Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Postby h.harb » Tue Apr 28, 2015 8:02 am

If you require bigger angles to make the same turn as your competitors you are not only slower, but you are also further in the back seat. This is just a very plain fact. Bigger angles only says you are dependent on the skis side cut, and you are not on the center of the ski. If you study, Gross, Hirscher and Christofferson, the 3 fastest in slalom, they don't need the big angles in slalom because their feet are closer, and they keep their feet under their hips to pressure the tips.
http://harbskisysems.blogspot.com/2015/08/gross-could-be-best-slalom-skier-in-2016.html
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 7047
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Postby sgarrozzo » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:31 am

Gross also uses a magic word: " VAMOS !!!" :D
sgarrozzo
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:23 am

Re: Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Postby DougD » Thu Apr 30, 2015 7:22 am

h.harb wrote:... the 3 fastest...don't need the big angles in slalom because their feet are closer, and they keep their feet under their hips to pressure the tips.

I suppose the ultimate example would be skiing a flush? A wide stance or big angle there would cause a racer to miss the gates altogether.

Skiing super-steep terrain is another instance where keeping the feet pulled back under the hips is critical. Watch the Deslauriers, Egans or any great off-piste/extreme skier... even Scot Schmidt, whose skiing didn't resemble PMTS as much as theirs. On dangerous steeps they always kept their feet beneath/behind their hips. Letting a ski scoot ahead and losing tip pressure in a 50 degree couloir above a crevasse? Possibly the last mistake you'll ever make.
DougD
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:22 am
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Postby h.harb » Sun Aug 16, 2015 4:24 pm

Check how Gross uses perfect PMTS technique to win in slalom.
http://harbskisysems.blogspot.com/2015/08/gross-could-be-best-slalom-skier-in-2016.html

If you look back on my Blog where I posted all the knocked kneed skiers on Fischer they were mostly Italians. Gross was one, he is now on Tecnica which is a Nordica, and the transformation is amazing as I expected. So if you thought I make this shit up as I go along, well no, it was posted 2 seasons ago, maybe even three. Congratulations to the Italians they made the change.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 7047
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Postby h.harb » Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:41 am

Of the skiers you mentioned, I've skied and done photo shots with every one of them, including Shane. Unfortunately, Scott is not the skier to emulate, he was the worst aligned and poorest technical skier of the group. Eric DesLauriers was the best technical skier of the group. Remember most of the skiing Scott did in the movies was in soft, deep, snow, he is a good athlete, so he covers up his lack of technique with strength and power. If you ever saw him ski on hard snow you'd be very disappointed. It's not pretty.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 7047
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Postby DougD » Thu Sep 03, 2015 11:47 am

Thanks, Harald. Understand what you mean about Schmidt. Even in deep snow, his athletic hopping didn't resemble PMTS skiing. I can only imagine how that would look on hardpack - yikes! I only mentioned him because he kept his feet beneath his hips... good fore/aft skills? Not a skier to emulate otherwise.

Interesting that Eric D. was the best technical skier. I remember thinking that Rob was good, but I can't assess technique like you do. Dan E. did get me out of bad boots and into something more neutral. That and the beers at John's bar were the best things I got from their camps.

However, the best expert camp I've ever done was with you and Diana... even though I've never officially camped with you! Just skiing around the periphery of Green/Blue last February transformed my skiing. I'd expected to take a couple days and play in the bumps at Winter Park. Instead, you inspired me to do hours of PMTS drills on Granby's greens. That exposed gaps in my balance and technique that I've focused on ever since. Later in the season I finally nailed entire runs of linked Super Phantoms on hard ice at Stowe. What a hoot! I can hardly wait for Short Turns 1. See you there!
DougD
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:22 am
Location: Connecticut, USA

Re: Bigger angles, bigger fallacy!!

Postby h.harb » Wed Sep 09, 2015 6:35 pm

So back to the original idea of the post, Ted needs big angles, Hirscher less because he has more counter balance and CA. Gross and Hirscher require less movements to go from one side to the other. It used to be cool to see how big an angle you can get, not it's inefficient.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 7047
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado


Return to Racing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests