-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Slow Line Fast Bump Skiing done slowly.
- Thread starter Josh Matta
- Start date
If so, then I picked well.
If you are going to get upset by my opinions, then at least please quote my postings for accuracy. You are not being accurate now.
To clarify, I was responding to Epic's comments that he feels it is necessary to ski to the edge of recklessness and that he knows someone who was injured twice, both times making the team, etc.... "risk it to get the bisquit" I believe was the wording.
My opinion is that either the participants going with that attitude are not ready or that IF that truly is the expectation by those in charge to ski on the edge of recklessness and risk injury...risk it to get the bisquit...then I don't approve. I'm sorry if this hypothetical conversation upsets you.
I have heard similar comments from some local DECL's so I do know some of this attitude does exist in those with the power, but I also know DECL's who are not so stupid. All I can do here in this thread is respond to Epic and a few others that seemed to be endorsing the idea that its necessary to "risk it to get the bisquit". Why is that necessary? I do not think it should be necessary. Either the participants with that attitude are not ready, OR, if that is the expectation then its a stupid expectation. Judge for yourself.
I mentioned that phrase "golf cart" in a LIII training clinic I took this last season. I used the phrase in reference to what I didn't want to look like, but felt I probably did look like, while trying to do the tasks required in the skiing exam.
Unexpectedly, the examiner/leader of the clinic did not like hearing me say that phrase, and took it as a complaint by me of his skiing and/or of the examination process itself. None of that was what I meant; I was being self-deprecating. Once said however, it was impossible to take back. It was also impossible to explain to him that I didn't mean him or the test and exam process.
From that point on during the two-day clinic it was clear that he put me in the category of "difficult student."
I hope I do not get him as an examiner when I go up for LIII one day, because there's now bad blood there.
I meant no offense when I said it...
Be warned if you're PSIA and working on certification: there are sensitive examiners out there who may take offense.
Sorry to hear that... I guess some will. I've heard some interesting things a few times. I know some others that are open minded so hang in there.
I mentioned that phrase "golf cart" in a LIII training clinic I took this last season. I used the phrase in reference to what I didn't want to look like, but felt I probably did look like, while trying to do the tasks required in the skiing exam.
Unexpectedly, the examiner/leader of the clinic did not like hearing me say that phrase, and took it as a complaint by me of his skiing and/or of the examination process itself. None of that was what I meant; I was being self-deprecating. Once said however, it was impossible to take back. It was also impossible to explain to him that I didn't mean him or the test and exam process.
From that point on during the two-day clinic it was clear that he put me in the category of "difficult student."
I hope I do not get him as an examiner when I go up for LIII one day, because there's now bad blood there.
I meant no offense when I said it...
Be warned if you're PSIA and working on certification: there are sensitive examiners out there who may take offense.
I'm guessing that he's heard it before, probably about his own skiing and is sensitive to it.
No worries. I'm guessing Epic might be talking about Mike Rogan who I think did something to his knee, but I could be mistakenFrom the people Ive spoken with, it's clear they need to perform at a high level. If they can't, what's the point? I don't recall any mentioning they thought they were risking injury any more than usual, so I'm not buying Epic's story that injury is more or less inevitable. I was reacting to and surprised by the level of umbrage you seemed to be placing on the tryout process and alleged mindset of PSIA based on what appeared to be second hand information. It all sounds a lot like fox and grapes for the most part. Anyhow...
Yea I definitely was not meaning to trash the "whole" thing. Just expressing an opinion about one particular point which was about motivating people to ski beyond their ability. "Performing at a high level", in my view would not be anywhere close to reckless nor would it involve undue risking it for the biscuit. I would compare say a junior SL racer going for it a little beyond thier capability, to say mikeala shiffran who can slice through a SL course as smooth as silk and win. Likewise these psia guys should be able to ski through this bump field very dynamically, yet in complete control with finesse and refinement if they are to represent our nation. If they can't, then the second best effort would be to ski more conservatively that is within their current ability, albeit less dynamic. They may or may not get the biscuit that way but so be it, that is where their ability currently is. I see nothing of value to ski beyond their current capability and have excessive risk of injury. My comments were in response to epic. As I said earlier, half a dozen of them I'm sure are great skiers we would all be happy to follow around. Many of them were either skiing a bit too conservatively or skiing borderline recklessly, one guy was flat out reckless. The prior may or may not get the biscuit but the latter is a poor choice.
Nearly all of them are deficient with changing edges while fully flexed, which is a huge part of the reason many people on this thread were not overly inspired by the video. That particular deficiency is very common throughout psia as very few in psia really understand that movement pattern or how to teach it. It also uses many contradictory muscle engagements and relaxations that are in many ways completely opposite of the status quo movement pattern most common thoroughout psia. That task was added to our divsion's L3 exam recently and that tells me they are becoming aware of this and hoping to improve things. Schanzy's comments were also right in line with that.
I am quite confident that th me selection process is more mature then that and is not particularly looking for people going for broke a littl me beyond their ability, and I'm confident that they would favor th more conservative skier, so long as good effective ski movements are being made. I am also confident that the selection process had more to do with looking for leadership qualities then bad ass skiing. A certain level of ski competence would need to be there of course but as carl would say "skiing is z easy part"
Nearly all of them are deficient with changing edges while fully flexed, which is a huge part of the reason many people on this thread were not overly inspired by the video. That particular deficiency is very common throughout psia as very few in psia really understand that movement pattern or how to teach it. It also uses many contradictory muscle engagements and relaxations that are in many ways completely opposite of the status quo movement pattern most common thoroughout psia. That task was added to our divsion's L3 exam recently and that tells me they are becoming aware of this and hoping to improve things. Schanzy's comments were also right in line with that.
I am quite confident that th me selection process is more mature then that and is not particularly looking for people going for broke a littl me beyond their ability, and I'm confident that they would favor th more conservative skier, so long as good effective ski movements are being made. I am also confident that the selection process had more to do with looking for leadership qualities then bad ass skiing. A certain level of ski competence would need to be there of course but as carl would say "skiing is z easy part"
I'd also say there's a mental component i.e., raw nerves, that certainly plays a role. I know and have skied with 3-4 folks who made the final 25 cut, and can tell you that I think you'd be happy to spend a day out skiing with them and most likely not find as many deficiencies as you're ascribing. Like any tryout or exam, there is a range of abilities. I can tell you Nick Herron, Eric L, Jonathan B just rip, plain and simple. There are others that I'm not as huge fan of their skiing, but they are certainly very good and very versatile skiers. The 3-4 I mentioned above are all very strong skiers and great coaches. When I look at clips like the tryout vid, what as find interesting is the difference in tactical choices, body type, ski choice, etc.. and their influence on outcome. Sure, some of the skiing in the clip isn't the 1% skiing we want to see, but that's a pretty tall order. A lot of women get their clock cleaned by Mikaela, but are still very fine skiers and clearly would stand out making turns on any hill, but I digress. Snow conditions, nerves, whether this was early in the day, the first day, or third, exclusively retracted turns or not, are all just nuanced variables. In short, one clip doesn't tell the whole story by any means. We're looking at one clip of one run of a multi-day process. For some, we're seeing an out take. I'm just not willing to toss anyone under the bus without more context unless the skier feels that a particular run is indicative of their best general outcomes.
As one of the candidates (Mr. 17.53) is most likely Jonathan Ballou, let me toss this clip in for a different take:
As one of the candidates (Mr. 17.53) is most likely Jonathan Ballou, let me toss this clip in for a different take:
Last edited:
From a non-instructors's eye using mainly the criteria of making difficult terrain look easy with round turns and less "air-pivoting" I like the lady at 6 min and the dudes at 14:20 and 15:50. I give major props to the one who took that hard face plant at the very beginning of the run, lost a ski, put the ski back on in record setting time, and then proceeded to make a very respectable run. I think it was around the 10 min mark for those on a time crunch. This video was very helpful to me to get a mental picture of what high level skiing looks like on difficult terrain and to see various strategies on how to approach it. Thanks for posting it!!!
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Posts
- 6,357
Just to be clear, that's my opinion/strategy and my words, not anyone else's except for "risk it to get the biscuit" that's my daughter's words/strategy for ski racing. I haven't been to Demo Team tryouts, but have been to Eastern Team, Dev, and DCL tryouts. It's sort of hard to work out what is the best strategy. Maybe Nate will chime in, he participated in the last D-Team tryout.
Not talking about Mike although you may be right about his knee. He did not participate in the last D-Team tryout since he is in the coaching role now. I'm certainly not saying it is required or inevitable that you get hurt, but I do think that they want to see more exciting skiing. More athleticism. I believe that "performance culture" is the term being used, and they'd like to see more of that and less golf-carting at all levels. Even if you are leading a Level I clinic you are expected to be "inspiring".
Going back to the bump skiing, I was skiing with Nate and Eric on the day that the Stowe video posted above was shot. This was a week or two before the tryout (I didn't make Eastern Team so I wasn't going) and we were being coached by Terry Barbour. If anything, I'd say that Nate and Eric were both working on more contact with the snow and more range in their movements to absorb the bumps more. I was being stupid and jumping over stuff because it is fun and the snow was soft and I didn't have to ski at a tryout in a few weeks time. Terry was too. These guys have funny stories about big wrecks at tryouts, it happens for sure. Since I've known him I think Matt Boyd has had three ACL injuries and I'm pretty sure that two of them happened at Teams Tryouts. He's willing to risk it. I think it should be obvious that the level of risk anyone might take in their line choice will change with conditions and usually these things happen in the spring when conditions can be all over the map. We might not be able to see that in the videos. Also remember that I said "the illusion of recklessness" in my first post on the subject. I don't want to actually destroy myself at a tryout, but I do want to look like I am going for it. That will look different on a beautiful 50 day than it would when skiing coral-reef under a cloudy sky.
Great post and good thoughts, BTS!
Like any forum topic, this one has definitely gravitated away from Josh's original intent of skiing a slow line fast and into a break-down of the PSIA National Demo Team Selection. And, as Erik mentioned, I was at the tryout and I made the final day cut of 25 from which the 13 team members were selected.
As an overview of the process, it was a 4 day selection process.
Day 1 was when the majority of the ski tasks were held and they ranged in level of difficulty from a Basic (open) Parallel Turn to "show 'em what ya got" (my words) bump run to end the day. There were something like 11 total tasks that we skied that first day, it was a long day. At the end of day 1 we had a couple hours to shower/change/re-charge before jumping into the evening where we each presented our prepared indoor presentation. That made an already long day, longer, but is very similar to a typical day at a major event like National Academy, Interski, or various Director Seminars.
Day 2 we met on hill and were broken out into groups where you either taught a prepared, 45 minute, 2 run, teaching clinic or a 15 minute, 1 run, draw from a hat, teaching clinic and 2 runs of movement assessment. I had the prepared teaching segment on that day and not only did you have to be on your game for your teaching segment, but also an active, engaged participant for all of your peers (something I would encourage any participant at any level of certification testing, to be). At the end of Day 2 we had our same couple of hours of turn-around before breaking into small groups for a round robin of various social media, communication, and team work activities.
Day 3, again, started on the hill and you did whatever you hadn't done the day before which for me was the 15 minute, draw from a hat, teaching. That involved drawing a number at the bottom of the hill. That number corresponded to a word in Rogan's notebook (my word was Extension). You then had the chairlift ride up to think about your word/clinic, present, and then the next ride up with the 3 selectors for debrief/questions. After the teaching segments and a quick break we went to conduct our 2 movement assessment evaluations. Those of you who have done movement assessment in certification may know that the ski tasks are selected so that flaws in the skiing are seen more obviously by the candidate and the skiing is not evaluated by the examiner. At the National Team Selection, the skiing was evaluated so the movement assessment was being conducted, in theory, on the candidates very best skiing and the task were not overly complicated so you could, as the performer, really present your best. (Quick side note, in one of those tasks, where my friend Matt Boyd was assessing my skiing, I got my highest score of the tryout, an 8.5 out of 10, and did not make Matt's job easy). On one of the assessment modules we addressed the performer while the selectors observed, just like you would in any lesson/clinic. On the other assessment module you spoke directly to the selectors, out of earshot of the performer, so you could have an honest, in depth conversation, just like you might in the locker room at the end of the day. At the end of Day 3 was when the cut to 25 was announced. We then, immediately, broke the remaining candidates into small groups where we presented 5 minute off the cuff indoor presentations with just 5 minutes before you went to prepare. Kind of like getting popped with a question while at the après spot after a day of presenting.
Day 4 was a short day where we were broken into small groups, each group with a different focus. Some taught some individual clinics, some taught some pair coordinated clinics, and some skied some more. Selection of the team occurred on the evening of the 4th day.
While this was a long, exhausting process, for me, I have to give it up to the selectors who met each night after we were released to score and discuss the days activities and see where folks were shaping out.
I will say that, as to the topic being discussed, I was motivated (because of my goals) and inspired (because of the level of the candidates) to put my very best on the line. I know of only one injury that occurred and I do not believe it was a case of the candidate taking two much of a risk. Certainly the candidate, who did make the team, did not feel he was being too risky when the injury occurred and he continued to ski the selection. It was one of those things that happens in skiing and I feel for anyone who has been injured doing something the love. Being active people, it is very hard for us to be laid up at in any capacity.
So, as I said, I was there so if you have any questions about the process or selection I will answer them openly and honestly to the full extent of my knowledge. I have always had respect for the team, but that respect is 20 fold more for having gone through the process and I fully plan to go through it again in 2020.
As an overview of the process, it was a 4 day selection process.
Day 1 was when the majority of the ski tasks were held and they ranged in level of difficulty from a Basic (open) Parallel Turn to "show 'em what ya got" (my words) bump run to end the day. There were something like 11 total tasks that we skied that first day, it was a long day. At the end of day 1 we had a couple hours to shower/change/re-charge before jumping into the evening where we each presented our prepared indoor presentation. That made an already long day, longer, but is very similar to a typical day at a major event like National Academy, Interski, or various Director Seminars.
Day 2 we met on hill and were broken out into groups where you either taught a prepared, 45 minute, 2 run, teaching clinic or a 15 minute, 1 run, draw from a hat, teaching clinic and 2 runs of movement assessment. I had the prepared teaching segment on that day and not only did you have to be on your game for your teaching segment, but also an active, engaged participant for all of your peers (something I would encourage any participant at any level of certification testing, to be). At the end of Day 2 we had our same couple of hours of turn-around before breaking into small groups for a round robin of various social media, communication, and team work activities.
Day 3, again, started on the hill and you did whatever you hadn't done the day before which for me was the 15 minute, draw from a hat, teaching. That involved drawing a number at the bottom of the hill. That number corresponded to a word in Rogan's notebook (my word was Extension). You then had the chairlift ride up to think about your word/clinic, present, and then the next ride up with the 3 selectors for debrief/questions. After the teaching segments and a quick break we went to conduct our 2 movement assessment evaluations. Those of you who have done movement assessment in certification may know that the ski tasks are selected so that flaws in the skiing are seen more obviously by the candidate and the skiing is not evaluated by the examiner. At the National Team Selection, the skiing was evaluated so the movement assessment was being conducted, in theory, on the candidates very best skiing and the task were not overly complicated so you could, as the performer, really present your best. (Quick side note, in one of those tasks, where my friend Matt Boyd was assessing my skiing, I got my highest score of the tryout, an 8.5 out of 10, and did not make Matt's job easy). On one of the assessment modules we addressed the performer while the selectors observed, just like you would in any lesson/clinic. On the other assessment module you spoke directly to the selectors, out of earshot of the performer, so you could have an honest, in depth conversation, just like you might in the locker room at the end of the day. At the end of Day 3 was when the cut to 25 was announced. We then, immediately, broke the remaining candidates into small groups where we presented 5 minute off the cuff indoor presentations with just 5 minutes before you went to prepare. Kind of like getting popped with a question while at the après spot after a day of presenting.
Day 4 was a short day where we were broken into small groups, each group with a different focus. Some taught some individual clinics, some taught some pair coordinated clinics, and some skied some more. Selection of the team occurred on the evening of the 4th day.
While this was a long, exhausting process, for me, I have to give it up to the selectors who met each night after we were released to score and discuss the days activities and see where folks were shaping out.
I will say that, as to the topic being discussed, I was motivated (because of my goals) and inspired (because of the level of the candidates) to put my very best on the line. I know of only one injury that occurred and I do not believe it was a case of the candidate taking two much of a risk. Certainly the candidate, who did make the team, did not feel he was being too risky when the injury occurred and he continued to ski the selection. It was one of those things that happens in skiing and I feel for anyone who has been injured doing something the love. Being active people, it is very hard for us to be laid up at in any capacity.
So, as I said, I was there so if you have any questions about the process or selection I will answer them openly and honestly to the full extent of my knowledge. I have always had respect for the team, but that respect is 20 fold more for having gone through the process and I fully plan to go through it again in 2020.
Great post, Nate! Thanks for your time and effort!
Agree 100%, that is one of the first things I said earlier in the thread as well BTW.
I also said earlier in the thread that all of us would be happy to follow around most of these skiers, myself included. However, you are incorrect to say that my MA would suddenly be different. My MA is accurate. This is not a value judgement on anyone. Nobody is too good to be analyzed for flaws, of which each of these skiers in this situation displayed some. These observations are made for the sake of learning, not to attack anyone or place a value judgement. Its just pure objective MA, nothing more. It seems you think certain personalities are above receiving MA unless the MA is coming from someone higher up the food chain. That is nonsense. Put the egos aside. I haver been one to be star struck. MA is not a value judgement...its just an observation. I believe my MA so far has been accurate, I haven't even really gone that deep, just pointed out some glaring things and explained what I see.
I would hope that even the top people on the national team, including the ones that have posted really inspirational videos of themselves on You Tube, are not afraid to look closely at their own skiing to see what they could improve upon. Saying "well that wasn't my best run because it was a stressful situations" is a perfectly legitimate point to make, but still the flaws were there and they surface in that stressful situation, so what are those flaws?
You don't get to any high level in any sport without consistently taking a critical look at your own performances and making decisions on what you want to tackle first to improve. I know that is my process. And I also don't believe MA has to come from someone who comes from above the food chain. I frequently ask folks to take a look at my skiing when I am working on something. I may be very specific on what I want them to look at and what I want them to provide feedback on.
The best players in any sport receiving coaching. Rarely are those coaches of higher ability then the player, but the player still take on the feedback. Good players also know when to take a piece of feedback, play with it, and if it doesn't work, throw it out.
The best players in any sport receiving coaching. Rarely are those coaches of higher ability then the player, but the player still take on the feedback. Good players also know when to take a piece of feedback, play with it, and if it doesn't work, throw it out.
Roger that Epic! Though I have had some conversations with local DECL's and I know to a certain degree this mentality is not exclusive with you. I heard one DECL here once say that an L3 candidate should not pass L3 without displaying at least one air carve in the bumps. My thoughts were, like really? All that shows me is you couldn't make a turn in time. That is not exemplifying ski technique mastery, that is exemplifying raw athleticism, something some people are born naturally with and some people will never ever have it. In terms of ski instructor leadership, I do not find that inspirational. Can be fun to watch and admire in its own way for whatever it is, unless its being used as a crutch because of inability to ski the line.
This I agree with! If someone is skiing below their ability to play it too safe.....ie...be a golf cart...then yea....that is no bueno too. And I like the idea of being inspiring to watch.
However, I'm just saying, you should not have to become reckless nor on the edge of recklessness to do so. If you do, then you are skiing beyond your ability, most likely displaying poor technique in the process of doing so, and possibly on the verge of an injury. That is not inspirational to me one single bit, especially when you are talking about a ski instruction organization. You can be as inspirational as can be while still remaining in control with great technique. If not, then ask yourself what are the technical flaws that need to be addressed in order to be both inspirational and refined at the same time.
I think it is Jon Ballou. There are videos from the same time period, also posted by Aspen Academy, for other skills. A couple of them post names of skiers in order of when they ski. The guy in blue and tan is JB; and, in the other skills, he skis smart and well. I like his pain-in-the-S's.
As for his Sodbuster, like I said before, I like something difficult made to look easy. His looked to me like a lot of effort and somewhat choreographed, like that bit of air in the upper part, it was like a jump that a figure skater would do for the judges. But, I guess that's what this event is all about; which, by the way, I wonder if that's why no one there gets me excited. Are they focused on exhibiting a list of skills, checking off boxes, rather than just having fun with it? I very much like JB's skiing in the Bump Round Lines video, posted by markojp.
Other videos of the 2015 Regional Tryouts can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTZEm8vakw6WkKHBq3pJvig/videos
Last edited:
You do need to push to, and sometimes over, your boundaries if you want to improve. That is something we, as instructors, need to remember. For ourselves and for our guests. We will need to push our boundaries if we want to expand them. Getting a bit out of control and then pulling it back is both exilerating and quite the learning experience.
Sure thing for self development, even perhaps free skiing, but this was a tryout for the national team. So during an actual tryout are you saying you think they should be skiing "beyond their boundaries" so they can improve?
How about when you are conducting a PSIA clinic? Should you be skiing beyond your boundaries in front of your students?
Don't forget, I was a participant at that tryout and understand the mindset of many there. Some maybe did push past their boundary and their performance suffered. Some skied at their boundary with the occasional slip over and recover and their performance was exciting and showed athleticism and performance. Others may have skied below their boundary and their skiing was lackluster. My personal goal is to push to and sometimes over my boundary so that it expands and the next time I tryout, hopefully, skiing just at my limit will show accurate and exciting skiing.
And to your second question, at times I ski at the level of my students so I can show them a lot of accurate, repeatable movements. Sometimes I ski above the level of my students so I inspire them to another level. And sometimes I ski just at and over my level to show them that I am human as well.
And to your second question, at times I ski at the level of my students so I can show them a lot of accurate, repeatable movements. Sometimes I ski above the level of my students so I inspire them to another level. And sometimes I ski just at and over my level to show them that I am human as well.
