Skiing the powder
- Dec 2, 2015
Whilst that's correct, I think @Suzski should retain her ding,ding,ding.Except that's not entirely correct really. The turn radius of a ski can easily be exceeded without rotary. (Meaning make a smaller radius.) The turn radius is roughly equivalent to the cosine of edge angle x the turn radius of the ski. (That's actually wrong I guess but the concept of more edge angle = tighter turn isn't)
So, a 30m gs ski at 45 deg edge angle:
Cos45 x 30m = 21m
Cos60 deg x 30m = 15 m
Yes!It's a little senseless to argue the point of racing vs demo skiers.
Small point but those guys are Australians, not New Zealanders.So "those NZ.." were RmG and PL
Not injected ice however a couple of older vids of McGlashan on a harder surface and another in gates. Looks like soft snow in the gates. Would you say he's adaptable?Have you(somebody) some videos of these guys in „solid race“ GS gates or free skiing GS on real icy groomers?
Rookie Academy runs out of NZ. Founders are Kiwis I believe (or at least reside there) and started it at Treble Cone.Why do they do so much stuff in NZ? They always seem to be there.
You should kick them out.
FIS races are competitions, the ISIA tests and Eurotest are only designed to test a standard. You don't have to do the Eurotest if you already have a certain amount of FIS points. Pretty sure to get FIS points you need to complete a number of races, what's the point of that if you just want to see if an instructor skis to a certain level.The way this thread is going, we are about a week away from discussing whether Spiderman would beat the Hulk at Super G. When we do, I'd suggest FIS rules must apply to the theoretical race otherwise the debate would just get stupid...
Anyway these organizations are making the racing evaluation unnecessarily complicated. What do they think FIS races are for?
Agreed, unfair to have someone optimize according to one criterion and then judge them on a different one (my previous comment was trying to say that in a less than serious way). In any multi faceted sport you rarely have someone excel in all aspects. Nevertheless, if you really want a world ranking I think doing one open or entry level FIS race will give you that.Haha why did this thread on turn initiation turn into a debate over whether Reilly and Pauly ski race? No they are not racers, but they are amazing skiers. Does it matter at all if they would get beaten by a WC skier in a race?
Is there any official PSIA direction on teaching turn initiation for advanced students wanting to perfect their arc-2-arc turns?In the most recent Alpine Manual, PSIA puts teaching carved turns, arc-to-arc ones, in the advanced skier category, not the intermediate category. This may be a case of semantics.... meaning it all depends on what an intermediate skier is defined to be.
@SKskier, no one in this thread ever claimed that these folk were in the top 50 -- @James posted that no WC skier would place in the top 50 in a Japanese technical event. You then said that these demo skiers would not be able to ski a WC injected GS course, so I pointed out that they had to ski within 12.5% of the time of two 50 point FIS skiers. That doesn't mean that they are competitive on the WC, but it does mean that they have sufficient technique to be able to ski a GS course with some respectability. Clearly that would not be competitive on the WC; otherwise they would actually be on the WC. And as @jimintransition said, the GS actually has to take place on a FIS GS course and his test was on a run that had been injected.This topic is about „how to start a turn“ for IM and advanced. My intent was to react in case of „Carving“(„how to start a turn“), because here in Europe carving is „holy grail“ for advanced hobby skiers. And RmG and others are very often considered as benchmark of carving for such wannabe carvers here.
(I reacted to)First claim here was that all L4 instructors must be very good in comparison with racers because they must ski FIS GS course after some „WC Top50 racers“. I doubted it, so I asked about details. Then it was shown, that those tests are done in limit 12% slower than "50 FIS points skiers"(it means average local race guy as my friends), so I said it is total different than „top 50 WC“ – it´s absolutely different level.
Because 50 points skier is 800th place in the world and "+12% slower skiers" on average snow(OK, setting gates as „original GS“ but usually not on ice) are far away from WC abilities and technique. Simply it is a few levels difference. Of course I think those demo skiers are much better than „average L4 instructor“, but there are visible differences in technique between them and real racers.
I think that´s mainly due to differences of technique – see my arguments in post 177(different timing, too much angulation only for effect etc.).
One of those differences I wrote is „tied“ with this topic(iniciation of turn), so I continued discussion to find other opinions about this(my arguments in p.177) – not to make some challenge „who is the boss or Hulk against Superman“(I repeatedly wrote that both „Aussies“ – sorry for geographical NZ mistake – are very good skiers generally).
My impression is that such „demo style“ of carving is often confusing for those thousands of „carvers“, who think that this „ass to grass“ is one of main principles! And I can not agree, as I said previously, have a look at that free skiing of WC stars, they angulate much less(again, see p.177), have different timing etc.
The result is usually copy+paste of that demo style and „carvers“ are enhancing hips to snow and then those guys can not carve on tougher terrain, nor to significantly cleanly tighten a radius(this is main result with "Race" technique).
James wrote about that „cosinus“ calculation – I would like to add, that for „tight“ carved turn(clean) skier need not only have more edge angle, but he needs to have it BEFORE fall line and sooner that is generally accepted – also adequately loaded, not only edged!
In one post I wrote something about rotary teaching. I consider it necessary to learn and repeat for all levels of skiers also for top racers! Because a lot of „carvers“ with problems with „tighter clean carving“ has deficits in rotary technique – they can not show solid skidded/pivot turn(e.g. full control of speed, radius and direction on icy steep slope mixed with some powder or some stork turn in that conditions).
I think without very high level of this rotary on steep ice, a skier is not ready("sensitive" edges and CoM work) for solid „race style“ carving. Of course, then how to continue for such high level carving on steeps and ice is for different topic...
Mike, in post 169 you wrote: "He is an ISA Level 4 ski instructor, which means he had to achieve the ISA standard in GS -- within 18% of a WC skier"@SKskier, no one in this thread ever claimed that these folk were in the top 50 -- @James posted that no WC skier would place in the top 50 in a Japanese technical event. You then said that these demo skiers would not be able to ski a WC injected GS course, so I pointed out that they had to ski within 12.5% of the time of two 50 point FIS skiers. That doesn't mean that they are competitive on the WC, but it does mean that they have sufficient technique to be able to ski a GS course with some respectability. Clearly that would not be competitive on the WC; otherwise they would actually be on the WC. And as @jimintransition said, the GS actually has to take place on a FIS GS course and his test was on a run that had been injected.
As to rotary and the appropriateness of demo team technique to carving, check out this video. What do you see specifically in the skiing of these three skiers that you believe is limiting and what do you see that you feel is leading to ski performance?
I know that there are differences between racers, but I say that there´s significant(not very visible for most people) difference in timing etc. between instructors/demo skiers and racers. And e.g. that hips to snow in demo videos is confusing advanced hobby carvers.I guess the rest of the issue, @SKskier, is that I don't think there is anything that is "demo style" carving. There is a great deal of variety in the carving of various demo teams and even within the demo teams. Not all of the Australians ski like Paul and Reilly. And the Italians ski differently than the Austrians or Swiss, let alone the Koreans or the Japanese. Some team members have technique that looks more like what you'd see on the WC as they come from a WC race background, while others are more recreationally based. There are many ways to get ski performance, and the terrain, snow conditions, and intent of the skier all figure into what's the right mix of tricks. Not everyone is looking to find the fastest way through a set of gates.
Even more to the point, there's variation in technique on the WC itself. Ligety skis differently than Hirscher, and Brignone skis differently than Schriffrin. Just consider this video analysis of Brignone's run at Killington this year and how her technique differs from pretty much everyone else on the WC.
Below is what the current PSIA Alpine Technical Manual says. I think this is on page 124. You'll see it's mostly a description of a carved turn, not a teaching progression.Is there any official PSIA direction on teaching turn initiation for advanced students wanting to perfect their arc-2-arc turns?