Incidentally I'm also a bit too much 'uppy and downy' to the extent of doing a slightly old fashioned almost-jumping-off-the-ground thing - as you might or might not remember from a clinic ages ago...
Edit: gah, new page.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
skimottaret, It think it's more about the use of language in ski teaching. The use of the word 'vertical' in the opening question is a good example and I suspected that it was a trick questions as I doubt that it's the intention to teach a purely vertical up and down movement pattern, hence the talk of lateral movement later in this discussion.
Quote:
I hear virtually all the instructors (myself included) say to stand tall to create pressure and flex to absorb it and I am questioning the wisdom of that.
Indeed. I'm not sure that as someone learning to ski that's going to be entirely meaningful to them. Better perhaps to describe the desired outcome in a way that the pupil will be able to feel or self check for.
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?
Mr Piehole, starting a turn with a slight wedge is not the same as a snowplough as the inside ski isn't actually doing anything (it is being used for balance in a snowplough). It's easy to fix, with a little bit of practice. I did a session on inside ski control last week and everyone in my group made immediate changes and were steering both skis perfectly parallel. With a bit of practice on their part the little wedge at the start of some of their turns should disappear.
Incidentally I'm also a bit too much 'uppy and downy' to the extent of doing a slightly old fashioned almost-jumping-off-the-ground thing - as you might or might not remember from a clinic ages ago...
tan θ = µs
where θ is the angle from vertical and µs is the static coefficient of friction between the objects
so there!
This is an 'extension' of a thread that feef started and kitenski kidnapped about BASI exams/technique. I was trying (badly) to explain compression/extension and fell into the same trap of talking about rising and falling. From what kitenski seemed to be saying the BASI hatred of 'rising and falling' seems to have been overdrilled just a tad but then I was never taught to low speed carve (never saw the point of it).
From listening to friend’s who took up skiing late in life I think there's often confusion in student’s minds about what 'up' and 'down' means in the context. Early on they think it means relative to the slope whereas instinctively instructors are talking about the students skis. At initial learning speeds rising and falling relative to the slope is inevitable, it’s only later on that leg compression and flexion during the turn means that relative to the slope your head is stable. Your head is not stable relative to your skis in either case. I think it would help if the ‘head to ski’ spacing was pointed out early on so that the concept of keeping a stable head relative to the slope is not confused with altering the distance between head and skis as I think it currently might be in some cases.
The only admissable uses of a snowplough are (i) for clearing snow (ii) apporaching a lift queue populated by French/Austrians /snowboarders or a combination thereof (becasue you never know what's going to happen and you need a cordon sanitaire (iii) belaying a stretcher sled down to a pick up point. All other use is 'verboten' - are we clear?
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Up and Down
Why not Down and then Up or have I been doing it wrong all these years
After all it is free
After all it is free
Quote:
Why not Down and then Up or have I been doing it wrong all these years
back in the day down and then up was the way, so in the modern era with skis that actually like turning it is wrong
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.
skimottaret,
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I wasn't at it, but the information I got back from the recent coaching conference was that "up and down is no more", i.e. deliberately getting up and down movements in the snowplough turn progression has been dispensed with, as they do nothing, and the pressure changes resulting from them are minimal.
As initially described to me though this also translated to "pressure management is out" - which is to me is also manifestly wrong. There is a world of difference between:
a) making up/down movements for the sake of it
b) complete absence of extension/flexion
c) terrain/technique-appropriate extension/flexion movements
a) and b) are clearly extremes reached when we lose sight of the purpose behind of c) and try to over-simplify stuff - and while we shouldn't over-complicate stuff we risk as much damage by over-simplifying as we do over-complicating. Over-simplification comes when we don't really understand what we're trying to explain.
So, at the risk of over-complication , lets go back to the basic mechanics of what we're doing. I tried explaining the origin and limitations of pressure-control by extension/flexion some time back, but didn't manage to get the message over, so here's another go. When we talk about "applying pressure" we mean that we push on our skis, but that push has to push back against something, and that something is our body weight. With a constant pressure on the snow our centre-of-mass rides in a straight line at a constant speed. Similarly, as we push, our centre-of-mass will move in the opposite direction to the push, and if we flex/suck up our legs, we're reducing the force on the snow, and our centre-of-mass will fall. But the important thing (particularly in the context of snowplough turns) is that the pressure change on the ski only applies while the rate of rise or fall is changing (Newton's 2nd Law: F = ma, not F=mv) - just rising at a constant rate does not mean more pressure on the ski. So the duration of the pressure change is limited by how long we can be de/increasing the rate at which we extend our legs - i.e. a quite short period - and is absolutely limited by how much we can extend/contract. And the corollary is that a pressure increase when we start extending is necessarily matched by a pressure decrease when we stop extending - even though we are still standing tall at the time - which is the way good old-fashioned up-unweighting works.
So skillful pressure management is dependent on a) our absolute range of movement and b) matching those movements to the terrain we're skiing, to make sure the pressure changes are appropriate, i.e. increases when we want them and decreases at natural compression points - and not the other way around.
We can probably split pressure control into two main categories - reactive and proactive. The reactive category covers skiing over uneven terrain, and here we use extension/flexion of the legs to respond to changes in terrain by absorbing bumps or extending into troughs. In the ideal, this keeps our CoM riding in a straight line without any of the undulations in the snow surface - the pressure changes at our skis are minimised, our legs act as shock-absorbers and we don't get spat out by big ruts. This all depends on our reflexes and flexibility. This also applies to a degree in cruisy shortish-radius turns. When we want a bit more performance, we can be more proactive with a bit of a push at the start of the turn (as rjs said) to get a bit more initial bend in the ski, then let the natural turn forces keep the ski bent until we actively suck-up and reduce pressure at the end (where the turn forces are naturally high) for a quick transition into the next turn. That would apply equally whether they are hard or soft snow turns - the old bouncy powder turn style is just pushing the skis that bit harder into the snow to get them to bend a bit more, but with modern skis you are better off with a more lateral push and there's not much rise/fall of hips or upper body necessary at all. If you want more performance than the ski gets out of the natural turn shapes then you will need to push/absorb more and you will get more rise/fall.
So, as I see it, any up-down movements are natural consequences of pressure changes on the skis. There's nothing inherently good about rise/fall and nothing inherently bad either. So the underlying idea of the change in BASI's thought's is good, although I'm not at all sure they've been communicated well.
That applies for normal skiing. The vast majority of us though don't have a large enough range of movement to cover the range of skiing we do, so we do get thrown about a bit in variable terrain, or don't get the most performance the skis are capable of delivering. So we need to work to increase that range of movement, and hence need to do drills to push those boundaries, and then up/down become good things in their own right - within the context of the drill. Hopefull, having done the drill, our bodies then understand how far they can move, and we can respond appropriately when we need to in the context of normal skiing.
skimottaret, re. your point about overflexing at the end of the turn. Any lateral pressure at the end of the turn, i.e. when your CoM is up the hill from your skis, is pushing you back up the hill, i.e. slowing you down, aka "resisting the hill". To get the fastest times you need to reduce the pressure there as much as possible commensurate with making enough turn to keep your line. In recreational skiing, you may be wanting to keep the speed down, so keeping pressure up at that point is more appropriate.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
GrahamN, good post. For me rate and range of movement is the key to making "up and down" effective rather than contrived. I spend a lot of time when teaching trying to get my clients to feel the results of their movements in terms of the pressure changes, both reactive and proactive.
What I see around the hill is that the opposite to "good" flexion and extension movements isn't "bad" flexion and extension movements, but all too often a big sideways push of the ski creating a large initial steering angle with no grip until the skis reach the fall line. For those skiers a big 'up' movement so they stand on the ski immediately, even if it means there is a mostly vertical component to the move, would be a significant improvement over their normal tail-push turns. Once you have replaced the sideways push with a more effective extension movement you can then focus on creating whatever lateral move is called for by the terrain you're skiing (and how you choose to ski it).
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.
Mr Piehole, I still use the snowplough on a few occasions, narrow off piste track home with no space to turn, approaching a busy lift q, in horrible breakable crust and when told to on a BASI course
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
kitenski wrote:
Mr Piehole, I still use the snowplough on a few occasions.
Yes, so do I. I'm struggling to make the point I'm trying to make, so I'm graciously bowing out now!
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Mr Piehole, splitter!
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
'Up and down' extension/flexion and unweighting are still perfectly valid skills that anyone who wants to ski offpiste should learn - useful for steeps and deep crud.
That uphill baton drag and 'sluffed' jump turn are me all over!
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?
clarky999 wrote:
'Up and down' extension/flexion and unweighting are still perfectly valid skills that anyone who wants to ski offpiste should learn - useful for steeps and deep crud.
agree and important to note... it is still a "separated" extension...the final pressure/push coming from the uphill ski to make the turn... "not both!"
For me, Newton's Second Law should be one of the Fundamental Elements and its absence is, IMV, the largest gaping hole in the BASI plan.
Sure, if you try and explain it from the physics, most punters (sorry, clients) will just switch off but, as instructors, we need to have a good, strong knowledge of what it's doing for us.
Not really, as this would only be valid “if” the happy little skier was “REALLY” good – perpendicular to incline and all that “stuff”! Plus as it (by necessity) has to disregard inertia which is consequential in skiing (unless, like me you’re in a cafe most of the time) it has nothing to do with Uppy and Downy thingies, that skimottaret was asking about
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
altis wrote:
For me, Newton's Second Law should be one of the Fundamental Elements and its absence is, IMV, the largest gaping hole in the BASI plan.
Will BASI have to weigh people every morning on the course so that they can work it all out.
But what about after lunch - it will change, (assuming that the student don't get thier mates to give em a push ) unless they got better during lunch then it (the result) "may" stay the same.
BASI should just stick to skiing and nowt else. I have some 2nd year uni students who can't really understand N's 2nd thing. Trying this on a basi course is a non starter.
After all it is free
After all it is free
Wayne, There are many analogies that may be used to explain this . . . ie. a car or motorcycle suspension, compression under load, surface irregularity absorption and control of both down and side vectors. Even rocket science mechanics can be explained by the application of farting. Every time I hear a BASI trainer at work there's often a mouthful of seemingly contradictory 'basipeak' that I cannot decipher. Lord knows what the applicants are making of it. I get the sense that trainees are being coached to pass a test somewhat like our kids for their SATs . . . and we know how well that's turning out
Is BASI turning out instructors who just talk Basispeak and demonstrate a movement in the text proscribed way. Are they taught to assess, analyse and feedback to the student in a manner that the individual student or group can comprehend and respond to?
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.
Masque wrote:
Are they taught to assess, analyse and feedback to the student in a manner that the individual student or group can comprehend and respond to?
Yes, this is taught, practiced and analysed. The techie stuff is also taught for self knowledge more than to pass onto students...
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Masque, yeah you may be right. What do I know.
The problem is that loads and loads (and more loads) of book use that same "wrong" EQ to explain the slippy slidey way skis work and it's just not true.
To think about this in BASI styleeee you could say that – as the acceleration is always parallel to the top of the snow (well most of the time it is) - if we assume the snow top is the angle of incline then it runs against the equation as that is the only for the pull down and skier never goes down a slope ( - they go paraelle to it (unless they are falling off a cliff and their skis just happen to touch the rocks on the way down ).
BUT as we are skiing then we could use a dumbed down a = g sin θ (acceleration of gravity and all that) which is better than tan θ = μs, but even this will fail as it assumes no external force (including friction – but this is only if I waxed my skis the night before ) but of course we all know there is and that will be those applied by the skier.
It all hurts my head so I'm going for a coffee
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads on Thu 20-12-12 17:45; edited 1 time in total
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Masque wrote:
Is BASI turning out instructors who just talk Basispeak
No, well not this BASI qualified instructor at least.
Masque wrote:
Are they taught to assess, analyse and feedback to the student in a manner that the individual student or group can comprehend and respond to?
Yes, in a structured way, and your ability to assess, analyse and feedback is assessed in the teaching courses we are required to pass.
Teaching is an individual thing, even if all teachers have to pass the same exams. Not just in skiing but in all areas. skimottaret and I have a very similar approach to teaching, we've discussed it endlessly, taught as a team, planned coaching sessions together, compare the videos we take of our clients, have similar life experiences, have undertaken the same exams, been coached by the same coaches, etc, etc. But there will still be differences in how we approach a particular teaching task, the language we use, how we interact with the individuals or groups we are teaching. I see references to BASIspeak, BASIinstructors, BASIoids and I simply don't understand it because every experience I've had with BASI instructors (or Trainers) has been unique, driven by them as individuals rather than some sort of clone created in Grantown-on-Spey.
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.
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
Wayne,
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Kitenski
Quote:
jedster, on my L2 last 2 weeks they didn't want any 'standing taller' at all, the head shouldn't come up, the lower body can flex, extend etc, but the head shouldn't come up....
Watch that Ted Ligety sequence and tell me his head wasn't higher in transition than at full angulation!
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
jedster, this is what the text says accompanying that video
Quote:
Flexion/Extension - To seniors who learned to ski in the era of staight skis, flexion, extension was called going up and down. This is another movement pattern that has changed with our ski technology.
In the traditional turn, we used to go up at the start of a turn to unweight the skis so that we could flatten the skis, then pivot or turn them more easily. Then we would go down, sometimes adding pressure to set to skid a bit and set the edges. Of course, there were all variations with bend/stretch and "carving."
Today, in a typical turn, we extend fore/agonally into the turn and then flex at the bottom part of the turn to reduce the pressure on the skis so that we can keep the edges cutting and not skid out. At the transition of edge change, we are still flexed. Then we begin to move into the new turn, extending in the direction that we are going next.
This extension at the top part of the turn helps us to shape that early part of the turn and get an early edge.
By managing the pressure at the bottom of the turn, we can also maintain a clean edge and shape that part of the turn also. In addition, if we want to increase our speed at the top part of the turn, we can propel ourselves down the hill with that extension, a similar move to skating.
However, because the shaped skis are so easy to turn, many skiers today are not flexing and extending or moving much at all. To be smooth, make sure you do flex and extend. Match this movement pattern to your turn shape - continually and progressively flexing and extending, never static. An added bonus is that this will also help keep your legs from getting tired
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
rob@rar, I can only speak from me being nosey around BASI classes. I also believe that there are not that many people going through BASI that can re-interpret the BASI manual into good punterspeak and that's not a skill that BASI teaches, it's you and people like you with cross application and people skills that go on to be effective teachers. I haven't seen the latest BASI manual, is it still a lot thicker than it needs to be?
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
FFS! Will you lot STOP using racing technique analogies to illustrate basic ski and postural procedures. They are not comparable in any applicable way
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?
Masque, with the greatest respect, I have a lot more experience of BASI instructors than you have. The new manual is good I think, and it has one of my photos in it so it must be brilliant. It's pretty thick so might not pass the "Masque Brevity Test" (that's not a phrase I ever thought I'd write), and to get the best out of it you need to spend some time with it. But despite being a few hundred pages thick it's not a script for teaching the perfect 'BASI lesson'.
Masque, I guess you may have overheard a techie instructor to instructor session(s). Last week I gave 3 teaching sessions, one was to improve the instructors on that course, and hence lots of technical speak was used. If you'd overheard that lesson/discussion I can see why you'd arrive at such a conclusion. Similarly a trainer giving prospective instructors feed back may well get very technical.
However try and be nosey around a BASI instructor teaching pupils, not instructors. It would be interesting to understand what differences you hopefully see/hear....
regards,
Greg
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Masque wrote:
FFS! Will you lot STOP using racing technique analogies to illustrate basic ski and postural procedures. They are not comparable in any applicable way
Disagree 100% but am signing off for the evening to go talk about and sample beer............
rob@rar, maybe I should sleep with the enemy and take a course or two . . .
Think of the opportunities
sshhh . . . you heard nowt . . . remember, I have guns now
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Masque wrote:
FFS! Will you lot STOP using racing technique analogies to illustrate basic ski and postural procedures. They are not comparable in any applicable way
The only reason you go down at the end of a turn is so you have somewhere to umm!... come up from!
"no that probably don't work either!"
After all it is free
After all it is free
gatecrasher, kitenski, the extremes of body position, mass transference, equipment construction, use and response is not applicable to any normal teaching environment. It is racing and not recreational sport skiing. I didn't throw a half-in, half-out double back somersault to illustrate basic trampoline technique. All sports are mastered in developmental steps and throwing up a vid or a pic of a ski racer in extremis illustrates NOTHING here unless the subject of the thread is 'Why do ski racers get their hips so close to the ground?'
This thread is about teaching uncoordinated numpties like me the feelings and responses of body/ski/snow required to learn to ski well. Using the racing analogy has no place in that conversation, none of us (or very few indeed) will ever have skills, strength, responses or balls to want, need or be capable of skiing like that. They are racing at the limits of themselves and their equipment and are often in survival mode using long practice and great strength to recover from virtual disaster. This is the last thing we need to teach or use to illustrate skiing in a teaching environment.
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.
A slow mo video of Ted, love the way he projects his body down the hill, steps the inside ski around, see how he stands (extends) the new outside leg. I'm over analysing my own turns now thanks to this thread. My takeaway from this is some flexibility is better than none for novice skiers and without doubt is a must going off piste and more advanced piste skiing. Hopefully tomorrow (snow tonight maybe) I'll be pressuring my skis down to compress the fresh powder ready to release the skis and bounce out of the fluffy stuff, old skool style, I may even chuck in some carvey powder turns.dreams, dreams
Masque, disagree, nothing wrong with seeing what the pros do, doesn't mean we need to emulate them but they tend to make extreme movements compared to what recreational skiers probably need a little of. If I'm helping out some novice skiers and see a decent skier coming down the slope I'll try a find one aspect of their technique to mention to the peeps I'm instructing. Such as look how dynamic they are, the hand position, the body position, the gap between the skis, etc. It's not always easy, the better the skier the smoother, faster and easier they make it look.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
).
) but of course we all know there is and that will be those applied by the skier.
