Lower the edge angles in the steeps

[jimtransition]

The

That's not the point of the op. He's really refering to the edge angle coming in to the transition in linked turns on steeps. Nothing to do with hop turns. It's generally accepted that one wouldn't drift off a cliff intentionally. Especially for a misinterpretation.
But ok, I get it. Nice skiing!

I'm not quite sure of the point of the OP, but he states that he thinks edging at the end of the turn causes acceleration, which taken to the logical extreme - a hop turn, is clearly not true. Even in a rounder turn on a less steep slope, I am still trying to edge to get grip. I don't ever see anyone getting great grip and rebound and think 'man that guy needs to skid more'.

 

[François Pugh]

Apologies to @Dan Egan if my earlier replies come across as flippant. Dan's OP makes a good point, and could be very useful to the appropriate audience, it just seemed too obvious to me to be worth noting, but then again I often miss what is painfully obvious to others, and see some things as obvious that others often don't see as obvious at all.

As I understand what Dan is saying, if your intent is to control your speed with speed controlling linked turns (not bicycle turns or jump turns- just your basic old school short radius turns) as you ski a slope that is moderate to steep in pitch say 20 degrees and greater (how much greater is up to you), as opposed to maximizing your speed with the purest cleanest arcs you can make, then you had best be aware that the natural tendency is to have higher ski to snow angles at the bottom of the C because of the slope angle, and that unless you compensate for that natural tendency, you will end up with your skis having a greater than intended angle to the snow and your turns closer to carving at the bottom of the C, giving you less efficient speed control.

If you find the terrain thrilling fine, ski it how you like, but if the terrain terrifies you, you shouldn't be skiing it; just say no.

 

[HardDaysNight]

The


I'm not quite sure of the point of the OP, but he states that he thinks edging at the end of the turn causes acceleration, which taken to the logical extreme - a hop turn, is clearly not true. Even in a rounder turn on a less steep slope, I am still trying to edge to get grip. I don't ever see anyone getting great grip and rebound and think 'man that guy needs to skid more'.

I understood his point to be that jamming on the outside ski edge in the last part of the turn, in a misguided effort to slow down, shoots the skier across the slope (accelerates him laterally) and blocks the release of that edge into a new turn. Do you disagree that this is a commonplace among intermediate skiers trying to survive steeps?

 

[jimtransition]

I don't usually take intermediates onto steep terrain so no I don't really recognise the movement pattern you're talking about. Maybe teach them how to do a proper short turn first.

 

[markojp]

The


I'm not quite sure of the point of the OP, but he states that he thinks edging at the end of the turn causes acceleration, which taken to the logical extreme - a hop turn, is clearly not true. Even in a rounder turn on a less steep slope, I am still trying to edge to get grip. I don't ever see anyone getting great grip and rebound and think 'man that guy needs to skid more'.

Jim, the OP is an extrememly experienced, well know, and highly regarded professional free skier who's made a name and a living for himself because of his skill set. We'd be wiser to listen and test rather than rush to judgement. From a coaching point of view, in truly steep terrain, we see people doing the J turn and slamming on the brakes with big edge angles (yes, this slows the skier down, buuuut.....), then having to unwind with a big 'up' or shoulder/upper body twist to get skis off edge. These big moves invariably compromise fluid, functional balance and the ability to move at will, with much smaller, more efficient and effective movements over the outside foot and down the hill. I could probably find clips of Ingrid skiing the same terrain on a powder day and it would be tactically very different. In the clip, it's firm and scratchy. I can tell you from experience you need your show calm, wired tight, and windows rolled up in that terrain in those conditions. She's moving purposely and fluidly. I think most here would be soiling their pants in the same place in those conditions.

Getting back to the point of the original post, people who think they need big angles in transisiton are almost always back and in. They're throwing on the brakes hoping they'll catch up their skis. When one is truly and effectively over the outside ski at transition, there's no need for high edge angles. Now let's take that idea to racing. Show me high edge angles in transistion, and I'll show you a very slow racer. Highest edge angles occur at apex, even off piste, even in steep terrain. This thread is a prime example of people talking past each other because we're all wrapped up in our local reality and specific interests. FP thinks his steep is the same as what the OP is talking about and Ingrid is skiing. It's not. It's much steeper than anything in Ontario or Mt. Washington on Vancouver Island. Harald Harb would have to vary his dirt and tactics to ski this, and I'm sure he could, but he'd look a bit different than at Vail. Meanwhile, those who can both tip and rip on lower angled terrain AND flow down very steep terrain prove again and again skiing is about versatility. It's never 'either/or' as some here seem to always suggest. It's all of the above. Everything and then some. The whole tool box. That's the difference between pretty good skiing and true 'expert' stuff. Folks like D. Rahlves do it all.

 

[jimtransition]

Jim, the OP is an extrememly experienced, well know, and highly regarded professional free skier who's made a name and a living for himself because of his skill set. We'd be wiser to listen and test rather than rush to judgement. From a coaching point of view, in truly steep terrain, we see people doing the J turn and slamming on the brakes with big edge angles (yes, this slows the skier down, buuuut.....), then having to unwind with a big 'up' or shoulder/upper body twist to get skis off edge. These big moves invariably compromise fluid, functional balance and the ability to move at will, with much smaller, more efficient and effective movements over the outside foot and down the hill. I could probably find clips of Ingrid skiing the same terrain on a powder day and it would be tactically very different. In the clip, it's firm and scratchy. I can tell you from experience you need your show calm, wired tight, and windows rolled up in that terrain in those conditions. She's moving purposely and fluidly. I think most here would be soiling their pants in the same place in those conditions.

Getting back to the point of the original post, people who think they need big angles in transisiton are almost always back and in. They're throwing on the brakes hoping they'll catch up their skis. When one is truly and effectively over the outside ski at transition, there's no need for high edge angles. Now let's take that idea to racing. Show me high edge angles in transistion, and I'll show you a very slow racer. Highest edge angles occur at apex, even off piste, even in steep terrain. This thread is a prime example of people talking past each other because we're all wrapped up in our local reality and specific interests. FP thinks his steep is the same as what the OP is talking about and Ingrid is skiing. It's not. It's much steeper than anything in Ontario or Mt. Washington on Vancouver Island. Harald Harb would have to vary his dirt and tactics to ski this, and I'm sure he could, but he'd look a bit different than at Vail. Meanwhile, those who can both tip and rip on lower angled terrain AND flow down very steep terrain prove again and again skiing is about versatility. It's never 'either/or' as some here seem to always suggest. It's all of the above. Everything and then some. The whole tool box. That's the difference between pretty good skiing and true 'expert' stuff. Folks like D. Rahlves do it all.

That's nice Dan is well regarded, I am guessing his fame was before my time because I can't remember seeing his skiing anywhere. If he creates a thread going against accepted norms on skiing, I am sure he is well prepared for people to disagree with him.

Having the highest angles at apex on steep terrain is just ridiculous unless you are Rahlves or Jeremie Heitz, when it becomes steeper the control phase becomes later in the turn due to the increased acceleration down the hill. Also I never one said we should have high edge angles in transition, only in order to slow down in the control phase. i guess the ambiguity may have come from the OPs use of 'last third of the turn'. Anyway, I hope everyone enjoys some steeps soon, certainly lacking them here in Japan.

 

[KingGrump]

@Tricia posted this video was posted in another thread.
Perhaps some clarity may emerge.

 

[jimtransition]

@Tricia posted this video was posted in another thread.
Perhaps some clarity may emerge.

Sick skiing, not too much skidding though

 

[markojp]

Again, edge angles are a tactical choice determined by conditions, pitch, and sometimes gear. If you're back and in, you're limited to big moves that compromise balance as HDN mentions above. Lots of folks are amazed at what happens when the stop jamming on the brakes in the final 1/3 of the turn and controlling speed by other means. Does that mean there's not a time when jump turns are a great option? Of course not. Sometimes that's the best approach in tight quarters. I did a few last week.
Your portillo clip is a good example.

I think Dan is speaking 'in general', and I agree. Again, it's about being on, moving with and over our skis that give us access to a full range of tactics commensurate with the intent and outcomes we're after.

FWIW, yes, we teach athletic intermediates and advance skiers who want to access steep terrain. Yes, it's steeper than anything inbounds and lift accessed I've skied in Japan. Safety is job one, and we have a progression of terrain we use to build skills and confidence just as I'm sure people would use in Portillo. We work on managing and not making forces. The former is what we see in expert skiers who move fluidly down the mountain. The latter is what we see in much of the publics' skiing who are jamming on the brakes. Maybe KingGrump can elaborate with his experiences at Taos. Anyhow, that's enough from me on this one.

(Steeps in Japan... head to Tateyama right after golden week. You have to skin and hike for it, but it's there. Many good lines. Inside the cone at Myoko is good, and the north side of Hakusan is a nice pitch. Rishiri island is on the bucket list... haven't got there yet.)

 

[AmyPJ]

I understood his point to be that jamming on the outside ski edge in the last part of the turn, in a misguided effort to slow down, shoots the skier across the slope (accelerates him laterally) and blocks the release of that edge into a new turn. Do you disagree that this is a commonplace among intermediate skiers trying to survive steeps?

Exactly. We have some short (say 6 turns) steep sections on a few of our intermediate runs, where I can practice skiing steeper stuff. The one breakthrough I had was following 4ster, who had me ski behind him from top to bottom (that's a long way, for those who don't know Snowbasin) watching his FEET. What was the result? I softened everything up, so for the first time ever, in one of the steeper sections, my skis didn't shoot across the hill at the end of the turn.

It's an extremely difficult habit to break. Interestingly, I developed it after I fractured my tibial plateau and was skiing on stiff skis and Head junior race boots, which were aggressive and stiff. Before that, I would ski the steeper stuff and skid away, and it didn't bother me much.

Today, we have 13 inches of fresh, so I don't think it will be an issue! Those steeper sections will be my friend today.

 

[AmyPJ]

@Tricia posted this video was posted in another thread.
Perhaps some clarity may emerge.

That was awesome. How fun would a video shoot of Dan with Marcus Caston be?

We are spending the weekend mountain biking in S. Utah with a Warren Miller veteran (I had no idea he was until it became a gondola discussion last weekend!) Anyway, I'll ask him if he ever skied with Dan.

A new Warren Miller segment idea: Where are they now.

Sorry for the segue. I 100% get what Dan is saying. This thread has been a great read for me.

 

[KingGrump]

you can lead a horse to water ...

 

[Philpug]

Having had the pleasure of skiing with Dan and John..along with brother Mike from my years back east and also Epicski Academys where @Bob Barnes and @Weems Westfeld felt Dan and brother Mike were worthy of sharing their knowledge. Dan was my coach at one of the ESA's at Stowe, he has a style and I will say technique bit more a tactical way of skiing moguls that was unorthodox..unorthodox might be the wrong word but it was the first one that came to mind, you might use untraditional or unique but where most were using the moguls as obsticles or to check their speed, Dan was demonstrated how to use them as opportunities to excellerate by using the back half of the bump...because in his explanation "that's where the good snow is".

There are few that I skied with that have more fun sharing their time and knowledge of the mountain than Dan and the rest of the Egan clan. Yes, while some of his methods might be unorthodox to some or out of their limited perspective, they are based on decades of time on the mountain and are skills that have been perfected and are there for a reason. These might not be the exact techniques that you will learn from traditional formulaic learning systems but are life skill..skills that in the extreme terrain that Dan still skis..that could save your life. I am sure the people questioning what Dan is sharing also have reels of their major ski movie footage and Hall of Fame credentials to share and bring to the table.

HERE is @MattSmith's account of skiing with @Dan Egan in Big Sky.

 

[Snowflake2420]

Nice article. I'd add I think what this is talking about as Philpug said pivot slipping and feeling the base of the ski on the snow and pressuring the toes a little to make them drop downhill with the fall line. A ski instructor friend showed this to me and my dad on a groomed run and it vastly helped us in moguls and undoing all of our east coast stem turning. Does this sound at all like the Clendenin method to anyone? Perhaps I'm an amateur mashing these up, but reminds me of that too.

Again agree the article will help people struggling with steeps. However, I'd also add learning jump turns eventually is a great tool, especially when starting the run, which can be the hardest part.

 

[Brian Finch]

Gotta admit, @Dan Egan & I skied with a client earlier this season & I was like “what’s he doing, how’s he doing it???!?!!”.

At one point on a moundy, ungroomed Steins- he was all ‘I’m not even trying to carve this...’ & my thoughts were let’s just not eat it.

Great read & tactics.

 

[Goose]

Ive read the opening post a few times. It seems enough posters are discussing the OP's implied thoughts to only the steepest (almost extreme-like) skiing. But isn't steep only relative to the skier? And also the conditions in which one is in? It seems the OP's suggestion could be taken to mean when in/on steeper slope...whatever amount of pitch relevant to the skiers point of view. Basically any pitch where the skier feels they need to use more edge in order to control speed and descent. Of course the steeper we go the more this would all apply but again, steep in only relative. Weather a blue skier on a steeper black or a black skier on a steeper double black , etc,etc.. It would seem to me the OP suggestion would/could still apply.

As for the suggested method itself. Im having a hard time accepting some of it. Or Im not reading it correctly. I understand the more dominant energy forces in the last portion of a turn on edge can offer acceleration via the stored energy. Its usually what we use to then bring us up (for lack of a better word) and around and into the next one or to accelerate across. But this imo is also where when on steeper slope we tend to make our choice to either continue to use that energy towards the next turn or dig it in to control the speed. If we are carving clean RR tracks per se then we are not slowing down. But digging in (if conditions permit) is I feel what we use to slow down. In sort of a half carve half hockey stop kind of way. And if wanting/needing to stop all the way its there for us to do so. I think that's how most people are skiing when they want to control speed on steeper (again relative) slope.

I don't really get (or at least not the way its written that I am making of it) where letting the skis go flatter is gong to work in favor of more control of speed. Especially the idea (again if Im reading it correctly) suggests less edge imo meaning basically wider turn and more time spent heading down the fall line.

I can understand the carve, the energy created and where it needs to be used, the skidding, the use of the uphill ski, etc...But Im not seeing where skiing flatter works towards the speed control we might be seeking. I get less energy is stored when flatter but speed should then pick up which is contradictory to what we desire (for this topic). The energy is the same imo. It can only either be stored or used. Eventually it all has to be used of course because it never disappears. We can either let it go less stored up and move faster (Think straight down and fast) or store it up and use it to control speed and any combo in between.

There seems to be something Im not quite getting here. For all I know (probably not) but I may be actually applying some of it without even knowing but when discussing in written text Im not really seeing it making a whole lot of sense in my head.

 

[Rod9301]

Ive read the opening post a few times. It seems enough posters are discussing the OP's implied thoughts to only the steepest (almost extreme-like) skiing. But isn't steep only relative to the skier? And also the conditions in which one is in? It seems the OP's suggestion could be taken to mean when in/on steeper slope...whatever amount of pitch relevant to the skiers point of view. Basically any pitch where the skier feels they need to use more edge in order to control speed and descent. Of course the steeper we go the more this would all apply but again, steep in only relative. Weather a blue skier on a steeper black or a black skier on a steeper double black , etc,etc.. It would seem to me the OP suggestion would/could still apply.

As for the suggested method itself. Im having a hard time accepting some of it. Or Im not reading it correctly. I understand the more dominant energy forces in the last portion of a turn on edge can offer acceleration via the stored energy. Its usually what we use to then bring us up (for lack of a better word) and around and into the next one or to accelerate across. But this imo is also where when on steeper slope we tend to make our choice to either continue to use that energy towards the next turn or dig it in to control the speed. If we are carving clean RR tracks per se then we are not slowing down. But digging in (if conditions permit) is I feel what we use to slow down. In sort of a half carve half hockey stop kind of way. And if wanting/needing to stop all the way its there for us to do so. I think that's how most people are skiing when they want to control speed on steeper (again relative) slope.

I don't really get (or at least not the way its written that I am making of it) where letting the skis go flatter is gong to work in favor of more control of speed. Especially the idea (again if Im reading it correctly) suggests less edge imo meaning basically wider turn and more time spent heading down the fall line.

I can understand the carve, the energy created and where it needs to be used, the skidding, the use of the uphill ski, etc...But Im not seeing where skiing flatter works towards the speed control we might be seeking. I get less energy is stored when flatter but speed should then pick up which is contradictory to what we desire (for this topic). The energy is the same imo. It can only either be stored or used. Eventually it all has to be used of course because it never disappears. We can either let it go less stored up and move faster (Think straight down and fast) or store it up and use it to control speed and any combo in between.

There seems to be something Im not quite getting here. For all I know (probably not) but I may be actually applying some of it without even knowing but when discussing in written text Im not really seeing it making a whole lot of sense in my head.

Less edge will enable you to skid down the fall line without going forward. Skidding is friction, which slows you down.

But even better, go try it.

 

[CalG]

At times, due to apprehension, I find myself "locked on edge" on the steeps. It's just sort of a high speed "shopping for the next turn" sort of thing.

I find that softening those edges is just that much closer to the full release that leads to a clean edge change.

Thanks to the OP for bringing it up. The idea came in handy this past Tuesday and Wed in zero vis conditions at KW.

 

[François Pugh]

Ive read the opening post a few times. It seems enough posters are discussing the OP's implied thoughts to only the steepest (almost extreme-like) skiing. But isn't steep only relative to the skier? And also the conditions in which one is in? It seems the OP's suggestion could be taken to mean when in/on steeper slope...whatever amount of pitch relevant to the skiers point of view. Basically any pitch where the skier feels they need to use more edge in order to control speed and descent. Of course the steeper we go the more this would all apply but again, steep in only relative. Weather a blue skier on a steeper black or a black skier on a steeper double black , etc,etc.. It would seem to me the OP suggestion would/could still apply.

As for the suggested method itself. Im having a hard time accepting some of it. Or Im not reading it correctly. I understand the more dominant energy forces in the last portion of a turn on edge can offer acceleration via the stored energy. Its usually what we use to then bring us up (for lack of a better word) and around and into the next one or to accelerate across. But this imo is also where when on steeper slope we tend to make our choice to either continue to use that energy towards the next turn or dig it in to control the speed. If we are carving clean RR tracks per se then we are not slowing down. But digging in (if conditions permit) is I feel what we use to slow down. In sort of a half carve half hockey stop kind of way. And if wanting/needing to stop all the way its there for us to do so. I think that's how most people are skiing when they want to control speed on steeper (again relative) slope.

I don't really get (or at least not the way its written that I am making of it) where letting the skis go flatter is gong to work in favor of more control of speed. Especially the idea (again if Im reading it correctly) suggests less edge imo meaning basically wider turn and more time spent heading down the fall line.

I can understand the carve, the energy created and where it needs to be used, the skidding, the use of the uphill ski, etc...But Im not seeing where skiing flatter works towards the speed control we might be seeking. I get less energy is stored when flatter but speed should then pick up which is contradictory to what we desire (for this topic). The energy is the same imo. It can only either be stored or used. Eventually it all has to be used of course because it never disappears. We can either let it go less stored up and move faster (Think straight down and fast) or store it up and use it to control speed and any combo in between.

There seems to be something Im not quite getting here. For all I know (probably not) but I may be actually applying some of it without even knowing but when discussing in written text Im not really seeing it making a whole lot of sense in my head.

Think of carving arc-2-arc versus short radius turns in moguls. Although many may not realize it, it is dragging your edges through the snow that slows you down. Arc-2-Arc carving takes your velocity and changes the direction while losing as little speed as possible. Now consider soft snow with continuum between pure carving on the base and smearing. Too much edge angle brings you closer to just changing direction with almost no speed loss, versus dragging your edges through the snow and losing speed.

 

[CalG]

On steep slopes, I'm not concerned about speed preservation. Ultimate gravity acceleration (free fall) is only a step away from the slope.