-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Flexing through transition (video)
- Thread starter TDK
- Start date
Nice. I wonder if you really want to say back seat or toilet seat. That connotes sitting down, shifting mass back relative to enter one is standing. The skier is not standing at transition, little or no weight on the feet. Just thinking. Not sure what's better term would be.
Do I see inclination at the blue gate?
Do I see inclination at the blue gate?
The moment at which racers “appear” to be in the backseat, is actually when they are fully flexed, so there is no weight on the skis. It is a dynamic position to allow the legs to fully flex, rather than a weight shift. Very different than a recreational skier leaning back on their tails.
Good visuals Tom!!!
Crystal.
Crystal.
Nice skiing, but I thing the "secret" hasn't been a secret for quite a while.
Great video. One minor comment is that I agree with your final comment about never being in static balance and I think it is very important (hence the last part of my signature). However, it looks like the force diagram shows static balance ...
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2017
- Posts
- 483
as others have said, nothing new and not back seat skiing. It is called retraction. Because they need to get their skis from one side of them to the other in a very short period of time, they retract (i.e. down- unweighting) the legs which allows the skis cross under them. If they used a extension move ( i.e. up-unweighting) in the transition, it would take way too much time and would not be near the following gate. After the retraction, the important move is to bring the hips forward up over the boots at top of the turn and this is where the extension is. If not, you will then be in the back seat.
I think a good way to look at the backseat "position" is whether it is functional or dysfunctional. While a weighted backseat is always dysfunctional, an unweighted backseat can be either functional or dysfunctional. As long as a skier's weight/pressure is back over the shovel after an unweighted transition, the backseat position is a function of mobility that never becomes "backseat" dysfunctional. However, if an unweighted backseat position during transition is far enough back that the skier is not able to get their CoM over the shovel in time for the next turn, that is dysfunctional as soon as the weight/pressure returns to the ski. This highlights the importance of non-static or dynamic balance that TDK and Jamt both raise.
A WC skier is an expert pilot of the CoM. They are able to manage their CoM's momentum that brings the upper body back over the skis as they are crossing under in time for the next turn. When an developing advanced skier attempts to mimic the fore/aft angles of a WC skier in a retraction turn, it is their poor CoM management skills that "lets them down" in the turn (both literally & figuratively). When a skier learns to pilot their CoM in a flat (vertically) and straight (laterally) line in opposition to a BoS that follows a large and consistent path of infinity including vertical motion that does not transfer to the CoM, we become skilled managers of the CoM to BoS relationship. However, if the release of a skier's CoM results in a "dropping motion" of the CoM, will exacerbate the dysfunctional backseat.
A WC skier is an expert pilot of the CoM. They are able to manage their CoM's momentum that brings the upper body back over the skis as they are crossing under in time for the next turn. When an developing advanced skier attempts to mimic the fore/aft angles of a WC skier in a retraction turn, it is their poor CoM management skills that "lets them down" in the turn (both literally & figuratively). When a skier learns to pilot their CoM in a flat (vertically) and straight (laterally) line in opposition to a BoS that follows a large and consistent path of infinity including vertical motion that does not transfer to the CoM, we become skilled managers of the CoM to BoS relationship. However, if the release of a skier's CoM results in a "dropping motion" of the CoM, will exacerbate the dysfunctional backseat.
Low through the transition is a great thing for rapid short turns. Vaulting certainly takes more time / distance. Knowing how and when each is a better option opens up the wide subject of tactics. Not that we need to go there as long as we realize retraction may or may not include weightless transitions. At least as long as the weighting is maximum at or shortly after the apex that model echos the idea in a graphic Barnes developed some ten years ago. Seeing the actual skiing gives it more life IMO. Good job T!
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2017
- Posts
- 483
Yes, I understand. I suppose use of the term backseat is perfectly good for those that understand the context. And, I don't know what else to describe it as. Weightless retraction? But that would take considerable clarification too.
Can also think in terms of where the feet are relative to the hip, rather then hip relative to the feet. If the feet get too far ahead during retraction float, then the skier will end up in the backseat during engagement later. During retraction float, keep the feet back as far under the hip as possible with strong pullback and dorsiflexion...which will still look like sitting on a toilet during a deep retraction, but as you said, what happens right after that will determine whether the skier is getting shovel engagement in the top of the turn.
There are several key factors that will contribute to obtaining fore-aft balance after a deep retraction, as quickly as possible. One is the above mentioned foot pullback or holdback during float and leading up to it (watch the inside tip lead). Another is how quickly the skis are engaged onto their new edges combined with how quickly the CoM moves into the center of the next turn.
If you take too long to engage them for the next turn, then float will end and the skier will be in a toilet seat squat on the tails of his/her skis wondering how to get started. Thankfully, deep retraction during float greatly facilitates very quick and aggressive edge angle development using the ankles and lower legs to initiate edge angles, as well as the quickest path possible for the CoM into the center of the next turn. As soon as new turn forces start to develop in the new turn direction, with the CoM moving inside, force vectors change radically and lines the CoM up in balance over the BoS in a more fore position.
Bottom line, deep retraction during float is not an error, its not really backseat. However, a skier can quickly become back seated unless they have used the opportunity to initiate a quick and aggressive turn and managed their feet back through transition as much as possible.
Slalom turns, flex to release cross under transition, given the ski and centre of mass paths, it's not all that hard to allow that flexed no weight on skis, boots not flexed position to change to hips over boots when the skis need to engage again.
Doing a flex to release cross under transition for GS turns at speed without ending up too far back when you need to be forward requires a lot more effort, but they sure are fun.
Doing a flex to release cross under transition for GS turns at speed without ending up too far back when you need to be forward requires a lot more effort, but they sure are fun.
Very true, but you cannot
But you cannot Tell if someone is pulling feet back just by looking at a picture, because the boots are too stiff to allow much ankle flexion.
Anyway I agree with what you're saying.
True.
Can also think in terms of where the feet are relative to the hip, rather then hip relative to the feet. If the feet get too far ahead during retraction float, then the skier will end up in the backseat during engagement later. During retraction float, keep the feet back as far under the hip as possible with strong pullback and dorsiflexion...which will still look like sitting on a toilet during a deep retraction, but as you said, what happens right after that will determine whether the skier is getting shovel engagement in the top of the turn.
There are several key factors that will contribute to obtaining fore-aft balance after a deep retraction, as quickly as possible. One is the above mentioned foot pullback or holdback during float and leading up to it (watch the inside tip lead). Another is how quickly the skis are engaged onto their new edges combined with how quickly the CoM moves into the center of the next turn.
If you take too long to engage them for the next turn, then float will end and the skier will be in a toilet seat squat on the tails of his/her skis wondering how to get started. Thankfully, deep retraction during float greatly facilitates very quick and aggressive edge angle development using the ankles and lower legs to initiate edge angles, as well as the quickest path possible for the CoM into the center of the next turn. As soon as new turn forces start to develop in the new turn direction, with the CoM moving inside, force vectors change radically and lines the CoM up in balance over the BoS in a more fore position.
Bottom line, deep retraction during float is not an error, its not really backseat. However, a skier can quickly become back seated unless they have used the opportunity to initiate a quick and aggressive turn and managed their feet back through transition as much as possible.
But you cannot Tell if someone is pulling feet back just by looking at a picture, because the boots are too stiff to allow much ankle flexion.
Anyway I agree with what you're saying.
I think most top skiers today flex to release in gs, and you can pull your feet back to recenter.
Flex to release in GS is certainly used! However it may not always be neccessary to retract as aggressively as in SL.
I want to say something else about the term "cross under". I commonly see or hear this being used to refer to flex-to-release type transitions, but I think a closer inspection is warranted here. This could lead to debates about what the term means, I hope not... Bear with me...
The idea behind so called "cross-under" is that somehow the skis cross under the body rather then the body cross over the skis. This can only mean one thing...the crossing laterally from one side of the skis to the other. Either the body crosses over the skis, or allegedly the skis can cross under the body, laterally. The ONLY way for the skis to cross laterally under the body is when pivoting is involved. If you are carving, the skis cannot cross under the body.
it certainly can be the case with retracted transitions that the skis also pivot and cross under the body, but it can also be the case where the skis are not pivoted during transition and so even though it may LOOK like the skis are crossing under the body...they aren't...the body is crossing the skis.
Why does this distinction matter? Because if you are trying to use a high performance retraction transition...carving as much as possible, then its absolutely crucial that the mind thinks of the skis not crossing under with a pivot. The skis must track straight through transition while the upper body moves across their path. It should absolutely not be assumed that retraction release always means cross-under and in fact for racing, its most likely not.
"cross-under" is an overly used term in my view...and one of the secrets to high performance retraction turns is specifically NOT thinking about it that way.
when we watch someone on a video doing high performance perfectly carved retraction turns, it certainly appears to the camara like the skis are zipping across underneath a stable upper body, but in actuality, we can't see the side view and if we could we would see the skier aggressively moving their CoM across the skis. The camara angle and frame of reference creates an illusion that somehow the skis are crossing under the body...this illusion is made more pronounced by the fact that in these types of turns the upper body makes very minimal displacement side to side, while the skis jet back and forth.....but what we cannot see from this view is how the CoM is advancing down the hill....crossing the path of the skis.
A true cross under is when the CoM literally doesn't move down the hill that much to cross the skis...but rather the skis have to be displaced sideways....in some kind of pivot action, to get to the new edges.
Just some food for thought...
The idea behind so called "cross-under" is that somehow the skis cross under the body rather then the body cross over the skis. This can only mean one thing...the crossing laterally from one side of the skis to the other. Either the body crosses over the skis, or allegedly the skis can cross under the body, laterally. The ONLY way for the skis to cross laterally under the body is when pivoting is involved. If you are carving, the skis cannot cross under the body.
it certainly can be the case with retracted transitions that the skis also pivot and cross under the body, but it can also be the case where the skis are not pivoted during transition and so even though it may LOOK like the skis are crossing under the body...they aren't...the body is crossing the skis.
Why does this distinction matter? Because if you are trying to use a high performance retraction transition...carving as much as possible, then its absolutely crucial that the mind thinks of the skis not crossing under with a pivot. The skis must track straight through transition while the upper body moves across their path. It should absolutely not be assumed that retraction release always means cross-under and in fact for racing, its most likely not.
"cross-under" is an overly used term in my view...and one of the secrets to high performance retraction turns is specifically NOT thinking about it that way.
when we watch someone on a video doing high performance perfectly carved retraction turns, it certainly appears to the camara like the skis are zipping across underneath a stable upper body, but in actuality, we can't see the side view and if we could we would see the skier aggressively moving their CoM across the skis. The camara angle and frame of reference creates an illusion that somehow the skis are crossing under the body...this illusion is made more pronounced by the fact that in these types of turns the upper body makes very minimal displacement side to side, while the skis jet back and forth.....but what we cannot see from this view is how the CoM is advancing down the hill....crossing the path of the skis.
A true cross under is when the CoM literally doesn't move down the hill that much to cross the skis...but rather the skis have to be displaced sideways....in some kind of pivot action, to get to the new edges.
Just some food for thought...
Sponsor
Staff online
-
Dave PetersenGraphic Designer/Social Media Manager -
T-SquareTerry -
PhilpugNotorious P.U.G.
Members online
- JibingDownhill
- Cheizz
- AltaSkier
- Prosper
- dusty
- Wasatchman
- SpeedyKevin
- Jerez
- butleri
- wv911
- raisingarizona
- BlueGrin
- saboteur
- Jersey Skier
- freeskier1961
- evr66
- BLiP
- Willyum215
- Mallet21
- David Chaus
- Wade
- drewmard
- mdf
- Shawn
- MissySki
- trailtrimmer
- Dave Petersen
- PupManS
- TheArchitect
- cjm
- Ozan
- LewyM
- textrovert
- Schussboelie
- ilovepugs
- kevblah
- T-Square
- Dislogical
- Crank
- dovski
- goaliedad
- Ivan
- surfski
- sparty
- Jwrags
- GregK
- SkiOAP
- Chip
- Nomax
- Philpug