Mogul G.O.A.T.

[jack97]

Watching again, I see what you mean. The way he uses "jumping" doesn't have to mean up in the air. It sounds like he just means a rapid weight shift.

I think Mosley using words like jump (or me with explode) is most skiers in the bumps are slow in getting the weight shift over to the new outside ski. Having a key word, phrase or image helps with making it happen.

 

[geepers]

@skier @jack97 Yeah, my bad point 1. The Manual means left/right.

 

[skier]

@skier @jack97 Yeah, my bad point 1. The Manual means left/right.

Did you read the document before responding? Because if you carefully read and understand what they are saying you might change your tune on other things as well.

This is how I've heard the terms up-unweight vs. down-unweight. I believe this is Razzi's web page. But, no big deal if it's used differently by some groups, though I'd be curious to see a glossary page to know which groups use it which ways. It helps when talking with those people.

http://www.effectiveskiing.com/Topic/Down-unweighting_and_Up-unweighting

 

[jack97]

This showed up on the ytube right side screen. The 1992 Olympics, Men's moguls, Grospiron at his peak, Carmichael getting a medal (damn he was fast) and JLB at 19 years old. BTW typical fluff piece on Grosporon in the middle of this.

 

[geepers]

Did you read the document before responding? Because if you carefully read and understand what they are saying you might change your tune on other things as well.

This is how I've heard the terms up-unweight vs. down-unweight. I believe this is Razzi's web page. But, no big deal if it's used differently by some groups, though I'd be curious to see a glossary page to know which groups use it which ways. It helps when talking with those people.

http://www.effectiveskiing.com/Topic/Down-unweighting_and_Up-unweighting

Obviously not carefully enough at the time.

Now that I have read that bit more thoroughly and looking at, say, the 2018 Olympic moguls where they do landings in rapid succession a roughly even left/right weight balance makes sense. For them.

 

[Mike King]

@Mike King, do you know why trainers promote "early pressure on the new outside ski" instead of "early weight transfer" to that ski? Or late weight transfer? This is a semantic question but it carries movement pattern content.

When people say "early weight transfer," that can happen as a result of several movements. One can remove weight from the new inside ski by lifting it or lightening it, both of which transfer "weight" to the new outside ski by default.

When people say "early pressure," it sounds like they mean something beyond "weight," something resulting from some kind of pressing... thus "early pressure" seems to mean extending off that new outside leg while it's still on its LTE, to "press" downward and put "weight" onto that ski.

"Early pressure" implies an extension to initiate a turn. "Weight transfer" allows for flexing to initiate the turn. And Delayed weight transfer implies yet another way of initiating. I'm wondering why the exclusive love for early pressure.

Your post above sounds like PSIA and/or your mountain trainers are exclusively promoting an extension move to start new turns. Is that the case? How come such an exclusive approach to turn initiation? You're not talking about bump turns only, are you?

There’s all sort of semantic issues in describing or teaching skiing and the words weight and ptessure are two examples. The trainers absolutely are NOT promoting only an extension movement to start a turn. They’d be more in the flex to release or retraction camp, although changing edges starts below that with tipping movements in addition to flexion and extension movements.

The semantic issues around pressure and weight have to do with the DIRT around pressure/weight exchange. We need to exchange the pressure/weight from the old outside ski to the new one. The question becomes when, at what rate, and how? Here in Aspen (and PSIA-RM) we are being coached to begin the process of exchanging pressure before edge change. If one uses the term Weight it may be interpreted as stepping uphill onto the new outsideski before changing edges. But I think what we are really attempting to do is a bit different. By the process of decreasing edge angle through the end of the shaping phase and finish phase of the turn, coupled with steering the skis under the body (CoM), pressure moves toward the new outside ski. This means that the CoM follows the skis through edge change, with early pressure/weight on the outside ski. Since the mass is with the ski and not traveling away from the feet, as the skis tip, they bend with the result that the ski is actively engaged to accept the increasing pressure and deflect the mass across the hill.

Does that make sense?

 

[geepers]

There’s all sort of semantic issues in describing or teaching skiing and the words weight and pressure are two examples. The trainers absolutely are NOT promoting only an extension movement to start a turn. They’d be more in the flex to release or retraction camp, although changing edges starts below that with tipping movements in addition to flexion and extension movements.

The semantic issues around pressure and weight have to do with the DIRT around pressure/weight exchange. We need to exchange the pressure/weight from the old outside ski to the new one. The question becomes when, at what rate, and how? Here in Aspen (and PSIA-RM) we are being coached to begin the process of exchanging pressure before edge change. If one uses the term Weight it may be interpreted as stepping uphill onto the new outside ski before changing edges. But I think what we are really attempting to do is a bit different. By the process of decreasing edge angle through the end of the shaping phase and finish phase of the turn, coupled with steering the skis under the body (CoM), pressure moves toward the new outside ski. This means that the CoM follows the skis through edge change, with early pressure/weight on the outside ski. Since the mass is with the ski and not traveling away from the feet, as the skis tip, they bend with the result that the ski is actively engaged to accept the increasing pressure and deflect the mass across the hill.

Does that make sense?

This is what Jonathon Ballou is talking about in https://soundcloud.com/snowpros/first-chair-how-to-take-your-skiing-from-good-to-awesome-part-2 ? (Also posted elsewhere.)
If you know JB could you just ask him to record Part 3 - been stuck at the top of the turn now for about 4 months.

 

[jack97]

Something that was mentioned but never got explored further from post # 3 was using your ears. When I go down a mogul run or see how others perform, I listen as well. Usually, you can hear the focus of the pressure, more on the forward side or at the tails. When done right, the sound is the most satisfying thing you can hear.

Below, JLB starting at 4:40

On harder snow, listen to the sound at :20 sec, yellow-green helmet. It's a close to a crisp snap.

 

[skier]

Something that was mentioned but never got explored further from post # 3 was using your ears. When I go down a mogul run or see how others perform, I listen as well. Usually, you can hear the focus of the pressure, more on the forward side or at the tails. When done right, the sound is the most satisfying thing you can hear.

Below, JLB starting at 4:40

On harder snow, listen to the sound at :20 sec, yellow-green helmet. It's a close to a crisp snap.

I'll bet JLB gets that question about the knees all the time. So, he's refined a solid answer that ends the debate quickly. He establishes that good mogul skiers can tell the difference between skiing with low impact vs. high impact, and with the right technique, it's not much impact.

People keep making that challenge, and great mogul skiers keep responding that it's not bad, but the myth continues. I've read through many forum threads on the subject. It's kind of like clockwork. Mogul skier wishes to discuss technique. Haters must point out that it's hard on the knees which is why they suck in the moguls, it's not worth damaging their knees. Then follows videos of competition crashes and injuries.... If competition injuries means we shouldn't zipper line ski, then Alpine racing injures (of which there are many) means we shouldn't carve. It's a broken record that goes round and round.

 

[Josh Matta]

I am more worried about wear and tear injuries...

I know which way of bump skiing hurts me, and I know which way doesnt hurt me.

 

[skier]

I am more worried about wear and tear injuries...

I know which way of bump skiing hurts me, and I know which way doesnt hurt me.

I'm worried about chronic injuries too. I've had more than my fair share from sports over the years, including knees, but none from skiing. Being a seasonal sport makes a huge difference. I would say those that can ski year round face different challenges than the rest. My knees heal up mogul skiing, because it's good cross training, physical therapy, building strength without impact. A sport that's hard on the knees is volleyball. Had tendonitis first in one knee, switched up my footwork, then years later in the other knee. Playing high level, several times a week year round lasted several years, before tendonitis set in, then took one year to heal with lots of time off and rehab. Now I only play sand, because of the soft landing.

I don't jump in the moguls, but I'll ski the fall line without any worries, because I feel how much less impact there is than volleyball.

Back in the days of pain, I couldn't run, because the knees would be sore immediately, but now for years I've run about 15 miles a week no troubles, year round. Skiing the fall line feels much, much easier on my knees than that. Though, I only get to ski moguls once or twice a week for a few months.

 

[CalG]

I'd say Plake's skills in the moguls were pretty awesome.

I like his honesty and attitude! ;-)
GP starts about minute mark 5 .
Anyone with $650.........

 

[geepers]

I'll bet JLB gets that question about the knees all the time. So, he's refined a solid answer that ends the debate quickly. He establishes that good mogul skiers can tell the difference between skiing with low impact vs. high impact, and with the right technique, it's not much impact.

People keep making that challenge, and great mogul skiers keep responding that it's not bad, but the myth continues. I've read through many forum threads on the subject. It's kind of like clockwork. Mogul skier wishes to discuss technique. Haters must point out that it's hard on the knees which is why they suck in the moguls, it's not worth damaging their knees. Then follows videos of competition crashes and injuries.... If competition injuries means we shouldn't zipper line ski, then Alpine racing injures (of which there are many) means we shouldn't carve. It's a broken record that goes round and round.

It depends how we ski and the condition of our body / moving parts.

Moguls can be skied low impact - two examples:
1. Lorenz's round line style (last run on vid)

2. Two zipperliners

Moguls can be skied much more aggressively:

Neither of those 2 approaches look particularly gentle to me. (When most people pass comment about the rigors of mogul skiing I'll bet London to a brick it's skiing like this they have in mind.)

How about different styles on the same terrain? Which of these 4 styles on the same bump run looks the least impactive, while still maintaining good speed and entertainment?

 

[jack97]

I'll bet JLB gets that question about the knees all the time. So, he's refined a solid answer that ends the debate quickly. He establishes that good mogul skiers can tell the difference between skiing with low impact vs. high impact, and with the right technique, it's not much impact.

QFT. The first time I noticed the "sound" was on a hard granular course, had a hard time linking turns because I couldn't get an edge. Then I hear these crisp snaps from uphill and it was a new assistant coach for the team. The guy was ripping turns like nobody's business, making it look so easy. He was helping a team member in getting that technique honed in. I will never forget that sound mainly because of how I was struggling that day. For packed powder, the other sound I notice is that "thump" in JLB's segment, very distinct. Both sounds are very noticeable when on the slope or up on the lift overseeing a mogul field..

 

[jack97]

How about different styles on the same terrain? Which of these 4 styles on the same bump run looks the least impactive, while still maintaining good speed and entertainment?

All four styles are least impactive if the technique is executed properly. I looked at these as not styles but approaches to ski moguls especially on non uniform bumps. Sometime you need to do all four and some more in one (non uniform) bump field. In addition, there are videos of a freestyle team where the coach emphasis using different approaches to skiing the course to round out their skills when they are competing on another course or when conditions are different.

 

[SSSdave]

Geepers A-Basin video with the 2 skiers on a moderate gradient slope is more like my personal relaxed rec bump style.

First 6 hours of skiing for this season last couple days. Started out with a few runs on groomers each session before taking it into fields. Amazing for such an old guy how many bumps I skied already but it took a few hours for brain and muscles memories to find each other before my form flowed like I prefer. Will be much better after 4 days and be smoother still after 8 days than 4 because there are a lot of big muscles, especially in my lower back that can only develop by making those turns.

 

[skier]

It depends how we ski and the condition of our body / moving parts.

Moguls can be skied low impact - two examples:
1. Lorenz's round line style (last run on vid)

2. Two zipperliners

Moguls can be skied much more aggressively:

Neither of those 2 approaches look particularly gentle to me. (When most people pass comment about the rigors of mogul skiing I'll bet London to a brick it's skiing like this they have in mind.)

How about different styles on the same terrain? Which of these 4 styles on the same bump run looks the least impactive, while still maintaining good speed and entertainment?

I think at this point it helps to understand what makes low impact and what makes high impact. First, snow is soft, so if there's powder on the ground just about everything is low impact. That's one incredibly fun thing about powder moguls, You can just fly off of any bump and land like you're floating on pillows. So, on hard surfaces (which lots of people avoid by the way) is where there's chance for impact, but there are several things that reduce it there too. First, with the right boot the tongue flexes which reduces the forces. Anytime something stretches or bends like a rubber band, the forces are greatly reduced. For instance dynamic ropes stretch, and can hold much greater falling weight than static ropes that don't stretch. Furthermore, the ski can absorb some impact by flexing. But, the ultimate tool for reducing impact is absorption and extension. The mogul skier learns to gradually apply and reduce forces with A&E so that it's more like riding a bicycle than jumping and landing. I'll repeat that. When you can gradually and continuously apply force, the impact is like riding a bicycle. You spread the forces over a longer distance which reduces the peak forces. Sometimes the bumps are so big, the backside is a cliff, and maximum extension doesn't reach the next bump, and you can point out videos of landings which would be more impact on hard surfaces. But, typically that skiing is in soft powder or there's just a few of them, and you can avoid those bumps.

 

[skier]

How about different styles on the same terrain? Which of these 4 styles on the same bump run looks the least impactive, while still maintaining good speed and entertainment?

I watched part of this video where you tagged it. You'll probably now embarrass me tremendously by pointing out that this skier is an Olympic medal winner, but still I'll take that risk by saying that his zipper technique at 1:45 is not good. His A&E timing is off, and he's getting bumped around, regardless of who he is.

 

[Mike King]

But, the ultimate tool for reducing impact is absorption and extension. The mogul skier learns to gradually apply and reduce forces with A&E so that it's more like riding a bicycle than jumping and landing. I'll repeat that. When you can gradually and continuously apply force, the impact is like riding a bicycle. You spread the forces over a longer distance which reduces the peak forces. Sometimes the bumps are so big, the backside is a cliff, and maximum extension doesn't reach the next bump, and you can point out videos of landings which would be more impact on hard surfaces. But, typically that skiing is in soft powder or there's just a few of them, and you can avoid those bumps.

QFT. I'm probably one of those who can't ski, and the moguls prove it, but what I have found as the path to enlightenment is skiing a direct line with a huge amount of dynamic range of motion. Flexion and extension, the fifth fundamental in PSIA's 5 fundamentals (regulate the pressure created by the ski/snow interface) is, in my opinion, the differentiator between advanced skiers and those who are experts. It's not just about skiing moguls; dynamic range of motion is crucial for skiing steeps. If you want a killer short turn, you've got to be able to have that dynamic range of motion.

In my experience, the single thing that helps someone who is intimidated by any bump field and allows them to ski any of these lines is dynamic range of motion in flexion of the ankles, knee, and hip. What I find is that skiing a direct line can be smoother, slower, more controlled, and also looks far more dynamic than the other lines, particularly as the slope tips up and the bumps become bigger. I loose my nerve to ski the round line in runs like Sodbuster at Highlands (slope angle near 40 degrees), but the direct line, when I get it, is much more simple and effective.

Personally, I think that the expert skier needs to have the ability to ski all of the lines, and that's what I'm working on as I hope to go for my level 3 this season. But the real point I wanted to emphasize here was the critical importance of flexion and extension.

BTW, wasn't that one of the points in the original post in this thread? Hmmm....

Mike

 

[skier]

QFT. I'm probably one of those who can't ski, and the moguls prove it, but what I have found as the path to enlightenment is skiing a direct line with a huge amount of dynamic range of motion. Flexion and extension, the fifth fundamental in PSIA's 5 fundamentals (regulate the pressure created by the ski/snow interface) is, in my opinion, the differentiator between advanced skiers and those who are experts. It's not just about skiing moguls; dynamic range of motion is crucial for skiing steeps. If you want a killer short turn, you've got to be able to have that dynamic range of motion.

In my experience, the single thing that helps someone who is intimidated by any bump field and allows them to ski any of these lines is dynamic range of motion in flexion of the ankles, knee, and hip. What I find is that skiing a direct line can be smoother, slower, more controlled, and also looks far more dynamic than the other lines, particularly as the slope tips up and the bumps become bigger. I loose my nerve to ski the round line in runs like Sodbuster at Highlands (slope angle near 40 degrees), but the direct line, when I get it, is much more simple and effective.

Personally, I think that the expert skier needs to have the ability to ski all of the lines, and that's what I'm working on as I hope to go for my level 3 this season. But the real point I wanted to emphasize here was the critical importance of flexion and extension.

BTW, wasn't that one of the points in the original post in this thread? Hmmm....

Mike

I feel like sometimes the round line is easier and sometimes it's harder. It depends a lot on the bump shapes and conditions.