New Years message

PMTS Forum

New Years message

Postby Harald » Sat Dec 25, 2004 5:53 pm

Happy New Year to all.

Second, the responses I am receiving here seem as close minded and dogmatic as those from the greatest antogonists over at Epic.


Si, I?m sorry you feel that way, but I don?t see where you pick up the idea that PMTS skiers are dogmatic and uncooperative. You are very late to a party in which the fat boy has taken the wall flower home hours ago. It doesn?t mean PMTS supporters or users are dogmatic or unfriendly, they are just sick of this topic. Maybe they didn?t like the way you introduced it. Maybe you have to be a little less leading in you questioning.

My experience in the last twelve years since being involved with ski instruction and training of ski instructors, has given me a complete education. I personally teach more than two hundred skiers a season, all levels from world class racers to beginners. I skied with Erich Schlopy three weeks ago and last week I skied with a skier, an intermediate, who hasn?t skied in ten years.

Two days after reviewing video with Erich, he placed sixth at the Beaver Creek World Cup, in the GS. He had a top five time in the upper section of the super G. We strategized about his turn entry movements, his alignment and his boot set up. At no time was there any discussion about using or increasing, rotary movements of any kind. There was no mention of knee driving or angulation in relation to leg, foot or femur steering. We tried to access a set-up that would stack (at an extreme angle) his boot, foot, knee and ski under his hip and upper body. This was done over a period of two weeks via cell phone and personal interaction.

The really top skiers use no steering or concepts of steering (when I use the word steering it encompasses and includes, leg rotary, foot steering and femur rotation). The only skiers using concepts that involve steering are the ones taught with PSIA and the PSIA instructors themselves.

In PMTS methodology we use no steering. If we see steering demonstrated or hear about it, we try to avoid it like the plague, as that is exactly what it is. Don?t be mislead we know steering and we have experimented with it. It serves only to reduce your skiing performance.

I do not respond to idiotic comments about how or where steering is invaluable, because it is worthless to try to discuss this topic with someone that brainwashed. These people, who believe in steering to ski, show their convoluted understanding, in their own skiing. We see the results and emphasis of rotary movements, in the low quality movements and in the skiing of almost every PSIA instructor, at any level, from the Associate instructor (Level 1), to the Demo Team.

The ones that ski well don?t use steering. There are some demo teams members that I respect. They have to play the game and use the words of PSIA to keep the faith, that?s what you have to do to remain in the organization. The reality is when the good skiers in PSIA really ski, they don?t use rotary movements in their skiing. When I see the struggling PSIA instructor skiing down a mountain, I know exactly how they could improve, immediately. To me watching this skiing and identifying the problems is so obvious it?s like a bill board.

There is a big difference between the way the very best skiers ski and the way PSIA skiers evolve. The best use different movements, they use a combination of lateral foot, ankle and passive (following) leg movements. These movements are accomplished with co-contraction of the antagonistic muscle groups around the key joints and a phenomenon called loose adoption before co-contraction is established. Loose adoption is a form of relaxation. It happens at the joints and the mid body to assist in developing alignment of the body to the ski edges. This action creates angles, alignment of the joints and of the body, to resist forces developed in the critical part of the turn.

This type of skiing is not available to those who begin or assist turns with rotary movements. Those good skiers that say they are using rotary movements are kidding themselves. Skis that are flat to the surface or on only slight angles at the being of turns are highly vulnerable to disengaging or pivoting. Any application or combination or foot, leg or hip steering either counter or rotational movements disengages the skis.

I observe this every day and have observed it every day for the past twelve years from the entire group of skiers I mentioned earlier. What I don?t understand is how the PSIA instructor can not see how detrimental these movements are to the skiers they are trying to teach. (I spoke to soon, I do know why) The PSIA analyzes movements to suit what they teach.

Almost all skiers are too quick to initiate rotary movements that push the ski tails back up hill to begin turns, which begins the downward spiral of poor turns. I know the response from the PSIA group already to this statement, so don?t give me your BS. I know the results of your teaching. I deal with it daily and the people I teach, deal with it daily. They are, in most cases very angry when they learn they have to undo what their PSIA teachers taught them.

How can you blame the regular PSIA instructor? I don?t and you can?t. When their model for skiing is what I saw on the famous, previously posted video on this forum of their best, how can you blame the regular instructor?

The gross over pivoting you see in intermediate skiers is a direct result of PSIA?s system. It becomes acceptable to regular instructors when they see a refined version of it from their elite, the demo team and most of your examiners. It isn?t acceptable here on the forum or in PMTS.

Diana spent years going to PSIA training before I met her. She was working toward becoming a trainer. She was always told the same. ?You are not using enough steering.? ?You are not a gifted skier, you aren?t a natural athlete, you are an engineer.?

Her skiing became worst every year she belonged to that organization. She had to do what they trained her to do because she wanted to move up in the organization and ski school, it ruined her skiing.

Now she out skis and out teaches every one of her former PSIA trainers, examiners and the demo team. Do you think I taught her steering the right way? Do you think I was able to communicate to her how to steer in a way the PSIA couldn?t? Do you think I coached her to use rotary movements better than they could? You know the answer. I had to re-train her and redo her skiing. Fortunately, Diana is very intelligent, dedicated and was able to reverse the poor information quickly.

We re-designed her skiing around balance and lateral movements, starting at the foot. We also aligned her boots and designed footbeds. Years of PSIA training couldn?t achieve the skiing she strived for; we accomplished it in a few months.

She has now taken her new ability and PMTS technique and turned her skiing around. She is skiing with movements that any skier would die for. I think that if she had time to train and truly devote herself to racing (even at age thirty seven), she could qualify to ski for one of the best NCAA teams in the nation.

Those that say PMTS skiing is limited have not skied PMTS. They are making excuses for their inadequacies. If I skied that poorly, I would seek out new methods and approaches, not stick to the same failing methodologies. I guess some are so brainwashed they can even justify their poor skiing. It isn?t that hard to conceive of, as they have many others in the same boat to commiserate with.
Harald
 
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:36 pm
Location: Dumont

Postby milesb » Sun Dec 26, 2004 4:38 pm

Harald, can you explain more about the "loose adoption"?
YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH78E6wIKnq3Fg0eUf2MFng
User avatar
milesb
 
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Si » Sun Dec 26, 2004 5:53 pm

Harald,

Happy New Year to you as well.

In my life I have learned that how others perceive me or my writing is not always how I perceive myself. I have also learned that it's usually worthwhile to figure out the genesis of a criticism or opposing point of view even when I'm convinced it's not well placed.

In defense of my comment I will say that I tried to very carefully pose my question so that it was not in the least leading. Furthermore, I can definitely say that my intent was also not meant to be leading. It was truly asked as an open question where I was interested in hearing the full range of ideas on this subject.

I think you know that my own personal opinions on ski movements and approaches to learning them have been strongly influenced by working with you and reading your books. However, as an individual I have some of my own perspectives. Most of these are alternaltive ways to think about skiing that I think provide even further support PMTS teachings. There are very few ways in which my thinking differs with yours and the PMTS system.

My motivation for asking this questions was truly to understand what other people thought. I had no intention of even throwing in my own opinion. I strongly agree with concepts relating to primary movements and the kinetic chain. However, that doesn't stop me from wanting to better understand what happens(or what can happen) in the kinetic chain. There are many movement learning systems (not at all limited to skiing) that focus on individual movements or muscle activation in order to improve that component as part of a kinetic chain or posture. Mostly I (for what it's worth), like you I think, believe that this is not a very effective approach, especially for ski movements. Nevertheless, I see and hear it enough that I think it's worth further questioning to determine whether there is something to it that I don't understand. That was the basic motivation for my first question. Without going into detail, my second question (strongly related to the first) was trying to better understand the limits of what can be produced using the kinetic chain of movement for tipping that you (and I) prescribe to. Perhaps in your greater expertise and experience you think these are foolish questions. If so, just say so, but in a way that doesn't transform my questions into something they are not.

The responses I got assumed a lot about my intent, motivation, and personal opionions that I think were way off. If, as you say, people were sick of this subject (and there's some question here as to whether biases came into play transforming my post into something they were sick of when my intent was actually focusing on something else) they could have politely said so or just ignored my post. That certainly was not what I got.

This is much more effort than I want to take talking about whether I asked a reasonable question and whether I got a reasonable response. It seems to me I'm just better off taking these questions elsewhere.
Si
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:28 am

check out earlier posts

Postby Harald Harb » Mon Dec 27, 2004 10:17 am

Si, I understand your intent. You have a worthy motivation, but how many skiers do you coach in one season? Have you tried your ideas with more than one hundred skiers at all levels? This is the test for a different approach.

If you have ideas that work for your skiing express them. That?s what this forum is about. But I have said in the past, if the agenda goes back to the idiotic PSIA approaches on teaching steering, wedge Christie and their other junk, those approaches will be dealt with properly and quickly.

Our system, PMTS works because it is efficient, employed with a sensible common understanding of movements based on the individual barriers that previous systems have imposed on skiers. We individualize the approach and needs for every skier. Every skier has individual ideas and needs for their skiing.

Is there an individual ski learning plan for every skier, no, but the PMTS system used by expert instructors can individualize the experience. PMTS does this better than any system. Some will say that PMTS can be integrated in to PSIA. I say that doesn?t work and I have said this publicly many times.

PMTS will make PSIA?s movement system much better, but that?s not too difficult.


You may have personal beliefs and feelings about your skiing, try to introduce what you feel you want to justify or validate, but I think the whole topic of steering, rehashed doesn?t do any one any favors.

I think one of the earlier posts suggested you look at the dozen or so threads about steering from this previous fall and summer. These are exhausting posts, going interminably, with minutia for every body part, and of course many opinions. I think if you are more specific with your question, you will have more success.
Harald Harb
 

Postby Si » Mon Dec 27, 2004 8:48 pm

Thanks for your considerations in responding Harald. Your response has some good points about individual skiers needing to figure out what works for them. However, I just want to be clear that I didn't post my questions here to present any of my own ideas or opinions (hence I don't understand the comment about how many people I've tried my ideas out with). It was truly asked as a question for me (and hopefully others) to learn from.

I have read many of the posts (most?) you refer to. While they discuss an approach and philosophy to skiing movements based on PMTS, from my perspective they don't seem to provide much objective information in regards to the questions I asked. In this way they are similar to a couple of the responses I got in that way. But I think I have a pretty good idea of the PMTS concepts in this regard and my intent was to explore a bit deeper into the "why" (most preferably with good objective evidence although I am very interested in people's subjective impressions as well) as opposed to the "how to" of the PMTS approach.

I haven't found posts here that address this depth of "why." Perhaps it is a limitation of the current state of art that objective evidence about these questions is lacking or perhaps I am just not aware of that evidence. One example of the best case for what I'm talking about might be EMG data from internal and external hip rotators during a pure tipping movement. Another might be data from force transducers from the boot binding interface to measure forces related to rotation of the ski in the plane of the snow (perhaps comparing some high level PMTS skiers and high level skiers who might be considered to lack certain PMTS skills in their movements). I don't mean I was looking for this specific information, they are only for example, but I was seeking the most objective information available.

I would be very interested and grateful if you can point me to further information about the two questions I asked (here on this forum or elsewhere).

Please don't take any of these questions to mean that I am suggesting specific disagreement with anything about the PMTS approach. I am only asking because I'm interested in better understanding these issues for myself and possibly others who might be interested. Based on my own impressions I would expect such objective information to support the PMTS approach.
Si
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:28 am

Postby Biowolf » Mon Dec 27, 2004 10:38 pm

The best use different movements, they use a combination of lateral foot, ankle and passive (following) leg movements. These movements are accomplished with co-contraction of the antagonistic muscle groups around the key joints and a phenomenon called loose adoption before co-contraction is established. Loose adoption is a form of relaxation. It happens at the joints and the mid body to assist in developing alignment of the body to the ski edges. This action creates angles, alignment of the joints and of the body, to resist forces developed in the critical part of the turn.

Harald, can you PLEASE explain this in detail. Also it would be great to know what you did to Schlopy's boots.
Biowolf
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 8:09 pm
Location: Whistler


Return to Primary Movements Teaching System

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests

cron