Railed skis and rotary movements
Again, good questions, here is my take on railed. First, it is used by some in a colloquial way to describe, two edge, pure carving. Railing the ski in that sense leaves two clean tracks. I don?t use that term often. I prefer to use pure carve or locked carve, or double tracking. Railed can mean, a ski tracking on its own, without much control, as was stated already in the thread.
As in, ?His ski railed out on him.?
This goes along with the worn out base description, where the edges get too high, railing is what the ski does when the edges are too high on the base.
SCSA once said on this forum that I was too easy on the TTS. The idea isn't be be attacking, it is to be accurate, informative and forward thinking. In an effort to clear up my position and that of PMTS I wrote the following:
What does steering and rotary movement teaching do to a skier?s technique?
(Steering and rotary movements are often interchangeable terms so when one is used alone here, it should mean both steering and rotary, in this context.)
When a ski is locked into a pure carve, leg rotation to increase performance has little or no positive influence, it?s futile. Increasing rotary action of the legs doesn?t shorten the radius or increase other performance parameters, but it can cause injury or knee damage. If you try to rotate or twist your legs when in a pure carve, you are imposing torque through the legs into a ski that is fixed in the snow. This creates twist around and in the knee joint, if you continue action to steer or rotor the leg, you could cause catastrophic knee injury, as the knee is stressed when the legs are torqueing around the fixed ski. If you hit a bump or divot in the snow, while applying the twisting force, that quick change of force, which is caused by a quick release and jarring (shock), can be enough to strain the knee ligaments and injure the knee.
Judging by the way advocates of rotary movements describe rotary movements as a necessary component of turns and not just a passive action of tilting, means that many instructors believe that the legs should be rotating or steering to turn the ski. I am not only against this teaching because it sends the wrong movement meaning and effect, but also because it is a contributor to knee problems, knee pain and knee injury.
I have been gathering comments and data from PMTS skiers for the past seven years. One of the major comments and responses from skiers who change their skiing to PMTS movements is; ?My knees no longer hurt.? I know that instructors don?t mean to cause knee problems in people?s skiing, but regardless how well meaning instructors are, the reality is that steering and leg rotation on a locked edge ski, can cause knee problems. Excessive rotation, which includes contributions from the legs, hips and shoulders, causes uncontrolled skidding, which has less stain on the knees, but it is totally inefficient. I know that is not what the TTS (traditional teaching systems) intends to teach, but we see the results of what they are teaching.
Most instructors think that I and PMTS don?t like steering because, they think, we believe it causes skidding. Emphasis on steering causes much more than poor skier performance. Skidding is only a small part of what teaching steering causes; it has an effect on many levels of skiing. The instructors who would like to criticize me or PMTS don?t understand what they are addressing. They are opening a black box they might not wish to explore.
Criticizing PMTS without complete understanding of its workings and reasons is na?ve. The terminology for steering (rotary movements) just flat sends the wrong messages. The skiers that come to us, almost all came from this teaching methodology. I ask you, how many come to us with edging or tipping skills, none. Do they have rotary skills, no? They definitely don?t have rotary skills the way the TTS would like them understood or performed. What they end up with after the TTS approach, is rotation, not rotary skills. I don?t believe in rotary skills because there are better alternatives, such as tipping and tilting, which encompass most of what is needed. I submit, if skiers and instructors could use rotary skills as PSIA would like them used, they would have some application to skiing, but I have yet to see this as the case.
Rotary movements, steering movements, (maybe it?s the way they teach it, as I understand what they are trying to accomplish, but it isn?t working) just don?t lead the skier to efficient, effective, useful movements or turns. If it worked wouldn?t we use it in PMTS? If it worked, wouldn?t we see skiers skiing successfully? I don?t understand how TTS experts can sit back and believe what they are doing is positive, because there is no evidence to support it. Don?t the critics of PMTS understand that if rotary movement teaching had positive effects, I would use them? Obviously not! I like to see people ski better, wouldn?t I use rotary movements in PMTS if they worked to make skiers ski better? They not only do not work they send the wrong message and they are damaging to skier progress.
On the other hand we see a shift in TTS, they are now putting more emphasis on tipping and tilting, so that must be working!!!!!
Skiers, who are learning TTS, end up with default movements that are based in trying to create the steering they were taught, but what they actually end up with is body rotation and no awareness of skiing with the feet or the skis. Am I generalizing? No, I am giving an accurate description of regular skiers as they are, when they come to take PMTS lessons. Do we help them change this ineffective way of skiing? Yes, and in about a week of half day instruction, they reverse much of the damage done and they are on their way to good skiing. PMTS skiers improve every time they go skiing, even when they are not taking lessons, because they are reinforcing the right movements that will evolve their skiing. A TTS student rarely improves because they are reinforcing elements that cause a spiral of dead-end movements.