To pole or not to pole
yunlong
they were one time Heavenly group lesson skiers and they didn't really
learn anything, and they wanted to learn skiing. Determined they were,
they showed up with brand new skiing outfits, clothes, boots, skis,
even to the new detachable wrist strap for their fancy poles. Yeah
right, I thought.
I gave them, a young couple, four lessons (2 each week): 1) to ride the
chair-lifts, 2) snowplow--wedge turn, 3) christie turn, 4) parallel
turn.
In the first lesson, I needed to know how much they did know, so I
asked them to show me how to stop, they barely made it. For too much
work to walk up the hill to practice that, I suggested we rode the
chair up, the lady wouldn't go because she has never ridden one. I
persuaded and took them up, they both fell on unload. Nevertheless, I
showed them how to control the speed and how to stop and a little bit
of turns, and they learned how to ski down the bunny hill. For the
first day, they were happy, so they scheduled a lesson the next day.
The second day they showed up dragging, because the fatigues
accumulated the day before. I took them to "higher" lift for I thought
that a longer run may give them better chance to pick up the rhythms of
skiing. But the idea of "higher" spooked the lady, she frozen on the
unload; I was holding her arm and thinking about supporting her as she
get out the chair, but she didn't get down the chair, and the chair
wrenched my wrist, yike. Anyway, they learned wedge turn and snowplow
skiing that day. They were happy and wanted other lesson, I told they
to go practice first.
A week later, they called me up wanted to go for the "blue" runs. When
I checked them out, they can snowplow quite fluently on the greens but
still catch the edge on the inside ski quite a bit. I didn't take them
to the blues but showed them the christie turn instead. They learned
christie turn that day, and scheduled the fourth lesson the next day.
In the fourth lesson I was going to teach them parallel turn, so I
showed them how to use poles to support their christie turn first. They
couldn't catch up the timing and did poorly in coordination. So I asked
them to give up the poles. The lady tried first and found it easier so
she persuaded her boyfriend to do the same. And at the end of the
lesson they both did parallel turn without using poles, though the man
still carrying the poles for his security crutch. I took them to the
top of Heavenly and they came down the Ridge (blue) like a seasoned
skier.
Come to think about it, in four lessons/days of skiing, they have
learned/accomplished more than what I did in four years on my own. To
pole or not to pole, is now the question.
Have funs, :)
IS
Jim Strohm
every hill has a "higher up" trail that's better for beginners than the
bunny slope at the base. Your decision to take them higher on the hill
was valid, assuming you'd scoped the day's trail conditions earlier.
Me, I've never had the time nor the inclination to explore Heavenly's
greens and learner slopes, because Sky lift almost always runs, and the
bowl below it is almost always open.
As far as poles? Teaching children to ski without poles seems to be the
rule, and not the exception, except when they're holding onto mommy's
poles and going out for a drag. Since kids are built so close to the
ground and their motor skills are less developed, poles can often be as
much a hindrance as a help. So teaching without poles is probably
better -- for small children.
Adults probably need to be taught skiing with the equipment as "all one
piece" -- i.e. in normal conditions you'll always have two skis and two
poles, and one body to use.
If you take a "first-ever" skiier and teach them to use their poles to
the utmost of their ability first, then they should be able to get the
bottom half of their body to follow their top half. Which means --
poles give balance, the focus for turns, and a good universal tool for
when you're not moving on your skis.
Until you learn to use your poles properly, you're going to have a
difficult time becoming a proficient skiier.
Here's an experiment you can try.
Get a four-legged stool. Set it on the floor. Shove it a few feet
along the floor. This is your skiier with both poles in active contact
with the snow.
Chop off one leg, and try the same things. This is your skiier with one
pole planted and the other pole searching for its next plant.
If you didn't kick the stool too hard, it stayed upright the whole time.
Now cut off the leg opposite the first one you cut off. Balance the
stool. Then shove it a few feet. I don't have to tell you what the
results will be.
This is your skiier who can't use their poles.
And -- don't spend more than 45 seconds teaching the snow plow to
grown-ups, unless you're buying lunch and it's gonna be "pizza, french
fries, pizza, french fries." Teach the parallel turn concept first, and
then the snowplow and wedge turns as "nice to know but you'll only use
them in the lift line."
Train for the ultimate goal, not the lesson plan objectives.
Jimintexus
yunlong
.....
>
> Adults probably need to be taught skiing with the equipment as "all
one
> piece" -- i.e. in normal conditions you'll always have two skis and
two
> poles, and one body to use.
Not really, one body and two skis will be sufficient.
>
> If you take a "first-ever" skiier and teach them to use their poles
to
> the utmost of their ability first, then they should be able to get
the
> bottom half of their body to follow their top half.
So you haven't seen the beginners tangled up in their tangled poles and
skis, eh?
> Which means --
> poles give balance,
Not really, balance is held at the feet/skis, not at the poles,
> the focus for turns,
and poling breaks the traction (so is the focus) of the turning force
and produces unstable turns.
> and a good universal tool for
> when you're not moving on your skis.
Ski like skate, no poles are needed.
>
> Until you learn to use your poles properly, you're going to have a
> difficult time becoming a proficient skiier.
Not really, the most proficient skiers I see are those ski patrollers
ski without poles.
>
> Here's an experiment you can try.
>
> Get a four-legged stool. Set it on the floor. Shove it a few feet
> along the floor. This is your skiier with both poles in active
contact
> with the snow.
>
> Chop off one leg, and try the same things. This is your skiier with
one
> pole planted and the other pole searching for its next plant.
>
> If you didn't kick the stool too hard, it stayed upright the whole
time.
>
> Now cut off the leg opposite the first one you cut off. Balance the
> stool. Then shove it a few feet. I don't have to tell you what the
> results will be.
What a tedious experiment, do you think that Mary needs to learn how to
use hacksaw to even do this experiment (and destroy a perfectly
functional stool)?
I had my students threw away their poles already.
>
> This is your skiier who can't use their poles.
>
> And -- don't spend more than 45 seconds teaching the snow plow to
> grown-ups, unless you're buying lunch and it's gonna be "pizza,
french
> fries, pizza, french fries." Teach the parallel turn concept first,
and
> then the snowplow and wedge turns as "nice to know but you'll only
use
> them in the lift line."
I don't get them into parallel turn until they have a solid fundation
on snowplow skiing.
>
> Train for the ultimate goal, not the lesson plan objectives.
What is your/the ultimate goal [in skiing]?
:)
IS
>
> Jimintexus
Jim Strohm
> Jim Strohm wrote:
> .....
>
>>Adults probably need to be taught skiing with the equipment as "all one
>>piece" -- i.e. in normal conditions you'll always have two skis and two
>>poles, and one body to use.
> Not really, one body and two skis will be sufficient.
I suppose you never learned the difference between "necessary" and
"sufficient" in your college philosophy classes.
>>If you take a "first-ever" skiier and teach them to use their poles to
>>the utmost of their ability first, then they should be able to get the
>>bottom half of their body to follow their top half.
>
>
> So you haven't seen the beginners tangled up in their tangled poles and
> skis, eh?
>
Sure I have, and most of their trouble seemed to stem from getting up on
the hill without any measureable skills with either skis or poles.
If you'd spend thirty minutes at the start of the class showing them how
to use their poles before giving them skis to get tangled up in, you'd
see a lot less pole / ski entanglements. They WILL get tangled in their
skis the instant they put them on. You should minimize the effect of
their poles contributing to that.
You should also minimize the detrimental effects of your students doing
the robot all over the hill. This is something that's easy to prevent
if they are just taught what to do with their poles. When they DON'T
know, they're just going to hold out their poles with their elbows
locked at 90 degrees. Because they don't know what else to do. "Domo
origato," as it were.
>>Which means --
>>poles give balance,
> Not really, balance is held at the feet/skis, not at the poles,
That being the case, where would the skiier's center of gravity be? If
it's at their feet as you say, then skiiers would be able to lean as far
as they want in any direction without falling over, because "balance is
held at the feet/skis," as you put it.
>>the focus for turns,
> and poling breaks the traction (so is the focus) of the turning force
> and produces unstable turns.
I said focus, not pivot-point. I'm not sure whether beginning skiiers
would have the ability to do pole-plant turns. Certainly they should
not be on terrain steep enough to enable or require pole-plant turns.
Anyway, any turn that's not a pure carved turn will have some degree of
inherent instability because it's a skidded turn. And any turn made
tighter than the carving turn radius of the skis HAS to be skidded to
some degree to make the turn.
So you've got your students carving all their turns after just four
days? Intriguing.
>>and a good universal tool for
>>when you're not moving on your skis.
> Ski like skate, no poles are needed.
Are you a skating teacher too? A lot of people come to the hill never
having learned to skate. If learning to skate comes with your ski
lessons, you should probably tout that benefit.
>>Until you learn to use your poles properly, you're going to have a
>>difficult time becoming a proficient skiier.
> Not really, the most proficient skiers I see are those ski patrollers
> ski without poles.
Read what I wrote -- "becoming a proficient skiier." Becoming. That's
YOUR business -- helping people become better, more proficient skiiers.
I'd like to hope that patrollers are already proficient enough skiiers
to be safe in what they do on the hill. And -- from what I've seen and
heard, being able to ski without poles -- for example, when sledding
somebody down -- is a job prerequisite, and not a sign of proficiency
under development.
Let's see, jumpers and freestylers ski without poles. Am I to
understand that your beginners exit four lessons with you, fully
qualified to join the ski patrol, jump a hundred meters, or throw a
triple back with five twists?
I'd like to see that.
>>Here's an experiment you can try.
>>
>>Get a four-legged stool. Set it on the floor. Shove it a few feet
>>along the floor. This is your skiier with both poles in active
[snip]
Apparently those examples were completely lost on you. So it's not as
surprising to me that you're unwilling to question your obviously
superior talents as an instructor, and unable to consider any deviation
in your methodologies because you are already the perfect instructor
reciting from the perfect set of instruction guides.
> What a tedious experiment, do you think that Mary needs to learn how to
> use hacksaw to even do this experiment (and destroy a perfectly
> functional stool)?
>
> I had my students threw away their poles already.
So they could ski fine with their poles and then you took away their
poles? That's almost as bogus as saying "they could ski fine with their
eyes, so I blindfolded 'em."
But really -- did you ACTUALLY think anybody would be credulous enough
to cut a stool to pieces so they could learn to ski?? (Never mind that
they caused the death of many, many little baby polyesters to make their
skis....)
>>This is your skiier who can't use their poles.
>>
>>And -- don't spend more than 45 seconds teaching the snow plow to
>>grown-ups, unless you're buying lunch and it's gonna be "pizza, french
>>fries, pizza, french fries." Teach the parallel turn concept first, and
>>then the snowplow and wedge turns as "nice to know but you'll only use
>>them in the lift line."
> I don't get them into parallel turn until they have a solid fundation
> on snowplow skiing.
Oh, so they can use the ski-through line at the lunch counter? "Pizza,
french fries, pizza, french fries, whoops caught an edge -- banana
split!" Oh wait, I forgot, they're already carving all their turns!
>>Train for the ultimate goal, not the lesson plan objectives.
>
> What is your/the ultimate goal [in skiing]?
My ultimate goal is to ski comfortably and competently, anywhere I want
to. It will never include patrolling, instruction, or pro competetive
skiing. To reach my goal I've had to overcome some egregiously bad
instruction. After my last bout with an instructor -- a week of
half-day semi-private advanced intermediate, I asked him -- "So what are
we supposed to do with our poles?" He considered the question for a
moment, then said, "I confess -- I completely forgot to say anything
about that at all this week, and I should have." He then spent fifteen
minutes _discussing_ the hows and whys of poling. I took his knowledge
and applied it that very afternoon, and achieved some pretty good
results in some steep iced-over moguls which had been completely above
my ability just ten minutes before his talk.
He was a pretty good instructor, and I felt that, even though he'd left
out some obvious important points, I'd benefited immensely from his
work. I wonder what would have happened if he'd had that little talk
with us the first day, and had amplified on it during the week? I'm
thinking we all would have got more from the lessons. Also, I'm almost
positive that the student who broke two ribs from landing on his pole
the wrong way would not have sufffered that injury. Even I knew NOT to
plant my pole in the fall line in front of me, between two moguls.
Of course, that would never happen to any of your students, because you
had them all throw their poles away!
Jimintexus
yunlong
> I feel like playing around with yunlong because he wrote:
>
> > Jim Strohm wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Which means -- poles give balance,
> >
> > Not really, balance is held at the feet/skis, not at the poles,
>
> gravity, not the feet.
The center of gravity is supported/held up by the feet.
> Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
> downhill racers carry them?
Security crutches, maybe.
>
> > and poling breaks the traction (so is the focus) of the
> > turning force and produces unstable turns.
>
> Ex-fucking-scuse me?
You are "ex-fucking-scused," nevertheless, watch your foul-mouth
language.
> Proper poling increases turn stability...
Not really, the pole-planting is to create an instability so the skier
can initiate the edge changing...
> and the
> first part of that sentence gets a bunny with a pancake on its head.
Not if you teach them stand properly on the skis.
>
> > Ski like skate, no poles are needed.
>
> If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over 40
> degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as bullshit.
I did, as flat-boarding.
> But until then...
Let's hear it what skills you have to handle the "powder or crud, on a
slope over 40 degrees"? How to use poles?
>
> > > Until you learn to use your poles properly, you're going
> > > to have a difficult time becoming a proficient skiier.
> >
> > Not really, the most proficient skiers I see are those ski
> > patrollers ski without poles.
>
> I assume that's because you only ski on easier slopes.
You may assume, even self-deceiving.
> If you'd ski
> difficult terrain, you'll find the patrollers using poles -
> unless they're carrying something or tieing rope.
Yup, "the most proficient skiers I see are those ski patrollers ski
without poles."
>
> > I had my students threw away their poles already.
>
> But you have them pick them up at some point...
No, among hundreds students I taught, only one teenager would like to
keep his poles.
> or do you only teach beginners?
So you think people ski without poles are beginners?
:)
IS
>
> Bob
yunlong
> yunlong wrote:
> > Jim Strohm wrote:
> > .....
> >
> >>Adults probably need to be taught skiing with the equipment
> >>as "all one piece" -- i.e. in normal conditions you'll
> >>always have two skis and two poles, and one body to use.
>
> > Not really, one body and two skis will be sufficient.
>
> I suppose you never learned the difference between "necessary"
> and "sufficient" in your college philosophy classes.
I have, but like to hear what do you mean by them.
>
> >>If you take a "first-ever" skiier and teach them to use their poles
to
> >>the utmost of their ability first, then they should be able to get
the
> >>bottom half of their body to follow their top half.
> >
> >
> > So you haven't seen the beginners tangled up in their tangled poles
and
> > skis, eh?
> >
>
> Sure I have, and most of their trouble seemed to stem from getting up
on
> the hill without any measureable skills with either skis or poles.
Yup, most of their trouble is placing the pole in wrong places then
step/ski over; without poles saves them from get into the trouble in
the first place.
>
> If you'd spend thirty minutes at the start of the class showing them
how
> to use their poles before giving them skis to get tangled up in,
you'd
> see a lot less pole / ski entanglements.
You even spend "thirty minutes" to explain how to use poles in a "two
hours" ski session?
> They WILL get tangled in their
> skis the instant they put them on. You should minimize the
> effect of their poles contributing to that.
I rather spend "thirty minutes" to explain to them how to "stand" on
the skis properly, and they won't have ski-pole entanglements ever.
>
> You should also minimize the detrimental effects of your students
doing
> the robot all over the hill. This is something that's easy to
prevent
> if they are just taught what to do with their poles. When they DON'T
> know, they're just going to hold out their poles with their elbows
> locked at 90 degrees. Because they don't know what else to do.
"Domo
> origato," as it were.
Don't you realize if they don't have/use poles, all the problems you
mentioned above become non-existence?
BTW, what/how's the techniques to use poles again?
>
> >>Which means --
> >>poles give balance,
>
>
> > Not really, balance is held at the feet/skis, not at the poles,
>
>
> That being the case, where would the skiier's center of gravity be?
Between the legs.
> If it's at their feet as you say, then skiiers would be able to lean
as far
> as they want in any direction without falling over, because "balance
is
> held at the feet/skis," as you put it.
Not sure where do you get this reasoning, not that "lean" is a bad
habit in skiing, and every one knows if you "lean" to one side far
enough, your legs would not be able to hold on that structure and you'd
collapse.
>
>
> >>the focus for turns,
>
> > and poling breaks the traction (so is the focus) of the turning
force
> > and produces unstable turns.
>
>
> I said focus, not pivot-point.
When you body wobbles, so is your focus.
> I'm not sure whether beginning skiiers
> would have the ability to do pole-plant turns. Certainly they should
> not be on terrain steep enough to enable or require pole-plant turns.
Why not, and when/where do you think that the beginners should practice
and learn the pole-plant turns?
>
> Anyway, any turn that's not a pure carved turn will have some degree
of
> inherent instability because it's a skidded turn.
Can't agree to that, instability is created because the wobbling of the
turning force, which is caused by uncoordinated body movements, and the
tracks of the skis are waving at the edge,
> And any turn made
> tighter than the carving turn radius of the skis HAS to be
> skidded to some degree to make the turn.
and a good turning track shows a curved line with a smooth [inside]
edge.
>
> So you've got your students carving all their turns after just
> four days? Intriguing.
No, flat-boarding doesn't stress using edges, thus has no carved turns
in the conventional sense, but it does stress "tracking the line" (i.e.
ski a line like riding a roller-coaster), and "turn at will"
techniques/skills.
>
>
> >>and a good universal tool for
> >>when you're not moving on your skis.
>
> > Ski like skate, no poles are needed.
>
> Are you a skating teacher too?
Yes, roller-blading.
> A lot of people come to the hill never
> having learned to skate. If learning to skate comes with your
> ski lessons, you should probably tout that benefit.
When I just started to ski, on a chairlift an old-timer told me, "ski
is easy, just like skate, except you have a two meters blade of the ski
instead a foot blade for the skate"; I didn't know either ski or skate
then, but now I do, yes, ski like skate is a way to do it.
BTW, I do use the same way to ski and to skate.
>
>
> >>Until you learn to use your poles properly, you're going to
> >> have a difficult time becoming a proficient skiier.
>
> > Not really, the most proficient skiers I see are those ski
> > patrollers ski without poles.
>
> Read what I wrote -- "becoming a proficient skiier." Becoming.
That's
> YOUR business -- helping people become better, more proficient
skiiers.
Yes, that's what I do, "helping people become better, more proficient
skiers" by teaching them ski "without" poles.
>
> I'd like to hope that patrollers are already proficient enough
skiiers
> to be safe in what they do on the hill. And -- from what I've seen
and
> heard, being able to ski without poles -- for example, when sledding
> somebody down -- is a job prerequisite, and not a sign of proficiency
> under development.
>
> Let's see, jumpers and freestylers ski without poles. Am I to
> understand that your beginners exit four lessons with you,
> fully qualified to join the ski patrol, jump a hundred meters,
> or throw a triple back with five twists?
I think that is too much an expectation for beginners with four
lessons.
The question remains, can you do all those you described above?
>
> I'd like to see that.
Me too.
>
>
> >>Here's an experiment you can try.
> >>
> >>Get a four-legged stool. Set it on the floor. Shove it a few feet
> >>along the floor. This is your skiier with both poles in active
>
> [snip]
>
> Apparently those examples were completely lost on you.
> So it's not as
> surprising to me that you're unwilling to question your obviously
> superior talents as an instructor, and unable to consider any
deviation
> in your methodologies because you are already the perfect instructor
> reciting from the perfect set of instruction guides.
That was to say if you cannot develop a method to practice on the ski
slope, the method is not worth to talk about.
>
> > What a tedious experiment, do you think that Mary needs to learn
how to
> > use hacksaw to even do this experiment (and destroy a perfectly
> > functional stool)?
> >
> > I had my students threw away their poles already.
>
>
> So they could ski fine with their poles and then you took away their
> poles? That's almost as bogus as saying "they could ski fine with
their
> eyes, so I blindfolded 'em."
Not sure where do you get this idea, I suggest them to give up the
poles because "they couldn't catch up the timing and did poorly in
coordination."
>
> But really -- did you ACTUALLY think anybody would be credulous
enough
> to cut a stool to pieces so they could learn to ski?? (Never mind
that
> they caused the death of many, many little baby polyesters to make
their
> skis....)
That was a joke for your increditable example.
>
> >>This is your skiier who can't use their poles.
> >>
> >>And -- don't spend more than 45 seconds teaching the snow plow to
> >>grown-ups, unless you're buying lunch and it's gonna be "pizza,
french
> >>fries, pizza, french fries." Teach the parallel turn concept
first, and
> >>then the snowplow and wedge turns as "nice to know but you'll only
use
> >>them in the lift line."
>
>
> > I don't get them into parallel turn until they have a solid
> > foundation on snowplow skiing.
>
> Oh, so they can use the ski-through line at the lunch counter?
"Pizza,
> french fries, pizza, french fries, whoops caught an edge -- banana
> split!" Oh wait, I forgot, they're already carving all their turns!
Maybe just you lose your marbles.
>
>
> >>Train for the ultimate goal, not the lesson plan objectives.
> >
> > What is your/the ultimate goal [in skiing]?
>
>
> My ultimate goal is to ski comfortably and competently,
> anywhere I want to.
Can you do it without poles?
Of course, because they can do "all-terrain" without using poles.
:)
IS
>
> Jimintexu
Richard Henry
"yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1105933867.0...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Bob Lee wrote:
>
> > Proper poling increases turn stability...
>
> Not really, the pole-planting is to create an instability so the skier
> can initiate the edge changing...
Actually, I have found that moving the pole as if it were to be planted,
without actually planting it, is sufficient to complete the act. Or at
least initiate it.
All attempts at humor aside, phantom pole planting gets the body into the
right position for turning. I usually don't bother to actually plant the
pole with any force unless I am in an extreme situation (going slow on the
steep, for instance) where not making the turn would have serious
consequences.
> > and the
> > first part of that sentence gets a bunny with a pancake on its head.
>
>
> Not if you teach them stand properly on the skis.
Whoosh!
>
> >
> > > Ski like skate, no poles are needed.
> >
> > If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over 40
> > degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as bullshit.
>
> I did, as flat-boarding.
Some might interpret that staement to mean that flat-boarding is bs.
rosco
yunlong wrote:
>>>Not really, the most proficient skiers I see are those ski
>>>patrollers ski without poles.
I would like to take an informal poll. Any patrollers out there? If
so, please let us know if you ski with or without poles.
How about ski instructors... any of you recommend skiing without poles
other than as a drill?
RAC
David Harris
news:1105933867.0...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
>> downhill racers carry them?
>
> Security crutches, maybe.
>
Okay, following along this increasingly silly thread, this line jumped out
at me.
First, I wouldn't restrict the question to downhillers, but include ALL
alpine racers. Every one of them. For ever.
"Crutches"?
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your reply, but it seems that you are saying you
know something that every professional and amateur racer of the past 50
years has missed. I doubt that very much.
Good luck with your fantasy.
dh
MoonMan
> "yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:1105933867.0...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
>
>>
>>> Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
>>> downhill racers carry them?
>>
>> Security crutches, maybe.
>>
> Okay, following along this increasingly silly thread, this line
> jumped out at me.
>
> First, I wouldn't restrict the question to downhillers, but include
> ALL alpine racers. Every one of them. For ever.
>
Two main reasons,
1) to get out of the start gate.
2) (in slalom) to protect oneselfe from the slalom poles.
Chris *<:-)
Walt
I forget who wrote:
>>>>Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
>>>>downhill racers carry them?
> Two main reasons,
>
> 1) to get out of the start gate.
> 2) (in slalom) to protect oneselfe from the slalom poles.
And let's not forget
3) FIS regulations
--
//-Walt
//
// Those who feed trolls will have trolls in abundance
MoonMan
> MoonMan wrote:
>
> I forget who wrote:
>
>>>>> Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
>>>>> downhill racers carry them?
>
>
>> Two main reasons,
>>
>> 1) to get out of the start gate.
>> 2) (in slalom) to protect oneselfe from the slalom poles.
>
> And let's not forget
>
> 3) FIS regulations
Oh yeah, you have to have at least three items (ski's and poles) when you
pass the finish gate to get a time
Forgot about that.
--
Chris *<:-)
Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!
Dave M
> <mercy snip>
Terribly tedious tendentious twaddle.
Dave M.
yunlong
> yunlong wrote:
>
> > Bob Lee wrote:
> > > I feel like playing around with yunlong because he wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jim Strohm wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > > Which means -- poles give balance,
> > > >
> > > > Not really, balance is held at the feet/skis, not at the poles,
> > >
> > > Couple of points. Balance is in the core - the abdomen and
center of
> > > gravity, not the feet.
> >
> > The center of gravity is supported/held up by the feet.
>
So what do you think supported/held up your center of gravity? "feet of
fools in funny shoes"?
>
> > > Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
> > > downhill racers carry them?
> >
> > Security crutches, maybe.
>
> Indeed. for without the crutches of security, falling lacks wisdom.
Even worse when you fall due to tangling with poles, it is lacked
wisdom before the falling.
>
> > > > and poling breaks the traction (so is the focus) of the
> > > > turning force and produces unstable turns.
> > >
> > > Ex-fucking-scuse me?
> >
> > You are "ex-fucking-scused," nevertheless, watch your foul-mouth
> > language.
>
> Perhaps tiny mind is unable to comprehend the depths of my
> sincere incredulity?
Or just you a small mind with a foul mouth.
>
> > > Proper poling increases turn stability...
> >
> > Not really, the pole-planting is to create an instability so the
skier
> > can initiate the edge changing...
> >
> > > and the
> > > first part of that sentence gets a bunny with a pancake on its
head.
> >
> > Not if you teach them stand properly on the skis.
>
> Even a properly create instable stance will receive the bunny with a
> pancake on its head. You must show the skills for its contradiction.
When you lower your center of gravity, you won't tumble; it's only
common sense. The question is now how do you stand on the skis?
>
> > >
> > > > Ski like skate, no poles are needed.
> > >
> > > If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over
> > > 40degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as bullshit.
> >
> > I did, as flat-boarding.
> >
> > > But until then...
> >
> > Let's hear it what skills you have to handle the "powder or
> > crud, on a slope over 40 degrees"? How to use poles?
> >
>
> My skills is such that the beginners will show inability to
> follow my pole use in powder or crud on a slope over 40 degrees.
It sounded like all mouth skills, how do you turn on the cruds again?
>
> > > > > Until you learn to use your poles properly, you're going
> > > > > to have a difficult time becoming a proficient skiier.
> > > >
> > > > Not really, the most proficient skiers I see are those ski
> > > > patrollers ski without poles.
> > >
> > > I assume that's because you only ski on easier slopes.
> >
> > You may assume, even self-deceiving.
>
> The only fool here is not to believe that patrollers obvious.
Or the only fool here is to deny the obvious.
>
> > > If you'd ski
> > > difficult terrain, you'll find the patrollers using poles -
> > > unless they're carrying something or tieing rope.
> >
> > Yup, "the most proficient skiers I see are those ski patrollers ski
> > without poles."
>
> Are they not the poles of idiots? That cannot see through skulls?
You cannot read, or you don't read beyond your skull?
>
> > >
> > > > I had my students threw away their poles already.
> > >
> > > But you have them pick them up at some point...
> >
> > No, among hundreds students I taught, only one teenager
> > would like to keep his poles.
>
> You must have sold the others for reasons of foolishness.
Or they smart enough to follow the good thing when they see one.
>
> > > or do you only teach beginners?
> > So you think people ski without poles are beginners?
>
> The cost of polarity is proficiency.
Huh? Tongue-tie?
:)
IS
>
> Bob
>
> > :)
> > IS
> >
> > >
> > > Bob
yunlong
> On 16 Jan 2005 20:07:48 -0800, "yunlong"
> <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Of course, because they can do "all-terrain" without using poles.
>
>
> Maybe you might actually answer a few of my simple questions this
time
> instead of just ignoring them. After all, you are a professional ski
> instructor, right?
>
> Poles are a necessity for more than just planting and coordinating
> turns. [Fact]
What else? And think about what you can do now with the free hands.
>
> What if you are wiped-out in near-armpit deep powder, and have
> to release a heel binding in order to "swim" out, because one
> of your skis is acting like an anchor?
>
> But the problem is, due to the orientation of the ski, you
> can't twist out of the toe. Nor can you reach the binding(s)
> with your hand.
>
> How in the hell are you supposed to release a binding without
> a ski pole?
We have been through that, you don't release your ski in "near-armpit
deep powder," it is a good way to loose your ski. The solution is to
remove most the snow on top of the ski (with your hands, and don't
loose your poles in that snow; well, without poles you don't have this
problem), then roll downhill "upside down" until your skis come out the
surface.
>
> What if you are trapped upside-down, head first orientation in a deep
> tree well, and can't twist out of a toe. Nor can you reach the
> binding(s) with your hand. The only way to release is by using a
pole
> to pressure a heel binding.
Bend your knees to unstuck the skis, and move your "whole" body to
unjam yourself.
>
> Again, one more fucking time, how in the hell are you supposed
> to release an unreachable heel binding without a ski pole?
Simple, step on it with another ski, or borrow a ski pole from a cute
female?
>
> Both of these situations have happened to me, and if not for
> your obsolete and useless ski poles, I would have been fucked.
[Fact]
Well, you have to go with the "line" and don't stop in the powder, if
you do, you may be stuck in it.
>
> Also, I would like to see your poor student skiers attempting to
> maneuver in low density, waste deep powder, or traverse along the
> flats of a narrow and rutted track (unable to skate) without the
> benefit of ski poles. Good luck.
>
> "all-terrain" without poles, my ass. [Fact]
Yup, it's your ass.
>
> Bwaaahaahaaaha !!!
Don't be silly.
:)
IS
>
> -Astro
LePheaux
"Richard Henry" <rph...@home.com> wrote in message
news:NbHGd.3721$hu.103@fed1read01...
because Some dumbyoung, errrr some youngdumb.is just a TROLL
this guy has proven the only thing he knows about skiing is what he read in
some very old ski mags.
snoig
You forgot, you need poles to help probe for stupid instructor avalanche
victims who forgot their poles, fell over and caused a slide that they got
buried in.
Why even bother arguing with guy, he's obviously just another clueless
instructor with no idea that real skiing happens once you get off of groomed
runs or even in areas that are not lift served. I'll bet he doesn't even
own a beacon.
snoig
LePheaux
"yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> The only fool here is not to believe that patrollers obvious.
>
> Or the only fool here is to deny the obvious.
<<>>
The only thing obvious here is that your obviously a fool who doesn't
believe the obvious facts that keep getting in the way of your trolling.
1
you don't know how to ski beyond the beginner level.
2
you don't teach anything due to your inability to communicate. you yoda like
talk.
Mary Malmros
> How about ski instructors... any of you recommend skiing without poles
> other than as a drill?
Most of the kids I teach aren't using poles, _yet_. A lot of that has
to do with their size and stage of development of physical coordination
and whatnot, though. Put another way, if I were teaching adults who
were skiing at the level of the kids I taught today, I'd have 'em using
poles, but with the kids I think it would have just created confusion.
--
Mary Malmros mal...@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.
Mary Malmros
Nonsense to both. The start gate could easily be constructed to perform
the function that the poles are used from in the start, and the
"protection" from the slalom gates is performed (in part) by the guard
on the top of the poles. You could accomplish the same thing by
carrying a small, similarly-shaped piece of plastic, not an entire pole.
David Harris
news:gruou09r4g9cac0ar...@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:57:09 -0500, Mary Malmros
> <malmro...@bcn.net> wrote:
>
>>You could accomplish the same thing by
>>carrying a small, similarly-shaped piece of plastic, not an entire
>>pole.
>
> I agree.
>
> Anyway, other than what I have posted previously, I see ski poles more
> as "feelers", or something like the antennae on an insect, or the
> whiskers on a cat or dog.
>
> They provide the skier with feedback on body position and motion
> relative to the snow surface.
>
> -Astro
>
Funnily enough, I've ended up agreeing with Yunlong, but I doubt he
meant it the way I'm taking it.
A couple of posts back he said "Not really, the pole-planting is to
create an instability so the skier can initiate the edge changing..."
My take on this is that pole-planting is a NECESSARY action which
results in a forced edge-changing. Not a bad way to get your next turn
started, in my experience.
I have no idea what Mr. Yunlong is really talking about. I've looked at
the video he provided, and maybe I downloaded the wrong one. All I see
is an advanced intermediate doing slow spins on a groomed slope. I
could do that in 1968, and didn't think it was worth remarking on.
FWIW, I will always ski with poles. In addition to being very useful
triggers for a turn, they can be used on the flats, getting out of a
fall in powder, and signalling to distant friends for additional
beverages or whatever.
dh
lal_truckee
> [poles] can be used on the flats, getting out of a
> fall in powder, and signalling to distant friends for additional
> beverages or whatever.
A complete understanding of the tool at hand, and it's highest purposes...
MoonMan
You're right in both cases, SnowBoard start gates have Hand rails and as
they're fixed you get more leverage and Well padded/protective gloves and
sleeves would remove the need,
But as Walt said FIS regulations require us to carry at least one pole :)
VtSkier
Walt
> I have no idea what Mr. Yunlong is really talking about.
Well, have you tried offering him a bunny with a pancake on it's head?
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/misc15.jpg
--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy
bdubya
<thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> To
>pole or not to pole, is now the question.
I doubt this is actually a "question"; I'm pretty sure your mind is
already made up on the subject, and that you're planning to take them
down a path to "flat-boarding". Hey, it's better than not skiing at
all, and it won't be the end of the world for them, since
"flat-boarding" can be un-learned.
bw
bdubya
<thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over 40
>> degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as bullshit.
>
>I did, as flat-boarding.
Did you look like this?
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/upperdynamic.wmv
Embarrassing.
bw
LePheaux
"bdubya" <bdu...@interaccess.com> wrote in message
news:9qbqu0lui96bs69h2...@4ax.com...
this one video clip is enough reason for dumbyoung to shut his pie hole.
The beginners I've taught ski better then that with or without poles.
and this is supposed to be from an advanced ski instructor .
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
VtSkier
Lessee, most every turn is a stem christie, that is,
bend knees to anticipate the turn, up-unweight,
up-stem on the unweight, skid the turn,
bring the inside (relative to the turn) ski parallel
with the outside (relative to the turn) ski.
Some of the turns are just foot swivels.
lots of sideslipping to get out of "bad" spots.
(I guess that's flatboarding)
Stop for almost every bump.
You're right it is embarrassing.
LePheaux said it best...
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
VtSkier
Walt
> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/upperdynamic.wmv
Wow. What a disappointment. You've got novice skier on a hill that's
obviously way too much for him. He's barely in control and on the verge
of a huge wipeout. But it never happens. Against all odds, he stays
upright. Bummer.
BTW, how was bahemya?
yunlong
> MoonMan wrote:
>
> I forget who wrote:
>
> >>>>downhill racers carry them?
>
>
> >
> > 1) to get out of the start gate.
> > 2) (in slalom) to protect oneselfe from the slalom poles.
Why not just use hands [hitting the slalom poles]? The racer in this
configuration may even be able to "run" through the course?
>
> And let's not forget
>
> 3) FIS regulations
Still try to hold on the status quo? What if we change the rules to
"poles optional," or even "no poles," how would the games shape up?
X games and skier X come to mind.
A sanctioned knowledge is a fake at its best, and corrupted at its
worst.
:)
IS
>
> --
> //-Walt
> //
> // Those who feed trolls will have trolls in abundance
Walt
> bdubya <bdu...@interaccess.com> wrote
>
>>Did you look like this?
>>
>>http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/upperdynamic.wmv
>
> Hokey smokes!! That's the worst mix of mediocre technique I think I've ever
> seen.
But you could learn to ski that way for a mere $60/hr.
Wanna take some lessons?
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_lesson.html
yunlong
> On 16 Jan 2005 19:51:07 -0800, "yunlong"
> <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over 40
> >> degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as bullshit.
> >
> >I did, as flat-boarding.
>
> Did you look like this?
Close enough, I was the chaser holding the camera.
>
> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/upperdynamic.wmv
>
> Embarrassing.
You feel so? The angle of the camera played a joke on you.
The trail is Upper Dynamic, Sierra-at-Tahoe; needless to say it is a
"diamond run," if you can shot a line down, even with poles, you are a
hotshot already, however, can you do it without poles?
:)
IS
>
> bw
MoonMan
> Walt wrote:
>> MoonMan wrote:
>>
>> I forget who wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
>>>>>> downhill racers carry them?
>>
>>
>>> Two main reasons,
>>>
>>> 1) to get out of the start gate.
>>> 2) (in slalom) to protect oneselfe from the slalom poles.
>
> Why not just use hands [hitting the slalom poles]? The racer in this
> configuration may even be able to "run" through the course?
V. simple, It hurts!
C *<:-)
VtSkier
> Sven Golly wrote:
>
>> bdubya <bdu...@interaccess.com> wrote
>>
>>> Did you look like this?
>>>
>>> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/upperdynamic.wmv
>>
>>
>> Hokey smokes!! That's the worst mix of mediocre technique I think I've
>> ever seen.
>
>
> But you could learn to ski that way for a mere $60/hr.
>
> Wanna take some lessons?
>
> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_lesson.html
>
>
Where, specifically, did you find that .wmv file?
It's not listed on the taomartialarts website that I
can find anywhere. If I go to
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/
I get an access denied error.
Reason for asking is that I bet IS has some other
movies floating around other than those showing
ballet on green or blue groomers.
VtSkier
yunlong
Yup, that'd change the equation; can't afford a gauntlet, eh?
:)
IS
>
> C *<:-)
Mary Malmros
> Walt wrote:
>
>>MoonMan wrote:
>>
>>I forget who wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>Also, if poles don't help balance, why do
>>>>>>downhill racers carry them?
>>
>>
>>>Two main reasons,
>>>
>>>1) to get out of the start gate.
>>>2) (in slalom) to protect oneselfe from the slalom poles.
>
>
> Why not just use hands [hitting the slalom poles]?
Go ahead and try it. Just once. Moving at World Cup speeds, not at
your drag-ass "flatboarding" speeds.
p.s. I hope your insurance covers lots of PT. It would be _such_ a
shame if you couldn't type any more.
yunlong
>
> > then roll downhill "upside down" until your skis come out
> > the surface.
>
> Good suggestion for anyone on a those flat-boarding 40°
> slopes. Will help thin the herd.
Small talk boosts your ego, eh?
>
> "So Mr. Johnson, how'd you injure yourself?"
>
> "Err, my skis got stuck in the pow off High Rustler. So I remember
this
> guy Yumlong suggests rolling downhill until they come to the surface.
I
> tried and the next thing I remember was waking up in ER."
When you stop/get stuck on a "armpit deep powder," you are stuck,
without a 40 degree slope to roll, you probably can't even recover; now
try to find your just released ski, while each step the boot sinks you
even deeper.
Maybe you need to learn how to roll as well?
:)
IS
>
> --
> Sven Golly
> Trolling as usual
> Remove the _ to reply
David Harris
@news.itd.umich.edu:
> David Harris wrote:
>
>> I have no idea what Mr. Yunlong is really talking about.
>
> Well, have you tried offering him a bunny with a pancake on it's head?
>
> http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/misc15.jpg
Yet another missed opportunity....
Regardless, I shall change my style and do slow spins, poleless, down all
hills from now on. This will free up some space on some of the harder
slopes, as I'll either give them a pass with my new technique, or kill
myself rather quickly.
I especially look forward to doing this in crud.
dh
uglymoney
<walt_...@YerBootsyahoo.com> wrote:
>BTW, how was bahemya?
Yes, I am curious as well. I considered it, but had to work
yesterday. 550 miles is a long ways for a short weekend.
We had a north wind here, cold and dry. Did that pull any moisture
off the lake?
nate
uglymoney
<walt_...@YerBootsyahoo.com> wrote:
>David Harris wrote:
>
>> I have no idea what Mr. Yunlong is really talking about.
>
>Well, have you tried offering him a bunny with a pancake on it's head?
>
> http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/misc15.jpg
Well I thought I had an idea while watching that video. A form of
skiing so slow that you can ski a whole mountain without stopping, but
then they stopped at the end, and my theory was blown out of the
water.
Why did they stop? To exchange more lousy ski tips? Certainly not to
rest.
nate
Bob
"yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> I don't get them into parallel turn until they have a solid fundation
> on snowplow skiing.
I've had students that just couldn't get wedge turns. Rediscovering that
they were inline skaters, I decided to just step ahead to parralel turns.
They were zipping down the mountain in minutes. It all depends on the
individual.
As for the pole issue - reaching ahead to plant your pole rotates the body,
tending to assist advancing the ski that will become the new uphill ski as
the turn progresses. If you reach downhill and forward with your body as you
plant the pole, it also places you in a better position to turn, flattening
the skis, allowing you to edge into the new turn easier. It's not the
planting of the pole - it's the body motions to do it.
I remember having dinner at snowbird many years ago listening to a big drunk
at at nearby table declaring that the most important thing was "power on the
pole". I chuckled to myself at the time that I'd love to watch him meet Alta
powder the first time.
Bob
yunlong
> yunlong wrote:
>
> > bdubya wrote:
> > > yunlong wrote:
> > > > Bob Lee wrote:
> > > >> If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over 40
> > > >> degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as bullshit.
> > > >
> > > >I did, as flat-boarding.
> > >
> > > Did you look like this?
> >
> > Close enough, I was the chaser holding the camera.
>
> that person's skiing? Answer carefully.
Yes, as I said, if you can ski down the Upper Dynamic "shooting a
line," you'd be a hotshot already.
>
> By the way, did you notice that the person was skiing off-balance as
> indicated by the hands and arms waving around up high?
Those were for unweighting, maybe; flat-boarding skis on a "flat
platform" which is formed by the balance of the feet, be that a wedge,
parallel, or open stance.
> If the hands
> were held low and out in front, the skiing should improve
significantly.
> And, oddly enough, a very good way to keep the hands low and in front
in
> bumps is PROPER POLE PLANTS.
There's NO "POLE PLANTS" in flat-boarding, hands are held in a dynamic
(not static) balance for unweighting and for expressions,
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_p_chasel6.jpg
>
> > > http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/upperdynamic.wmv
> > >
> > > Embarrassing.
> >
> > You feel so? The angle of the camera played a joke on you.
>
> So it was the camera angle that made it look like it wasn't any fun?
It was the camera angle that showed the terrain appeared to be flat,
and you have to pardon my computer 400mz cpu's resolution.
>
> > The trail is Upper Dynamic, Sierra-at-Tahoe; needless to say it is
a
> > "diamond run," if you can shot a line down, even with poles, you
are a
> > hotshot already, however, can you do it without poles?
>
> *Why* would you do it without poles when poles would help you
> ski it easier and better?
Two reasons: 1.) as I have shown, it is not "simply" "easier and
better," the "timing" of the pole-plant alone is going to take an
average skier at least four/five seasons, if not ever, to master/catch
up, and how to use the poles is another question, where flat-boarding
is ready to go when one has learned to control the skis; 2.) the main
reason, pole-planting breaks the flow of the glide, depicts a rigid ski
sequence, and restricts the free movements of hands, and consequently
restricts the body movements, which is less than I would like to ski.
>
> Before you ask, I ski "diamond runs" that are harder than that
> all the time in bumps, powder and crud...in tele gear.
I did that too,
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_p_chasel6.jpg
at Breckenridge, 1985.
> But I use poles.
I did not, :)
IS
>
> Bob
yunlong
>
> > When you stop/get stuck on a "armpit deep powder," you are stuck,
> > without a 40 degree slope to roll, you probably can't even recover;
now
> > try to find your just released ski, while each step the boot sinks
you
> > even deeper.
>
That was to say you didn't know what you were talking about.
>
> > Maybe you need to learn how to roll as well?
>
> I would do whatever is appropriate to the conditions. Rolling with
skis
> stuck in the snow on the steeps is rarely a good option. Releasing
the
> heel with a pole works pretty well under most circumstances.
Good lucks in finding your ski in the "armpit deep powder."
>
> FWIW, I found a few of your "enlightening" posts on a couple of Tai
Chi
> boards. Seems your fellow practitioners of Tai Chi have little use or
> respect for your thoughts there either.
Yup, those conceited lower characters act pretty much the same
everywhere on the net.
Wayne Decker
probably guess how I feel. I watch people. If their body language tells me
that they are using their poles as a security blanket--I take them away.
Once they seem to realize that skiing happens on the skiis and not the poles
I give them back--with the caveat that if I see them creap forward--I'll
take them away again.
--
I ski, therefore I am
"yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1105812694.6...@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Had a really nice couple-students the last couple of weeks. They said
> they were one time Heavenly group lesson skiers and they didn't really
> learn anything, and they wanted to learn skiing. Determined they were,
> they showed up with brand new skiing outfits, clothes, boots, skis,
> even to the new detachable wrist strap for their fancy poles. Yeah
> right, I thought.
>
> I gave them, a young couple, four lessons (2 each week): 1) to ride the
> chair-lifts, 2) snowplow--wedge turn, 3) christie turn, 4) parallel
> turn.
>
> In the first lesson, I needed to know how much they did know, so I
> asked them to show me how to stop, they barely made it. For too much
> work to walk up the hill to practice that, I suggested we rode the
> chair up, the lady wouldn't go because she has never ridden one. I
> persuaded and took them up, they both fell on unload. Nevertheless, I
> showed them how to control the speed and how to stop and a little bit
> of turns, and they learned how to ski down the bunny hill. For the
> first day, they were happy, so they scheduled a lesson the next day.
>
> The second day they showed up dragging, because the fatigues
> accumulated the day before. I took them to "higher" lift for I thought
> that a longer run may give them better chance to pick up the rhythms of
> skiing. But the idea of "higher" spooked the lady, she frozen on the
> unload; I was holding her arm and thinking about supporting her as she
> get out the chair, but she didn't get down the chair, and the chair
> wrenched my wrist, yike. Anyway, they learned wedge turn and snowplow
> skiing that day. They were happy and wanted other lesson, I told they
> to go practice first.
>
> A week later, they called me up wanted to go for the "blue" runs. When
> I checked them out, they can snowplow quite fluently on the greens but
> still catch the edge on the inside ski quite a bit. I didn't take them
> to the blues but showed them the christie turn instead. They learned
> christie turn that day, and scheduled the fourth lesson the next day.
>
> In the fourth lesson I was going to teach them parallel turn, so I
> showed them how to use poles to support their christie turn first. They
> couldn't catch up the timing and did poorly in coordination. So I asked
> them to give up the poles. The lady tried first and found it easier so
> she persuaded her boyfriend to do the same. And at the end of the
> lesson they both did parallel turn without using poles, though the man
> still carrying the poles for his security crutch. I took them to the
> top of Heavenly and they came down the Ridge (blue) like a seasoned
> skier.
>
> Come to think about it, in four lessons/days of skiing, they have
> learned/accomplished more than what I did in four years on my own. To
> pole or not to pole, is now the question.
>
> Have funs, :)
> IS
>
Richard Henry
> Sven Golly wrote:
> >
> > I would do whatever is appropriate to the conditions. Rolling with
> skis
> > stuck in the snow on the steeps is rarely a good option. Releasing
> the
> > heel with a pole works pretty well under most circumstances.
>
> Good lucks in finding your ski in the "armpit deep powder."
Perhaps you missed the thread on powder cords.
Walt
> Heh. I still want to watch Itchy roll over on a 40 degree slope.
Wouldn't it be all slush at that point?
Richard Henry
"Bob Lee" <rl...@swcp.com> wrote in message
news:rlee-2CD484.0...@individual.net...
> In article <1106108266.4...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Bob Lee wrote:
> > > Before you ask, I ski "diamond runs" that are harder than that
> > > all the time in bumps, powder and crud...in tele gear.
> >
> > I did that too,
> > http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_p_chasel6.jpg
> > at Breckenridge, 1985.
>
> Uh, where is the 'diamond run', the bumps, and the crud or powder?
The camera angle confuses things.
Speaking of which, I finally watched the flatboarding movie. I think if I
saw someone skiing like that I might try to help.
"Hey, man, are you ok? Did you lose your poles? Want to borrow one of
mine?"
VtSkier
powder cords. It's the tape the ski patrol weaves into
the ropes they use for trail closing. It's either bright
orange or day-glo green, flat about an inch wide, very
tough, couldn't break it, had to cut it and rolls up
very flat to hide in your pant leg. A buddy of mine and
I will be going west (he's already gone) this month or
next and will try this out. 'Course somebody else may
have already figured this out.
VtSkier
VtSkier
> Sven Golly wrote:
>
>> Heh. I still want to watch Itchy roll over on a 40 degree slope.
>
>
> Wouldn't it be all slush at that point?
>
slope argument again?
Jeremy Mortimer
@news.itd.umich.edu:
> Sven Golly wrote:
>
>> Heh. I still want to watch Itchy roll over on a 40 degree slope.
>
> Wouldn't it be all slush at that point?
>
It's not impossible. I rolled over on one of the Balme couloirs at Tignes,
which must be about 40 degrees, with no ill effects other than a rather
alarmed companion. I just landed on my skis and stood back up. It happened
because a jump turn unexpectedly ended in deep slush.
I was using poles, though.
Jeremy
yunlong
> In article <1106108266.4...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > yunlong wrote:
> > >
> > > > bdubya wrote:
> > > > > yunlong wrote:
> > > > > > Bob Lee wrote:
> > > > > >> If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over
40
> > > > > >> degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as
bullshit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I did, as flat-boarding.
> > > > >
> > > > > Did you look like this?
> > > >
> > > > Close enough, I was the chaser holding the camera.
> > >
> > > Seemed to be skiing very slow. So, were you satisfied with
> > > that person's skiing? Answer carefully.
> >
> > Yes, as I said, if you can ski down the Upper Dynamic "shooting a
> > line," you'd be a hotshot already.
>
Actually, no real "hotshots" really argue with me, they know what I can
do; only those half-baked self-claimed experts who couldn't present a
valid argument or demonstrate what they can do, but only faking it,
"I'm the expert... you don't know how to ski..." and verbiage
ceaselessly.
> A lot of people here have a lot more knowledge about skiing than you
do.
That's what I like to see it, what kind of "a lot more knowledge about
skiing" is, care to present an argument?
> What's that saying you have about arrogance?
Look deep into yourself, you may find the answer.
>
> > > By the way, did you notice that the person was skiing off-balance
as
> > > indicated by the hands and arms waving around up high?
> >
> > Those were for unweighting, maybe; flat-boarding skis on a "flat
> > platform" which is formed by the balance of the feet, be that a
wedge,
> > parallel, or open stance.
>
> Heh. You're saying the arms waving around are 'for unweighting,
maybe'?
> Too funny.
Yup, in your denial.
>
> > > If the hands
> > > were held low and out in front, the skiing should improve
> > significantly.
> > > And, oddly enough, a very good way to keep the hands low and in
front
> > in
> > > bumps is PROPER POLE PLANTS.
> >
> > There's NO "POLE PLANTS" in flat-boarding, ...
>
> Yeah, well take it from 'hotshot' - there *should* be pole plants.
The
> skiing would be better.
No, do the same thing with less equipment is better.
>
> > ...hands are held in a dynamic
> > (not static) balance for unweighting and for expressions,
>
> Expressions?!?
Yes.
> rotfl
Silly.
>
> > > > The trail is Upper Dynamic, Sierra-at-Tahoe; needless to say it
is
> > a
> > > > "diamond run," if you can shot a line down, even with poles,
you
> > are a
> > > > hotshot already, however, can you do it without poles?
> > >
> > > *Why* would you do it without poles when poles would help you
> > > ski it easier and better?
> >
> > Two reasons: 1.) as I have shown, it is not "simply" "easier and
> > better," the "timing" of the pole-plant alone is going to take an
> > average skier at least four/five seasons, if not ever, to
master/catch
> > up, and how to use the poles is another question, where
flat-boarding
> > is ready to go when one has learned to control the skis; 2.) the
main
> > reason, pole-planting breaks the flow of the glide, depicts a rigid
ski
> > sequence, and restricts the free movements of hands, and
consequently
> > restricts the body movements, which is less than I would like to
ski.
>
> Utter bullshit.
Do you have a reason? Or just utterly bullshit yourself.
>
> > > Before you ask, I ski "diamond runs" that are harder than that
> > > all the time in bumps, powder and crud...in tele gear.
> >
> > I did that too,
> > http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_p_chasel6.jpg
> > at Breckenridge, 1985.
>
> Uh, where is the 'diamond run', the bumps, and the crud or powder?
So you are a "single" minded, eh? Show you a picture and you think that
is all there is? Or just in denial to protect your losing face?
:)
IS
>
> Bob
yunlong
> "Bob Lee" <rl...@swcp.com> wrote in message
> news:rlee-2CD484.0...@individual.net...
> > In article <1106108266.4...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > "yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Bob Lee wrote:
>
> > > > Before you ask, I ski "diamond runs" that are harder than that
> > > > all the time in bumps, powder and crud...in tele gear.
> > >
> > > I did that too,
> > > http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_p_chasel6.jpg
> > > at Breckenridge, 1985.
> >
> > Uh, where is the 'diamond run', the bumps, and the crud or powder?
>
> The camera angle confuses things.
Yup, and those easterners just have no idea how "big" the
mountains/continental divide really is.
>
> Speaking of which, I finally watched the flatboarding movie.
> I think if I saw someone skiing like that I might try to help.
>
> "Hey, man, are you ok? Did you lose your poles? Want to borrow one
of
> mine?"
Yup, I get that kind of question all the times on the chairlifts; it's
funny how people really see things.
:)
IS
LePheaux
"yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> boards. Seems your fellow practitioners of Tai Chi have little use or
>
>> respect for your thoughts there either.
>
> Yup, those conceited lower characters act pretty much the same
> everywhere on the net.
>
<<>>
Your attitude, arogance, and complete inability to admit your wrong is so
totally
anti tai-chi that at this point no one here believes you have any training
in tai-chi period.
let me guess your a self taught taoist.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
BTW ALL the pix of yours show some of the worst balance and form I've ever
seen.
LePheaux
"VtSkier" <VtS...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:357c8lF...@individual.net...
LePheaux
"Wayne Decker" <wde...@usamedia.tv> wrote in message
news:41edf4d0$0$22515$2c56...@news.cablerocket.com...
> Wow! Quite a discussion.! Since I often ski without my poles--you can
> probably guess how I feel. I watch people. If their body language tells
> me
> that they are using their poles as a security blanket--I take them away.
> Once they seem to realize that skiing happens on the skiis and not the
> poles
> I give them back--with the caveat that if I see them creap forward--I'll
> take them away again.
<<>>
VtSkier
snoig
> > Before you ask, I ski "diamond runs" that are harder than that
> > all the time in bumps, powder and crud...in tele gear.
>
> I did that too,
> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_p_chasel6.jpg
> at Breckenridge, 1985.
I've got news for you yunlong. That run is not a diamond run. I live in
Breck and can tell you without a doubt that there are no diamond runs on the
mountain where that picture could possibly be taken from. The only diamond
runs that have or had chairlifts on them at Breck are all above treeline or
face a direction where you cannot possibly get a picture looking down into
town. The trail you are on in this pic is a blue trail that gets groomed
every night. If you think I'm wrong, please provide the name of the trail
to prove me wrong. I'd be more than willing to go out and snap the same pic
as well as of the trail marker of the so called 'diamond' trail. So, some
more of you BS exposed.
BTW, both skiers in this picture and other pictures/movies are leaning so
far into to mountain that I've be supprised if you don't spend a lot of time
on your butt. What ever happened to stand up straight?
IMHO poles are very handy when skiing. They can be used as outriggers to
help maintain that center of balance in situations where your center of
gravity has gone past the point of no return if you didn't have poles. An
before you tell me that if I had ballance that wouldn't happen, let me tell
you that it happens all the time. Cases where you may hit a rock or log
buried under powder so you can't see it. Let me guess, you know where all
the rocks are before you get to them because you visualize being the rock.
Here's a better idea, learn to ski and get off the groomers one in awhile.
snoig
bdubya
<thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>bdubya wrote:
>> On 16 Jan 2005 19:51:07 -0800, "yunlong"
>> <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >> If you could skate in powder or crud, or on a slope over 40
>> >> degrees, then what you wrote might not be viewed as bullshit.
>> >
>> >I did, as flat-boarding.
>>
>> Did you look like this?
>
>Close enough, I was the chaser holding the camera.
>
>>
>> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/upperdynamic.wmv
>>
>> Embarrassing.
>
>You feel so? The angle of the camera played a joke on you.
Please; that's a really pathetic little dodge. The angle of the camer
is so erratic that it can't impart any information at all, let alone
"play a joke" on anyone. The angle of the SKIER does say a little
about the angle of the slope, but what's embarrassing is how the skier
needs to traverse most of the slope to recover (because he/she is in
the backseat); once the slope eases (at the end of the video), the
skier manages to link a few turns, but up higher, it's just not
happening due to the lousy form.
>
>The trail is Upper Dynamic, Sierra-at-Tahoe; needless to say it is a
>"diamond run," if you can shot a line down, even with poles, you are a
>hotshot already, however, can you do it without poles?
I'm not sure what you mean by "shot a line", but while I'm no hotshot,
I could definitely ski that run with much less effort than your
student is putting forth.
Let me put it this way: the skiing I see in your videos takes me way
back, to my first trip west, as an unschooled, inexperienced
17-year-old in Snowmass. On that trip, since I had never had any
lessons, I was making things up as I went along, and the survival
techniques that I stumbled upon are all on clear display in your
videos. Not working the edges on the groomed, and pushing the tails
out to make the turns. Flailing down the bumps, unable to link a
turn - your "upperdynamic" video could be a clip from my first run
down the double-black Lower Powderhorn, except that I was carrying
poles. (I had no use for them because I was so far back, but I was
carrying them.) The slow spins on the flats, occasionally pausing to
ski backwards for a few turns. I've been there. Even riding the
tails in order to survive the powder (which you have advocated in the
past, IIRC).
I'm not saying there's anything inherently wrong or evil about skiing
like this; I enjoyed that trip immensely, I'm sure you enjoy your
skiing as well, and I figure your students are enjoying themselves as
well. But those techniques, or habits, are inherently limiting; when
I wanted to explore a little more of the mountain (steeper runs,
off-piste, etc), I had to unlearn them all, and learn a more orthodox
style which unlocked vast terrain I couldn't access before. Based on
your comments about "off-piste", I suspect you're in the same
dead-end. If your pride won't allow you to see the wall you've walked
into, that's your problem, and although I think it's a shame that
you're charging people to be led into the same cul-de-sac, I'm sure
that those who wish to go farther will find their way out the same way
I did. And maybe someday you will as well.
Best of luck to you,
bw
bdubya
<nouglym...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 11:20:16 -0500, Walt
><walt_...@YerBootsyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>BTW, how was bahemya?
>
>Yes, I am curious as well. I considered it, but had to work
>yesterday. 550 miles is a long ways for a short weekend.
>
>We had a north wind here, cold and dry. Did that pull any moisture
>off the lake?
Some, but not as much as forecast. You had to go fairly deep into the
trees to link a few turns of untracked, but it could be found. Of
course, I managed to find a line that was too tight for me (I'm just
not man enough to wrestle those 190s around that quick), but the
shoulder's feeling much better today......the more accessible areas,
were cut-up, but far from skied-out, and the snow was REAL light by MW
standards. Even the frontside runs were soft, where they usually get
some icy spots up top. Saturday was pretty crisp (high was maybe 2
degF, +/-) with a consistent light snow coming down . We actually saw
the sun for a while on Sunday, and temps might have hit 10 or so.
Crowds were about what I expected; there were two times that we
actually had to wait behind somebody else before we could load, but
other than that it was ski up and sit right down.
But boy, it's a long drive. We're headed back for Prezdets' weekend,
but might overnight somewhere along the way for a change.
bw
Walt
> Let me put it this way: the skiing I see in your videos takes me way
> back, to my first trip west, as an unschooled, inexperienced
> 17-year-old in Snowmass....
> Best of luck to you,
Nice exposition. You do realize, however, that you'd probably be more
successful trying to explain the Nimzo-Indian defense to a spoon.
Aj 427
Telluride, New Zealand, etc. Presume you were not surprised when your
Students found turning without poles easier than with them.....nor
should you.
I'm 85 (4/27/20) and have taught skiing and boarding to my wife, 4
daughters, 10 Grandchildren and hundreds of others, particularly those
50 and over....all without poles. Sr Member NSPS, PSIA, Gold
NASTAR/Skis&boards, 70+ Club (Free Ski Passes), etc. with over 55 years
experience skimming down Double D <> <> runs using both 203cm RC4
FISCHER skis as well as boards and all without poles.
In short....teach'em to stop on a dime ......like the inside edge of the
downhill ski OR board
and sell the poles. "Just two less things to worry about" for the
begnner.
Well help others and have fun in a super sport all can play for the rest
of their lives.......the sooner the better.
Aj 427
Sr NSPS//PSIA/Gold NASTAR, 80+ Club Member, etc. Have taught hundreds
to ski pole-less all over world...Europe. New Zealand, etc.
Just show'em how to stop-on-a-dime...on the inside edge of their
downhill ski (or board) and after a few runs they'll be surfing down
from side to side, leg to leg, on their inside edge.
After one day to get the hang of "hard-on-the- downhill ski" pole-less
turns on the inside edge and one day to practice they should be good for
the week.
We've done it with 7 year to 75 year old males and females very
successfully and have received their many thanks and subsequent
benefits.
Good luck, help others and have fun!
1/19/05
Aj 427
I'm afraid you Instructor friends still have a lot to learn. I taught
many to ski without poles since 1926 and I'm an 85 year old 80+
racer/skier/boarder, Sr NSPS/PSIA, NASTAR Gold, 80+ 15 yr Club Member.
Suggest you read some of the other discussion msgs. No debate just 55
years experience on
<><> all over the world. Kind regards. 1/19
Aj 427
the kids.
You're just giving them two more things to worry about other than where
they're goin' to eat tonight
Suggest you read more Group msgs.! 1/19
VtSkier
> READ THE REST OF THIS DISCUSSION GROUP. I'm 85, skiing since 6, 1926.
> Sr NSPS//PSIA/Gold NASTAR, 80+ Club Member, etc. Have taught hundreds
> to ski pole-less all over world...Europe. New Zealand, etc.
>
> Just show'em how to stop-on-a-dime...on the inside edge of their
> downhill ski (or board) and after a few runs they'll be surfing down
> from side to side, leg to leg, on their inside edge.
>
Yes, "hockey stops". That's pretty much what I learned at the
outset, not as long ago as you, but about 1950. Also I did
carry poles since we didn't have any lifts and it was much
easier to go uphill if we had poles to push with. We really
didn't use them for any part of downhill, we just carried them
so we would have them to go back uphill.
People doing what you describe on snowboards has been the subject
of several (or one ongoing) discussion(s) here. The translation
of a hockey stop to snowboard is to flip around onto the
heel side and dig your edge in. Trouble is, once there, the rider
never gets off the heelside.
> After one day to get the hang of "hard-on-the- downhill ski" pole-less
> turns on the inside edge and one day to practice they should be good for
> the week.
>
Yes, you can handle a lot with just hockey stops. In fact I
see this quite a bit. Someone tearing down the hill, in the
back seat, fear on their face and a quick pivot of their
skis and they are stopped, hopefully still upright.
Poles, as have been discussed here, have their place and in
fact can be used successfully for certain turns.
Almost always children are taught without poles and very
often adults are taught without poles. I don't think anyone
here denies that. What has been argued strenuously
is that poles should, in all conditions and in all cases, be
abandoned permanently. This is what has been argued against.
> We've done it with 7 year to 75 year old males and females very
> successfully and have received their many thanks and subsequent
> benefits.
>
Again, beginner's technique. Can be successful for a lot
of conditions but won't let you onto the big mountain without
at least a bit of instruction.
Aj 427
Just try to enter downhill competition without poles.....the promoters
will laugh you off the mountain. We know ! Poles distract from the
appropriate balance over the skis regardless of the terrain
and...hence...slow the accomplished/seasoned racer DOWN.
Other racers will complain to competition management......they do NOT
want you to have an advantage by skiing without poles at ANY time.
Suggest reading all the Group msgs.
Mary Malmros
> In article <1105980323....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> "yunlong" <thedreamo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>We have been through that, you don't release your ski in "near-armpit
>>deep powder," it is a good way to loose your ski. The solution is to
>>remove most the snow on top of the ski (with your hands, and don't
>>loose your poles in that snow; well, without poles you don't have this
>>problem), then roll downhill "upside down" until your skis come out the
>>surface.
>
>
> I sense you can roll upside down in knee deep snow with your ski
> coming to the surface in a place with Chocolate rivers, gumdrop trees
> and Cotton Candy Clouds.
Ooom-pa loom-pa doom-pi-dee-doo!
Could have resisted, didn't want to ;-)
What do you get when your boards are all flat?
When you ski like a chicken being mauled by a cat?
(okay, someone else take over from here)
--
Mary Malmros mal...@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.
yunlong
> Been skiing since 6 without poles all over the globe....Wolf
> surprised when your Students found turning without poles
> easier than with them.....nor should you.
>
> I'm 85 (4/27/20) and have taught skiing and boarding to my
> wife, 4 daughters, 10 Grandchildren and hundreds of others,
> particularly those 50 and over....all without poles. Sr
> Member NSPS, PSIA, Gold NASTAR/Skis&boards, 70+ Club (Free Ski
> Passes), etc. with over 55 years experience skimming down
> Double D <> <> runs using both 203cm RC4 FISCHER skis as well
> as boards and all without poles.
Wow,
>
> In short....teach'em to stop on a dime ......like the inside
> edge of the downhill ski OR board
> and sell the poles. "Just two less things to worry about" for
> the begnner.
>
> Well help others and have fun in a super sport all can play
> for the rest of their lives.......the sooner the better.
thanks, old timer, :)
IS
snoig
news:6882-41E...@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net...
If this were true, I would expect to see downhill racers with tiny poles
that were just enough to get by the FIS requirements. Where are they?
snoig
Mary Malmros
Suggest _I_ read more Group msgs? _You're_ the fenugi here, old feller,
no matter how many gallon pins you got from the PSIA. Suggest _you_
read what you're replying to.
Dave M
<snip yet more Terribly tedious tendentious twaddle>
So, as is often asked of another denizen of this little cyberspot:
Why do you stay here and try to convince the cretins that you are correct?
Just go and "ski" (or whatever the hell your are doing -- expressing??)
as you wish.
btw, my five yo looks better on skis than that. At least she is not
flapping about looking like a wounded Mallard. Balance? Stability?
Grace? Are none of those part of the bullshit-chi ski experience?
Sheesh -- at least the F2f posts talked about something. Yours, pure
terribly tedious tendentious twaddle.
Go back to the bridge, troll.
Dave M.
VtSkier
minutes of your posting it. I haven't seen your
reply to my message. If you are for real and not
some troll out there trying to stir up a nest of
hornets, you might read and reply to messages
on this discussion group directed to you.
VtSkier
VtSkier
> Aj 427 wrote:
>
>> Mary: Believe me, your adult students will be even more confused than
>> the kids.
>> You're just giving them two more things to worry about other than where
>> they're goin' to eat tonight Suggest you read more Group msgs.! 1/19
>
>
> Suggest _I_ read more Group msgs? _You're_ the fenugi here, old feller,
> no matter how many gallon pins you got from the PSIA. Suggest _you_
> read what you're replying to.
>
I think this guy may be a troll. He's not yunlong because
he can write a readable English sentence, but I think he's
someone out there trying to stir us up further.
VtSkier
Mary Malmros
I just wanna know how he can ski without no poles and all them NASTAR
gold medals pinned to his chest.