Ski Width and Certification Exams

[James]

I actually got prescribed fat skis by an examiner in the bar after the L3 exam. It was pretty funny. We didn't get to see raw scores.
The latest kick is sidecut. They want to see you on something without much.

 

[HDSkiing]

Lots of information in that video and I’m still trying to decipher it through my small brain. But the OP was about the portion dealing with exam success rate and ski width.

In recent years I’ve doubled my ski quiver to 2 skis. Currently My daily driver, teaching, clinic ski etc. is a 170 Head iRally at 76 under foot. At the other end is a 177 K2 Pinnacle 105. I love the iRally because even with its 13M radius you can still do any size turn, and it’s a great ski to do demos on (hint to cert candidates) While it does like to give a lot of “feedback” in the bumps it’s a turner, quick and responsive. Now my K2 105’s, well those are just plain fun, if you want/need a break from skiing like “PSIA MAN” or speed racer jump on these and go in search of powder stash’s in the trees, they’ll put a smile on your face.

Ok so I say all that to say this, and forgive me if it’s obvious, but ski the one you like when your doing your own thing. BUT if you are an Instructor going through the IDP (Instructor Development Pathway) you should at the least know what maneuvers will be asked of you. The PSIA-RM publishes these each season, listing eleven or twelve of which your examiner will choose nine. When you begin to train for those maneuvers the ski you are on will be a factor, put that factor to work for you.

In my case I took (& passed) my level II on the Head iRally’s. For me, and for the tasks asked of me that ski is Superior for the majority of maneuvers, the one exception maybe being hockey slides as the K2’s pivot like a dream. I received superior scores in the bumps & Wedge Christies Despite being on a edgy/carvy ski with a race pedigree. Out of 7 of us 3 passed the skiing portion, which is less than the 60% pass rate in the division. I don’t remember what the other candidates skied on but the examiners were on narrow skis for what thats worth.

While this forum has a wide variety of skiers with different interests if you are an Instructor looking at level II in particular remember that a lot of the maneuvers asked of you will need to be done at a lower speed. This is so the examiner can look for accuracy and precision and because you should be able to competently demo a maneuver to students in the intermediate to advanced zone. Pick the ski you can do that on. Can I do RR Tracks on my 105’s? Sure. Can I do them way better on my heads? Oh yeah.

But that’s me, I grew up on slalom skis, raced on them and now ride them the majority of the time I’m teaching. I also think, IMHO whether you like it or not that most Instructors will be able to do the level II and certainly III maneuvers better on a narrower ski, but hey I get there’s always an exception.

On another note with all the epic powder and I do mean epic (if I was up for a long hike I could ski today in NM) I did spend a lot more time on wider ski’s. Working full time I was on skis 108 days this last season. I did notice that by April I was having a lot of knee throbbing issues, can’t help but wonder if the increased days on fat skis added to it or I’m just getting older.

 

[geepers]

I actually got prescribed fat skis by an examiner in the bar after the L3 exam.

Did you take them with or without food?

In recent years I’ve doubled my ski quiver to 2 skis.

I would imagine it helped a lot to (at last) have a ski on each foot.


Your knee issue may be illuminating. Do you think you tend to ski the wides with the same technique you've developed/ingrained on skis like the iRally?

My adult son has Faction 3.0 - about 106 underfoot I think. On groomers I find them absolutely terrible as I'm trying to cleanly carve. Feels like trying to get an aircraft carrier to change direction.

 

[François Pugh]

I find technique I've developed with SL skis on hard snow works great with fat rockered skis in deep snow, but requires more effort an skill with those skis on hardpack. The fat rockered skis also pivot and smear well in deep snow, which race skis don't.

 

[Wilhelmson]

Will the popularity of wider skis and their use by kids in earlier stages of skiing development improve their ability to perform these exam drills on wider skis when they are older, or will there be generations of skiers who have to relearn proper technique in order to pass the exams?

 

[fatbob]

My adult son has Faction 3.0 - about 106 underfoot I think. On groomers I find them absolutely terrible as I'm trying to cleanly carve. Feels like trying to get an aircraft carrier to change direction.

Hard groomers or soft enough to get an edge into? An adult male of reasonable competence shouldn't really be having too much difficulty in getting a 106mm ski to edge reasonably on any penetrable groomer. And thereafter make carves of a fashion. Sure they might lack something compared to the thrill and precision of a performance ski but it's not all or nothing. I never really get the oil tanker/aircraft carrier analogy - I've skied some skis like that of course but its more a function of tune and specific characteristics than it is width.

Movement Superturbo for example - that was one ski that really liked higher speeds and not so many poncey turns. It's stablemate at the time , the much wider Flyswatter by contrast was a laughter inducing riot with its pivotability and generally fun nature.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

The fundamentals that create good ski performance remain. It is not impossible to apply them to wider skis.

 

[HDSkiing]

I would imagine it helped a lot to (at last) have a ski on each foot.

Yeah and it's really amazing, who knew

My adult son has Faction 3.0 - about 106 underfoot I think. On groomers I find them absolutely terrible as I'm trying to cleanly carve. Feels like trying to get an aircraft carrier to change direction.

So when I take my K2's out its usually in deeper snow, when I want to ski in the trees, or in the crud. I've skied the iRally's in a foot or so of powder and they did pretty well.

Back to the K2's so yeah, when I'm off piste etc. I wouldn't say I ski them the same, more "Scarving" but to get to and from the off-piste, I have to get on the groomed with them and I tend to revert back to race form. Also some days if I threw them on I would just keep skiing them even on the groomed, being too lazy to go back to the locker room.

I get the aircraft carrier analogy, if I lay the K2's over, there is a definite "lag" by comparison to a ski like the iRally, also as it is rockered when I really get over that inside ski, the outside ski tends to de-camber a bit and as a result will track differently making the OS ski a little squirrelly (this is only at a really high edge angle and I accept it could be operator error lol). The knee issues seemed to be more general stiffness on the sides of the knees, lasting till a few weeks after ski season ended, but I can't help but wonder if there is some connection. If you look at the video in there is a slide depicting ground force angles from the edge back up to the knee, the wider the ski the more that angle increases placing more pressure to one side of the knee rather than the center.

Will the popularity of wider skis and their use by kids in earlier stages of skiing development improve their ability to perform these exam drills on wider skis when they are older, or will there be generations of skiers who have to relearn proper technique in order to pass the exams?

This was another take away for me from the video. With racer-kids its a no-brainer. It was postulated that other kids, while they are developing, should be on narrower skis as the force angles of the edge being further from the centerline of the knee might be more detrimental to them than to an adult. I'm not saying that is the case, just that it was raised in the video and is food for thought.

As far as learning proper technique, I think that can be done regardless of width. But most recreational skiers are not constantly being coached, they spend the majority of their runs having fun, skiing with their friends, family, etc. So, again from the video (don't yell at me) skiing on wider skis sometimes results in less carving, the ski is less engaged at the top of the turn more so at the bottom of it, resulting in heel pushing. If you only get out a few days or weekends a season and you're having fun, and not wanting to change, who cares?

But yeah if your job is to teach, which means being able to demo certain maneuvers to people who do want to learn to do those high performance turns, engage the skis, particularly the OS ski through all phases of the turn and to understand the ski/snow interaction occurring based on the fundamentals then yeah you need to be able to ski to the standard. That standard can be done all day every day on wider skis, but if you are developing your skills, and looking for a ski that is designed to do certain things better, well that is going to be on the narrower side IMHO.

Anyway I found this a fasinating video and resulting discussion!

 

[Wilhelmson]

As far as learning proper technique, I think that can be done regardless of width. But most recreational skiers are not constantly being coached, they spend the majority of their runs having fun, skiing with their friends, family, etc. So, again from the video (don't yell at me) skiing on wider skis sometimes results in less carving, the ski is less engaged at the top of the turn more so at the bottom of it, resulting in heel pushing. If you only get out a few days or weekends a season and you're having fun, and not wanting to change, who cares?

I agree that while it's possible to ski well on anything learning on wider skis would reinforce skidding, though without proper instruction that's probably true with any width ski, perhaps to a lesser extent on narrow. Since we're in the having fun camp I figure my kids' 2 lessons a season with 25 days sure beats my 5 days with 1 lesson learning moguls by myself, but it did give me a high tolerance of pain

 

[markojp]

Will the popularity of wider skis and their use by kids in earlier stages of skiing development improve their ability to perform these exam drills on wider skis when they are older, or will there be generations of skiers who have to relearn proper technique in order to pass the exams?

Sort of a non-issue. Rec ski kids in the west have been learning on wider skies for awhile. Ski width doesn't become much of an exam issue until L3, and most folks will have to put some thoughtful effort into their skiing by the time they get to that bridge.

 

[cjm]

Some observations from north of 49.

For Level 1 exams, candidates show up in all manner of skis. Course Conductors are directed to avoid commenting on candidates’ ski choice, they should be able to meet the ski standard on any board. By L2, if they have been working and sessioning at a ski school, they might have a more performance oriented ski but it still isn’t a major factor.

From experience and observation, the majority of Level 3 and 4 candidates in the Rockies region are on skis 75mm or less. High performance carvers or rec. race skis with a 14-18 m radius. You will see a few SL and few in the 80mm range. The <75mm seems to be the best all round ski for challenging the various exam components.

I haven’t been to eastern Canada but looking at photos and videos, they seem to prefer a narrower SL type ski. The west coast appears to prefer skis similar to those used in the Rockies, at least for the exams. Folks from those regions might have a better handle on it.

I expect all L 3 & 4’s have a “powder day ski” but in the Rockies the everyday driver for many seems to be a high performance ski. Personally, I find these skis handle most conditions and when managed by a competent pilot, they have a broader performance range than often characterized by media and even the manufacture. I’m still working on competent pilot bit.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

Yeah and it's really amazing, who knew




So when I take my K2's out its usually in deeper snow, when I want to ski in the trees, or in the crud. I've skied the iRally's in a foot or so of powder and they did pretty well.

Back to the K2's so yeah, when I'm off piste etc. I wouldn't say I ski them the same, more "Scarving" but to get to and from the off-piste, I have to get on the groomed with them and I tend to revert back to race form. Also some days if I threw them on I would just keep skiing them even on the groomed, being too lazy to go back to the locker room.

I get the aircraft carrier analogy, if I lay the K2's over, there is a definite "lag" by comparison to a ski like the iRally, also as it is rockered when I really get over that inside ski, the outside ski tends to de-camber a bit and as a result will track differently making the OS ski a little squirrelly (this is only at a really high edge angle and I accept it could be operator error lol). The knee issues seemed to be more general stiffness on the sides of the knees, lasting till a few weeks after ski season ended, but I can't help but wonder if there is some connection.

When you move over the inside ski, do you increase pressure on that ski?

I found the big K2s with rocker tops and tails flop too much for my taste. When on a high edge angle without soft, deep snow to support them, the end edges keep grabbing and letting go, creating the flops.

 

[Mike King]

When you move over the inside ski, do you increase pressure on that ski?

I found the big K2s with rocker tops and tails flop too much for my taste. When on a high edge angle without soft, deep snow to support them, the end edges keep grabbing and letting go, creating the flops.

Bags calls them hello/goodbye skis because they wave at you coming and going.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

LOL, Mike. That's one I'll remember.

 

[crgildart]

Would you rather be stuck in chopped up powder and crud on an FIS SL ski, or be stuck on icy hardpack on an 80-90 ski with some rocker?
.

The odds of encountering those extremes is important in ski choice, but a competent pilot can manage both on either.

The fundamentals that create good ski performance remain. It is not impossible to apply them to wider skis.

And the fundamentals that carve, pivot, and pressure remain and can be transferred to any arrow

Sort of a non-issue. Rec ski kids in the west have been learning on wider skies for awhile. Ski width doesn't become much of an exam issue until L3, and most folks will have to put some thoughtful effort into their skiing by the time they get to that bridge.

It only matters if the ski choice is an obvious handicap to the candidate's ability to peform the drill well.. and if they suck on fat skis they'll also suck ion skinny skis and vice versa.

I find technique I've developed with SL skis on hard snow works great with fat rockered skis in deep snow, but requires more effort an skill with those skis on hardpack. The fat rockered skis also pivot and smear well in deep snow, which race skis don't.

I suspect ultimately more passing candidates are using narrower skis because people who are experienced on narrow skis usually have been skiing longer than people who prefer a really wide ski for all occasions.... and they need to be prepared for all occasions. Doesn't mean that kids who grew up on a race team aren't now rocking stuff in the 100s under foot for everyday drivers.. it just means they are probably going to to thinner for an instructor Lx exam... because they know thinner are little better for the hard snow drills. If they're not comfortable on sub 90s, odds are they didn't grow up with much formal ski instruction, race program,etc. Doesn't mean they aren't great skiers or can't totally shred.. Just means that they may be at a disadvantage due to lack of experience on different platforms.

 

[HDSkiing]

When you move over the inside ski, do you increase pressure on that ski?

I found the big K2s with rocker tops and tails flop too much for my taste. When on a high edge angle without soft, deep snow to support them, the end edges keep grabbing and letting go, creating the flops.

Yup I'm sure I do, the IS stays arc'd the OS does that wavy thing that @Mike King mentioned. It's not as bad as it sounds and these are really great skis in soft snow and trees, but get them on the groomed and lay them over and they kinda let you know that's not their thing lol. Lower edge angles, more pressure on the OS and its not even a thing, ski turns great.

 

[geepers]

An adult male of reasonable competence shouldn't really be having too much difficulty in getting a 106mm ski to edge reasonably on any penetrable groomer. And thereafter make carves of a fashion.

The fundamentals that create good ski performance remain. It is not impossible to apply them to wider skis.

Also possible to use a Mack truck for commuting.


BTW fatbob - that's sexist. Any reason for specifically limiting the set to males?


Another interesting part of the original presentation is "Influence of ski width on perceptual characteristics in young ski racers". Around 53 minutes.

I agree with the race kids.

 

[fatbob]

Yeah not sexist. Just a 106mm ski is a different proposition for an average guy to an average gal. I'm a big guy and I pretty much ski a 107mm ski as a daily driver on trips. Now the same ski in shorter lengths is very much a big powder ski for some of my female friends.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

Yup I'm sure I do, the IS stays arc'd the OS does that wavy thing that @Mike King mentioned. It's not as bad as it sounds and these are really great skis in soft snow and trees, but get them on the groomed and lay them over and they kinda let you know that's not their thing lol. Lower edge angles, more pressure on the OS and its not even a thing, ski turns great.

Wavy thing occurs WITH weight on the ski. But your move to the inside should include lightening the inside foot. Wouldn't make the "hello/goodby" go away, though.

 

[James]

When on a high edge angle without soft, deep snow to support them, the end edges keep grabbing and letting go, creating the flops.

At 0:45, this?