How to ski, versus how skiing works...

A snowHead

It seems to me that virtually all threads on snowHead

's that are intended to be technical analytical discussions of skiing topics such as body mechanics, skiing related physics, specific drills, fault correction, etc. inevitably turn into an argument that things are getting unnecessarily overly complicated.

Ski instruction and coaching when on the slope should be clear and simple utilising plain illustrative language coupled with demonstration and not be confusing or complicated. However, when trying to discuss, understand and dissect detailed concepts on a forum like this what is wrong with descending into technical language and ski specific jargon? Both types of discussions have merit but don’t seem to mix well IMO.

Should threads in the BZK's forum be prefaced that a thread is EITHER about learning how to ski and is skewed towards coaching, instruction and tips that you would expect to hear on the slope, OR, is intended to be a detailed technical analysis on how skiing works, with technical terminology that may get geeky at times.

I see a place for both types of discussions here and would this help avoid the inevitable counter productive arguments that seem to crop up?

A snowHead

skimottaret, Yes, good idea.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

What puzzles me is that children are taught without all the tecnospeak and seem to pick it up quicker.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

skimottaret, It's a good idea but I don't know if it would get rid of the arguments. When I go into a technical thread I can quite quickly see what level the discussion is pitched at. If it is above my head I think "hey, this is way above me" but I don't feel the need to scold anyone because their discussion is technical.
Perhaps we could flag up whether the thread is aimed at instructors or pupils .....though then I might not feel welcome in the technical threads and we couldn't have that could we wink

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

jbob, That could be a whole new topic Very Happy

ickabodblue, but some of the best questions in technical threads are asked by "pupils" wink

You'll need to Register first of course.

ickabodblue, techy discussions shouldnt be aimed at a certain audience or be "above" anyone, joining in and asking for clarification to try to understand helps make sure that what is being discussed is actually being understood. good to have different points of view IMO.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

david@mediacopy, Absolutely true, as FastMan so eloquently said in another thread, but I think that some of the technical types can articulate questions very well where,I certainly, struggle and feel a little awkward. That said I do not want to feel excluded from technical threads.

After all it is free

ickabodblue,

If an instructor is talking over your head, they aren't instructing very well...IMO

JT, Yeh, but we're not talking about conventional instructing are we? We're talking about blogging. In a lot of these threads folk are bouncing ideas off one another in an attempt to improve their instructing skills and to learn from each other.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

JT, Of course, But if said instructor isnt well versed on the underlying detail and theory of what he/she is trying to communicate to students they may not be able to succinctly give the best advice or correct the students underlying problems.

All teachers IMO should have a deep knowledge of their subject matter and be able to clearly communicate, as you say spouting jargon isnt instructing.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

ickabodblue, or getting their point across.... I should have said.

snow reports

ickabodblue, You and me both Very Happy

You know it makes sense.

skimottaret, I remember a thread slightly similar to this a few months ago, about how to teach, which met with the usual silence/disdain.
Some people like to teach, some like to show off their knowledge, some like to make others feel somehow less valid, and some enjoy hero worship.

Recently, on another forum Wink

I said this...

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Wear The Fox Hat, I seem to remember that one and it went a bit quiet. I think it is harder on this kind of forum to have a good debate about "soft" teaching or coaching issues and it is easier to be technical and detailed in the confines of a bulletin board. Not sure the soft topics are met with disdain.... at least not by me and I learned a few things on the ones i have participated on.

A snowHead

skimottaret, true, you don't have to listen to anyone, but the signal to noise ratio can lose a lot of the signal if a group discussion becomes a monologue or dialogue where others are not encouraged to join in.

A snowHead

I think the best thing about discussions on Snowheads is that no matter how technical they become anyone seems welcome to join in. I think if the instructors wanted to discuss technique and for this not to happen that they'd reserve their discussions to a password protected instructors area. This doesn't happen. The techies on the site know that this is a public forum. I believe that they offer up their considerable expertise for consumption by all. The amount of knowledge I've seen offered up, not to mention the time spent typing it is to my mind generosity beyond belief. Us beginners are treated, largely wink

, with as much respect as the experts. There always seems to be tacit understanding that we were all beginners once. I for one fully appreciate the response to often, what must seem to someone that has been doing this for years, innane questions in that, ultimately, I always find out the answers even after a bit of good natured mickey taking - but that never hurt anyone.

As folks like Wear The Fox Hat, have often encouraged - there is no such thing as a daft question. The daft person is the one that out of choice, or pride, decides to remain ignorant. When I don't understand a technical discussion I'm afraid I'll interupt it and ask questions until I do. Now I'm sorry if this sometimes breaks the 'run' of the discussion, but hey! its a public forum isn't it?

Even if questions were flagged as pupil or instructor, I'd still read both and I'd still interupt both if I didn't understand things - it seems an extra effort for no real gain, but I guess if you want to feel elitist then you could tag you discussion as 'instructor' or 'technical', but it won't make any difference to how I treat the threads. I don't think snowheads would want it to either.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

veeeight,

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

veeeight,

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

David Murdoch, I agree about the use of unexplained jargon - but that's where folks like me can always say - 'I didn't understand that bit, please explain'. To whit could you please explain 'crossover', 'crossunder' and what the unexplained acronyms ILE and OLR in your post above represent. At the moment I summise 'Inside leg extension' and 'outside leg retraction'. I was once told that in report writing you should qualify an acronym the first time you use it in a piece of writing.

OK, the above is a bit naughty given what you were trying to get at, but as you see its easy to fall into the very trap you were trying to explain. wink

After all it is free

There's lots in Bend Zee Knees I don't understand. Normally I ask for it to be explained or sit here patiently until it becomes clear. Can't say I've ever felt the need to berate other contributors for using technical shorthand, not least because the forum does not impose a 'clarity and brevity' test on our writing skills before we are allowed to sign up. Sometimes the jargon makes me feel a bit inadequate as a skier, but given how much I need to learn to become a good skier I guess that's not entirely a bad thing.

Megamum, you are very naughty. But seriously, what do the phrases "inside leg extension" and "outside leg retraction" really mean, viscerally, to you? They don't mean much to me... wink

Nor do ILE vs OLR? Just knowing what the acronym represents doesn't help a great deal when the full phrase makes no contextual sense either.

Which I suppose is the point of language. It is a shared medium. And much of what I see crossing over from some other forums is a lack of shared language. Should we care? Not up to me to decide...

rob@rar, but my point is compare and contract Easiski's contributions compared to some other contributions. And (in case you were making a specific point in answer to mine,) veeeight, specifically complains about "some quarters" asking for simple explanations. I see nothing wrong with that. Skiing need not be over-complicated, it is difficult enough. The best teachers I have had have made it all so wonderfully simple... wink

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

David Murdoch, Exactly (including the positive bits)! Except that I don't have a degree in theoretical physics, so I am particularly interested to see that someone who does have such a degree feels the same way I do.

...but I think your post was quite a bit longer than mine!! wink

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

David Murdoch, and, quite rightly, easiski has a good following because of it. But does that mean other people shouldn't contribute because they don't write as well as easiski or fastman? If there's stuff that either I don't understand or isn't relevant to my skiing because I'm not at the level where I can put that theory into practice I will either gloss over it or try to follow it out of academic interest. Because it's not relevant for me doesn't mean that it should be criticised for being too complex/too high level.

I don't see that there is a problem of people asking for simple explanations. When that happens I see a good number of people doing their best to provide a simple answer. What I do see is a problem is criticism being aimed at people who are well versed in the technical shorthand and use it to have a discussion, but being criticised by others who are not so well versed in that technical shorthand.

I think you might be confusing technical discussion with how skiing works with how it should be taught. I agree that the best teachers make it simple, and I think on several occasions those contributors here who get into the minutia of technique have all acknowledged that point.

There is a time for simple and a time for more complicated. It doesn't make one right and the other wrong. Some prefer one way, some prefer another, and some are prepared to take both and all the rest in-between. How about a bit more tolerance around here of people who are wired differently?

You know it makes sense.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

David Murdoch, In actual fact they were two terms I didn't struggle with the first time I saw them written in that thread. I had recently watched some video footage and penny was dropping about how the lower part of the body almost falls away from the upper part of the body in the turn. I could see the concept of legs extending and retracting in my minds eye and, for me at least, those particular two terms made perfect sense. Sorry, but you picked an item that just happened to work for me.

A snowHead

Hurtle, to answer your earlier statement, some people find Gordon Ramsey an inspiration. Some find him patronising and obnoxious. The same can be said for Marco Pierre White. Some think that Craig Revel Horwood's comments are patronising and hurtful, others think that they are factual.

As a diner you can choose which restaurant go wish to go into, and thus which chef you want preparing your meal. You pays your money and takes your choice. If you don't like that particular chef/restaurant, don't go there.

Conversely a chef can eject a diner who he/she doesn't want in their restaurant.

However it is extremely bad form to go in to a restaurant and loudly proclaim that that same dish could have been prepared in half the time using less ingredients by a.n.other chef that you know.

David Murdoch, I can sorta see what you are getting at, but the truth is still that how-to-ski threads can and should be kept simple, whilst there is much more scope to get techy in how-skiing-works threads. If it is a how-to-ski thread I have absolutely no problems in asking for things to be kept simple. As for crossover and crossunder, yes, they are two very disctint transitions. Perhaps you know them as extension and retraction turns?

There also seems to be some confusion that the techy type threads are supposed to be "teaching to all" threads (which they mostly ain't) - so why should these threads be in the same vein as if an instructor were teaching on the hill? It isn't meant to be a skiing lesson!

A snowHead

rob@rar, I agree (working up your post rather than down). Yes, I think there is (or if there isn't we have a problem) consensus that good teachers are able to distill complexity into apparent and practicable simplicity.

I think your point above that hits the nail on the head. I see shorthand that is not universally understood being used. That to me is jargon. I also see shorthand and methods that (appear) to be not universally agreed upon being used. That to me is dogma. (we don't see that so much round here but it's apparent elsewhere).

It disturbs me that I can have reasonably high level technical discussions with experienced professionals (guides, moniteurs, etc.) and yet can't always (often can't) understand what is going on here. What I often don't see are "simple answers" (when simple answers, IMHO, exist...)

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

rob@rar,

You need to Login to know who's really who.

I am generally against trying the re-invent/rename the skiing wheel and trying over hard to impress people in these threads
Just as you can pull up someone for the former, you can do so in the latter.

If it is interesting and going somewhere, then fine but maybe these threads lost their market pretty quickly. Maybe some don't

Meat and poison, but mostly we just like talking about it. But, I reckon everyone is capable of talking out of their backsides at times... Not many posters here who aren't, IMV.

Laughing

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

veeeight, The logical conclusion of what you say is that you are immune from criticism. Sorry, but I disagree, I don't think anyone on here is immune. This forum is not, to use your own analogy, your restaurant.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Hurtle, I didn't come to that conclusion, and have no idea how you did.

After all it is free

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

I would think talking about how to ski and how skiing works on the internet is an entirely different beast to a lesson on a mountain. It must almost boil down to the picture painting a thousand words. An instructor on a mountain can say - 'watch while I show you, and keep an eye on what my outside leg does this time' - How on earth do you go about painting that picture in writing without recourse to some terms that, depending on the level you happen to be in your profession, you might assume are already understood.

It no different for any subject - dancing as used as an example above, driving, playing a musical instrument, riding a horse, even cooking -try to explain folding in the flour to someone in writing that has never done it before. Such demonstrations are the subject matter of technical writing courses., and sometimes teamworking demonstrations You might not realise it because I write as I 'think' here, but I've done several of these courses. One favourite example is get the students to come up with instructions to change a tyre - the exercise is usually done to demonstrate how a team works better than a individual, but its interesting to see how many instructions it actually takes and even then mostly the instructions assume knowledge of what things such as wrench, chocks, gloves, handbrake etc. actually are.

Maybe we need a glossary thread for technical terms so that when terms are discussed or used an explanation in more simple terms could be added to the glossary and an appropriate link made from the more technical thread? Of course this would assume that everyone could agree on the explanations in the glossary wink

Help!!

How to ski, versus how skiing works...

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Bend ze Knees