• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

How does counteracting tighten up a turn?

razie

Sir Shiftsalot
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Posts
1,619
Location
Ontario
The video posted by @karlo is not an example of counteraction. That's just hip dump park and riding, very static, not useful.

This is an example of me working on counteraction, some seasons ago:


You can see the resulting ski bend:

1580404900648.png


1580404649478.png


That's a 13m WC ski making maybe an 8m turn, on a green run... and counteraction is directly responsible for that.

How?
 

LiquidFeet

instructor
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,697
Location
New England
You are assuming that we ski from the top down.

Because the skier in @karlo 's video is executing a carving state, all the "countering" you see is a result of the mechanics needed (from the bottom up) to build and maintain and align with the carving state as @oldschoolskier explained above. So your second sentence is somewhat valid except that the countering of the pelvis happens as we create angles in in pursuit of a higher edge.

"Countering" can be done intentionally, actively, in order to edge the skis. Meaning, at the end of the old turn, a skier can turn the upper body (from the hips up) to the outside of the new turn and whammo that skier will get an edged turn. As an exaggeration, that skier can even turn the upper body to face uphill, and this will start the new turn. This turn will have been created from the hips up, not from the feet up.

Is this OK? People will disagree on that. But I think we might want to know it works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J2R

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
The video posted by @karlo is not an example of counteraction. That's just hip dump park and riding, very static, not useful.

This is an example of me working on counteraction, some seasons ago:


You can see the resulting ski bend:

View attachment 91918

View attachment 91917

That's a 13m WC ski making maybe an 8m turn, on a green run... and counteraction is directly responsible for that.

How?
If that is what counteraction is, how is it different from angulation?
 
Thread Starter
TS
J

J2R

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Posts
29
Both are shown. Angulation is forming the angle from his upper body to his legs. Counteraction is the rotational aspect - his upper body is facing in a different direction from where the skis are going.
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
The video posted by @karlo is not an example of counteraction. That's just hip dump park and riding
I’m not sure that’s right. It is certainly park and ride, one parks early in turn. I’m don’t think it’s exactly a hip dump, though I’ll admit I’m not 100% sure what a hip dump is. What I see is a controlled and extreme pelvic position that results in the pelvis facing downhill at the end of the turn, enabling a quick shift to the new outside ski. A hip dump, I think, does not result in the pelvis facing downhill, resulting in being aft at the end of a turn and difficulty or delay in getting onto the new outside ski.

I recently did a drill similar to that at 0:40. I didn’t counteraction at the belly of the turn, but there was extreme counteraction at end and beginning of turn. The drill was given to me as a way to address an incapacity of the left hip. It worked. When doing the drill, I felt a huge difference between left and right, and the left hip got loosened up and mobilized. After that, I was able to carve properly; my left footers engaged early and properly. What I see at 0:40 is a drill that would hold the hip stretch longer, through the entire turn and, at the same time, not set me aft and unable to enter the next turn.

for convenience,
 

Magi

Instructor
Instructor
Joined
Apr 8, 2017
Posts
404
Location
Winter Park, Colorado
What keeps the upper body stable and how? That's what I always like to know when I hear that expression ;) I always suspected it may have to do with the Higgs boson...but what's the applicability?

The action of your muscles against each other, and the connection of your feet to the surface you're balanced on. The applicability is the less mass you have moving at a given moment, the less mass you have to stop moving to go the other way, and the shorter the lag to changing the direction of travel of your CoM.

The biomechanics/anatomy of the motion is that the femoral head rotates in the acetabulum (hip socket). How you make that motion happen (what muscles you fire), and what amount of anchoring you have to the surface you're standing on determines what actually moves.

This can produce two kinds of motion:
  • Rotation of the acetabulum around the femoral head (AF movement); i.e. Stand on one leg and move your body over the leg you're balanced over/standing on.
  • Rotation of the femur in the acetabulum (FA movement); i.e. Stand on one leg and rotate the leg that's in the air

So when I (and PSIA generally) talk about rotating the legs under a stable pelvis - they're talking about using FA movement (the leg rotates inside the hip socket to cause the leg to move and the upper body to "remain still").

"Upper body rotation" (A movement of some/all of the torso from the pelvis up to cause a rotational moment around roughly the Z axis) is caused by AF motion, or spinal twisting.


SUPER PHYSICS NERD STUFF THAT IS NOT RELEVANT AT ALL INBOUND - PLEASE SKIP:
Higgs boson
"According to the Standard Model, a field of the necessary kind (the Higgs field) exists throughout space and breaks certain symmetry laws of the electroweak interaction.[e] Via the Higgs mechanism, this field causes the gauge bosons of the weak force to be massive at all temperatures below an extreme high value. When the weak force bosons acquire mass, this affects their range, which becomes very small.[f] Furthermore, it was later realised that the same field would also explain, in a different way, why other fundamental constituents of matter (including electrons and quarks) have mass."

And since Skiing is all about moving mass to fun places by interacting with a gravity well...
 

razie

Sir Shiftsalot
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Posts
1,619
Location
Ontario
I’m not sure that’s right. It is certainly park and ride, one parks early in turn. I’m don’t think it’s exactly a hip dump, though I’ll admit I’m not 100% sure what a hip dump is. What I see is a controlled and extreme pelvic position that results in the pelvis facing downhill at the end of the turn, enabling a quick shift to the new outside ski. A hip dump, I think, does not result in the pelvis facing downhill, resulting in being aft at the end of a turn and difficulty or delay in getting onto the new outside ski.

for convenience,

@karlo - counteracting is the skier countering the path of the feet, as the skis rotate throughout the turn. Your skier does not do that. What he does is to rotate the shoulders to the outside a lot at the beginning of the turn (there is nothing to counteract, although he is countered) and then park it there and surf the turn, following the skis around. That is a weird form of rotation, although he is countered. That should help clarify the terminology...

That's also hip-dumping 101. He's hips do not move at all throughout the turn, after the initial "dump and counter". A hip dump totally results in countered at the end of the turn (pelvis facing more or less downhill), that's been discussed here at length over the past few years.
 

razie

Sir Shiftsalot
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Posts
1,619
Location
Ontario
The action of your muscles against each other, and the connection of your feet to the surface you're balanced on. The applicability is the less mass you have moving at a given moment, the less mass you have to stop moving to go the other way, and the shorter the lag to changing the direction of travel of your CoM.

The biomechanics/anatomy of the motion is that the femoral head rotates in the acetabulum (hip socket). How you make that motion happen (what muscles you fire), and what amount of anchoring you have to the surface you're standing on determines what actually moves.

This can produce two kinds of motion:
  • Rotation of the acetabulum around the femoral head (AF movement); i.e. Stand on one leg and move your body over the leg you're balanced over/standing on.
  • Rotation of the femur in the acetabulum (FA movement); i.e. Stand on one leg and rotate the leg that's in the air

So when I (and PSIA generally) talk about rotating the legs under a stable pelvis - they're talking about using FA movement (the leg rotates inside the hip socket to cause the leg to move and the upper body to "remain still").

"Upper body rotation" (A movement of some/all of the torso from the pelvis up to cause a rotational moment around roughly the Z axis) is caused by AF motion, or spinal twisting.


SUPER PHYSICS NERD STUFF THAT IS NOT RELEVANT AT ALL INBOUND - PLEASE SKIP:
Higgs boson
"According to the Standard Model, a field of the necessary kind (the Higgs field) exists throughout space and breaks certain symmetry laws of the electroweak interaction.[e] Via the Higgs mechanism, this field causes the gauge bosons of the weak force to be massive at all temperatures below an extreme high value. When the weak force bosons acquire mass, this affects their range, which becomes very small.[f] Furthermore, it was later realised that the same field would also explain, in a different way, why other fundamental constituents of matter (including electrons and quarks) have mass."

And since Skiing is all about moving mass to fun places by interacting with a gravity well...
:thumb:

Totally. That's a very good description.

However, I don't agree that it explains why the body stays "stable" when you rotate FA. The example there does, because it says "stand on one leg" and that anchors the upper body while you rotate FA the free leg. In skiing, say between turns, you're not anchored into anything... so in my understanding, nothing will keep the body stable... except the Higgs ;) by giving it mass thus inertia or angular momentum, which can be used indeed to keep the body "stable", but only in short snappy turns, like skiing bumps (which don't work without a blocking pole plant because of this btw - that's an easy way to test the physics of it).

The blocking pole plant would be another mechanism to anchor the body, but again it's very short and applicable only on a small subset of turns (short and snappy like bumps). It helps, but it's not enough to anchor the body given those forces.

Hence my question still stands... what keeps the body stable when the feet turn underneath? I assert that nothing does. There is no "ether" to anchor it. The inertia and blocking pole plants help, but are not sufficient. In my acception, you need two things: 1) relaxation and 2) counteraction (AF movement, to counteract the FA rotation coming from the feet up as well as any "manual" FA rotation) - this is how we create good separation.

And you have it exactly right: when carving on the outside leg, say in a GS turn, I am in fact anchored on that leg, just the same as standing on one leg in your example - this leg cannot really twist except at the exact rate that the ski is turning. What I can do is, just like in your example, is to AF-rotate my hips on top of that leg and counteract, to keep my hips from rotating with the ski! That's exactly what counteraction means, the way I understand things... :thumb:

cheers
 
Last edited:

LiquidFeet

instructor
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,697
Location
New England
What about this video:

And here is HH:

Thanks for finding that TDK video. One of the things he's demonstrating is the thing I was talking about in my previous post somewhere upthread ... turning the body to the outside of the new turn at transition to start the turn. Weird looking turns, huh? Ted does something along these lines, using that swimming arm. Ted Ligety looks way more smooth than does TDK's demonstrator, but it's the same idea. Ted's guy uses different DIRT than does Ted, which should come as no surprise.
 
Last edited:

JESinstr

Lvl 3 1973
Skier
Joined
May 4, 2017
Posts
1,133
"Countering" can be done intentionally, actively, in order to edge the skis. Meaning, at the end of the old turn, a skier can turn the upper body (from the hips up) to the outside of the new turn and whammo that skier will get an edged turn. As an exaggeration, that skier can even turn the upper body to face uphill, and this will start the new turn. This turn will have been created from the hips up, not from the feet up.

Is this OK? People will disagree on that. But I think we might want to know it works.

Snips from the counter video above

At end of release from previous turn, counter begins with a shoving back of the uphill hand and arm behind the body to begin the counter and looks like he might be heading to the rear
1580429433359.png

Yep, heading to the rear but the initiation has begun
1580429773525.png

So here he is coming into the apex with a decent edge angle.
Question, is it the countered position that has allowed that amount of edge or is it the shortening of the inside leg which all good skiers do regardless of transitional technique. Question 2, if this was on boiler plate, would we be seeing this kind of inclination and counter?
1580430188879.png

And here he is in the belly of the turn. Hmmm, looking like every other accomplished, high end skier. So what was the value add of all the hoopla above?
1580430336663.png

Personally, I try not to create excessive upper body movements (especially aft biased) but as the the old saying goes, it's not how you start but how you finish.
 

Noodler

Sir Turn-a-lot
Skier
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Posts
6,314
Location
Denver, CO
The primary focus for correct CA/CB should be on the pelvis, not on the shoulders, head, or arms. Proper pelvis position should drive correct shoulder position. When assessing CA/CB in MA, look at what the pelvis is doing. If the pelvis is square to the skis, but the shoulders are countered, then the skier is not receiving the full benefit of counteracting.

Also note that focusing on driving the inside arm forward without actually having the inside hip forward is also missing the mark.
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
If what HH is doing, with those two poles strapped together, is counteracting, I like it. Counteracting worked for me, to fix my hip mobility and my skiing.
 

Noodler

Sir Turn-a-lot
Skier
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Posts
6,314
Location
Denver, CO
If what HH is doing, with those two poles strapped together, is counteracting, I like it. Counteracting worked for me, to fix my hip mobility and my skiing.

The two poles connected together across your pelvis hip points is referred to as the "hip-o-meter". The intention is to provide the skier with more visible feedback regarding the position of their pelvis. As I noted in my previous post, true counteraction is all about the position of your pelvis throughout the turn.
 

geepers

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
May 12, 2018
Posts
4,256
Location
Wanaka, New Zealand
Geepers, I don't think we need a pure carved turn to address this subject. IMO carving is a process of circular travel that results in a level of purity.

I would also submit that the inclination in B2 cannot happen without extensive vertical angulation of the inside leg as the stick figure shows.

Well, yep on the carving comment - just wanted to make sure OP didn't mean stivot.

The 2nd bit? If you mean we need to fold the inside leg somewhere because it isn't telescopic then we're in violent agreement.

What about counter, specifically, as in rotational separation, separate from lateral separation? What about the counteraction of the upper body specifically, like the OP was looking for?
Exactly, razie, rotational separation is what I was talking about. Lateral separation, getting your weight over your outside ski, is a different issue, and the physics of why that is necessary and how it works is quite clear to me.

Ummm... when did the definition of separation exclude a rotational component? Sure news to me.

A small forward tilt of the upper body at the hips (like in a ski stance) combined with rotational separation of upper and lower body will move mass to the outside. Or at least above the natural lateral balance line.

That's a 13m WC ski making maybe an 8m turn, on a green run... and counteraction is directly responsible for that.

How?

1. Magic?
2. Separation of the upper and lower body (see above) allowed for angulation to provide grip and increase edge angle resulting in more bending of the ski and a tighter turn radius than would have occurred without it.

(You are - or at least were - flexible at the hips.)
 
Last edited:

geepers

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
May 12, 2018
Posts
4,256
Location
Wanaka, New Zealand
The two poles connected together across your pelvis hip points is referred to as the "hip-o-meter". The intention is to provide the skier with more visible feedback regarding the position of their pelvis. As I noted in my previous post, true counteraction is all about the position of your pelvis throughout the turn.

The skier or the observer?

Got to say if I'm trying to get good angles in a wide carving turns I'm too freak'n busy to pay much attention to where poles held across hips are pointing.
 

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
24,452
Well, yep on the carving comment - just wanted to make sure OP didn't mean stivot.

The 2nd bit? If you mean we need to fold the inside leg somewhere because it isn't telescopic then we're in violent agreement.




Ummm... when did the definition of separation exclude a rotational component? Sure news to me.

A small forward tilt of the upper body at the hips (like in a ski stance) combined with rotational separation of upper and lower body will move mass to the outside. Or at least above the natural lateral balance line.



1. Magic?
2. Separation of the upper and lower body (see above) allowed for angulation to provide grip and increase edge angle resulting in more bending of the ski and a tighter turn radius than would have occurred without it.

(You are - or at least were - flexible at the hips.)
I want John Gillies voice as Siri.

 
Thread Starter
TS
J

J2R

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Posts
29
Personally, I try not to create excessive upper body movements (especially aft biased) but as the the old saying goes, it's not how you start but how you finish.

I would say that the kind of counteracting I am talking about doesn't look like an upper body movement at all. Rather it is a resistance to movement - you are resisting the natural tendency for the pelvis to point the same way as the skis are pointing. Effectively your are rotating your pelvis towards the outside of the turn, against where the skis want to take it, but an observer looking up the hill towards you would see you with a still (or stable) upper body.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

  • Dwight
    Practitioner of skiing, solid and liquid
Top