to the tip of your ski. But I do not need to bet. I just have to look at the photo. I dont care if you do not plant it exactly when its close to your tip. But the fact is that its close to the tip. This is what counts. The problem I pointed out was that you have to raice your arm as your ski pole vaults over. This is avoided if you plant more down in the fall line.

The pole does not touch the snow at the tips of his skis. Maybe the misunderstanding is this - the skis are the body are on different paths. The body is inside the skis. The pole swing is inside the body. The pole swing is not just forward, but down the hill in a diagonal direction. That is where he is going. His skis are going in a slightly different direction.

Maybe you are misinterpretting the photo because you like to make your pole plants quick, like you tell your students. Just an observation.

PJ does not make his pole plant quick, but let's it swing out far. So maybe you are misjudging the timing in the photo and assuming it will be quick and close to the tips of his skis.

I don't see how you say that PJ is raising his arm and vaulting over his pole. When you look at the photo, you see that his hand does come back and up a bit, but he is also inclining more. If you look at the level of his hand in reference to his jacket, you will see that. He also skis with his hand farily high compared to many skiers. When you swing the pole, your hand will move some, even if you are mainly using your wrist to swing the pole.

The pole also hardly touches the snow, there is hardly any pressure on it. It is not a braking pole plant, but a gliding pole touch. It's hard to vault over something when there is not much pressure on it.

He extended his inside leg but not entirely since he also at the same time flexed his outside leg.

Not really. Both my legs are pretty even here. This also is a continuum. One leg is always getting longer and one leg is always getting short.

This is not entirely true. If you look at your right leg in the above photo and contrast it to your right leg in the next photo you will see that your right leg extended! Why is that? Yes, because you extended into the edge change. We are missing one photo but if we had it Im willing to bet both legs were more extended than in previous photo.

Please read PJ's response. One leg is always getting shorter and one leg is always getting longer. At the point where the body is crossing over the skis, they are both flexed. How flexed they are depends on the intensity and radius of the turn. In these turns, they are not that flexed. There was no need for his body to be closer to his feet, because there was not that much pressure. These were not that highly dynamic turns.

PJ was more flexed previously, but here, his body is already in the arc of the new turn even though his feet are not there yet. He started the extension before this point, however he is not extending to change the edges, he is extending to manage the pressure and transfer more energy to the top part of the turn. The extension is active and can INCREASE the amount of pressure at the top part of the turn on the skis. This is quite the opposite of the up-unweighting you keep referring to.

You can change edges flexed and you can change edges while more extended. It's all about blending the movements, about direction and timing.

Your observations about extension are correct, but it's the connection of the extension to the edge change that is what I am questioning. The extension starts way before the edge change and will continue until way after the edge change.

I'm not ture sure how else to explain it to you. I'm thinking that maybe it's a movement pattern that you do not have in your skiing since you said later on that you didn't really need extension and flexion that much in racing turns. (A statement which I do not agree with either. I am believer and a user of flexion, extension and early and active weight transfer foot to foot!

This so that he could extend into transition.

I am not extending into transition. My skis are coming under my body. At this frame, my legs are about the same regarding extension/flexion.

Yes, they are matched. At some point they have to be. This happens to be that exact moment.

The camera did not happen to shoot a photo at the exact instance of edge change. However, I understand where you are referring to. They are close at this frame.

I believe that you are calling edge change the transition point. That is fine. However, please try to hear what we are trying to communicate. We believe that it is important what and how you think, that it will effect your skiing. We do not believe it is beneficial to look at skiing as a series of independent points or events. If you want to have smooth, flowing movements, then you can't always dissect the movement patterns into points, when actually they are continuums of various movement patterns that blend.

This is the old style up-unweighting flexing-extending cycle for un-weighting the skis in order to initiate a steering angle.

No. It is a progressive weight shift, not unweighting. There is pressure built up in the turn that is being transferred forward by crossing over to the inside of the new turn.

Call it what you want. If you cross over like this it will cause unweighting. Or lets say the elements are there.

I think you are looking at the photos from what you know in your own skiing. I'm beginning to suspect that you do not understand what we are talking about when we say take the energy from one turn and transfer it into the next.

I'm not too sure you know what it feels like to start the weight transfer early and actively just after the apex of the turn.

If you understood what these feel like, then you wouldn't think that the photos look like up-unweighting. The movements that the photos are showing are actually increasing the pressure on the top part of the turn a bit. If these were more dyamic, intense turns, then that amout of additional pressure would be more apparent.

I never initiate a steering angle. I am continuously guiding and steering my skis, while edging, while changing edges, while skidding or carving or arcing. I am still steering. I always guide/direct my skis. Again, part of a continuum.

In PSIA you have this great consept of tips go in first. Check it out to see the difference between setting up a steering angle at initiation or following the tips as they carve into the turn. Follow the tips. Clean tracks. There is a HUGE difference between TGIF consept skiing and wannabe carvers.

Not too sure what you mean by the tips go in first. They are at the front of the ski, so if you are skiing forward, then they go first.

If you are referring to pressuring the tips to start the turn, or at the top part of the turn, the we do not believe in that.

Regarding setting up a steering angle, that is not PSIA, that is Ron LeMaster and some others. We also do not believe in that concept of a steering angle.

What we do in a turn is to guide/steer the ski continuously. We steer it onto the edge, not just tip the ski onto the edge, but a combination of steering/guiding and tipping, both working together as we edge the ski. PJ has named that the "Blue Angel" effect, like the U.S. fighter jets - they tip and turn at the same time.

For carved turns, you ski the skis lengthwise as you suggest where the tails follow in the same track as the tips. To do this cleanly, you guide the skis so that they maintain a cutting edge in a radius that is appropriate to the edge anle, sidecut, the bend and the pressure on the skis. This gives clean tracks.

The general public who do not really carve, do not maintain the coordination of everything that goes into guiding the skis lenghtwise on this arc. Simply tipping the skis and trying to ride the edge will not always achieve clean tracks. This is about where many fail to make a nice carve.

To ski the skis on their edges in clean carving tracks involves working all the skills together, precisely, timed to work together - how much you edge, how much you guide and steer, how you manage the pressure, fore/aft, foot to foot as well as total pressure of the turn forces. How you stay in dynamic balance on your skis. Fun and great!!!

However, carving is not the end all way to ski either. There are a variety of other ways, in a variety of terrain and conditions. Carving should just be one technique that we teach mastery of.

Eather he is doing just that or its just an ingrained movement he does.

There are many different types of turns. There is not one way to carve and one way to skid. This snow was soft and quite lively (medium to high moisture content - real springy snow) The key here is the managing of the pressure, when to soften, when to flex. I am adapting to the snow and the turn shape and intensity.

When carving the flexion-extention movement should be reversed. Or totally left out.

What? If you want to make sharper turns, not that these are, you have to be able to flex and extend in more than just the vertical plane - up and down. It's complex/compound flexing and extending - it's lateral, the combination with the vertical plane. All the world cuppers do a lot of this - flexing and extending to the inside as well as toward their feet.

You have two main flexion/extention cycles. One extends through transition and flexes through the turn and one flexes through the transition and extends through out the turn. The latter can be generalisized as modern reaching SL turns. The former as a typical un-weighting technique. This is quite complex. Read about it in other threads.

Your model of two main flexion/extension cycles is not quite correct. If you could understand what we are describing, you would see that it's not either of the main cycles that your model allows. Our model has yet another way regarding flexion/extension - so at least three or more, not two types of cycles...

Even though there is an up-unweighting technique, we have not described that. You keep misinterrpretting what we say and calling it up-unweighting. I think you keep doing this because what we are describing is not how you usually ski. I think you do not like anything that deals with flexing and extending or a very early, active weight transfer, or anything that even hints of steering and guiding the skis....

Hence, you are having difficulty understanding what we are describing because that is not how you normally ski and you do not know the feelings associated with these techniques.

Read again below what PJ said...

The flexing is to manage the turn forces at the bottom of the turn so your skis can maintain their hold on the snow and carve. The extending is to reach out and around at the top of the turn to get earlier, higher edge and shape that part of the turn. It's the combination of the flexion and extension that allow you to manage the pressure, to even it out to make a smoother arc throughout the turn, and from turn to turn, so transition is smoother. That is carving.

The reason you flex at the end of the turn is that you need to flex in order to extend later on. You cannot just flex and flex and flex. And you need to extend in order to un-weight and create a steering ange at transition. Except that you are carving and you dont need to un-weight. Check out the modern flexing extending pattern. In order to manage pressure under your outside ski you need to be extending. Not flexing.

In our model, you flex to manage the turn pressure at the bottom of the turn... just about all the time. It's the timing of the extension that varies regarding the intensity, shape, speed, snow conditions, terrain, etc.

Again, I think your model of skiing is inhibiting your understanding of what we are describing. Please read again what we said. Read that we said we flex and then we extend and repeat.

These movements have nothing to do with creating a steering angle at transition. We do not ever "create" a steering angle, any place, any time. That concept is totally unapplicable to what we are describing.

Flexing and extending manages pressure, both foot to foot as well as the total pressure of the turn, as well as fore aft.

We never said that you need to unweight to steer the skis. You said that. However, by what you said, it seems that you also know that you do not need to unweight to carve, so why are you suggesting unweighting to steer?

Just because we advocate flexing and extending does not mean we are advocating unweighting the skis. That is the part of the concept that you do not understand.

Steering is not about creating some "virtual" steering angle. Steering is about a continuous guiding of the ski, throughout the whole turn, always. Steering is about using your muscles to resist forces just as much as it is about using your muscles to introduce new forces and directions for your movements.

TDK6. I think the main issue here is that you are taking your "model" of modern ski technique, and trying to superimpose it on what we are trying to explain to you. You are taking what you know how to do and trying to make it fit something that is a bit different from what you do, so it is not fitting too well.

There are some things that seem to be "laws" in your model. One of these appears to be that all flexing and extending have to do with some kind of purpose to be able to unweight the skis. This is not true.

When we talk about managing pressure, that does not mean that we want to skis to be unweighted. The fact that you are connnecting extending/flexing with un-weighting dates your model to the late 60's or so in that respect.

He is in the back seat but its no coinsidence. He is like this in every turn he makes. If he flexed to relese he would be entering the transition float and back seat would not be such a bad thing but since he is going to extend into edge change there will be pressure increase and his back seat is a problem.

The back seat is not a problem because you are moving inside  the turn and you are ahead of your feet - anatomy and physics. I was back a little due to pressure build up with the springy snow because I didn't pressure manage accurately and soon enough. However, as soon as I move into the turn, I am ahead of my feet. This is not a tip-center-tail thing. I am trying to maintain centered, moving with my skis from the strongest position in the middle.

This centered stance thing is what is putting you in the back seat. Its hard to maintain a centered position. For this kind of skiing it does not matter but if you ski with more performance you need to be more forwards. your head needs to be placed over your knees. You need to be much more forward.

Again, that is your model, not ours. The lack of the centered attitude is what put PJ in the back seat. He didn't manage the pressure at the bottom of the turn, early enough or just plain enough. He "popped" the turn and his skis jetting out, putting him a slight bit back, but not much.

Don't you remember jet sticks? Remember one way you could use them? PJ did that, but just a very very little bit, not enough to make hardly any difference in his ability to enter the new turn and catch up with his feet.

It seems that you are indeed looking for a position in your model. Were PJ making more dynamic turns, he would look a bit different, however, he would stsill be balanced over his feet, not over the tips of his skis or even forward of the toe piece of the bindings. Were he going faster, getting back would have more of an effect.

In more dynamic turns, it's even more important to stay up with your skis and not get back. However, you do not need to get too far foward to not get back at the bottom of the turn. You need to only stay up with your skis, centered.

I am not extending into edge change. It is all a progressive movement that starts at the apex of one turn and goes to the apex of the next turn. As I move through the apex of the turn, the pressure the turn forces increase. I increase my edge angles accordingly. As my edges increase in angle to the snow, pressure increases. So to even out the pressure I flex or extend, which I need to do, to keep the pressure as even as possible throughtout the whole turn - not only foragonally, but also foot to foot. So the term you need to add to your vocabulary, relative to weight shift and edge change is finishiation.

Great word this "foragonally" and especially "finishiation". Im finnish so this is finnishiation .

Glad you like the words. We use them a lot because they are pretty accurate and descriptive - easy to understand.

However, in order to respell the finishiation word, you first need to go out and own it - so you will be a Finnish guy demonstrating true finnishiation!!! Love it!

Same color scheme.

Picture five - only one more to go after this one...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

.

Early edge, shaping the top part of the turn. Not working the front of the ski, just centered. Guiding both feet, more weight on outside ski.

Ok, see the extention he made! Outside leg totally extended. Also extended from his waist. See how his skis are floating with minimal pressure. He is unweighted right here. From this position he is dropping down. When you drop you CoM down there is decrease in pressure. That means no effective shaping of turn in the high-C.

Relative to shape the top part of the turn - The skis are engaged, not floating. If you take a note, from the previous picture to here, the skis are gone from being mostly pointed across the hill, to almost to the fall line, engaged, on their edges, hence shaping the top part of the turn. Guiding an edged ski the whole way. I have transferred some of the momentum and pressure from the bottom part of the previous turn to the top part of this turn. It is more even, not great pressure here, but not floating either. No float-touch-sting going on as in yesteryear...

We need a better definition on the word "guiding".

Guiding is using your bones and muscles both resisting and actively "moving" your skis. It is basically directing, making your skis go where you want them to go, steering them. Is this rotary? Sometimes, but not always. Much of the time, it is resisting them from turning and trying!

Starting to incline, dropping his inside shoulder. But note that his inside arm did not drop just jet. In the next pickture you will se it dropping but not here. Its because he planted his pole forward and as he skis past it it has to vault over thus raising his arm. Its close to shoulder height here. Thats why we swing our pole out in a circle and plant down in the fall line.

Pole swing. The pole swing in a gliding turn is critical to overall timing and direction. The touching of the pole happens just as you have released your old edges, but when you are extended. Therefore there is no break in the flow of the turn.

You should not be extended when you plant your pole. These are independent movements. You are coupling it to extention. Thats what I remarked on earlier.

Again, we have different models. You are connected to your pole with your hand. It is not independent of your body, so it should not have an independent movement. What you do with your pole effects the rest of you.  Different model, different way of looking at it.

It is not a classic pole plant which occures with opposite timing. Many times in these turn, the pole swing occurs and whether the pole touches the snow or not doesn't really matter. When you swing your pole out around and down the hill,  as you suggest, you have a tendency to rotate your hip to the outside, consequently needing to counter to fix what the pole plant created.  But with a pole swing and light touch, you can move right across and into the new turn with minimal interruption.

I think there is more tendency to pull your upper body into a rotation if you bring your arm in the direction you are moving, forward. The pole swing downhill is also done with the wrist.

First, when you say in the direction you are moving are you talking about your skis or your body? I think you are misunderstanding what PJ meant. He means foragonally - which is forward AND downhill, but not out and around. Your pole swing leads your body into the turn.

I can see that the old Can-Am pole swing and plant the late 70's has not been completely lost.

Same color schemes, Last, sixth picture...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

Just about to apex again. Balanced against outside ski. Center of ski. Using just enough edge to maintain shape of turn. Going with it.

I dont want to be picking on an old man and he skis very well for being the age he is. However, the devil lies in the details. Very typical skiing for the averidge advanced skier/instructor that has been skiing since the 60s. Or for a long time anyway. Im not sure what skis he is on but I suspect they are not high performance SL skis. So for overall recreational skiing on a groomer cruising this is totally acceptable. But if you put the guy on a racing track and started to look for performance this skiing would need a lot of fixing. On a hard icy steep racing track you could not get away with this kind of aft balance or weightless high-C. You need to tip your skis on their edges earlier, stay lower and angulate more.

The qualifier is that this is not a race course. This is very soft snow. I like to ski all conditions, all terrain. I like to make all the turns feel the same. I am the one that has to adjust.

The skis are a K2 racing ski which they don't make any more. They are the skier cross racing skis. A nice strong and lively ski.

You don't need more edge for the size or shape of the turn.

There is no aft balance and weightless High-C. The skis are continuously engaged and carving throughout the whole turn. The pressure is evened out as much as possible relative to speed, terrain and snow conditions. I ski with a really early edge.

RE staying lower and angulating more - why? So you make your thighs tired? If you angulate actively with your legs, and counter appropriately with your upper body, doesn't necessarily mean that you tip your upper body to the outside as you seem to think I should be doing.  The more you tip our upper body to the outside, the harder it is to hold the edge of the outside ski. Hence stacking the bones, moving inside the turn yields the greatest strength.  That is what I do.

Of all of these comments, about these pictures, the body attitude of crotch to arm pits aiming at the outside of the upcoming turn and actively flexing/extending tipping and guiding of my legs to guide the skis, is my overall goal. Whether it be on ice, steep, soft powder, flat groomed, steep groomed ,any other condition, the tactics I use will then determine how successful I've been. Blending of the skills, how I look at it, rotary, edging, pressure; using them all independently and interdependently, like on stereo dials, they each can go 1-10, in intensity, in dominance; They work independently to maintain dynamic balance.

And he should wear a helmet. Whats up with the 60+ skiers! I'm vain...

See you in a race course. Come to Jackson Hole and ski with me there. That is where I teach and coach.

Im running out of time.... but that was it for this time. I dont want to rant on your skiing. I just made some observations. I think you are looking good but we clearly have a very different view on skiing. We can all improve.

I appreciate your comments. I think we are both beginning to learn a bit how different we both think. This is good. It's good to be challenged and learn to think differntly - not that I'll change, but it's good to know this.

We all agree that we can all always improve!!! WE AGREE!!!! That is one of the greatest things about skiing. No matter how old we are getting, we are still improving and learning.

TDK6 - I guess we are here alone now huh... Anyways, I admire your intensity and passion. We had a long day and need to get some sleep for tomorrow's long day. Don't have any time now to post a reply to your photos and video, except to say that we both pretty much agree on the physics of the turn forces at play.

I think we need to clarify angulate/stack/inclinate and counter a bit. I understand what you are saying and I'll try to explain a bit more our model on those and how we like to use them.

On pressure control, especially lateral pressure, we are quite a bit different on in the lower level skiers.

Anyways, just wanted to let you know that we are still around, but very busy getting this one small job done.

Be back soon - hopefully time tomorrow evening.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cookie Bewley Hale

TDK6 - I guess we are here alone now huh...

Naw...the rest of us who are watching are just sitting here wishing this whole thing was happening the day after Labor Day.

Yeah, still following, but the rainbow is getting a bit tedious.   We can remember points made and when we can't we can look it up.  Let's get into the skiing model definitions without the feedback loop, please.

Redundancy gets tedious pretty quickly. Mostly because it assumes we're all too dense to remember points made just a few post ago.

Edited by justanotherskipro - 6/12/10 at 4:40pm

I'll start to address this, but need to get some sleep - got some wiring in a remodel to get finished in the morning and I don't want to be so tired, I screw up wiring the panel....

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

Cookie, great postings. Let me try to change the format a bit and answere in a stand alone posting.

There has been a lot of discussion regarding inclination during the last few years. Is good to understand that during the turn many things change. Most notable change is that there is not as much pressure build up under our skis in the high-C part of the turn as there is in the low-C. The reason for this is that in the high-C you are turning in the direction where gravity is pulling you but in the low-C part of the turn you are turning away from the direction where gravity is pulling you. A good visual is the ammount of snow spraying from your skis. Like we can see in PJ's photomontage. Also you may accelerate as you head into apex so your speed is faster after apex than directly after transition directly adding to pressure build up. In other words, in the high-C you need not to be as efficient as at or after apex. I think we can agree on this. Here is a diagram I did a few years ago:

I agree and you described the physics well. The only thing I don't quite agree with is your statement that "in the high-C you need not to be as efficient as at or after apex". I think that the high-C part of the turn is critical if you want to maximize your speed in the race course and that it is critical if you want to set yourself up for a smooth low-C. In general skiing, how you shape, pressure, edge in the high-C is what distinguishes the really good skiers from the general weekend warrior skier.

Now we come to the big question of what is better, stacking or angulating. If one was superior to annother then only one of these techniques would be used. Therefore I make the gross conclusion that both have their time and place. Pros with inclination is stacking of the bones favorably. Pros with angulation is that it increases the tipping angle and it helps you balance over the outside ski. This is highly simplified offcourse.

I agree, kind of. I like to think of stacking to the turn forces. In order to stack, I both incline and angulate. How much I do of either depends a lot n the turn intensity and size. In longer turns, there is more inclining. In shorter turns, there is inclining, but with more anulating.

You do not want to wave your CM around, but direct and guide it in the shortest, most efficient line. Inclining gets your CM further from your feet, however, it also allows for stronger stacking using the bones with less muscular energy to create a high edge to hold the turn. This is good in long turns - your body goes to the inside as far as possible, taking the shorter path. However, in longer turns, you still angulate as you begin to move to the new turn right after the apex.

In short turns, your CM is going straighter and you legs reach out and around. You don't want to be whipping your CM from side to side, but rather keep it going forward. So there is more angulating in short turns.

What I do not agree with the concept of anulating to balance over the outside ski. If you tip your upper body more over the outside ski, that does not put you in a position of strength regarding turn forces. You have to use more muscular energy to hold this tipped position.

Also, why would you want to put more weight on the outside ski anyways? There is enough weight on the outside ski from the forces of the turn. I don't need to add any more to them by tipping over it. I think of balancing against the outside ski, but not

tipping over it. However, I understand that is what you demonstrated mainly in your lower level skiing snowplow/wedge turns. I do not see as much of it in your normal skiing.

When I think of getting more edge angle, I think of my lower leg and driving my shin more towards the inside of the turn. Angulating is mainly when you are flexed and there again, I do not try to angulate and feel the "pinch" as some say. I think of mainly staying balanced, driving my shins. Angulating starts more when I start moving to the new turn with my body while my legs and skis are still in the old turn.

If we look at the above diagram its easy to make the conclusion that stacking would be most efficient when forces are greatest but we have to take in consideration many things. In SL for instance we want to keep the mooving mass to a minimum. In GS we need to keep our weight forward. I like to think of the high-C as a part of the turn where we set up the gross parameters of the turn. We make a quick estimate of how much inclination is needed. Too little we loose edge hold and drift into a skidd, too much and we fall to the inside. We need to stay in the sweetspot. Tweeking and fine adjustments are then done by such movements as angulation and upper body counter.

I think this is about what I also said above.... hadn't read ahead far enough. But, I like the staying in the sweetspot part... The only thing I would take out is the word upper body counter. I think of counter more in terms of my lower body going one direction in a bigger arc and my upper body going in a similar direction, but in a shorter arc with a slightly different timing pattern as to when certain movements start to change direction.

Fine adjustments I consider are what I do mainly with my lower legs and feet.

You are saying that angulation causes the femures to rotate outwards and that it decreases edge angles. If they do this then they are doing it wrong. Its not possible to de-crease edge angles if you angulate from the hip but its possible to counter rotate your body so that your femures (knees) point outwards. This is however upper body counter done the falcely. If you do it correclty then you turn your hips into the turn using your lower leg as the axis arround which you are turning insted of placing the axis in the middle of your hips. The wrong way of fixing this is by teaching inclination insted. Thats why I allways work on the basics with all my stundents no matter what level they are.

I didn't say angulation causes the femurs to rotate outwards, I said that countering too much does that. When you counter your hips towards the outside of the turn, it causes your femurs to start to point your knees more towards the outside and usually, downhill.

Now upper body counter is what I call the shoulders. Lower body counter is the hips. You can actually counter your shoulders quite a bit before it will effect your hips.

I'm trying to understand what you are saying and I think we agree if you are saying this - you keep rotating your hips with your legs as you turn - they line up together to direct the skis. (The lead change is then not great) The hips are part of the lower body. I think of them as being the joystick for the legs. You can't orient and use your legs if your hips are pointing in the wrong direction.

Counter and angulation are two different and separate things. I want my students to first learn to use their legs correctly, so I simply make sure that their hips are going in the right directions working with their legs. They usually do this with no problem.

I don't want them twisting or tipping their upper body around in weird positions, so I usually work on balancing with minimal effort. I simply have them guide and direct their upper bodies where they are going next - that is the zipperline concept - point your zipper where you are going next. Simple and it results in appropriate counter.

If you do this and then stay balanced and use your legs, angulation and counter will take care of themselves usually. The zipper concept eliminates the tipping.

My wedging video focus is on pressure controll. There is a lot they have to learn before they carve efficiently. Its easier to teach sombody stacking than to unlearn them banking.

With the zipper concept, they don't bank. The wedge video is where you tip over the outside ski for pressure. In my model, I don't call that pressure control, I call that pressure mis-control. I don't want them learning to add pressure to their outside ski. I instead teach them to guide and steer their skis - that's a major difference in our models.

OKAY, I need to get some sleep. I'll respond to the rest of your post tomorrow - I also added my two bits this evening to the virtual bump fracas.

Im out of time.... untill later....

tdk

JASP -

Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro

Redundancy gets tedious pretty quickly. Mostly because it assumes we're all too dense to remember points made just a few post ago.

Sorry you took it that way. Was not my intention at all.

I was linking the comments to what was quoted. More for my benefit I guess so I wouldn't get screwed up and forgot something....

Over the years you have developped an own way of thinking about skiing based on old consepts. Not a bad thing but here is an opportunity for you to maybe learn something if you let go of your resistance. Its time for a brush up. Consider this:

In the old days you extended into transition. The reason was that you needed to unweight your skis to initiate a skidding angle. In order to be able to extend you had to flex first. Thats how the flexing through out the turn came about. Not to increase pressure during the turn, to prepare for extention and decrease pressure after full extention was reached. However, there are other options for unweighting than feet extention into transition because you can for example let your body vault over. This causes unweighting as your CoM is lifted up and then dropped down. Once you accept the fact that all other turning than clean carving involves setting a skidding angle the flexing and extending cycle is easy to understand.

Updating your skiing would include adapting the new extention and flexion pattern where you flex at transition and extend into the turn as a tool for clean carving. This does not mean that you would never use your more traditional flexion and extention pattern for other kind of skiing. Also as I suggested earlier on, you should be able to ski with no flexing and extending in the sagittal plane. Always keep the stance leg carrying the load long and strong. We call this kind of transition a Inside Leg Extention transition. Flexing through the transition we call Outside Leg Flexion. Or Outside Leg Relese.

OLF

You relese the turn by flexing your outside leg. When you do this all your weight minus possible upward forces fueled by CoM being moving away from the BoS shifts to your inside leg and ski. Depending on how radical your OLF is you eather pick your ski off the snow completely or leave it on the snow simply taking some pressure off. In the transition you end up with both legs flexed at the knee joint. Equally much. The relese also starts what we call a "float". During the float you can eather keep both feet on the snow or you can lift them up in the air. Depending on how much you incline and bend your inside knee the lower you are in the transition. This way its possible to keep your CoM from moving up and down providing a fluid flow down the hill. This kind of transition can only be used when you link turns since the turn fuels the transition. In transition your CoM has shifted back but since you are floating it does not matter. Typical modern SL turns.

ILF

You relese the turn by extending your inside leg. This way your CoM goes up. At transition your legs are long and matched. This way your hips will never drop back and you will retain good fore/aft balance through out the whole turn and transition. Typical GS turn.

Here is a diagram on this topic that I drew sometime before:

To me the pole plant looks as its made very close to the tip of the ski! Deffinetly closer to the tip than the fall line. The swing also implies its made forwards. It carries momentum from the turn directs it where the skier is going.

Like your drawings TDK6 but don't agree with your comments about "in the old days" vs. "new technique".  All the movements you are talking about were used 30 plus years ago by good skiers.  I don't think anything is new here for us old farts?  What has changed a bit is how we blend our movements or change the skill application bias to work better with the newer ski designs.  It is not as black and white for me as it seems for you either?  Again, blending!

Also, don't think I flex for the reasons you suggest?  But then maybe I will learn something here

Picking up where I left off and then onto the new post you put up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdk6

I have absolutely no gripes with movements being continuous. On the contrary. The reason we sound a bit digital 0/1 here is that we need to be able to pinnpoint the exact moment when we do things. It makes our discussion easier. The skiing is still the same. Nothing changes that. We only need to make sure we talk the same language. It seems that we are here at epic debating less and less when a transition starts. Less arguments over semantics in general.

I agree that the inside ski needs not to be carving 100% all the time. I watched a wc skier parctise last winter and after her run I took a look at the tracks. Inside ski was skidding many times. Outside ski was carving all of the time. There is a lot of talk about how to keep your inside ski carving and adding to your performance.

The inside ski takes a shorter arc and it has less weight on it. So it's along for the ride. However, if it is actively guided and edged, it will drag less and add to your performance.

One way of doing it is to start out your turn with your skis closer together in the snow but increasing this separation towards apex and then closing up the tracks towards the next transition. This way your inside ski will be able to maintain its carving, adding edge hold and causing less dragg.

In a higher speed turn, if you keep your femurs and shins parallel and edge way over in the turn, due to the angle of the shins in edging combined with the slope of the hill, your skis will leave wider tracks on the snow - even though your legs remain parallel. So the track will be as you say, but it is because the legs are kept parallel and the same distance apart and they are being kept that way while edging more.

Here is a video of my tracks carving down a easy slope. I have been trying to analyse my tracks all winter filming them as often as I have had the opportunity since I notissed that on my turns right, I think, my inside ski was skidding more often. I think that there is a lot to learn about looking at the tracks. Its kind of the blue print of your skiing. I allways tell my students to look at their tracks and then compare them to some one that is much better. Most of the times there is a big difference. Here is the clip:

I think you are right on to look at your tracks and to advise your students to do the same. I always emphasize what to do with the skis as the objective, not the bodily movements. Then I teach how to move to get the skis to do what you want them to do.

Looking at your track, here is what I see. You seem to rebound out of most turns with your edge change being in the air. I would say that you probably are not flexing and extending much to manage the pressure. I'm assuming that you  were rebounding your turns on purpose. Of course, if you managed the pressure more by flexing and extending and an earlier lateral weight shift, you would not have the pop.

The top part of the turn doesn't have much shape. However, that is due to the rebound and late weight transfer. A more active and earlier weight transfer would allow you to shape the top part of the turn more. But again, I'm also assuming that you were making turns like this on purpose and that you can also make other types that show carving, but a rounder top portion, a smoother edge change.

Looking at the inside ski, I'd guess that even in these rebounding type of turns, you probably could have more active shins and edge the inside ski more. Extension at the top part of the turn and into the apex would also allow you to get your feet further from your body which would also increase your edge angles.

When I have time, I'll get some more video and pictures up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

To me the pole plant looks as its made very close to the tip of the ski! Deffinetly closer to the tip than the fall line. The swing also implies its made forwards. It carries momentum from the turn directs it where the skier is going.

The skis will continue more across the hill. By the time the pole touches the snow, the pole is further down the hill and more near his boot. His body follows the pole. He is moving across his skis at this point with his body, foragonally, forward and across down the hill.

If he were to be swinging the pole more down the hill, his body position would be overly countered. His moving right where he wants to be moving for this next turn.

I think the main thing that is different from your model to our model, is that we try to shape the top part of the turn much more than you seem to. To top part of our turns are more round and across the hill. The body moves inside, but the skis move out and around. So this looks different to you and is not what you are used to looking at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

Over the years you have developped an own way of thinking about skiing based on old consepts. Not a bad thing but here is an opportunity for you to maybe learn something if you let go of your resistance.

Okay, let's try to understand this. PJ and I have a different model of what is good skiing than you do. I am trying to understand your model and at the same time trying to explain our model to you. It's not resistance on our part. To tell you the truth, if you were to ever get to ski with PJ, I think you would realize what an incredible skier he is and probably want to try and figure out what he is doing that works so well. So, as I am trying to take the time to understand your model, I would hope that you are also taking the time to try and understand what we are saying. It is educational for both of us.

Its time for a brush up. Consider this:

In the old days you extended into transition. The reason was that you needed to unweight your skis to initiate a skidding angle.

You needed to unweight to displace the skis into the new direction. I wouldn't call that a skidding angle though and they never did either.

In order to be able to extend you had to flex first. Thats how the flexing through out the turn came about. Not to increase pressure during the turn, to prepare for extention and decrease pressure after full extention was reached.

If you look at the first down-up-down in the Arlberg stem christiana, you will see that they flexed to brake and slow down at the bottom part of the turn. They were not down unweighting with the braking. They were adding pressure to the skis by going down and then setting their edges or skidding to brake. Then the up-unweighted to make it easier to steer a flatter, unweighted ski. They used rebound also to help them do this.

If there was not the down stem, then they would crouch while already starting their body swing. This crouch or flexing, also weighted the skis more as they then would push off with both feet to up unweight, flatten the skis, swing their body and skis around in the new direction.

However, there are other options for unweighting than feet extention into transition because you can for example let your body vault over. This causes unweighting as your CoM is lifted up and then dropped down. Once you accept the fact that all other turning than clean carving involves setting a skidding angle the flexing and extending cycle is easy to understand.

What you are calling vaulting over is the rebound effect. The direction that the CoM goes in older turns was indeed more up and back even. It was necessary to unweight to flatten the skis so they could be rotated in the new direction. However, that is not the only method of making a skidded turn.

There are other ways to skid a turn such as down unweighting, flattening and pivoting the skis - think of the bend-stretch and Jobert's toilet turns. These are not carved turns, yet they are not performed with any up-unweighting. The main concept is that if you want to skid a turn, you can unweight it first. However, the more you flatten the ski, the less you need to unweight it.

A flat ski turns quite easily with steering, so there is really no need to unweight it at all.

SO it's not true as you stated that "all other turning than clean carving involves setting a skidding angle the flexing and extending cycle is easy to understand".

I would suggest you try to stop thinking about skidding angles too. That is one of the most confusing, non-dynamic terms that has been around, and in my opinion, does not really apply to any type of skiing, except that done in books with lines and drawings that do not equate closely to reality....

Updating your skiing would include adapting the new extention and flexion pattern where you flex at transition and extend into the turn as a tool for clean carving. This does not mean that you would never use your more traditional flexion and extention pattern for other kind of skiing.

TDK6, you just said "flex at transition and extend into the new turn as a tool for clean carving"... This is what we do, but we start flexing just after the apex, start transferring weight to the new ski just after the apex. However, since we have quite a bit more of a range of motion than you ski with, we also start moving to the new turn with our body earlier than you do. At transition, we are crossing over your skis/skis crossing under, and we are still flexed. However, that is not the maximum flexion. This also allows for a much cleaner, shapely arc at the top of the turn.

Also as I suggested earlier on, you should be able to ski with no flexing and extending in the sagittal plane. Always keep the stance leg carrying the load long and strong.

That is how you seem to prefer to ski - with hardly any movement at all. We can both do that quite easily and would gladly demonstrate that for you. However, we do not believe it to be a very efficient way to ski. The body is too stiff, cannot adapt to terrain and snow variables as easily, and cannot manage the pressure of the turn forces. That cause the turn forces to load up in the lower part of the turn. That is why in the video of your tracks, you popped almost every turn at transition and made the edge change in the air.

We call this kind of transition a Inside Leg Extention transition. Flexing through the transition we call Outside Leg Flexion. Or Outside Leg Relese.

OLF

You relese the turn by flexing your outside leg. When you do this all your weight minus possible upward forces fueled by CoM being moving away from the BoS shifts to your inside leg and ski. Depending on how radical your OLF is you eather pick your ski off the snow completely or leave it on the snow simply taking some pressure off. In the transition you end up with both legs flexed at the knee joint. Equally much. The relese also starts what we call a "float". During the float you can eather keep both feet on the snow or you can lift them up in the air. Depending on how much you incline and bend your inside knee the lower you are in the transition. This way its possible to keep your CoM from moving up and down providing a fluid flow down the hill. This kind of transition can only be used when you link turns since the turn fuels the transition. In transition your CoM has shifted back but since you are floating it does not matter. Typical modern SL turns.

I totally understand what you are saying and I can perform such turns. They are fun too.They are one way to turn, but they are not the only way to carve a turn.

ILF

You relese the turn by extending your inside leg. This way your CoM goes up. At transition your legs are long and matched. This way your hips will never drop back and you will retain good fore/aft balance through out the whole turn and transition. Typical GS turn.

If you are moving more foragonally into the turn, you CoM does not have to go up much at all. You can also transfer some of the energy from the old turn into the new turn to accelerate even more that the top of the turn with almost a skating movement. However, you are still flexed at transition or edge change, but not fully flexed.  Please consider the following photos  of Ted Ligety.

Notice his range of movement - flexion and extension. Notice how active his lower legs are to shape and edge. Notice his maximum extension is not at transition. At transition, he is still extending. His flexion started right after the apex of the turn.

At the apex of the turn, his outside leg is fully extended. Then it starts to flex to manage the forces of the turn. Both legs then flex, but he is already beginning to move to the new turn, so his outside leg stays flexed longer as his inside leg starts to extend, moving his body into the next turn while his skis are still finishing up the old turn. At transition he is still pretty flexed, but is extending to the inside and down the hill - foragonally.

This is the timing that I am talking and that PJ is exhibiting in the turns of him. This is quite modern and not old fashion skiing.

Thanks and night.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdk6

Over the years you have developped an own way of thinking about skiing based on old consepts. Not a bad thing but here is an opportunity for you to maybe learn something if you let go of your resistance.

Okay, let's try to understand this. PJ and I have a different model of what is good skiing than you do. I am trying to understand your model and at the same time trying to explain our model to you. It's not resistance on our part. To tell you the truth, if you were to ever get to ski with PJ, I think you would realize what an incredible skier he is and probably want to try and figure out what he is doing that works so well. So, as I am trying to take the time to understand your model, I would hope that you are also taking the time to try and understand what we are saying. It is educational for both of us.

No problem. I see from the photos and read from the postings that PJ is a great skier. And Im sure I would benefit a lot from skiing with him. Or with you. You also seem like a nice guy having your chops all figured out.

Its time for a brush up. Consider this:

In the old days you extended into transition. The reason was that you needed to unweight your skis to initiate a skidding angle.

You needed to unweight to displace the skis into the new direction. I wouldn't call that a skidding angle though and they never did either.

When I talk about a skidding angle Im referring to the ski not running along its edge. I have tried to draw a pickture to explain the phenomen here below. The fact is that eather you are running along the edge or you are not. You are talking about "displacing the skis into the new direction". This displacement into a new direction is what creates the ski edge to run over the snow at a new skidding angle (steering angle). You see that when you displaced the ski into a new direction your forward motion did not change. Its the friction between the skis edge and the snow that will make you turn.

In order to be able to extend you had to flex first. Thats how the flexing through out the turn came about. Not to increase pressure during the turn, to prepare for extention and decrease pressure after full extention was reached.

If you look at the first down-up-down in the Arlberg stem christiana, you will see that they flexed to brake and slow down at the bottom part of the turn. They were not down unweighting with the braking. They were adding pressure to the skis by going down and then setting their edges or skidding to brake. Then the up-unweighted to make it easier to steer a flatter, unweighted ski. They used rebound also to help them do this.

If there was not the down stem, then they would crouch while already starting their body swing. This crouch or flexing, also weighted the skis more as they then would push off with both feet to up unweight, flatten the skis, swing their body and skis around in the new direction.

All down movements are not down-unweighting movements. I have a slightly different take on the old Austrian ski school system from the 50s but flexing through out the turn did not unweight the skis. That I agree on. However, the reason for this slow flexion was that in order to be able to extend into transition you had to be flexed first. The extention was then somewhat explosive and gave a totally different effect than the gradual flexing. You are right about the up-unweight and flatten of the skis. At this moment the skis were displaced into a new direction and a new skidding angle was established.

However, there are other options for unweighting than feet extention into transition because you can for example let your body vault over. This causes unweighting as your CoM is lifted up and then dropped down. Once you accept the fact that all other turning than clean carving involves setting a skidding angle the flexing and extending cycle is easy to understand.

What you are calling vaulting over is the rebound effect. The direction that the CoM goes in older turns was indeed more up and back even. It was necessary to unweight to flatten the skis so they could be rotated in the new direction. However, that is not the only method of making a skidded turn.

There are other ways to skid a turn such as down unweighting, flattening and pivoting the skis - think of the bend-stretch and Jobert's toilet turns. These are not carved turns, yet they are not performed with any up-unweighting. The main concept is that if you want to skid a turn, you can unweight it first. However, the more you flatten the ski, the less you need to unweight it.

Down-unweighting is a very falcely understood technique. You cannot unweighting your skis and displace them into a new direction in a functional way by down-unweighting. Flexing your legs from an extended stance. You can try it right were you are. Stand up and have your legs extended. Now try to turn yourself 90deg to your right by flexing your legs and then quickly turning your body and feet. You need to be very very quick to do it. Hardly any elegant skiing manuver to turn on snow with your skis on. Now try to bend your knees and flex down. Now jump up and as your feet leave the floor turn your body and legs right. Se how easy it is. You can even do it 180deg. if you want. So when somebody tells me he down-unweights to turn I know he uses some kind of up-force like a virtual bump to push his body up. Down-unweighting from a leg movement standpoint is the same as a up-unweight without the leg extention. In other words its only the latter part of the up-unweighting consept. All up-unweighting has a component of down-unweighting built into them.

Note that skiing with a flat ski is not very efficient since its the ski edges and edging that causes the skis to turn. The skis are only flat because they go from one edge to annother in order to turn in different directions. The flat part is used to displace the skis into the new direciton by setting a new skidding angle.

A flat ski turns quite easily with steering, so there is really no need to unweight it at all.

This is not true. You need to unweight because you dont want to have full weight on your skis as the new skidding angle is initiated. As you land back on your feet you should alredy be on your new edges. Or you will catch an outside egde and get slapped into the snow.

SO it's not true as you stated that "all other turning than clean carving involves setting a skidding angle the flexing and extending cycle is easy to understand".

Yes it is. Its very logical but you need to think out of the box.

I would suggest you try to stop thinking about skidding angles too. That is one of the most confusing, non-dynamic terms that has been around, and in my opinion, does not really apply to any type of skiing, except that done in books with lines and drawings that do not equate closely to reality....

I look at skiing from how my skis interact with the snow. Your approach is not quite accurate. If you dont understand the lines in the books and the diagrams then I suggest you start digging into that stuff pronto. I also suggest you look up PhysicsMan postings on various topics. Im not willing to go as far as describing everything in mathemtical formulas but I admire folks that do.

Updating your skiing would include adapting the new extention and flexion pattern where you flex at transition and extend into the turn as a tool for clean carving. This does not mean that you would never use your more traditional flexion and extention pattern for other kind of skiing.

TDK6, you just said "flex at transition and extend into the new turn as a tool for clean carving"... This is what we do, but we start flexing just after the apex, start transferring weight to the new ski just after the apex. However, since we have quite a bit more of a range of motion than you ski with, we also start moving to the new turn with our body earlier than you do. At transition, we are crossing over your skis/skis crossing under, and we are still flexed. However, that is not the maximum flexion. This also allows for a much cleaner, shapely arc at the top of the turn.

I dont ski with a very aggressive up-extention at the transition but that really has noting to do with the range. I flex and extend in the saggital plane and extention is seldome in the vertical plane. I too start flexing after apex but slightly later as you do. I wait untill I relese the turn. After I relese the turn my body starts crossing over my skis that are crossing under. This part of the turn we also call the float. Here I am unweighted. Since I dont have a body high up that I need to drop down I can immediately  engage my new edges and start carving.

Also as I suggested earlier on, you should be able to ski with no flexing and extending in the sagittal plane. Always keep the stance leg carrying the load long and strong.

That is how you seem to prefer to ski - with hardly any movement at all. We can both do that quite easily and would gladly demonstrate that for you. However, we do not believe it to be a very efficient way to ski. The body is too stiff, cannot adapt to terrain and snow variables as easily, and cannot manage the pressure of the turn forces. That cause the turn forces to load up in the lower part of the turn. That is why in the video of your tracks, you popped almost every turn at transition and made the edge change in the air.

I wonder why you think I pop up in the air at transition? I watched the video and I did not see any transition made in the air. I knew this offcouse but it still puzzles me why you think so. Here is an example:

One set of edges transfers into annother set of edges.

We call this kind of transition a Inside Leg Extention transition. Flexing through the transition we call Outside Leg Flexion. Or Outside Leg Relese.

OLF

You relese the turn by flexing your outside leg. When you do this all your weight minus possible upward forces fueled by CoM being moving away from the BoS shifts to your inside leg and ski. Depending on how radical your OLF is you eather pick your ski off the snow completely or leave it on the snow simply taking some pressure off. In the transition you end up with both legs flexed at the knee joint. Equally much. The relese also starts what we call a "float". During the float you can eather keep both feet on the snow or you can lift them up in the air. Depending on how much you incline and bend your inside knee the lower you are in the transition. This way its possible to keep your CoM from moving up and down providing a fluid flow down the hill. This kind of transition can only be used when you link turns since the turn fuels the transition. In transition your CoM has shifted back but since you are floating it does not matter. Typical modern SL turns.

I totally understand what you are saying and I can perform such turns. They are fun too.They are one way to turn, but they are not the only way to carve a turn.

That is correct. Only one way to do it.

ILF

You relese the turn by extending your inside leg. This way your CoM goes up. At transition your legs are long and matched. This way your hips will never drop back and you will retain good fore/aft balance through out the whole turn and transition. Typical GS turn.

If you are moving more foragonally into the turn, you CoM does not have to go up much at all. You can also transfer some of the energy from the old turn into the new turn to accelerate even more that the top of the turn with almost a skating movement. However, you are still flexed at transition or edge change, but not fully flexed.  Please consider the following photos  of Ted Ligety.

It is correct that you are moving your body into the turn. This is nothing unique. But it is offcourse difficult because the recreational skier doesent feel comfortable moving into the turn like this. It is also called an upside down position. I call it setting up the gross parameters of the turn. That includes the ammount of inclination. Good skiers make this move very aggressively and Ligerty does so in frames 3 and 4. Very impressive.

Notice his range of movement - flexion and extension. Notice how active his lower legs are to shape and edge. Notice his maximum extension is not at transition. At transition, he is still extending. His flexion started right after the apex of the turn.

Ligerty is not extending through the transition. In his first turn he did not extend his outside leg at all. It remainded at the same length through the whole transition. Its an typical ILE transition. He is vaulting over. He is extending his inside leg to match his outside. In his second turn he did not extend eahter. He flexed. Not much but still flexed. His inside leg extended but his outside leg flexed a bit. He got airborn. He did the flexing to absorbe the upward force caused by the virtual bump or reboudn or a combination of both. There is also not a lot of flexing and extending motion here. Note also that Ligerty is a breed of his own. Like Bode is.

At the apex of the (second) turn, his outside leg is fully extended. Then it starts to flex to manage the forces of the turn. Both legs then flex, (No, inside leg extends after apex) but he is already beginning to move to the new turn, so his outside leg stays flexed longer as his inside leg starts to extend, moving his body into the next turn while his skis are still finishing up the old turn (No, the skis are in the air so they are not doing anything). At transition he is still pretty flexed, but is extending to the inside and down the hill - foragonally. (he cannot be extending into the turn from such an upright position. he needs to drop his body down and into the turn. no extention)

Im not sure but your knowledge seems to be very extensive but you look at the pictures and you make to me strange conclusions. Why? Anybody else have a clue?

This is the timing that I am talking and that PJ is exhibiting in the turns of him. This is quite modern and not old fashion skiing.

Thanks and night.

My comments in purple now. I'm going to delete some of the quotes to try and shorten things a bit. I must say that PJ and I are very much enjoying this conversation. It's quite refreshing because you do think on your own and we both are trying to communicate ideas and not just get hung up on semantics as some in the virtual bump thread seem to be doing...

I also really appreciate your sincerity and obvious dedication to skiing. I really do hope that it'll work out to be able to meet up and ski next your at St Anton at Interski. It should be fun. When PJ was on the team, he skied in 4 Interskis - 1975, 1979, 1983 and 1987. He hasn't been to one since as a spectator. I never was at one, so we are both looking forward to going. PJ always found them quite educational to discuss ski techniques with others from all around the world. He is hoping that is is much the same, but you never know. I think you would also find it interesting to attend and be able to talk to some of the best, non-world cup skiers around the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

Over the years you have developped an own way of thinking about skiing based on old consepts. Not a bad thing but here is an opportunity for you to maybe learn something if you let go of your resistance.

Okay, let's try to understand this. PJ and I have a different model of what is good skiing than you do. I am trying to understand your model and at the same time trying to explain our model to you. It's not resistance on our part. To tell you the truth, if you were to ever get to ski with PJ, I think you would realize what an incredible skier he is and probably want to try and figure out what he is doing that works so well. So, as I am trying to take the time to understand your model, I would hope that you are also taking the time to try and understand what we are saying. It is educational for both of us.

No problem. I see from the photos and read from the postings that PJ is a great skier. And Im sure I would benefit a lot from skiing with him. Or with you. You also seem like a nice guy having your chops all figured out.

Thanks. You'd benefit more from skiing with PJ though. He is still amazing to ski with. I'm lucky to be able.

PJ is also an excellent clinician - very very popular and successful. This is because he actually is quite capable of helping people improve their skiing. He not only understands skiing quite well, but he has this great gift of also being able to figure out what someone can next be successful at to improve their own skiing.

He is also quite versatile in his skiing. He can ski and demonstrate quite well, just about any technique, including weird stuff like the Ruade, or horse kick. Enough lauding PJ, I'll get on with reading and commenting further.

Text omitted....

You needed to unweight to displace the skis into the new direction. I wouldn't call that a skidding angle though and they never did either.

When I talk about a skidding angle Im referring to the ski not running along its edge. I have tried to draw a pickture to explain the phenomen here below. The fact is that eather you are running along the edge or you are not. You are talking about "displacing the skis into the new direction". This displacement into a new direction is what creates the ski edge to run over the snow at a new skidding angle (steering angle). You see that when you displaced the ski into a new direction your forward motion did not change. Its the friction between the skis edge and the snow that will make you turn.

Yes, I understand the skidding angle you refer too. I have this thing about how you say something, which words you use to describe things, not only have an important impact on communication, but also have an important impact on understanding the complete reality of the concept. The words indicate quite a lot about what you will allow your brain to consider and to understand. Certain words can actually hinder you from thinking about the whole reality of something. (This line of thought is from my training for my Masters Degree in Teaching the Gifted and Talented).

So no problem with the skidding - and I love your diagram. The word I don't think is helpful to use is the word "angle" - used with either skidding or steering. You are quite correct about the friction of the skis edge and it's tracking ability that will cause the ski to turn - flat skis are not very effective in creating turns, so the edges have to have at least enough friction to effect the turning. World Cuppers are great with this skill - they can be going at mach speed in a direction, flatten theirs skis, twist them sideways  and not change their direction, but only slow down a bit. You see on course inspections sometimes. It's a great skill. They are so well balanced and feeling the snow; i.e. aware of their edges on the snow.

The reason I don't like the word "angle" is this. It does not add much to the description of the skis and mainly serves to start one thinking about something that is really not of much bearing on making the turn. When you say "angle", many people's minds will then want to know what the angle measures... the exact measurement of the angle is not that relevant. The fact that you talk about either skiing the ski lengthwise  or skiing the ski sideways is what is relevant. Skiing the ski sideways encompasses all angles when the ski is not going straight. Your diagram is quite good as a descriptor. The ski is skidding and the exact angle is not that important. - Just a minor, tweaking point and I don't want to sidetrack what you are saying very much, because I do agree with your basics here. So you displace the ski, skid the ski, turn it towards the new direction. Need to ski because the dynamics of the skis back then were harder to work with than our new skis.

In order to be able to extend you had to flex first. Thats how the flexing through out the turn came about. Not to increase pressure during the turn, to prepare for extention and decrease pressure after full extention was reached.

If you look at the first down-up-down in the Arlberg stem christiana, you will see that they flexed to brake and slow down at the bottom part of the turn. They were not down unweighting with the braking. They were adding pressure to the skis by going down and then setting their edges or skidding to brake. Then the up-unweighted to make it easier to steer a flatter, unweighted ski. They used rebound also to help them do this.

If there was not the down stem, then they would crouch while already starting their body swing. This crouch or flexing, also weighted the skis more as they then would push off with both feet to up unweight, flatten the skis, swing their body and skis around in the new direction.

All down movements are not down-unweighting movements.

This is correct.  You can also add pressure/weight by flexing as we do in check turns, classic short swing turns which are still used in some chutes by many people.

I have a slightly different take on the old Austrian ski school system from the 50s but flexing through out the turn did not unweight the skis. That I agree on. However, the reason for this slow flexion was that in order to be able to extend into transition you had to be flexed first.

I do agree that you can't keep either flexing or extending. You do need to flex in order to be able to extend again and you need to extend in order to be able to flex again. Understood and intuitive.

The extention was then somewhat explosive and gave a totally different effect than the gradual flexing.

Remember the old down-up-down. It really did go down-up-down then down-up down etc... There were two downs with a slight pause in between. You are right that classic movement pattern was not typically gradual. Some of the explosive was the rebound that was created intentionally to help unweight to flatten and steer the skis. The first "down" weighted to load up the skis and the snow; the "up" released and unloaded and not only was the rebound used, but the body also extended as if jumping and adding even more explosive muscular energy to the "up"; the second "down" was the landing, to soften it a bit so it wouldn't be too jarring, but only as much as need to be. Then it was all repeated. I shouldn't only say was, it is still a valid way to turn today with it's own applications.

You are right about the up-unweight and flatten of the skis. At this moment the skis were displaced into a new direction and a new skidding angle was established.

Totally in agreement except for you could cross out the word angle.... my bias, not a necessary word or correction, just a picky thing that if I were training and coaching you, I'd keep nagging you about - unless of course, you were to tell me something that would redeem that word...Don't worry about it though. I respect you and you can use it if you like, as long as you realize it's not a necessary part of the description....

However, there are other options for unweighting than feet extention into transition because you can for example let your body vault over. This causes unweighting as your CoM is lifted up and then dropped down. Once you accept the fact that all other turning than clean carving involves setting a skidding angle the flexing and extending cycle is easy to understand.

What you are calling vaulting over is the rebound effect. The direction that the CoM goes in older turns was indeed more up and back even. It was necessary to unweight to flatten the skis so they could be rotated in the new direction. However, that is not the only method of making a skidded turn.

There are other ways to skid a turn such as down unweighting, flattening and pivoting the skis - think of the bend-stretch and Jobert's toilet turns. These are not carved turns, yet they are not performed with any up-unweighting. The main concept is that if you want to skid a turn, you can unweight it first. However, the more you flatten the ski, the less you need to unweight it.

Down-unweighting is a very falcely understood technique. You cannot unweighting your skis and displace them into a new direction in a functional way by down-unweighting. Flexing your legs from an extended stance. You can try it right were you are. Stand up and have your legs extended. Now try to turn yourself 90deg to your right by flexing your legs and then quickly turning your body and feet. You need to be very very quick to do it. Hardly any elegant skiing manuver to turn on snow with your skis on.

It is easier to do down unweighting when moving and the faster you are moving, the easier it is to do. This is because of gravity and momentum. Gravity pulls you towards the center of the earth or down. Momentum keeps you going in the direction you are going. When momentum is great, the total sum of the vectors of the forces changes from down to more forward and down. On a steep hill, this is even more true. The effect is that the more momentum you have, the longer period of time you can down-unweight before you will hit the ground and bottom out, so to speak.

You are correct that from a standing still position, you have to be quite quick and athletic to down unweight and rotate at the same time. However, it is possible, On skis, with a bit of speed it is quite easy to perform. It's also quite fun. During one clinic of some level 2 candidates this year, I took off making some nice bend-stretch turns using down unweighting. None of the candidates had ever seen such skiing, thought it was quite comical and wondered what I wad doing and how I was doing it. So, yes, it's not that prevalent in modern skiing and many do not even know about it.... but it is still fun and a good workout for your thighs, but kind of hard on your knees....

Now try to bend your knees and flex down. Now jump up and as your feet leave the floor turn your body and legs right. Se how easy it is. You can even do it 180deg. if you want.

Even a 360 if you want. No question, up unweighting, especially with the added force and energy from the muscles rapidly jumping is easy. No argument there. It's also quite intuitive and natural for people to do when told to unweight - they jump up.

So when somebody tells me he down-unweights to turn I know he uses some kind of up-force like a virtual bump to push his body up.

Herein lies our difference in the understanding of the physics of down-unweighting. In my model, there is no rule that says you have to go "up" to either un-weight or to make a turn. You can go down, make the turn as you are going down and staying low by simply pushing your feet out and around. A typical bend stretch turn is not carved, but rather skidded. You sink, unweighting your skis, keep your body low and then stretch out your legs around in the turn. It's fun and there really isn't any up until after you begin to really steer your skis around. The up as you steer your skis around does not unweight them, but starts to add weight back to them and ski them around. So, it's down to unweight and then up to weight. Bend-stretch.The Austrians used to be quite good at it.

Down-unweighting from a leg movement standpoint is the same as a up-unweight without the leg extention. In other words its only the latter part of the up-unweighting consept. All up-unweighting has a component of down-unweighting built into them.

Hmmm, still thinking on that one...... down and up unweighting are the same in that they are both unweighting the skis. Yes.

So, therefore, it is a true statement because, as you say they both unweight and there is no leg extension in down unweighting. First sentence true.

I'm not too sure what you mean by the "latter part of the up-unweighting concept".... If you mean that you have to go down to go up, then sort of. In down un-weighting you do go down and flex. In up unweighting, you can use the same bit of a concept of flexing to absorb if you want to try and "land" softly by flexing and absorbing the pressure; i.e. the flexing movement lessens the pressure that is being added to the skis as you come down on them after extending and unweighting them. So in that sense it is similar use of the physics. So if that is what you mean, I'll buy that.

Note that skiing with a flat ski is not very efficient since its the ski edges and edging that causes the skis to turn. The skis are only flat because they go from one edge to annother in order to turn in different directions.

Totally agree that if your purpose or intent is to turn, flat skis are not the ticket for efficiency. However, you can do rounded side slips and still turn some. In a carved turn, I don't even consider or think about the skis every being flat. Look at your tracks in your video clip. You never had flat skis on the snow most of the time. You used rebound and changed edges in the air.

The flat part is used to displace the skis into the new direciton by setting a new skidding angle.

In more skidded turns, yes (but loose the angle word...) It used to be very hard to steer and edged ski. In modern skiing, if you are indeed making nice round arcs, with nice round, shapely top parts of the "C", you will see that at edge change, there is not much direction change or steering or skidding angle that you refer to. In modern turns, the skis are not steered until after they are on their new edges. This is the blue angel effect - tip to turn them. Steering and edging working together to carve instead of skid. I find that this quite useful to explain to students to help them feel their edges and keep them carving. I tell them that at edge change, do not try to change direction yet. Be patient and feel your edges cutting into the snow ALL the time. Keep them cutting as you slowly steer them - balance your steering to your edging.

A flat ski turns quite easily with steering, so there is really no need to unweight it at all.

This is not true. You need to unweight because you dont want to have full weight on your skis as the new skidding angle is initiated. As you land back on your feet you should alredy be on your new edges. Or you will catch an outside egde and get slapped into the snow.

Maybe you misread what I said or maybe I didn't say what I intended to quite correctly. With flat skis, it's very easy to steer. If I keep my skis flat on the snow, I can pivot them quite easily. There are no edges in the way of spinning them around. If I start moving, but keep them flat, I can still steer them easily in a similar fashion. I do not need to unweight because they are flat. Of course, this is not possible on a steeper slope because you would only go down the hill and not across the hill if you were to keep your skis flat. However, by varying your fore/aft balance, you would still be able to steer the flat skis without unweighting. Think of when you spin 360's on the snow, your skis are flat and you vary the fore/aft pressure. It's like that.

If you make the mistake of edging the ski, the you will slam as you said. However, if your ski is flat, you do not need to unweight to steer it.

If you are skidding, whether you need to unweight or not will depend on how much edge you have, how fast your are going and how patient you are with your steering. I see a lot of intermediates who hardly unweight at all, they are very "heavy" on their feet all the time and they still make turns.

Now, if you want to be very sudden and abrupt in your steering, you will catch an edge as you said and slam. But you can make turns with skidding and no unweighting if you balance out your edging and steering.

SO it's not true as you stated that "all other turning than clean carving involves setting a skidding angle the flexing and extending cycle is easy to understand".

Yes it is. Its very logical but you need to think out of the box.

I am thinking out of the box a bit differently... try this - you stated an absolute in saying "ALL" other turning except carving... needed the unweight flex/extend to steer a skidded ski. I just had described ways to steer your skis that were skidding without the unweighting and flexing and extending. Maybe in your model, it's a rule restricting what is possible, but my model is a bit more inclusive. If we were on the snow, I'd demonstrate that you indeed can steer skis that are not carving without flexing and extending.

I would suggest you try to stop thinking about skidding angles too. That is one of the most confusing, non-dynamic terms that has been around, and in my opinion, does not really apply to any type of skiing, except that done in books with lines and drawings that do not equate closely to reality....

I look at skiing from how my skis interact with the snow. Your approach is not quite accurate. If you dont understand the lines in the books and the diagrams then I suggest you start digging into that stuff pronto. I also suggest you look up PhysicsMan postings on various topics. Im not willing to go as far as describing everything in mathemtical formulas but I admire folks that do.

Hmm, I'm going to run out of time.. it's very late for me and I have work to do tomorrow that is quite physical... I need sleep, so just a bit more....

I also look at skiing from how my skis interact with the snow. I totally agree that is what skiing is all about. I have no problem understanding diagrams. I am a nerd and very very good at math and physics. I design and houses, engineer connections in moment frame structures and I used to work geology with drill holes and ore bodies... I have no issue with drawings in books if they are correct. I do have issues with people who draw their diagrams and are not educated in what they are trying to explain.... If I ever have a question with some physics issue, I ask my brother. He works at the Naval Research Lab in D.C. running a labor lab. He has is Phd (Piled Higher and Deeper) and has even a more extensive knowledge of physics and dynamics than I do. My father was an aerospace engineer and so was my son, before he passed. I have spent countless hours discussing laminar flow, turbulent flow, vectors, forces... etc. My other brother has a chair at Yale with 2 Phd's in math and economics... talk about a math whizz... If I have more questions, I ask him...  So I do understand quite  bit more than you think I do. I just do not think the skiing diagrams commonly put forth are very accurate pictures of reality. Some are a bit useful, but many are down right incorrect and wrong. Most ski instructors are not that professional when they delve into areas in which only have a dabbling of knowledge and understanding...

Sorry I sort of exploded there... but that is another pet peve with much of our ski instructing profession - they pretend to know things when they don't and the pretend to be the authority when they shouldn't. To teach skiing you don't need all that stuff. Most skiing physics is quite intuitive and you can explain it to your students without many words and by much demonstration. Certainly diagrams and the likes are useful for discussion such as this, however, many of the diagrams in the supposed ski books by the fake experts are worthless, confusing and a fraud - put there to look so official when they are junk!!!!

Okay, I'll stop ranting now.

Updating your skiing would include adapting the new extension and flexion pattern where you flex at transition and extend into the turn as a tool for clean carving. This does not mean that you would never use your more traditional flexion and extention pattern for other kind of skiing.

TDK6, you just said "flex at transition and extend into the new turn as a tool for clean carving"... This is what we do, but we start flexing just after the apex, start transferring weight to the new ski just after the apex. However, since we have quite a bit more of a range of motion than you ski with, we also start moving to the new turn with our body earlier than you do. At transition, we are crossing over your skis/skis crossing under, and we are still flexed. However, that is not the maximum flexion. This also allows for a much cleaner, shapely arc at the top of the turn.

I dont ski with a very aggressive up-extention at the transition but that really has noting to do with the range.

I agree, from what I've seen,  that you do not ski with a very aggressive up-extension, or even flexion for that matter, and you don't have much of a range either.

I flex and extend in the saggital plane and extention is seldome in the vertical plane. I too start flexing after apex but slightly later as you do. I wait untill I relese the turn. After I relese the turn my body starts crossing over my skis that are crossing under. This part of the turn we also call the float. Here I am unweighted. Since I dont have a body high up that I need to drop down I can immediately  engage my new edges and start carving.

If you were to extend only in the sagittal plane, then you could not extend foreagonally into the turn like you need to and in fact where you do extend.

Well, maybe you need to drop the planes point of view too. Most movements through space and time cannot be accurately described as either sagittal, frontal or transverse planes. In reality, with both our bodies, our skis and the hill, all those planes are rotating, tipping and moving around so fluidly that it is not only confusing, but very inaccurate to try to understand moving in those planes...

I too start flexing after apex but slightly later as you do. I wait untill I relese the turn.

You are correct in your analysis of the timing of your flexing and extending. I agree that is what you do and that I begin the movements earlier in the turn.

After I relese the turn my body starts crossing over my skis that are crossing under. This part of the turn we also call the float. Here I am unweighted. Since I dont have a body high up that I need to drop down I can immediately  engage my new edges and start carving.

Often your skis leave the ground at edge change. About beginning to be able to engage edges and carve immediately, that is what we also do. We get very early edge, very very early in the turn, but the edge angle is quite progressive throughout the whole turn - it is timed with the need, as is the guiding, the flexing and extending - all based on need to ride the skis on edge efficiently. Our bodies are not high up either and there is no need to drop down to engage edges and carve. Matter of fact, we are more likely to control the rebound more and not leave the ground on edge change, but simply to roll over onto the new edges, with no displacement and landing like in many of the turns in your track video.

SO, in our model, we can also have the same purpose and intent to carve as you do. The main difference is your concept that we have our bodies high and need to drop down. That is not accurate. The other major difference is that we "move" a lot more with more progressive movements, stretched over a greater amount of time with a greater range of motion.

Also as I suggested earlier on, you should be able to ski with no flexing and extending in the sagittal plane. Always keep the stance leg carrying the load long and strong.

That is how you seem to prefer to ski - with hardly any movement at all. We can both do that quite easily and would gladly demonstrate that for you. However, we do not believe it to be a very efficient way to ski. The body is too stiff, cannot adapt to terrain and snow variables as easily, and cannot manage the pressure of the turn forces. That cause the turn forces to load up in the lower part of the turn. That is why in the video of your tracks, you popped almost every turn at transition and made the edge change in the air.

I wonder why you think I pop up in the air at transition? I watched the video and I did not see any transition made in the air. I knew this offcouse but it still puzzles me why you think so. Here is an example:

One set of edges transfers into annother set of edges.

Yes, and in the air at edge change. That is the result of keeping your stance leg strong as you say, with hardly any pressure management through flexing.

We call this kind of transition a Inside Leg Extention transition. Flexing through the transition we call Outside Leg Flexion. Or Outside Leg Relese.

OLF

You relese the turn by flexing your outside leg. When you do this all your weight minus possible upward forces fueled by CoM being moving away from the BoS shifts to your inside leg and ski. Depending on how radical your OLF is you eather pick your ski off the snow completely or leave it on the snow simply taking some pressure off. In the transition you end up with both legs flexed at the knee joint. Equally much. The relese also starts what we call a "float". During the float you can eather keep both feet on the snow or you can lift them up in the air. Depending on how much you incline and bend your inside knee the lower you are in the transition. This way its possible to keep your CoM from moving up and down providing a fluid flow down the hill. This kind of transition can only be used when you link turns since the turn fuels the transition. In transition your CoM has shifted back but since you are floating it does not matter. Typical modern SL turns.

I totally understand what you are saying and I can perform such turns. They are fun too.They are one way to turn, but they are not the only way to carve a turn.

That is correct. Only one way to do it.

ILF

You relese the turn by extending your inside leg. This way your CoM goes up. At transition your legs are long and matched. This way your hips will never drop back and you will retain good fore/aft balance through out the whole turn and transition. Typical GS turn.

If you are moving more foragonally into the turn, you CoM does not have to go up much at all. You can also transfer some of the energy from the old turn into the new turn to accelerate even more that the top of the turn with almost a skating movement. However, you are still flexed at transition or edge change, but not fully flexed.  Please consider the following photos  of Ted Ligety.

It is correct that you are moving your body into the turn. This is nothing unique. But it is offcourse difficult because the recreational skier doesent feel comfortable moving into the turn like this. It is also called an upside down position. I call it setting up the gross parameters of the turn. That includes the ammount of inclination. Good skiers make this move very aggressively and Ligerty does so in frames 3 and 4. Very impressive.

Notice his range of movement - flexion and extension. Notice how active his lower legs are to shape and edge. Notice his maximum extension is not at transition. At transition, he is still extending. His flexion started right after the apex of the turn.

Ligerty is not extending through the transition. In his first turn he did not extend his outside leg at all. It remainded at the same length through the whole transition.

Look closely and you will see when he started his extension. He is more flexed before the edge change. At edge change he had already begun extending. If you ask him, he will even tell you this same thing. Look at the first frame - really flexed. Look at the second frame - just about transition and he is not as flexed as before. He is already extending, but he is not fully extended until around the apex of the turn. He then begins to flex right after the apex and start the cycle again. These pictures illustrate that he is extending as he is passing through edge change at transition.

Its an typical ILE transition. He is vaulting over. He is extending his inside leg to match his outside. In his second turn he did not extend eahter. He flexed. Not much but still flexed. His inside leg extended but his outside leg flexed a bit. He got airborn. He did the flexing to absorbe the upward force caused by the virtual bump or reboudn or a combination of both.

From all the definitions of vaulting, I would not want to label Ligety as vaulting.... He is actively crossing over and moving into the new turn with his body - i.e. extending on his new outside leg, old inside leg. This move he began shortly after the apex of the turn. He began the early lateral weight shift, just as he passed the gate. His extension continues through the transition to the apex of the turn. Just compare the frames and how close his bum is to his feet. Don't get confused by long leg, short leg. Long leg short leg is greatest at full extension near the apex.

He does indeed accelerate more in the top part of the turn by actively extending into the turn and "pushing" his body faster down the hill with his very active outside leg extension movement.

He did almost get in the air a very little bit and the tries to not do that, but he is not perfect and every turn is not perfect. He usually tries to manage the turn forces to not pop.

There is also not a lot of flexing and extending motion here. Note also that Ligerty is a breed of his own. Like Bode is.

There is a great amount of flexing/extending motion here. Look at the distance between his bum and his feet - his outside leg goes from being fully extended at the apex, to just about fully flexed at the bottom of the turn. Look again closely and don't get confused by long leg/short leg. In a high G turn, you have to have inclination to stack your body, you will have one leg short when inclined and when you are fully extended.

At the apex of the (second) turn, his outside leg is fully extended. Then it starts to flex to manage the forces of the turn. Both legs then flex,(No, inside leg extends after apex) but he is already beginning to move to the new turn, so his outside leg stays flexed longer as his inside leg starts to extend, moving his body into the next turn while his skis are still finishing up the old turn (No, the skis are in the air so they are not doing anything). At transition he is still pretty flexed, but is extending to the inside and down the hill - foragonally. (he cannot be extending into the turn from such an upright position. he needs to drop his body down and into the turn. no extention)

I think you are confusing how the two legs move in a higher G, more inclined turn. Apex is fully extended, inside leg is very flexed, but this is overall an extended position. Distance between head or bum and skis is greatest. When talking extension and flexion, look at the distance between the skis and the bum or head. Don't get confused by inside leg and outside legs and how they are flexing or extending independently due to the inclination and angulation needed to sustain the turn and stack to the turn forces. So, apex is about fully extended, even though one leg is long and the other leg is short.

After the apex, the outside leg begins to flex. This is a more flexed position, but the inclination is not as great, so the inside leg is not as flexed. The inside leg is getting a bit longer, but the distance between the head or bum to the skis is getting less and less. Flexion is occurring as he is managing the turn forces so they will not over power his ability to hold the edge.

(The skis are not as a rule always in the air. He tries to keep them on the ground. When they are in the a bit, it is not until edge change.)

He is not "up" and has no need to drop his body down. He started moving and extending to the new turn BEFORE transition. His body starts to go to the new turn BEFORE his skis do. At transition, edge change, he is flexed, but getting longer/extending. He is not "upright", he is moving across his skis, still relatively flexed, but extending, towards the apex of the new turn. He is not dropping down, but moving across and extending, getting longer.

As soon as he is across his skis, his skis finish the old turn and are immediately on edge in the new turn. His continued extension movement allows him to get a high early edge angle as he continues to separate his body from his skis. He is now at the top of the turn, still extending, not dropping down, but still getting longer. He is inclining more and more as he gets more edge angles and as he keeps extending.

At about the apex of the turn, his feet are furthest from his head/bum that they can get. His outside leg is fully extended. His inside leg is flexed because of the inclination. Overall, this is about full extension.

Right after the apex, he begins to flex - his head/bum getting closer to this skis. The legs flex differently because of the direction his body is now beginning to move - from the inclined inside of the old turn and already starting to move towards the new turn. I don't think you are following this, but I am describing what Ligety is doing and also what it feels like when you do it. In understanding flexion and extension, you have to keep in mind the turn forces and the inclination it will take to manage them. You have to understand the hips and where they are going (whole other discussion). You have to understand the axis of the body and how it moves from being inclined to being more angulated. You have to understand the direction your shoulders and core are moving - in the direction of the new turn, this is counter.

I know I'm repeating myself, but I do hope that this will help you understand what I am describing.

Im not sure but your knowledge seems to be very extensive but you look at the pictures and you make to me strange conclusions. Why? Anybody else have a clue?

Hopefully my more lengthy discussion above gives you a clue. I think the basis is the definition of when someone is extended and when they are flexed. As I said above, look at how long or how short they are by how close their bum and head are to their feet. Fully extended does not mean both legs long. Flexing does not mean that both legs are getting shorter. You need to factor in the turn turn forces and how he is managing them to understand what flexion looks like and what extension looks like - basically if you were to measure their length from their head or bum down to their skis - when it is it the longest (extended) and when is it the shortest (flexed).... Let me know if you still think I am making some strange conclusions.

This is the timing that I am talking and that PJ is exhibiting in the turns of him. This is quite modern and not old fashion skiing.

Thanks and night.

Night again. I did finish and now I will be very tired tomorrow... This forum thing is quite addicting.... and enjoyable discussion.

Thanks.

We've got to do something about figuring out how to respond but with shorter posts..... or maybe I do. It's now 2:55 AM and I'm going to be dead tomorrow... only a few hours of sleep. I need to figure out some other way of doing this.... or be more disciplined in limiting the time I spend I guess... damn.

Cookie - sorry to hear about your son but its interesting to hear that you are surrounded by math and physics experts. Im also a bit in the same situation surrounded by engineers and sciantist. Im a naval architect myself like my father was. So Ive studied diagrams and charts and did my share of calculations over the years. Glad you liked my skidding diagram. Im trying to draw very naive and basic drawings to support my statements and theories. This way its easy for somebody else to relate to what Im writing.

Let me scroll through your last posting. I have never been trying out for interski. I dont have the time. Our racing schedule is quite busy and I have my teachin and coaching responsabilities and my kids, family and my day job. But thanks for the invitation. At least I know you two are going so I will keep that in mind. You never know. St Anton is one of my favorit ski areas.

I have no gripes with anybody having a different skiing model to mine. Im kind of used to it. The challenge is to be able to describe it well enough for others to understand. And to be able to ask good and relevant questions.

I can easily drop out the word "angle" but Im not sure I will do that quite yet. Sorry. In hydrodynamics the angle plays a major role. Maintaining a very little skidding angle while "steering" or "guiding" the skis is what we strive for. So its a blend of skidding angle, edge angle, pressure and speed.

I use the classic short turn quite often. Since its the basis for mogul skiing Ive started to use it with my kids and my jr racing groups. Its pritty hard for them because they are so used to just tipping and turning. Also the high frequency is hard for them. Before they start understanding how to use rebound they are completely lost. And before they nail the short turn they are not able to ski moguls properly. Here are many schools and I will not go into it any deeper.

Speed in itself has noting to do with how easy it is to down-unweight or not. Gravity is pulling on us the same. But you are partially right, because of the momentum turning creates. Remember when I said that when a person says that he uses DUW for turning I know he uses momentum from somewhere. This is just such a case. You say its easy to do if you are up to speed and if you have momentum. Exactly.

You are right. You dont need to unweight to turn. Not even if you are not carving. The technique builds on turning the skis when they are flat. But its more complicated than I want to get into right now. Ive learned it by the name "one/two footed relese". Dont know if you are familiar with the technique in question. It builds on relesing the ski edges and letting the skis swing arround. Kind of like in the short classic short turn I mentioned earlier. But here we are talking strictly linked turns. Short turns. Edge angles build up very quickly. The pivot and the steering happens when the skis are flat and as the edge angles increase the skis start to perform and the skier is deflected in the desired direction. And the speed controll is there as well.

When you extend your legs and you go for the classic UUW move the unweighting happens as the accelleration upwards is reversed and stopped and as it starts to accellerate in the other direction, down. DUW would be the same without extending first. You would be extended to start with and quickly flex your legs to unweight. Here is a diagram I made a long time ago:

Its to display that DUW is the latter part of UUW. Also the time is shorter. Those are just estimates.

The reason I talked about the saggital plane was that the extention at apex when skier is max inclined does not push the CoM up vertically. It pushes it up at an angle. Its more resisting the turn forces than resisting gravity. Its a combination of both. If you extend at edge change then you would be pushing your CoM vertically.

Its interesting that you think that I dont have a lot of range in my flexing and extention. You must be using some ref. of my skiing. Which video? Or is that statement based on what Ive said in typing?

Its also interesting that you think that Im flying in the air in every transition in the video of the tracks. I can assure you that that did not happen. And it shows very very clearly in the video. If I had jumped into the air there would not be any tracks at all at transition. That was not the case.

About Ligerty. Its late and I need to go to work early in the morning so I will make this short. I did not understand what you were saying regarding the flexion and extention taking place in Ligertys skiing. In some fragments I agree but overally your explanation did not give me a clear pickture of how he flexed and extended. Perhaps you could open it up a bit when you have time. In the mean time take a look at a diagram I made some time ago. It displays the relationship between inside leg and out side leg and how the CoM is positioned and moving in all 3 planes.

Good night....

TDK - just got back from a long day and made the mistake of checking the virtual bump there - what a nut house that thread is. I come over here and you are so much more sane and logical - calm waters. Interesting about the naval architecture. I grew up on boats, racing and sailing. My father was also somewhat of an inventor and did many things. We had a 39' Concordia which he took the bottom off off and we replaced it with a fin keel, trim tab and spade rudders - later got rid of the spade rudders for a more normal rudder. I was old enough to help through the whole process - we did all the work ourselves and my father did the design. Ended up being a fantastic boat.

I need sleep and I'll go through your post in the morning. I've read only part of it and I'm sooo tired. You brought up a very good point that we've found so true too - many of the younger kids today lack what I call the "soft" skills of feathering, skidding etc. They learned on shaped skis and know how to edge and pressure them, but not finesse them. I have this article that I'm done writing and just need to edit and draw one more diagram for - I'm calling it the "Lost Art of Short Turns" or something like that. I compare the classic short swing turn with the modern short radius (reaching, gliding) turn. I'll get it out soon.

Night.

Next afternoon -

I was thinking that both air and water and snow have so much in common - they are all understood in the engineering world using the precepts of fluid dynamics. Since you are so familiar with them, that probably has contributed to your thinking on your own for so long - that's great. I respect and appreciate you for that.

You are also so correct that the "challenge is to be able to describe it well enough for others to understand. And to be able to ask good and relevant questions."

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdk6

I can easily drop out the word "angle" but Im not sure I will do that quite yet. Sorry. In hydrodynamics the angle plays a major role. Maintaining a very little skidding angle while "steering" or "guiding" the skis is what we strive for. So its a blend of skidding angle, edge angle, pressure and speed.

I like that comparison of the angle of the skis to the rudder. I can see why you would like the word angle. It sounds like we are on the same page with the blending of it all. I guess I just don't like the concept of setting a definite steering angle or skidding angle at transition... I think it's much more descriptive and helpful to think in terms of continual guidance, blended with everything else. We agree on what we are talking about though.

I use the classic short turn quite often. Since its the basis for mogul skiing Ive started to use it with my kids and my jr racing groups. Its pritty hard for them because they are so used to just tipping and turning. Also the high frequency is hard for them. Before they start understanding how to use rebound they are completely lost. And before they nail the short turn they are not able to ski moguls properly. Here are many schools and I will not go into it any deeper.

Yes! That is what I also agree with - learning to use the "soft" skills! Also, totally agree on the connection of short turns to bumps.. Matter of fact, we have an old video of PJ in the 1980's in one of the Warren Miller videos I think it was, connecting the short turns to learning bumps. Still the same today. We do that, but not with the classic short turn, but rather take the modern, reaching, gliding short turn into the bumps. Not pivoting and sliding around, but more a carving with a a rounded top arc too. This is not Olympic style bump skiing, but more like the previous bump skiing video I uploaded.

Speed in itself has noting to do with how easy it is to down-unweight or not. Gravity is pulling on us the same. But you are partially right, because of the momentum turning creates. Remember when I said that when a person says that he uses DUW for turning I know he uses momentum from somewhere. This is just such a case. You say its easy to do if you are up to speed and if you have momentum. Exactly.

Yes, I was being loose with the word speed, and technically, since it has a direction, could say velocity... but not worth the confusion it might bring. So yes, the faster you go, the more momentum is a factor in determining how long you have in DUW until you hit the ground. So, we agree. Nice.

You are right. You dont need to unweight to turn. Not even if you are not carving. The technique builds on turning the skis when they are flat. But its more complicated than I want to get into right now. Ive learned it by the name "one/two footed relese". Dont know if you are familiar with the technique in question. It builds on relesing the ski edges and letting the skis swing arround. Kind of like in the short classic short turn I mentioned earlier. But here we are talking strictly linked turns. Short turns. Edge angles build up very quickly. The pivot and the steering happens when the skis are flat and as the edge angles increase the skis start to perform and the skier is deflected in the desired direction. And the speed controll is there as well.

I understand what you are saying regarding unweighting and turning and no need to try to go into some lengthy complicated explanation. I think I know what you are talking about a one/two footed release. There is also a technique that I call more stepping, that goes one/two - first one foot and then the other foot. We used to call something a step-hop-wedeln.

When you extend your legs and you go for the classic UUW move the unweighting happens as the accelleration upwards is reversed and stopped and as it starts to accellerate in the other direction, down. DUW would be the same without extending first. You would be extended to start with and quickly flex your legs to unweight. Here is a diagram I made a long time ago:

That is what I thought you were saying. The only thing I would add is that in DUW, for it to be unweighting, you need to be actively moving with the direction of the turn forces more rapidly to actually increase the sum of the velocities for it to be actual unweighting. Simply flexing and absorbing will not be unweighting, you need to flex fast enough in order to unweight. It can be part of  UUW as you have diagrammed.

Its to display that DUW is the latter part of UUW. Also the time is shorter. Those are just estimates.

The reason I talked about the saggital plane was that the extention at apex when skier is max inclined does not push the CoM up vertically. It pushes it up at an angle. Its more resisting the turn forces than resisting gravity. Its a combination of both.

Totally agree, but I just don't like to think in terms of the planes because then you have to also imagine rotating the planes and it's gets really messy as a mental image. I think it's much easier to think in terms of moving yourself through space and time and just looking at what is going on and what the forces are and how they are changing as you move... that plane thing is just another one of the things that I thinks complicates the description. However, I'll agree that when it aids describing what view point you are looking at an object, it helps. Back to the turn - totally agree that it's more resisting turn forces than gravity at the apex, but still both.

If you extend at edge change then you would be pushing your CoM vertically.

Now, here is the point that I think I need to try to explain better. Extending at edge change does not necessarily mean moving your CoM vertically. I'll try to explain using Ligety's turns as an example. Just after the apex of the turn, he already starts moving from one foot to the other foot, internally, within his legs, exchanging which leg has how much weight on it. You cannot see this much of the time, but, with Ligety, he says that is what he is doing when he describes his turn (other video I referred to previously of Ligety describing his turning).

At about this same time, he also starts to move his CoM into the new turn. This you can see and it looks like a bit more counter and angulation combined. (Mind you, this does not include his hips yet - they are still being used to keep his skis engaged in the turn, which at this point, has a lot of pressure to it.)

PJ says that Franz Hoppichler used to always say, "you Americans go way too much up and down in your skiing".. and he was correct too. He impressed on PJ the need to not move his CoM around any more than need be. A very disciplined and guided upper body is what is needed - moved with the turn, not being thrown around or moved unnecessarily.

So, think in terms of this smooth disciplined movement of the CoM, along the path it follows smoothly from one turn to the other with minimal up and down component,  mostly just the arc of its line. Ligety does this very well. He begins moving to his new ski early, so this allows him to be able to start moving his CoM, while he is very flexed on the path of the next turn.

This means that he does begin to get longer or extend at this point, but gradually, and in conjunction with the turn forces of the turn he is just coming out of. Some have called this diving down the hill, but I don't think that description is very good either. When I ski with Ligety and follow him, I feel more like I am watching a cougar clawing its way down the hill, almost pulling himself along as fast, as some and as powerfully as he can - reaching ahead and pulling himself forward.

Now, of course, this is not what he is doing, but it just "feels" like watching a cougar running down hill.So he is very active in his powerful, controlled and progressive extension movements that begin just after the apex of the turn.

As he is approaching edge change, he is still flexed, but getting longer because his CoM is still travelling into the new turn in this foragonal direction - not up, or very very little up to it. He continues this same move right through edge change. Edge changes does not disrupt the movement or flow of his CoM - still same trajectory into the new turn. However, if he has not properly managed the turn forces enough, he will pop some when he rolls his skis to the new edges - they will unload when the edges are released. He tries to minimize this because it's a bit disruptive to the whole energy flow and transfer into the new turn.

As Pepi Stiegler would say, "you don't want to disturb the snow".  So, the purpose is that at edge change, you do not disturb either the snow or your CoM continuing to move into the next turn.

Right after edge change, since the CoM is well along its trajectory in the new turn, you don't have to make any gross upper body movements at that point in time. It's already enroute and nothing needs to change. This allows you to, instead, use your legs more to accelerate even more at this top part of the turn. You are free to shape the top part to keep a clean edged track in the snow and even actively push off - extend - into the new turn more, adding a bit more speed.

I hope this helps explain more the movement pattern that I have been trying to describe and that you ask more about later in this post.

Its interesting that you think that I dont have a lot of range in my flexing and extention. You must be using some ref. of my skiing. Which video? Or is that statement based on what Ive said in typing?

No, I went and looked at some of your videos on Vimeo and YouTube. Don't remember which ones, but it was labeled you and the ski jacket looked the same. PJ commented that you looked like you had a lot of Austrian influence, but could use more movements with getting longer and shorter - not up and down, but in the direction of the turn forces.

Its also interesting that you think that Im flying in the air in every transition in the video of the tracks. I can assure you that that did not happen. And it shows very very clearly in the video. If I had jumped into the air there would not be any tracks at all at transition. That was not the case.

Not flying, but just popping the release a bit. Your edge to edge tracks are very clean, but the distance between them where there could be a rolling edge change shown in the track isn't there. You didn't jump in the air, but there was still quite a bit of energy in the skis as you changed edges and they popped a bit. They are very dynamic tracks showing much energy in the skis. I've looked at tracks where there is more steering onto the new edges, very clean, no skidding and they don't have that gap in them as they roll from release to engaging again. But that energy in the skis at edge change is also a function of flexion and extension and the timing of when you start to move into the new turn. So, you could make just as clean tracks, but with a smoother transition edge to edge by changing your timing just a wee bit and moving a bit more, flexion/exetnsion wise.

About Ligerty. Its late and I need to go to work early in the morning so I will make this short. I did not understand what you were saying regarding the flexion and extention taking place in Ligertys skiing. In some fragments I agree but overally your explanation did not give me a clear pickture of how he flexed and extended. Perhaps you could open it up a bit when you have time. In the mean time take a look at a diagram I made some time ago. It displays the relationship between inside leg and out side leg and how the CoM is positioned and moving in all 3 planes.

[Pictures omitted for sake of length of post]

Hopefully the description helped above with the flexion and extension movements in Ligety. I'll try to draw up some diagrams this evening when I have more time to help explain them. I do like your diagrams. I'll see if I can draw up something using the same concept of illustrating the same thing from differing perspectives.

Back to work... Haven't gotten a whole lot accomplished today in my office.... luckily I'm my own boss...

TDK  - Just a quick thought - if that's possible, quick I mean.

Extending while going through edge change - if the movement was "UP", you would not be as flexed at transition, but rather more extended. However, whenever you see people flexed at transition, they are extending, but not "up", they are extending more forgonally in a more horizontal plane.

Look at picture prior to extension and see the greater amount of flexion. However, the axis of their body is still more tipped inward in response to the turn forces. Now, this next thought is more complicated to visualize. Take that flexed and tilted body and start to rotate the axis more down the hill. If the hill is pitched, there is not much of an "up" component to the path the body travels. Do the same thing with a body on the flat, and it indeed goes up.

Go back to the hill example. As you tip that axis more down the hill. the distance from the top of the body to the hill increase, so they legs can actually extend more without having the body go "up" at all.. Still not extend fully, and still flexed, but not as flexed joints as previously... I'll try to draw it up later. But if you take your two hands, use one as a slope and the other as a flexed skier and tip one, you will see what I am trying to say in regards to being able to be extending more at transition, but not in an "up" direction.

Okay - browser is not getting shut down for the day...

Well, not quite off yet - one more video that may help with the "up" thinking and moving to the new turn. I can't find any videos here of gs type of turns, but here is one from a few years ago of short turns without a lot of up. These are short turn, so the flexion and extension is not that great, but it is enough to manage the CoM moving in the direction of travel without much "up".

I'm going to do my best to give you a quick idea of one small piece of tdk's model in a nutshell.  Most all of us here at Epic know exactly where he got it, and who developed it.

Compared to tdk's "model" there is a BOATLOAD of up in the video of PJ making short turns.

Look at the moments where you see even the slightest up at the begining the turn in PJ's short turn video (foragonally or not) and think of what it would look like if you substituted a deep flexing move (to almost a sitting position) followed by the body crossing over the skis (release at transition) THEN the body extends (without going vertically) coming into the apex of the turn.

If you can get that picture, you will have a much better grasp on what tdk is trying to say.

Here's a thought: would there be any up if the extending of the short leg was equally blended with the flexing of the long leg?

Here's another thought: is the elimination of up necessarily more efficient?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Louie

I'm going to do my best to give you a quick idea of one small piece of tdk's model in a nutshell.  Most all of us here at Epic know exactly where he got it, and who developed it.

Compared to tdk's "model" there is a BOATLOAD of up in the video of PJ making short turns.

Look at the moments where you see even the slightest up at the begining the turn in PJ's short turn video (foragonally or not) and think of what it would look like if you substituted a deep flexing move (to almost a sitting position) followed by the body crossing over the skis (release at transition) THEN the body extends (without going vertically) coming into the apex of the turn.

If you can get that picture, you will have a much better grasp on what tdk is trying to say.

Thanks. I think I do understand what TDK is saying and what he does. I've looked at some videos.

I wouldn't say thought that there is a boatload of up in PJ's short turns. Sure there is some up, but they are quite smooth and he is flexing and extending a bit, but not much... If you look at his head on the horizon, there isn't a lot of up going on. He is pretty much guiding his upper body and going with the turn. If you look at his hips, you will see that it looks like more up motion, but he is actually more moving across with some angulating. Mainly he is moving with his feet pretty smoothly.

I'd call them very nice short turns. Very smooth, balanced and keeping up with his skis.

What I am trying to show TDK is that it is possible to move/flex/extend without going up, but rather more forward with the skis. That is what PJ is doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by therusty

Here's a thought: would there be any up if the extending of the short leg was equally blended with the flexing of the long leg?

Here's another thought: is the elimination of up necessarily more efficient?

You are correct. If you blended the legs together and flexed them more when crossing under, that would minimize the up even more. However, I don't think it would be more efficient because of some basic body mechanics with the skis making the guiding of the skis more inefficient. I think that would disturb the snow even more and not be as smooth.

I think what PJ is demonstrating are some pretty efficient short turns - not slalom turns, just your basic short turns - and it's in short turns where you usually see quite a bit of extra up and down movements in many skiers.

I'd buy PJ's turns any day - wish mine were always as consistent as his are - but then, not many ski quite like PJ....

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