Toe pressure is crap
foot2foot
> I continue to maintain that alpine skiing is a function of toe pressure
> - all else is folderol. Teach them toe pressure; when required,
> imaginary very long toes reaching out to the shovel of the ski, but
> still toe pressure.
Yea, well what about crossover? They can pressure all day and
nothing will happen unless they're crossed over. Cept maybe
they'll bruise the bottom of their foot. HUH?
What about that pal? !!!???
And what about basic skiing body position? You can pressure all
day but it won't work if you have your skis behind your head, ala
that yoga guy I saw. What about it, like every every every every
every ski technique type I've ever asked says? Basic body position/
balance, is number one.
Most of them would say that steering is number two, but actually
crossover is.
Now, you're saying what?..... that angulation combined with
weight distribution to the big toe inside edge of the outside
ski over the ball of the foot is all you ever need to do? Or,
did you say that the angulation is not anything important either?
Wayne Decker
feet--and what they are doing is a good way to help him/her to START the
turn. Especially for the primarily kinesthetic learner. It really gives
them a way to focus on getting that inside edge of the turning ski pressed
into the snow. That said, it doesn't stop there. The rest of the follow
through has to happen for the turn(s) to flow: balancing, pressuring,
rotating, shifting, compressing, extending, angling, etc. --and yes,
counterbalancing the turn by crossing over to the inside of the turn--if it
is fast enough and sharp enough to warrant it--just like counterbalancing a
bike.
Wayne
--
I ski, therefore I am
"foot2foot" <foot...@notatjuno.com> wrote in message
news:115p0f9...@corp.supernews.com...
Norm
> "lal_truckee" <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>> I continue to maintain that alpine skiing is a function of toe
>> pressure - all else is folderol. Teach them toe pressure; when
>> required, imaginary very long toes reaching out to the shovel of the
>> ski, but still toe pressure.
>
> Yea, well what about crossover? They can pressure all day and
> nothing will happen unless they're crossed over. Cept maybe
> they'll bruise the bottom of their foot. HUH?
Paid attention to crossover when I was out this weekend. Your right, its
important, can't possibly turn without it. But you know what? Its the
easiest part of the whole equation. If your anywhere near correct on the
rest of it, crossover just happens, its hard to do it wrong. But if anybody
had given me the hint to imagine my big toe extending all the way to the end
of the ski, Man, that would have helped huge when I was learning. Might have
even helped me get out of the back seat. I think that is one of the biggest
improvements an intermediate skier can make, and one of the most difficult
changes to accomplish.
VtSkier
Well if that would have helped, I have this new gadget
which stretches your big toe approximately 18" which
helps you visualize the effect much better.
ant
> Might have even helped me get out of the back
> seat. I think that is one of the biggest improvements an
> intermediate skier can make, and one of the most difficult changes to
> accomplish.
True enough, it is a biggie, and often where "the plateau" begins.
ant
foot2foot
"VtSkier" <VtS...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3c4m2aF...@individual.net...
> Well if that would have helped, I have this new gadget
> which stretches your big toe approximately 18" which
> helps you visualize the effect much better.
So, it worked on the other appendage then? Now you can
use it on your toe as well?
foot2foot
"Norm" <normgr...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:Bc27e.989954$6l.258209@pd7tw2no...
> Paid attention to crossover when I was out this weekend. Your right, its
> important, can't possibly turn without it. But you know what? Its the
> easiest part of the whole equation. If your anywhere near correct on the
> rest of it, crossover just happens, its hard to do it wrong. But if
> anybody had given me the hint to imagine my big toe extending all the way
> to the end of the ski, Man, that would have helped huge when I was
> learning. Might have even helped me get out of the back seat. I think
> that is one of the biggest improvements an intermediate skier can make,
> and one of the most difficult changes to accomplish.
Crossover is important for any skier to understand, because it's
the biggest reason people fall. If you find yourself in trouble,
regain your balanced position and cross over to one side or the
other. But, *you"re* right. It is the most basic, and so easiest
part of turning. It's the most basic, undeniable truth of all of
skiing. To turn right, you're body must be on the right side of
the skis, and vice versa.
Actually, you might try *lifting* the toes as you ski. You might as
well lift the toe that extends to the end of the ski as well, because
it's the big toe ball of the foot you want to push with, not the toe.
If you push with the toes as well you're likely to end up cramped,
tight and tentative.
If you want to get out of the back seat, try lifting the tail of
the inside ski and leaving the tip on the snow as a drill to get
the feel of forward. Also, just pull your skis back under you
as far as you can during the bottom half of each turn, then
get used to skiing that way. Or, try to ski without any knee
flex *at all* for a while on easier terrain.
And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
Sheesh.
foot2foot
"Wayne Decker" <wde...@usamedia.tv> wrote in message
> But it takes both. I think that getting a beginner aware of his/her
> feet--and what they are doing is a good way to help him/her to START the
> turn.
Initiating the turn with a wedge is a good way for a beginner
to learn to start a turn. Pressure on the ball of the foot is
a part of that wedge system
> Especially for the primarily kinesthetic learner.
That might well be true, but to be honest, this progression is so
simple that one really doesn't need to worry much about things
like learning styles. Of, course, it certainly wouldn't hurt to try to
get in touch with how a person seems to learn best.
> It really gives them a way to focus on getting that inside edge of the
> turning ski pressed into the snow.
Yes, push with the ball of the foot.
> That said, it doesn't stop there. The rest of the follow through has to
> happen for the turn(s) to flow: balancing, pressuring, rotating, shifting,
> compressing, extending, angling, etc. --and yes, counterbalancing the turn
> by crossing over to the inside of the turn--
Well, once the beginner has set the edge of the outside ski with
a wedge changeup motion, and transferred the weight to that
outside ski, really all they need to do is to match the skis by
a slight lift of the tail of the inside ski, then put it next to the
outside ski. The goal is to pressure the front of the skis to
the point that the tails skid around the tips to the extent that the
skier wants them to.
> if it is fast enough and sharp enough to warrant it--just like
> counterbalancing a bike.
If one initiates the turn with a wedge changeup type move,
crossover is already taken care of, because in a wedge,
one is already crossed over either ski, and able to turn
either direction as such.
Now, once one moves beyond the beginner stage, it
becomes a question of blending of the various elements
of the mechanics of skiing. Truly, there is no end to
the ways one could turn a ski, or to the ways the
elements can be blended.
lal_truckee
CLIP
>
> Crossover is important for any skier to understand,
CLIP
> And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
I feel abused.
And anyway, crossunder is better than crossover. Translates to the steep
and deep better than crossover. Crossunder keeps the upper body static
and in the fall line.
The Real Bev
>
> foot2foot wrote:
> CLIP
>
> > Crossover is important for any skier to understand,
>
> CLIP
>
> > And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
>
> I feel abused.
Enjoy it while you can, some people have to pay big money for abuse.
> And anyway, crossunder is better than crossover. Translates to the steep
> and deep better than crossover. Crossunder keeps the upper body static
> and in the fall line.
And it's easier.
--
Cheers,
Bev
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Little Mary took her skis upon the snow to frisk.
Wasn't she a silly girl her little * ?
ant
> And anyway, crossunder is better than crossover. Translates to the
> steep and deep better than crossover. Crossunder keeps the upper body
> static and in the fall line.
Nicely put.
ant
VtSkier
Yeah, and I've watched him do it.
Scott Abraham
"Bob Lee" <rl...@swcp.com> wrote in message
news:rlee-761EE5.0...@individual.net...
> foot2foot wrote:
>
> [...]
>> And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
>>
>> Sheesh.
>
> Sorry, it's just that we can't be too careful here.
We surely need to be careful, those of us who tell the truth and do not
allow freaks like Bob Lee to intimidate us.
Because if we piss him off, Bob Lee and his friends will lie to the cops,
lie to judges, participate in criminal conspiracies of real life harassment,
defame, tell gross and disgusting lies, and otherwise do anything they can
to attack anyone who sees them for the sick freaks they are.
Scott Abraham
"ant" <ant_...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:3c8fnaF...@individual.net...
Hey, just got back from Whistler. You remember, of course: you committed
felonies because I exposed you as a lousy skier.
Scott Abraham
> foot2foot wrote:
> CLIP
>
>>
>> Crossover is important for any skier to understand,
>
> CLIP
>
>> And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
>
> I feel abused.
Welcome to the club. At least he didn't accuse you of molesting children.
Or commit felonies to harass you.
Scott Abraham
"The Real Bev" <bas...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:42668055...@myrealbox.com...
> lal_truckee wrote:
>>
>> foot2foot wrote:
>> CLIP
>>
>> > Crossover is important for any skier to understand,
>>
>> CLIP
>>
>> > And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
>>
>> I feel abused.
>
> Enjoy it while you can, some people have to pay big money for abuse.
Some people merely have to tell the truth about the sick freaks of rsa, and
people like Bev abuse for free. Want to tell me again how Bert implanted
false memories of being abused as a child?
Or any of your other sick, blaming lies?
>
>> And anyway, crossunder is better than crossover. Translates to the steep
>> and deep better than crossover. Crossunder keeps the upper body static
>> and in the fall line.
>
> And it's easier.
It's always easier for a sick psychopathic liar like Bev Ashley to lie when
someone exposes her vile acts.
Scott Abraham
No surprise that two pathological liars and criminals ski with each other.
foot2foot
Have to agree, in a way, depending on the situation though.
And the same principle applies, no matter how it's happening.
Your body must be on the inside of the turn.
Crossunder is more of a short turn thing, crossover a longer
radius thing. It all boils down to when the extension happens,
during the first half of the turn, or the last.
Actually maybe I don't completely agree, they're just two
separate tools to use as you wish.
It seems that, in the pow, the extension at the end of the
turn might work better than at the start, but then again I
don't see why extension at the start wouldn't work as well.
Besides all that, if you have the skis, or even if you don't,
in the pow, all you really *need* to do is to balance and
steer with the legs from the hip socket. As long as you
can keep the balance, that's all you need.
As far as the over/under,
The important thing is, the skier must understand the body
must be on the inside of the turn, and one way or the other,
the body must change sides in relation to the skis as you
go from one turn to the next.
If the skier is locked up in the fall line, on the inside or
outside ski, they need to get crossed over more to one side
or the other.
MoonMan
> "lal_truckee" <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:IGu9e.3551$J12...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>> foot2foot wrote:
>> CLIP
>>
>>>
>>> Crossover is important for any skier to understand,
>>
>> CLIP
>>
>>> And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
>>
>> I feel abused.
>>
>> And anyway, crossunder is better than crossover. Translates to the
>> steep and deep better than crossover. Crossunder keeps the upper
>> body static and in the fall line.
>
> Have to agree, in a way, depending on the situation though.
> And the same principle applies, no matter how it's happening.
> Your body must be on the inside of the turn.
Are you trying to wind me up as well?
yes in most cases your body *will* be inside the turn, and I aggree that it
*should* be, but there is no *must* about it!
Crossover seems to me to be a result of turning, Crossunder (i do like that
term) is a way of moving the skis from one side of the COM to the other, but
the turn has started before the skis have moved to the outside of the body
relative to the turn.
--
Chris *<:-)
Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!
foot2foot
"MoonMan" <chris.a...@codeway.invalid.com> wrote in message
> Are you trying to wind me up as well?
Gladly so. It would be a tremendous relief from the crap
going on here lately.
> yes in most cases your body *will* be inside the turn,
Must be. In every case.
> and I agree that it
> *should* be, but there is no *must* about it!
Sure there is. Turning is otherwise impossible, and I *still*
don't understand that example or whatever that you once
posted. My friend, there simply is no other way. The
body *must* be on the inside of the turn or else the force
of inertia or "centrifugal force" will simply cause the skier
to fall to the outside.
> Crossover seems to me to be a result of turning,
I can't see how. Turning can not be done unless you are
crossed over. Even if you're crossing under with the "quiet
upper body" slalom type turns, the body is *still* to the inside.
> Crossunder (i do like that
> term) is a way of moving the skis from one side of the COM
(center of mass)
> to the other, but
> the turn has started before the skis have moved to the outside of the body
> relative to the turn.
Hmm, let's see. I traverse to get things moving. To turn left, I
sort of thrust my skis out to the side of my body, then, I let the
turn come around, and there comes a point, where, if I simply
leave my body where it is, the skis are directly in front of, or
under? my body.
So, where does the next turn start? Not until the edges change,
which can't really happen until the skis start to move to the
other side of my body. Even if there could be such a *moment*
as I think you describe, the turn, nor any turn, could not
continue unless the body is on the inside of the skis.
See, this thing of yours continues to sort of amaze me, really,
not to be rude or hurt your feelings or anything, after all, in this
case you're not trying to get people to break their legs on those
piece of junk snowblade things, and as such are deserving of
severe rebuke for pure egotism and lack of concern for anyone's
safety as opposed to the considered importance of your own
opinion, or even to your just being "right", despite how many
people get hurt.
But I can only think that you have some sort of skier dyslexia or
something with this crossover business. .
It *is* must. Your body *must* be on the inside of the turn for
it to succeed. I can not imagine how you do not see this.
If you are not crossed over you will simply fall to the outside.
bdubya
Y'know, given that skiing is a pretty dynamic thing, with the COM and
the skis frequently in motion relative to each other, and always in
motion relative to the terrain, aren't crossover and crossunder the
same thing? Seems to me the only difference is in the mind of the
skier, who thinks of either the skis or the COM as the static element,
even though neither is.
bw
Walt
> Y'know, given that skiing is a pretty dynamic thing, with the COM and
> the skis frequently in motion relative to each other, and always in
> motion relative to the terrain, aren't crossover and crossunder the
> same thing?
Shhhh. The problem is that a certain somebody thinks he owns crossover,
and if he finds out we're using it he's going to report us to the FBI.
OTOH, *I* own crossunder, and hereby give everybody permission to use
it. Unless you're flatboarding, of course.
--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy
lal_truckee
> foot2foot wrote:
>
>>"lal_truckee" <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:IGu9e.3551$J12...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>foot2foot wrote:
>>>CLIP
>>>
>>>
>>>>Crossover is important for any skier to understand,
>>>
>>>CLIP
>>>
>>>
>>>>And tell LAL I was just kidding with the gruff manner.
>>>
>>>I feel abused.
>>>
>>>And anyway, crossunder is better than crossover. Translates to the
>>>steep and deep better than crossover. Crossunder keeps the upper
>>>body static and in the fall line.
>>
>>Have to agree, in a way, depending on the situation though.
>>And the same principle applies, no matter how it's happening.
>>Your body must be on the inside of the turn.
>
>
> Are you trying to wind me up as well?
>
> yes in most cases your body *will* be inside the turn, and I aggree that it
> *should* be, but there is no *must* about it!
Now, now! Don't forget that the respondent operates in a semi-static
frame of reference, with a fixed vertical defined by gravity, not the
varying FoR with the z axis defined by turning forces and extending from
snow contact through the CoM. If he was to adopt the latter he would
have to either learn Tensors, OR ski for fun until internalyziing the
mechanisms became second nature and no words were required. The true
answer is: (Da DAH) the body's CoM sbould never be inside or outside the
turn, but directly on the dynamic z axis, and skiing is a constant
corrective activity to return the CoM to the that axis.
Or maybe it's just a fun way to scoot around the snow?
lal_truckee
Hooray, a ski post! I knew you could do it! And I stand properly lectured.
I suggest you begin thinking of the moving frame of reference with a
dynamic z axis (AKA vertical.) It rarely coincides with the gravity
defined vertical. Or just consider skiing as a natural extension of living.
VtSkier
compelling, but can't it be said that zee axis "will" be
on the inside of the turn or you ass will be sliding with-
out benefit of edges? Or, said another way, zee axis and
your ass "must" be inside the turn?
"must" = "will be or else" don't you agree?
Say, are you off snow again? Oh, yeah, you
already told me you'd be in the flatlands today.
Crossover/Crossunder = different mental pictures.
Crossover = turn from a traverse wherein you change your
edge and your weight to what will become the outside
of the turn and physically move your upper body to what
will become the inside of the turn.
Crossunder = linked turns with small angle across the
fall line, keeping upper body still and moving your
feet/skis back and forth under your body. Not wedeln,
though, because wedeln type turns are not complete,
well executed turns with edging (my picture of wedeln,
YMMV)
I do think it amounts to the same thing, but emphasis
is different as are the mental pictures.
VtSkier
MoonMan
Yep, I'm just trying to get foot to look at things in a different way
--
Chris *<:-)
MoonMan
> I can't see how. Turning can not be done unless you are
> crossed over. Even if you're crossing under with the "quiet
> upper body" slalom type turns, the body is *still* to the inside.
In a slalom turn, you are turning the skis not yourself - well idealy
anyway, if you want to see how poor a racer I am you can always check my FIS
points :( - your COM should be traveling in as straight a line as possible)
you actualy pressure the ski after it's on it new edge so Centripetal force
actually does not apply during the turn
<snip>
> Hmm, let's see. I traverse to get things moving. To turn left, I
> sort of thrust my skis out to the side of my body, then, I let the
> turn come around, and there comes a point, where, if I simply
> leave my body where it is, the skis are directly in front of, or
> under? my body.
Traverse? again idealy both from a Racing and the CSIA's point of view you
should never be traversing, you should always be turning.
Think about the turn in another way, you roll the skis from one edge to the
other, the shape of the ski then makes an arc in the other direction,
carrying the skis across underneath you - crossunder - but it has happened
after you have turned the ski.
>
> So, where does the next turn start? Not until the edges change,
> which can't really happen until the skis start to move to the
> other side of my body. Even if there could be such a *moment*
> as I think you describe, the turn, nor any turn, could not
> continue unless the body is on the inside of the skis.
edge change should occurr before the skis can cross under your COM.
>
> See, this thing of yours continues to sort of amaze me, really,
> not to be rude or hurt your feelings or anything, after all, in this
> case you're not trying to get people to break their legs on those
> piece of junk snowblade things, and as such are deserving of
> severe rebuke for pure egotism and lack of concern for anyone's
> safety as opposed to the considered importance of your own
> opinion, or even to your just being "right", despite how many
> people get hurt.
I don't want to upset you but I nearly stuck my oar in when you where
discussing the relative popularity of skis and boards. In my small sample of
5 european ski resorts this year it seemed to me that blades are becoming
more popular than boards, even when the conditions are really not suitable
for blades. I suspect this has much to do with the fact that if you can
skate can blade without any instruction and most skiers, borders and even
people new to snowsports have skated as children.
as it happens I haven't used my blades on snow this year, but as the dry
slope race season starts on Sunday I will be getting them out for course
inspections again.
MoonMan
> bdubya wrote:
<snip>
>
> OTOH, *I* own crossunder, and hereby give everybody permission to use
> it. Unless you're flatboarding, of course.
and most grateful I am for that permission.
--
Chris *<:-)
MoonMan
Thank god I'd put my tea down,
>
> Or maybe it's just a fun way to scoot around the snow?
Perhaps that's the answer to the Question of life, the Universe and
everything.
downhill
> Traverse? again idealy both from a Racing and the CSIA's point of view you
>
>should never be traversing, you should always be turning.
>
>
>
What about gliding? I spent much of this year learning to execute short
turns gliding to the next starting point of turn.
I had thought that making one turn from the last turn was fast and it
sure is a blast if you like g force on body. With my limited Super-G
runs I did not spend that much time making turns as I did gliding
towards the next gate at Sunday River last month. I will confess I have
skied many of my GS races as one turn end the next starts, but that is
only I did not finish the first turn fast enough and have to start next
one before I am really late..
michael
yunlong
> bdubya wrote:
>
> > Y'know, given that skiing is a pretty dynamic thing, with
> > the COM and the skis frequently in motion relative to each
> > other, and always in motion relative to the terrain, aren't
> > crossover and crossunder the same thing?
Not to a partitioned mind.
>
> Shhhh. The problem is that a certain somebody thinks he owns
> crossover, and if he finds out we're using it he's going to
> report us to the FBI.
>
> OTOH, *I* own crossunder, and hereby give everybody permission
> to use it.
Maybe just somebody like to create a confused term to confuse
him/herself to make others think that he/she have gotten a deeper
thought?
> Unless you're flatboarding, of course.
Yup, flatboarding doesn't use the terms, it only states/requires that
finishing the turn on the uphill ski, unless it goes straightlining
[where it turns without turning],
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/straightlining_worldcup.wmv
IS
VtSkier
> Walt wrote:
>
>>bdubya wrote:
>>
>>>Y'know, given that skiing is a pretty dynamic thing, with
>>>the COM and the skis frequently in motion relative to each
>>>other, and always in motion relative to the terrain, aren't
>>>crossover and crossunder the same thing?
>
> Not to a partitioned mind.
>
>>Shhhh. The problem is that a certain somebody thinks he owns
>>crossover, and if he finds out we're using it he's going to
>>report us to the FBI.
>>
>>OTOH, *I* own crossunder, and hereby give everybody permission
>>to use it.
>
> Maybe just somebody like to create a confused term to confuse
> him/herself to make others think that he/she have gotten a deeper
> thought?
Uhm, no, I think there is room for both terms.
I posted on that subject. Different mental pictures
probably same move, but feels different.
>
>>Unless you're flatboarding, of course.
>
> Yup, flatboarding doesn't use the terms, it only states/requires that
> finishing the turn on the uphill ski, unless it goes straightlining
> [where it turns without turning],
Finishing the turn on the uphill ski? Isn't that the same
as beginning the next turn on what will become the outside
ski?
Oh, yeah, straightlining, where it turns without turning,
uhm, okay, then what?
foot2foot
> Now, now! Don't forget that the respondent operates in a semi-static frame
> of reference, with a fixed vertical defined by gravity, not the varying
> FoR with the z axis defined by turning forces and extending from snow
> contact through the CoM. If he was to adopt the latter he would have to
> either learn Tensors, OR ski for fun until internalyziing the mechanisms
> became second nature and no words were required. The true answer is: (Da
> DAH) the body's CoM sbould never be inside or outside the turn, but
> directly on the dynamic z axis, and skiing is a constant corrective
> activity to return the CoM to the that axis.
>
> Or maybe it's just a fun way to scoot around the snow?
>>
There you go with this crazy elaborated, and not useful at
all definition of "inside" the turn. The common point of
reference would be plumb, as it is for most anything else.
You know as well as I do that a skier can't turn unless his
body is on the inside of the turn. You can do anything else
in the book to the skis, buy if you're not crossed over it
won't work.
LAL, it *is* important for skiers to realize this simple fact,
and it's not taught by most today, and many don't even
realize it.
foot2foot
"MoonMan" <chris.a...@codeway.invalid.com> wrote in message
> Yep, I'm just trying to get foot to look at things in a different way
>
> --
That's a relief, I was thinking you were seriously addled.
BTW, most US shops are dumping the "blades" in favor
of short release binding skis like the dickens.
I was pointing out the danger and trend to responsible peeps at
the last area I skied at, one of the people replied, "Oh, like that
eh", because a person who had just rented them was hauled off
the hill with a broken leg.
I'm glad to see that people are at least skiing on something, this
might mean many are entering the sport, and the shorties make
that start fun and easy, though limited. But they really should
get some bindings.
foot2foot
"Walt" <walt_...@YerBootsyahoo.com> wrote in message
> Shhhh. The problem is that a certain somebody thinks he owns crossover,
> and if he finds out we're using it he's going to report us to the FBI.
Perhaps you should actually try to contribute to the discussion
instead of feeding your ego with your usual stuff.
If you can.
(I just know I shouldn't have responded to that post, but actually
the same parade of responses is going to follow it whether or
not I do).
Walty has surely taken *another* nice on topic skiing thread
and hashed it with the typical parade of cheerleaders more
than likely.
He gets upset if he's not the center of attention, or if the parade
group isn't laughing at his jokes.
foot2foot
"bdubya" <bdu...@interaccess.com> wrote in message
> Y'know, given that skiing is a pretty dynamic thing, with the COM and
> the skis frequently in motion relative to each other, and always in
> motion relative to the terrain, aren't crossover and crossunder the
> same thing? Seems to me the only difference is in the mind of the
> skier, who thinks of either the skis or the COM as the static element,
> even though neither is.
>
> bw
Yes, the only difference is where the extension takes
place, last half of the turn or first half. That, and the
radius of the turn might sort of apply. People usually
think of the crossunder as a thing akin to short "quiet
upper leave your body where it is" turns. Wider turns
are more of a cross over
But really, the difference lies in when you extend.
Extension at the start of the turn launches the body
across the skis.
Extension through the second half of the turn starts at
the fall line, so the skis are already to the outside of
the body, and the turn is well underway. By the time
of the changing of edges needs to happen, retraction
( or flexion) has begun.
So, it's either that the skis cross the body through
extension or retraction.
Scott Abraham
character: if the freaks of rsa like him and ski with him, he's gotta be an
asshole.
"foot2foot" <foot...@notatjuno.com> wrote in message
news:116ikuf...@corp.supernews.com...
The Real Bev
> Now, now! Don't forget that the respondent operates in a semi-static
> frame of reference, with a fixed vertical defined by gravity, not the
> varying FoR with the z axis defined by turning forces and extending from
> snow contact through the CoM. If he was to adopt the latter he would
> have to either learn Tensors, OR ski for fun until internalyziing the
> mechanisms became second nature and no words were required. The true
> answer is: (Da DAH) the body's CoM sbould never be inside or outside the
> turn, but directly on the dynamic z axis, and skiing is a constant
> corrective activity to return the CoM to the that axis.
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/#examples
Nice work!
--
Cheers,
Bev
---------------------------------------------
"The primary purpose of any government entity
is to employ the unemployable."
ant
> You know as well as I do that a skier can't turn unless his
> body is on the inside of the turn. You can do anything else
> in the book to the skis, buy if you're not crossed over it
> won't work.
Wrong.
ant
Scott Abraham
"ant" <ant_...@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:3ctkf5F...@individual.net...
Hey, foot, she's right about that. I seem to recall that her fat ass was
waaaayyyy to the outside of the turn when I embarassed her in the gates at
Whistler.
yunlong
> yunlong wrote:
> > Walt wrote:
> >>bdubya wrote:
> >>
> >>>Y'know, given that skiing is a pretty dynamic thing, with
> >>>the COM and the skis frequently in motion relative to each
> >>>other, and always in motion relative to the terrain, aren't
> >>>crossover and crossunder the same thing?
> >
> > Not to a partitioned mind.
> >
> >>Shhhh. The problem is that a certain somebody thinks he
> >> owns crossover, and if he finds out we're using it he's
> >> going to report us to the FBI.
> >>
> >>OTOH, *I* own crossunder, and hereby give everybody
> >> permission to use it.
> >
> > Maybe just somebody like to create a confused term to
> > confuse him/herself to make others think that he/she have
> > gotten a deeper thought?
>
> Uhm, no, I think there is room for both terms.
> I posted on that subject. Different mental pictures
> probably same move, but feels different.
Nevertheless, methinks that "finishing the turn [with the weight] on
the uphill ski" describes a more precise action to finish a turn.
> >
> >>Unless you're flatboarding, of course.
> >
> > Yup, flatboarding doesn't use the terms, it only
> > states/requires that finishing the turn on the uphill ski,
> > unless it goes straightlining [where it turns without
> > turning],
>
> Finishing the turn on the uphill ski? Isn't that the same
> as beginning the next turn on what will become the outside
> ski?
Yes, that is the idea, so the skier is ready to turn at the end of
every turn, which is what makes smooth linked turns.
>
> Oh, yeah, straightlining, where it turns without turning,
> uhm, okay, then what?
Superpipe?
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/sierra_superpipe5.wmv
IS
lal_truckee
> VtSkier wrote:
>
>>
>>Finishing the turn on the uphill ski? Isn't that the same
>>as beginning the next turn on what will become the outside
>>ski?
>
>
> Yes, that is the idea, so the skier is ready to turn at the end of
> every turn, which is what makes smooth linked turns.
It appears that yunlong thinks he discovered early weight transfer.
And I thought he was talking about the actually sort of difficult skiing
on the outside edges of the inside ski exclusively, which the kids do
for fun and advanced youth do as an excercise in edging and balance.
I propose we award yunlong the official RSA "Humor in Skiing Award" for
his contributions to the group. Seconds?
Mary Malmros
> yunlong wrote:
>
>> VtSkier wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Finishing the turn on the uphill ski? Isn't that the same
>>> as beginning the next turn on what will become the outside
>>> ski?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, that is the idea, so the skier is ready to turn at the end of
>> every turn, which is what makes smooth linked turns.
>
>
> It appears that yunlong thinks he discovered early weight transfer.
Of course not, you silly twit. He _invented_ it.
Get with the program.
--
Mary Malmros mal...@verizon.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.
yunlong
> yunlong wrote:
> > VtSkier wrote:
> >
> >>Finishing the turn on the uphill ski? Isn't that the same
> >>as beginning the next turn on what will become the outside
> >>ski?
> >
> > Yes, that is the idea, so the skier is ready to turn at the
> > end of every turn, which is what makes smooth linked turns.
>
> It appears that yunlong thinks he discovered early weight transfer.
It reminds me the story I heard, after Columbus discovered the new
world and returned to Spain, some of his contemporary dignitaries were
jealous and tried to derail his achievement in a reception party by
claiming that the discovery was not a big deal, and anybody who had a
ship could do it, just heading west, it was easy, blah, blah, blah...
Then, Columbus ask them to stand an egg... Well, we all know the end of
the story by now...
>
> And I thought he was talking about the actually sort of
> difficult skiing on the outside edges of the inside ski
> exclusively,
What a self-conceited stupid thought;
> which the kids do for fun and advanced youth do
> as an excercise in edging and balance.
it sounded like an old fart pretending that he knew what he was talking
about. Well, we all know the end of the story by now...
>
> I propose we award yunlong the official RSA "Humor in Skiing
> Award" for his contributions to the group.
Humor it is.
> Seconds?
Do you jump?
http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
IS
Mary Malmros
> Do you jump?
>
> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
That's totally, totally amazing. I've never seen anyone actually do
such an advanced technique before. No, really.
(Any of y'all familiar with the #9 lift at Mount Snow?)
ant
> poles! I've never seen anything like that! You *so* rock.
wow, me neither. we had better shut up now, cos this guy has just proved
that he is in fact a world cup aerialist! damn, how embarassed do we feel?
ant
He flies through the air
With the greatest of ease
Flaps both his arms
As he falls on his knees.
The Real Bev
> Bob Lee wrote:
> > yunlong wrote:
> >
> >> Do you jump?
> >>
> >> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
> >
> > Dude! Awesome! I totally can't believe you did that - and without
> > poles! I've never seen anything like that! You *so* rock.
>
> wow, me neither. we had better shut up now, cos this guy has just proved
> that he is in fact a world cup aerialist! damn, how embarassed do we feel?
Jeez, not in my wildest dreams could I expect to do that without injuring
myself. Oh, wait...
> He flies through the air
> With the greatest of ease
> Flaps both his arms
> As he falls on his knees.
Watch out, guys, this may be considered stalking.
--
Cheers,
Bev
----------------------------------------------------------------
"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably
the day they start making vacuum cleaners." --Ernst Jan Plugge
lal_truckee
Holy mother of Ullr, the trolls tremble at totally terrific technique.
yunlong
> yunlong wrote:
>
> > Do you jump?
> >
> > http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
>
> That's totally, totally amazing. I've never seen anyone
> actually do such an advanced technique before. No, really.
"Yup, most little knowledge cannot see/read beyond their skulls."
>
> (Any of y'all familiar with the #9 lift at Mount Snow?)
Are you saying because others jump under the #9 lift at Mount Snow, so
that you can claim the credit that you jump too?
Conceited little knowledge it is.
IS
yunlong
> Bob Lee wrote:
> > yunlong wrote:
> >
> >> Do you jump?
> >>
> >> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
> >
> > Dude! Awesome! I totally can't believe you did that - and
> > without poles! I've never seen anything like that! You *so*
> > rock.
>
> wow, me neither. we had better shut up now, cos this guy has
> just proved that he is in fact a world cup aerialist!
Yup, most little knowledge cannot see/read beyond their skulls.
> damn, how embarassed do we feel?
And a little knowledge even feels embarrassed? That's novelty.
IS
yunlong
>From what I gather, you don't jump, can't do superpipe, can neither ski
straight nor spin, but in a perpetuated wiggles, you think you are one
great skier who knows all about skiing? Yup, thanks for being such a
fine example of conceited little knowledge.
IS
Scott Abraham
How about we start some other awards? Official RSA "pathological liar who
also moderates rsa terrorist award"? Sorry this freak can't win it this
month, Mary Malmros already has the prize for her denial of the criminal
stalking that has occured here for the last six years.
The mind boggles at the prospect.
Official RSA "Biggest Defamation of the Month"
Official RSA "Most Creative False Allegation of Molesting Children Award".
Official RSA "Felon of the Month" given to the regular who has contributed
the most to the stalking and harassment of Foot2Foot.
And of course, the Oscar of Rsa, the "Asshole of the Month" award. So many
freaks in the running, impossible to predict.
Scott Abraham
> Bob Lee wrote:
>> yunlong wrote:
>>
>>> Do you jump?
>>>
>>> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
>>
>> Dude! Awesome! I totally can't believe you did that - and without
>> poles! I've never seen anything like that! You *so* rock.
>
> wow, me neither. we had better shut up now, cos this guy has just proved
> that he is in fact a world cup aerialist! damn, how embarassed do we feel?
Maybe as embarassed as this crapbuggershit skier felt after she challenged
me to races and got humiliated?
Watch out, Yunlong, she'll be making false allegations to the cops next!
Scott Abraham
"The Real Bev" <bas...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:426AFEB6...@myrealbox.com...
> ant wrote:
>> Bob Lee wrote:
>> > yunlong wrote:
>> >
>> >> Do you jump?
>> >>
>> >> http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
>> >
>> > Dude! Awesome! I totally can't believe you did that - and without
>> > poles! I've never seen anything like that! You *so* rock.
>>
>> wow, me neither. we had better shut up now, cos this guy has just proved
>> that he is in fact a world cup aerialist! damn, how embarassed do we
>> feel?
>
> Jeez, not in my wildest dreams could I expect to do that without injuring
> myself. Oh, wait...
>
>> He flies through the air
>> With the greatest of ease
>> Flaps both his arms
>> As he falls on his knees.
>
> Watch out, guys, this may be considered stalking.
>
Another sick stalker jokes about the vile history of rsa.
Hey, bitch?
What part of real life felonies don't you remember? The part where YOU
committed felonies?
Scott Abraham
"ClarenceDarrow" <shyster...@bert.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:cGhhdHBoaWw=.59d12b2f848726362b87a4ed9385f24f@1114369972.nulluser.com...
> Scott Abraham wrote:
>
>> How about we start some other awards? Official RSA "pathological liar
>> who
>> also moderates rsa terrorist award"? Sorry this freak can't win it this
>> month, Mary Malmros already has the prize for her denial of the criminal
>> stalking that has occured here for the last six years.
>> The mind boggles at the prospect.
>> Official RSA "Biggest Defamation of the Month"
>> Official RSA "Most Creative False Allegation of Molesting Children
>> Award".
>> Official RSA "Felon of the Month" given to the regular who has
>> contributed
>> the most to the stalking and harassment of Foot2Foot.
>> And of course, the Oscar of Rsa, the "Asshole of the Month" award. So
>> many
>> freaks in the running, impossible to predict.
>
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Uh, duh. I have the balls to use my own name, freak. I have the balls to
face you in person, freak.
You're still in the running for "Most Creative False Allegation of Molesting
Children". That's what an asshole does, asshole.
>
> By the way, I enjoy that useless crap you sell on ebay.
More defamation, more stalking. Same old sick shit from a nutless freak.
> Do you visit yard sales or go dumpster
> diving? You have got to be the biggest schmuck on usenet.
You truly are a disgusting twerp. Clue time. Shmucks hide in anonymity and
take cheap shots, shmuck.
> What do Michael Jackson, Scott
> Abraham and Caviar have in common - they all come on little crackers.
> BWHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Got the balls to say that in person, shmuck? Of course not. Just another
nutless Usenet freak spewing filth while hiding behind his computer.
Anytime, asshole.
Dick Gozinya
<scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>How about we start some other awards? Official RSA "pathological liar who
>also moderates rsa terrorist award"?
Bert
Sorry this freak can't win it this
>month, Mary Malmros already has the prize for her denial of the criminal
>stalking that has occured here for the last six years.
>The mind boggles at the prospect.
>Official RSA "Biggest Defamation of the Month"
Scott Abraham
>Official RSA "Most Creative False Allegation of Molesting Children Award".
Again, Scott Abraham
>Official RSA "Felon of the Month" given to the regular who has contributed
>the most to the stalking and harassment of Foot2Foot.
Scott Abraham, winner again
>And of course, the Oscar of Rsa, the "Asshole of the Month" award. So many
>freaks in the running, impossible to predict.
Yes Spock easy to predict, the winner is Abraham again. Does
your Rabbi know you steal?
>
"I am Homer of Borg. You will be assim...ooooohhh, donut"!
Dick Gozinya
Scott, we love how obsessed, and yet so powerless you are
Dick Gozinya
<Wrigleyfield-no-spam@.invalid> wrote:
>Scott Abraham wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>Abraham, So Disgusting, So Worthless, So Loud, So Ugly and So Powerless.
>
>BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>Your brother said you were a sick joke that molested children (him).
>
>BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
yes, then he later allowed false memories to be implanted in
his mediocre Spock Brain
Dave M
>lal_truckee wrote:
>
>
>>yunlong wrote:
>>
>>
>>>VtSkier wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Finishing the turn on the uphill ski? Isn't that the same
>>>>as beginning the next turn on what will become the outside
>>>>ski?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Yes, that is the idea, so the skier is ready to turn at the
>>>end of every turn, which is what makes smooth linked turns.
>>>
>>>
>>It appears that yunlong thinks he discovered early weight transfer.
>>
>>
>
>It reminds me the story I heard, after Columbus discovered the new
>world and returned to Spain, some of his contemporary dignitaries were
>jealous and tried to derail his achievement in a reception party by
>claiming that the discovery was not a big deal, and anybody who had a
>ship could do it, just heading west, it was easy, blah, blah, blah...
>Then, Columbus ask them to stand an egg... Well, we all know the end of
>the story by now...
>
Sure, except that it wasn't Columbus, it was Brunelleschi who did the
egg trick when he was questioned about the design for the dome over the
Duomo in Firenza. Close, though.
Dave M.
Dave M
>yunlong wrote:
>
>
>
>>Do you jump?
>>
>>http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/highjump180.wmv
>>
>>
>
>Dude! Awesome! I totally can't believe you did that - and without poles!
>I've never seen anything like that! You *so* rock.
>
>Bob
>
>
Yeah! And without edges, too.
Dave M.
Sean Monaghan
Welcome back, Scott. I see that you made it back online. Were you in
jail, again, as several RSA regulars had suggested in your absence?
You still haven't thanked me for hooking you up with the RFN free
server details, BTW. How do you like X-Privat, so far?
--
Sean Monaghan
http://www.Kookology.info
Winner of the Pierre Salinger Memorial HL&S Award
To e-mail me, change the zeros (00) to letters (oo) in my addy.
Scott Abraham
"Dick Gozinya" <in...@inya.com> wrote in message
news:nbun6112c2u242iug...@4ax.com...
Nice projection, typical of you. So sick you don't realize you only feel
powerful while hiding in anonymity, taking cheap shots from your computer,
writing what you would never have the balls to say.
Clue time, freak. I'm the one with the power. You fear me. You are
terrified of me. That's why you don't have the balls to spew your shit in
person.
Scott Abraham
"Dick Gozinya" <in...@inya.com> wrote in message
news:kh2o61tu8fo56pvf6...@4ax.com...
Scott Abraham
"Sean Monaghan" <se...@k00kology.info> wrote in message
news:426c51b4$0$54213$892e...@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
Again? Care to tell me when I was in jail, ever?
>
> You still haven't thanked me for hooking you up with the RFN free
> server details, BTW. How do you like X-Privat, so far?
Fuck yourself, freak.
Scott Abraham
Anytime, freak.
No surprise you're a Cubs fan. Biggest assholes on the planet.
"Phlubarb" <Wrigleyfield-no-spam@.invalid> wrote in message
news:cGhhdHBoaWw=.9b4512a4e76e196b60c235559c83647d@1114375213.nulluser.com...
Dick Gozinya
<scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Are you serious?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Dick Gozinya
<Wrigleyfield-no-spam@.invalid> wrote:
>Scott Abraham wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>Ooooooh! That really hurt. I'm totally devastated but I'll recover. I find it very intriguing that
>you have decided to attract all this negative attention and for what? .....your self-anointed
>monarchy of a usenet news group and social rejection at Whistler (all the rest of the
>nonsensical verbiage is just that, nonsense). I literally work with the dying and their families
>every day and, NOT ONE, has ever acted with your hatred and immature uncontrolled vitriol.
Spock hangs with Bert, isn't that considered equivalent?
>After all this time, some one with an IQ in the low thirties would have figured out the whole
>process but you coninue merrily along inviting abuse and ultimately becoming an
>insufferable bore and boor. Have a great evening and don't let the bed bugs bite.
foot2foot
"Phlubarb" <Wrigleyfield-no-spam@.invalid> wrote in message
> Scott Abraham wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Ooooooh! That really hurt. I'm totally devastated but I'll recover. I
> find it very intriguing that
> you have decided to attract all this negative attention and for what?
> .....your self-anointed
> monarchy of a usenet news group and social rejection at Whistler (all the
> rest of the
> nonsensical verbiage is just that, nonsense). I literally work with the
> dying and their families
> every day and, NOT ONE, has ever acted with your hatred and immature
> uncontrolled vitriol.
> figured out the whole
> process but you coninue merrily along inviting abuse and ultimately
> becoming an
> insufferable bore and boor. Have a great evening and don't let the bed
> bugs bite.
>
Oh give me a break you psychopathic fool. After all the obscene
demented tripe you post? Explain why you keep interjecting
yourself into this situation if your so mentally stable?
Scott Abraham
"Phlubarb" <Wrigleyfield-no-spam@.invalid> wrote in message
> Scott Abraham wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Ooooooh! That really hurt. I'm totally devastated but I'll recover. I
> find it very intriguing that
> you have decided to attract all this negative attention and for what?
> .....your self-anointed
> monarchy of a usenet news group and social rejection at Whistler (all the
> rest of the
> nonsensical verbiage is just that, nonsense). I literally work with the
> dying and their families
> every day and, NOT ONE, has ever acted with your hatred and immature
> uncontrolled vitriol.
> After all this time, some one with an IQ in the low thirties would have
> figured out the whole
> process but you coninue merrily along inviting abuse and ultimately
> becoming an
> insufferable bore and boor. Have a great evening and don't let the bed
> bugs bite.
>
>
You truly are a sick freak.
Pure projection. The only people who can stand you are the dead. What a
pathetic twerp you are. Truly a gutless freak.
No surprise you're a Cubs fan. Coward. Warped. Twisted, despicable, and a
pathological loser.
Scott Abraham
complaint about assholes like this.
"foot2foot" <foot...@notatjuno.com> wrote in message
news:116qp12...@corp.supernews.com...
Scott Abraham
Yes. And we both know it.
Of course, easy enough to prove me wrong.
Verifiable name and address. I promise I will visit you.
Scott Abraham
"Bob Lee" <rl...@swcp.com> wrote in message
news:rlee-2D6B8D.1...@individual.net...
> foot2foot wrote:
>
>> ... Explain why you keep interjecting
>> yourself into this situation if your so mentally stable?
>
MR. PKB? From Bob Lee, who is so mentally unstable he committed felonies
over a stupid newsgroup?
Scott Abraham
"Phlubarb" <Wrigleyfield-no-spam@.invalid> wrote in message
> foot2foot wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I see you're talking to yourself again, Scott.
>
> You're such a transparent fool.
>
Yeah, right.
Since I know damn well I'm not, I guess I'm laughing at a transparent fool.
Scott Abraham
"ClarenceDarrow" <shyster...@bert.com.invalid> wrote in message
> Scott Abraham wrote:
>
>>
>> MR. PKB? From Bob Lee, who is so mentally unstable he committed felonies
>> over a stupid newsgroup?
>
> adult life and
> received job promotions not to mention putting his life on the line for
> people. Why?
Doesn't change the fact that he was so mentally unstable he committed
felonies over a stupid newsgroup. Why did he do that, freak?
> Dumbfuck. What do you do besides sell junk on the Crap Shack? Do you
> even have a
> legitimate job? How many minimum wage jobs have you had in the last 10
> years. Coming
> from a substance abusing fuck face like you.........
>
Thanks. I can think of no better indictment of Bob Lee than having a sick
freak like you come to his defense.
Scott Abraham
"ClarenceDarrow" <shyster...@bert.com.invalid> wrote in message
> Scott Abraham wrote:
>
>
>> Doesn't change the fact that he was so mentally unstable he committed
>> felonies over a stupid newsgroup. Why did he do that, freak?
>>
> jobs or separate
> fiction from reality (like you)
You really believe the insanity you write, don't you?
Sad.
Almost as sad as you ducking the meet YOU set up at Copper, freak. No
surprise: none of you have ever had the balls to meet me in person, and none
of you ever will.
Got a name?
>
>
>
>
>> Thanks. I can think
> Yeah? When? We've seen no proof of that, you deranged idiot.
You really need to see a shrink.
>
>
>> of no better indictment of Bob Lee than having a sick
>> freak like you come to his defense.
>
> Thanks, I can think of no better confirmation of my position than having a
> brain damaged
> substance abusing criminal sot like you disagreeing with me.
You are insane. Get help.
scat...@hotmail.com
Scott Abraham wrote:
> You really believe the insanity you write, don't you?
> Sad.
> Almost as sad as you ducking the meet YOU set up at Copper, freak.
No
> surprise: none of you have ever had the balls to meet me in person,
and none
> of you ever will.
> Got a name?
Hey, that was me melon head and you still never showed up. Chickenshit!
Scott Abraham
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114530361.3...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
You? I showed. Where were you? So hard to keep the assholes straight.
Why don't you use a real name to avoid confusion? Chickenshit!
We both know who didn't show, acorn balls.
You.
scat...@hotmail.com
Yep, you always were a chickenshit and you just can't stop lying about
it. Everybody here knows who showed up and who didn't.
Scott Abraham
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114531836.9...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Everybody here knows I showed and you didn't. Because everybody here is
like you: gutless cowards who have never showed.
For damn sure, you and I know.
Let me give you another chance.
Verifiable name and address, and wherever you live, I will show up there and
give you another opportunity.
Bluff called.
scat...@hotmail.com
YAAAWWNNN!!
Scott Abraham
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114533207.7...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The typical response of a coward exposed as the nutless bitch he is.
Bluff called.
scat...@hotmail.com
Ok, Copper, Friday and since there is no 'big clock' (you retard) in
the Burning Stones Plaza at noon.
There bluff called retard. I know you won't be there.
Scott Abraham
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114537066.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
A. I won't be anywhere near Copper and you know it. However, if you want
to set a time and place in Seattle, do it. I'll show, the only difference
being I'll waste a helluva lot less time than I did the last time I showed
and you ran. Assuming you were there in the first place, of course.
B. You didn't show the last time, you retard, so why should I waste my time
again?
C. Give me a verifiable name and address, and I promise to show up at your
door. Unlike you, I keep my promise. As I kept it when you ran at Copper
the last time.
The typical response of a coward exposed as the nutless bitch he is.
Come get some, freak.
Bluff called.
Dick Gozinya
<scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Liar, I invited you to Banff, and you didn't show.
Scott Abraham
>>>>Nice projection, typical of you. So sick you don't realize you only
>>>>feel
>>>>powerful while hiding in anonymity, taking cheap shots from your
>>>>computer,
>>>>writing what you would never have the balls to say.
>>>>Clue time, freak. I'm the one with the power. You fear me. You are
>>>>terrified of me. That's why you don't have the balls to spew your shit
>>>>in
>>>>person.
>>>>
>>> Are you serious?
>>> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
>>
>>Yes. And we both know it.
>>Of course, easy enough to prove me wrong.
>>Verifiable name and address. I promise I will visit you.
>>
> Liar, I invited you to Banff, and you didn't show.
Liar. All you had to do is give me a verifiable name and address so I could
identify you.
You didn't.
Verifiable name and address, and I promise I will visit you.
Bluff called
scat...@hotmail.com
I guess "Let me give you another chance. " just means you will be
hiding again in that troll hole basement of yours surrounded by filthy
ski cloth that you stole from the donation bin.
Scott Abraham
<scat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114539246.7...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>I said I'd meet you and you chicken out.
No surprise you snip the ridiculous conditions. You didn't show last time.
You chickened out. Why should I bother to travel to Colorado?
>
> I guess "Let me give you another chance. " just means you will be
> hiding again in that troll hole basement of yours surrounded by filthy
> ski cloth that you stole from the donation bin.
Name and address. Verifiable. Bluff called.
Coward. Freak. Pussy.
RSA at its finest.
scat...@hotmail.com
Don't worry Scroat, Berttie will be home soon and you can get off the
computer for the day. In fact, why don't you get off now and take a
walk down to the corner store and buy a new jar of mayo so you and Bert
can play another game of implant the false memory and other things.
And remember, even though you make Bert shave all his hair an wear a
diaper, he's still above the age of consent.
scat...@hotmail.com
scat...@hotmail.com
Don't worry Scroat, Berttie will be home soon and you can get off the