Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
GrahamN wrote:
So I still reject the idea that carving (on a hard piste...the soft snow discussion is a diversion from the main subject of this thread) is the least tiring method to get down a hill.
And skiing chop is simply just harder work than flat pistes, however you do it...that's why resorts spend so much time bashing pistes to give us a nice time.
Precisely my point in post 5 of this now lengthy thread. As my therapist once told me, just because a lot of people are saying it, it doesn't mean that they are correct.
Funnily enough, the last four days I have been skiing with my wife who uses a more typical blend of rotation and edging. I didn't have to wait for her much. The reason should be obvious - I was sking faster but MUCH LONGER DISTANCES as I was travelling further across the piste (or making many crossings of a third of the piste) because I was using turn geometry/gravity to shed speed not skidding! It's the whole slow line fast vs fast line slow thing that means you can get to the lift at similar times.
Yes, fine, agreed. As I've said several times, the secondary purpose (and a consequence of the primary purpose) of carving is to have fun, and get more mileage for a given vertical drop...which is what you report, and I have no quarrel with "patk and ride" it being the most efficient means .of travelling in the direction the skis are pointing (which is different from getting down the hill). Thinking about this walking back to the hotel this evening (hopefully the snow will be stable enough for us to actually ski tomorrow), I think the main mechanism of losing that potential energy on a carve is air resistance....I suspect you will lose way more through that than through the residual snow friction when truly carving. But your legs will be working much more than hers, as our muscles are far from a 100% "perfect machine".
On that point, think about the old exercise of sitting against the wall. You are doing exactly ZERO work (in the physics, mechanical sense), but your biochemistry is doing loads to maintain that position against the wall and not collapsing in a screaming heap. You need to do the same to manage the turn forces for the higher G turns and greater distance you travel. So I still reject the idea that carving (on a hard piste...the soft snow discussion is a diversion from the main subject of this thread) is the least tiring method to get down a hill.
And skiing chop is simply just harder work than flat pistes, however you do it...that's why resorts spend so much time bashing pistes to give us a nice time.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Hurtle wrote:
@Je suis un Skieur, PS, forgive me for asking, but is your name correct? I thought - and I would welcome correction if I'm wrong, my French is quite rusty - that one would say, "je suis skieur".
Ooh, good question but there's a bit more to it.
It's meant to be a reference to a very famous T shirt that was produced by, I think, Dynastar, in, I think, the 1990s. It was green with the words in big bold white letters. Trouble is it's so long ago that I can't find a picture of one anymore and neither can I remember for sure if it had "un" in it or not. I always thought it did but grammatically, it shouldn't - but maybe that's why it was so "cool" at the time, because it wasn't grammatically correct. @Mollerski may be right that it was a parody of "Je suis un rockstar".
I never owned one; I tried to buy one but they were produced in a limited run and almost mythical.
@Je suis un Skieur, thank you! I don't remember such a t-shirt, though I was brand loyal to Dynastar for ages - had three consecutive pairs of skis from them.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Je suis un Skieur wrote:
Is it possible that you're a little over-sensitive on the subject? I haven't said carving turns on piste is the "holy grail and solution to all one's problems",
Possibly, and you weren't one of those making it out to be so, but it's the strong undercurrent of this thread, as in so many over the years, and why I pitched in. From countless posts, it's clearly a perception of those trying to progress that it's a holy grail, and it should be the job of instructors and other experiemced skiers to correct that.
Another point of basic physics (actually maths), since there's been some rubbish posted about the radius of carved turns..if you are making turns of longer radius than the ski sidecut you are skidding the ski (and something Phil got wrong when explaining it to us on one course I was on - sometimes his grasp of physics and maths is a little short of what would be advisable). The sidecut defines the radius of the circle the ski would describe if it were possible to rail while perfectly flat on the snow. If you make a longer radius turn, the ski tail is not following cleanly in the groove made by the tip, but smearing it a bit (and the tip will be doing its own smearing too). This is why it's generally more stable to carve a slalom ski than ski straight down the hill. If you put it on edge the turn radius comes down (by some function of cos(tip angle) which I once worked out but can't now remember), until if you had an infinitely flexible ski it would be approximately 1/6 the length of the ski at something a bit less than 90° when rhe ski's tip and tail touch (this is obviously completely impossible in real life)
Quote:
In comparison, the opportunity to use a "deep snow carve" as you call it comes up once in a blue moon. Useful if you've got the budget for heli-skiing.
Probably more often than you think...even if you only restrict that to "bottomless powder" I've had that several times...Klosters was the first time (and scared me shitless), Chamonix, La Grave, Serre Chevalier spring to mind immediately...but pressure carves are relevant when you have more than 10 cm or so
Quote:
Interesting also that you mention Phil Smith. He personally taught me to carve in my eighth week on snow. It was a revelation that skis turned themselves if you just rolled....It poses the question though, that if the need for carving skills is 20 years of BS, why would someone as revered as Phil Smith choose to teach the skill to someone like me who was little more than an upper intermediate punter at the time?
He didn't teach me carving (that came elsewhere, although I've been on a few of his race courses at various levels too) but did probably more than anyone else to refine my off piste technique. But I never said that the need for carving skills is 20 years of BS, just the over-emphasis on it shown on threads like this.
Quote:
It clearly is an important tool in the box if you want to ski at a better level and that's why myself and several others expressed disappointment that the OP is making a conscious choice to discount the technique completely.
Agreed 100%, and I've not said anything to contradict that. My objection is to its being proselytised above everything else...which it has been in this thread. As I've said above, it's a tool to be used when appropriate, but skidding is an equally valid tool in its appropriate place (which is frequently getting down a piste with the least effort).
After all it is free
After all it is free
@GrahamN, all I know is Phil Smith had his kids doing carving demos on youtube when they were about six. The same kids are now ripping up the World Youth skiing scene, so carving must be a pretty useful thing to learn.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
.. Another point of basic physics (actually maths)...
I think you may mean "mechanics".
GrahamN wrote:
.. My objection is to [carving] its being proselytised above everything else...which it has been in this thread. As I've said above, it's a tool to be used when appropriate, but skidding is an equally valid tool in its appropriate place (which is frequently getting down a piste with the least effort).
Noted.
You need to be a bit careful about the definition of the word, of course.
To me, experts have a toolbox full of techniques, all of which they can use as needed. Most experts will carve most of the time, and certainly not only on easy slopes. Some stylistic forms of carving (eg snowboarding's Extreme Carving) are limited to that, but that's far from the only way to carve a turn. I was carving nice soft mogul fields today in Whistler.
This thread's OP didn't want to bother with carving: they're happy with a toolbox without that. I don't think anyone's trying to tell them that's wrong, or "not valid" (whatever that means). Some have pointed out that it's less fun than having a full toolbox.
I spend most of my days in bottomless powder, so I see a lot of skiers using there carving skills in those conditions. But terrain doesn't really matter: folk with a full toolbox simply ski better than those with a more limited set of techniques. I don't think that's controversial, it's obvious.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Je suis un Skieur wrote:
@GrahamN, all I know is Phil Smith had his kids doing carving demos on youtube when they were about six. The same kids are now ripping up the World Youth skiing scene, so carving must be a pretty useful thing to learn.
Are they tearing it up on BBRs?
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Quote:
I think the main mechanism of losing that potential energy on a carve is air resistance...
That is a very good point that I never considered. A windy ridge can bring me to a standstill in my old baggy snowboarders pants. The pedant in me can't resist pointing out that it is perhaps more accurate to say that you are shedding kinetic energy.
I've not read the whole thread but I suspect that the OP is carving some of the turns, or parts of the turn, as you would have to actively work to avoid it if your parabolic skis had any kind of a waist on them.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
ronniescott wrote:
I've not read the whole thread but I suspect that the OP is carving some of the turns, or parts of the turn, as you would have to actively work to avoid it if your parabolic skis had any kind of a waist on them.
How dare you accuse a committed non-carver of such a thing!! I have video evidence and teasing comments from my teenager that will rebut this scandalous allegation!
My next thread will be entitled "Can't fondue, won't fondue" - which in similar fashion should evolve into a detailed argument on the merits of fondue vs raclette - and advanced fondue-making techniques. And whether fondue a more efficient way than raclette to ingest cheese.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
GrahamN wrote:
@zikomo, since you appear to not have any desire to understand what I am saying (I've said nothing that you attribute to me), there seems little point in continuing with you.
(And you don't change trunk shape on a hard piste by applying more pressure, you change your edge angle. More pressure works in the soft snow carve)
Higher edge angles or more pressure? Often a combination of both. An expert such as yourself should understand how both affect turn shape, and how to blend them effectively.
On your other point I do indeed read what you say. I find having to do this tedious but your assertion that you did not say anything that I attribute to you is simply untrue. And I find that sort of assertion particularly childish and unpleasant when I responded directly to what you actually said:
GrahamN wrote:
, So you then charge off, on anything more than a moderate red at speeds incompatible with most resort skiers, then skid to a halt and wait for the rest of your group to catch up.
zikomo wrote:
Those that I ski with (mostly my family) are all able to ski at broadly the same speed as me. So no, I have not experienced racing off only to have to skid to a halt to wait for others.
GrahamN wrote:
If you need to stop.in a hurry, do you carve out a turn or skid to a halt.? Oviously the latter, and in extremis, it's a hockey stop. Unless of course you can't skid....it's highly amusing watching high end dry-slope racers trying to stop at the end of the course, as they put such a burr on the ski edge that it's physically impossible for it to go sideways (and it's pretty heart stopping if you get into that position yourself)
zikomo wrote:
If I need to stop in a hurry I can indeed choose to do so with a hockey stop. Again I don't see your problem. Somehow suggesting that all those who carve do not have any steering or skidding skills (I have actually said repeatedly that these are equally important to master) is ridiculous.
GrahamN wrote:
I'm not "trying to find reasons to dispute that carving, particularly on less challenging slopes, is not [an] efficient" way to ski fast, just that for the vast majority of resort skiing it's frequently not the least tiring way. But you added an important qualifier there..."on less challenging slopes". Of course on greens and the easiest blues there is little speed control required, so allowing the skis to go as fast as they can is not often a problem. Once you get on to a stiff blue or red, it's not the right tool to choose for an easy ride. Remember the Women's downhill at Val d'Isere is a red, and when they ran the men's down the black Face there was virtual rebellion amongst the competitors because it was too fast.
zikomo wrote:
The steepness of slope that you can carve efficiently is determined by your skill level, and only that. It does not relate to the efficiency, but to the skill level. Also the turn shape you choose is a bigger determinant of effort than steepness of slope.
zikomo wrote:
You seem to also ignore that turn shape then carving can be adjusted at will to adjust line and relative speed. Particularly important to ensure that you overtake any other slope users safely. If you cannot change the shape of your turn using only more or less pressure then you should not be carving at all frankly. As is the case if you cannot alternate between carving and steering/skidding at will at any point of the turn. Interesting that you have left both aspects out in your rant, whilst claiming to be a capable carver.
I think we actually do agree on many points, especially that steering skills are vital and a competent skier should have all the tools available to them. If you find carving more tiring then I will take your word for it. I don't when recreational skiing in general. It is indeed more tiring when skiing at high performance levels, regardless of whether your turns are carved or more steering is used. I have no idea how you ski, but it is clearly different to how I ski if you find carving more tiring at recreational levels of performance.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
zikomo wrote:
I have no idea how you ski, but it is clearly different to how I ski if you find carving more tiring at recreational levels of performance.
Very much this.
And much better phrased than I seem to be able to manage.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
So today's skiing (little visibility, mostly 1+m deep heavy wet powder when off piste) showed up a few things. At one point the guide, when pointing out that speed was really not the recipe for the day, reminded us that a snowplough is not only a beginner's technique, and a vital technique in speed control. Most of the time we couldn't see reliably more than a couple of ski lengths ahead of us, so your control had to be immediate. Blending in snowploughs and subtle sideslips was the order of the day.
I was back-marking our group all day so was restricting speed throughout (except for when I fell back a bit to allow a pitch to have a bit more fun on). I'd say over 90% of my turns today were skidded to allow that. But what was by far the biomechanically most efficient speed control technique when we got back on piste? A gliding snowplough! (blending in enough edge to control the braking effect). Way less tiring on the legs than anything else! Not all the time, but an extremely useful and important tool in the flatter pistes when the burn in the legs got a bit too much.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
I saw all but one of the men's downhill world cup contestants using the snowplow on a particular bend in the course. I can't remember where but it was steep and narrow. @GrahamN, where are you skiing? Wet powder?
I saw all but one of the men's downhill world cup contestants using the snowplow on a particular bend in the course. I can't remember where but it was steep and narrow.
Yeah and the guy who won it was the one that carved the turn!
So today's skiing (little visibility, mostly 1+m deep heavy wet powder when off piste) showed up a few things. At one point the guide, when pointing out that speed was really not the recipe for the day, reminded us that a snowplough is not only a beginner's technique, and a vital technique in speed control. Most of the time we couldn't see reliably more than a couple of ski lengths ahead of us, so your control had to be immediate. Blending in snowploughs and subtle sideslips was the order of the day...
Amazing then how competent snowboarders manage to achieve the same thing - speed control - without that. I regularly ride very deep snow with skiers. I don't see people snowploughing; each to their own I guess. Don't try it on AK spines either
Didn't watch this years for some reason, presumably were they all copying kilde from last year.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Nothing at all wrong with a ploughie in heavy traffic narrows.
After all it is free
After all it is free
Pretty sure we already covered how useful the snowplough can be a few pages ago, or maybe in another recent thread.
@Mollerski, TBH narrow crowded paths are one place I try never to snowplough. I remember 20+ years ago following instructors and noticing how they were continually turning on such paths and in more recent years got good enough to do so. Short, part-skidded, linked turns all the way down allow me to accurately overtake snowploughers without inconveniencing them, taking much less effort and being in much better control all the time.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
How about the last few meters joining the back of the lift line. Prove me wrong.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@ronniescott, Sure, I said I _try_ not to, but there are for sure circumstances where it the most, possibly the only, effective technique. I've previously mentioned several other situations where I very often employ a full or partial snowplough turn as well.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@Chaletbeauroc, I'm referring to sections too narrow to overtake. Anyone familiar with the back route out of Fredarola Rigugio?
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
ronniescott wrote:
How about the last few meters joining the back of the lift line. Prove me wrong.
..or the last meter before cleaning out the lift gate?
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
This video popped into my YouTube recommendations, seems Mr Ligety can carve.
Interesting video, especially the footage itself, great slo-mo's!
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Mollerski wrote:
@Chaletbeauroc, I'm referring to sections too narrow to overtake.
Thinks... naah, no such thing
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
ronniescott wrote:
@GrahamN, where are you skiing? Wet powder?
Maybe wet powder was a slight overstatement, but certainly deep soft snow with a high moisture content. Basically soft crud (that if you tried standing on without a ski would swallow you up to your hip), interspersed with random patches of 10cm breakable crust that even the guides couldn't spot (or understand why it was there) until they'd led us into it.
Gressoney,. Over Sat and Sun they had the biggest snowstorm in the last 15 years, but it only got down to freezing briefly on Sunday morning. We were cut off by avalanches until 1pm yesterday, and had an avalanche Sun pm that came into the car park opposite the hotel. Today it was 4° at Stafal at 10 am.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
@Thomasski, really good video that.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Ravensburger wrote:
There there, @Hurtle & @Mollerski.
But then, skiing like a racer does - staying low, forward, continuously altering long leg-short leg, building the edge angle and resisting the forces that build after the fall line just like doing one-legged squats in not just one G but perhaps several, depending on the speed - a couple of minutes of that and most of us are spent.
And then you rest on the chairlift. It's perfect interval-training for strength, with some cardio-benefits.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
GinaMae wrote:
And then you rest on the chairlift. It's perfect interval-training for strength, with some cardio-benefits.
Why would you need to rest? Perfect technique carving (not mine) requires so little effort apparently.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. Instead of carving, if you "ski like a ski-racer", you get tired. So what? You have an entire chairlift-ride to rest. I agree with alot of what you have been saying. I see plenty of people flying down the hill, making perfect carved-turns. They go faster than I want to, they get down faster than I want to, and in my view, they are riding their skis, not skiing.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
GinaMae wrote:
They go faster than I want to, they get down faster than I want to, and in my view, they are riding their skis, not skiing.
Carving does seem to be a popular aspiration these days. My friends were keen to demonstrate their carving skills on Thursday but couldn’t find anywhere flat, wide or quiet enough at Argentiere to safely carve more than 5 or 6 turns. Everywhere else however seemed just fine for turns straight down the fall line controlled by short swings scrubbing off the speed and maintaining close control
Several years ago one of the group smashed up his shoulder whilst carving at high speed on a green run colliding with a snowboarder.
The video above shows carving as a very high speed form of skiing. It seems to me that fully carved turns are suited to wide empty slopes where high speeds are possible but are not suitable for fully controlled slower turns, particularly in tight, steep or busy places.
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Tue 2-04-24 13:40; edited 4 times in total
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
I can carve on slopes where I can cruise, but need to skid when it gets steeper to scrub speed.
When I do carve it feels safer and more stable than any other form of skiing, and less tiring. I do realise that the forces involved are pretty small, but the position feels very strong and enabled me to relax and ski quicker. I've really enjoyed this recently acquired skill
After all it is free
After all it is free
If most skiers are skidding their turns most of the time and modern shaped skis are less easy to skid than alternative designs, I would have thought there is a market to promote skis that are actually good at skidding?
I’m thinking skis that excel in short turns, within their own length where necessary. Wouldn’t that better fit with the type of turns most skiers are actually doing ?
Or is that space already filled by ‘all mountain’ skis ?
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
@Peter S, I think that they must do them already, since all those instructors are obviously using them whilst so effortlessly and slowly skidding and slipping their slow, controlled way across all those terrifying, oft-icy red and black things, and I and other utterly incompetent idiots are desperately trying to emulate them with mutterings of "forget the *****y edges", "stop ****ing trying to carve it", and so on and so forth.
Doubtless just me, of course
If only all of my earlier lessons hadn't - by choice of instructors more than slow wussy old me - involved how to edge and carve, I think that I'd be a much more confident, nay competent, skier now.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I was thinking about this thread when I was skiing in the slush on Monday – how do skiers not go AoT on those last few hundred metres through the wettest slop at the bottom, if they don't use their edges? I'm going edge to edge with quite short quick turns, otherwise my torso will rapidly overtake my feet, and we all know how that ends.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
