Transitioning from Knee and Ankle Roll to …

[stevo]

Pure carving where the tail of the ski exactly follows the tip to within a micrometer is an impossible utopia.

agree. I call that edge locked arcing.

Would define brushed carving as one where the tail is displaced from the track of the tip by anything from a couple of few cm to, maybe, 20-25cm and that displacement is controlled by the skier. So not an edge locked carve and not a skid.

controlled by the skier how? There is a huge difference between intentional pivoting and refined butter-knife edging skills which extract carving action out of the skis while also allowing some "spreading" in limited doses.

you mentioned between a few cm and 20-25 cm, but what is your label for displacement under a few cm?

for me that is brushed carving.

20cm of displacement is not really what I could call brushed carving at all. Maybe some carving action in wedge turns or extremely slow first day skiing exercises where there is a minute amount of carving action present, but that is not what I would ever label as "brushed carving". Brushed carving to me strongly resemebles pure carving, has a large presence of carving action redirecting the direction the skier is going, but with very small amounts of displacement in order to control speed in a refined way. In fact getting brushed carves with the smallest displacement possible is part of the nuanced skill set there and actually helps achieve the greatest speed control because higher edge angles are possible. High edge angles are not possible with large amounts of displacement.

If the tail is displaced from the track of the tip then the ski has pivoted in some way, allowing for the softness of the snow.

There is a huge difference between pivoting and the ski self-steering itself through lack of edge lock. so no I don't like your use of the word "pivot" there, but I do like your re-explanation better about some displacement happening when edge lock is not achieved.

In my view "pivoting" is an intentional steering effort, requires the ski to be fairly flat in order to do it also. This is very different from applying finessed edging skills to achieve non-edge-locked carving. brushed carving is intentional, not from the snow caving in...though both things can result in similar results IMHO.

But if I understand you correctly what you are trying to say is......pure carving is zero slippage off the track...but you also say it's an impossible utopia.....and everything else is pivoting. Perhaps there is a grey zone in there?

 

[geepers]

In my view "pivoting" is an intentional steering effort, requires the ski to be fairly flat in order to do it also.

Ski doesn't have to be flat - just need a bigger spanner to torque to the ski. For example intentional load the front of the ski somewhat in front of the binding and the ski will pivot around that point and will do so even when on edge. Ron le Master called it oversteering. Ppl do that all the time unintentionally however it can also be done deliberately for, say, swing short turns. It's not a rotary input but the result is the ski redirects. MHO see that frequently in HH vids.

pure carving is zero slippage off the track...but you also say it's an impossible utopia.....and everything else is pivoting.

The front of the ski creates the groove in which the ski rides. My understanding is that front portion of the ski compresses/relocates the snow and then the rest of the ski rides the groove. Watch some slomo turns of WC skiers training GS and note how much the front part of the skis flex through the fall line. Yep, it's affected by the hardness of the snow however tail rarely follows the exact path of the tip. But that's not the same thing as the pivoting described above.

 

[stevo]

Ski doesn't have to be flat - just need a bigger spanner to torque to the ski. For example intentional load the front of the ski somewhat in front of the binding and the ski will pivot around that point and will do so even when on edge. Ron le Master called it oversteering. Ppl do that all the time unintentionally however it can also be done deliberately for, say, swing short turns. It's not a rotary input but the result is the ski redirects. MHO see that frequently in HH vids.

regardless of the various things you are saying, it is an intentional rotary effort to pivot the ski...not a finessed edging skill to withhold pivoting from happening while also not achieving edge lock. Very different things. I also still feel that a ski needs to be either fairly flat or fairly light to be heel pushed or rotated on the snow. If the ski is actually engaged and carving, its extremely difficult to affect rotational movements of the ski at that point...and the edging of the ski will actually cause it to want to tighten up the displacement, rather then go the other way. I most definitely would not refer to some kind of Ron Lemaster endorsed tail swinging as anything with the name "carve" in it.

I don't really want to discuss HH here, people get too angry when his name comes up. But by the way, his videos were not always demonstrating "brushed carving" per se. Yes many times his skis pivoted on the snow in many demonstrations, I do not disagree with you, but I also would not refer to those particular videos as brushed carving...and as far as I know, neither would he. What is debatabnle and unprovable is whether he was intentionally twisting his legs or not to achieve those non-carved pivoting scenarios.

I asked you about the grey area between pure utopian carving and tail swishy pivoting...what to call that..and you didn't provide any suggestion. I'm more than happy to use something else that wasn't coined by you know who, but for now that is the best label I have heard for it.

The front of the ski creates the groove in which the ski rides. My understanding is that front portion of the ski compresses/relocates the snow and then the rest of the ski rides the groove.

sometimes there is a groove to ride, sometimes not. I say more often then not...there is not. I "carve" in powder and 3D snow all the time, for example...there is no groove. The physics are more complex than simply saying you get on the utopian groove and ride it. The ski is bent and constantly being diverted and self-steering itself.

Watch some slomo turns of WC skiers training GS and note how much the front part of the skis flex through the fall line. Yep, it's affected by the hardness of the snow however tail rarely follows the exact path of the tip. But that's not the same thing as the pivoting described above.

Agree 100% with this. pure edge locked arcing is in my view a theoretical ideal. But in reality we are dealing with a snow surface that is not that ideal and carving in it happens through a number of factors...and there is a grey area of carving efficiency which nobody seems to want to discuss that way, but that is what brushed carving and numerous other techniques we sometimes talk about also get into the area of achieving in carving action without "riding a groove". In certain conditions a groove can contribute. I can feel when my ski is locked onto an actual groove but honestly I find that mode boring. Its like being on the disneyland car ride and suddenly realizing you don't have to actually steer the car if you don't want to.

 

[François Pugh]

I maintain that there are ways to control your speed while making nothing but clean arc-2-arc tracks on the ski hill, but as you increase the steepness of the hill, even a perfectly skilled skier will reach a point on a 1000 ft vertical ski hill where the limit will be reached at which point he will be skiing faster than his skis can cleanly carve the turn (unless they are very long radius skis), or he will not be able to keep the skis in the grooves due to the size of the turn dialed up by the skis is smaller than the turn he is making that requires that tipping angle. Unless of course the run is a mile wide.

Whether or not that point is reached depends mainly on the width of the run, the steepness of the run and the skis under foot. It is reached in deep powder, in deep wet snow, on ice and on everything in between.

Not bruising the snow, evenly distributing the force in time and space and along and length of ski and how clean is clean are all nice things to talk about ......in another thread. Here they are obfuscation and have no place in this discussion, IMHO of course.

 

[geepers]

I also still feel that a ski needs to be either fairly flat or fairly light to be heel pushed or rotated on the snow. If the ski is actually engaged and carving, its extremely difficult to affect rotational movements of the ski at that point.

Yeah - used to also think that. Then leant different techniques. It's just a matter of how torque is applied to the ski.
1. If extending at transition and attempting to twist the femurs in the hip socket it's like using a screw driver. Aren't able to generate a lot of torque and the skis need to be fairly flat.
2. Flex at transition and turn the knees provides more torque as there's now a lever added to the system. More torque but still won't help much when the skis are on edge.
3. Do the oversteer thingy and there's more torque and less resistance to the skis displacing. Same can be achieved by pulling the feet back. Can use either or both.

None of this is original thought. Watch the BPS vids "Carving vs steering - understanding torque" and "Mastering the short turn"

heel pushed

Absolutely nothing to do with pushing. Pull the tails of the skis to the back of your head. Pull your feet back. No pushing at all.

I asked you about the grey area between pure utopian carving and tail swishy pivoting...what to call that..and you didn't provide any suggestion. I'm more than happy to use something else that wasn't coined by you know who, but for now that is the best label I have heard for it.

The CSIA call them drifted turns. At least when I last looked at L3 ski exam criteria.

But forget about labels as they are distraction - if some-one does the type of turns you describe as "brushed carve" what will the ski tracks look like?

sometimes there is a groove to ride, sometimes not. I say more often then not...there is not. I "carve" in powder and 3D snow all the time, for example...there is no groove. The physics are more complex than simply saying you get on the utopian groove and ride it.

We must be talking about different sports. Skis that are close to pure carving create the groove as they go. If we didn't need them to create grooves then we wouldn't need to keep the edges sharp for hard snow.

In certain conditions a groove can contribute. I can feel when my ski is locked onto an actual groove but honestly I find that mode boring. Its like being on the disneyland car ride and suddenly realizing you don't have to actually steer the car if you don't want to.

Boring? If you say so.

Paul Lorenz in "The Road To Carving" describes the progression as skidding to gripping to slicing to carving. Carving is where the edge angle is increased so the line is controlled by increasing the bending of the ski.


I find that last part in the progression endlessly fascinating.

 

[stevo]

Conversation is getting to difficult to reply on iPhone so maybe more later but all I will say for now is that you made a lot of references to “torque”, all of which is a rotation oriented carve killer and nothing at all to do with whatever I was trying to say earlier when I thought I was agreeing with you but apparently I was not

 

[François Pugh]

If you pressure the tip of a tipped ski the tip applies torque to rotate the ski. The ski will rotate about a pivot point located somewhere behind the tips, exactly where depends on a lot. If the ski is "carving" then it can't rotate at a faster rate than a ski following the path of the curve dialed up; if the ski is "brushed carving" it can rotate at a faster rate creating more steering angle. Adjust fore aft balance of a "brushed carving ski" adjusts the rate of steering angel increase/decrease. Adjusting the fore/aft balance of a "carving" ski tightens the turn by bending tip more and changing it's aim and trajectory but within the limits of the flexibility of the ski.

The question isn't is the ski rotating, but is it rotating to match its turn and what is making it rotate.

 

[stevo]

None of that is necessary to brush carve or drift carve. You simply need to have less then the critical edge angle (but not too much less) the ski does the rest. There is no need to hyper load the front of the ski or provide any torque or extra pivoting whatsoever, in fact in general the name of the game is PREVENTING the ski from oversteering.

All of the skills and movements related to pure carving apply nearly exactly the same to brush carving, but pure carving is actually easier. For number of reasons. For one thing you can just tip em over beyond the critical edge angle and it will be fine, just tighter arc. Brute force. Brushed carving requires just the right amount of edging while also simultaneously endeavoring to NOT twist the ski, and in some cases even using functional tension to prevent them from over steering on their own. Too much skid is loss of carve and loss of speed control also which defeats the purpose. So this is more nuanced and requires better touch and feel then pure carving. more precision. A balancing act between edging enough to actually carve and also to affect speed control, while also still allowing them to smear instead of edge lock.

it’s also way easier to balance laterally on an edge locked ski then on one that is smearing, brushing, drifting.

generally speaking you want the displacement off the theoretical pure carve groove to be as tight as you can make it without actually locking into edge lock. That can result in ski track that is still quite defined for each ski and a shaped and all the rest but will look smeared out a bit rather then dug out. Unless the snow is particularly soft then it still might look a bit dug out.

In my experience the greatest actual speed control comes when you keep the displacement as minimal as possible. That is brushed carving. Anything with bigger displacements or torquing or twisting, etc is something else entirely. Not to say those things aren’t perfectly useful in their own right but they have nothing to do with what I consider to be brush carving and what I was meaning when I used the words.

we definitely are having a problem communicating. I Keep trying though

 

[geepers]

all of which is a rotation oriented carve killer

At least we agree there's very little torque needed for a carved turn.

None of that is necessary to brush carve or drift carve. You simply need to have less then the critical edge angle (but not too much less) the ski does the rest.

Any vid of what you consider 'brushed carves'?

 

[Rod9301]

Pure carving where the tail of the ski exactly follows the tip to within a micrometer is an impossible utopia.



Would define brushed carving as one where the tail is displaced from the track of the tip by anything from a couple of few cm to, maybe, 20-25cm and that displacement is controlled by the skier. So not an edge locked carve and not a skid.



If the tail is displaced from the track of the tip then the ski has pivoted in some way, allowing for the softness of the snow.

There's not a perfect definition as carving to skidding occurs on a continuum rather than in discrete increments.

In brushed carving, the tail follows the tip, but the outside ankle is slightly tipped to the outside, so the ski slides a bit, from both the tip and the tail, in equal amounts. The inside foot is tipped.

 

[geepers]

In brushed carving, the tail follows the tip, but the outside ankle is slightly tipped to the outside, so the ski slides a bit, from both the tip and the tail, in equal amounts. The inside foot is tipped.

Ok - so relaxing platform angle so the skis slide.

The bit about tail following the tip, presumably passing through the same point in the snow (or very close to it) like a real carve, implies a zero steering angle (other than the shape of the ski).

The vids on yt of brushed carves are HH and there is readily visible displacement of the tails from the path taken by the tips.

Is there any vid that shows what you described?

 

[James]

Is there any vid that shows what you described?

Read his post closely, he’s describing HH brushed carve you saw. Tail following the tip in amount of displacement both havefrom the path of the ski center. Not in the groove of the tip. It’s not a carved turn as usually defined.

 

[Chris V.]

In brushed carving, the tail follows the tip, but...the ski slides a bit, from both the tip and the tail, in equal amounts.

With respect, I think that this is quite impossible (as a description of ski performance, without regard to the biomechanical input creating that performance).

If one sideslips directly down the fall line, all movement is lateral, none is in a direction lengthwise along the skis. So in that case, sure, it's possible to create equal amounts, or rates, of sliding in the tip and tail. Indeed, this is the very definition of a continuous sideslip that doesn't include any dipping of tip or tail. Obviously, tip and tail follow separate, parallel paths, straight downhill.

However, if we combine the lateral motion with forward motion, things are different. Now we're comparing the paths of a point on the inside edge of the tip of the outside ski, and a point on the edge of the tail. In a brushed turn, the point on the tip may follow a path that isn't straight in line with the direction the edge is pointed. Meanwhile, the edge is bent into an arc. Since the tail is also slipping laterally a bit, the point on the tail won't follow the shape of that arc. It takes time for the tail to catch up to where the tip has been. By that time, the point on the tail will have slipped out from the path of the point on the tip. The amount of the divergence of the paths is defined by the rate of slippage of the tail. And that's how you get a track wider than a pencil line.

As I believe James states in different words.

Not that this is a bad thing.

 

[geepers]

Read his post closely, he’s describing HH brushed carve you saw. Tail following the tip in amount of displacement both havefrom the path of the ski center. Not in the groove of the tip. It’s not a carved turn as usually defined.

The wording was "...tail follows the tip...". If it's following a similar trajectory but is displaced to the outside of the turn then it's what CSIA would call it an Intermediate Parallel turn although the mechanics for achieving it may be somewhat different. The track is definitely very different from a carved turn.

Note: image not Harold, just a disciple.

Thought it was some special type of turn that was supposedly really challenging.

 

[stevo]

Read his post closely, he’s describing HH brushed carve you saw. Tail following the tip in amount of displacement both havefrom the path of the ski center. Not in the groove of the tip. It’s not a carved turn as usually defined.

First of all, I am not a representative for PMTS. Nothing I said was meant to be speaking for them. Nor was I referring to anything that I consider to be a specific teaching system concept. Do not take my words that way or assume that what I am saying lines up with them nor should you take anything they have said and apply it to me. I like PMTS as a ski instruction system about as much as I like PSIA...which isn't saying much. They both have their pros and cons and I have very little interest in either one of them at this point because of all the dogma, tribalism and politics.

I have read HH's materials, just as I have read LeMaster and many others..there is good info in all of them, none of them are holy scripture. But yes, I use some of the same language as used throughout all of them...there is nothing proprietary about using the word "carving" or even "brushed carving". It is just a generic description though unfortunately there is not universal agreement about what even the word "carving" means quite exactly, much less "brushed carving", so this leads to endless word salad debating..which this thread is quickly devolving into.

The PMTS folks might like to chime in and say that is their label, but they don't own that label any more then they own the label to "carving" or "counter balancing" or numerous other generic descriptions, some of which were around long before anyone heard the name HH or PMTS. I'm sure they have some good ideas and techniques about how to approach skiing with brushed carving outcomes, but whatever i was saying was not intended to refer to them or their techniques specifically. I do not speak for them. I can tell you what I personally think they mean, if you care to hear what I think, but whatever I say is just my own opinion and is not coming from them. I do not represent them in any way, shape or form and take no responsibility for any specifics of their teaching system.

I thought I was agreeing with Geepers when I regretfully used that language. It appears maybe me and Geepers didn't agree after all...maybe.......it's not clear to me right now exactly if we agree or not...but I was trying to hahaha. But anyway this has apparently triggered some dogmatic tribalism and well I'm not interested in that fight. But hey knock yourselves out.

 

[stevo]

Is there any vid that shows what you described?

In answer to @geepers about some video of brushed carving, I don't actually have a handy list of videos and it would take a long time to go looking for something like that, so I'm not going to. If you are wanting to get some PMTS specific video you should ask PMTS people, which I am not one.

If I ever find any generic brushed carving video I would be happy to let you know. but I will just say that I have seen many many videos over the years of high end ski instructors performing what I consider to be quality brushed carved turns. I see them doing it on the hill sometimes too. Not all. I also see a lot of pivoty ski instructors. Most recreational skiers I see are typically either pivoty....or Rairoad tracky.....so...I see the in between true brushed carving as uncommon among recreational skiers...and non-existent for good reason among racers. brushed carving is in between pure carving and pivoty skiing..I think you know what I am talking about already....and I'm sure you have seen it plenty of times and had CSIA clinic sessions approaching the topic of how to avoid too much pivoty turn entry...while also getting a minimally skidded round turn shape top to bottom. However you want to teach it, or call it, that is a brushed carving. but also this is about the actual technique used.

So my definition of brushed carving, which I think I have already stated above, is a minimally skidded turn which does not have pivot redirect. Let's be open minded and just say without a significant pivot redirect. But definitely not edge locked..that is the key. Fundamentally the mechanics involved to acheive it involve tipping the skis rather then twisting the skis, and using the carving action to affect the round turn shape...In essence using carving technique rather then pivot entry or steering focused technique....with the outcome being brushed round turn shape.

 

[James]

The wording was "...tail follows the tip...".

I know, he left out the important part, then added it in to the recipe later. Sort of. The front goes in from the center path, the tail out.

Kind of why you have to use carving type skis, preferably under 80mm, but really slalom or near. You’re using the weather vane effect so the tip has to pull. They’re not allowed to use active rotary in that one group, but others can so then it’s less important.

 

[stevo]

With respect, I think that this is quite impossible (as a description of ski performance, without regard to the biomechanical input creating that performance).

If one sideslips directly down the fall line, all movement is lateral, none is in a direction lengthwise along the skis. So in that case, sure, it's possible to create equal amounts, or rates, of sliding in the tip and tail. Indeed, this is the very definition of a continuous sideslip that doesn't include any dipping of tip or tail. Obviously, tip and tail follow separate, parallel paths, straight downhill.

However, if we combine the lateral motion with forward motion, things are different. Now we're comparing the paths of a point on the inside edge of the tip of the outside ski, and a point on the edge of the tail. In a brushed turn, the point on the tip may follow a path that isn't straight in line with the direction the edge is pointed. Meanwhile, the edge is bent into an arc. Since the tail is also slipping laterally a bit, the point on the tail won't follow the shape of that arc. It takes time for the tail to catch up to where the tip has been. By that time, the point on the tail will have slipped out from the path of the point on the tip. The amount of the divergence of the paths is defined by the rate of slippage of the tail. And that's how you get a track wider than a pencil line.

As I believe James states in different words.

Not that this is a bad thing.

I happen to agree with you that it's unlikely the tip and tail are displacing equally. I see PMTS folks sometimes use that description and it makes me wince. But..the reason they are using that language is because they are emphatically trying to explain that they are absolutely not intentionally rotating their ski on the snow in any way shape or form. If the ski does it automatically on its own, they take no responsibility for it.

But also it's probably not quite as you are describing it either. The ski can both self steer itself, as well as carve a bit, changing the direction it's going...ie....carve...without actually being locked into a groove. Similar as an airplane wing through the wind..a bent ski does some interesting things. with non edge locked carving.....the front will actually be slipping a bit...as will the tail. will they be equally sliding? I don't know... maybe not..that feels more like a drift of some kind perhaps..but remember the side cut of a skidding ski can cause that ski to both change the direction its moving (which is really what carving action is) as well as it can cause the ski to automatically self-steer...ie pivot itself...on the snow. and those two things combined are what causes a skidding ski to make round ski turns. The tip is not locked into any groove, it's actually skidding also. It's not necessary to swing the tails out. It's not necessary to twist the skis. The term brushed carving implies that heavy carving techniques are being used, but simply put, the ski doesn't reach critical edge angle, thus does not edge lock and thus will have a skiddy element to it both front and back...ie...brushed.

 

[stevo]

I know, he left out the important part, then added it in to the recipe later. Sort of. The front goes in from the center path, the tail out.

Kind of why you have to use carving type skis, preferably under 80mm, but really slalom or near. You’re using the weather vane effect so the tip has to pull. They’re not allowed to use active rotary in that one group, but others can so then it’s less important.

an edged ski in my opinion does not work like a weather vane. the tip can't skid towards the direction of its engaged edge which is blocking that from happening like a chisel. The tip doesn't pull.

Its possible that the tail and tip can both skid outwards at different rates, which could contribute to yawing affects. maybe that actually is like a weather vane I don't know, but the tip doesn't rotate in relative to the ski itself..that is the point. Both the tip and tail are skidding outward in a skidding ski. what is variable is whether they are doing it equally, or the tail is skidding out a little more....or a lot more.

However, the interesting thing about the ski shape and the way that all works is that an engaged ski that is getting some carving action also wants to move in the new direction it is pointed. When it does move in that new direction it then reduces the yaw. Thus a consistent amount of steering angle can be preserved, even in a skidded turn. The self-steering of the ski is changing the direction its pointing, but at the same time if you have it edged and getting carving action, then its also simultaneously reducing the yaw, which basically ends up keeping the yaw (ie, steering angle) somewhat consistent.

When the tails fan out..that is when they were too flat or other problems which caused the tail to skid outward too much and at the same time probably loss of carving action, probably not enough edge engagement...and so the steering angle just grows out and carving action lost. well unless of course your actual intention and desire was to fan out the tails because you need to point the skis that way right now and don't have time to use carving action to do it..in which case...losing the carving action and letting them just fan out...is quite desirable.

A true pivot, like a pivot slip, where the tip moves in..only happens on a flat or lifted ski.

 

[François Pugh]

A ski in "brushed carving" leaves a trail that is wider than a ski that is "pure carving". If the inside tip edge of the ski were able to leave a trail of thick ink that ink would be pretty close to the inside of the brushed carving skis wide trace in the snow, and if the inside tail edge of the ski were to leave a trail of thick ink, that trail would be pretty close to the outside of the track. Does tail follow tip? At least we can say it does not go through the same points in the snow, or touch the same snow flakes.