I think of some of "consequence" is due to the fact that skiing analysis completely ignores hysterisis. (To double check that assertion I have just quickly scanned what is probably the most complete paper I've seen on the subject of carving: "Physics of Skiing: The Ideal?Carving Equation and Its Applications" U. D. Jentschura and F. Fahrbach; Universit?at Freiburg, Physikalisches Institut. It's never mentioned there, either).
Hysterisis is essentially the delay between the cause and the effect. I was first thinking about it when Francois was talking about flat vs. steep skiing. There's a delay between when you input a "tip" and when the ski makes contact with the snow and decambers into the carving position. During that time a lot of space can go by in the steeps!
So I'm also thinking some of the "wide body" transitional positions could also be due to the hysterisis effect: Your body says "turn" to the ski and it says, "OK, I'll get to it, just wait". But of course, the biomechanics are already repositioning your body for a turn while the ski, still cambered, is running straight ahead. After a bit, the snow reforms the ski into a carving attitude and it begins to turn.
The study of the hysterisis effect is definitely on the agenda for studying ski physics. By the way, I understand hysterisis is a major component of the physics steering a car.
As an aside, after the paper derived the "ideal carving formula", it noted that WC courses effectively make ideal carving impossible.
More later, but much later as I have to re-charge my math skills