Phantom Move / Phantom Edging

PMTS Forum

the hips settle to the outside

Postby John Mason » Fri Jan 07, 2005 3:23 pm

piggyslayer wrote:In this drill, I strongly feel a tipping action of the foot causes movement in my hip joint resulting in counter balance and counter rotation. I am striving to get the same ?cause and effect? in all of my skiing.



Yes - it will do this too. This rotation of the hips to the outside is a natural response to the tipping. This natural response can also be resisted if we stay square on the skis and don't let it happen. I wonder if being over co-contracted would prevent this movement and keep one square.

We worked a lot on this at the instructor camp. You're square as you're over your skis right at transition, but as you tip the inside leg and stand on the outside leg you (and I hate to use this term but SCSA used it too and it's not too bad, but better to see demonstrated in person then read in a forum) sit down - or let the hips settle pointing to the outside of the turn. This adds more edging to the turn and is held till the next transition when you unwind and are again at neutral (square) at the next transition.

This motion of the hips away from the direction of the turn, I found counter-intuitive. Like so much in skiing, we have to consciously train our muscle memory to do the efficient movement and not the intuitive movement. (notice, intuitive would be much more like the "go" principle being bandied about on Epic while specifically this hip move is totally the oppisite of this)

However, when practiced, the results are a lot of fun and eventually it becomes intuitive and normal feeling. Even though the current PMTS literature doesn't focus on the hip positions so much, you see this in HH's skiing in the earliest DVD consistently. I'm glad this component of great skiing is being explained as it's already improved what I'm doing as I continue to integrate this hip counter into my skiing.
John Mason
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:52 pm
Location: Lafayette, Indiana, USA

Postby *SCSA » Fri Jan 07, 2005 6:27 pm

Flexion is my new pet peeve.

I sent John an email about this just a minute ago.

Today at the Big Show I skied with a skiing superstar (Extreme champion, world cup racer) that I will not name. he/she/it was skidding turns, I'm not sure I saw one carved one. Boot locked stance, making turns from the heel. Absolutely zero flexion. Harald, would call this he/she/it sloppy. Fast? You bet. But sloppy.

he/she/it knows HH and was very complimentary. But, he/she/it had no idea what HH teaches. The flex move, was foreign. he/she/it was all excited about tipping (which will Forever track back to HH) and WAS COMPLETELY AGAINST STEERING. I REPEAT. COMPLETELY AGAINST STEERING. Completely in favor, of tipping.

PMTS really is the secret sauce.
ttfn,
*SCSA
 

Postby *SCSA » Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:24 pm

This is important. I sent this to John, thought I'd share it with...the he/she/its. :)

One of the big complaints about PMTS is that it advocates an up move. Wrong! Wrong, wrong, wrong. The naysayers have confused flex and extend, to be an up move. Now here's where I will challenge anyone. :wink: If anyone thinks PMTS teaches an up move, let me know. I'll show you on the snow, that you're wrong. Then you'll buy me a beer. :lol:

Now here's a clip of an email I just sent Mason. later,

########################

John, with what I learned from HH this last time, I feel like skiing is brand new. I'm totally excited to work on my turns. Ripping, is a much lower priority with me now.
It's groovy. PMTS skiers really are different. Once again, HH has come through -- big time!

Don't get sideways with Lito's stuff. He talks about -- and even advocates -- an up move. It's in his video. Don't do it! Flex and extend! Flexing and extending, is in NO WAY AN UP MOVE. I can prove it to anyone, anytime, on the snow.

Now, does an up move work? You bet it does. That's what 99% of all skiers do. I was doing it. But that's not PMTS. I'm really starting to wonder now, if HH invented the flexing move. I've never see it taught/talked about, anywhere.
*SCSA
 

Up Move

Postby Joseph » Sat Jan 08, 2005 9:17 am

Watch world cup races *SCSA. Flexing and allowing the legs to come under the body without any active up move is a crucial component of the skiers, men and women (I don't know about its), who win races. Harald may not be the first to do this move on skis, or even the first to teach it to racers (I'm not sure). But he certainly is the first to teach this move to recreational skiers. If you want to be an expert, you have to be taught expert movements. Modeling a teaching system after world cup movements--priceless.
Joseph
 

Postby Guest » Mon Jan 10, 2005 8:57 am

Is there a sequence of pictures in one of the books or videos that does a good job of showing the flex and extend in action?

Can someone describe the flexing move in excruciating detail? Is it something that can be done in off snow training?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » Mon Jan 10, 2005 9:42 am

I certainly believe that PMTS has novelty in its progressions to teaching skiing and its underlying set of assumptions about how to ski efficiently. However, I have my doubts that the claim made by Joseph about flexing to bring skis under the body is quite accurate:

"Harald may not be the first to do this move on skis, or even the first to teach it to racers (I'm not sure). But he certainly is the first to teach this move to recreational skiers."

It seems to me that this concept has been around for a LONG time under the moniker of a retraction turn. I did a quick google search and quickly found a reference back to 1971 from NASIC II in Vail where someone from the Austrian National Team was demonstrating retraction technique.
Guest
 

Postby Joseph » Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:32 am

Underlying assumptions? To which do you refer. Name them and I'll give you a scientifically accurate reason why teach each step the way we teach it. Biomechanics and Physics play a pretty big role in our "assumptions". As for your comment about retraction turns, there is a subtle, but very important distinction between retraction and flexing of the stance leg at the end of the turn. Retraction is an active pulling up of both legs toward the body. Flexing of the stance leg is how we describe giving into the forces at the release of the turn. This allows us to let our hips move to the inside of the turn early in the "high C" part of the turns. The distinction may not be clear to you, but it is certainly clear to any of us who can actually make a turn in both manners.

If you really want to understand what we teach, read the books and watch the videos. Be open minded enough to try PMTS. I used to ski the PSIA way. I can still twist my legs with the best of them. I choose not to because PMTS made me a far better skier and coach in one year than I ever could have become banging my head against a wall with examiners and PSIA trainers who have no idea what good skiing is. I feel sorry for people who are so afraid to learn something new. We meet people on a daily basis who come to us only to learn that they're beginners again. I did it too. But it did not take me long to rebuild my skiing and discard all the crap movements that examiners had me learn. I just don't understand people who are too proud to admit that they can learn from another person. Neither science nor actual results can be denied. You can do your best to pick little holes in the system and tell everyone out there that PMTS is a fad or isn't perfect. Nobody's saying it is. We're just saying that it's the best out there and PMTS is constantly evolving. The more you try and convince people that there's active rotary in high level racing, the more you try to convince Harald's own students that he doesn't know what he's talking about, the more you sound like some nobleman from the dark ages who wouldn't put up money for Columbus to explore because 'everyone knows the world is flat'. The world is round my friend and spinning without you. Care to join the real world?

Joseph

"If you tip it, they will turn."
Joseph
 

Postby Guest » Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:56 pm

Quite a rant! I certainly consider myself a PMTS skier so I am afraid it is misplaced (you made the wrong assumptions!).

My comment was made because I find that unsubstanitated claims like the one you made only serve to turn off people unfamiliar with PMTS. As a strong advocate for PMTS that makes it very difficult to "spread the word."

In my experience it is far better to present your case with humbleness and humility. I fully understand that PMTS movements are based on a biomechanical evaluation. However, there are many degrees of "scientific proof" in general and in movement analysis especially. For example, there certainly is reseach that supports building movements from the base of a kinetic chain, a basic assumption of PMTS, but there is also research that shows the efficacy of isolating movement components to improve performance in certain situations. The latter should be understood and not automatically excluded if you want to claim scientific validity to the approach.

I don't think that PMTS has arrived at a point where they have coupled muscle (EMG) activity and movement analysis data to actually demonstrate what muscles are acting (and to what degree) in various segments of ski movements and beyond that to "prove" anything about efficiency in comparison to other movement patterns. This is certainly a minimum standard found in other sports where there has been funding for this kind of research. Beyond that of course, is the development of models that can be used to more readily explore, evaluate, and compare different movements. The best that I can ascertain, PMTS assumptions (yes assumptions) about muscle activity during movement and the efficiency of such movements in comparison to other movement patterns are based on biomechanical models, motor learning literature, and human perception. That does not make them infallible or proven in any way. It just says they have a basis in movement science.

I have no hesitation to say the PMTS movements are based on a strong biomechanical and motor learning rationale and appear to be more efficient based on users perceptions and self reporting. But to say such assertions have been "scientifically proven" seems to me an exaggeration that only inflames those who are in disagreement with the approach, giving them fuel to criticize the entire system.

Even if Harald is the first to teach flexion/relaxation of the stanse leg to release a turn (for recreational skiers that is - and I seriously doubt this is true on an individual basis) I don't think this can be proven or demonstrated. However, it can be said that to our knowledge PMTS is the only system that prescribes such movement from the beginning of the teaching progression maintaing such turn initiation patterns through the highest levels of skiing.

Basically what I'm trying to say, as a strong PMTS advocate, is learn to communicate in an effective way as opposed to such an antagonistic fashion.
Guest
 

Postby Joseph » Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:41 pm

Name the assumptions, I'll tell you why those movements are more efficient. You sound to me like a person who likes to talk about skiing but can't walk the walk. You want to argue semantics or split hairs, have fun. If you think you're smarter than everyone else when it comes to skiing--fine. Have fun with that too. Just remember, you're not the one who started his own company, pioneered a new teaching system, invented the most accurate dryland skiing tool on earth and is constantly redifining the affects biomechanics and alignment on the modern skiier.

You'll still be the same skier you are now until you admit that you have far more to learn about skiing. It doesn't sound to me like you're ready to do that. It sounds to me like you're saying PMTS is better but it can't be proven. This is why I thought that philosophy was stupid in college and still think it is. If you want to play the part of the pretentious intellectual, have fun in that rut. But you'll still never improve your skiing until you're willing to admit that the best skiers in the world use no active rotary movements in their skiing and ski from the base of the kinetic chain--then you have to go out and pursue skiing with those principles in mind. Have we done a study of who burns more calories, the tail pusher or the PMTS poster child--No. That would be a waste of our time. We both know who burns more calories and we both know who rips and who doesn't.

Now as to the antagonistic comment, I'm only responding to the tone in your previous posts. As for you "spreading the word" for us. Thanks but no thanks buddy, we're covered. People don't want to learn from someone who thinks he/she can dissect every ski turn on a molecular level and acts as though they're smarter than everyone else. They want somebody who can help them to ski well. That takes real smarts.

Joseph

Oh, and when you're ready to figure that flexing thing out, suck it up and buy a lesson. I'm available, but Harald and Diana may be booked--for the entire season. Call ahead for next year.
Joseph
 

Postby Ott Gangl » Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:48 pm

>>>>Basically what I'm trying to say, as a strong PMTS advocate, is learn to communicate in an effective way as opposed to such an antagonistic fashion.<<<

You know, as I sit here sipping my manhatten and reading this thread I wonder how anyone would gravitate to PMTS with so much venom being spit around, it scares the hell out of me, just think of the casual reader. It's like a snake pit, just read your own words.

Why do you care and have to comment of how lousy PSIA d-team members ski and how bad the lesson of instructors are, just tout your own thing and quality will winn out. Mercedes doesn't have to villify Ford.

Back to my manhatten...

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

Postby Guest » Mon Jan 10, 2005 3:13 pm

Not sipping a Manhattan but have the very same impression. That is one of the most juvenile responses I've ever seen. I think PMTS is great. But a number of PMTS advocates seem to be their own greatest enemies. Guess I'll just keep it to myself for my own purposes. Can't see myself suggesting that someone come to this forum to see this kind of antagonism. It's too bad, I've personally lead 4 or 5 people to PMTS camps and a few others to PMTS privates. Don't know how many just bought the books based on my suggestion but I expect a few dozen. I've never seen a business so ready to diss their customers!

Reminds me a lot of Bush. Doesn't ever seem able to accept criticism, even if presented with the most constructive intent.
Guest
 

Hello to Guest

Postby SkierSynergy » Mon Jan 10, 2005 3:30 pm

Guest.

I am sympathetic to some of what you have said in the last few posts. Hey, If you don't mind, e-mail me at SkierSynergy@hotmail.com. I would just like to say hello.

Maybe we could do a bit of skiing if you are in my area.
SkierSynergy.com -- comprehensive services for the girlfriends of skiers
SkierSynergy
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:05 am
Location: Mt. Hood -- Portland Oregon

Postby NoCleverName » Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:07 pm

To me, also, the words of "Guest" do not seem antagonistic; perhaps challenging, but in a spirit of clarification rather than condemnation.

We ought to be able to debate the points here with good-humored vigor rather than stoop to ad hominum attacks or condecending responses. As was alluded to above, that merely lessens the credibility of the responder.

If, on the other hand, you think a questioner is a "troll", then do what all experienced netizens do: ignore it. There's a concurrent thread around where it looks like the community has fallen for a troll hook, line, and sinker. You've got the expect the occasional grenade to be tossed in here: just duck for cover and come out after the smoke clears. Don't give the impression that the slightest inkling of being a non-believer will get you a ticket to the wood chipper.

Anyway, I've got nothing to contribute to the flexion vs. retraction argument; besides, since I don't own a copy of Gray's I doubt I'd understand the right answer if it was given. Isn't there a simpler way of understanding this stuff?
User avatar
NoCleverName
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 am
Location: Massachusetts

Guests and Guests

Postby John Mason » Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:20 pm

part of the problem is in the past there has been a Guest posting that was only interested in being rude and not having a discussion

So, often any new person posting as Guest is assumed to be that mystery person.

It would be better if no one used the name Guest to post. It would be even better if the forum had a login requirement and loging in worked right.
John Mason
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 10:52 pm
Location: Lafayette, Indiana, USA

Postby Joseph » Mon Jan 10, 2005 4:39 pm

If anybody's feelings were hurt by my directness, I do apologize. I must admit to having made an assumption that this "Guest", is the same person that Harald lambasted on the thread about PMTS not being, just carving. If you are not that "Guest" then I apologize for my poor assumption and tone. However, if you are that "Guest", consider my apology rescinded. In either case, use a name, please. You don't need to login to post. As for your comment about us not treating our customers well, you are so far off base it's not even funny. We go out of our way to treat every one of our customers as well as is humanly possible. People that have skied with us already know this.

Guest, whoever you are, if you are truly interested in improving your skiing, I strongly suggest taking Jay up on his offer. He is a great skier and a real nice guy (nicer than me anyway).

If anyone's feathers are still ruffled, I offer a quote from Harrison.
"It's the internet, Get over it."

Joseph
Joseph
 

PreviousNext

Return to Primary Movements Teaching System

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests

cron