• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Technical Models

Fishbowl

A Parallel Universe
Skier
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Posts
514
Location
Lost
This collection of threads has been really thought provoking, especially the definition of the term “technical model” and how it applies to moving forwards as a skier.

When I think about my goals as a progressing skier, I tend to look at the finished product rather than specific techniques. I think it’s fair to say that we all know good skiing when we see it, regardless of our MA abilities. So, I want to ski with rhythm, timing and balance. I want to be athletic and dynamic, yet appear effortless. I want a quiet upper body that also counters against the slope. I want consistent rounded turns that enable me to control my speed. I want to “go there”. I want clean early edge engagement with high edge angles. But most of all I want to flow down the mountain with grace and speed.

So, the next question is how to get there. All the videos Helluva posted a few pages ago show good skiing that encompass all the qualities I just outlined, yet they are clearly achieved in different ways. We all see the skis and legs turning, but is it the skis turning the legs or the legs turning the skis? This aspect of MA is all about cause and effect and truly understanding what you need to learn to achieve your goals. BTS nicely breaks down how each skier is using leg extension and/or retraction to release and engage their edges. It’s all good skiing, but at this point the “technical model” comes into play, forcing us as students to pick a teaching system that suits our goals. We need to look at the philosophy of each system and decide which technical model to follow.

For example, I like the way HH skis and would be happy to emulate his style. Looking at his teaching materials he clearly has an affinity for the “flex to release” style of skiing. His teaching method employs clearly laid out drills that would enable the student to learn and progress in this style of skiing.

So now I have my goal; good skiing. My technical model; flex to release, and my teaching method; PMTS.
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
look at the finished product rather than specific techniques.

And, development of techniques, as broad and deep as possible, allows one to come up with finished productS that are all good.

flex to release

That sounds like a great thing to explore and get to know better. I'd love to learn the range of possibilities to explore, from the ridiculous to the mainstream.
 
Thread Starter
TS
razie

razie

Sir Shiftsalot
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Posts
1,619
Location
Ontario
One model that was posted was, just Balance, in the context of movement on skis of course. That one is perhaps at my paygrade. And, I kind of like it.

Well - this is why you must do your own critical thinking. "just Balance" won't lead you to good skiing... won't lead you to a healthy result, actually - because to turn and control speed, you need to disturb balance, also known as "the first law of motion".

So that's not even a one turn model, let alone a good skiing model.

By contrast, even that A-B-C model is quite specific in describing what to do in different phases of the turn and alignment and coiling are two elements of great skiing!
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
When I think about my goals as a progressing skier, I tend to look at the finished product rather than specific techniques

That's really good point. For example, being the novice I am of things technical, I had never heard of "flex-to-release" until here. However,

. I want a quiet upper body


achieving that goal, quiet vertically, laterally, rotationally (or is it sagitally), seems to me results in flex-to-release. Hence, I think a lot of technical stuff is achieved if one simply watches carefully and emulates carefully. And, that said, sure, look at what's happening at a great skier's lower body. But, to me, it's what's happening in the upper body that my goal is; there is very little degree of freedom for the lower body to accomplish that upper-body goal.
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
When I think about my goals as a progressing skier, I tend to look at the finished product rather than specific techniques

That's really good point. For example, being the novice I am of things technical, I had never heard of "flex-to-release" until here. However,

. I want a quiet upper body


achieving that goal, quiet vertically, laterally, rotationally (or is it sagitally), seems to me results in flex-to-release. Hence, I think a lot of technical stuff is achieved if one simply watches carefully and emulates carefully. And, that said, sure, look at what's happening at a great skier's lower body. But, to me, it's what's happening in the upper body that my goal is; there is very little degree of freedom for the lower body to accomplish that upper-body goal.
 

Doby Man

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Aug 22, 2017
Posts
406
Location
Mostly New England
For @karlo: 101 Flex to Release Quiz

What are you releasing?
  1. Your CoM
  2. Your edges
  3. Your BoS
  4. Your third left buckle
  5. Ski cafeteria breakfast burrito
What are you flexing?
  1. Boots/dorsiflexion
  2. Hips
  3. Knees
  4. Your mind
  5. All of the above

Based on causation which happens first causing the second?
  1. Flexion
  2. Release
  3. They are one in the same
  4. Nobody really knows

What is the origin of flex to release?
  1. PSIA
  2. CSIA
  3. PMTS
  4. USSA
  5. World Cup
  6. Unfortunate breakfast burrito yoga incident
For 10 extra credit points:
In ten words or less, what exactly is a quiet upper body?
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
@Doby Man, how much time do I have, and is this an open book quiz?

oh hell,

What are you releasing?
Your edges,
and, Ski cafeteria breakfast burrito

I leave quite a trail

What are you flexing?
Boots/dorsiflexion (had to look up definition of dorsiflexion)
Hips
Knees

I never flex my mind. I'm always reaching and stretching.

Based on causation which happens first causing the second?
Nobody really knows, except the skier himself. Depends on his intent? Unless of course he's supposed to adhere to a technical model and his intentions and movements are... properly aligned. Then, it depends on the technical model?

What is the origin of flex to release?

watch in slo-mo and the legs upon "release"

For 10 extra credit points:
In ten words or less, what exactly is a quiet upper body?

Michaela Shiffrin

Edit: Do I get to edit?
 
Last edited:

Doby Man

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Aug 22, 2017
Posts
406
Location
Mostly New England
Ha! You get an "A" for cheating. Excellent cheating ... a monkey and Michaela.

I love that monkey. I love Michaela too, but in a different way, of course. They both show us how we can create and manage energy with a skill blend of balance, mobility, leverage and momentum with huge truckloads of effortlessness.

I would think that following a model is a demonstration of intent. Right?

What do you think the money’s intent is?
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
Yes, any endeavor to learn is a demonstration of intent. But, the intent to crush that mogul field, or the intent of expression, I think all models have to be thrown aside.

I'm going to go out on the limb and say PMTS developed Flex to Release because the other organizations are likely too big and too busy to think through something like that. Not that there weren't practitioners of it at the other organizations. Just that thinking it through, giving it a name, putting it in context with all else takes a lot more focus than I think those other organizations can muster.

The monkey wants treats. I'll work on that quiet upper body. But, that is already a well-trodden topic here, leading to, I think, a locked thread. :)
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
How's this @Doby Man? A quiet upper body is: One which is transported tranquilly, unperturbed by external forces.

I'm thinking a ride on the Shinkansen.
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
Back to Mikaela and the monkey, I see a clear relationship. Big, early extension. Flex timed with release for maximum velocity to the next branch/gate. I'm no physicist, but it seems to me , since she already maximizing gravity and resustance-reduction to go down the hill, her extensions and flexes may be maximizing her velocity across the hill, not down it. Not being a physicist, nor a racer, I can't say for sure.

What I can say for sure is that I see a clear relationship between the monkey's backwards reaching leg extension and back-arching to what I think Mikaela does. I even feel it when I ski, kinda like I have monkey feet and I'm reaching back, at turn initiation to grab a branch.

So, though I understand models mow, and the benefits of them to learn, I still fail to see how a model helps me explore my range of motions and the feelings I derive, both from intents and effects.

pardon misspellings. I can't seem to use touch to get back to them to correct. I have to backspace and correct and retype everything.

Oh, one more thing. If one strives for that quiet upper body, using flex to release to help, there is almost no degree of freedom, for the turn size and shape we want, with respect to balance. So, I fail to see the point of a model, except to get to advanced. After that, just get a little coaching now and then? Free our minds to explore our bodies and feelings?
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
I don't understand. Did I say something wrong? And, it's so quiet. Has everyone given up on me?
 

Fishbowl

A Parallel Universe
Skier
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Posts
514
Location
Lost
I don't understand. Did I say something wrong? And, it's so quiet. Has everyone given up on me?

I think the subject has just run it's natural course. And if someones still doesn't claim to get something after it has been explained a dozen different ways, and broken down into infinite detail, they will never get it, or have an ulterior motive.
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
...And for those who find "technical models" constraining, brain-draining, individuality-denying, and painful to consider for any reason (Karlo??), I give you this:
51ZJoWohvIL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

(first published in 1977, with numerous editions afterwards; a classic)

OK, read it, sort of. I cheated and went to the end. From there, I skipped over Chapter 9, Learning to Snowboard and went to Chapter 8, Relaxed Concentration and was immediately engrossed. It's like Gallwey has read my mind, not about what we have been discussing here, but how I learn, and put everything to words. Foot Concentration, awareness of feet. Skiing centered, thanks to Mikaela Shiffrin videos that I've been watching the last three years. Seeing, the slope is a giant canvas and skis are brushes. Listening to Your Skis, Broad and Narrow Concentration. Wow. Next chapter back, Chapter 7, Discovering Ski Technique, "my primary reference is my own experience, I become more capable knowing when I am on or off track. The instructor is.. making me more... independent." These chapters referenced what was discussed in Chapter 2, Self 1 and Self 2. I am so in sync with this book, I knew right away what that was. A big THANK YOU!
 

karlo

Out on the slopes
Inactive
Joined
May 11, 2017
Posts
2,708
Location
NJ
the subject has just run it's natural course

a 3 page limit

Yes, perhaps. But, @razie did solicit examples of technical models. So, now that I understand what many are talking about, here are three. Not all three are consistent with the primary definition of technical model is. The first one is this one,

Model 1:
http://www.xcskiacademy.com/blog/psia-xc-technical-model

It is not an alpine model, but it is a skiing technical model. Says so on the title, so I can't wonder about that. :) What caught my attention are slide 3 and 4.

Slide 3, Who is this for. It is for every stakeholder. That sounded correct to me straightaway.
Slide 4, Where did this Model Come From? PSIA and USSA. I thought @Doby Man was kidding when he included USSA as a choice in his quiz. I thought USSA put together ski teams to go to World Cup, not technical models, kind of like an Olympic Committee. Shows you what I know.

Anyway, one of the stakeholders in Slide 3 is the athlete. In the recreational skiing world, that would be the recreational skier - beginner, intermediate, advanced. The model needs to be simple enough for the student to understand, so that lessons, drills, concepts, are all in context. So, I am on board with something very simple. I like the technical model that is presented. Any adult recreational skier can understand it. The instructor giving the lesson had better have a lot of detail behind it.

Model 2:

and a series of videos by Richard Berger (see 2:09 of this video). Berger is presenting detailed elements of turns. What happens at turn initiation, through the turn to transition, and the timing of it; skidding, slipping, edging, extension, flexion. Folks with other models may disagree with the "rightness" of Berger's model, but it is a well defined model. It is a model, in relation to the parallel turn, that is very detailed, but I think difficult for a beginner and intermediate skier to understand. If the skier gets exactly the same thing from Berger each time, and any other instructor adhering to the model, the skier will not get confused and will advance quite nicely with that model.

Model 3:
I'll call it the "do as I do" model. It is what I referred to before and one that I used the past two seasons. The 6 or 7 turns starting at 0:25 here,


Each year, I got more and more out of it. This is the definition of quite upper body I was referring to. It is a quietness that is defined not by what is seen by the observer, it is quietness as felt by the skier. It's just that MS's quietness is so quiet, it can be felt, not just observed by the observer. I think, this few turns are unique as a 'do-as-I-do" model in that it develops so much. What is unique? Yes, quietness, no lateral, vertical, and rotary movement of the upper body that is in excess relative to what is clearly her intent, which is to make a series of turns (we aren't racing here) along a line that is at a nice angle off the fall line. Yes, working on this can be described as a drill. But, it is so much more than one thing, it necessitates so much, with respect to every aspect of a turn that, to me, it might as well be a model.

So, there you have it. 3 models from karlo. Any others?
 

Sponsor

Top