Him... again!

[arothafel]

Many of you are familiar with his skiing... but, I hadn't seen this video...

I never, ever see anyone at Mammoth skiing like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZckQEOs_0g&feature=related

[carver_hk]

I watched a training video of another famous Japanese skier, Sato. In the video he demo-ed how to perform turns very much like this one. When compared with PMTS, from what I m seeing, many drills are very much like PMTS with three things exceptionally different. 1 - drills are mostly fast moving (eg, fast two footed release). 2 - there are deliberate rotation in turn initiation (so, they also learn fast pivot slip). 3 - no requirement on stance width. Anyone actually know their systems or any thought based on what I know?

[HeluvaSkier]

1 - drills are mostly fast moving (eg, fast two footed release). 2 - there are deliberate rotation in turn initiation (so, they also learn fast pivot slip). 3 - no requirement on stance width.

This is an interesting list to me. I haven't watched as much of the Japanese skiing as some others here, but most everything I have seen doesn't have any deliberate rotation - including bump skiing and short radius turns (turns that could easily be called a BPST). Perhaps I haven't seen the right clips yet. Everything I have seen (for the most part) indicates that the Japanese have perhaps one of the most up-to-date demo teams on the planet right now as the Essentials are demonstrated extremely well in their skiing. Whether their teaching is in line with their skiing is another thing to ponder. I don't know Japanese so that will remain a mystery to me - but the skiing is good.

As far as stance width is concerned, I don't think you'd find a "stance width requirement" in PMTS other than to say that it needs to be right for the skier (not contrived). As long as the Japanese are ensuring that the stance width is not contrived I think that could be considered a similarity. PMTS promotes a narrower stance than many other schools of instruction because it promotes dynamic balancing as opposed to static balance, but if a student were blocking tipping angles and other essential movements with too narrow of a stance I am certain that the prescription would be to widen the stance slightly to be more functional. In fact, I actually know of a skier who Harald instructed to widen their stance a small amount...

[BigE]

Heluva,

normally, tipping angles are blocked by the too wide stance. The too wide stance promotes strong rotation of the femurs in the hip socket to get the skis tipped. This is the same rotation that some traditional schools teach as necessary for carving, and they use the pivot slip to unlock the hip joint and allow that rotation to occur.

can you describe why a too narrow stance can inhibit tipping? Why not just flex the inside leg more?

[HeluvaSkier]

Heluva,

normally, tipping angles are blocked by the too wide stance. The too wide stance promotes strong rotation of the femurs in the hip socket to get the skis tipped. This is the same rotation that some traditional schools teach as necessary for carving, and they use the pivot slip to unlock the hip joint and allow that rotation to occur.

can you describe why a too narrow stance can inhibit tipping? Why not just flex the inside leg more?

Agreed on too wide. National organizations preached a "wide stance" for years and it did nothing but stagnate skiing - especially in racers (I'm sure you've seen it). The only way to ski from a wide stance is as you say.

On too narrow - I've seen skiers with their boots locked so tight together (taking narrow to an un-natural extreme) that they cannot easily flex the inside leg because it is getting caught on the stance boot. I'd say that would be considered non-functional to the point where it would affect the skier's ability to balance with the outside ski - although I'd guess it is more easily corrected than a skier who is too wide.

Overall, I think that stance widths used by skiers are far too wide...

[BigE]

I agree that most skiers are skiing too wide -- I admit, I used to think that up to shoulder width was ok... but no more.

It's an epidemic.

The problem with narrowing stance is that if you don't also try to keep your jacket zipper straight up, you'll end up with the weight on the wrong ski. You need both parts to be successful. Narrowing the stance alone won't work on a student that has no tipping/edging skills. These skiers edge by leaning one way or the other. If you narrow your stance and lean you will create inside ski weight dominance. So you NEED to counterbalance/angulate (ie. keep your zipper straight up) to get the weight dominance to the outside ski.

The problem with teaching narrow stance is the instructor will often talk ONLY about the stance width and leave counter balance/angulation completely out of the picture. Those instructors will fail.

[trtaylor]

I agree that most skiers are skiing too wide -- I admit, I used to think that up to shoulder width was ok... but no more.

It's an epidemic.

The problem with narrowing stance is that if you don't also try to keep your jacket zipper straight up, you'll end up with the weight on the wrong ski. You need both parts to be successful. Narrowing the stance alone won't work on a student that has no tipping/edging skills. These skiers edge by leaning one way or the other. If you narrow your stance and lean you will create inside ski weight dominance. So you NEED to counterbalance/angulate (ie. keep your zipper straight up) to get the weight dominance to the outside ski.

The problem with teaching narrow stance is the instructor will often talk ONLY about the stance width and leave counter balance/angulation completely out of the picture. Those instructors will fail.

Have you ever read Harald's ACBAES 1 or seen the accompanying videos? Have you viewed the PMTS on-line lessons? I agree tipping goes hand in hand with the narrow stance. But, counterbalance comes later. The real problem is no instructors, other than PMTS, talk about tipping.

[Max_501]

The problem with narrowing stance is that if you don't also try to keep your jacket zipper straight up, you'll end up with the weight on the wrong ski.

Doesn't this apply to a wide stance?

[h.harb]

First this video is excellent skiing. It's basically two footed releases with very fast tipping and strong rebound.
There is no rotation.
Stance width has nothing to do with this:

The problem with narrowing stance is that if you don't also try to keep your jacket zipper straight up, you'll end up with the weight on the wrong ski.

[h.harb]

Greg is right I have told some skiers to make their stance wider or more like separate the feet.. It has to do with lack of individual ski use. Some skiers were taught to push both skis to the side with their feet locked. To get them to understand tipping they have to separate and engage each ski individually or they will never make progress creating angles.

[BigE]

Max,

It applies to wide as well. However, with the narrow stance, the base of support is smaller, so it's easier to lose balance when leaning in and fall down. When leaning in with a wide stance the edge of the inside ski is not so engaged and slides more, which makes the skier think they are very outside ski dominant when they really are not.

trtaylor,

You are right, there is another way to ensure outside ski dominance -- lift the inside ski. Then it's true, leaning in won't hurt you. It's wrong, but it won't hurt. Kudos to Harald for the safety built in to the progression.

But IIRC, lifting the inside ski was not one of "The Essentials of Skiing". So, the only other way I know to ensure outside ski dominance is not to lean in -- it is to counterbalance, which is discussed very early on....

[h.harb]

The problem with narrowing stance is that if you don't also try to keep your jacket zipper straight up, you'll end up with the weight on the wrong ski.

CB is important in either case, and both in wide or narrow stances you will be on the wrong ski without it. And it's still called leaning without it.

[HeluvaSkier]

Knowing both PSIA and PMTS beginner level progressions I can truthfully say they are very different in their approach.

With a gliding wedge progression a wider stance is taught (beginners always default to standing too wide because it feels safe, and the instructors do not correct them), the wide stance is reinforced by the wedge so no balance is taught, and the first turning method that is taught is steering the feet. Edging the ski is ignored to the point where running a flat ski is actually encouraged and a tipped ski is discouraged. It is easy to get a skier sliding on the easiest in about an hour to hour and a half with this approach - but they don't go much farther - and to go farther more "skills" need to be added.

In PMTS the initial stance is much narrower and it forces the student to begin (even before putting skis on) to balance on one foot or the other because the first movement that is introduced is tipping - and it is continually reinforced through the entire progression. PMTS teaches balancing that does not break down once the skier starts to slide. Balance with the outside ski is reinforced, and the first ski to move to create the tipping is always the inside ski. I had the pleasure of running through parts of this progression with a skier the other day and I had the kid (previous wedge-only turner) out of the wedge and parallel skiing within about 400' of vertical on a relatively flat green trail. The best part is, that what I taught this ten year old will serve him very well as he progresses. I skied with him for a one-hour private.

Once this kind of skiing is established, it is easy to add necessary balancing and countering movements as the tipping intensity increases - for some skiers it may even become second nature to avoid falling over. I think the full process for a beginner lesson with PMTS is about 3 hours (correct?). A ski school would more than likely consider this to be unacceptable for various reasons (I understand the reasons, but don't necessarily agree with them).

So watching this Japanese skier ski - I basically see a very good BPST - as Harald said - two footed releases, active [early] tipping, and no active rotary to turn the skis. I hope that the instruction to accompany this is as good as the demo. If so, I'd say the Japanese are doing a good job with their national system because the demo is demonstrating exactly what PMTS teaches - proper balancing and tipping to create turns. When I went back to rebuild my skiing - that is where I started. Without it, the rest is like building a house without a foundation.

[h.harb]

Greg, your post demonstrates not only a skier who uses PMTS, but one who is teaching PMTS. I could have written that post without deviating from any word.
Thank you

[carver_hk]

So watching this Japanese skier ski - I basically see a very good BPST - as Harald said - two footed releases, active [early] tipping, and no active rotary to turn the skis. I hope that the instruction to accompany this is as good as the demo..

I m kind of result oriented thinking. Over the days of my last trip in Japan, I didn't see any skier ski nearly like this guy. In fact very far. And most skiers on the mountain looks pretty average to me. That made me think if their teaching system, not the top skiers, is really equally good.

MonsterMan - As you are on the same mountain, you want to share with us what you see?