MA Practice - Advanced

Discussion in 'Ski School' started by David Chan, Aug 21, 2019.

  1. LiquidFeet

    LiquidFeet Making fresh tracks Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    2,073
    Location:
    New England
    I disagree with some of what JESinstr has just posted.

    JESinstr posted:
    The whoopsie turn begins with a hooking (bowed leg lead) of the new inside leg accompanied by an inward inclination (lean) of the upper body. Violation of Fundamental #2: Control pressure from ski to ski and direct pressure toward the outside ski . His inside edging movements and body lean at this point in the process produces a bias for directing pressure to the inside ski. This non-adherence also creates a divergence situation between the skis.


    First, there's no problem with momentarily loading the new inside ski at turn initiation. Tip divergence is bad, and for various reasons, but it is not a necessary result of letting weight stay on the new inside ski at the very top of the turn. The skier who begins a turn with a bowed new inside leg, which is flexing, will be light on the skis above the fall line so the inside ski will not necessarily diverge. Weight may stay momentarily on that new inside ski, but if it does that missing outside ski pressure will grow all on its own by the fall line in a flex-to-release initiation.

    However, I saw no tip divergence in any of these turns. And I can't see any tip divergence here in this turn. JESinstr may be guessing that there's tip divergence, and if he has never done the particular release that he's describing which keeps weight on the inside ski at first ("weighted release"), he may expect tip divergence is a natural result - but it isn't.

    Furthermore, this skier in this turn is not doing a weighted release. His head moves up at initiation. He is shortening the new inside leg and tipping its ski onto the little toe edge, yes, as JESinstr points out, but at the same time he is lengthening the new outside leg. That combination moves his head upward - somewhat. Any new outside leg extension will direct pressure toward the outside ski immediately. A turn that starts with new outside leg extension, even when accompanied with flexing the other leg, will get that outside ski pressure early in the turn, earlier than in a true weighted release.

    Can we tell from the video what the pressure distribution would be in this turn? No, but if we look at other turns, giver the consistency of the turns, we can guess that there is no tip divergence, and that pressure goes directly to the new outside ski immediately.

    Important point: the fundamentals as they are currently stated do not tell anyone when in a turn anything is supposed to happen. Thus there can be no violation. The pressure goes to the outside ski when the skier wants it to, and in his other turns it does what he intends. In this turn, the snow snake struck, and the recovery was handled just fine.

    JESinstr posted:
    In regards to Fundamental #1 Control the relationship of the Center of Mass to the base of support to direct pressure along the length of the skis. .... With the divergence comes a "to the rear" bias affecting the COM-to-BOS relationship hence the need to rotate (Skid) the outside ski to try and "Catch up" with the inside as is evidenced by the resulting spray.


    When a skier is flexing that new inside leg for a weighted release ((which JESinstr is describing but this skier is not doing), weight indeed does move momentarily toward the back of the skis as the hips go down.

    JESinstr is right, that momentary movement of weight back can be quite prominent in a deeply flexed release. But there is not necessarily a problem with such a turn start. Any true flex-to-release turn drops the skier's body quickly into the new turn (momentarily aft), skis tip dramatically and fast onto new edeges, and then weight moves forward over the skis because the body ends up ahead of the skis. Such a skier will no longer be aft by the fall line, when the pressure mounts on that outside ski.

    But this particular turn does not have this much flexion, and from the given camera angle we can't see if the skier's weight is consequently over the tails or not. JESinstr may be working, not from observation, but from a belief that a skier MUST load the tips at the very start of every turn, and that going bowlegged at turn start necessarily puts the skier aft. Perhaps JESinstr also thinks that Fundamental #1 says that a skier always needs to load the tips to start a turn. It doesn't, and we don't know if this skier loaded the tips in this turn; no good side views!

    Fundamental #1 doesn't indicate which end of the skis need pressure anyway, nor at what time in a turn they need that pressure. Thus no violation of Fundamental #1 is possible.

    ==============
    PSIA intentionally shaped the fundamentals to help examiner determine whether a skier has versatile control over the skis. The fundamentals do not to tell us how to ski. That's why the. writers left out any prescriptions of what to do when. The fundamentals can't be "violated."

    A versatile skier will exhibit notable control over all kinds of variations and be able to use those variations when needed as regards fore-aft pressure regulation, lateral pressure regulation, vertical pressure regulation, edge angle regulation, and regulation of rotational dynamics. High control using a wide range of variations nets a score of high skills on all five fundamentals. Skiers who only have one turn, who use only one set of turn mechanics, won't be getting any high scores.





     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2019
    David Chan likes this.
  2. karlo

    karlo Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Posts:
    1,590
    Location:
    NJ
    I’ve been able to refrain from reading more posts to this thread. But, I did open the book on the five fundamentals.
    • Control the relationship of the Center of Mass to the base of support to direct pressure along the length of the skis
    • Control pressure from ski to ski and direct pressure toward the outside ski
    • Control edge angles through a combination of inclination and angulation
    • Control the skis rotation (turning, pivoting, steering) with leg rotation, separate from the upper body
    • Regulate the magnitude of pressure created through ski/snow interaction.
    Im realizing that saying there is a bit of park-and-ride isn’t MA. It’s an outcome of movements or non-movements. So, I’ll try again. Again, I’ll focus on what’s happening uphill of the camera.

    Ski/snow interaction:
    Left turns. The most snow kicked up is when the tips are pointed more downhill.
    Right turns. The most snow kicked up is when the tips are pointed more across the hill.
    In both turns, more pressure is on the outside ski, as most of the snow being kicked up is by that ski.

    Rotation. There is considerable femur rotation input rotational at the top of the turn, resulting in knees, feet turning with the skidding skis. As the ski edges engage, rotation at the hip discontinues, resulting, as the turn continues through carving, little or no additional counter-rotation developing (I think more so with right turns than left).

    To transition, subject unweights by extending both legs. Entering the next turn, both legs are flexing, inside leg more than the other. Approaching highest edge angle, the inside foot projects forward, being most forward once at highest edge angle. Foot pulls back as subject rises (extends both legs) to enter transition. (That highest edge angle has a significant swell time, hence the park and ride).

    Waistline:
    Left turns, the waistline is more parallel to slope, on account of more angulation.
    Right turns, the waistline is at more of an angle to the slope, on account of more inclination and less angulation.

    Face, torso and shoulders are not generally facing downhill, rather they are more generally facing the direction of travel, from origin to viewer’s left of camera.

    Poling: Poling is more pronounced with the right pole, and performed more with the arm than the wrist. Handle of pole is brought up, to initiate poling, by raising the arm at the shoulder. Pole plant is fore of the boot. Poling with the left is very little, sometimes non-existent, with the basket dragging behind the boot throughtout.
     
    David Chan likes this.
  3. Thread Starter
    TS
    David Chan

    David Chan getting after it! Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Posts:
    113
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    OK Karlo, I'm glad you are taking the exercise one step at a time and revisiting it as you work out some of the things for yourself.

    First some comments.

    Correct that "park and ride", while an accurate description of what the image looks like, it is not very descriptive of what is going on.

    Good description and observation on the Ski Snow interaction. I like that you use "inside/Outside" rather than uphill/downhill. It's much more descriptive and accurate.

    Good that in your Rotary section, you talk about when and where it happens, What part of the body is involved, and it's result. Good observation on asymmetry. (more on that later)

    Foot to foot /weight distribution Good with timing and description, Since you started at the snow with your first observation, Maybe do the same with your flexion/Extension? Which joints first, etc.. But good job.

    Poling, is last in your list. Good description of the movements. Is it a "plant" or a "touch"? (again more on that)

    Overall Good job not assigning "good/Bad" to movements and/or timing. Now if you go back and read this description, then close your eyes, and visualize it, You should have a much better image of that you saw in your mind.

    Time for some follow up questions to your latest pass.

    On Asymmetry and how the skis are working or the turns are developing. There was a pretty significant side hill (looking up from the camera the hill slopes down to the right) Does that change some of the turn mechanics? Unfortunately in Video sometimes that doesn't show up well but if you were doing the assessment on the hill you would have known that. Would that change your assessment of the turn mechanics? (Defend either way)

    For the rotary part: For the speed and dirt of these particular turns, would more "counter" really be an asset or just for show, or is this appropriate for these turns. You describe well, when it is happening and it's interaction with the rest of the body. Does the "lack of larger counter or separation" really take away from the turns?
    Also regarding asymmetry, does the side hill explain the more or less inclination/Angulation/Edge angles? Again good description of what's going on, does it now match what you are seeing more accurately. Repeat this side hill question for your face/torso/shoulders response.

    Poling... for the speed and size of these turns, is a more aggressive pole plant really needed (you described them well by the way) Would a more aggressive or pronounced pole touch really enhance these turns or is it more a symptom of the lower intensity of the speed of the turns.. And then again, going to the asymmetry of the turns and the side hill, does this help explain the clear observation you are seeing in the actual movements.
     
  4. Thread Starter
    TS
    David Chan

    David Chan getting after it! Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Posts:
    113
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    I'm deciding to start to ask feedback online so people that are just following along can see some of the interaction.

    FYI Liquidfeet and I did this via private message as we were trying to not "taint" the conversation but now that several people have begun to weigh in, I think it's time to start working more in view.



    Several people have asked "what the intent was" and there has been a lot of prescription without much accurate description.

    So for the record..

    I took this video of myself not as an "attempt to get better" or "Here's me skiing, help me fix it". I was not trying to "ski it perfectly" I knew it probably would not be very "dynamic" The background is.

    I was in the process at the end of last season to start setting up a new pair of boots for the coming season. My last several boots have had cuff adjustments, Boot Sole planing, Toe lifts, and several other adjustments. I always want to ski in them to confirm adjustments before making them permanent. At a L1 exam that I was shadowing, The examiner noticed a difference in my skiing from day one to day two, when we were out free skiing, that my shins were no longer "parallel"

    I made some adjustments to my boots but no longer had an examiner or real good eye, to watch me ski so my next best choice was to have someone video me. Since I was with Phil and Trish on this day, I asked if Phil could get a video of me, so I could evaluate my own cant adjustments. (funny how you can't see yourself ski very often)

    The intent (in my mind when skiing this particular run) was to ski medium and a little shorter radius turns, paying very close attention to, as I gently guided the skis on to an edge, the bottom of my feet, use the feedback I was getting to keep the edge angles as equal as possible, and feel where they bite and start to hook up., then to take them to the edge release and feel if they were getting a simultaneous edge release.

    To shorten the turn radius, of course you have to put the ski on a higher edge angle, load the shovel of the ski a bit more, and give the ski just a little more rotary input. Just as I did that, was when the bobble at 19 seconds happens. I hit an ice patch and because I was starting to overload the tips a little the tails gave way..

    The conditions were what they were. Salted Icy race course with the surface starting to turn to spring mush. Good pitch with a slight side hill just because I was trying to stay out of the center of the run doing this "task"

    I was probably trying to ski a little more two footed because I really wanted to feel what both skis were doing and how they were tracking.

    Because I was paying very close attention to moving very deliberately, when I went back to look at the video, It occurred to me that what was going on in/and on the snow, were pretty clear and would make a good video for people learning to do MA, to separate the "emotional fix this/fix that" and just look at the ski performance and body performance.

    This does not take away the accuracy of many of the comments if my goal were to get better. There are lots of good observations.

    It also makes it easier for me to give feedback/follow up questions to some of the MA given because I was pretty in tune with what I was doing and feeling in those turns.
     
    LiquidFeet likes this.
  5. JESinstr

    JESinstr Lvl 3 1973 Skier

    Joined:
    May 4, 2017
    Posts:
    457
    @LiquidFeet said :I disagree with some of what JESinstr has just posted.

    LF, I am sorry but this is the only way I know to respond to all your presumptive comments below. My responses are in Green
    JESinstr posted:
    The whoopsie turn begins with a hooking (bowed leg lead) of the new inside leg accompanied by an inward inclination (lean) of the upper body. Violation of Fundamental #2: Control pressure from ski to ski and direct pressure toward the outside ski . His inside edging movements and body lean at this point in the process produces a bias for directing pressure to the inside ski. This non-adherence also creates a divergence situation between the skis.


    First, there's no problem with momentarily loading the new inside ski at turn initiation. Unless your intent is to carve the ski which appears to be his general intent. Hopefully we can agree that if carving is the goal, the sooner you get on to the inside edge of the new outside ski the better. Tip divergence is bad, and for various reasons, but it is not a necessary result of letting weight stay on the new inside ski at the very top of the turn. But then again, it could be. The skier who begins a turn with a bowed new inside leg, which is flexing , You really believe that bowing out the knee as a "Hooking" initiation and flexing movement is solid mechanics? Come on, have you been secretly colluding with HH? that will be light on the skis above the fall line so the inside ski will not necessarily diverge. Weight may stay momentarily on that new inside ski, but if it does that missing outside ski pressure will grow all on its own by the fall line in a flex-to-release initiation. So you advocate passive edging & pressure management of the outside ski?
    However, I saw no tip divergence in any of these turns

    Really?

    . upload_2019-8-24_21-39-7.png


    And this one is from your own post up thread
    [​IMG]


    And I can't see any tip divergence here in this turn. JESinstr may be guessing that there's tip divergence, and if he has never done the particular release that he's describing which keeps weight on the inside ski at first ("weighted release"), he may expect tip divergence is a natural result - but it isn't.
    Check out the angles of the boots and direction of the heel binders. In spite of the evidence above, this could be debatable.

    upload_2019-8-24_21-37-30.png




    Furthermore, this skier in this turn is not doing a weighted release. When did I write about weighted release? His head moves up at initiation. He is shortening the new inside leg and tipping its ski onto the little toe edge, yes, as JESinstr points out, but at the same time he is lengthening the new outside leg. The goal is not to lengthen the outside leg, the goal is to secure a solid, controlled COM to BOS relationship with inside edge of the new outside ski so that pressure can be directed there. That combination moves his head upward - somewhat. Any new outside leg extension will direct pressure toward the outside ski immediately. A turn that starts with new outside leg extension, even when accompanied with flexing the other leg, will get that outside ski pressure early in the turn, earlier than in a true weighted release. Again, turn initiation is not about leg extension.

    Can we tell from the video what the pressure distribution would be in this turn? No, but if we look at other turns, giver the consistency of the turns, we can guess that there is no tip divergence,
    Please see photos above and that pressure goes directly to the new outside ski immediately. But does it go to an outside ski where the COM to BOS relationship with the inside edge of that outside ski is properly established

    Important point: the fundamentals as they are currently stated do not tell anyone
    when in a turn anything is supposed to happen. Thus there can be no violation. The pressure goes to the outside ski when the skier wants it to, and in his other turns it does what he intends. In this turn, the snow snake struck, and the recovery was handled just fine. Sorry, but this is is pure gobbledygook. You saw the results of poor implementation of skiing skills. Why don't you go to ground zero where the snow snake bit him and go backwards from there? What did he do to get himself into such a precarious position that allowed him to be so dramatically affected by a change is snow conditions?

    JESinstr posted:
    In regards to Fundamental #1 Control the relationship of the Center of Mass to the base of support to direct pressure along the length of the skis. .... With the divergence comes a "to the rear" bias affecting the COM-to-BOS relationship hence the need to rotate (Skid) the outside ski to try and "Catch up" with the inside as is evidenced by the resulting spray.


    When a skier is flexing that new inside leg for a weighted release ((which JESinstr is describing but this skier is not doing), weight indeed does move momentarily toward the back of the skis as the hips go down.
    Problem is your assumption that the move to the rear is short lived and that may not always be the case.

    JESinstr is right, that momentary movement of weight back can be quite prominent in a deeply flexed release. But there is not necessarily a problem with such a turn start. But then again, there could be and my whole analysis was based on the belief that when you start a turn pooly, you usually finish it poorly. Any true flex-to-release turn drops the skier's body quickly into the new turn (momentarily aft), skis tip dramatically and fast onto new edeges, Well that surely didn't happen did it? and then weight moves forward over the skis because the body ends up ahead of the skis. Say what? your body ends up ahead of the skis? Now you are really losing me. Such a skier will no longer be aft by the fall line, when the pressure mounts on that outside ski. What about the management of edges and pressure prior to the fall line or is the plan not to create any?

    But this particular turn does not have this much flexion, and from the given camera angle we can't see if the skier's weight is consequently over the tails or not. JESinstr may be working, not from observation, but from a belief that a skier MUST load the tips at the very start of every turn, and that going bowlegged at turn start necessarily puts the skier aft. Perhaps JESinstr also thinks that Fundamental #1 says that a skier always needs to load the tips to start a turn. It doesn't, and we don't know if this skier loaded the tips in this turn; no good side views!
    Don't be so presumptuous. Loading tips is a tactical issue. If you understand the design relationship between the boot and the ski you would know that loading the tips is a function of shin to boot contact. Tip loading, when it is done and for whatever reason it is done, can and should be executed while maintaining the COM to BOS relationship through the arch and center of ski shape which by the way is not the center of the ski.

    Fundamental #1 doesn't indicate which end of the skis need pressure anyway, nor at what time in a turn they need that pressure. Thus no violation of Fundamental #1 is possible. Except for the simple fact that if you want the ski to carve (which the skier in the video is trying to do) you have to manage the COM to BOS relationship in a prescribed methodology. Skiing is not a helter skelter free for all.

    ==============
    PSIA intentionally shaped the fundamentals to help examiner determine whether a skier has versatile control over the skis. The fundamentals do not to tell us how to ski. That's why the. writers left out any prescriptions of what to do when. The fundamentals can't be "violated." .
    So now I get it. The fundamentals are for examiners only. Why then did PSIA publish and promote it? This thread is about building MA skills and you are rejecting (as you did in your post upthread) the MA value proposition that the 5 fundamentals brings to the table. They may not be the best framework for MA but they ain't the worst either. Proper MA begins with the instructor knowing what the student is attempting to do. We know that carving a turn requires management of outside ski edging and pressure. We know that if you choose a late entry into the carving state by using a rotary induced brush or skid, it carries the descriptive name "Brushed Carve". If your intent is to carve a turn, you better get yourself on to the inside edge of your new outside ski and the sooner the better.

    A versatile skier will exhibit notable control over all kinds of variations and be able to use those variations when needed as regards fore-aft pressure regulation, lateral pressure regulation, vertical pressure regulation, edge angle regulation, and regulation of rotational dynamics. High control using a wide range of variations nets a score of high skills on all five fundamentals. Skiers who only have one turn, who use only one set of turn mechanics, won't be getting any high scores.

    Well I think we can agree that our skier in the video has some issues with versatility.
    [​IMG] upload_2019-8-24_22-49-11.png
     

    Attached Files:

    markojp and LouD-Truckee like this.


  6. karlo

    karlo Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Posts:
    1,590
    Location:
    NJ
    For the sake of this thread running smoothly, I suggest that we avoid stating that we disagree with another; we avoid rebuttals if that happpens to us; or, do so in PM’s. We share our MA and, when desired, supporting evidence. We ask folks for clarifications if we do not understand how an MA assessment was arrived at. If there are conflicting MA’s or opinions that the OP wishes us to explore, we let him moderate that, rather than engaging amongst ourselves on our own. I think that will avoid us inadvertently hijacking the thread. And, it will avoid inadvertent flares that can shut the thread down. Just a suggestion.

    I think the thread has been going very well. I’ve started reading other folks MA. It is most educational.
     
    David Chan likes this.
  7. JESinstr

    JESinstr Lvl 3 1973 Skier

    Joined:
    May 4, 2017
    Posts:
    457
    Thank you Karlo
     
  8. LiquidFeet

    LiquidFeet Making fresh tracks Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    2,073
    Location:
    New England
    OK, good idea, @karlo, about not responding to others' comments.

    But, this back-and-forth between JESinstr and me has highlighted that the two of us understand turn mechanics very differently. That's important to know, isn't it? It's not that we see different things (although @JESinstr did find tip divergence and I missed it), but that we conclude that different things are happening from what we see. It's our differing understandings of how turns are motored that leads us to our different interpretations.

    Examiners and trainers need to take these kind of differences into consideration. If disagreements in a technical thread highlight such differences, and if we keep those conversations civil, maybe that's a worthy exercise. I'd like to hear the OP's thoughts on this.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2019
  9. Thread Starter
    TS
    David Chan

    David Chan getting after it! Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Posts:
    113
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    This leads back to why I advocate that we train to observe and describe (and several mentors also taught me this) before applying any bias. If we watch and describe accurately, we are all on the same page at least to start. The premise of this exercise. If we are seeing something different, help each other to determine what that difference is.

    Examiners can not refute what actions are happening. Its on the video in this case... the skier can not either.. the proof is in the photo or footage. All a good examiner would be able to say is OK. That’s accurate, now what would you do to ... if you go in a different direction, maybe not the same one as the examiner might have taken, but can defend your choices because of the actual observation you will find that there are not always only one path.

    Then building a prescription, now involves overlaying some interpretation, being in a partnership with your client, allows this to happen in a less struggle with goals and outcomes. Hearing the intent can change your interpretation, and prescription.

    Thanks Karlo for putting this back on track.
     
  10. geepers

    geepers Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Posts:
    859
    Location:
    Australia
    The 4 CSIA Technical References are definitely intended to be used in assessing a skier. They apply hierarchically.

    One other thing that was drummed into our CSIA training - always detail the criteria for the ski task that you set for the skiers being assessed. For example: advanced parallel (pure carving) turns approximately 3 cat tracks wide, at consistent advanced speed, with smooth, continuous, rounded turns. Then demo what is required. Assess the skiers against the criteria: Carving turns or excessive sliding? Kept to required width? Too fast, too slow? Kept gaining speed? Rounded turns or not? etc.

    Using the CSIA tech refs...

    #1 Use of all joints helps maintain balance, providing the ability to manage forces acting on the ski and the skier.

    Skier has stance and balance issues and appears to be predominantly too far forward as well as inside. Even allowing for the soft snow conditions this is causing loss of grip with sliding of ski tails from the fall line. With the loss of grip on the outside ski and the increased friction the old outside ski is being dragged back behind the CoM in the later stages of the turn. As the skier transfers load to the new outside ski there is more bending at the hips to compensate and the skier is entering the new turn forward.
    The moment at 0:19 is a symptom of the skier not having strong balance on the outside ski.​

    #2 Turning is led by the lower body and the ski design.

    Turning is led by the lower body - the ski tips change direction before the upper body. The turning appears to be initiated predominantly by tipping of the lower body with some steering above and through the fall line before the loss of grip described above.
    #3 Upper and lower body separation allows for angulation to provide grip.

    Predominantly there is separation of the upper and lower body. Hips and shoulders appear to be mostly parallel to a line through the ski tips. Although there are some turns where the shoulders lead the hips this is largely due to the balance issues and bending at the waist outlined in #1 above. As is the loss of grip of the ski tails from the fall line.
    #4 Co-ordinated movement patterns direct the forces acting on the skis and the momentum of the skier from turn to turn.

    The skier predominantly contiuous turns. The ski tips are generally constantly changing direction indicating that there is little traversing across the pitch.
    The loss of grip described in #1 above is affecting the movement patterns as the skier has to make additional movements into transition to compensate.
    Use of poles to assist timing is inconsistent.​
     
  11. karlo

    karlo Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Posts:
    1,590
    Location:
    NJ
    The only formal MA training I have had is one training session at my home mountain, conducted by a trainer who is no longer there. In addition to the MA itself, he trained us to avoid any and all comments or opinions directed at the skier or at any individual's opinions/observations. Anytime we said 'you', 'his/her', 'your skiing', 'his/her opinion', etc., he had us re-phrase. He only wanted us to describe what we saw and listen to what others saw. Those two things, phrasing and listening were just as much of the MA training as describing what we saw.
     
  12. karlo

    karlo Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Posts:
    1,590
    Location:
    NJ
    Yes, hill slopes to viewer's right. That doesn't change my observations. Rotation is principally ski snow interaction and femur rotation and is independent of slope. Counter is upper body relative to lower body, and is independent of slope. Extend to unweight is independent of slope.

    Use of more counter changes everything; but I would not classify is as an asset, nor showing off. I also would not categorize the amount of counter, as seen in the video, as being more or less appropriate.

    Not from the turns we see here. And, there is nothing wrong with the turns here.

    The side hill does not explain the inclination, angulation, edge angles. Rather, the turn types that the subject wants explains them. Same answer for face/torso/shoulders.

    More aggressive poling is not needed. Pole touches to the fore, even light ones, is good habit. Me, I too often hardly pole at all. But, we aren't here to critique anyone's skiing, right? :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2019
  13. Thread Starter
    TS
    David Chan

    David Chan getting after it! Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Posts:
    113
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA

    Asymmetry, that was a "trick question"! observations were accurate however if you try to read intent/outcome goals into the skiing, you might have come up with different interpretations of what was going on.
     
  14. karlo

    karlo Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Posts:
    1,590
    Location:
    NJ
    Yes, there was certainly asymmetry in both turns and movement. But, I don't understand what you're asking or saying. I wasn't trying to read intent or goals.

    edit: Or, are you saying the MA is ok as-is?
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2019
  15. Thread Starter
    TS
    David Chan

    David Chan getting after it! Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Posts:
    113
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Yes. MA was fine.

    You mention the asymmetry as part of your MA and the trick part of the question was to see if you were reading or trying to read intent, into what you were saying. Good job not getting sucked into trying to read intent into the asymmetry. Sometimes you have to stand your ground.
     
  16. LiquidFeet

    LiquidFeet Making fresh tracks Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    2,073
    Location:
    New England
    Leaving out supposed intent, evaluation, and prescriptions for improvement in MA is difficult. At the first mountain where I taught, in every training session, our lead trainer would hammer this point in. I learned it was important at that mountain. Once cause and effect are sorted out, then evaluation and potential fixes can be talked about. It's still hard to leave those things out. Being able to proofread and edit a post when online helps.

    I had a one-on-one training session with a trainer some years ago. I was a new hire at that mountain. We stood at the top of a run and he said follow me, stay in my tracks, and do everything I do. He took off, and I followed. We stood in line at the chair, not a word from him. Sat on the chair. He turned to me and asked, what did you see?

    Oh. Tricky. I realized that he was not interested in knowing if I could do everything he did. He only wanted to know what I noticed as I tried to match his skiing. It was stealth MA. I missed seeing the snow spray, but got pretty much everything else he was doing. On other occasions with this trainer we would stand on the side of the trail and he'd point out a skier and ask what I saw. Sometimes that skier would blast past and I'd have only a few seconds to see what I could see. That task involved choosing my focus instead of trying to catch everything. Good training.

    Once he told me to follow an awkward-looking skier down the hill and match that guy's skiing in order to figure out what he was doing. I refused. I was in a jacket, there was a chair at the side of that hill, and the run was full of people. I didn't want to invade that skier's privacy by mimicking him right behind his back without his consent. But it is a very effective thing to do that with a willing client when watching them doesn't produce a confident MA.
     
  17. karlo

    karlo Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Posts:
    1,590
    Location:
    NJ
    yay!

    What's that app the kids use? Post a picture and it only stays up a short while. Do that for a video. You get one look and have to make-do!

    Ok, I'll try looking at MA videos just once.
     
  18. Thread Starter
    TS
    David Chan

    David Chan getting after it! Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2015
    Posts:
    113
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Snapchat Heh..

    It's good practice but it's also good practice while training your eye, to slow things down and see what things will cause other symptoms.

    Use both when ever you can.

    RE focus.. when you are out on the mountain, take a few runs or chair rides, to decide on a "focus" like "edge" for instance. Then just watch skiers and focus on edge angles. Are they equal? how are they developed? when are they developed? etc.. if you want to break it down even further, just try to determine one part of the turn.. Maybe just initiation? does edge happen before skis start turning?, or Release? Just look at when a release happens and how.

    Do this regularly and you will learn to catch it very quickly. Then when someone blasts by you, it will be ingrained in your memory, "they were doing x-y-z!"
     
    karlo likes this.
  19. LiquidFeet

    LiquidFeet Making fresh tracks Instructor

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2015
    Posts:
    2,073
    Location:
    New England
    What I focus on while riding the chair and watching others below is initiation. What does the skier do to start each turn? That often nails the "cause" of whatever dysfunctional things are going on and that fall under other categories.

    Another widely problematic issue is the skier being aft over the skis. Sometimes fixing initiation can fix the aft issue.

    Then I ask myself, what benefit (in terms of ski-snow interaction) would this skier gain by altering that initiation, or by getting not-aft? Fixing initiation or fixing fore-aft balance should produce a new ski-snow interaction that can open up new terrain and/or new conditions for that skier. Or sometimes it would simply give the skier more control on their current terrain.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2019
    karlo likes this.
  20. karlo

    karlo Out on the slopes Skier

    Joined:
    May 11, 2017
    Posts:
    1,590
    Location:
    NJ
    I’ve been working with beginner, though not newbies, to intermediate kids. My focus has been training them to read the terrain, then finish the turn across the hill; practicing pressuring outside ski with short leg long leg; feeling their feet to attain fore aft balance. That’s a generalization really. It’s the core from which I start, before tailoring to each student.

    Next time, I’ll post an MA after one and only view. Then an MA after closer study
     
    David Chan and LiquidFeet like this.

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice