Epic Posters

PMTS Forum

Postby Max_501 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:26 am

SCSA wrote:I think there are others like Phil, who've been around a long time, who can bring valuable points of view here.

If there's a way to maintain the focus of the board while opening it up some, I'm all for it.


I guess it depends on what this site is meant to be. I have always thought of it as a tech support site for HH's camp and book customers. If that is the intention than opening up discussions will do little but cause confusion for those still learning PMTS. I suspect its the very tight focus that makes it a viable learning tool.

If you want to see what happens when the discussion becomes open to any and all input take a look at the threads in the ski instruction forum on Epic. There are dozens of different opinions on how you do something.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Postby Max_501 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:46 am

SCSA wrote:Let's say someone started dinking around with one of the PMTS moves, then modified it.


Interesting...I've never modified any of the PMTS stuff. I assume that HH is already giving me the best way to do something and I do it exactly as prescribed which has resulted in a steady improvement in my skiing.

I guess I don't feel I have the foundation to be mucking around with modifying drills and movements.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Postby Flexon Phil » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:55 am

For those of you who know my history, you should knw me well enough that by no means am I here to cause problems or to take away from anything hte site is offering.

I will say the negativity that I have seen is not only not good for the site but also not good for the industry as a whole. If I was running this or any site, I would not want some of these posts being representative of me and my product. There is an old saying...Some will, some won't, so what. If you give people a positive view of a product, you will have a better chance of selling it, than some of the 'exclusion' tactics that have been shown.

Personally, I want nothing but good for here and skiing in general.
My TM can beat up your TM
Flexon Phil
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:33 am

Clarfications are in order

Postby John Mason » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:10 am

PMTS is not the only path to great skiing.

In my long discussions over these last 4 years there are a couple of things we PMTS'ers say that might seem over-zealous. And one thing that we say that really is a fundemental difference.

So, 3 premises:

1. Is PMTS the only path to great skiing: obvious answer - no : reference - HH's books - the obvious evidence of some of the best WC skiers never coming up through PMTS

2. Is there such a thing a great skiing. Is there in the PMTS mindset a definition of great skiing that we strive towards: Yes - This very basic concept is very foreign to non-PMTS'ers or casual PMTS'ers because they have not reached this same conclusion. Certainly the idea of a goal in skiing and ski instruction is pretty foreign to the PSIA viewpoint of ski instruction.

3. Is PMTS the most optimal path available to top level efficient skiing? Most people that post here think it is. Most people that post here think or have experienced that much of what other methods teach will actually block the arrival of great skiing.

1, 2 and 3 above create most of the arguments. A PMTS skier looks at the video that HH posted of the guy proposing to teach tightening his turns and see an example that fails item 2 above. He doesn't look like the WC slalom racers at all. He is way to loaded on his inside ski. He has tons of tip lead. He has no early carve engagement. To us it looks like basically ugly skiing. But to most people I've skied with at non PMTS race camps at Mt Hood they would also say that's ugly skiing. He mentioned the 'gorilla turn method'. At the atomic race camp I went to pretty much all facets of that program (since a student brought the DVD) was deemed counter productive to the goals being taught.

I think that item 3 above is where the panning of PSIA comes from. Never do the PMTS'ers I know think there is only one way to learn great skiing, but most think the specific PSIA approach implied by their cert tests and their skier level classifications is from the stone age and has little to do with achieving number 2 above - great efficient skiing.

The other issue that confuses lurkers is what is efficient skiing and great skiing. Sometimes they confuse a PMTS'er as being able to do movement analysis or be critical of a skier even a PSIA demo team skier as equating to PMTS being a one dimensional way of skiing. That's not true. But in the varied types of releases and huge variety of turns the PMTS toolset allows a skier to do their are very common 'markers' that we use or test ourselves on for if we are skiing a PMTS way or not. This has to do with efficiency and use of the ski to create the turns rather than being inefficient.

For the new people on the forum - please consider 1, 2, and 3 above and if you have some specific questions about those and why we tend to have those 'koolaid' attributes, that might be a useful discussion. But there is not much point of being here if in the course of discussing 1 2 and 3 above you have an interest in disucssing what I label "PMTS myths" because that's a waste of everyone's time.

Common myths being discussed in this thread and others are:

1. PMTS'ers think PMTS is the only way to be a great skier
2. The idea of a goal of what defines a top level PMTS style skier equates to a single narrow way to ski

What would be quite productive is keep discussions and MA on just that. In my non-PMTS instruction I've had, the PSIA goal being taught would never ever had got me to how I ski now. Their end product was simply not the same. But at the non-pmts race camp the goals were identical but the terms and efficiency of the instruction to get there were not as good as PMTS. Not all race camps were as good as that one I went to as you can go to the 'gorrilla turn' school of race camp. PMTS is a high standard, a complete toolset. If not, I and others would not do it.
John Mason
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:52 pm
Location: Lafayette, Indiana, USA

Postby Bob.Peters » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:21 am

Max_501 wrote:
SCSA wrote:Let's say someone started dinking around with one of the PMTS moves, then modified it.


Interesting...I've never modified any of the PMTS stuff. I assume that HH is already giving me the best way to do something and I do it exactly as prescribed which has resulted in a steady improvement in my skiing.

I guess I don't feel I have the foundation to be mucking around with modifying drills and movements.


See, Max, I don't understand this belief.

By all accounts, you're a very good skier. I'm also assuming that you have a somewhat different height/weight/body shape/boot size from Harald. It seems almost certain to me that you must generate turning forces somewhat differently than Harald.

I think you must certainly know what feels good in a turn and what doesn't. If you're doing a drill or making a turn and some variation of a movement just "clicks", why isn't that a completely valid development? At least for you personally, if not necessarily for the PMTS system in general.

I think that's all SCSA is saying. Skills development is a continuum. As we become better at doing *any* skill, we become better able to evaluate the worth of variations on that skill.

Once you've become good enough to conclude that the current version of PMTS is the right way to ski, I would think you're good enough to experiment a little and decide whether there's a movement that improves things. That's how evolution occurs.
Bob.Peters
 

PMTS evolves but remains the same

Postby John Mason » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:28 am

In the years PMTS has been rolling along, we never used to hear much about counter. Then at the camps this started being much more of a focus. That's a 'new movement' for many that have been doing PMTS for years. But it was always there. You see it in HH's skiing in the early DVD's.

I'm not sure the discovery of a new movement cue or teaching tool well ever stop, but a truely 'new' movement that affects the actual skiing and changes or modifys the outcome will be significant event. There are only so many ways the skeleton can make skis tip. I know the 'waist steering' movement seems to be trying to be a new movement, but the result creates skiing that does not match goal 2 above. Thus this movement will not be incorporated into PMTS skiing ever.
John Mason
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:52 pm
Location: Lafayette, Indiana, USA

Postby Ott Gangl » Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:53 am

>>>I guess it depends on what this site is meant to be. I have always thought of it as a tech support site for HH's camp and book customers.<<<

Oh my! that puts a totally new light on what this site is, something I never thought about, a tech support site. That explains why skiers who are not involved, yet, in PMTS are often sidelined, if you don't want tech support for PMTS, what are you doing here, oh my.

But even so, there should be tolerance for exploratory questions here that don't get the most often quoted answer, 'Buy the books and videos and then come back'. Might not that turn a lot of people away?

....Ott
Ott Gangl
 
Posts: 451
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 3:16 pm
Location: Ohio, USA via Bavaria

Postby Sidecut » Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:16 am

Flexon Phil wrote:
Like Ott, I beleive 80% of the people out there who cannot ski have never either taken a lesson or took one and are self taught. That cannot be blamed on PSIA or any other teaching system. And quite frankly, 80% of those people are happy with the way they are skiing and don't want to spend the time to get better.


So you've answered your own question. PSIA has been the largest subscribed to teaching method in the US for over 40 years. Because it is an organization that's "mission" (which theya re only to happy to hide behind) is to educate instructors it is entirely fair to gauge the success of the organization by it's impact on the customer.

People no longer take lessons and have no interest in ski instruction or becoming a better skier. This is a complete change that has happened over the decades. People used to WANT to take lessons and WANT to improve, They would go away on ski weeks to do that. Now while there are other factors that have influenced this trend, PSIA must bear a large part of the blame. As their membership has increased and their influence has increased the desire and demand for lessons has decreased. I would say that this is the result of a poorly trained membership teaching an ineffective method. People don't take lessons because they do not see the value and benefit.

As for 80% of people being happy to ski that way, I suggest that you go to any ski area on a powder day and see how happy the 80% is. They are not because they cannot ski it. The percentage of first time skiers that does not have exposure to soem type of pro instruction is in reality very small.

In little organizations like PSIA or NSPS, you inevitabley get petty politicians who take over the group and hijack it. Let's face it you're also not getting exactly the cream of the crop in leadership roles at these places. As a result there is a desperation to maintain the status quo and the group stagnates.

As a result PSIA's influence with the public is ZERO, with the areas it's ZERO, with manufactureres it's ZERO. The only people it influences is it's membership who are more interested in validating their own skiing with pins and jackets then they are in changing PSIA so that it could become a vital and influential partner in skiing. Don't Rock The Boat!

My buddy just got his PSIA newsletter and all I can say is thank god I'm not in it. Another dues increase and a plea for money to send skiers to Snowbird for training. As I said before , It's a ponzi scheme.
User avatar
Sidecut
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 10:44 am

Postby Flexon Phil » Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:42 am

Sidecut,

I am sorry, but looking at the definition of a Ponzi Sheme....
Ponzi scheme usually offers abnormally high short-term returns in order to entice new investors. The high returns that a Ponzi scheme advertises (and pays) require an ever-increasing flow of money from investors in order to keep the scheme going.

The system is doomed to collapse because there are little or no underlying earnings from the money received by the promoter. However, the scheme is often interrupted by legal authorities before it collapses, because a Ponzi scheme is suspected and/or because the promoter is selling unregistered securities. (As more and more investors become involved, the likelihood of the scheme coming to the attention of authorities will continue to increase.)

The scheme is named after Charles Ponzi, who became notorious for using the technique after emigrating from Italy to the United States in 1903. Ponzi was not the first to invent such a scheme, but his operation took in such a large amount of money that it was the first to become known throughout the United States. Today's schemes are often considerably more sophisticated than Ponzi's, although the underlying formula is quite similar and the principle behind every Ponzi scheme is to exploit lapses in judgment arising out of greed.

How does PSIA fit into this? Who is making all the money?


I see PSIA as a cookie cutter teaching method that is (fairly) easy for a ski school to adapt to to teach.

As far as the 80% not being happy on a powder day..the same 80% won't be happy in a mogul field. I would aslo venture to say that 80% of those 80% are also skiing ill fitting gear. I am not really sure what you point is.

If you want to get out there and bang the drums for PMTS, by all means do so..but in reading your posts and reading the way others see your view and methods..you are doing more damage than good. I have been in sales almost my whole life, I have never sold anything to someone that I had to beat into buying a product.
My TM can beat up your TM
Flexon Phil
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:33 am

Postby Max_501 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:45 am

Bob.Peters wrote:See, Max, I don't understand this belief.

By all accounts, you're a very good skier. I'm also assuming that you have a somewhat different height/weight/body shape/boot size from Harald. It seems almost certain to me that you must generate turning forces somewhat differently than Harald.


Others have said I'm a decent skier but I'm nowhere near the level HH is, and unless I happen to reach a point where I'm skiing better than HH (never gonna happen) its doubtful that I'm going to come up with a different way of doing things that is somehow 'better'. I certainly know lots of ways to make things worse.

I don't think that the size issue makes a difference for efficient movements.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Postby dewdman42 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:00 pm

Why are we having an Epic-like debate here on this forum? This debate has been done over and over and over again on Epic. There are plenty of PMTS supporters and detractors on Epic to debate this stuff all you want. The only reason this thread has not been deleted and some people banned is because Harald is out sick with the flu right now.

He has made it very clear that this forum will not be used to debate the merits of PMTS. On this forum, the natural assumption is that PMTS rules! Deal with it.

Anyone who wants to learn PMTS can buy the books/videos and study them. What are you waiting for? I view this site as a support site for PMTS enthusiasts. Epic is a chaotic place were debates on every subject under the skier sun take place. We don't want that kind of situation here. Go to Epic for that.

John Mason, your long post above pretty much sums up things well in my view.

Listen I am not a 100% pure PMTS skier. In fact Harald might even say that I'm not even close to it, hard to say. I learned to ski pretty well before I ever heard about PMTS.

However, I recognize that PMTS is an EXCELLENT system that will arrive skiers to a place of high performance. I do not at all see the same capabilities in the current PSIA/CSIA systems. The best skiers in those systems have gotten additional training elsewhere or they never would have gotten to that level.

When I go to race camps, the stuff I am taught aligns itself very well with PMTS, but not so much with PSIA/CSIA. In my own teaching I am frequently finding myself using PMTS concepts and finding them to be extremely effective...and also finding that my students have huge smiles when I do. PMTS brings high performance skiing concepts to average recreational skiers in a way they can digest.

PSIA/CISA have completely different missions that have nothing to do with truly high performance skiing. They have more to do with looking pretty, skiing in control, enabling skiers to 'get down" any part of the mountain without looking terrible or feeling sketchy. Ok. Its really unfortunate that the methods they are employing there will not arrive at true high end skiing, but that is how it is folks. If you want to ski really high end skiing in ANY conditions, you need lots and lots of race training to compliment your TTS lessons. Or..you can just go with PMTS and you'll be on the right track from the get go.

If you come to this forum with an open mind and ready to receive, you will be embraced. If you come to this forum with a critical mind, putting out an attitude that you need to be impressed before you will believe anything, you will not be embraced so well.
dewdman42
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:52 pm

Postby midwif » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:20 pm

Dewdman, very well put.
midwif
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:28 am
Location: new york city

Postby Max_501 » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:20 pm

dewdman42 wrote:If you want to ski really high end skiing in ANY conditions, you need lots and lots of race training to compliment your TTS lessons. Or..you can just go with PMTS and you'll be on the right track from the get go.


Even better PMTS plus race training! Man those SL gates are just kicking my butt.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Postby Flexon Phil » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:21 pm

It's not me debating..I am all for a great teaching system. :D
My TM can beat up your TM
Flexon Phil
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:33 am

Postby ramshackle » Thu Feb 01, 2007 6:33 pm

Sidecut wrote:People no longer take lessons and have no interest in ski instruction or becoming a better skier. This is a complete change that has happened over the decades. People used to WANT to take lessons and WANT to improve, They would go away on ski weeks to do that.


I got two things to say about this statement or group of statements there Sidecut and the first is that what used to be is that skiing was done either by the very rich who used it more as a form of relaxing leisure with a tiny bit of skiing done to break up the cocktail hours and then by serious athletes or maybe people who at least were serious about skiing. But then some time in the 70s or maybe early 80s skiing became something that was trendy and cool and lots of people did it just to do it just to be with people who did it or just to say they did it and these people werent at all serious about skiing more like serious about what they considered a skiing scene if you know what I mean.

The other thing I want to say is that your being a bit generous or maybe romantic about what you say used to be I mean your looking back fondly on a time that never really was at least not to the great extent you say it was. Ive been skiing since the late 60s and Ive seen skiing become popular in that 70s time period I talked about only to watch the fad die out and thats when snowboarding started to come onto the scene and a lot of people said snowboarding saved skiing but the truth is that those people are looking only at skiing since the fad of the 70s and theyre not looking back before the big fad period because the serious skiers always have been there and they havent really gone away.

And hey as to the PSIA is a ponzi scheme charge man you really gotta cut out that exaggerating nonsense I mean PSIA may have some kooks and some nimrods and a lot of those PSIA teachers may be more concerned with pretty turns than powerful turns or efficient turns but that dont mean its a ponzi scheme and it dont mean that its a ripoff see theres people who only want to look pretty going downhill and for those folks PMTS looks too complicated and like too much work.
If your skiing feels good to you then it is good for you but that doesnt mean you cant improve your skiing okay?
ramshackle
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 3:05 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Primary Movements Teaching System

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests