suggestions for my technique on video

I'm impressed with how much you are able to draw a lot out of a
distant foggy video of her sprinting uphill full out.


"Ken Roberts" wrote:

Camilo wrote
... former US Olympians, national-level coaches . . .
They all really emphasised the looking up hill from a
relaxed torso and neck.

Kikkan Randall in the 2007 World Cup Rybinsk Sprint Final:
http://www.kikkan.com/russiasprnt_video.html

Lots of uphill V1 skate in the segment from time 1:40 - 2:05.
so which is it:
Neck relaxed and looking up the hill the whole time? or
Ducking her head quickly off to her poling-side on each V1 pole-push?
. (and what about the other skiers doing V1 in that segment?)

Whatever various USA coaches may teach and snow in nice courses and
demos, seems like when the fastest USA skiers like Kikkan Randall and
Carl Swenson get to the World Cup level, they put aside the simplistic
teachings and instead do what it takes to really compete.

Ken

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 23:07:16 GMT, "Ken Roberts"
wrote:

Camilo wrote
... former US Olympians, national-level coaches . . .
They all really emphasised the looking up hill from a
relaxed torso and neck.

Kikkan Randall in the 2007 World Cup Rybinsk Sprint Final:
http://www.kikkan.com/russiasprnt_video.html

Lots of uphill V1 skate in the segment from time 1:40 - 2:05.
so which is it:
Neck relaxed and looking up the hill the whole time? or
Ducking her head quickly off to her poling-side on each V1 pole-push?
. (and what about the other skiers doing V1 in that segment?)

Whatever various USA coaches may teach and snow in nice courses and demos,
seems like when the fastest USA skiers like Kikkan Randall and Carl Swenson
get to the World Cup level, they put aside the simplistic teachings and
instead do what it takes to really compete.

It may be simplistic, but you would do well to reduce the amount of
head motion you have - at least as shown in your recent videos. It's
way more than a top level athlete has unless he/she is completely
blown and can't move any other way. Not efficient, even in the
context of sprinting.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Sorry if this gets posted twice.

A great DVD on this topic would be to check out:

http://www.xczone.com/newskitech.htm

There is a section that talks specifically about body rotation as part
of weight transfer. Many folks learn early on an exaggerated weight
transfer involving aligning nose / knee / toes on each skate. There is
a segment on this topic at ~ 54-60 minutes in.

At ~62-65 minutes, there is more of a scientific discussion of how much
rotation the Top 20 XC skiers exhibited in a variety of terrain over a
5 year analysis period. Assume nose/knee/toe rotation is 100 degrees.
Top skiers rotate less than 60 degrees max on steep hills. On
relatively flat terrain, this drops to 5 degrees max. Sprint finishes
are close to 1-2 degrees max (assume it was based on flat terrain
sprints). So there is some rotation but not a huge amount. The DVD also
points to research that shows these rotations are only for 0.3 of a
second and the remainder of the glide is pretty much zero degree
rotation. So whatever rotation there is, it is not for long.

The DVD does not indicate if top 20 skiers exhibit more rotation than
the top skiers. But I think the emphasis is clear, excessive rotation
interferes with forward motion (in general). Top skiers studied exhibit
a relatively small amount of rotation even over difficult terrain.

wrote
Assume nose/knee/toe rotation is 100 degrees. Top
skiers rotate less than 60 degrees max on steep hills.
. . .
Top skiers studied exhibit a relatively small amount of
rotation even over difficult terrain.

60 degrees is not a small amount of torso or head rotation. Definitely
it's not like "looking straight up the hill". While it's not the same as
aligning the head with the aim of the ski, but "numerically" it's closer to
aligning with the ski than aligning "straight up the hill".

(Didn't that DVD also say that the max rotation for the women World Cup
racers was _more_ than the 60 degree (or was it 60%) reported for the
men? -- which might possibly suggest that those of us with even lesser speed
and strength than them could benefit from more torso-shoulder rotation?)

I find it odd that I'm remembering the announcer in that segment of the DVD
as talking with a deep solemn voice like this data implies that something
like Quiet Upper Body is better than Nose-Knees-Toes alignment -- when the
numbers being reported are actually closer to NKT. My interpretation of the
data would be that what elite racers are doing in rotation when doing V1
skate up a steep hill is complicated: more complicated than either the
simplistic QUB or the simplistic NKT theory.

On relatively flat terrain, this [rotation] drops to 5 degrees max.

Yes, V2 skate is different from V1. The pole-push is aimed more straight in
the direction of overall forward motion. And the elite racers keep their
heads aiming mostly straight ahead -- though they may duck their head down
before each pole-push.

Ken

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote
It may be simplistic, but you would do well to
reduce the amount of head motion you have

"simplistic" is just what most coaching advice should be. Sometimes the best
advice is exaggerated simplistic -- exaggerated by the coach in the right
way at the right time for that particular learning person.

So thanks for the simplistic advice. I'm still working on it.

One thing I found while trying to work on it last week, is that something
that sounded simple ("looking straight up the hill") turned out to be tricky
for my muscles to execute -- while something a bit more like what some top
racers are doing (allowing my head to "naturally" duck and turn toward my
poling side in V1) -- turns out to feel simpler and easier. But that's just
my personal inner feelings.

Ken

When you learn to skate well, you'll be embarassed about some of things
you've written. When I mentioned quiet upper body to a student of mine
who takes part competitively in other sports, she commented about how
coaches in the other sports say the same thing.

rm


"Ken Roberts" wrote:

wrote
Assume nose/knee/toe rotation is 100 degrees. Top
skiers rotate less than 60 degrees max on steep hills.
. . .
Top skiers studied exhibit a relatively small amount of
rotation even over difficult terrain.

60 degrees is not a small amount of torso or head rotation.
Definitely it's not like "looking straight up the hill". While it's
not the same as aligning the head with the aim of the ski, but
"numerically" it's closer to aligning with the ski than aligning
"straight up the hill".

(Didn't that DVD also say that the max rotation for the women World
Cup racers was _more_ than the 60 degree (or was it 60%) reported for
the men? -- which might possibly suggest that those of us with even
lesser speed and strength than them could benefit from more
torso-shoulder rotation?)

I find it odd that I'm remembering the announcer in that segment of
the DVD as talking with a deep solemn voice like this data implies
that something like Quiet Upper Body is better than Nose-Knees-Toes
alignment -- when the numbers being reported are actually closer to
NKT. My interpretation of the data would be that what elite racers are
doing in rotation when doing V1 skate up a steep hill is complicated:
more complicated than either the simplistic QUB or the simplistic NKT
theory.

On relatively flat terrain, this [rotation] drops to 5 degrees max.

Yes, V2 skate is different from V1. The pole-push is aimed more
straight in the direction of overall forward motion. And the elite
racers keep their heads aiming mostly straight ahead -- though they
may duck their head down before each pole-push.

Ken

100 degrees, definitely not. The Austrian skate video, Perfect
Skating, says that next skate ski goes at a right angle to the previous
one. Try it. That's a lot, and more than you'll see or need in any
technique. 70-80 degrees seems to be about tops I see or have
experienced. Which means that no matter which of the figures you
choose, 60 degrees is effectively turning in the direction of the ski,
without fully aligning KNT. Normally, there's neither time nor need to
do so. Looking at videos, good skaters who didn't get caught up in the
American KNT craze having been doing it that way since the 1980s. I
don't know where the XC Zone is today, but my understanding from
reading the polemics is that they were "New Skate" proponents, denying
any turn at all. Thus, admitting 60 degrees would be tantamount to
capitulation, whether they realize it or not.

rm


wrote:

Sorry if this gets posted twice.

A great DVD on this topic would be to check out:

http://www.xczone.com/newskitech.htm

There is a section that talks specifically about body rotation as part
of weight transfer. Many folks learn early on an exaggerated weight
transfer involving aligning nose / knee / toes on each skate. There is
a segment on this topic at ~ 54-60 minutes in.

At ~62-65 minutes, there is more of a scientific discussion of how much
rotation the Top 20 XC skiers exhibited in a variety of terrain over a
5 year analysis period. Assume nose/knee/toe rotation is 100 degrees.
Top skiers rotate less than 60 degrees max on steep hills. On
relatively flat terrain, this drops to 5 degrees max. Sprint finishes
are close to 1-2 degrees max (assume it was based on flat terrain
sprints). So there is some rotation but not a huge amount. The DVD also
points to research that shows these rotations are only for 0.3 of a
second and the remainder of the glide is pretty much zero degree
rotation. So whatever rotation there is, it is not for long.

The DVD does not indicate if top 20 skiers exhibit more rotation than
the top skiers. But I think the emphasis is clear, excessive rotation
interferes with forward motion (in general). Top skiers studied exhibit
a relatively small amount of rotation even over difficult terrain.

Just so it is clear, the DVD is talking about V1 / steep hills and 60
degree rotation max _observed_. Flatter terrain results in much smaller
angles (IE 5 degrees over flats). In addition, the rotation only lasts
for 0.3 seconds (extremely short period of time given the complete
skate motion). So it is a terrain specific case + they are clear there
is a length of time that must be considered. Don't think they are
contradicting themselves, just indicating different terrain will
require different techniques.

These degree statistics are from a sports study of Top 20 XC skiers
over 5 years (empirical data from top result winners). Would be nice to
have a reference to the actual studies as well.

On Jan 25, 1:44 pm, wrote:
100 degrees, definitely not. The Austrian skate video, Perfect
Skating, says that next skate ski goes at a right angle to the previous
one. Try it. That's a lot, and more than you'll see or need in any
technique. 70-80 degrees seems to be about tops I see or have
experienced. Which means that no matter which of the figures you
choose, 60 degrees is effectively turning in the direction of the ski,
without fully aligning KNT. Normally, there's neither time nor need to
do so. Looking at videos, good skaters who didn't get caught up in the
American KNT craze having been doing it that way since the 1980s. I
don't know where the XC Zone is today, but my understanding from
reading the polemics is that they were "New Skate" proponents, denying
any turn at all. Thus, admitting 60 degrees would be tantamount to
capitulation, whether they realize it or not.

wrote:
Sorry if this gets posted twice.

A great DVD on this topic would be to check out:

http://www.xczone.com/newskitech.htm

There is a section that talks specifically about body rotation as part
of weight transfer. Many folks learn early on an exaggerated weight
transfer involving aligning nose / knee / toes on each skate. There is
a segment on this topic at ~ 54-60 minutes in.

At ~62-65 minutes, there is more of a scientific discussion of how much
rotation the Top 20 XC skiers exhibited in a variety of terrain over a
5 year analysis period. Assume nose/knee/toe rotation is 100 degrees.
Top skiers rotate less than 60 degrees max on steep hills. On
relatively flat terrain, this drops to 5 degrees max. Sprint finishes
are close to 1-2 degrees max (assume it was based on flat terrain
sprints). So there is some rotation but not a huge amount. The DVD also
points to research that shows these rotations are only for 0.3 of a
second and the remainder of the glide is pretty much zero degree
rotation. So whatever rotation there is, it is not for long.

The DVD does not indicate if top 20 skiers exhibit more rotation than
the top skiers. But I think the emphasis is clear, excessive rotation
interferes with forward motion (in general). Top skiers studied exhibit
a relatively small amount of rotation even over difficult terrain.

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 15:08:33 -0600, wrote:

When you learn to skate well, you'll be embarassed about some of things
you've written. When I mentioned quiet upper body to a student of mine
who takes part competitively in other sports, she commented about how
coaches in the other sports say the same thing.

I was thinking something similar. There are certain fundamentals that
are applicable to a lot of sports that take place on two feet.

A friend of mine is a tennis and rowing coach (and also an
accomplished bike racer) and is learning to ski. He can't quite do it
as well as he would like, but from his sports experience, especially
from tennis I think, he's really good at looking at better skiers and
describing what they're doing that he's not yet doing but wants to do.
Things like weight shift and compression and stuff like that.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote
There are certain fundamentals that are applicable
to a lot of sports that take place on two feet.

Yes there are lots of things that are shared, but there is one key thing in
the physics that makes skating different from other muscle-powered
propulsive motions like running, seated bicycling, and classic skiing:
The ski (or ice or inline skate) while gliding can transform the _direction_
of physical Force and Work in a special way -- by acting as a "simple
machine" called an "inclined plane".

In particular the ski (or inline or ice skate) can transform sideways-aimed
Force and Work into backward-aimed Force and Work. Because of this special
physics there are opportunities in skating for using sideways muscle moves
to add to forward motion Work and Power -- in ways that are not possible
with most other human-muscle-powered propulsive methods.

So it can be possible that sideways motions which are counter-productive in
other sports can be helpful in propulsion by skating.

Ken