Jonathan Ballou video presentation

[markojp]

You're missing 'stroking the ski' through the arc. JB didn't invent this. Arguably, Killy did.

 

[geepers]

...but then we'd have to mention physics, and it seems the general consensus here is we can can ski just fine without knowing anything about it, so there you go.... The question is answerable, but it'd be much better to address this when there's snow on the ground and words /ideas can be tested on the hill.

Think that's a bit over-stating it. It's possible to know very little physics and ski like a champion. And possible to be a regular rocket scientist and hardly able to stand up on skis. And possible to be a rocket scientist ski ace.

The real issue is: can we express it in terms the audience can understand.

The question is answerable, but it'd be much better to address this when there's snow on the ground and words /ideas can be tested on the hill.

Plenty of snow on the ground where I am atm. (Thredbo, Australia.) Although it's 13 deg C on the hill and keeping CoM within 3 boot-lengths of the BoS is a challenge in the slow snow. We may need 20 deg C wax if this keeps up.

You're missing 'stroking the ski' through the arc. JB didn't invent this. Arguably, Killy did.

Stroking the ski through the arc....?? Is that done with the outside or inside hand? Are we supposed to be 'holding the fart' at the same time?

 

[markojp]

Yrag... Aaarrrrg. Blrrrft... you're in Aus... watch Reilly and Tom and you're ok to go. It's that time of year when anything and everything said will be misconstrued, misinterpreted, and misuderstood in electronic instruction land. No patience on my part, so I'll excuse myself from the discussion. Say 'hi' to Cosmic Carl if he's still around and you happen to see him down your way, geepers.

 

[Skisailor]

You're missing 'stroking the ski' through the arc. JB didn't invent this. Arguably, Killy did.

Um . . . Lol. Ok. That answer tells me a lot actually.

Maybe I should rephrase.

When a normal, decent, level 8 or 9 recreational skier applies this "ball-arch-heel" . . Excuse me "back of the arch" . . . fore-aft movement during a turn, what particular body part(s) do they actively move to come forward again to start the next turn?

It has to be something they can do very quickly to reposition the CoM from behind the BoS to forward of the BoS at or before transition.

If the answer is "pull the feet back", I want to know how. One foot? Both? What muscles make this move?

Now, I would theorize that with their constantly dorsiflexed ankles, they could still unbend their knees which would bring the hips and CoM forward.
But we all know that would result in an extension to start the turn. And we are also advocating flex to start.

So . . . . how is this forward movement accomplished?

 

[Mike King]

I don't think Ballou is advocating a constant angle of ankle flexion. What he's told me is that you have a constant activation of the Tibeleus Anterior. There's been a discussion of whether the flexion in both ankles matches (a la the USST GS manual) -- some trainers say so (Ballou and Fogg are in that camp) while others are not. Ballou and Fogg tend to advocate more dorsiflexion through the three phases of the turn, while other former demo team members advocate a greater range of motion, almost to the point of plantar flexion through the finish of the turn -- that's also a mechanic favored by half of CSIA (the western half).

 

[markojp]

Um . . . Lol. Ok. That answer tells me a lot actually.

Maybe I should rephrase.

When a normal, decent, level 8 or 9 recreational skier applies this "ball-arch-heel" . . Excuse me "back of the arch" . . . fore-aft movement during a turn, what particular body part(s) do they actively move to come forward again to start the next turn?

It has to be something they can do very quickly to reposition the CoM from behind the BoS to forward of the BoS at or before transition.

If the answer is "pull the feet back", I want to know how. One foot? Both? What muscles make this move?

Now, I would theorize that with their constantly dorsiflexed ankles, they could still unbend their knees which would bring the hips and CoM forward.
But we all know that would result in an extension to start the turn. And we are also advocating flex to start.

So . . . . how is this forward movement accomplished?

I wish I had more time to address this, but it looks like you're in Bozeman... if you're on staff at Big Sky, you have access to Eric Lipton. I'm sure he could quickly clarify this on snow with you...... 'pulling feet back'... hamstring, glutes.... back of the chain rather than quad dominant skiing. Tibialis Anterior for functional tension dorsiflexion.

 

[Skisailor]

Yes. I am. And I have met Eric but not skied with him.

 

[Skisailor]

I wish I had more time to address this, but it looks like you're in Bozeman... if you're on staff at Big Sky, you have access to Eric Lipton. I'm sure he could quickly clarify this on snow with you...... 'pulling feet back'... hamstring, glutes.... back of the chain rather than quad dominant skiing. Tibialis Anterior for functional tension dorsiflexion.

In all honesty, I am trying to envision finishing a turn with closed ankles (as per @mike_m who says he keeps them constantly closed), a tensed up anterior tibialis and my weight now back on the front of my heel or back of my arch. I am flexing to release so my knees and hips are flexed or flexing. As per Ballou, I now need to get my weight back "forward" to start the next turn, and I am to do this by using my glutes to pull my feet back - while keeping my ankles closed the whole time?

Wow. Is that really possible? So my ankles get even MORE closed during this move?

No wonder my clinicians are always breathing harder than me at the bottom of the run! Lol. Just kidding. Well. Mostly. . .

 

[mike_m]

I think you'll find that one can roll forward with the ankles closed. Some folks pull both feet back under them; some do more with the new inside foot; some tip forward into the boot cuff and project the hips forward; some do a combination. Not really strenuous moves. The slope of the hill helps. Perhaps it's worth trying at the beginning of the season?

Best!
Mike

 

[markojp]

No wonder my clinicians are always breathing harder than me at the bottom of the run! Lol. Just kidding. Well. Mostly. . .

Are you going as fast as they are in the same track with the same angles and arc? Probably not if the focus is high performance carve turns.

 

[Skisailor]

Are you going as fast as they are in the same track with the same angles and arc? Probably not if the focus is high performance carve turns.

Sometimes. Often not. Depends on the clinician. But they're not waiting long if at all at the bottom. It's also part of my point. They can make skiing a green run look effortful. Lol. I had a clinician tell us that "good skiing is hard work." Say what? That's not how I want to ski (in my personal skiing) nor what my clients are asking for.

Again - there is more than one way to ski that is "good" skiing! I would submit that what I am working on with my mentor is dynamic all terrain skiing that is generally more efficient (less effortful). I'm not the perfect messenger for her techniques because I'm still a work in progress. But my skiing has been transformed over the past 5 years.

But we digress - I'm truly just trying to understand what movements are actually being advocated. I think there are some issues there with what is really being done or maybe just how it's being described. ????

 

[mike_m]

Indeed, I have found that 90 percent of lessons that fail are the result of miscommunication. The student thinks he/she is understanding what the coach is asking for, thinks it's being done, but because the coach didn't communicate clearly what was desired, and the student misinterprets, the result isn't good, and both end up frustrated! If I may, let me go back to my original post in the New Zealand focuses thread:

"Make the transition with lifted, flexed feet (or, just try relaxing/tipping the old outside foot; see what works best for you). Before starting downhill, immediately reverse angulation (tip the feet, point the boots and knees downhill; reverse the angulation of the hip).

· Simultaneously, and before the skis start downhill, create a new platform early using subtle ankle movements. Move with the skis and allow them to travel for a time in the direction they were pointed at transition, then roll over and press the inside edge of the new outside ski into the snow and immediately engage it.

· As the skis start downhill, immediately focus on the inside half of the body. Start by sliding the new inside foot back (you can add a lift of the inside tail to help tip you forward). This inside-foot slide back continues up the body into lifting the inside thigh/hip and the entire inside half of the body pulling diagonally ahead (the outside half of the body is down and back; the outside pole tip can even glide along the snow toward the back of the outside binding to ensure functional angulation)."

The transition occurs first, then, only after the skis start downhill, does the feet-back/hips forward movement take place. The toes and front of the feet (all the way to the balls of the feet) are dorsiflexed to engage the ligaments in the front of the shin and pull you forward toward the tips of the skis and commit you downhill. Does that help clarify/make some sense?

Best!
Mike

 

[markojp]

Sometimes. Often not. Depends on the clinician. But they're not waiting long if at all at the bottom. It's also part of my point. They can make skiing a green run look effortful. Lol. I had a clinician tell us that "good skiing is hard work." Say what? That's not how I want to ski (in my personal skiing) nor what my clients are asking for.

Again - there is more than one way to ski that is "good" skiing! I would submit that what I am working on with my mentor is dynamic all terrain skiing that is generally more efficient (less effortful). I'm not the perfect messenger for her techniques because I'm still a work in progress. But my skiing has been transformed over the past 5 years.

But we digress - I'm truly just trying to understand what movements are actually being advocated. I think there are some issues there with what is really being done or maybe just how it's being described. ????

Go ski with Eric.

 

[Doby Man]

OMG My question is always - what move does he then use to get quickly back forward again to start the new turn? Especially with advocacy of constant dorsiflexion and forward tension in the ankle.

Re: Getting back over the ski. It is my opinion that pull back has its benefits but not so much in regular technique as there are better, more effortless options to use such as facilitating timing and momentum to our advantage. When we project or pilot our CoM in a steady, straight forward trajectory (compared to the BoS) and release it into transition with the power and direction needed, it will be there for us when we need to pressure the shovel at initiation. However, we can keep a “leash” on that CoM with aggressive dorsiflexion through transition. When we release our CoM from the prior turn, we are given feedback as to the power and direction, or trajectory, of that release which is the ticket we are given with a specific flight plan we must then follow. Mismanagement of momentum and timing is the wall many advanced intermediates will hit while trying to work out their first retraction turns. If you want to ski low, you have to have a plan to be held up by the turn rather than your muscles. That plan is the flight path of the CoM. The result of this mismanagement is what puts people far enough back where they really need to jerk their feet back underneath them to correct. For me, that is an unrelaxed way to be. As well, if I use pull back with every turn, it no longer retains itself as the valuable corrective option it would otherwise be. For me at least, being tall requires an extra trick to get out of the backseat when I screw the pooch. For others, it is a magic correction that gets them through their next stage of dev. It helps in teaching dorsiflexion that is not occurring naturally. Because I do not ski moguls often, a focus on pull back is often a terrain based tactic I will use. As far as I’m concerned, the dolphin turn “is” the drill to learn strong pull back maneuver for whatever reason we may use it for.

Re: Ballau: They way he was bouncing around between his slides, it seems like he was asked to do it last minute as well as he seems to be referencing that day of skiing frequently, so, no judgment. I think his concept starts out with a very astute point as to how the steering angle of the ski (centerline of ski vs shovel or tail taper angle or, ideally, the cumulative representation of both the shovel and tail taper angles) is related to a resultant steering angle of the turn (direction of movement vs direction of ski) but then he goes pretty far off the reservation regarding the tail and its influence on direction. Nonetheless, as interesting the concept may be, he doesn't seem to make much out of it more than an observation of a certain relevancy. He interestingly discusses the trichotomy of the kinetics of a turn: 1. The methodology of the skier, 2. The mechanics of the ski, 3. The output of the ski (that funnels directly into the methodology of the following turn). He is relating the “mechanics” of the ski that lies between the “methodology” of the skier and the “output” of the ski. Kinetically, a good way to breakdown the process of a turn. The “kinetic chain” does not end with the feet, the toes, or even the skis but, instead, the output of the ski, all three aspects of which represent the full kinetic cycle of one turn or, the energy flow of one turn cycle. When we are able to cross reference the physical kinetic chain cycle with turn phase chronology, we know what we are supposed to be doing and when.

 

[Skisailor]

Re: Getting back over the ski. It is my opinion that pull back has its benefits but not so much in regular technique as there are better, more effortless options to use such as facilitating timing and momentum to our advantage. When we project or pilot our CoM in a steady, straight forward trajectory (compared to the BoS) and release it into transition with the power and direction needed, it will be there for us when we need to pressure the shovel at initiation. However, we can keep a “leash” on that CoM with aggressive dorsiflexion through transition. When we release our CoM from the prior turn, we are given feedback as to the power and direction, or trajectory, of that release which is the ticket we are given with a specific flight plan we must then follow. Mismanagement of momentum and timing is the wall many advanced intermediates will hit while trying to work out their first retraction turns. If you want to ski low, you have to have a plan to be held up by the turn rather than your muscles. That plan is the flight path of the CoM. The result of this mismanagement is what puts people far enough back where they really need to jerk their feet back underneath them to correct. For me, that is an unrelaxed way to be. As well, if I use pull back with every turn, it no longer retains itself as the valuable corrective option it would otherwise be. For me at least, being tall requires an extra trick to get out of the backseat when I screw the pooch. For others, it is a magic correction that gets them through their next stage of dev. It helps in teaching dorsiflexion that is not occurring naturally. Because I do not ski moguls often, a focus on pull back is often a terrain based tactic I will use. As far as I’m concerned, the dolphin turn “is” the drill to learn strong pull back maneuver for whatever reason we may use it for.

Re: Ballau: They way he was bouncing around between his slides, it seems like he was asked to do it last minute as well as he seems to be referencing that day of skiing frequently, so, no judgment. I think his concept starts out with a very astute point as to how the steering angle of the ski (centerline of ski vs shovel or tail taper angle or, ideally, the cumulative representation of both the shovel and tail taper angles) is related to a resultant steering angle of the turn (direction of movement vs direction of ski) but then he goes pretty far off the reservation regarding the tail and its influence on direction. Nonetheless, as interesting the concept may be, he doesn't seem to make much out of it more than an observation of a certain relevancy. He interestingly discusses the trichotomy of the kinetics of a turn: 1. The methodology of the skier, 2. The mechanics of the ski, 3. The output of the ski (that funnels directly into the methodology of the following turn). He is relating the “mechanics” of the ski that lies between the “methodology” of the skier and the “output” of the ski. Kinetically, a good way to breakdown the process of a turn. The “kinetic chain” does not end with the feet, the toes, or even the skis but, instead, the output of the ski, all three aspects of which represent the full kinetic cycle of one turn or, the energy flow of one turn cycle. When we are able to cross reference the physical kinetic chain cycle with turn phase chronology, we know what we are supposed to be doing and when.

Awesome post. Thanks! With regard to pull back, I have only ever used it as a recovery move. If I needed to use that move from turn to turn to turn, I would ascribe it to something going wrong in my turns, not to mention it would quickly tire me out relative to my normal turn mechanics. I'm all about dialing in those "more effortless options" you mentioned.

That said, and particularly as turn radius increases and the trajectory of the CoM cannot move inside as quickly but must travel more along the length of the ski, I am trying to understand more precisely what movement is being used and what muscles are being engaged to bring the skier's CoM-BoS balance point forward again from back of the arch to ball of the foot.

The BoF - arch - heel movement pattern is not something I advocate, but I want to understand what others are doing and will play around with it once back on snow.

With regard to Ballou's presentation, I agree he went off the reservation with regard to the effect of the tail's steering angle - but I DO believe he made more than just an observation about it. I think he was trying to utilize that idea to justiify his advocacy of the need to pressure the tail at the end of turns. That section came while he was talking about pressuring first the tip then center then tail of the skis in each and every turn.

 

[Zentune]

Interesting point Doby. The accuracy of the com flight path is indeed important, and it is influenced by several factors of course, full body, tri-planar joint articulation (when and where available!) being chiefest amongst them.

Of equal importance to me however is the placement and management of the feet, in regards to how the forces line up and also in regards to how the TC/stj complex itself allows for some tri-planar separation....so in my view, ints not an either/or thing. Therefore, I don’t view a pullback as a correction per se (although it certainly can be!) but rather a component.

Consider too that there are other available corrections, much higher in the chain, that advancing students also use.

My 2 cents.

zenny

 

[HardDaysNight]

I am trying to understand more precisely what movement is being used and what muscles are being engaged to bring the skier's CoM-BoS balance point forward again from back of the arch to ball of the foot.

This occurs as a result of the diverging paths the feet trace relative to the CoM at the finish of a turn and into the new turn. There is no intentional movement
or conscious muscular engagement required to make it happen. As the skis carve back up under the body and out to the new side the old inside/new outside leg begins to extend because of the geometry; the ankle opens within the confines of the ski boot and the balance point migrates to the BoF. There is however little force to be resisted at this phase. As the CoM moves more directly downhill relative to the feet, the ankle closes and sets up the alignment appropriate to resist the forces of the pressure phase. See post in the NZ thread.

 

[Skisailor]

This occurs as a result of the diverging paths the feet trace relative to the CoM at the finish of a turn and into the new turn. There is no intentional movement
or conscious muscular engagement required to make it happen. As the skis carve back up under the body and out to the new side the old inside/new outside leg begins to extend because of the geometry; the ankle opens within the confines of the ski boot and the balance point migrates to the BoF. There is however little force to be resisted at this phase. As the CoM moves more directly downhill relative to the feet, the ankle closes and sets up the alignment appropriate to resist the forces of the pressure phase. See post in the NZ thread.

Two quick thoughts :
1) I specifically identified the case of longer radius turns where we don't have the benefit of the CoM moving "directly downhill relative to the feet. "

2) As someone whose personal turn mechanics DO involve this type of CoM movement downslope relative to the feet, recent changes in our training have disparaged that movement pattern in favor of "tip to start then move along the length of the ski". Tipping and being patient about moving the CoM across the skis then DOES require a fore-aft movement to allow the CoM to catch back up to the feet. If we are not back over the forefoot before the skis begin to turn into the fall line, we just continue to get farther and farther behind.

 

[HardDaysNight]

To the extent that there is any divergence between the paths of the feet and the CoM, the mechanism I described pertains. In my view, by the time the skis are turning into the fall line the ankles are closed and the pressure is felt where the tibia intersects with the foot, i.e., just forward of the heel. If one hasn’t moved accurately earlier in the turn to set up the paths of the feet and CoM appropriately for the turn one wants then by all means pull the feet back if necessary.

 

[Skisailor]

To the extent that there is any divergence between the paths of the feet and the CoM, the mechanism I described pertains. In my view, by the time the skis are turning into the fall line the ankles are closed and the pressure is felt where the tibia intersects with the foot, i.e., just forward of the heel. If one hasn’t moved accurately earlier in the turn to set up the paths of the feet and CoM appropriately for the turn one wants then by all means pull the feet back if necessary.

Despite the fact that you state: "there
is no intentional movement
or conscious muscular engagement required", what you wrote above is what I was looking for. The ankles are moving from a state of plantar flexion to being closed by the time the skis are entering the fall line. So flexion is, in fact, happening, which will likely (though not necessarily) affect the position of the CoM relative to the feet.

Of course that flexion could be more passive than active as we manage building forces, but I think I may be thinking more broadly about different turn sizes and speeds and how this all might work in a variety of situations (where active movement may be necessary).

I would venture to say that what you describe above may be at odds with the particular language that is being emphasized and the understanding that is coming down to rank and file instructors in training clinics, where constantly closed ankles, pulling up toes and constant tension in the anterior tibialis are the words of the hour.

Thanks for your responses.