Perseverance in the context of mastering something difficult is part of one's DNA as well. It applies to both academics and athletics... and its not about competition. Someone looking to enjoy the bumps needs some of that desire to get better with their skiing, otherwise stay in the flats or ski hero bumps when the opportunity lends itself.Most WC and top competitors start skiing at a very early age. Their DNA are way different than the rest of us. I used to have dreams of playing in the NBA when I was a kid. Just wasn't in my DNA, I suppose. We all have constraints.
Bumps are "high impact" only when you get in the backseat, manhandle the skis to turn(bad for the knees and hard on the quads), and because you manhandled the skis you don't slow down enough and crash in to the next bump (bad for all the joints involved). This can happen whether you take the "blue" line or zipper line. Given the same slope, zipper line requires you to move more quickly and make more turns in a same timeframe so it's more difficult and aerobically demanding but it's not inherently high impact.Let's kill the "GOAT", "best" technique, and bashing about style please. That's not helpful nor the purpose of this thread.
Deb Armstrong sustainable bump video just published a few days ago
This reminds me of the bumps for boomers blue line technique
That's the crux of what confuses me with the word "sustainable", It looks fluid and efficient because of the demonstrator's skills. Line section can only take you so far, there's techniques that needs to be mastered to make it low impact.What I find unexplained in those "sustainable" videos is how they are using the shoulder of the bumps to smear and control the speed.
I have a pair of the creamsicle flavor, 193s IIRC, short for the time, The daily driver of the day was K2 MSLs, at 203There were a couple P40's.
The original P40 F1 was red with cream color. GS ski. (2000/01) I had that in 193. They also made other P40's in that series. I believe there might have been a creamsicle, orangey/white colored slalom one.
GS was pretty stiff, not a great mogul ski but you use what you've got.
They then went to a P40 series that was black with colored stripes. Yellow, slalom, Red, Green. I had a slalom one .
I guess blue line DOES get you so far and zipper IS more difficult. So yeah, while zipper is not high impact per se, I understand the confusion.That's the crux of what confuses me with the word "sustainable", It looks fluid and efficient because of the demonstrator's skills. Line section can only take you so far, there's techniques that needs to be mastered to make it low impact.
I agree there is a lot of different ways to skin a cat, and carving cross under short turns can be utilized with little or no modification in many situations, but I'd make it "the ski travels any direction you want including along its length, across its width, and anything in between", especially in this thread's context. I used to make only carvy turns in the bumps. After spending 30-60 min in the morning doing pivot slip variations for a couple of dozen days, my bump skiing became much better.the ski travels along its length across the snow rather than across its width.
I have no ambition to ski bumps like the WC competitors do.It's interesting how some topics just bring up the same old arguments spit out with the same old passion. One of them is helmets (or have the helmet protagonists finally won that skirmish?) and the other is bump skiing technique.
My thought is this: there are many different techniques that can be used to successfully navigate a mogul run. Some of them work better than others depending on slope, snow condition, roundness of the bumps themselves and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, the skill level of the pilot.
I've come to believe that much of the skill blend of WC mogul skiers represents the pinnacle of technique and the most importantly part of that is the dynamic range they have in their flexion and extension movements. This dynamic range, and the ability to change edges while in an extremely flexed position, is hugely useful not only in bump skiing, but also in skiing steeps, in dynamic short turns wherever they might be, in medium radius turns, and, well, just about anywhere.
But not everyone has that ability (currently) to ski with great degrees of dynamic range. Does that mean that one should avoid skiing bumps because of this deficiency in technique? Nope. In fact, I'd argue that one can use the skill inventory and blend that they currently have, but work on dynamic range in the bumps to improve their skiing everywhere.
The fifth fundamental: regulate the magnitude of pressure created by the ski/snow interface, is, in my opinion, the elusive piece that ties the other skills together. It's a critical component in obtaining ski performance, where the ski travels along its length across the snow rather than across its width. And getting the tail to follow the tip is the best way to smooth out the ride -- it certainly might be one way to define "sustainable" skiing.
So, might we get off of the "my way is the only sustainable way to ski bumps" mantra? What I want to see is more people skiing the bumps. I'd like to see them working to improve their versatility. Sometimes that might be the Taos, Deb Armstrong, or WC method. But anyone, can improve their skiing everywhere by working on their dynamic range. And having that dynamic range will reduce the impact on your body, prolong your ski life, and help glue all of the skills together everywhere on the mountain,
No doubt slipping a ski is a critical skill in skiing -- after all, the fundamental is: "Control edge angles through a combination of inclination and angulation." Mermer Blakesley, a multiple PSIA demo team member and selector of the demo team, required clinicians (attendees) at the National Academy to demonstrate competence in three essential tasks before taking them into terrain, one of which was pivot slips. And while slipping a ski is an essential competence and can up your game in many circumstances, it is not the way to achieve the best ride from the ski. Getting the terrain to come across the length of the ski, rather than the width, is the way to even out the terrain in many circumstances.I guess blue line DOES get you so far and zipper IS more difficult. So yeah, while zipper is not high impact per se, I understand the confusion.
I agree there is a lot of different ways to skin a cat, and carving cross under short turns can be utilized with little or no modification in many situations, but I'd make it "the ski travels any direction you want including along its length, across its width, and anything in between", especially in this thread's context. I used to make only carvy turns in the bumps. After spending 30-60 min in the morning doing pivot slip variations for a couple of dozen days, my bump skiing became much better.
That said, if I were an instructor and spent an entire 2 hour lesson on pivot slips and at the end of the lesson told my clients "OK, you guys do this for 1 hour in the morning every time you ski for next 2 years. I promise you will be a better bump skier. See you 3 years later!", I have a feeling I won't get popular.
Absolutely. In "many" situations it is. Like if the snow is deep, I want my skis to glide almost completely along the length. Not to mention when I want to carve. In bumps though, a lot of times I want them to be a bit more sideways although rarely 90 degrees. Maybe like between 0 to 40 degrees? The secret is being able to modulate between that 0-40 degrees at will.Getting the terrain to come across the length of the ski, rather than the width, is the way to even out the terrain in many circumstances.