Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

PMTS Forum

Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:34 am

Anticipation is a rotary tool, best used for pivoting or steering. From an anticipated position, the moment you release your edge engagement from the the prior turn your legs/feet/skis will attempt to quickly twist downhill, to match your downhill facing upper body. It's as though a loaded spring exists within the body's mid section. The moment the edges disengage, the spring is released, and the skis twist downhill. You don't have to try to make it happen, it just does. The solid pole plant simply provides an anchor point to create more rotary force and help power that pivoting.


This is another example of skiing and racing technique misunderstanding. We teach in PMTS that you hold your Counter Acting in transition, Counter is referred to by this person as Anticipation. We also retract the energy from the ski with the legs, and use it to tip our skis to the new edges and cross our Cg over the skis to create a High C engagement, with the least amount of pivot. This is what Hirscher and the other top three slalom skiers try to do.

This explanation isn't world cup skiing or PMTS Blue Level skiing, it's PSIA and TTS teaching and understanding. This is why you see all the needed up movements and late hitting. If you create what he's talking about here, you will be permanently pivoting excessively and trying to catch up to your skis from the back seat. Just like Rogan's skiing an earlier thread.

ALE knows who this is, I was searching the internet for an article I did years ago on alignment and came across a long convoluted discussion about what PMTS is and isn't. Of course except for ALE's points, all the others had no understanding of PMTS and totally misrepresented it.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby Ihamilton » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:27 pm

After reading this I watched Lara Dalla Mea on YouTube. Her skiing shows what a load of crap this guy is trying to peddle.
Ihamilton
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:09 am

Irwin,
I think you have it right with your definition. "Load of crap", this is what these people are being fed. ALE was gracious in his defense of PMTS, on this Australian Forum, I think it was Australian, but in essence he was dealing with the "there is a sucker born every minute crowd", and they are working off a belief system instead of reality.

If you look at this sequence of Hirscher, which is already a few years old, he has made a complete edge change and his body is on the downside of his skis, out of a completely CA finished turn and his skis hardy changed direction. Now I am not a genius and everyone has eyes, yet they can't see that pivoting isn't happening here and doesn't in most world cup slalom, if you are skiing with the best technique.

The people with the wrong technique and analysis of World cup skiing have this belief that world cup skiers use anticipation to redirect the skis, to get the tips to go downhill. In fact, what these skiers are doing is using the CA to get the legs and body across there skis, without any twisting or pivoting of the skis. The funny part is that most recreational skiers are doing exactly what they are trying to promote as world cup technique, the public does actually pivot "already". So, these people aren't teaching anything, they are teaching skiers to pivot and the skiers are already pivoting, so what is the point? Most people already pivot and steer their skis to the falline, and that's why they are unsuccessful in all conditions.

The technique that this Australian Forum is promoting has so many flaws and missing pieces, it would be a miracle if anyone ever learned to ski, let alone create useable technique. In addition they want to also promote using extension, which is in total conflict with any of the movements that world cup skiers use. It's absolute abomination and it's sad that such charlatans have a forum where they can lure skiers into their belief system. Wow, it's like many of these evangelists that sucker old people in and take all their money.



Image
Image
Image

If you go back to the Post on my Blog on, "Off Piste Skiing", and High C, the last one that I put up, I use exactly the same technique as Hirscher, PMTS, in crud on 95mm skis. I don't understand the agenda from many of these people who profess to know and put down PMTS. But they are just pulling in suckers and selling a load of crap. http://harbskisysems.blogspot.com
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:23 am

Just updated my Blog with the real story about how it's done on the world cup. ALE if you want to paste my link into that Aussie forum you are welcome to use my link. I'd hate to so the whole country of Australia be bamboozled by that atrocity they call a ski technique on that forum.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:01 pm

In every Essential of skiing, each essential component, that puts together a great ski turn, there are huge misunderstandings in ski teaching and coaching technique. What is astounding, is that the really talented skiers get around the poor advice and let their natural instincts take over. However, even after these athletes have success with movements that are different from what the coaches suggested, the coaches justify the difference with tailored explanations that on the surface look reasonable, however with further investigate and proof, they end up completely incorrect. This is why it's so difficult to become a good skier with the instruction that is generally available. Unfortunately there are not many approaches that lead to ski correctly.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby Ihamilton » Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:50 pm

The part of his explanation that stuck with me was in the last sentence about the " solid pole plant". The reason I wanted to to look at LD Mae again was to refresh my memory of her skiing and to confirm in my mind that she had no such thing as a solid pole plant. This tiny girl's skiing disapproves everything in his statement. I have to assume he hasn't seen the clip of Lara.
The solid pole plant bit also brought back a memory from last season or the year before. The supervisors want us to have a lesson plan, that is, what we are going to teach today. Many instructors go to a morning training session and whatever is taught there they use on their victims (sometimes known as clients) of the day. Keep in mind that lots of days the instructor has never had any of the clients before, they don't even know what level the skiers are at. So after introductions the lesson goes like this " today I am going to teach you......" Forget goals of the client or determining a SMIM, the students are going to get the "plan". So one morning a group of instructors came into the restaurant at the top of the mountain about 30-40 minutes before the start of lessons after they had been in the morning training session which was on "the solid pole plant". It was really cold and the conditions were solid bullet proof ice. I saw lesson after lesson going down the hill with the instructors just hammering their poles onto the ice and behind them where their students slipping and sliding, trying their best to make a solid pole plant. I can hear the guy who wrote the above giving a lesson. "I want you to anticipate the next turn, make a solid pole plant, pivot your legs and steer the next turn." Not my idea of student centred teaching. If it wasn't sad it would be funny.
Ihamilton
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:20 pm

The no swing pole plant is not a solid jammed in pole plant, neither are the majority pole plants made by the top three slalom skiers. Those statements highlighted in the first post, are really out of date as far as what is happening now in skiing.

This is a pole tap not a jamming in of the pole. Image


HH says, This is a load of crap, wrote:The solid pole plant simply provides an anchor point to create more rotary force and help power that pivoting.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby NoCleverName » Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:21 am

The number of muscles you would have to recruit to make a "solid pole plant" would negate any fluidity in CA or CB. If not kill it altogether.
User avatar
NoCleverName
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 am
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby Max_501 » Wed Sep 25, 2013 7:57 am

NoCleverName wrote:The number of muscles you would have to recruit to make a "solid pole plant" would negate any fluidity in CA or CB. If not kill it altogether.


Don't agree with that statement. I can make a very solid pole plant just by placing the tip of the pole in a bad spot.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4044
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Wed Sep 25, 2013 8:31 am

The activity itself of jamming or hard pole planting, interrupts a more smooth or fluid efficient transition; that part is correct; however the muscles involved don't negate a transition or eliminate CA, CB. A strong pole plant in bumps or steep, deep, heavy crud, could still be effective. Even if you jam the pole in, you don't lose CA, it doesn't help the CB for the next turn, but it doesn't make the next turn CB difficult, that's more a function of how you move in the transition.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:03 am

For those just joining this thread, this statement below, is from a self promoting coach, with no credentials, it's from a thread in an Aussie ski forum. This blunder is only "one example" (there are many misconceptions displayed in this thread) of the tailored comments, opinions and beliefs of ski technique that this coach has. I hate to say it but, the larger community of coaches hold some of the same beliefs. Rather than moving on, studying and learning what is actually happening and how the modern WC racers are skiing, they cling to the same old beaten up concepts.

What is worst is they try to manipulate the descriptions to fool people into thinking they are correct. This type of misinformation and manipulation only serves to confuse skiers and screw up further an already dismal understanding of the sport. And why are we surprised that we question why skiing isn't progressing. It's people like this that are holding back progress and development of better ski teaching product.


Anticipation is a rotary tool, best used for pivoting or steering. From an anticipated position, the moment you release your edge engagement from the the prior turn your legs/feet/skis will attempt to quickly twist downhill, to match your downhill facing upper body. It's as though a loaded spring exists within the body's mid section. The moment the edges disengage, the spring is released, and the skis twist downhill. You don't have to try to make it happen, it just does. The solid pole plant simply provides an anchor point to create more rotary force and help power that pivoting.


There are three or possibly 4 slalom skiers that make this era (the last 4 years) special as far as technical development. And this is cutting edge skiing, which utilizes all of what I've written about skiing over the last 15 years. Why can't people see the difference? Are coaches really that blind, or limited, the good movements and changes in technique are so obvious, and the bad movements so detrimental, yet unfortunately that is what they cling to.

As far as free skiing there are so few (Sato and a few Koreans) that really are in a special class, yet the model is taken from the mediocre, rather than from the best. Hard to understand.
BTW, Lorenz is one of the models that shouldn't be emulated, sure it's energetic, however it's the deadend example of the heavy, inefficient, strength derived technique progression. He has evolved the inefficient technique, as far as it can go. Few will ever be able to ski this way without amazing leg muscle development and the energy of youth. I'm not putting him down, he's done a great job with the technique he has. But it's not the way to skiing success for the majority.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby A.L.E » Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:14 am

My take...

Fastman (Rick Schnellmann,"Your Ski Coach" from CO) contends in the Aussie forum thread that keeping counter acted for the student leads to a pivot of the lower body because of the unwinding of CA. But in fact he's created the fundamental pivoting problems to begin with. What he does and doesn't teach his students is where his problems stem from. He doesn't teach and emphasis PMTS fundamentals of relaxing the outside ski weight, early transfer of weight to the up hill new stance ski, strong tipping of the new inside ski and Hi C engagement. All of which is happening with the feet and will help eliminate pivoting. His problem is his students are gross leg steerers and extension releasers to start with, he has encouraged steering/twisting and paid lip service to controlling up movements. That combination is where his pivoting is inherently coming from. PMTS has already controlled the forces he continues to battle with.

And to add more confusion, after teaching a student to square it all up in transition (assuming they even had any CA through the turn) he says CA can be added back in, provided presumably he's not seeing a pivot.......

From what I see from plenty of TTS instructors skiing square is the default, with too much weight on the inside ski. CA, CB and Hi C are in short supply. Late, pivoted edge sets are far more prevalent. And it all goes back to what is taught and accepted in the beginning.
User avatar
A.L.E
 
Posts: 396
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 12:18 am
Location: sydney australia

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby h.harb » Wed Sep 25, 2013 10:07 am

A.L.E. right on the money.

What is amazing is how Fastman tries to parley his beliefs to an audience he thinks doesn't know much about skiing. I'm not commenting here because I want to get a reaction, but most skiers who are learning and skiing PMTS, after a few sessions understand skiing better than coaches like Fastman. So the debate is hilarious, here is a guy trying to be an expert with recreational skiers, skiers who have never coached or taught skiing before, yet they know more about the sport then he does, but he professes to be an expert. What is sad is he doesn't realize that his audience is beyond him. Although if you read the thread you will see there are those that have been brainwashed into his way of believing.

You may have noticed I use the work "believing" when referring to techniques espoused by such people as Fastman, because he has no proof, no facts and no science behind what he writes. His skiing shows exactly that, and it also shows his lack of understanding. I guess he doesn't watch his own skiing any more than world cup skiing or he is in total denial about his skiing and he thinks he skis like Hirscher.
I know i can no longer aspire to ski with the speed and energy of a world cup skier. But I know that at reduced speed, I can make turns and transitions with the same "movements", as Hirscher and Sato. The pictures and video don't lie, at least they don't lie if you are honest to yourself about it. Hirscher and Sato are examples of PMTS skiing at the highest levels. After all, that is redundant, and superfluous, because they are the best in the world at what they do.
User avatar
h.harb
 
Posts: 6771
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Dumont, Colorado

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby NoCleverName » Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:01 pm

Max_501 wrote:
NoCleverName wrote:The number of muscles you would have to recruit to make a "solid pole plant" would negate any fluidity in CA or CB. If not kill it altogether.


Don't agree with that statement. I can make a very solid pole plant just by placing the tip of the pole in a bad spot.


Obviously my solid pole plant sucks, then. Another reason not to do it. :mrgreen:
User avatar
NoCleverName
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 am
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Another example of complete misunderstanding of skiing.

Postby milesb » Wed Sep 25, 2013 6:34 pm

Just want to take this opprtunity to apologize for something I posted here about "anticipation" about 10 years ago. I wuz wrong, sorry.
YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH78E6wIKnq3Fg0eUf2MFng
User avatar
milesb
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Los Angeles

Next

Return to Primary Movements Teaching System

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron