Author Topic: Canadian Style!  (Read 3114 times)

meput

  • 1 Year Member
  • 200 Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #60 on: October 27, 2012, 06:02:03 pm »
OK, time to get this thread back on topic: Canadian Style, eh.

Liam, you started this with video examples that showed extension release and flex release. The two are not the same. So (Liam and anyone else with the answers), which technique is "Canadian"? What type of release does CSIA promote and teach. Wider or narrower stance? Outside (big toe edge) ski weighting or weighting both skis? Leg steering/body twisting or tipping? Inclination vs counterbalance? etc.

I have never skied in Canada, nor have I taken lessons from, or skied with a CSIA instructor. So educate me. What is Canadian style?

Food for thought: http://www.snowpro.com/downloads/manual/ENU/#/Canadian%20Ski%20Teaching%202012/194/pages

« Last Edit: October 27, 2012, 08:05:49 pm by meput »

HighAngles

  • 1 Year Member
  • 200 Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 208
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #61 on: October 28, 2012, 04:25:04 pm »
OK, time to get this thread back on topic: Canadian Style, eh.

Liam, you started this with video examples that showed extension release and flex release. The two are not the same. So (Liam and anyone else with the answers), which technique is "Canadian"? What type of release does CSIA promote and teach. Wider or narrower stance? Outside (big toe edge) ski weighting or weighting both skis? Leg steering/body twisting or tipping? Inclination vs counterbalance? etc.

I have never skied in Canada, nor have I taken lessons from, or skied with a CSIA instructor. So educate me. What is Canadian style?

Food for thought: http://www.snowpro.com/downloads/manual/ENU/#/Canadian%20Ski%20Teaching%202012/194/pages

I think this is a fairly "telling" video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgQJ-W3JP38

<a href="http://&lt;iframe width=&quot;420&quot; height=&quot;315&quot; src=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/embed/dgQJ-W3JP38&quot; frameborder=&quot;0&quot; allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://&lt;iframe width=&quot;420&quot; height=&quot;315&quot; src=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/embed/dgQJ-W3JP38&quot; frameborder=&quot;0&quot; allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;</a>
« Last Edit: October 28, 2012, 04:38:01 pm by HighAngles »

Liam

  • Ski Shop/Ski Patrol
  • 200 Posts
  • **
  • Posts: 399
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #62 on: October 28, 2012, 06:49:07 pm »
Is it telling, high Angles?

There is all kind of skiing in that video!  The initial turns are a little 'meh' (the skiing in the groomed corridor with cones-and I get the impression some of those featured are people trying to pass their level 4)-but as it goes on, it demonstrates some great, dynamic, skiing (IMHO) and who ever the demo guy in red is (featured several times and in the segment 'expert bumps' right after 'round turns and Bumps' and a few times before that) is a pretty swell skier (and may be Beaulieu again-in fact, I'm pretty sure that it is).

Meput-All these guys ski narrow off piste, and go a little wider on (that is for all videos posted in this thread-Michel stays the widest of all of them, and Foster the narrowest on anything but groomers)-so I think that slightly variable stance with a nod towards the narrow side of things seems pretty consistent across Canadian instructors pictured here.

I'd wager Josh Foster is the more likely candidate for what you get from a CSIA instructor...(which, I think is what you're getting at-difference is, I like his skiing and his instruction--but then again, MIchel and Beaulieu are incredible skiers-who wouldn't want to emulate them?). 

Honestly, Tobin (Section 8) is the real connective tissue between these canadian level 4's-he has elements of Foster and Beaulieu (nd it's why I have always liked his instructional site and short videos).  poke through his stuff

LivingProof

  • Global Moderator
  • 400 Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 892
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #63 on: October 29, 2012, 08:34:19 am »
OK, time to get this thread back on topic: Canadian Style, eh.

Liam, you started this with video examples that showed extension release and flex release. The two are not the same. So (Liam and anyone else with the answers), which technique is "Canadian"? What type of release does CSIA promote and teach. Wider or narrower stance? Outside (big toe edge) ski weighting or weighting both skis? Leg steering/body twisting or tipping? Inclination vs counterbalance? etc.

I have never skied in Canada, nor have I taken lessons from, or skied with a CSIA instructor. So educate me. What is Canadian style?


Meput,

The below video is from last year's Interski of the CSIA team.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wP2N_UpOja0

I'm no pro with respect to the movements they are making, but, my guess would be:
Both feet weighted
Feet mildly separated
Stand square to the skis
Release is a very miniman down unweighting or sucking the thighs up while rolling edges
Inclination of the body

Looks similar to PSIA skiing. Just musing, but, how does a group of people come to consensus about the style of skiing to be demonstrated? I doubt there is one or two technique guru's that are given technique authority in CSIA or PSIA. Perhaps this power is granted to one person for purposes of how the demo team will ski, but, hard to believe that becomes dogma throughout CSIA. How would all members be retrained for major changes?

Harald has great freedom to change very quickly, it's good to be king even in a tiny kingdom.

Liam

  • Ski Shop/Ski Patrol
  • 200 Posts
  • **
  • Posts: 399
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #64 on: November 05, 2012, 01:27:26 pm »
Just watched this Josh Foster Video...on using skidded, steered and carved turns.  Again, not a very technical tip (in fact he says exactly that at the start), but it showcases the very open ended tactical approach prized by the upper level CSIA instructor types. Like I've said before, I really dig his easy, instructor style mode of skiing.  Very Calm and smooth.

Though short, this may be may favorite video by him-his turn choice matches terrain...imagine, that? What does he mean by skidded turn?  And how is his steered turn different from his slo-mo carved turn?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwM380qamXM


midwif

  • Global Moderator
  • 1000 Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 1389
  • Location: New York City
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #65 on: November 05, 2012, 04:55:20 pm »
I will start off by saying that I will probably never be able to ski the gnar like bush.....
Or handle terrain that a lot of you can.

However, what I see is mainly up unweighting.
He is very efficient at it, but it is what I aspire to eliminate from my skiing.

No sound on my computer this evening, so just looking at his turns, not at what he said.

L.
"Play it Sam"

Liam

  • Ski Shop/Ski Patrol
  • 200 Posts
  • **
  • Posts: 399
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #66 on: November 06, 2012, 09:06:07 am »
midwif,

Sure, he extends at the end of many of his turns.   But why does he do it, and why shouldn't he?  The man has about 40 videos of himself doing instructional skiing on everything from moguls, to powder, to steeps, to groomers-why is that something you cannot abide?

Or, more importantly, why do you 'aspire' to make a particular movement, or more directly, to eliminate an extension? 

I seem to recall a thread here about a clinic y'all did with John Clendenin--if I remember, you pretty much found the experience limiting (at best) because JC taught the use of a subtle extension in some of his turns (do I have hat right??). 

 My sense, which goes along with the idea behind these threads is, that for mostly aesthetic reasons, you (and perhaps all of us) prefer the look of one approach to skiing and it's offshoot style.  Which, in the the end, I think is plenty of a good enough reason to choose one style over another.  I find it funny that all the would-be anatomical engineers insist that their choices are based on inarguable  proofs, rather than just doing a little soul searching and fessing up, they pursue a specific type of skiing because it just looks like how they want to ski.

That someone might watch JC or Josh Foster ski, and say, that looks great-how do I emulate their style shouldn't surprise anyone.  Nor is it a choice based on ignorance, but rather, it is a choice based on aesthetic preference.  Anymore than someone watching Glen Plake, or HH, Or Section 8 Tobin, of JF Beaulieu, or Bushwacker, or the Meathead Guys, or whomever, and find their style of skiing inspirational, if not also aspirational.

To suppose that their choice is based on either a lack of physiological/ scientific knowledge or a superior understanding of how best to slide down a frozen surface on planks is equally misguided.  In the end, our choices are subjective and aesthetic, and there are many masters in this diverse discipline.  Which is, of course, what makes skiing such a great open-ended recreational pursuit.




jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #67 on: November 06, 2012, 09:13:16 am »
Just watched this Josh Foster Video...on using skidded, steered and carved turns. 
I will say that I could not see any difference in what his feet were doing between the three types of turns he was showing.
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

midwif

  • Global Moderator
  • 1000 Posts
  • *
  • Posts: 1389
  • Location: New York City
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #68 on: November 06, 2012, 10:41:47 am »
midwif,

Sure, he extends at the end of many of his turns.   But why does he do it, and why shouldn't he?  The man has about 40 videos of himself doing instructional skiing on everything from moguls, to powder, to steeps, to groomers-why is that something you cannot abide?

Or, more importantly, why do you 'aspire' to make a particular movement, or more directly, to eliminate an extension? 

I seem to recall a thread here about a clinic y'all did with John Clendenin--if I remember, you pretty much found the experience limiting (at best) because JC taught the use of a subtle extension in some of his turns (do I have hat right??). 

 My sense, which goes along with the idea behind these threads is, that for mostly aesthetic reasons, you (and perhaps all of us) prefer the look of one approach to skiing and it's offshoot style.  Which, in the the end, I think is plenty of a good enough reason to choose one style over another.  I find it funny that all the would-be anatomical engineers insist that their choices are based on inarguable  proofs, rather than just doing a little soul searching and fessing up, they pursue a specific type of skiing because it just looks like how they want to ski.

Liam
Just to clarify, I learned to ski for the first time at age 36. I spent the first 10 years of my ski life taking lessons on occasion or on trips to vermont, at the mountain I was skiing, ie PSIA type lessons.


after really feeling like I was dead ended and wanted to satisfy my appetite to ski more advanced terrain, I found PMTS.
And have made the most progress in my skiing with that system.

I was taught the wedge, unweighting etc. And found that I ski better when I don't have those in my"style".
Just doing what works for me.
ANd I came to really appreciate how PMTS coaches looked skiing compared to everyone else around on the trails.

As far sf JC; I had real difficulty mixing his skiing style in with the PMTS> I found it too hard to separate out what I had learned from pmts. Not mentally flexible enough, I think.
L
Interesting subject
"Play it Sam"

ToddW

  • 4-6 Year Member
  • 200 Posts
  • ****
  • Posts: 320
  • Location: Westchester, NY
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #69 on: November 06, 2012, 12:32:28 pm »
I find it funny that all the would-be anatomical engineers insist that their choices are based on inarguable  proofs, rather than just doing a little soul searching and fessing up, they pursue a specific type of skiing because it just looks like how they want to ski.

Liam,

I'm glad to know you can read my innermost thoughts so precisely.  Please apply your gift to scan the entirety of the People and give me the outcome of all congressional elections before the markets close today.

I didn't choose a school of instruction based on style -- I'm a big guy so my skiing will never appear stylish.  I chose it because it was the only one that didn't set off my finely honed physical BS meter (I have a PhD in physics and an undergrad engineering degree.)  I wasted much money on other instruction at several ski schools before coming to this conclusion. 

jbotti

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 400 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 961
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #70 on: November 06, 2012, 02:23:26 pm »
midwif,

Or, more importantly, why do you 'aspire' to make a particular movement, or more directly, to eliminate an extension? 

Why? Because it is inefficient and by definition slower and makes it harder to get the new edges engaged. For most of us with non WC athletic skills this makes a huge difference.

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Canadian Style!
« Reply #71 on: November 07, 2012, 12:05:20 pm »
midwif,

Sure, he extends at the end of many of his turns.   But why does he do it, and why shouldn't he?  The man has about 40 videos of himself doing instructional skiing on everything from moguls, to powder, to steeps, to groomers- (1) why is that something you cannot abide?

Or, more importantly, why do you 'aspire' to make a particular movement, or more directly, (2) to eliminate an extension

I seem to recall a thread here about a clinic y'all did with John Clendenin--if I remember, you pretty much found the experience limiting (at best) (3) because JC taught the use of a subtle extension in some of his turns (do I have hat right??). 
Maybe speaking a little bit for Lynn, but I disagree.
1. No one said she can't abide it -- she said she chooses to do it differently. I'm pretty sure that he can make another 40 videos and Midwif won't care how many of HIS turns HE makes with extension.
2. Kool-Aid. Several of us spent years not getting any better with a particular paradigm (or non). Lito correctly called us Terminal Intermediates.  We found something that DID make a difference in our skiing, and have made a conscious choice to TRUST those people for our skiing progression rather than free-lancing it. We aren't eliminating extension, we just choose not to include it. We believe our coaches who say that there are subtle side effects of extension that should be avoided. I find it wonderfully relieving to have a trustworthy coach/coaching progression.
3. Our Clendenin experience was unfulfilling, but while your "because" supports your thesis it is incorrect (as Midwif said).  I accept that others (more than merely Gary), have enjoyed his camps; I choose otherwise.  And it's OK for Gary and I (or for you and Midwif) to make those differing choices.

FWIW, I don't believe that PMTS is the only way to enjoy skiing -- it's just the way that dramatically increased my enjoyment of skiing and it has earned my trust.

And, for me, I think that is the whole point of these stimulating discussions.  Everyone's skiing is his own choice.  Everyone's path to enjoyment is his/her own as well, and what people are looking for from from their skiing is unique.  I maintain that Bushwacka busting through the trees with his PSIA+ technique is enjoying skiing just as much as Jbotti skiing with PMTS technique.  But I think it's a mistake to confuse the technique for the destination -- and the destination is enjoyment of being outside sliding around in and on the white stuff. Technique is just a path to get there. I've certainly seen people with NO technique (unless no recognizable technique is, actually, a technique) have a wonderfully enjoyable day of skiing, even though they often stop just after lunch because their knees hurt. They've reached their destination on their own path (and, therefore, have no need for "better" technique, because it doesn't gain them any additional enjoyment)?
« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 03:18:22 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."