Some thoughts on ski technique from a Yank

A snowHead

After editing Steve's book ("Open Your Heart With Skiing"), he suggested I try my own hand at writing. Well, we'll see if you agree! The following is the introduction from a handout I've written give to my students at Copper next season. Discussion and questions from Snowheads welcome! Let me know if you find this of interest/value or if you'd like any more. Cheers!

Many people, if asked why we turn, answer, “To slow down.” Let’s think about this. When we drive a car, why do we turn? To slow down? We turn a car to change direction. It’s the same in good skiing. In skiing, our intent dictates our technique. If our intent in skiing is to slow down–to not go down the hill, to use our skis as brakes--our technique will entail twisting our bodies away from the next turn, skidding, traversing. On the other hand, if our intent is to change direction, an entirely different technique is used: smooth steering, consistent movements, controlled speed. So...what is your intent when you ski? TURNS are not BRAKING! In good skiing, every turn has a "go" thought: to take us to our next destination.

Let’s use an analogy: How do jet fighters turn? They can only fly in one direction: forward. They maintain the same speed. So how do they turn? By flattening their wings coming out of one turn, tipping their wings to roll over, then banking strongly. Take that into your feet in a ski turn. Imagine your feet are standing on two jet fighters flying in formation. They fly forward together, flatten together, then roll their wings over together and bank. Both fighters move and tip together, the same speed and the same amount, then move immediately into another turn. Supple, never-ending activity, feet rolling over from one side to the other continuously, never a dead spot with no activity.

On every turn, remember to use a patient beginning with an active end. Here’s another analogy: Imagine, as you look down the slope, there is a giant clockface painted in the snow. Start a turn standing on “12.” Your task is to let your skis trace that clockface, touching every number. Gravity will do the work! Let your body fall forward. Your skis touch 1 o’clock, then 2 o’clock. Start tipping over your “jets.” You are going very slowly. Let your body continue falling forward and keep tipping. At 2, 3, and 4 o’clock, you are gaining speed. At 6 o’clock, people start to get nervous! “I’m going too fast!” At that point, you have a choice: You can either hit the brakes and revert to defensive skiing...or there is another alternative. That’s right. Continue rolling over our “jets” and continue tracing the numbers on the clock. If you turn your ski tips up the hill to 7, 8, or even 9 o’clock, you are skiing uphill. So what happens when we ski uphill? We slow down. Do we have to try to slow down when we ski uphill? Of course not. Gravity will do it for us. This is one of the keys to good skiing. Gravity will start the turn; gravity will also end the turn! EXPERTS NEVER TURN TO SLOW DOWN! Their cue to begin a new turn is when gravity has slowed them down and they want to speed up again! Try to accelerate through the end of the arc until you feel you are going too slowly! That is your cue to turn: to go faster again! Once this becomes our intent, a whole new world of ski technique opens up before us.

A snowHead

The jet plane analogy may be a good mental image to get beginners to think about their edges... like it.

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

Being totally honest, I find it a little patronising for my taste.

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

I find the style makes it difficult to concentrate on the content. For me too much of the "see the numbers?" "that's right" type of interjection makes me switch off. It's fine face to face, but not in writing. But that could be just me.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Not wishing to put the boot in too much but I DON'T LIKE SHOUTING! either. I'd have thought the beginner would be more concerned about turning to change direction e.g. when traversing rather than turning to slow down so I don't really get the set up premise but this too might be a N American thing where your default skiing move is straight running on a shallow slope.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Hi Mike. Snow is flying, and skiing is right around the corner here in Colorado. Can't wait, getting the itch. Bet you are too.

About your excerpt; this is a common theme I've heard from PSIA types on Epic for some time now,,, that turning is not about speed control. Personally, I've always found it a bit silly. Of course turning has an element of intended speed control to it, and there's nothing negative about using turns for that purpose.

The idea you just turn to go to a new destination just doesn't fly. The destination is the bottom of the hill, so why turn? Because if most people skied the straightest line to that destination they would wet themselves. So rather than arrive at the bottom of the hill with soiled britches, they get out of the falline by turning. That's the facts, Jack. Turning to manage speed is not a bad thing,,, it's an intelligent thing, a prudent thing, a safe and responsible thing. You even explain in your excerpt how turn shape can be used to control speed. But then you revert back to; "EXPERTS NEVER TURN TO SLOW DOWN!", in essence downplaying the validity of the turning uphill to slow down advice you just shared. It's inconsistent.

My advice is to drop the PSIA popular theme of condemning the idea of turning to control speed, and run with the other end of your thoughts, the idea of how to make good turns while managing the relationship with the falline for speed control. That's a more realistic position, and a message that all learning skiers would benefit more from hearing.

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

FastMan, I am SO glad you said that. I was just wondering whether turning to control my speed was yet another of my many failings! I was so busy worrying about that, that I falied to spot the inconsistency. wink

After all it is free

FastMan, exactly. I've heard this a few times, and it gets my hackles up each time. I didn't realise it is a PSIA mantra, but that makes sense now.

mike_m. Assume you're standing at the top of a black piste/groomer and see a bar at the bottom of it. Where do you want to go? Maybe to the bar. In which case why do you make loads of turns from side to side? You are not then turning to change direction, you are turning, as FastMan says, to arrive at the bar in fewer than two pieces, and at the very least to avoid carrying a nasty smell with you when you get the beers in. I find the "EXPERTS NEVER TURN TO SLOW DOWN!" comment utterly ridiculous. There will be times you turn to change direction, but the majority of time anyone turns (unless in a race) is precisely the opposite - to keep speed under control. If you're trying to get people away from linked hockey stops all the way down the hill then fine, but don't shoot yourself in the foot by asserting something that's patently untrue. It's of course true that a braking turn and a direction-changing turn are different things, but as far as I'm concerned both have their place in normal recreational skiing.

Another thought - try doing your 12-9 turns on a 40 degree 10 metre wide couloir and see how far that gets you. I suggest that's probably better as a thought experiment, though.

Interesting points. Let me see if I can address some. The assumption has been made by some respondents that my suggestions are aimed at a beginning skier. To some extent, they are applicable there, but the people I would show this to would tend to be people who are already skiing green slopes at least. As with many skiers at this level or above, they confuse braking with turning. Most come to a lesson skidding more than they want to and feeling like they are working much harder on skis than they want, expending more energy than they want, and wishing they could ski with more smoothness, flow, and genuine control. Now, obviously, good skiers need the abilty to brake and slow down at will. Noone with any sense would dispute that. The point I am raising (perhaps not as clearly as I might, but that's why I'm asking for feedback) is that most inexperienced skiers don't realize that ski turns are not, BY DEFINITION, braking. Of course we turn to manage our speed, but there is a difference between managing speed by braking and skidding because we have no other skills, and choosing the speed we want and knowing how to maintain that speed using line, choice of turn radius, and degree of turn completion. That is the key. Many skiers have no idea that they can move down a ski hill without traversing, braking, skidding or the many other defensive moves they resort to because noone has ever taught them that there is any other way. They have no concept that they can maintain a consistent speed by using the gravity that frightens them to slow them down, simply by continuing their turns up the hill. If you read my suggestions, those are the skills and the mindset I advocate. You're right, I do say that experts do not turn to slow down. In my observation, they don't. They BRAKE to slow down, as the situation requires. Fastman, Graham: If you are skiing at the speed you wish, in control, are you constantly braking? I think not. I would suggest that expert skiers brake in situations when a defensive reaction is called for, or if, for whatever reason, their choice of line or turn radius/completion are inappropriate in a given turn. Both of you seem to be reading a good deal more into my post than is actually there. I think my car analogy is appropriate. When we are driving, in the middle a curve, and our speed is appropriate, do we need to brake? We can if we choose, of course, but is it necessary? Does the car like being braked in the middle of a turn? I think not. I suggest it is the same in skiing. As far as doing 12-9 turns in that couloir, you're right, I probably wouldn't. But then, in that situation, defensive tactics are appropriate. As I said in my post, "Intent dictates technique." Would I (or you) need to use those same defensive tactics on a green, blue, or red slope where we didn't need to? Again, I think not. That was my point: A defensive mindset is not usually required in good skiing.

Good discussion!

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

And folks, there is another reason to turn. I often don't turn to control my speed, or to get to a particularly interesting place. I do it purely to enjoy the sensation of turning. The feeling of riding a clean edge, of feeling the G's such a turn produces, of managing the shape of a turn just because I can, and experimenting with how wide a range of turn shapes that management provides. This for me defines one of the great joys of the sport.

snow reports

Agreed, a good turn is so much more fun than a good straight bit

You know it makes sense.

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

Here's the view of a perennially low-grade skier...

I like the jet-fighter analogy - it certainly paints a clear picture of ankle / knee roll and edging. Not that I can do any of that stuff, of course.

I dislike the "EXPERTS NEVER TURN TO SLOW DOWN!" thought which is contrary to my understanding of the whole point of the turn - speed control (in addition to the obvious and unavoidable steering which comes with it).

I'm embarrassed to have to admit that I am a member of the group described thus..."Many skiers have no idea that they can move down a ski hill without traversing, braking, skidding or the many other defensive moves they resort to because no-one has ever taught them that there is any other way".
Actually, it's not strictly true that I "...have no idea...", etc but I can't often put the idea into practice. I 'ski' (I use the word carefully Embarassed

) this way because I have never overcome my fear of losing control of my speed and I constantly fall back (literally sometimes!) on defensive 'braking' techniques. The steeper it gets, the less control I have and the more I jam on the brakes. It's ugly and, as I found to my cost at MSB, it's a disaster in fresh snow, although it works great on rock-hard ice Toofy Grin

.

Depressed now - must do some work.

A snowHead

mike_m, this is remarkably close to an argument we'd had here before - almost always with PSIA instructors/instructees, hence the "that makes sense" comment. I also don't like the way you're using defensive as a bad word; defensive is good, and vital, when the terrain requires it - the knack is to find a way of not making it the only modus operandi, and control its degree.

My big objection to your main point is that it is only possibly if you have sufficiently wide expanse of slope to allow the uphill turn. The couloir example may be a case beyond that of your taget audience. Another one that may be considered advanced terrain is navigating through a crevasse field - you'd better be able to control your speed completely independent of line as the line you'd want to take for your method may be blocked by a gaping hole. Here though is one that lands right in the middle of your target audience ability level (I'm assuming early intermediate). I can't remember a huge amount about Colorado terrain, but the Alps are littered with blue and red (i.e. blue-black in US parlance) tracks at 5-10 degree pitch. These are essentially tractor tracks or dirt roads during the summer, and typically of the order of 3 metres wide. Once you get off the bunny slopes you will ski on these - it's virtually inescapable as they often link different pistes or areas of the mountain. They frequently have a bit of a bank along one side and a bit of a dropoff (sometimes a very substantial one) on the other. Going down these, the only reason to turn is to check your speed - and you will be doing that a lot. You have no chance whatever of turning back up the hill, so you have to have some other way of maintaining that speed control. In the early days it'll be a braking plough, the amount of braking you need dependent on the gradient. Soon after it should more likely be linked braking turns, probably with a bit of parallel sideslip, again with the amount of edge and angle dependent on the gradient. Actually on rare occasions the track's narrow enough, or the consequences of catching an edge and going over the drop are sufficiently severe, there's really no opportunity for anything except a plough. The argument we've had before is whether sideslipping is a basic or advanced technique. To my mind this is absolutely core - this is not an advanced technique but an important and vital survival technique (and I think survival is actually a desirable outcome) and should actually be taught before anything you're describing above. This is deceptively simple terrain, and early intermediates will be on it, but (as I remember very well) always approach it with a bit of dread. You'd better have an effcient way of maintaining the braking in these conditions or you're going to get very tired very quickly - or be a danger to both yourself and everyone else on the slope. As your skill level improves you get more subtle with edge pressure and ski angles and can control the amount of braking achieved independently of line, so you tire less and are progressively less constrained by terrain. From my own experience, I know that this is stuff I've been having to use since about my second week on skis - and was the very first thing my second week instructor taught us.

I should stress that I'm not saying that what you're describing is wrong (which would be repeating your error), but that it's just one tool of many. Way back when, when I was writing up a thesis, my supervisor took me to task greatly for writing something that required later qualification to be correct. If the first thing you read is manifestly wrong, the reader/examiner will immediately think you're talking rubbish and then be ill-disposed to change their mind when they see the qualifications that make it clear you actually do know what you're talking about. For my part, I have to say that is very much the case here.

A snowHead

GrahamN,

Agree entirely on the track problem - the scariest terrain I've yet encountered to any extent. Fortunately, my otherwise lamentable technique works quite well in such situations.

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

good point about the cat-tracks Graham. I'm picturing someone try to ski the track to the top of the Courchevel Gd Couloir without turning for speed control - would be entertaining to watch

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

FastMan, agreed.

mike_m, your prose is over-flowery and almost unreadable. I suspect this sounds better spoken by you to a pupil than it looks on the screen. Your ideas on turning whilst interesting, are predicated on a very rigid specific meaning of the word "turn" which separates it from any braking/slipping/stepping elements which are integral to technique under many circumstances. You lost me the minute you said this.

Even when these techniques are not being used, whilst turns may not decrease speed relative to the snow, they sure as hell do decrease velocity relative to the fall line, otherwise we would see people doing GS turns all the way down the flying K...

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Snowheads goes all Epic Ski ?

In this case I can see what the debate is about - speed control versus direction change.

However, the whole thread is like watching two bald men fighting over a comb, or watching paint dry.

I don't know if it is just me but even the most basic threads on ski technique are rather tiresome. I would much rather watch a skiing DVD, or better still take a lesson from a ski instructor.

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

yep, I can't read these things sometimes..I'd rather watch some guys doing it...

I did see a good instructional DVD the other day in Lockwoods about steeps.... but can't recall the title

After all it is free

EXPERTS NEVER TURN . wink

"Just go straight". Very Happy

Perhaps I'm missing something here. Several of the above respondents continue to take me to task for not acknowleging that defensive and braking skills are necessary in good skiing. I re-read both my posts and I said that defensive skills are vital--in the appropriate circumstances. My premise is that such moves are not the ONLY skills needed in good skiing and should only be resorted to as the situation and terrain demand. Somehow I can't see skiers like Fastman and Graham twisting the tails of their skis around defensively and skidding down groomed blue slopes. I would be willing to bet that any video of them would show consistent turn shape and speed control through line--an offensive intent--exactly the tactics I am suggesting defensive skiers be exposed to--as many of them never have been. I'm not quite sure why this concept is eliciting such a strong negative reaction. I was not party to prior discussions involving this, but apparently some nerves were touched. I would ask that my premises be judged on their own merits. Red Leon is exactly the type of skier I am addressing in this. His intent is to improve as a skier because he can see that there are things that expert skiers do that he can't at this point. There are skills they have that enable them to ski with less effort and more control without resorting to defensive tactics. These are the skills--resulting from a change in mindset about why we turn our skis--that I am attempting to introduce in my lessons. In my experience, turning to control line instead of turning to slow down is a significant avenue to accomplish this. Turns can be long radius, medium radius, or extremely tight radius (which certainly can be done on moderately steep and/or narrow terrain). My premise is that this offensive mindset in skiing is a good deal more likely to result in enjoyment of the sport and lead to continuing development of the skier than technique based of fear and braking tactics. Other than the second sentence, the quote from Fastman that Fatbob highlighted is one I would write myself. That was not written by a defensive skier.

In any case, thanks for the feedback. Good food for thought!

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

mike_m, I have to concur with stoatsbrother and paraphrase Salieri in the film Amadeus - "too many words". It's probably me, but I find it a bit difficult to latch onto the key points in what you are saying: your OP sounds like the exposition of a hypothesis without having stated said hypothesis in the first place. If I'm reading it right, it equates to the mantra I took away from last year's PSB thanks to Easiski - "the fall line is your friend"?

Secondly it sounds to me like your text is directed at a specific group of people with a specific problem, i.e. those who ski too defensively (been there, done that, T-shirt). In which case, I would certainly not use that text for general use. For the sake of other people on the mountain, I would far prefer early intermediates to ski too defensively than too offensively. If you are going to advocate using the edges and shape of the ski to follow the radius and use uphill motion for speed control, I think you need to add caveats relating to the applicability of the technique in given environments and conditions.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Experts seldom throw their skis sideways in an attempt to (defensively) brake would be an observation.............

mike_m, is correct in the sense that defensive skiing is probably the single biggest factor in stopping someone progressing.

snow reports

mike_m, there was a thread on Epic with ssh, nolo and Physicsman where Steve asked how it was that skiers with rounder turn shape, and, presumably, fewer braking moves, were actually arriving at the bottom of the hill after he did.

Thus far, I see your original exposition being unclear on whether you wish to make braking intent optional to turning intent, or to throw it out entirely. The negative opinion, IMHO, will continue so long as the readers see you as taking away a familiar useful tool and substituting turning uphill, which, in this thread, is still perceived as a gross, large scale manoeuver.

So, perhaps taking cues from Physicsman's points in the other thread, the task of explaining how to modulate gross uphill turning into finesse speed control is still ahead?

On a personal note, until you explain drag mechanisms no inline skater will ever believe you, because turning uphill regains most of the potential energy, and the dreaded excess speed is -once again- ahead. In effect, turning uphill prolongs the speed terror.

http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=26995

You know it makes sense.

mike_m, sorry about the negativity, and getting the point over that turning does not necessarily involve braking is a good one. The problem, as Fastman and I have both said, is that you are continually overegging the pudding. Let's look at a few sentences.

I personally don't like the car analogy - cars have completely independent braking and steering mechanisms (unless you're a stunt driver doing handbrake turns all over the place). Skis on the whole don't - but that could be used to make that point though. The plane analogy is nice, and would be particularly nice to relating that to smoothness of edge engagement (although I was watching one of the Red Bull Air Races the other night, and that seemed to be very binary horizontal|vertical|horizontal, repeat until nauseous). Not sure about the standing on two planes one though - when I've seen planes fly in formation at airshows they normally try very hard to keep the formation flat and roll with repect to the centre of the formation rather than make equivalent motions about their own axes, so I had to think about that one quite hard before seeing what you were getting at.

Good: "On the other hand, if our intent is to change direction, an entirely different technique is used: smooth steering, consistent movements, controlled speed." You've got the conditionality in there - clarifying the linkage of technique to intent.

Bad: "TURNS ARE NOT BRAKING! In good skiing, every turn has a "go" thought: to take us to our next destination."
The initial categorical shout is just wrong - they may or may not be, depending on circumstances. The "go" thought may well be "I need to slow down NOW - before I go over that cliff" and nothing to do with new destinations.

Bad: "At that point, you have a choice: You can either hit the brakes and revert to defensive skiing...or there is another alternative." Equating braking with being defensive..and by strong implication, bad. It may be, but it may not be. A series of short radius or short swing turns have loads of braking, but are not particularly defensive. Yes, turning up the hill is an alternative - in the right situation - but as you say above that may well be a very bad alternative.

Bad: "EXPERTS NEVER TURN TO SLOW DOWN! " - we've already done this one.

Iffy: "Their cue to begin a new turn is when gravity has slowed them down and they want to speed up again!" Actually they've probably been trying to maintain a steady speed all through the turn - varying radius as their path closes and diverges from the fall line. But what's the answer to the obvious question that comes from this: "I'm not ready to start speeding up again yet but I'm running out of piste width", or "what about that dufus/tree/whatever in my way? I need to avoid him now. What do I do?".

Good as far as it goes: "Of course we turn to manage our speed, but there is a difference between managing speed by braking and skidding because we have no other skills, and choosing the speed we want and knowing how to maintain that speed using line, choice of turn radius, and degree of turn completion.".....or by appropriate elements of braking.

"Turns can be long radius, medium radius, or extremely tight radius (which certainly can be done on moderately steep and/or narrow terrain). My premise is that this offensive mindset in skiing is a good deal more likely to result in enjoyment of the sport and lead to continuing development of the skier than technique based of fear..." Absolutely - but then why spoil it with continuing "... fear and braking tactics". Another implicit statement "braking = bad stuff".

"If you are skiing at the speed you wish, in control, are you constantly braking?" In certain circumstances - absolutely. OK may be more of a European thing as we always hear about how empty US slopes are Wink

- but on the late afternoon run back to resort you probably have a maximum of 10 metres of clear piste before there's someone you have to avoid. Sometimes I've had as little as 1m clear right at the side of the piste unencumbered with bodies in various states of control and panic. Braking while running directly down the fall line in these situations is good. Again not an unusual or particularly advanced situation. I do though ski mostly off-piste, and there have been many cases where the consequences of a fall are sufficiently severe that there's been a good amount of braking and sideslipping. As an admittedly extreme example, in one case a couple of years ago we had a steep track which was in some places less than 180cm wide - my skis are 184cm long Wink

- with maybe a hundred metres of drop off the edge, although there was a rail protecting it - and that track lasted probably about a km Shocked

). Plenty of controlled and constant braking required there.

Again I repeat - it's not so much the technique you're describing that I take issue with, it's the prescriptive tone of the piece. It reads as THE way to control speed - not one of many. OK, in your subsequent posts you've clarified your position, but I'm still not convinced your heart's in it Wink

. I have no doubt that getting people out of a timid/frightened mindset is a good idea, and probably quite a task - but I don't see that rubbishing braking manoeuvres en masse helps. As you said above it's an alternative which is a better choice in some situations - but it's important to know that it's a worse one in others. I would have thought that a good thing to get over to students is the concept of technique selection: "OK here's a slope - what kinds of things do we think are going to work best on it? And if that doesn't work, what's plan B?"

FYI: The arguments we've had (with various PSIA types snowHead

) before have been largely about the value of sideslipping and traversing. As I said above, I consider these absolutely key skills. Maybe it is just that I was taught how to do this even before parallel turns - but it's always stood me in good stead. If you can sideslip efficiently you can get out of jail pretty much anywhere.

(And just to clarify, I'm not an instructor - but someone who came to skiing in my mid 30s and have worked at it fairly hard since, particularly in the last 5 or so years).

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

Comprex, I skied with Uncle Louie after that thread and got the inside answer to Steve's dilemma. Uncle Lou was adding a bit of steering to his turns that Steve didn't notice. In other words, he was interjecting a small amount of extra skidding/sliding that produced subtle breaking.

And now you know, the reeeeeeeest of the story.

A snowHead

comprex, that's what a crap wax job and poor base grind will do for you... Toofy Grin

mike_m, The basic problem - I suspect - apart from the opacity of your wording [sorry - you did ask for criticism] is that many of us have - over many years - seen a succession of Ski Messiahs come along and tell us that everything we are doing is wrong, all our assumptions are incorrect and that we need to follow the one true path to enlightenment. Such evangelical purity, in skiing, as in Politics and religion, is rather unattractive.

If we were Racers, or aspired to do nothing but huge freeride turns all over the place, that might make sense. But for most of us skiing the terrain we ski, we need a repertoire of techniques, some of which may - to an expert - seem defensive, but are useful and safe. I don't know where you are based, but using a place I know a bit, I cannot see your style working too well for skiing Alta 1 or Tower 3 at Jackson Hole, unless you are happy to get shaken to bits at the bottom, or leap the bumps on the run out.

I can see that turning uphill, either overtly or more subtly is a great fun technique and very stylish, but if you try and sell it as the answer to everything you will lose many people. However I am absolutely with you on the need to ski offensively! in every sense of the word wink

A snowHead

FastMan, I felt it had to be that, because PM's explanation

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

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

[quote="comprex"]

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

mike_m, I think some of your images are interesting although a little overcomplicated (planes and clocks). However you do seem to equate braking with skidded, turns presumably with the antendant upper body rotation. I do agree that a lot of moderate skiers do this, that it is undesirable AT THAT STAGE OF THEIR SKIING LIVES, and that they need to learn to control their speed by using the skis to describe arcs ending up pointing uphill to some degree. Once they've got the idea they do find they feel more in control.

However the skidded turn is only the illusion of control (we all know this) because you're fighting the skis, the mountain, gravity and human biomechanics etc. etc. etc. I take major issue though with that same phrase about experts - well, it's quite clear that I'm no expert because I do often turn to control my speed (and also 'cos I like it), and yes - I did always end up behind ssh going down - that's because I'm a control freak and he doesn't finish his turns!!! Laughing

At the end of the day though, it looks as though you've missed the point that braking is not the same thing as controlling your speed. I should hate to think you don't get this over to your students. As previously mentioned you do seem to be a little disparaging about the word defensive, and I would take issue with that.

Interesting thread though. Latchigo, JT, You evidently must have read it to be posting on it. NehNeh

If you don't like this type of thread then don't bother - that's fine, I don't much care for Apres Ski - but I just don't go to that forum! wink

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

After all it is free · Last edited by After all it is free on Tue 9-10-07 22:10; edited 1 time in total

I just want to add one more thought on this topic.

If doing things that add a bit of speed control while turning (such as steering/skidding) is considered defensive skiing, then carving is arguably the least defensive form of turning. Carving a turn produces the fastest possible speeds,,, and the more steering/skidding added, the slower one will go. So is such defensiveness a bad thing? Not in my opinion. For the most part people intuitively understand the extent of their abilities, and will back off when they sense that their speed is approaching the threshold of that which their skills can handle. Self governing such as this is a wise and prudent thing. Imagine what would be happening on the slopes if we humans did not possess such a self presservation mechanism. It's bad enough as it is, but in that scenario it would be down right ugly.

The key to reducing defensive skiing is raising the minds perception of where those personal thresholds reside. Skill development does that. As skills increase, the minds concept of what constitutes intimidating and/or dangerous shifts accordingly. As this happens, people are freed to make cleaner turns and run straighter lines on steeper terrain in confident comfort. Carving becomes a realistic and safe option in a broader landscape of skiing situations. Scary finds a new place to dwell.

Fear is a powerful critter that deserves it's due. It serves us well by keeping us safe,,, but it can be squelched. That squelching of fear can be done without putting into jepardy that important saftey net it provides. Learning is most productive and relaxed when done in small steps that don't take people too deep into dangerous waters. Kind of like eating an elephant: you do it one bite at a time.

easiski, I understand and agree with every word you say.

Whitegold, Controversy is good. Assuming your view is correct and everyone else is wrong is not. And a thesis which shouts that no expert would ever use edge-checks to slow descent or deliberately use a braking element in turns must surely attract some criticism? Or do you buy the whole opening post?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Help!!

Some thoughts on ski technique from a Yank

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Bend ze Knees