or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bob Barnes Article TPS

post #1 of 37
Thread Starter 
Just read Bobs article in TPS. Interesting that the conclusions pointed out that movements were corrected without coaching or instruction. This certainly points out the importance of correct alignment. I have had similar results over the years(using ductape). It also points out(to me at least) that movement analysis by itself does not give you enough information. Skis on the snow are much more informative. This is something that video analysis does not provide very well.
That system that allows on hill adjustment sounds really slick. I wish there was a way to do that with ones own boots. I do like the "spacer"concept. How does it fit in with the "width" issue?<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SLATZ (edited September 21, 2001).]</FONT>
post #2 of 37
which TPS issue? the current one?
post #3 of 37
The article was written by the "other" Bob Barnes who used to be the ski school director at Crystal Mtn. and was formerly on the PSIA Demo team. He is also a great skier and a fun person. He is the skiing/riding director at Winter Park. "Our" Bob Barnes is at Copper.
post #4 of 37
SLATZ, or anyone else,
Can you tell us on what surface the duct tape is applied? Is it placed on the ski/boot interface or somewhere on the binding? I'd like to experiment but I don't have access to the article. I know it has to be applied on the inside, in my case, because of knock knees.
post #5 of 37
Thread Starter 
The article was about the new Dalebello boot system of alignment.
I have been putting the ductape on the bottom of the boot at the heel and toe contact points(boot must be pretty dry). I use about 1" and put 1/2 on the sole and wrap the rest up the side. I am currently using about 9 layers on my outer L boot. I have used as many as 12 or 13 but only long enough to get a reading(liability you know). I might add that I do this with athletes I work with and not with ski school customers.
I haven't taken it off and ground my boot beacause I want to experiment with some ideas I got from reading The Skiers Edge.
Incidently, does anyone know where I can get one of those router bits with the ball bearing on it they're using to level the top of the boots with?<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SLATZ (edited September 21, 2001).]</FONT>
post #6 of 37
I have not read the article or book you are talking about that has a router bit with a bearing but I can tell you where to get those bits.
Almost all woodworking shops would have them.
Home depot carries quite a few.
rockler on line http://www.rockler.com/ecom7/categor...DID=6&CATID=78

you can go to www.boschtools.com
or search for freud tools (make good bits)
CMT tools makes router bits.

When you find the model bit you want, you can see if amazon.com sells them in their tool section.
The other place you might try is www.toolcribofthenorth.com They ship out of amazon.com's warehouses now.
post #7 of 37

As far as the router bit, any tool supply house should have them. Might try Tognar. I wasn't sure if you've done boot grinding before, but there is a lot of stuff to consider. A few items; you have to build up the top along the edge you planed. The surfaces have to be roughed up, and the resins are very temperature sensitive. Height of interfaces are 19 mm toe and 30 mm heel plus/minus 1 mm. Also, if you plan to get into this with junior boots, you only have about 5 mm of material to work with, about 8 mm on an adult boot.

If you are going to lift boots, you don't need to build up the boot interfaces, just plane down

Most important thing is to plane out any rock or twist in the boot before you set in a cant. I haven't yet seen a boot that has a flat sole. There is always some distortion.

If you really want to get into this, let me know. I do about 5 pair a year. It's a pain in the butt, but its the only way to go for racers.<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by edgreen (edited September 22, 2001).]</FONT>
post #8 of 37
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the tips on the bits. I'm not too up on woodworking tools.
Thanks for the suggestions. I've been doing this for almost 20 years. I made a jig that would hold the boot so that you could grind the part you wanted in one pass with a body grinder. I used to use 2 part fillers(my daughter sells auto body supplies)but now I do the tops with a plastic welder. I have also switched to truing the bottom with a belt sander then using a small jointer. This system is fairly portable and I can take it to the hill. With the advent of lifters I don't add to the tops anymore. My system for the tops is a cut off wheel at high speed in a drillpress. I use a notched guage to set the hight. This summer at Hood all the boot guys had those router setups. The Nordica rep said he thought they came from "out east", the Atomic guy said"Europe". It sounds like it's not magic after all.
Right about warped soles. It bugs me when they talk about "altering" the sole, they're usually closer to DIN when I get done with them than "out of the box". Of course any tool is only as good as the operater. <FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SLATZ (edited September 22, 2001).]</FONT>
post #9 of 37
That's Bob Barnes ("Barnie") skiing with Harald in the "1" video.

He's out of Winter Park. Winter Park seems to have their own thing going. They don't seem to be in the gang and they're not really in the movement. But the Movement has some early roots there. Hmm.

But I think Barnie is much more Movement like than gang like.
post #10 of 37
Thread Starter 
As a resident of a Swiss community I'll try to stay neutral.
post #11 of 37
?? Bob is a former PSIA D-Team member, and current PSIA examiner.
post #12 of 37
Which Bob, Todd?

Bob Barnes of encyclopedic fame currently is an examiner. That other guy was on the D-team for two terms ('92-2000) but not an examiner.
post #13 of 37
Too many Bobs! I call 'our' Bob Barnes Bob Barnes 1, and the other guy Bob Barnes 2. You've got to be at least Level III to try out for the D-Team, so BB2 is definately a "gang" member - and I thought he was an advanced educator, is he a DCL?
post #14 of 37
Good post Bob - and I remember you telling me that about 'A' and '1' now, I like it!
post #15 of 37
What is odd here, is no one has commented on the article. Having read it this morning, some of the thoughts I have had on MA are somewhat validated. It all has to do with "stance geometry." Even at entry level, a skier's stance geometry needs to be correct in order to accurately perform skiing movements.

It is my understanding from the article, stance change will probably occur when the geometry is correct. This should lay to rest the long discussions on stance that we had here a few weeks ago. Individual stance, uncorrected, will be different in almost every skier, due to the body trying to make adjustments to the skiboot/ski combination. In essance, there is no right or wrong stance in uncorrected geometry. The question now is what is the optimum stance in corrected stance geometry?

post #16 of 37
Yo Barnes,

I just went to Amazon.com - ever heard of that place?

I did a search on "ski" books, then sorted by best selling.

Harald's books are 1 and 3. Lito's book is 4. Your book is #12.

Today, Harald's book is ranked 6,078. Your book is ranked 79,184. Uhh, looks like you're a little behind, bro.

Me thinks you have a serious case of market share envy, bro.

So you can go on all you want. You want proof? I just gave it to you and handed it to you on a silver -- freakin -- platter.

Alternative ski instruction rules!

Answer me this:
If Traditional ski instruction is so good, how come the best selling ski books in the land are by Harald and Lito?<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by SCSA (edited September 23, 2001).]</FONT>
post #17 of 37
So crude that I am left speechless..... and I am aware that some parties may look at that as a positive thing.
post #18 of 37
We may get vehement about issues - but "Bozo breath" and such, even if silly, sounds like the kind of personal insult that is beneath us.

In any case, apples and oranges are getting mixed here. Nobody has been arguing about which books were most popular with recreational skiers. The PSIA has far more instructors, schools and students but all of its books are very specialized towards instructors. Bob's book is not written like any of the authors books you've named are - you need to be a hard core skier or a pro to have any desire or need for his data.

Bob never claimed his book sold more than anybodys, or that he even aimed it at the mass market. You completely changed the subject of the discussion and then say "You want proof? I just gave it to you and handed it to you on a silver -- freakin -- platter."

You had previously argued that the PSIA has no manual . . . I named a bunch of them. Then Bob brought up the fact that HH's books/system are not in conflict with a lot of other books/systems out there. You ignored the discussions completely - went out on a new tangent and boast that HH's book has sold more than Bob's?! Come on!! Apples and oranges.
post #19 of 37

Hey man, I get called all kinds of names. Then I throw in bozo breath and everyone has a cow.

I'll remove it. But just like you said, "You reap what you sow"
post #20 of 37

In Bob's post, he's saying that basically, people at Winter Park laugh at PMTS.

Then he goes on an implies that decision makers at Winter Park consider PMTS to be a joke.

So what he's really doing once again, in his famous passive/agressive approach, is to convince readers of this thread and members of this forum that PMTS is not legitimate. This is what I responded to and what you ignored. So, I am comparing apples to apples.

My response is simple. If PMTS and alternative ski instruction is such a "joke" and is laughable as Barnes claims, then why do they have all the market share?

Why are Harb's books outselling all the competition -- combined?

Why do Lito's book sell so well?

Now I'd like you to answer me. Answer the questions specifically.
post #21 of 37
You are still mixing apples and oranges. PSIA doesn't sell books to recreational skiers! If you looked at the # of PSIA books sold to Instructors/Coaches in America vs. any others I'm sure that PSIA books are far more popular. Maybe the PSIA ought to aim some books at the general market - but they do not. This entire argument is silly and you know it!

And once again, in case of selective memory . . . I wish PMTS, Perfect Turn, the USSCA and some other systems would give the PSIA some competition in terms of professional market share - whether they are 'better' systems or not . . . I think competition is good for the consumer. Brings quality up and prices down. But they don't, I'm sure that many more students go through even ASC's Perfect Turn system than HH's.
post #22 of 37
The argument is not about PSIA selling books. It's about Bob saying that PMTS is laughable and not legitimate.

So I ask again. If PMTS is laughable and not legitimate, then why do they have all the market share?
post #23 of 37
I'll add this.

Since alternative teaching books have all the market share, isn't that a direct reflection on PSIA?

PSIA trains ski instructors, right? Then those ski instructors get jobs working for a ski area - guys like Barnes, right?

Well, if PSIA trains ski instructors, and PSIA ski instructors don't teach PMTS, and PMTS books are number 1 and 3 for ski instruction...you tell me. Seems to me that that recreational skiers are looking for another choice than a PSIA trained ski instructor, no?

The evidence is overwhelming. That skiers are not satisfied with ski instruction. If they were, the books wouldn't be selling.
post #24 of 37
Now you tell me, Barnes.

If PMTS is laughable and a joke, why all the sales?

Why are the books outselling all the competition - books put out by PSIA loyalists and supporters, people like you, - combined!

If your beloved product is so good, why is it so far behind in market share?

Why is it that an upstart competitor, Harb, can put out a book and outsell those who've been publishing books for years?
post #25 of 37
Well lets see, John Grisham is a major best selling author, does that make him the literary genius of the century? Comparing Bab Barnes' book, which is, like it says, an encyclopedia, to the Harb books does not prove anything whatsoever.

I think that its interesting that Barnes' book, which is not a "how to" book, has recieved a considerable market share from the non instructor population.
post #26 of 37
Can we get back to stance geometry? SCSA, please back off your rhetoric for awhile?

If you want to fight with Barnes and Murchinson, start another thread. But don't screw up a good discussion. But don't think you are alone in your fight. I have some philosophical issues with the "gang." Someone will push the button and off I'll go. But I won't mess up a good discussion. Thanks in advance for your cooperation, Paul.

post #27 of 37

McDonalds is #1 in its category - fast food. How could you compare McDonalds to a 5 star restaurant? You can't - they're not in the same category, so therefore they're not comparable.

Same with Ford versus Porche. The Ford Taurus was the #1 seller in its category. It was not the #1 seller in the Sports Car category.

How could you draw this reference? It doesn't even make sense! Are you that clueless?

My point is that in the category of SKI INSTRUCTION, HH's books are the best sellers - by far. And, since Lito's book is #4 in the same category, my point is also that alternative teaching systems are selling more books than traditional teaching systems.

You have the right to call PMTS a joke and laughable - but you better be able to prove why or shut your friggin pie hole. Isn't that what you ask of me? But you're not willing to adhere to the same standards you ask of me, are you?

So judging by the numbers on Amazon, I'd say that skiers are looking for another choice. Maybe they feel that traditional ski instruction is laughable and a joke, eh?
post #28 of 37

I have nothing else to add.
post #29 of 37
> SCSA: So judging by the numbers on Amazon,
> I'd say that skiers are looking for
> another choice. Maybe they feel that
> traditional ski instruction is laughable
> and a joke, eh?

That's simply not a logical conclusion.

A very obvious alternative explanation for the success of Harb's books is that his titles dance right around the edge of a blatently impossible claim.

For a very modest sum (ie, less than the cost of a lesson), he hints/promises the impossible (ie, "anyone can become an expert") to people with significant disposable income, and who have already invested quite a bit in the sport. They reason, "I know the title is just hype and I'm not going to become an expert overnight, but even if this author is halfway right, has some sort of alternative viewpoint, and I pick up just one useful tidbit from this book, its worth it to me."

Even if his title was simply shortened to something more believable like, "The new way to ski for beginner and intermediate skiers", I guarantee you that his sales would be vastly less.

If the title was totally truthful, for example, "New emphases in ski instruction for beginner and intermediate skiers", his sales would probably be minimal.

Thus, to me, the numbers on Amazon don't say a thing about whether or not customers are "looking for another choice", but rather, that they are (as always) lured by hype and false promises.

Tom / PM
post #30 of 37
Thread Starter 
One of the things I see in the article is, if you correct the alignment most of your work is done for you. On the other hand all the instruction in the world won't get you anywhere if the stance geometry isn't correct. Witherall said that in fewer words in How The Racers Ski back in 71.
Joubert used to say a lot of ski instruction was not necessary, he even titled one of his books "Teach Yourself to Ski".
I had a conversation over the weekend with a former Central Examiner about the potential for using the Dalebello system and its ease of use in conjunction with ski school/rental learning center.(probably pretty expensive) An interesting concept?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching