Unweighting

[Rusty Guy]

I just have a sec. Miles I think from the sound of your post we're very much in agreement. I simply have gotten the impression rotation is taboo. My point is we can do it, there are situations where we need to do it....so why not.

John, remember I said inversion inherently involves "toeing in". We can certainly manage that. Roger is a good coach. I've free skied with him a couple of days. I'd like you to find my old post at epic called "the great boot cuff quiz" I think you would find it interesting.

I'm sure Harald has spent plenty of time aligning you. I don't ski with a negative delta. I merely ski with none. My toe is the same height as my heel. When doing this you have to factor a variety of other issues such as ramp angle of the boot board and forward lean. I think one of the main issues facing skiers today is that their boots have way too much forward lean, ramp angle, and delta angle.

Be careful as you experiment that you don't compromise the AFD. Once you have settled in on a setup get your boots ground.

I no longer ski in the Fischer boot and now ski in the Doberman. Having skied in the Fischer boot previously it took a while to adjust to the Nordica.

[Harald]

This statement was posted in this thread.

"Tony talked about the importance of inside leg steering and how prevelant it is among current racers."

This statement is hog wash. But some like to grovel with the hogs and need washing.

[Harald]

This is absolutely ridicules and has absolutely no merit what so ever. :

?He debunked the idea that anyone on the courses today can make edge to edge turns. There is exceedingly active redirection according to Tony.?

Anyone making this statement is out of touch with modern skiing and athletes. If you try to redirect the skis in slalom, you will be late into the next turn groves, headed in the wrong direction and not able to apply the side cut of the skis that require body angles, not steering.

Any redirection slows the body from creating extreme angles required in slalom ski racing.

In GS the turns the (gates) are sometimes farther apart than the ski radius allows; therefore the racers have to wait until they are in position over the gate to apply angles and side cut through tipping. This is done with counter acting movements of the upper/mid body and flattening or releasing (de-tipping) of the skis, not steering. Racers are always in tune with their edges and the angle of the body to their edges. Leg steering gives no feedback about edges or angles. It causes loss of fine motor control developed through foot and ankle use and sensations. Racers do not use or think about leg steering as a skiing technique.

Just a bit of science, to really confuse the already confused.

[Guest]

Racers do not use or think about leg steering as a skiing technique.

Just a bit of science, to really confuse the already confused.

Harald,

I am most certainly confused. Where is the "bit of science" in what you just wrote?

After we get that figured out, and you are kind enough to "unconfuse me" would you then comment on either the accompanying photo or article.

http://www.skiracing.com/news/news_display.php/1905/

[Rusty Guy]

Forgot to add username above

[Harald]

So what's your point?

If you ever care to read anything about PMTS, you will find the science on every page in the PMTS Instructor Manual. I?m not about to rewrite everything in a forum I?ve written for your convenience. Before you make comments, you do have they availablity of resources to become educated.

Kinesiology; gross motor muscles over power weaker fine tuning muscles.

Proprioception: The foot has highly concentrated mechanisms for sensory feedback and balance feedback. The thighs, hips and legs have inferior sensory feedback ability, therefore they do not moderate accurately what is happening at the base of the kinetic chain, relative to ski angles and pressure adjustments.

[Rusty Guy]

First of all I don't know if you were attempting in any way to define kinesiology.....but that isn't it.

I was asking you to look at a photo, read an article, and comment all in light of your comments about the role of steering in skiing.

That's my point.

I related comments that I attributed ,from a person you know, a person who is certainly one of the better skiers in the state, a person who has had substantial interface with the international ski racing community, and you launched into a spirited denial.

I simply don't understand your obsession with "rotary movements" or "steering" either not existing in ski racing or being negative in ski teaching.

No you'll become insulting (the hog comment was cute but it lost something in the translation) and call me confused, uninformed, yatta, yatta, yatta.

Harald I'm not the most educated guy in the world, however, I'm fairly proud of my cv and the institutions that I attended. Do I get confused and do I need more information? You bet. You mentioned "a bit of science, and I couldn't find the science in your comment.

I'll venture if I took one of your camps I'd get to drop the labels!

Now, I will ask again, Bodie Miller is shown in a photo. It is not science. It is evidence. How did is skis turn 90 degrees? Little muscles or big muscles? How does Bodie "pitch and slide his skis? Is this carving or is he referring in the artcle to turning the skis sideways?

I'm merely interested in your response.

Gotta go pass along all my confusion to some poor soul who gets stuck taking a ski lesson from me.

[*SCSA]

This happens every year and I'm fing sick of it.

I meet Rusty and Bob, we hug and promise to buddies for life. Then the back stabbing starts.

Knock it off!

Rusty, you're making nice turns, that's great. But all you're doing here is antagonizing people. Knock it off!

You wanna rip it up? Fine. Let's rip. When Vail fills in show up and we'll rip. You've never seen me go, all mountain. We've always skied together on groomers, snowmaking.

Rusty, if you don't dig PMTS, that's cool. But you don't have to come over here and throw the whole thing sideways. Right, wrong, or indifferent, we're following PMTS. In my case, I have no plans to follow anything but.

Quit being a dick.

[jbotti]

Rusty Guy,
I am someone that has direct experience with being taught by high level PSIA instructors and also by Harald and Diana. I started skiing two years ago at the age of 42. Luckily, racing as a runner and a triathlete gave me a level of conditioning that made learning to ski easier at age 42. My entire first season I skied almost exclusiveley with a PSIA level 3 examiner who is widely viewed as one of the best teachers and skiers (as he raced in his youth) in the Tahoe area. He is a wonderful guy and he is a good teacher. Still my progress as a skier did not start to really take form until I started working with Harald and Diana. I have taken lessons in a nmuber of disciplines over the years starting when I was 6 when my parents (both professional musicians) brought me to my first cello lessons. Harald and Diana are at the very highest level of any of the teachers that have ever taught me in any discipline. This has nothing to do with PSIA vs. PMTS. It has to do with knowledge, analysis, dedication and intensity. They have more of it than anyone else I've met in the field. My sense is that you must feel somehwat intimidated by Harald's fastidious anallytical approach with intense focus on details. When I read your posts it doesn't appear that you have the knowledge or the ability to really go toe to toe with Harld when it comes to exercise physiology. That's OK, I think very few in the field can. And this is part of the issue and why so many students with a desire for knowledge and an intensity to learn are attracted to Harbskisystems. The average PSIA ski instructor has entered the field becuase he/she loves to ski and does what the PSIA asks to become an instructor. Very few have studied exercise physiology, the kinetic chain and worked on their communication skills to improve their ability to instruct.

This gets me back to my story. I will give one example that illustrates the differenece in teaching approaches (and if it is also part of the PMTS vs PSIA debate so be it, but that is not my intention). Every PSIA instructor I have lessoned with has always told me to get tall going into turns and before I skied with Harald I had trouble engaging my edges in the early part of a new turn. One of the first things that Harald had me do was to learn to flex my legs which reduces the pressure on the skis which in turn allows a transition into the new turn. Now I am not a ski instructor, but I can understand simple physics. More importantly, even if I couldn't understand the undeniable physics, my experience as a intermediate skier was more than undeniable. One approach supported me in transitioning turns, the other made it harder. In fact every one of my friends that I have shown flexing into turn transition has had the same experience.

My point is simple. I don't care about religion, or the religious battle that you seem to have with Harald (or that Harald may have with you and the PSIA). What I care about are results that I can see and experience. I aslo know that to progress in any discipline I also need knowledge. Harald has it. The books are amazing, specific and are tools that enhance my abilities as a student and the knowledge he brings is not something I have seen from any PSIA instructors including level 3 examiners.
My sense is that you are threatened by Harald and PMTS. If you are competitive, you should be threatened. He brings more to the table than most. If you indeed are really interested in expanding your knowledge and abilities as a teacher, you will first need to examine the potential limitations of what you been taught and what you do. This is the case for all of us as we try to learn and grow, we all must at some point abandon something that has gotten us to the current point but no longer serves us. You can start by convincing other PSIA instructors that telling intermediates to stand up before turnig inhibits their progress.

[jclayton]

Eggsactly ,
PMTS is not a religion or a dogma or a cult it is simply a system that works . Jbotti's story is being multiplied in everincreasing numbers .

IT SIMPLY WORKS WHERE OTHER SYSTEMS HAVE FAILED !!!!

Any arguments about definitions etc.... are peripheral to the above fact .

[SkierSynergy]

I think this thread is about dead. Who wants to continue arguing about the negative effects of leg steering AGAIN.

The justifications for eliminating any positive reference to leg steering have already been clearly explained in detail and with lots of compelling references and examples. Look at the many previous posts here on the subject and the other written materials available. I will start a couple of related threads that focus on some common misunderstandings of people trying to apply PMTS to their own skiing in an attempt to get better.

I also feel compelled to make a few quick comments here.

1. Leg steering. Right. Nough said. People do it every day that is not in dispute, but that doesn?t mean it?s the preferred thing to do. For me, I try everything in my power to avoid it. Power is not down that path.

2. PMTS is not about just teaching carving ? though the movements that start out a beginner are the same ones that produce high level carving. As a beginner, one learns the phantom tip drag. If the stance ski is held flat and the free foot tipped the person will turn, but also skid. The relationship of the tipping angles determines how much skid results. It?s easy to hockey stop with inversion/eversion alone (no steering). In fact it?s much faster and easier to control with just those movements.

3. Ott made some sarcastic remarks that if it?s so easy to just tip then there?s no need for instruction. Ott, knows he is simply being sarcastic and not helpful here. However, in some aspects his comment is true. People who learn to use primary movements move through levels of skiing much faster. TTSs rope people into more instruction with poorer quality results. Much of this situation is because In PMTS, there is a common set of movements that can be applied throughout one?s skiing and those movements are very precisely defined. TTSs are based on teaching large maneuvers and bags of different skills/tricks for different conditions and purposes ? often the exact definition or purposes of those maneuvers/tricks are vague and vary from instructor to instructor. This is why there is such an emphasis on fitting the skill to the purpose. And why instructors try to develop a large bag of exercises and tricks. So in this respect PMTS is more systematic, much simpler, better defined, and easier to learn. So, I would have to agree with you on this Ott.

4. The picture of Peter Kelty does not indicate any leg steering. He is nicely countered and stacked. Note how the skis and legs are nicely aligned going in one direction (where he is looking) and the hips and shoulders are nicely countered against the turn. I also like the obvious inside leg flexion.



[Sorry the arrow to the right reads "direction of travel" and the arrow to the left reads "direction of counter"]

I will post a thread today on differences in models of upper/lower body coordination between PSIA and PMTS that should address this further and also clarify why TTS movement analysis is so often inaccurate on this issue ? why they mistakenly tend to see leg steering when we see obvious counter.

5. There is no unweighting in any traditional sense in PMTS. PMTS recognizes parts of the turn that are less pressured, but the skis are not lightened in oreder to change their direction. And though it can be easier to tip thenm when they are lighter, they can also be tipped weighted, and the turn doesn't happen until they are tipped and pressured.

In PMTS, turns are made in contact with the snow, not in the air. To the extent that you are turning in the air, you are not skiing. Hop turns are useless as a skiing skill. If you hopped down a slope, you hopped down it. You didn?t ski down it. Simple as that. Staying connected to the ground is the most balanced way to ski bumps and all mountain terrain and it?s also the fastest in a course. Being an ex-bumper and arialist, I?m all for getting air, but it is not a component of a PMTS turn.


6. In PMTS there is no ?anticipation? or ?unwinding of the legs into the new turn? in any way similar to what happens in TTS models of ULBC. ? see my upcoming topic for further info on this.


7. Bode Picture/ description.

The quotes are from
http://www.skiracing.com/news/news_display.php/1905/

Bode says he uses two types of turn. One is the traditional carved turn and the other is a skidded turn. The skidded turn is used in situations in which there is more horizontal distance between the gates than can be covered with a clean carved turn. In a more normal gate set the carved turn is faster. In the more horizontal gate set, the skidded technique allows a more direct line to allow him to ?pitch? himself across the hill before he engages his edges all at once.

?So I kind of make up time on both ways. I make up time on the clean side by going faster, and then on the other turn by cutting off so much of the line.?

He used ?pitch? and ?skid? to describe his movement. Another description might be ?drifting" across the hill to the next gate. Harald has commented that this horizontally wide style of gate setting has been showing up here and there in somne courses and that this is why the drift is needed. In other words it is something about the gate setting and not anything about what is good technique in general. Is this a trend? Is it good setting? I?m in no position to say. But it?s clear that Bode describes his change in turn technique in the context of this style of gate setting. Given other gate patterns he does a clean carve because it?s fastest. Further, this is something that I can't imagine doing much in normal skiing. I can't thing of the last time I felt a need to drift across the hill from high speed carve to high speed carve.

But how does Bode accomplish the drift turn? Looking at the montages, I don?t see any evidence of leg steering and he doesn?t mention anything about leg steering. He says two things. First he uses the verb ?pitch? as in throw yourself across the hill. This could suggest an upper body motion or whole body motion. This would be consistent with his tendency to sometimes airplane the first part of his turns and then get on it when the pressure builds. However, that alone would be pretty hard to control. Further in the article he describes how the drifting is affected by, and controlled with differences in edge angles (tipping rather than steering):

?The pitching that I do, I usually do on my right foot. It?s sort of by design. I have a lot less edge on my right foot, and more edge on my left foot.?

I am able to pitch on my right foot because I have a lot less edge, so I can have a high edge angle and slide into the turn, killing some speed but having basic control over it, and then drop everything in at once.?

This could be done by having less edge angle than one should for the general energy of the turn, but I also think it is interesting that Bode finds it easier to do when his flatter aligned foot is the stance foot. This would suggest that it is also an effect similar to the lowly phantom drag. Flatten the stance edge more than the free foot edge and you begin to drift. It?s in this situation that he claims to have more control over his skid. Interesting.

As he describes it, the gate set forces everyone to skid somewhere in the turn. If you tru to carve the gate you have to skid at the bottom of the gate before and also lose speed around the horizontally wide gate. He choses to skid the top of the turn around the horizontally wide gate and thereby carry more speed.

Leg steering? I don?t see it in the montage and he doesn?t discuss it. Instead he discusses something much more consistent with a differential tipping/edging phenomenon. Maybe "pitch might suggest some whole body airplane movement (that many have noted is a part of the untamed side of Bode's technique), but then Bode himself also describes the difficulty others at his caliber have trying to imitate this. I think I'll leave it alone.

[Ott Gangl]

Jay, my sarcastic remarks were in answer to the post that basically said tip the skis and everything else will take care of itself.

Nothing is that simple in skiing, nor is skiing as difficult as all the intricacies discussed here make it out to be.

Drift, carve, scarve, hop,tip, swivel, pivot and steer, all good skiers can do all of them and apply them at will, it aint rocket science, it comes from skiing for a long time and perfection in skiing comes from doing, not reading about it. But then, every skiers idea of perfection is different.

If you read my posts you know that I am mostly clarifying what different maneuver mean or meant and not saying anyone should do it or not.

This thread asks if PMTS teaches unweighting. After reading a variety of misunderstanding of unweighting I posted what unweighting was, how it was done and what it was used for, mainly with the old straight and stiff skis, which was edge/weight/lead transfer, that was all, and pivoting or any other component was/is seperate of the unweighting, up or down.

....Ott

[Rusty Guy]

jbotti,

I guess my first comment would be that if I was intimidated would I come over here and disagree? I have said ad nauseum I think HH and Diana are great skiers. I have no doubt they are very good teachers. I merely dare to disagree with Harald on a few points and that tends to lead to insults. That's fine. In terms of my background in exercise physiology you are right. I have no formal education in that realm. Does Mr Harb?

Jay,

I have said this before and will say it again. You write in a very cogent manner. Thanks for taking the time to pen your response. I think there is room for considerable interpretation in terms of the article involving Bodie and think your answer is reasonable. I don't see how the photo montage involving the three "clips" can be interpreted to not involve rotation. The skis turn 90 degrees in five feet. Passive rotation? I really think that's a stretch.

SCSA,

I really have to call you on this one and say it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. You have quite a history of asking tough questions! I'm also amazed by the swings in your opinions. Have you forgotten your recent e-mails? I hazard to say you were not quite so positive about PMTS two weeks ago.

[SkierSynergy]

Rusty, Thanks for reminding me of a point I forgot.

But first. I said that I saw no leg steering. Skis can quickly change direction with no leg steering and no upper body rotation -- especially if they skid. That is one of the points of the phantom drag description. You are right that much of what Bode says is ambiguous. I am leaving some room open for the possibility that Bode is rotating his body a bit, but he definitely does not say anything about leg steering and I don't see any in the montage. Change of ski direction doesn't necesarily mean leg steering (or body rotation for that matter). I think his description suggests foot stuff, though his use of "pitch" could mean a lot of things.

OK now to the pooint I forgot.

There is no such thing as passive steering.

Passive rotation refers to a passive rotation of the femur. This does not produce steering or rotation in the skis. When the legs are flexed and the foot is inverted the femur passively rotates to accomodate these movements. It is akin to changes in parts of a car's suspension system as the suspension flexes. This is totally different than active inputs of the steering wheel.

There is no such thing as passive steering or rotation of the skis.

[Arc]

Jay, my sarcastic remarks were in answer to the post that basically said tip the skis and everything else will take care of itself.

Nothing is that simple in skiing, nor is skiing as difficult as all the intricacies discussed here make it out to be.

Drift, carve, scarve, hop,tip, swivel, pivot and steer, all good skiers can do all of them and apply them at will, it aint rocket science, it comes from skiing for a long time and perfection in skiing comes from doing, not reading about it. But then, every skiers idea of perfection is different.

If you read my posts you know that I am mostly clarifying what different maneuver mean or meant and not saying anyone should do it or not.

This thread asks if PMTS teaches unweighting. After reading a variety of misunderstanding of unweighting I posted what unweighting was, how it was done and what it was used for, mainly with the old straight and stiff skis, which was edge/weight/lead transfer, that was all, and pivoting or any other component was/is seperate of the unweighting, up or down.

....Ott

Ott,
I think I share your desire for clarification, so accept that is my intent here as well. So I am just queuing off a couple thins you mentioned.

I would have to suspect that anyone with the perceprion that PMTS is just about "tip the skis and everything else will take care of itself" probably has a very limited working knowledge of PMTS.

I do not tip my skis, I tip my feet, inside my boots, the tipping of the skis is the resulting outcome I intend. While I agree that there are many ways to tip the skis as an outcome, I know of none more efficient than by starting with the feet inside the boots.

I'd also suggest that efficient skiing IS relatively simple when compared to inefficient skiing. Inefficient movements and compensating movements interact and feed each other to breed an infinate variety of complex inefficient combinations. Hense the complexity associated with discussions of inefficient skiing, there are a lot more people doing it and vast number of perspectives from which to argue. But to what end? It is still inefficient skiing. Maybe that doesn't mater to some, but it does to me. As I get along, still many years behind you, I value any gain in efficiency i can get. It makes the mountain bigger and my days longer.