Tip Lead

[Erik Timmerman]

We frequently see posts about the need to pull the inside foot back. The folk advocating staying squarer to the skis hardly ever mention it, if at all. Is there a connection?

That does kind of seem like a paradox doesn't it? I think it can take a little bit to reconcile one's views on that. I know I had to have a bit of faith to reconcile it myself. If we just think about the pivot-slip task which should highlight separation, my expectation is to see tip lead. Since one hip socket is ahead of the other it makes sense that the inside (or uphill ski) will have tippled equal to the width of the hips. It would be really easy to expect that this is the "correct" amount of tip-lead to see when actually skiing if one is skiing while turning the legs relative to the hips. In practice that does not have to be the case. I think you can reduce tip-lead from a fair bit of counter. I also think that you can over-do counter and that freeing the hips to be more square can really liberate your skiing and help you move from a grind and into a glise.

 

[Rod9301]

Stand up, feet hip width apart. Tilt upper body to on side from the hip joint whilst keeping the spine straight and square to the pelvis and facing same direction. Lift and other leg flexing at the knees and hip. Congratulations - you are now angulated at the hips with a straight spine and no rotation. If we tilted that whole body posture sideways, added skis and put it on snow we'd be in a ski turn.

View attachment 185479

Am I missing something here?


And, yes, angulation through rotational separation is available as well. Got interested in tech skiing only a few short years ago when CSIA Tech Ref #3 was all the rage: "Upper and lower body separation allows for angulation which provides grip."



An interesting point. Main take-way for me was the lateral movement at the hips and its importance in angulating.



Not too bad for a guy who is 60 y/o, young as that is.



He's not the only one.

The guy in blue is countered. Not sure what you're trying to say, that countering is not necessary?

 

[geepers]

The guy in blue is countered.

Guy in blue is Stefano Belingheri. First mentioned in post #84 as one of the instructors advocating keeping the body facing in the same direction that the skis are travelling. Here's a promo of the Projected Productions vid of him.



You be the judge but MHO whatever he's doing in those carving turns it's not this - mentioned in post #81.

Countering, maximum and early,

 

[markojp]

Quite aside from anything else, I love his skiing.

 

[JESinstr]

Guy in blue is Stefano Belingheri. First mentioned in post #84 as one of the instructors advocating keeping the body facing in the same direction that the skis are travelling. Here's a promo of the Projected Productions vid of him.

You be the judge but MHO whatever he's doing in those carving turns it's not this - mentioned in post #81.

I have stayed out of this "Counter" sidebar because in my over 50 years of teaching, a fundamental tenant was that the upper body faces the intended direction of travel. This is a little tweak from facing the direction of the skis and that is evidenced when Belingheri performs a Stivot.

You don't counter in skiing, Counter happens. Nice skiing BTW and notice how he looks where he wants to go.

 

[Sledhead]

Yes Jesinstr, a passive outcome for those who are delegating the forces of circular travel and its angular momentum rather than directing them individually into a lackluster performance outcome. Regarding eriktimmerman’s comment, I would say the opposite regarding tip lead and counter. If anything, too much counter will pull the hips with it and aid in disengaging the inside ski altogether. It will also fund a rate of angulation that will put ‘all’ the pressure on the outside ski. Inside disengagement is the main cause of excessive tip lead. That is where it will go if you do not use it and therefore, will require a pull back effort to keep it in place. When the inside ski is minimally engaged, there is no need for that hamstring to contract to pull it back as it is the ski to surface interaction outcome that provides the tension keeping it where it needs to be. When is the counter too much? You have surpassed the rate needed to supply angulation based outside pressure dominance and you will have to rotate that much farther in the other direction to get to the next turn. Rotation has a force vector referred to as angular momentum not to be confused with angulation that can be a cause of too much counter. It is a wasted movement with other disabling factors such as park and ride and, of course, lack of inside ski participation. When is the counter not enough? You are not able to maintain outside pressure dominance and are falling to the inside such as too much inclination and not enough angulation. In short turns, rotating the CoM with the BoS is too slow as it will require the CoM to rotate more than necessary. In long turns there is more time for the CoM to rotate with the BoS and not counter at all.

An on-line discussion on countering based in the sciences of biomechanics, physics and ski engineering begs for a frame of reference that allows everyone to speak the same language. For those just learning, typically, if not always, “counter, countered, countering”, etc., is referring to the rotational movement of our center of mass and not the base of support, but in reference to it and that of which has its own equal rotational capacity in the other direction. Within whatever state of flexion that can be managed through the turn, there is a certain RoM of coiling and recoiling between the CoM and BoS that is biomechanically available to the individual skier. It is a critical factor of mobility, the RoM of which, can be rather consequential to skill development. Coiling defines the musculoskeletal rotational pathway of movement along the kinetic chain, the ends of which establish a building oppositional tension that offers a certain rotational stability as do many other types of movements within the planes and axis they operate within. It is the combination of mobility and stability that our musculoskeletal structure is capable of that guides certain pathways of movement for skiing. As a biomechanical prerequisite, the more overall flexion we can acquire in our chain, the more mobility with which we will have to coil/rotate.

The term “counter” is used in many forms regarding ski technique while its relative base definition remains standard throughout: in the wrong way; contrary to the right course; in the reverse or opposite direction.
Countering, counter, countered: rotation (movement or position) of CoM away from direction of turn
Counter rotation: rotation of CoM away from direction of turn
Counter steering: rotation of BoS (skis) away from the direction of the new turn
Counteract: rotation of the CoM away from direction of turn
Counter balance: angulation of CoM
Counterculture: snowboarding
Counterproductive: anyone who doesn’t ski
Coiling: Both CoM and BoS rotate in opposite directions slightly throughout the entire turn.

One way to look at countering in terms of finding the correct duration, intensity, rate and timing of the movement is to think of the pathway you want to pilot it on. All the CoM’s job is to do in this regard is to maintain a flight path down the centerline running between the apexes scribed by the BoS. That’s it. It is the tipping angles applied to well pressured skis that chooses where exactly the BOS will go and thus, where the centerline for the CoM will be. Determining what the ratio of CoM counter to BoS rotation exists during coiling can be difficult to the external observer, especially from a still in which timing is not obvious.

It is helpful to think of the CoM and BoS as parts of the body that work the same for everyone. Once we start breaking things down to each individual rotational movement between the ankle, hips, waist, spine, shoulder and navicular, things start to get hazy and change radically from mind to mind and anatomy to anatomy. As well, the DIRT that these individual zones of rotation are to execute, will not be directly applied with any success. Instead, allow all those rotational movement patterns and the DIRT at which they are executed to be the passive output of the paths the CoM and BoS take. Yes, but how do we control these two paths (of circular travel)? We pilot the CoM and tip the BoS. Our CoM is our momentum which is a vector that retains its own force. Our BoS moves side to side underneath it with a vector supplied by the mechanical force of the turning ski as snow surface interaction outcome. The vectors are already there. All we have to do is pilot and steer these forces. Other than for angulation, coiling can be seen as a key element of mobility that allows for a greater path differential between the CoM and BoS. A focus on only the CoM and BoS rather than all the individual movement capacities that lie between, factors that can never be set in stone, can help a developing advanced skier to find their body’s maximum rates of rotational mobility which is what will ultimately constitute a skier’s ability to navigate higher levels of skill.

 

[razie]

Context in Richie's vid (post #66) is longer radius, carving turns.

Paraphrasing Richie's words from his section in Projected Production's Legacy Part 2 Long Turns vid for the pole under elbow drill:

• Supports angulation and neutralises upper body so it is not twisted into the fall line (i.e. it's 90 degrees to the skis) to be able to control pressure and "weight more both skis" (I figure he means what @Erik Timmerman wrote in post #55 above "Balance is being able to apply any of the skills to either ski at any time. We want to be balanced on the outside ski, we want to be able to switch balance foot to foot at will.")
• One of his favorite exercises
  • Feels so strong and balanced
  • More comfortable (almost) than normal pole position.
  • Very good one for slushy snow and steep terrain.
• Hip and shoulders stay facing direction of the skis and the direction of travel
  • If upper body faces too much downhill then too much twisted out of the turn and not able to carve and not really strong in controlling pressure
  • Have to follow the skis whilst holding angulation - angulation comes from a leveling of the hips whilst facing with the skis

Stefano Belingheri ( ex-WC GS racer with podiums) also talked about following the skis in Projected Production's Technica Pura vid series. Again context is longer radius, carving turns.

• If body twisted against the direction the feet the femur wrt the tibia gets blocked, the knees cannot move inside and cannot incline the knees and ankles into the turn
• The other advantages of following the skis:
  • Able to maintain much better weight over the outside ski. If we angulate and counter-rotate over the outside ski the tip moves out of the turn whereas we want the ski to cut into the turn for better grip
  • Helps us to incline the feet and legs inside the turn earlier
  • Use less energy when aligned with skis as we can better handle the load on the body compared to being counter-rotated
• Safer:
  • Less chance of a bad back, bad knees and sore muscles
  • Keep vision going where the skis are going
  • Can look up and down the hill so more situational awareness

Reilly McGlashan points out in Projected Production's Legacy Part 2 Long Turns that staying squarer to the skis provides more access to tippling the feet. If countering at the hip too much we lose the ability to tip the feet as at some point we will start supinating the foot.

GS and SL use the same technique. There are of course variations of various things (especially the DIRT) but the base technique is the same. So we cannot actually say one technique applies to slalom turns and one to GS turns.

Bumps are the core of skiing and we can work up from there, deduction-style... because you can't cheat them: you have to turn very quickly and not where you want but there they want (lines not withstanding).

IN bumps I think everyone using skis agrees that angulation and counter rule and maintaining counter using the blocking pole plant is the thing. In fact bumps are all feet and tipping, that should be obvious to anyone...

I don't think anyone skiing bumps argues that you can't tip or can't use the feet or shouldn't use the feet in bumps. Even in the face of all that counter.

SL turns are one up from this, very quick carved lots of offset turns, less than 1 second apart.

Same tech applies: strong angulation and counter, pole plants almost mandatory, tipping the feet and maintaining counter in transition divides the cans from the cannots, especially as the pitch increases.

Moving to Speed turns, same things apply, however, it is harder to maintain counter in transition because of the duration of the turn and reducing pressure along the transition phase. It is also somewhat less required, since you have all the time in the world to engage the ski. Resisting the generally bigger forces in the turn, requires more stacking than snapping angulation etc.

GS is in the middle. Arguments can be made for both sides, but if you want performance you will move (counter and angulate) and if you want to cruise, you will incline and rotate (I.e. stand still as the feet go side to side, from the point of view of the skier). It is harder to tip because you can't rush the ski.

That's really all there is to say imho. Either extreme is just someone with a hammer looking for nails... which won't fit the hammer because go back to the bumps above. One set of DIRT increases performance (angulate max, counter max) and the other decreases performance (incline, rotate).

And then there is Takao and the Japanese style which is catching on among these guys, because it is more relaxed and flashy and these guys can pull off anything.

But it is not the thing to focus on when you're learning. It is easy to inclinate and rotate, it is harder to do the opposite. So if you want to do more than just cruise long turns with minimal control, then learn to move, the movements, counter this counter that, don't just stand tall while the legs go side to side!

I was working the other day with "blue jacket" to get some flashy turns on tape and he was flabbergasted at how much he had to detune the skiing to get a long turn from a quick ski. If you have a 13m slalom ski and you're trying to get it to carve a high angles 20m turn, you have to do the opposite of performance, you have to incline and rotate, which is one big reason why you see these guys doing more of it: they don't carry 20 skis with them, just one maybe two.

If you had a 30m ski trying to carve it into a 20m turn you will do the exact opposite, increase the performance with the performance set of movements above...

Cheers.

 

[HardDaysNight]

^^^Amen. I remember some of our old Epic Ski discussions. What a great educator you have become. I wish I had made as much progress - age sucks. The only thing I’d point out is that one can’t make a 13m ski cleanly carve a 20m turn. The attempt does result in inclination and rotation though. To me it’s amazing that skiers serious about technical improvement ignore literally decades of WC coaching experience and take the YouTube videos of random Australians as gospel.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

To me it’s amazing that skiers serious about technical improvement ignore literally decades of WC coaching experience and take the YouTube videos of random Australians as gospel.

Yeah, why would you do that when there are videos of random Austrians?

 

[LiquidFeet]

....
If you have a 13m slalom ski and you're trying to get it to carve a high angles 20m turn, you have to do the opposite of performance, you have to incline and rotate, which is one big reason why you see these guys doing more of it: they don't carry 20 skis with them, just one maybe two.

If you had a 30m ski trying to carve it into a 20m turn you will do the exact opposite, increase the performance with the performance set of movements above...

Good points. Thanks, @razie.

 

[Rod9301]

GS and SL use the same technique. There are of course variations of various things (especially the DIRT) but the base technique is the same. So we cannot actually say one technique applies to slalom turns and one to GS turns.

Bumps are the core of skiing and we can work up from there, deduction-style... because you can't cheat them: you have to turn very quickly and not where you want but there they want (lines not withstanding).

IN bumps I think everyone using skis agrees that angulation and counter rule and maintaining counter using the blocking pole plant is the thing. In fact bumps are all feet and tipping, that should be obvious to anyone...

I don't think anyone skiing bumps argues that you can't tip or can't use the feet or shouldn't use the feet in bumps. Even in the face of all that counter.

SL turns are one up from this, very quick carved lots of offset turns, less than 1 second apart.

Same tech applies: strong angulation and counter, pole plants almost mandatory, tipping the feet and maintaining counter in transition divides the cans from the cannots, especially as the pitch increases.

Moving to Speed turns, same things apply, however, it is harder to maintain counter in transition because of the duration of the turn and reducing pressure along the transition phase. It is also somewhat less required, since you have all the time in the world to engage the ski. Resisting the generally bigger forces in the turn, requires more stacking than snapping angulation etc.

GS is in the middle. Arguments can be made for both sides, but if you want performance you will move (counter and angulate) and if you want to cruise, you will incline and rotate (I.e. stand still as the feet go side to side, from the point of view of the skier). It is harder to tip because you can't rush the ski.

That's really all there is to say imho. Either extreme is just someone with a hammer looking for nails... which won't fit the hammer because go back to the bumps above. One set of DIRT increases performance (angulate max, counter max) and the other decreases performance (incline, rotate).

And then there is Takao and the Japanese style which is catching on among these guys, because it is more relaxed and flashy and these guys can pull off anything.

But it is not the thing to focus on when you're learning. It is easy to inclinate and rotate, it is harder to do the opposite. So if you want to do more than just cruise long turns with minimal control, then learn to move, the movements, counter this counter that, don't just stand tall while the legs go side to side!

I was working the other day with "blue jacket" to get some flashy turns on tape and he was flabbergasted at how much he had to detune the skiing to get a long turn from a quick ski. If you have a 13m slalom ski and you're trying to get it to carve a high angles 20m turn, you have to do the opposite of performance, you have to incline and rotate, which is one big reason why you see these guys doing more of it: they don't carry 20 skis with them, just one maybe two.

If you had a 30m ski trying to carve it into a 20m turn you will do the exact opposite, increase the performance with the performance set of movements above...

Cheers.

I agree with everything except angulation in bumps, assuming you're talking about him angulation.

Most bump skiers really on femur internal rotation at the hip and big absorption, instead of having the skis way out from under the body.

 

[razie]

Ok. full inclination when skiing bumps. I'll try that next time. Which hand do I pole plant with?

 

[markojp]

I like to minimize lateral displacement in the bumps.

 

[Smear]

As inclination increases the inside leg has to have somewhere to go. If you don't level the hips it's going to go forward. Pull it back as hard as you want, but your ankle can only flex so much.

Thanks for giving a connection between hip leveling and too much tip lead, that's a new one for me. Have felt pretty good about my skiing this preseason. But then we had a lot of rain and a solid freeze. Really struggling with grip on the slickest parts, despite being on newish SL-skis with sharp edges. And then realizing that this icy snow is more like what the surface is like close to the gates on an average day, than the hero snow I've been practicing on all of the preseason....

I feel that pulling the outside foot forward during the last half of the turn really helps grip on hard snow, but it also feels a bit "forced" in the amount needed to have effect. So perhaps I'm compensating for a lack of hip leveling. Going to work on hip leveling now in addition to reducing the tip lead. I know have work to do there as pointed out by @markojp some years ago. Bad habits die hard...

One thing no one has mentioned is that you drop the inside pelvis/femur head toward the snow in every turn. While doing some outside ski to outside ski work, try to imagine the new inside 'femis'* stays the same distance from the snow as the outside through the arc. Applied to Josh's white pass turns in terms of what I'm talking about, try dropping the 'femis' and deliberately/accurately 'place' the outside ski on the snow at apex.

 

[geepers]

Bumps

No-one I know or follow does much lateral movement in bumps. And they don't get high edge angles except maybe on the side wall of a bump. Show me a photo of anyone with long/short legs (as is the case in a high edge angle carving turn) in the bumps and I'll show you one of some-one about to crash.

(There's more lateral movement in swing short turns but again edge angles are relatively modest, loads lower and shorter duration than long turns.)

So I try a quick dryland experiment to see if the random Austrian and Italian have a point. Standing side on to a wall, hand on wall for support, raised inside leg, little bit of lateral flex at the hip, pronate outside foot so the little toe is light to lifting (it's closed chain so the knee comes in a little). Now I see how far I can counter-rotate my hips before I feel strain in the long outside leg trying to push that knee out and flatten that foot. Answer is not very much. YMMV. OTOH can increase angulation considerably (to increase lower leg angle with the hips dropping down and inside) through lateral movement at the hips.

MHO maybe these guys have a point.

One set of DIRT increases performance (angulate max, counter max) and the other decreases performance (incline, rotate).

What does "angulate max" mean? Mental image is some-one who attempts to keep their body vertical throughout the turn.

What does "counter max" mean? Mental image is some-one who faces their upper body to the trees at the top and throughout the turn.

As far as inclining and rotating... watch the previously posted clip of Stephano Belingheri. I'd hazard a guess that few would realise he's actually rotating his hip into the turn at the top without him declaring that to be the case. The inclining thing... Lorenz wrote articles about it over 10 years ago (June 7th 2012).

Remember this?

Quoting from the article...

Please see “Diagram 2”, the skier on the right has only slightly angulated causing the CoM to shift ever so slightly to the outside now balancing the centripetal force pushing against the outside ski.
The point I am really making here is that the amount of angulation needed is very small if the skier has inclined the appropriate amount relative to their speed and the pitch of the hill. The spine is not vertical, it is still inclined. Anymore angle than this and the skier would be over angulated creating as many, and potentially more sever problems than being too inclined.

The position in “Diagram 3” is very common among high level skiers and particularly candidates around level 3/4. This “over-angulation” is just as unbalanced and possibly more dangerous than if the skier were to incline or completely bank into the turn as in the first diagram. The ski is over edged and the centripetal force has to go somewhere as it is not opposed or balanced. This usually results in over straining of the leg muscles to deal with the pressure and failing that, the skis jetting out in front of the skier. Over angulation often feels like there is too much pressure or increased “g-force” through the turn. It can feel like leg muscles are struggling and your whole body is getting smaller. This struggle is not only uncomfortable, it also prevents the skier from moving further inside further and increase in edge angle and centripetal pressure. At slow speeds this position can be dealt with through muscular effort. The interesting thing is that most people would say that this is a good position.

but if you want performance you will move (counter and angulate) and if you want to cruise, you will incline and rotate (I.e. stand still as the feet go side to side, from the point of view of the skier).

If you have a 13m slalom ski and you're trying to get it to carve a high angles 20m turn, you have to do the opposite of performance, you have to incline and rotate, which is one big reason why you see these guys doing more of it: they don't carry 20 skis with them, just one maybe two.

So you reckon this type of skiing is poor performance? (Sorry, back to random Aussies as they are the ones posting vid of carving with skis of different radii.)




Guess we all have our viewpoints.

 

[Zirbl]

I was working the other day with "blue jacket" to get some flashy turns on tape

You were filming Belingheri, or is this a reference to another skier?

 

[razie]

You were filming Belingheri, or is this a reference to another skier?

Another.

 

[razie]

No-one I know or follow does much lateral movement in bumps. And they don't get high edge angles except maybe on the side wall of a bump. Show me a photo of anyone with long/short legs (as is the case in a high edge angle carving turn) in the bumps and I'll show you one of some-one about to crash.

(There's more lateral movement in swing short turns but again edge angles are relatively modest, loads lower and shorter duration than long turns.)

So I try a quick dryland experiment to see if the random Austrian and Italian have a point. Standing side on to a wall, hand on wall for support, raised inside leg, little bit of lateral flex at the hip, pronate outside foot so the little toe is light to lifting (it's closed chain so the knee comes in a little). Now I see how far I can counter-rotate my hips before I feel strain in the long outside leg trying to push that knee out and flatten that foot. Answer is not very much. YMMV. OTOH can increase angulation considerably (to increase lower leg angle with the hips dropping down and inside) through lateral movement at the hips.

MHO maybe these guys have a point.



What does "angulate max" mean? Mental image is some-one who attempts to keep their body vertical throughout the turn.

What does "counter max" mean? Mental image is some-one who faces their upper body to the trees at the top and throughout the turn.

As far as inclining and rotating... watch the previously posted clip of Stephano Belingheri. I'd hazard a guess that few would realise he's actually rotating his hip into the turn at the top without him declaring that to be the case. The inclining thing... Lorenz wrote articles about it over 10 years ago (June 7th 2012).

Remember this?
View attachment 187418
Quoting from the article...



View attachment 187420




So you reckon this type of skiing is poor performance? (Sorry, back to random Aussies as they are the ones posting vid of carving with skis of different radii.)




Guess we all have our viewpoints.

Of course it is not strong performance, as far as bending the ski goes. Flashy and well beyond what most skiers can do, but in those runs, they are merely riding sidecut on the respective ski, on soft snow. If you noticed, I talked about bending the ski significantly below sidecut radius. That's what I considered as more performance, I thought it was reasonably and directly defined.

Also, angulation does not require nor imply legs out and far to the side, not sure where some read that... although it may be the natural reaction to calling it "angulation" as opposed to just refering to "counterbalance" which would automatically put it in the context of and relative to edging (the proper way to think of it) - it became a geometrical concept devoided of meaning and effort... which is why I shall endeavour once again to avoid that term.

Same random dude, as well as others, going for actual performance, i.e. actually getting the ski to perform at tight radius, for the visual aid needed here:



And to clarify the performance in bending the ski even further, here's how short a radius an 18m ski can do, if you do everything right:

 

[geepers]

Also, angulation does not require nor imply legs out and far to the side, not sure where some read that

Picture?

well beyond what most skiers can do

 

[Smear]

Also, angulation does not require nor imply legs out and far to the side, not sure where some read that...

Picture?

You don't have to look further than Razie's avatar for pictures. He is coming off the backside of a very steep bump, almost no lateral displacement and plenty of angulation