The Active Upper Body

[Skisailor]

I like the force vector idea as far as “body over” or “feet under”. I think that students easily misinterpret this language, however. So we have to be careful.

And most concerning to me, other instructors - even clinicians - seem to be interpreting this concept in a way that does not recognize that the feet and COM travel different paths.

 

[LiquidFeet]

....A cool thing I have been playing with is trying to replicate the skate like movement you see in a lot of WC skiers, with the new outside hand moving back in the initiation to pressure the outside ski super early..... Has anyone else tried the same?....

Jim, are you talking about something like Ted's swimming new-outside-arm? I think he does this to get the edge angles as high as possible at turn initiation. As here:

 

[LiquidFeet]

I like the force vector idea as far as “body over” or “feet under". I think that students easily misinterpret this language, however. So we have to be careful.... And most concerning to me, other instructors - even clinicians - seem to be interpreting this concept in a way that does not recognize that the feet and COM travel different paths.

This concept can be clarified in a lesson by having the skiers attempt to lift the tail of the inside ski. If they can do that, then their "weight" or "body" is balanced on/over/against the outside ski. In PSIA literature I've read that one should use the word AGAINST instead of ON or OVER, or something like that. Honestly I can't remember which it is, just that the words are considered very very important and using the wrong one is considered bad.

My take is that it's better when the words we use are not in control of the understanding. Skiers can let go of the understandings/misunderstandings the initial verbal descriptions generated once can feel the new sensations we are teaching them to create. Specifically, if they can lift the tail of that inside ski, they can feel the resulting lightness of that ski and the weight/pressure concentrated under the outside foot/ski.

Words need to be brief, not technically accurate, and accompanied immediately by effective demos/progressions. Example: I know it isn't just "weight" once there is some momentum built up, but in a lesson I am not going to talk about momentum, centripetal force, centrifugal force, resulting forces and vectors, circular travel, inertial travel, or anything like that. Talking about those things here online is fun and informative. But on snow, in a lesson, I'm going to use the shortest verbal phrase that gets something close to the idea across, then move on to having the students do it. Once they can feel and do it, we can rename it anything ... the "Charlie Move" for instance, and when asked to do the Charlie Move they will know what it means.

 

[Skisailor]

This concept can be clarified in a lesson by having the skiers attempt to lift the tail of the inside ski. If they can do that, then their "weight" or "body" is balanced on/over/against the outside ski. In PSIA literature I've read that one should use the word AGAINST instead of ON or OVER, or something like that. Honestly I can't remember which it is, just that the words are considered very very important and using the wrong one is considered bad.

My take is that it's better when the words we use are not in control of the understanding. Skiers can let go of the understandings/misunderstandings the initial verbal descriptions generated once can feel the new sensations we are teaching them to create. Specifically, if they can lift the tail of that inside ski, they can feel the resulting lightness of that ski and the weight/pressure concentrated under the outside foot/ski.

Words need to be brief, not technically accurate, and accompanied immediately by effective demos/progressions. Example: I know it isn't just "weight" once there is some momentum built up, but in a lesson I am not going to talk about momentum, centripetal force, centrifugal force, resulting forces and vectors, circular travel, inertial travel, or anything like that. Talking about those things here online is fun and informative. But on snow, in a lesson, I'm going to use the shortest verbal phrase that gets something close to the idea across, then move on to having the students do it. Once they can feel and do it, we can rename it anything ... the "Charlie Move" for instance, and when asked to do the Charlie Move they will know what it means.

Generally agree but I’m sometimes surprised about the number of students who ARE very verbal or left brained or whatever you want to call it, and who want more precise language and understanding before they will move. Trying to keep it student centered . . .

But my bigger concern was actually about instructors and clinicians who seem to be interpreting the “feet under the body” language too literally. As they watch a skier coming towards them, they want the body to stay more vertically lined up over the feet. Feet away from the body is seen as problematic - even when there is pretty decent angulation.

I think there are some communication issues within PSIA regarding language like “keep your body over your feet”, “move with your skis”, “move along the length of the ski” and others. We may all think we know what this stuff means. But during the upcoming early season training, it may be worthwhile to clarify the understandings with trainers.

 

[JESinstr]

But my bigger concern was actually about instructors and clinicians who seem to be interpreting the “feet under the body” language too literally. As they watch a skier coming towards them, they want the body to stay more vertically lined up over the feet. Feet away from the body is seen as problematic - even when there is pretty decent angulation.

Skisailor. A sidebar if you will.

Whether intentionally or unintentionally, you nailed the key factor of why so much great input on this forum gets lost to those coming here to gain knowledge.

And that is "Frame of Reference" . Without a "Fame of reference" declaration, much knowledge can be lost.

For the "viewer" the input is totally through the sense of sight. For the "Viewie" the input is a combination of equilibrium, pressure, muscle coordination, proprioception etc. And in terms of sight for the "viewie", it is anything but the analytical Frame of Reference that the "Viewer" is using.

As the "Viewie" in a normal medium speed, medium radius turn, I can definitely feel myself moving along the length of the ski, directing pressure toward the outside ski etc, but I doubt many, without the knowledge to observe said fundamentals would see them. I think the PSIA fundamentals are pretty much right on and as an instructor, I hope their continued adoption will create a consistent "viewie" Frame of Reference.

Now as to your opinion on feet under body, The issue is feet aligned with body to allow the skis to perform against the dominant force in play at any point in time... ie Gravity, Centripetal or usually, a combination of both.

 

[Uke]

So many things to comment on, I'll try to be brief.

One of the reasons that I use under rather than over is that it seems to help change the skiers mindset from our high friction, stay upright, oppose gravity everyday way of thinking to enter into the world of standing on a moving platform that is pushing you where you want to go. I don't have any specific reason for thinking this just base it on 30+ years of observing my students. In skiing over/under has little to do with what it looks like and everything to do with what it feels like.

Question Everything. Someone around here said that. I do my best to do that. It might make you unpopular with some trainers. If it can't be easily restated in clear terms then its bullshit. There is too much jargon thrown around with too little checking for understanding. Accept that others may use terms that you don't like but can be descriptive of what's going on. An example of this last is the word 'topple', LF likes the word as a descriptor of how the body moves into the new turn. For me its a passive/falling gravity driven thing and not how I get inside my new outside ski, I am propelled there by the forces the skis generate. Still, I have no problem understanding what she means when she uses the word.

I orient myself to the moving platform that my skis create. The tilt of the playground is only one factor in determining the angle of the platform and right now my thinking is that it has had too much importance attached to it over the years.

As regards the OP. In my view the body's activity should be reactive and anticipatory and as disciplined as possible. At the highest levels anticipatory activities smear into arc generating moves.

PSIA has taken the idea of not moving the arms and just using the wrist to flick the pole to the level of dogma in my opinion. Yes, 99% of all 'pole plants' out there are horrible and often because of arms flailing about, but the solution isn't just about keeping the arms still. Its about finding how to best use disciplined arm movements to enhance ski performance. With this perspective it easy to see that the 'wild' arm movements of t top skiers in GS arn't flailing or reacting but are purposeful moves to create or enhance a specific outcome at snow level.

Lord, that was a long post,

uke

 

[jimtransition]

Jim, are you talking about something like Ted's swimming new-outside-arm? I think he does this to get the edge angles as high as possible at turn initiation. As here:
View attachment 57621

Yes exactly, I think at that stage of the turn it's more a movement to the outside ski (most people doing it will have all or part of their inside ski off the same time), it's often followed by raising the outside hand in order to assist inclination and bigger angles. It feels like a bit like a skating movement as you're doing it.

 

[Dakine]

No better way to learn about upper body mobility than by practicing carving in the NASTAR high tuck where your upper body is mostly immobilized.
Skiing from the hips on down is hard at speed and even harder when going slow.

 

[razie]

Good observation and good thoughts. I have to give you though the obvious/expected answer...

Too many seem to focus on the outcomes, i.e. "stable upper body" or "COM going on the shortest path" or "upright torso" etc. Kind'a like in real life, you know "It's good to look like that guy... or have a boat like that guy" (or whatever strikes your fancy).

Too few seem to focus on what it takes to generate those outcomes. The inputs, the effort, the movements, the struggle. This is where the gap lies, in my mind. There is a big difference in telling someone "keep your body stable" versus "counterbalance" - i.e. actively compensating for the skis tipping one way, to stay in balance (and have the weight over the outside ski). Or, in the case of the video, what you could call "early counterbalancing". Same with counteracting. At big angles, it is a very different struggle than at low angles! "Keep your body stable" kind'of implies something too passive, for me. This year I actually had to hit the gym, to progress: it's the only way!

You do see MS strongly flexing out of the turns, as to avoid pushing the body on a different path, to allow it to go straight down and then actively counterbalancing etc. I don't think she's pushing herself down the hill - at the speed that she's carrying, just letting the body move forward, as the skis cross under, is enough! Yes, the upper body is very active. CARE though must you take to prevent it from disturbing balance: it should only move to complement or counter or anticipate the lower body, never really first (that can become an interesting discussion of what anticipation actually is)!

After a long struggle, as your skiing improves, you may start to see the world differently (i.e. as in the OP) and this way of looking at it is closer to what it takes, what it feels like, for me.

cheers

p.s.1. You are right not to hunch forward. Skiing more upright is fine as long as you're not purposefully back and you can keep your feet back as well! You have more ROM and more options that way than locking the hips and it's easier to avoid jamming the turn. As a bonus, you're likely more skeletally aligned at "big forces". GS is a little different, as you have to clear the gate.

p.s.2. The turn should have 3 phases: flat skis, big forces, flat skis. Wait, that's only two!

p.s.3. Perhaps non-intuitive, but relaxation plays a big role in what MS is doing and is the active ingredient of separation. Wow, that sounds too philosophical... I scared myself just now! Anyways - don't disregard the relaxation required to decouple the active upper body from the active lower body.

 

[Josh Matta]

it is curious that so far I am the only person who perceivesmy upper body is active to remain stable beside Razie.

IMO people perceptions can be different, but what is actually happening can not be. If you think turning your legs keeps your upper body stable I would love to see 3rd person video of you skiing.

 

[Steve]

In this attached article Robin Barnes seems to think that leg turning is key, that plus keeping a functional tension in the pelvis in a counteracting sense, so the leg turns against the pelvis.

Similar to the Fulcrum Mechanism


Fulcrum Mechanism
independent steering of the legs beneath the pelvis, with no involvement of the upper body; highly versatile, it is the essential rotary principle of modern “Center Line™” turns. Today more commonly referred to as "leg steering," "leg rotation," or "independent leg rotation," the fulcrum mechanism entails each leg rotating about a separate axis, turning in the hip socket, beneath a stable pelvis and upper body. Each leg, planted on the ground, stabilizes the pelvis and provides the resistance against which the other leg turns. The fulcrum mechanism is easily visualized and experienced by standing on two separate barstools (not recommended if the bartender is watching) and turning each stool with a foot. Highly versatile, with the fulcrum mechanism we can turn either ski or both skis simultaneously and with great precision. When both legs rotate simultaneously and at the same rate and intensity, keeping the skis parallel, the fulcrum mechanism is traditionally known as "braquage."

 

[razie]

In this attached article Robin Barnes seems to think that leg turning is key, that plus keeping a functional tension in the pelvis in a counteracting sense, so the leg turns against the pelvis.

If the legs don’t turn, relative to the upper body, there is no separation... so it is key, indeed. The question is: since the edges are locked in a carve (just assume those turns for now)... how are they actually “free to turn” or are they just bracing and allowing the upper body to turn the other way? What one could see as “functional tension in the pelvis while the feet are turning” some can see as “functional tension in the feet as the torso is turning the other way”. There is only action and reaction - and the only part that’s truly anchored is the feet, in the boots, on the edge, carving and anchored in the snow. The body is not anchored anywhere, other than its inertia, which is much too easily disturbed.

It is a little more nuanced (and thus much harder to accomplish) at the top of the turn, where the skis are not strongly engaged yet, wich is where most skiers unwind and loose it... it’s soooo easy to unwind the feet, that even just thinking “feet are turning” it’s enough for me to loose it, pivot and forget early engagement (showing the bases to the uphill)!

Hope that made sense. Cheers

 

[Josh Matta]

In this attached article Robin Barnes seems to think that leg turning is key, that plus keeping a functional tension in the pelvis in a counteracting sense, so the leg turns against the pelvis.

Similar to the Fulcrum Mechanism


Fulcrum Mechanism
independent steering of the legs beneath the pelvis, with no involvement of the upper body; highly versatile, it is the essential rotary principle of modern “Center Line™” turns. Today more commonly referred to as "leg steering," "leg rotation," or "independent leg rotation," the fulcrum mechanism entails each leg rotating about a separate axis, turning in the hip socket, beneath a stable pelvis and upper body. Each leg, planted on the ground, stabilizes the pelvis and provides the resistance against which the other leg turns. The fulcrum mechanism is easily visualized and experienced by standing on two separate barstools (not recommended if the bartender is watching) and turning each stool with a foot. Highly versatile, with the fulcrum mechanism we can turn either ski or both skis simultaneously and with great precision. When both legs rotate simultaneously and at the same rate and intensity, keeping the skis parallel, the fulcrum mechanism is traditionally known as "braquage."

this is good talk about how a one footed with no other contact steered turn is impossible. ^^^

 

[Josh Matta]

If the legs don’t turn, relative to the upper body, there is no separation... so it is key, indeed. The question is: since the edges are locked in a carve (just assume those turns for now)... how are they actually “free to turn” or are they just bracing and allowing the upper body to turn the other way? What one could see as “functional tension in the pelvis while the feet are turning” some can see as “functional tension in the feet as the torso is turning the other way”. There is only action and reaction - and the only part that’s truly anchored is the feet, in the boots, on the edge, carving and anchored in the snow. The body is not anchored anywhere, other than its inertia, which is much too easily disturbed.

It is a little more nuanced (and thus much harder to accomplish) at the top of the turn, where the skis are not strongly engaged yet, wich is where most skiers unwind and loose it... it’s soooo easy to unwind the feet, that even just thinking “feet are turning” it’s enough for me to loose it, pivot and forget early engagement (showing the bases to the uphill)!

Hope that made sense. Cheers

So Razie I know your school of thought basically disdain leg steering, but have you ever thought about during the transition while there is very little balance on your skis holding them on their line that turning your legs against the way you are actually turning can stop the pivot....

I hope that makes sense. I said something pretty similar in my first post in this thread.

 

[razie]

So Razie I know your school of thought basically disdain leg steering, but have you ever thought about during the transition while there is very little balance on your skis holding them on their line that turning your legs against the way you are actually turning can stop the pivot....

I hope that makes sense. I said something pretty similar in my first post in this thread.

Heh - so counter-steering, eh?

I don’t really have a problem with steering... i think that 1) it’s hard to control and best avoided to learn fine ski control and 2) it’s a very abused and misunderstood term. Like in the example above: when you’re flexed in transition, what is steering? Is it foot steering as opposed to leg steering? Is it the same thing? When the ski is carving at 80 degrees edge angle, again what is steering? Etc - just saying “just steer left, darn it” doesn’t seem to actually solve anything for me. And there’s some obvious bio-mechanical disadvantages of controlling fine movements with big muscles etc. We can bounce that around sometime, if you want.

I noticed your counter-steering there, but I was thinking I'd like to be on snow before answering it... it is another example of what steering could mean... let me think: so you finish a right footer, so you would continue to “steer” to the left while switching the edges. I don’t think it sounds outlandish. The feet are already wound up (if you have countered some) so you can’t really turn them much more - in fact, you need that tension just to not unwind, if you think about it - and, as you roll the skis on to the new edges, they would grab the tails anyways so it would work. In fact, if you do it right and focus on a clean edge change via foot-tipping, i.e. inversion, it kind’a has that counter-steering effect and I think you’re right, it kind’a feels maybe that you do that counter-steering. Again, it may just be the effort it takes in the feet to not unwind the counter - as if you relax the feet when the skis are flat, and let them loose, they would rotate strongly into the turn and pivot the skis, assuming you got some counter. The trick is to keep them in check until you switch the edges, and after you are on the new edges, let the “uncoiling” effect do its thing.

A lot of words - that seems to be my problem. Always with the words, eh?

Cheers.

 

[karlo]

"Keep your body stable" kind'of implies something too passive,

it is curious that so far I am the only person who perceivesmy upper body is active to remain stable beside Razie.

, me, me, don’t forget me!


As for the anticipation thing, for me, since I am, I feel, actively working my upper body, I am anticipating every little change in fall line, since my focus is to retain upper body orientation to slope and height from slope.

 

[jimtransition]

This concept can be clarified in a lesson by having the skiers attempt to lift the tail of the inside ski. If they can do that, then their "weight" or "body" is balanced on/over/against the outside ski. In PSIA literature I've read that one should use the word AGAINST instead of ON or OVER, or something like that. Honestly I can't remember which it is, just that the words are considered very very important and using the wrong one is considered bad.

My take is that it's better when the words we use are not in control of the understanding. Skiers can let go of the understandings/misunderstandings the initial verbal descriptions generated once can feel the new sensations we are teaching them to create. Specifically, if they can lift the tail of that inside ski, they can feel the resulting lightness of that ski and the weight/pressure concentrated under the outside foot/ski.

Words need to be brief, not technically accurate, and accompanied immediately by effective demos/progressions. Example: I know it isn't just "weight" once there is some momentum built up, but in a lesson I am not going to talk about momentum, centripetal force, centrifugal force, resulting forces and vectors, circular travel, inertial travel, or anything like that. Talking about those things here online is fun and informative. But on snow, in a lesson, I'm going to use the shortest verbal phrase that gets something close to the idea across, then move on to having the students do it. Once they can feel and do it, we can rename it anything ... the "Charlie Move" for instance, and when asked to do the Charlie Move they will know what it means.

Surely it depends on the level you are teaching and the structure of the lesson. I teach mostly high level multi day privates, so I have time to go into depth and I feel my clients have a better understanding because of that. If I was teaching a 2 hour group lesson, simplifying the tech would be appropriate, but using your own language is going to confuse people when they move onto a different instructor.

 

[karlo]

If I was teaching a 2 hour group lesson, simplifying the tech would be appropriate, but using your own language is going to confuse people when they move onto a diff

I understood Liquidfeet to say that whatever the officially correct language is, it is less important, from the learning perspective, than getting the skier to feel what needs to be felt. Once the skier feels it, the official language, whatever it is, is sufficient whether one agrees with it or not.

The matter of using the arms like a skater, I think it is easier and better for one who is learning to stick with an idealized reference method. Simpler the better, so just flicking the wrist, to me, is good. Defining position of upper body relative to slope and the ideal of it gliding over it is also an idealization. However, the learning skier using it as an objective reduces the degrees of freedom by which one skis and simplifies the learning experience, IMO. Kinda, not exactly, like me telling my son, "don't slouch". It's not just posture. It affects the entire stride of his walk, for the better.

 

[Tom Holtmann]

Good observation and good thoughts. I have to give you though the obvious/expected answer...


After a long struggle, as your skiing improves, you may start to see the world differently (i.e. as in the OP) and this way of looking at it is closer to what it takes, what it feels like, for me.

Razie - I may be dense but since this seems to be the punch line of "what it takes/feels like" I don't know what OP (other plane?) means or how exactly you start to see the other world differently or feel the world differently.

Thanks

 

[Steve]

Hey Tom. OP means "Original Poster" or the thread starter.