Your exact argument that "you don't need skills to teach beginners" is the problem
Never said that.
Quote:
As I said - a simple easy race course like a Nastar course should be well within the ability of anyone who wishes to call themselves an instructor to ski at a reasonable level....
I don't see how doing a noddy little race on a easy course proves much.
As for your instructors telling you how bad the first one was, well they would say that, wouldn't they!
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sun 2-09-07 13:50; edited 2 times in total
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Dypcdiver wrote:
So why is it a race with a pass or fail, I advocate a ski off under the supervision of several examiners (to eliminate the "cute bum" syndrome) not a bunch of blue and red plastic (they used to be wood ) poles being the deciding factor.
A stopwatch is a much more effective way to assess objectively. The bunch of examiners have a role in assessing more important factors such as teaching ability which can't be judged objectively.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Tim Brown, comprehension is not your strong suite.... they liked my first instructor - hence took me back to the level he taught me to... it was the dippy dora in between they disliked... and they had no idea I used to ski with her.... they were her trainers and kept shaking their heads and mumbling about how much work was required to get rid of her issues and get her skiing into the ball park where she MIGHT just have a chance to pass... they only discovered she was my instructor after I confessed... I had had a couple of lessons with another instructor between before finding my regulars...
Last I heard she still cannot get close to her ISIA level instructor cert... whilst I am closing in on that level of skiing fast.... the general opinion is I have overtaken her a couple of years back... but I still have a few hangover mental problems from the disability issues... they are getting resolved..
Oh and I have a FEW instructors and they all like each other- in fact they recruit me instructors at the suitable level....(they are not friends but respect each others skiing - in fact there are regular arguments about the next step... but nothing really negative... most are instructor trainers)... I'd not choose to ski with folks that put down others for fun...but i do expect strong analytical skills
No, which is why I said it can't be judged objectively and is best done by a bunch of instructors. I've never said that a timed test will tell you how well an instructor is able to teach students.
Tim Brown, comprehension is not your strong suite[sic]....
First, middle, last, whatever. But if you're nearly at the stage where you can teach people to snowplough, than congratulations.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
rob@rar, OK, I misread your post So we do agree that a stopwatch can judge how fast a skier can get down a race course but has nothing to do with their teaching ability, which I belive is what BASI is all about
After all it is free
After all it is free
Dypcdiver wrote:
rob@rar, OK, I misread your post So we do agree that a stopwatch can judge how fast a skier can get down a race course but has nothing to do with their teaching ability, which I belive is what BASI is all about
Yes, we most certainly agree that the timed run says nothing about teaching skills. But isn't BASI also about developing/ensuring technical ability as well as teaching ability? It most certainly was last time I looked at their qualification structure. The timed run says a lot about technical proficiency, which you will know much better than me.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Dypcdiver, no point in them having brilliant teaching skills if they have no idea of what they teach...
Would you want a home economics teacher to instruct your future heart surgeon?
If we only measure teaching skills we have as many problems as if we only measure racing(technique)... that is why exams measure many facets... including off-piste, safety(avalanche training), teaching in a second language, etc etc....
Check the syllabus for staatliche sometime... it is pretty comprehensive from what I can gather... and it is only the final assessment after 2 others and you must ski very well to even get into the course....
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
little tiger,
Quote:
Dypcdiver, no point in them having brilliant teaching skills if they have no idea of what they teach...
Would you want a home economics teacher to instruct your future heart surgeon?
Now you're just being silly.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
I know some great rugby coaches that were rubbish as players.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Tim Brown, no I'm taking your ridiculous objection to an objective measurement of technical skills to its most absurd....
You can see the issue with my example above... but not with your desire to only test teaching skills and not technical skills for instructors...
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
little tiger, look, your noddy little race on an easy course will prove nothing.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
little tiger, I am advocating a ski off observed by a group of examiners. The ski off demonstrates the ability of the candidate to teach skiing. Or put more simply show they are good enough skiers to teach skiing at the level at which they have chosen to be examined at.
Race training is a different thing. It is too specialised to be applied to the vast majority of the skiing public, who in the main just want to be able to get down runs without falling and injuring themselves.
There are some people who think racing is what skiing is all about, I have had my fill of standing around getting cold waiting my turn to go through the wand, I have wider horizons.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Dypcdiver wrote:
Race training is a different thing.
In what way?
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Dypcdiver, I've had mostly examiners and trainers as my instructors.... and I can say that there is way too much politics happening in examining to be at all objective....
The benefit of the racing component is that it is one (the only) component where politics can take no place.... you ski the time - or you don't....
Does not matter whose ex-gf you stole or who you pissed off years ago... or etc etc etc... Does not matter if you ski holding little pinky at 6 degrees or 7 degrees.... Does not matter if you "look pretty" on skis... or look a little chunky, gay etc...
At one stage the ski school had a running joke that to be my instructor you had to a) win ski exam race easily and b) fail the whole thing by a near miss.... Why? Well I had my 2 regular instructors at that resort who had done just that.
The first had won the level 3(level 2 was ISIA) race skiing on a broken leg(don't ask) but been unable to complete the rest of the skiing component due to pain. He managed to pass free skiing on a resit by skiing well on the day - but then failed demos repeatedly despite the trainer using him as the example of how to do the same demos.... Eventually he passed.... He sure did not need the piece of paper as he was more qualified elsewhere... but he enjoyed the training - else he may have left...
The second beat the CSIA pacesetter by 1 second... but failed the exam by 1 mark.... He no longer works as a ski instructor...
Were they good teachers? The first was booked out for teh following season by the end of the previous season... The second had ski school highest return rate for group lessons....
Without at least the race component I think there would be no incentive for either to even try for their final exams... they just did not play the politics quite right... the race component at least lets them make their point in one arena... it then becomes more difficult to say the persons technical skills are nqr and so easier for them to persist
Some of my other instructors were examiners, and trainers and in fact one of the above was also a trainer in another country...
As I have said before I have regularly been complimented on the level of my instruction - by folks from other countries...
I'll defend the idea of a race component - and I'm the least likely person to do so... disabled "older" athlete with a chronic fear of speed...
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
little tiger wrote:
The benefit of the racing component is that it is one (the only) component where politics can take no place.... you ski the time - or you don't....
Well said.
During the time I was ski-racing, I was always glad that I was not competing in a "judged" sport.
Then, years later, when I found myself doing some instructor exams, I realised I was - in a way.
Luckily I hadn't stolen anyone's girlfriend, so my wedge christies just scraped a pass mark
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
little tiger, it come as no surprise to me that these awarding bodies are riddled with the stuff you mention. Running little noddy races is like putting a sticking plaster over a gapping wound.
rob@rar, Tim Brown is being silly... because I suggested that a simple race like the nastar thing Rocky Mountain PSIA use migth be suitable for lower levels.... so now he thinks Eurotest too hard and everything else a "noddy race"....
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
little tiger, rob@rar, Look, to me skiing is about having fun and the only measurable thing in that is the size of my grin. If you lot think running gates is fun, fine by me, it just means less tracks in the powder.
After all it is free
After all it is free
Dypcdiver, I've skied with Fastman on a powder day in Colorado in April.... We had GS and SL race skis on... I did not see it stop us from skiing the powder - in fact we were in the first up as they opened top lifts.... We did both think we could have had fatter skis when our buddy skipped off across the snow whilst we skied in it... I don't seem to recall running any gates that day.... and he is after all a race coach... Why does having race experience mean you cannot get fresh tracks? What is the "all or nothing" mentality.... Having the ability to run gates has never stopped anyone from skiing powder that I know of...
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Dypcdiver wrote:
Look, to me skiing is about having fun and the only measurable thing in that is the size of my grin. If you lot think running gates is fun, fine by me, it just means less tracks in the powder.
That's kind of irrelevant to this debate isn't it?
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Yet another interesting thread that disintegrates into rubbish... oh well....
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
GrahamN, you're right about carving in racing not being doable all the time. Quite often a pre carve redirection is required. For those who don't know what I mean by a redirection, it's a manual turning/twisting of the feet/skis toward the direction of the new turn. When such a redirection is called for, the best/fastest means of doing it in a race course is a pivot. I distinguish pivoting from steering. Pivoting is a redirection done while the skis are un-pressured. Steering is a redirection done when the skier's weight is pushing the skis down on the snow; also referred to as "pressured". The following montage shows a well executed pivot.
Notice no pressure on her skis during the second last image, at the heart of the pivot. This is evidenced by no snow flying off the skis, and no bend in the skis. Pressure returns in the final image of the montage. Snow begins to fly, the skis enter reverse camber, and she is in the midst of feathering into a clean carve. This is how good racers redirect.
Oh, and good point about how more pivoting will be happening with the required increase in GS ski radius. Should be interesting to see them struggle with adjusting.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
skimottaret wrote:
Yet another interesting thread that disintegrates into rubbish... oh well....
Oh well, at least the bit you didn't like was actually on topic. Will you be visiting other threads to pass your verdict?
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
FastMan,
Quote:
GrahamN, you're right about carving in racing not being doable all the time. Quite often a pre carve redirection is required. For those who don't know what I mean by a redirection, it's a manual turning/twisting of the feet/skis toward the direction of the new turn. When such a redirection is called for, the best/fastest means of doing it in a race course is a pivot. I distinguish pivoting from steering. Pivoting is a redirection done while the skis are un-pressured. Steering is a redirection done when the skier's weight is pushing the skis down on the snow; also referred to as "pressured". The following montage shows a well executed pivot.
as usual, the clearest and most accurate description of what happens and all in one succinct paragraph. I see pre carve redirection by good racers all the time. Last season I particularly remember seeing a great demonstration right in front of me by a coach and two about 12yr old boys from the LDA race club on the Valentin in icy conditions. As you describe, no pressure pivot, then feather to a clean carve. The slightly older boy could do it but the younger couldn't. Neither could I when I tried to follow them on that snow!
skimottaret, good try though, and some useful ideas and interesting discussion has arisen from it. I agree with your conclusion that ISIA would be the time that an objective test ought be introduced. I do believe that objective testing is important, just that from the viewpoint of this punter the level required should be informed by the technical ability necessary to do the job, not the difficulty necessary to restrict the numbers allowed to do it. I personally think that ISTD is fairly superfluous (it's logical, and I therefore suspect, that in some countries it's nothing more than Eurotest plus ISIA level for everything else) but if to serve as an upper echelon/superior cadre, well, why not? (still not agreeing with the level of the Eurotest bar though) As far as the original question goes, I'd agree Level 1 no - it would fly in the face of the primary objectives of recruitment and enfranchisement. At Level 2, if within that system the Level 1 is seriously low, I'd agree that it'd be too much - after all it would actually be Level 2 that is the first real rung.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
FastMan wrote:
Should be interesting to see them struggle with adjusting.
Or perhaps "re-adjusting", in the case of a couple of the older racers who actually skied on GS skis before 1997. Maybe that's why The Herminator didn't hang up his boots yet
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Off topic, but this video is a good example of a pivot entry, with none or very little rotary "steering" of the skis when not in transition.
In this run, Francois Borque, due to the nature of his clean-ish carves in the course, takes a much rounder line than most.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Tue 4-09-07 17:35; edited 1 time in total
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
The time differences at the splits are in relation to the current leader, so it's not always easy to tell, without seeing that leader's run and where he gained or lost time. There was a certainly a mistake around 2:11 where he got pinged out of a turn, missed the start of the next turn, and had to go the "long way around". That may have cost him a bit of momentum for the final flat just before the finish.
Otherwise pretty nice skiing!!
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
veeeight, thanks. That video is chock full of the non pressured pivot move I was describing. I'm sure for those new to the move, it may be hard to see where it's happening in the video, as Borque's execution of it is so quick and efficient. His feathering skills (the touchdown period between pivot and carve)are so refined it can make it hard for the less trained eye to even see when/where he's pivoting.
For those of you that missed it on first view, watch the tails of his skis during the period where one turn is finishing and the next is about to begin. That period is called the "turn transition". Watch for the tails to make a quick uphill/sideways displacement just before he begins to carve his new turn. That's the pivot.
And as always, we need to bring this stuff back to how it relates to the recreational skier. There are many types of transitions that are available for skiers to use. Each has use in recreational skiing. A good goal for the recreational skier looking to improve is to develop the ability to execute as many different types of transitions as possible, as well as the knowledge and ability to apply them spontaneously and appropriately in varying recreational skiing situations.
This pivot/carve transition is high up on the difficulty scale, but is a valuable one to possess. It's suited to people who have already learned to carve clean arc to arc turns (turns where the entire direction change is done with carving,,, no pivot included), enjoy doing it, and would now like to take that carving into steeper and tighter terrain. In such terrain, pure arc to arc skiing can result in uncomfortable speeds, and limited space can make a pivot transition a necessity to quicken the turn. It's much the same as why racers use it. They have a designated route they must follow down the slope, and steeper sections of the course are typically set in a manner that makes pure arc to arc carving rather impossible to achieve. The turns are so sharp that a pivot must be utilized. Recreational skiers can use the same transition when they want or need to make a turn happen more quickly too.
Understand why I say it's a high level transition. The average recreational skier is trapped in a single transition. I spoke about it in the "what's the rush" thread. It involves a big steered (pressured) tail push at the beginning of the turn, followed by a sloppy steered/slid completion of the turn. While there is tail displacement at the beginning of the turn, similar to this pivot/carve transition shown in veeeight's video clip, , the two transitions are actually completely different. In developing new transitions the average recreation skier first needs to learn how to eliminate that big pressured redirection at the start of their turns. From there, carving, and arc to arc carving can be learned and added to the execution options. And finally, once clean arc to arc carving transitions are well imbedded, a non-pressured pivot can be added in.
As you can see, there are many steps on the ladder of progression. For those interested in advancing their skill level, that knowledge is actually a good thing. It's much easier to imagine possible reaching a summit if you focus on the steps to be taken, rather than just the massive peak towering in the sky. I'm currently working on a new article on transitions that will go into more depth on what they are, how they're used, and all the varieties that exist. I'll provide a link here when it's done, in case anyone is interested in reading it.
...It's much easier to imagine possible reaching a summit if you focus on the steps to be taken, rather than just the massive peak towering in the sky. I'm currently working on a new article on transitions that will go into more depth on what they are, how they're used, and all the varieties that exist. I'll provide a link here when it's done, in case anyone is interested in reading it.
I'd be very interested. I'm at the stage where I can fairly consistently go arc to arc with clean lines in the right conditions but don't have the finesse to quickly feather back into a carve if I try to do an unpressured pivot whether I'm in or out of the gates. I might even be wrong to think that it's getting back on the edges that's the difficult bit - I suspect doing an unpressured pivot has to be done right to be able to set up for it.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
slikedges, I find atm the hardest bit is the feather.... I tend to slam the edges on too fast when I try.... (Well easiski has been breaking me of this bit..).... If I did this at any sort of speed I think I'd be flat on my butt on snow very quickly as they bit...also it is SLOW...
I have spent quite a bit of time with easiski trying to learn to have a bit more finesse in my edge usage...
Will be interesting to see how I progress with this as I feel I'm just starting to see real improvement in my fine edge work.... and also better control of transition timing with my ILEs
Oh well... more stuff to keep working at I guess.... I will have to see how I go over the next year or two...
Having just come back to this thread (another 2 pages to read through) after travelling etc. I'm astonished! The interesting thing is that all the 'antis' as far as the race course element is concerned seem to be suggesting various options that are all already part of the various bodies' exams. Everyone is also assessed on technical skiing and teaching and many other bits and bobs by groups of trainers. Off piste skiing is already part of everyone's curriculum (not sure about PSIA here). Bumps also.
Tim Brown I'm probably one of your 50 somethings ... being as I passed my grade 1 in 1992 ....
little tiger, You're not far away now from that feathering. I think the pivot part is fine both up and down unweighted. Only a little way to go.
However, regarding the age-old theory that less able instructors could teach all the beginners: I hate that idea! Firstly I (and many others) like teaching beginners and secondly the bad habits ingrained from having inadequate instruction early on are a pig to sort out! Note all those Snowheads who've had big group lessons for 2 weeks, either with the ESF or the Austrian Ski School or whoever, and have then given up lessons until they became Snowheads and realised there was an alternative.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
easiski,
Quote:
The interesting thing is that all the 'antis' as far as the race course element is concerned seem to be suggesting various options that are all already part of the various bodies' exams.
that is what i find interesting as well, that most of the antis (not all) argue that a timed race at some point during the course of ski instructor training somehow overshadows or undoes all the other skills and teaching you need and are required to undertake to be well rounded. After having to complete a race timed you then turn you into a "racer" and for some reason that somehow implies you will be a lousy instructor.
The pro race contingent ALL to a person argue for a balanced approach in instructor training with racing being one element..
After all it is free
After all it is free
To pass the TT or ET is not only about technical ability. It also takes a great deal of dedication and commitment to the profession (for those that peruse it as that). These are key qualities that I would hope teachers have.
As I said before though, there is a place for part time, amateur and entry level instructors to teach in our many grass roots facilities in the UK. Without them the UK would not have such a strong ski industry, which in turn feeds those who follow ski teaching as a profession
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
easiski wrote:
Tim Brown I'm probably one of your 50 somethings ... being as I passed my grade 1 in 1992 ....
But not when you passed grade 3, you weren't 50. My point is that too many old farts are getting passed. To allow that to continue, Rob even advocates age related handicapping for any race that gets introduced.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Tim Brown wrote:
... Rob even advocates age related handicapping for any race that gets introduced.
Please explain why someone 'old' (BTW, just what is the age range you're trying to insult on this occasion) is unable to be a good ski instructor, assuming that they have both the teaching and technical skills (neither of which are age related).
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
) poles being the deciding factor.
So we do agree that a stopwatch can judge how fast a skier can get down a race course but has nothing to do with their teaching ability, which I belive is what BASI is all about 
