Agreed. experience is a great "teacher" and yes it needs to be in a safe/controlled environment.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Teaching Turn Initiation to Upper Int. & Advanced Skiers
- Thread starter Suzski
- Start date
Agreed. experience is a great "teacher" and yes it needs to be in a safe/controlled environment.
Sure. And if the pitch is anything but extremely gentle the speed builds up quickly.
Your original question was "So why does the industry basically teach rotary initiated turns first?"
So, I'll try once more.
Because skidding is an effective form of speed management. If a skier does not know how to reduce speed by skidding and can only use line then they will have a problem if there is an obstacle (another skier, fence, tower,...) on their intended line. They don't have the ability to suddenly sharpen the turn to go uphill of the obstacle so they turn back into the fall line and pick up a little more speed. This happens even on bunny hills as they frequently contain moving obstacles.
Once they have the ability to apply the brakes if needed then, yes, why not.
Yep. As long as they have complimentary skills to control speed regardless of the path they may be forced to take.
Last edited:
The “other David C” here....
So let’s say you do introduce edge control and have beginner skiers who can carve the start of a turn, and they end up going faster. OK, teach them to keep the turn going, basically an uphill christie, just another method of speed control. You can also introduce sideslipping, and skidded turns, and fore/aft balance and rotary, and everything else. I’m not sure that one is more critical to emphasize first.
Thing is, until you work with someone, you don’t know what are going to be the skills that comes most easily to them. I like to work with what they can actually do rather than emphasize a “normal” progression.
But what do I know?
So let’s say you do introduce edge control and have beginner skiers who can carve the start of a turn, and they end up going faster. OK, teach them to keep the turn going, basically an uphill christie, just another method of speed control. You can also introduce sideslipping, and skidded turns, and fore/aft balance and rotary, and everything else. I’m not sure that one is more critical to emphasize first.
Thing is, until you work with someone, you don’t know what are going to be the skills that comes most easily to them. I like to work with what they can actually do rather than emphasize a “normal” progression.
But what do I know?
- Joined
- May 13, 2017
- Posts
- 69
It's an interesting one. Reposting here the video from the Interski thread where Paul Lorenz discusses the continuum between rotation and carving.
Also, specifically for the word "skidding". Would we call the turn mechanics that they are demonstrating at 4:00 a "skidded turn"?
Yes, i have the same feeling - a lot of technique videos "how to" are based on their "demo style". I think it is not adequate way for those "hobby racers with ambitions"
and some principles they(JAP, Reilly...) show are not effective for good carving on steeper terrain or "ice".
One of those uneffective principles in their carving is "prolonging" the turns after "apex" - typically "GS turns" with SL/AM skis.
In Alpine carving they need to change their direction much sooner than is "typical" carving seen on groomers.
You can do quite short turns with FIS GS radius 30m, but without understanding real principles(what is effective in race)
you are not able to do it - and this is what "Japan style" is missing.
And all those "race" principles could be transferred into amateur skiing(of course, not race drift etc., I mean "pure carving" as a holy grail).
Also too much "ass to grass" is not good principle is usually ther. Skier should not to try make this without real need(steepness, speed...)
The skis should "shift" you there, not skier with lateral force.
"So why does the industry basically teach rotary initiated turns first?"
Control of the skis/body/forces, speed management. In slower speed you learn faster, you have enough time
to concentrate(continuously) on movements.
But rotary movements are necessity for all types of skiing. It is misunderstanding to say "carving do not need
it". All Alpine racers needs to find exact grip(edging) on icy course, pivot/drift etc. and rotation is essential.
There are also some "expert" techniques in race carving how to "add a pressure" on ski tips(for shorter "clean carved" radius).
And some specific rotation in hips/femur are neccessity if you want to do "race carving" with tight turns with "pure edge".
One race coach told me that a skier should also to learn rotation to "find a pure race carving"
(also that "99% of non-race skiers are not able to fix last 20% of skidding movement in their carving").
But topic is "turn initiation" - my next idea is(shortly), that there is often exaggerated transition "cross under" for
non-race skiers. Firstly should be(I write about "carving" on groomers) learnt "cross over" - there is more time
to adjust the skis, legs and the rest of the body(of course, practise on flat terrain).
With immediate flexing of both knees and crossunder, intermediate skier is not able to "be fore-aft balanced"
and is back seated(skis are faster than torso after fall line) if he wants or not.
Control of the skis/body/forces, speed management. In slower speed you learn faster, you have enough time
to concentrate(continuously) on movements.
But rotary movements are necessity for all types of skiing. It is misunderstanding to say "carving do not need
it". All Alpine racers needs to find exact grip(edging) on icy course, pivot/drift etc. and rotation is essential.
There are also some "expert" techniques in race carving how to "add a pressure" on ski tips(for shorter "clean carved" radius).
And some specific rotation in hips/femur are neccessity if you want to do "race carving" with tight turns with "pure edge".
One race coach told me that a skier should also to learn rotation to "find a pure race carving"
(also that "99% of non-race skiers are not able to fix last 20% of skidding movement in their carving").
But topic is "turn initiation" - my next idea is(shortly), that there is often exaggerated transition "cross under" for
non-race skiers. Firstly should be(I write about "carving" on groomers) learnt "cross over" - there is more time
to adjust the skis, legs and the rest of the body(of course, practise on flat terrain).
With immediate flexing of both knees and crossunder, intermediate skier is not able to "be fore-aft balanced"
and is back seated(skis are faster than torso after fall line) if he wants or not.
I don't know, it looks to me that there technique works pretty well in steep terrain. Check out the following around 3:45.
My text should better be "steep AND ice"...have a look at 3:49 then(turn to the left from skier´s point of view) - this is on softer snow and there is a lot of drifting
in the beginning of turn(so this is not not "pure edges"). Then - he is "waiting" for transition more than Alpine racers...what´s radius of his skis here?
Now imagine yourself this skier is in a race course(the same slope, but much harder snow) - do you think that he will be able to ski through the GS gates with fluency and speed? My opinion is, that with this "style" he will be "off" very soon. Again, i write about carving on harder snow, turning tight turns etc...
Sure he can. 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. But you seem to be objecting to their style. That's fine -- aesthetics are personal. But you should also recognize the level at which these folk are skiing and the performance that they get from their skis. There are not many who can achieve that level.
BTW, if you watched a bit before the spot in the video I posted, you would hear Paul Lorenz talking about that slope and the snow conditions. It was crumbling snow without much structure. Getting the edge angle and performance from the skis that they did with that soft snow is as tough a task as it is to get it on hard snow.
As to the Japanese technical competitions, take a look at this video that discusses the competitions themselves.
Apropos of @JESinstr basic point, it’s worth considering that pure carved turns and skidded or brushed turns are not fundamentally different in the movement patterns that underlie them. The difference resides in the edge control and fore/aft balance point, not in twisting the skis around. Why not begin to develop those correct movement patterns from word go?
I’ve mentioned it before but it’s worth listening to Russ Wood’s podcast with Tom Gellie in which he describes his realization that edge control through ankle/lower leg movements is fundamental to accurate skidded turns. He also speaks about how limited the range of rotation of the femur in the hip joint actually is in good skiing and the various measurements he’s undertaken to show this. It’s very interesting- which is another way of saying that I agree with him entirely
I’ve mentioned it before but it’s worth listening to Russ Wood’s podcast with Tom Gellie in which he describes his realization that edge control through ankle/lower leg movements is fundamental to accurate skidded turns. He also speaks about how limited the range of rotation of the femur in the hip joint actually is in good skiing and the various measurements he’s undertaken to show this. It’s very interesting- which is another way of saying that I agree with him entirely
- Joined
- May 4, 2017
- Posts
- 1,142
Thanks for contributing that video. Nice to see the subject of what carving is, addressed.
Lorenz talks about ski performances and I can relate to that concept. The turns he has them doing beginning a 4:00 are short radius turns and (unlike the medium radius turns he has them doing in the beginning) the intended radius for these turns is below the radius design parameters of the ski. So rotary assistance to accomplish the intended task is not only appropriate but required. In most instances it is good mechanics to develop a turn with rotary as the "on ramp" to the performance state. So I would not call them skidded turns because skidding is not the intent, it is just what rotary results in on the way to the performance carving state.
- Joined
- May 4, 2017
- Posts
- 1,142
Apropos of @JESinstr basic point, it’s worth considering that pure carved turns and skidded or brushed turns are not fundamentally different in the movement patterns that underlie them. The difference resides in the edge control and fore/aft balance point, not in twisting the skis around. Why not begin to develop those correct movement patterns from word go?
I’ve mentioned it before but it’s worth listening to Russ Wood’s podcast with Tom Gellie in which he describes his realization that edge control through ankle/lower leg movements is fundamental to accurate skidded turns. He also speaks about how limited the range of rotation of the femur in the hip joint actually is in good skiing and the various measurements he’s undertaken to show this. It’s very interesting- which is another way of saying that I agree with him entirely
Well stated HDN,
Happy to see some consideration being given to this perspective.
One of the biggest issues intermediates face is the inability to complete their turns. Why is that? It might be if all the skier knows it skidding, it becomes problematic as they approach perpendicular to the fall line. Without the knowledge, edging skills and movement patterns to create a carving state, the only option to control speed is to react to the force of gravity pulling you down the hill. Once this movement pattern, (with all the back seat balance and body twisting) is established it very difficult to change.
If you take a (brakes removed) ski to the top of a slope and point it very slightly off perpendicular, It will begin to move and rotate to find the fall line. So initiation, in the end, is no big todo. It just takes the pull of gravity and patience. That ski will never, on its own, cross the fall line. The edging based movement patterns associated with the act of carving are a fundamental component to skiing and there is no reason we can't address this at the entry level. IMO
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2015
- Posts
- 24,970
Not sure the point of that. What's the difference in joint movement if it's a passive or active movement of the legs? For the skis to point one way or the other they have to move a certain amount in the joint. Is this an argument for pelvis rotation?
Gotta agree with Mike on this. Sure, on solid ice they might modify things a little, but I don't see any issue with edge hold and that technique.
Seems a lot of the technicsl style maintains a more vertical upper body. In short turns the arms are out and horizontal and the pole plant is blocking. Slalom skiers often have the inside hand on the snow or near it. While upper body stability is essential in slalom, verticality and especially horizontal arms don't serm to matter much.
It's easy for us forget just how fast slalom skiers go watching Mikaela in slo mo.
Compare:
Slo mo
Full speed:
Well we're a little too focused on the competition results as opposed to the turns in the competition, which is the subject really. The point is that most freeskiing racers don't look much like the technical skiers in general. Not about competing. Yet the ultimate standard seems to be the tech skiers.
Julia Mancuso was absolutely competitive and placed third in an FWT event. (2010) That was also on the Bec des Rosses which is pretty much the Hahnenkamm of FWT. Travis Ganong would do quite well too though it's doubtfull he'd do it while still racing. Both are free skiing Squaw skiers. The risk is too great likely for active wcup these days. But speed skiers can do quite well as a lot of the skill is transferable. Air maneuvers would be the defining element for placement.
Richie Berger is a tech style skier. Does the Austrian demo team now ski like that? Last I looked they didn't but maybe 2019 is different. As far as being Austrian, so was Hansi, and he actually raced and won on the wcup in slalom and gs.
I actually think that's some fun looking skiing. There's more air in it than a lot of tech skiers. And I din't mean off the snow.
Last edited:
I don’t think there is a point per se. It just is what it is according to Russ. The pelvis does, of course, follow the skis to a significant extent in turns fully completed across the hill.
I'm not clear why this comment "...won't work on ice". It's a bit like claiming that a driving style suited to World Rally Championship won't work in F1 - true but not really relevant given the different context. Hopefully the vid @Mike King posted with Lorenz discussing the Japanese technique wrt to the soft snow will provide some insight.
Not sure I fully understand your point re 30m skis. Lorenz and McGlashan often do the business on longer radius skis. Here's one on 25m skis.
And another Australian buddy of theirs on various 23m to FIS 30m skis. (Picked this 'cause it specifically notes the ski being used.)
Re the "too much arse to grass". Are you implying hip dumping? Not the case - these guys are skiing at speed and often on steep slopes. That lower body inclination is required to balance against the centripetal forces they are generating. Here's Lorenz on carving.
Whether or not rec skier should be attempting to get their hip on the snow is an entirely different matter.
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
What is that „18% of a WC skier“? Is it limit „WC time+18%“(in seconds) in some testing course?
If so, those times are(from my experience here in EU of some „A level instructor“ friends) measured on standard slope, not typical icy/injected pista. And „benchmark“ skier is not WC, but average EC skier. Mainly difference is „ice“ and course is not so "tough"(in comparison of real race).
Of course, Reilly and Lorenz are great skiers, no doubt. I begin my reactions after that post with „TOP50“, because somebody mixed Japan tech competitors with Hirscher etc. and it was probably little confusing for me(being not native english speaker).
So I thought at that time, that generally opinion was „Reilly and Lorenz were TOP50 in WC“ or „they could be if they want to be there“. So I tried their FIS records .And this(Top 50 WC) is not possible(even if thy try), for sure, there are some differences in technique, that those guys can not be succesful there in such hard conditions.
All those videos posted after show very good skiing also on R25-R27m skis. But none of them are on icy steep(„WC/EC“) slope – they usually(I see some of their videos before) choose softer/easier terrain for their demos.
Have you(somebody) some videos of these guys in „solid race“ GS gates or free skiing GS on real icy groomers?
What is that „18% of a WC skier“? Is it limit „WC time+18%“(in seconds) in some testing course?
If so, those times are(from my experience here in EU of some „A level instructor“ friends) measured on standard slope, not typical icy/injected pista. And „benchmark“ skier is not WC, but average EC skier. Mainly difference is „ice“ and course is not so "tough"(in comparison of real race).
Of course, Reilly and Lorenz are great skiers, no doubt. I begin my reactions after that post with „TOP50“, because somebody mixed Japan tech competitors with Hirscher etc. and it was probably little confusing for me(being not native english speaker).
So I thought at that time, that generally opinion was „Reilly and Lorenz were TOP50 in WC“ or „they could be if they want to be there“. So I tried their FIS records .And this(Top 50 WC) is not possible(even if thy try), for sure, there are some differences in technique, that those guys can not be succesful there in such hard conditions.
All those videos posted after show very good skiing also on R25-R27m skis. But none of them are on icy steep(„WC/EC“) slope – they usually(I see some of their videos before) choose softer/easier terrain for their demos.
Have you(somebody) some videos of these guys in „solid race“ GS gates or free skiing GS on real icy groomers?
Here is older video of GS WC skiers(free skiing), usually at r27 very stiff skis(FIS norm at that time). Could you see difference
in comparison with Lorenz?
- different timing - WC skiers are faster in transition and sooner have fully weighted outside ski.
In "Clean" carving turn on hard snow you must be sooner fully weighted before fall line.
Real radius in clean race carving depends mainly on phase of turn "before the fall-line" - "what you did not before fall line,
you can never do after". And if you are "late" fully edged AND weighted, you can not "tighten the radius" on ice in GS course.
(only with situational drift) in speed.
Lorenz and others are usually later finishing their turns - it means, that racer is "preparing" his next turn significantly sooner.
- more flexing than needed(Lorenz) for purpose and conditions - WC skiers use it different(mix CO/CU according need).
So this "demo" skiing is more for "effect"(so I said "ass to grass") than for race utilisation on ice.
Demo skier is often not in ideal skeletally stacked position with those hips(grass..), forces are not ideally tranferred into edges
and skis are not bent fully(as should be) and he can not tighten the radius(for GS course with tighter arcs than Lorenz shows).
Can you see that stronger position with less angulation in WC skiers? Not so much angulation and "grass".
You can also can a look at free skiing of Ted Ligety on 35m radius.
- different "frequency" of turns - you can compare it with Ligety free skiing, how long lasts one turn. Demo skiers
are longer in one turn, cause is obviously that different timing with late transition and iniciation before fall line.
With radius 23m should be Paul´y frequency faster than Ted´s(on 35m skis), but it is oppostie - why?
In race carving(GS/SG...SL is specific "gymnastic" acitivity) you MUST be fully loaded and skeletally stacked
(for optimal force transfer info skis) BEFORE fall line, not AT fall line.
It's actually within 12.5% for men and 17.5% for women and the standard is from 2 50 point FIS skiers. See attached. And no, none of these folk would be top 50 WC skiers, although there are ski instructors who have been top 50 WC athletes.
https://www.nzsia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/NZSIA-SKI-Speed-Test-Outline-.pdf
Do WC athletes have great technique? Absolutely. Is it useful to observe WC technique? Sure. Is it relevant to instructing the general public? Less so.
Mike
I introduce the concept of edging at the entry level. The concept of flattening the skis to allow the student to turn or tip their skis in the new direction; by introducing side slipping, by experimenting with uphill arcs that allow students to feel the stability of their edges while going across and up the hill.
Let’s face it. Many beginner lessons leave much to be desired. Not enough emphasis on stance and edge release and a huge rush to get to more “exciting terrain”. Many intermediates can’t control their speed because they are stuck in the cycle of backseat, upper body rotation, too much weight on the uphill ski habits which severely limit their options.
And many beginner group lessons are only 1.5 to 2 hours long, leaving little time to do anything other than one way to turn left and right and stop.
Sponsor
Members online
- VickieH
- Yepow
- Tom K.
- Even_Stevens
- LuliTheYounger
- DanoT
- dbostedo
- Dwight
- 4aprice
- BLiP
- Eleeski
- deb-art
- LiquidFeet
- graham418
- Jelder
- Gina D
- ilovepugs
- Cheizz
- Posaune
- Jersey Skier
- skidaddy
- Spnole
- Mothertucker
- Mattadvproject
- Jwrags
- COSkier87
- trailtrimmer
- Wasatchman
- chris_the_wrench
- AltaSkier
- mdf
- FrequentFlyer
- KimJongTr1ll
- nnowak
- Brian Finch
- no edge
- mikes781
- Johnfmh
- scvaughn
- Peak203f
- Larry
- Rudi Riet
- crgildart
- SKI-3PO
- GB_Ski
- Crank
- zircon
- Philpug
- ev_steve
- Jerez