- Joined
- Dec 21, 2015
- Posts
- 4,123
It is a task that may be examined on the level 3 exam.
same as every other division.
It is a task that may be examined on the level 3 exam.
....a question which might help answer this is whether Bumps For Boomers is considered "advanced". I'm not a boomer, but I do use "standing on the uphill ski and drift down" for extreme speed control in tricky steepish terrain including moguls, and in theory it should work in just about anything. It really does work well for what it's designed to do, providing anywhere from ~zero up to max edge friction with decent direct control for a potentially very graceful glide, basically the polar opposite of carving....
Sounds awful. This is hard, let’s not bother teaching it.
^^Bumpers will complain once again it's not bump skiing.
Below is the Bumps-for-Boomers process for getting down bump runs, which I gleaned from extensive reading this last summer (I have not attended a camp):
--Separation is not required at Bumps-for-Boomers camps.
they dont really stand on the uphill(inside) ski, they do talk alot about using the inside ski to smear but trust me standing on the inside ski even on flat ski would spell trouble, and they dont ask people to do that.
speed has nothing to do with ones off piste ability level. In fac those that can crawl(but might choose to go faster) typically have much more refined and precise skills .
In the typical turn, the uphill ski becomes the outside ski (and needs to be weighted) before it becomes the downhill ski. Just say'n.I didn't attend their class, but the gist from the website is that they put weight on the uphill ski before it becomes the downhill ski so that there's minimal weight shift in the transition. It makes sense minimizing moves in the fall line transition reduces physical ability/effort required, but also helps allow a smooth drift to minimize time the skis point down. Your point about trouble when applied to any traditional technique is well noted, and I don't know exactly how they teach it, but it seemed to work when I tried it even if I don't 100% weigh the uphill (maybe ~70%) and felt easier to progress into than traditional mogul technique.
When looking at this stuff online, I found that John Clendenin the former freestyle champ teaches similar methods also marketed at seniors.
So if for the sake of argument we accept this is the one end of the range with race carving at the other end, with the stuff in between a mix of skid and carve, do you divide that graph into intermediate/advance vertically with the carve end considered advanced (because it's technically harder), or horizontally with proficiency at the method considered advanced (because become better at something is harder), or some mix of both?
@Doby Man don't throw water on my dream ;-)The one thing worse than being a terminal intermediate is being an terminal advanced intermediate. HELL!
@Doby Man don't throw water on my dream ;-)
You've got it all backwards, James. Bumpers don't care how you ski. It's your buddies that are always turning up their nose at anything that's not carving. Bumpers just respond by saying, no, we don't have to ski the way you're telling us. We like our way better.
In the typical turn, the uphill ski becomes the outside ski (and needs to be weighted) before it becomes the downhill ski. Just say'n.
The "Bumps for Boomers" aspect is not really anything related to the original topic.
Skiing more difficult or most difficult terrain does not make one an advanced skier if they are using skills not associated with advanced skiing.
New ideas on methods for negotiating difficult terrain may be regarded as an advancement....of a sort.