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.