 Poster: A snowHead
|
Whitegold, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
offpisteskiing, how much you have to angulate to remain balanced on the outside ski is governed by several factors; speed of travel, radius of turn, and ski sidecut. For any particular turn, there will be a singular amount of angulation that will put 100 percent of your weight on your outside ski. As you reduce it, weight will be progressively transferred to your inside ski. By managing the amount of angulation we use, we have full power to dictate exactly how much weight we want to put on each ski, from 100 percent on the outside ski, to 100 percent on the inside ski, or any variance in between.
The other point that needs to be made, is angulation comes in different forms. I can knee angulate to achieve outside ski balance, and look completely different than I would using hip angulation to do it, but my Center of Mass would be in the exact same location. Why would you use one or the other you might ask? Well, if you want to know you will have to ask.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Whitegold
Are you from the Isle of Man ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Inclination is banking done well (no increase in angulation required to maintain weight on outside ski).
Banking is inclination done badly (need more speed or less inclination or more angulation as too much weight ending up on inside ski).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
slikedges, are you implying that angulation isn't [ever?] necessary? Your post reads that way, but I might have misunderstood it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| offpisteskiing wrote: |
| FastMan wrote: |
| That's why when people incline too much their weight falls to their inside ski. |
But if they incline an appropriate amount then they can remain balanced against the outside ski... |
Correct. The implication above from FastMan that 'inclination = falling on the inside ski', is misleading - although it does often follow. Spyderman was right when he said that shortening that inside leg would allow skiing on the outside ski with pure inclination [edit: I originally mistyped that as "angulation", but context should have shown I meant inclination - my only defence is that it was very late when I was first writing] - although he would have to be going at a different speed. As whitegold says, inclination is doing it all with a straight body, angulation is putting an additional bend in somewhere along the way (e.g. hips or knees).
1) As shown in FastMan's pictures, you are balancing on a ski when the resultant force from combining gravity (downwards) and the "centrifugal" force (horizontally outwards) passes from your CoM through the point of support.
2) If that combined force vector from your CoM hits the ground inside your ski you will fall into the turn. If it hits the ground on the outside of the ski you will fall to the outside of the turn. This applies irrespective of which ski you're on, or whether you're angulating or not.
3) The centrifugal force component gets larger as your speed increases or the radius of turn decreases (v*v/r). So if you speed up for a given turn radius you will need your CoM further inside to avoid falling outside the turn - so you incline more.
4) If solely inclining, there is just one speed at which you will be balanced on your chosen ski for a given radius - but whether that is the inside or outside ski is your choice.
5) Clearly, if you are standing on the outside ski the point of support is further away from the centre of the turn than if standing on the inside ski (unless you are skiing with your legs crossed - but even so that just changes the definition of which is the inside and the outside ski  ), so you need to take measures to ensure that that force vector from your CoM falls further from the centre of the turn if on the outside ski.
6) If skiing with solely inclination [edit: originally same mistype as above], that just means you have to be going a bit faster for a given turn radius.
7) It's perfectly possible to ski with no angulation on either the inside or the outside ski (if you have the control to do it) - you just need to be going at the right speed, and that means going faster for the same inclination angle if balanced on the outside ski.
The point of angulation is that it allows you another degree of freedom when choosing your speed and turn shape. As described above, for a given turn shape with no angulation you can only travel between two speeds (those causing the force vector to pass through the inside ski balance point or the outside ski balance point) without falling over. That's way too limiting for any useful skiing (and probably verging on the impossible to maintain given varying slope steepness, terrain etc). By changing the amount of angulation you can move the position of your CoM either to the inside (less angulation) or outside (more angulation) of the turn, so moving that balance point on the snow independently of your speed. Hence, you can choose a range of turn shapes for a given speed, or deliberately provoke falling to the inside of the turn (so increasing the angle of the ski and tightening the turn), or to the outside of the turn (to decrease the angle of the ski and relax the turn, or start a transition). The problem comes when you don't get it right, and if angulating too little for the speed you are going you will fall too much to the inside of the turn, onto the inside ski, then continue falling inside and finally hit the deck.
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Tue 11-01-11 22:00; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GrahamN, ah, thanks, I had forgotten the speed factor, which is silly of me, because I experienced just this in a lesson with Rob a few months ago:
| Quote: |
The problem comes when you don't get it right, and if angulating too little for the speed you are going you will fall too much to the inside of the turn.
|
It was messy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pure inclination will also push your COM further outside your BOS for any given speed than will angulation, and whilst it is entirely possible to ski the turn with just Inclination when you slightly miscalculate it or the conditions are variable, because you have further to move your COM to regain a stable position it takes more strength and time so is more likely to end in tears.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
GrahamN, good job expanding on what I said. Just be carefull about suggesting people need only go faster if they want to turn while inclinated. At anything beyond low edge angles it doesn't matter how fast you go, you have to angulate. No one goes faster than these guys through turns. See the massive angulation in the following pic:
and they have to angulate. The amount of angulation above is massive. You won't find any shots of these guys fully inclinated at the apex of a turn, even in speed events at more moderate edge angles. See pic below:
The only place you will see pure inlinated positions is at the beginning of a turn, but they're using it to create a state of imbalance that allows them to rapidly tip into the new turn. See fourth frame in montage below:
By the time they get to the apex they are balanced again, and strongly angulated. See next pic:
If these guys can't inclinate and stay balanced on their outside ski, at the speeds they go, the average Joe and Jane recreational skiers sure as all heck won't be able to. Therefore, the important message that should come out of this discussion is that learning skiers DO need to angulate to remain balanced on their outside ski, and the skill should be introduced right at the earliest stages of learning. I'm happy to see instructors introducing basic angulating skills while their students are still in a wedge. Build a basic level of competence early on, and more drastic levels of angulation will be easier to adopt later on, when edge angles grow.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Mon 10-01-11 8:05; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't learning to side-slip involve some angulation? That's usually around lesson 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
FastMan, your examples are slightly out of context with your argument...
Those guys could turn purely using inclination, but not at the exact radius they need on the specific terrain they are on in a standard WC race. As GrahamN states above it is possible to turn purely using inclination and remain balanced against our choice of inside or outside ski, but the field of parameters for this is quite small (in terms of speed/radius/angle of slope etc).
In reality most people use & benefit from a combination of inclination & angulation in their turns as this gives an appropriate mix of stacked position, and quick, responsive position to vary the edge angle as required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Hurtle, I'm just wondering why it was called the Evasion turn. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Yoda, not a clue. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| offpisteskiing wrote: |
You said:
As GrahamN states above it is possible to turn purely using inclination and remain balanced against our choice of inside or outside ski,
offpisteskiing, I read that statement from GrahamN too, and it sounded to me just like you seem to have interpreted it. I'm assumed when I read it that he'd just phrased unclearly what he was trying to say, so I just let it go. But now you've repeated it in the same context, so I feel I should clarify, because your above statement is wrong.
At any particular point during a turn, your lateral balance point will be in one place. If that place happens to be under your inside foot, you can not just arbitrarily lift your inside ski and continue on with the same turn radius, while trying to balance on your outside ski. You'll be out of balance and will fall down.
Same is true for a turn in which you're angulated and balanced on your outside ski, with inside ski lifted. Suddenly switch to your inside, and maintain the same turn radius, and you'll again be out of balance, the likely result being the skier getting ejected over their skis to the outside of the turn.
You said:
In reality most people use & benefit from a combination of inclination & angulation in their turns as this gives an appropriate mix of stacked position, and quick, responsive position to vary the edge angle as required.
Just to clarify here, the term inclination refers to a singular position, with the body being straight like a telephone pole. Add the slightest amount of angulation, and you're angulated. The term angulation does not refer to a singular position, like inclination does. It refers to a full spectrum of body positions. You can not combine them at the same time, because the moment you use any amount or type of angulation, you instantly become angulated, and no longer inclinated.
Many skiers suffer from not using enough angulation, and thus have too much weight on their inside ski. Observe the feedback instructors here at snowheads and other discussion forums offer to folks who submit videos, and comments such as "you're leaning in" and "level your shoulders" are pervasively common. It's why I say it's so important to teach angulation skills early on. Leaning in, like any movement pattern habit, is best shed early on, before it gets embedded in peoples muscle memory. It holds them back from higher levels of skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
FastMan, I didn't say that you could balance against either the inside or outside ski for a given amount of inclination, but that you can incline and remain balanced over either your outside OR your inside foot (you choose) - no implication that you could swap from inside to outside foot & remain balanced for a similar amount of inclination at similar speeds.
As to inclination being a 'singular' position - there are varying degrees of inclination (from 0 to lots) just as there are varying degrees of angulation (from 0 to lots).
This thread does however prove my point that it is not constructive to talk tech on internet forums as the 'degree of separation' between participants is too wide ... I say tomato you say tomayto and all that jazz.
At which point I shall gracefully retire to go & ski the 50cm of fresh in Courmayeur tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Or, to paraphrase:
I could make a turn using inclination while remaining balanced against my outside foot.
I could make a turn using inclination while remaining balanced against my inside foot.
(Yes this is not easy, and the combination of parameters allowing success is small).
If I create 5º of angle (or angulation) between my upper body and legs (thinking in simplistic 'stickman' terms), I can achieve a variety of edge angles relative to the snow. How? By inclining this angulated body position...
Now; powder...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| offpisteskiing wrote: |
As to inclination being a 'singular' position - there are varying degrees of inclination (from 0 to lots) just as there are varying degrees of angulation (from 0 to lots).
|
I'm not speaking of the how far the skier in telephone pole straight posture tips into the turn. Different edge angles, but same straight body position. In angulation you have a multitude of body positions you can use, which allows you to establish and maintain any desired state of balance, at a vast variety of speeds, edge angles and turn radii.
Inclination allows outside ski balance to happen in a minuscule number of turning situations. Many people have problems improving, because leaning in (inclinating) is an element of their default skiing. They can't balance on their outside ski, because they don't have the angulation skills to do so, and they can't enjoy even moderatley higher edge angles, because they're leaning in habit won't allow it. Until they learn to angulate, they're doomed to floundering in ineffective and inefficient forms of skiing.
And with that, I'm done. I hope, somehow, through all the clutter in this thread, that simple yet crucial message reached the ears of of at least someone who can prosper from it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FastMan wrote: |
| offpisteskiing wrote: |
You said:
As GrahamN states above it is possible to turn purely using inclination and remain balanced against our choice of inside or outside ski,
offpisteskiing, I read that statement from GrahamN too, and it sounded to me just like you seem to have interpreted it. I'm assumed when I read it that he'd just phrased unclearly what he was trying to say, so I just let it go. But now you've repeated it in the same context, so I feel I should clarify, because your above statement is wrong.
At any particular point during a turn, your lateral balance point will be in one place. If that place happens to be under your inside foot, you can not just arbitrarily lift your inside ski and continue on with the same turn radius, while trying to balance on your outside ski. You'll be out of balance and will fall down.
Same is true for a turn in which you're angulated and balanced on your outside ski, with inside ski lifted. Suddenly switch to your inside, and maintain the same turn radius, and you'll again be out of balance, the likely result being the skier getting ejected over their skis to the outside of the turn.
|
|
You are reading into this more that what I or offpisteskiing has said, and so making a classic straw-man argument. I may be doing the same, but your strong implication is that inclining means banking and skiing on the inside foot. This is not necessarily the case. If you are skiing balanced on the inside foot with pure inclination, you can then do exactly the same at the same radius on the outside foot - you just need to be going a bit faster (to get the radial component of that vector a bit bigger and shift the balance point to the outside ski) - and get that inside foot out of the way. Similarly, if you are skiing while purely inclined balanced on the outside foot, you can do so in the same position on the inside foot, you just need to be a bit slower. I'm not saying that this is desirable, just that it is possible - which is what Spyderman said at the start.
Re inclination vs angulation it's a matter of definition. Your definition is that anything with a bend in it anywhere is angulated. With that definition there's little possibility of saying much about where the body or CoM are beyond that - you're either angulated or you're not. The definition I (and I think offpisteskiing and probably most over here are using (when it's appropriate to differentiate between the two) is that inclination is in essence the angle between the line from CoM to BoS and the vertical (or more likely the normal to the skiing surface), and angulation refers to the angle made within the body - typically between the lower legs and the torso.
As for the WC photos, the most important thing about a race course is it's a test of skill. It wouldn't be much of a test if it were set with the turns of the size that could be achieved at speeds that can be sustained by the skiers and the slope with pure inclination - so of course we see everyone on a WC course with a load of angulation. I do remember though seeing a number of turns at Schladming last year where Lizeroux was virtually straight bodied, almost lying on the snow - staggering skill level to hold that.
And pur-lease  , there are no such words as "inclinated" or "inclinating" (unless you maybe went to a similar school to Dubya's) - it's "inclined" and "inclining".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Vivat BZK! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GrahamN, phew! I was worried about complexicatingly and confoundications for a minute but feel reassured now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Gaud, how'd I get dragged back into this train wreck?
Not a staw-man, GrahamN. I'd let the comment go originally because I assumed my interpretation had to be wrong. When it got parroted again later, I was concerned others might come away with the same interpretation I did, so I just wanted to clarify. That was my only reason for bringing it up. Please don't accuse me of devious debated tactics, I don't do that. For as long as I stay here, my motivation is purely education. I despise debate club games. I have no time or tolerance for them.
Your definition of inclination (the CM to BOS line tipped into the turn) is the new school one I referred to in my glossary. I wish I'd known that was the perspective you were coming from, I could have structured my responses to you accordingly. Could have saved us a lot of time, and avoided a lot of confusion for people trying to make any sense out of this thread.
I hope in the resultant clutter, the crucial message that should come out of this thread has not been lost. It's so important for learning skiers to develop angulation skills.
By the way, Falline is not a real word either, even in Texas dictionaries, but it gets used a lot in the skiing world. We take some language liberties in skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No accusation of devious debating tactics, just of repeatedly working at refuting points that neither I nor offpisteskiing had made. There is no disagreement that angulation is a crucial skill, as I said in my first post. Re the inclination definition: I assumed you were unaware of the (what you call "new school") definition, as it was patently clear in offpisteskiing's post, and clarified even more in his follow-ups, that that was what he was using. The fact that you know of that definition then makes it even more surprising that you then took him to task over it - and continued after those follow-ups. Before patronising us too much it may be worth remembering that, while I'm only a lowly trainee entry-level instructor/coach, offpisteskiing is a full cert BASI Trainer.
I've never ever used the word "falline" either - why do so when there's a perfectly good expression in "fall line"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
So bankers are to blame for bad skiing as well? Excellent, they deserve a bonus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Yoda wrote: |
| So bankers are to blame for bad skiing as well? Excellent, they deserve a bonus. |
Surely they deserve a plan to bail them out and have their lessons paid for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
GrahamN, brilliant - thanks for reminding me of those! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Thanks folks for all the responses, plenty for me to try to emulate
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| FastMan wrote: |
I hope in the resultant clutter, the crucial message that should come out of this thread has not been lost. It's so important for learning skiers to develop angulation skills.
|
I've been lurking and picking out what driblets I can make sense of in this forum, and I think I picked that up at least, so thank you 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Lethal_Hamster wrote: |
| FastMan wrote: |
I hope in the resultant clutter, the crucial message that should come out of this thread has not been lost. It's so important for learning skiers to develop angulation skills.
|
I've been lurking and picking out what driblets I can make sense of in this forum, and I think I picked that up at least, so thank you |
Thanks, Lethal Hamster, for letting me know my effort wasn't in vain. It's the hope that readers like youreself are actually out there, trying to learn, that motivates me to persevere through the cluttered chaos that sometimes erupts in internet forums.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| FastMan wrote: |
| Lethal_Hamster wrote: |
| FastMan wrote: |
I hope in the resultant clutter, the crucial message that should come out of this thread has not been lost. It's so important for learning skiers to develop angulation skills.
|
I've been lurking and picking out what driblets I can make sense of in this forum, and I think I picked that up at least, so thank you |
Thanks, Lethal Hamster, for letting me know my effort wasn't in vain. It's the hope that readers like youreself are actually out there, trying to learn, that motivates me to persevere through the cluttered chaos that sometimes erupts in internet forums. |
I find it very helpful, for the most part - I think a big problem is that no one seems to be making or refuting the same points! I saw one fairly heated thread when someone was talking about teaching novices and someone was talking about coaching ski racers, and they both thought they were talking about the same thing. It's often heavy going but usually informative so I'm very grateful for those like you who take the time to clarify things!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Lethal_Hamster,
| Quote: |
I think a big problem is that no one seems to be making or refuting the same points!
|
If you think that happens in BZK - and I agree with you - you should try some of the non-skiing arguments that are running in Apres at the moment. No two consecutive posts are on the same subject!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hurtle, I tend to avoid those - there's enough things to disagree about when it comes to technology, let alone politics!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Sleipnir, surely that's mid fall?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| Sleipnir, surely that's mid fall? |
Could well be, but there were no other photos. Another good reason why angulation is better.....helps you stay on two skis!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
