video make-over

Stepping forward. I suggest this is backward. Don't work at or think of
stepping the foot forward. Instead bring the body forward and the
recovering foot comes forward with the body and is just "there." Good
skiers look like they are stepping forward because they are bringing their
bodies forward. Work on cause, not effect. To me stepping forward always
feels wrong. Bringing the body forward and having the ski be right under
the body when I step on it feels right.

Ski Exuberantly,

Hank Garretson

Mammoth Lakes, California

Stepping forward. I suggest this is backward. Don't work at or think of
stepping the foot forward. Instead bring the body forward and the
recovering foot comes forward with the body and is just "there." Good
skiers look like they are stepping forward because they are bringing their
bodies forward. Work on cause, not effect. To me stepping forward always
feels wrong. Bringing the body forward and having the ski be right under
the body when I step on it feels right.

Ski Exuberantly,

Hank Garretson

Mammoth Lakes, California

Nathan wrote
if Ken Roberts had stood there with a good coach
for two hours, he could have made more progress
in those two hours than he has in the past year

I'm at best an ignorant amateur in coaching athletes, but in this case I do
have a special perspective to offer -- so here it is:

I had a great year of learning new techniques of ski-skating, and I had a
lot of fun learning it. The improvements in performance that I achieved were
way beyond anything I ever expected. In the latest weeks since I got those
tips from Andrew and Jim and JanneG and Jay based on my recent videos, I've
skated really tough hilly courses -- sometimes the whole course for several
hours with my Legs only, no poles -- where a year ago I would have said was
only possible for elite athletes with amazing VO2max.

Playing with new motions and new perceptions has been really fun in itself.
Even if some of the motions were wrong, they were still interesting and fun
to play with. I guess some people think that "working on technique" is some
unfortunate necessity to achieve better race-finish-order results. For me
it's a chance to discover new joyful motions, or new amazement on arriving
at the top of a hill without having worked so hard.

And while I am an ignorant amateur about the coaching process, I have heard
something different -- from very experienced coaches, some on this
newsgroup, another that I paid for face-to-face coaching -- heard that
achieveing a fundamental deep change in one's XC ski technique can take a
long time -- like "months" is not unusual. Possibly standing there "with a
good coach for two hours" works instantly for the gifted athletes that come
to Nathan for coaching, but perhaps my rate of progress is not a failure for
the rest of us "less gifted" merely normally athletic skiers.

If you are really into learning to ski well, you will
do yourself a lot of good by joining a local club
program, going to a few clinics in your area, and perhaps attending a
camp.

I've done all those things. (Well almost, since we don't have a local "club"
with a "program" -- but I've gotten the local face-to-face coaching which is
available.) My skiing technique has benefited from all those things.

I find it rather odd to be trigger for a warning against "trying to figure
this out without any coaching" -- since I support all those coaching and
instructional things, including very much our local and regional
face-to-face coaching.

Many times in conversations I've recommended that a person get face-to-face
coaching from a professional, and suggested specific places to find that. I
could believe that my website on XC ski technique has more instances of
phrases like "this is difficult to learn without an instructor" or "best to
get an instructor to work on this" than any other website or book on XC ski
technique.

Now I do also like to analyze videos of my own technique -- and inviting
other people to help me analyze them. It's another prong of my overall
learning strategy. I don't think it's a "magic bullet" for me or anybody
else. Analyzing video is very tricky -- and so is every other approach to XC
ski technique. And for me what I've found is that both of these rounds of
public video analysis have lead to deep new insights which I didn't get from
other coaching approaches.

Ken
_________________________________
Comcast wrote
I have coached a lot of people who do not have World Cup fitness and
they have all managed these techniques very well. It is not that the
techniques themselves require a huge engine and enormous strength; getting
them down takes a lot of practice and repetition. I have taught this to
16-year-old girls and 50 year-old 5th-wave master skiers. They struggled
with it at first because it does take a lot of coordination and repetition
to break old habits. But with good coaching (I'll pat myself on the back
here), anyone can do it and once they get it, they ski much faster and
more
efficiently.

I think the problem is, and probably most of the coaches who are
paying
attention here will agree, that many of you are trying to figure this out
without any coaching or help from the outside. I can't believe how often
we
hear "I learned more in the last two days than I have in the past five
years" at clinics and camps.

Ken has a great idea here to get video analysis from all over the
world,
but to be honest, if he had stood there with a good coach for two hours,
he
could have made more progress in those two hours than he has in the past
year, even with all the effort he puts into studying technique on his own.

Technique is a fascinating thing, and I'm not suggesting that you give
up this passion for figuring it out, because that is an important part of
making it happen. If you are really into learning to ski well, you will
do
yourself a lot of good by joining a local club program, going to a few
clinics in your area, and perhaps attending a camp. You will be amazed at
how much you will get out of it.

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com

Nathan wrote also
In V1, you should be planting way farther forward, somewhere
in front of your toes at the very least. Probably more like
15-30cm in front of your toes.

Maybe that's right for the athletes at the level that Nathan coaches. And I
can see how planting my pole-tips out in front could work for me on flat or
gentle terrain. But I do not train with poling workouts over the summer any
more. I tried it one or two years, getting real serious about double-poling
on rollerskis. I bet that's what most of the athletes coached by Nathan do,
and as a result I became a tremendously strong poler, and I found it
delivered a tremendous gain for my classic skiing the next winter. But I
refuse to do that any more.

So for skating up a steep hill, I just don't think I have the strength to
get an effective pole-push if I plant my pole-tips 6-12 inches (15-30 cm) in
front of my toe. When I work out the geometry and physics of poling, I find
out that the "low-gear" angle to best deliver high force at low speed is
with the pole angled further back. Maybe that angle is better for me (and
lots of other non-podium skiers). Also maybe my poles are too long for me
for that steep a hill.

Strangely, when I look at Ole-Einar Björndalen making his second pole-plant
at time :03 of the skateClimbSlomo.mpg video on JanneG's Technic page, it
looks to me like he's planting his pole-tip right next to the toe of his
boot. And in the SkateFeetSlomo.mpg video, I'm not finding the 15-30cm in
front of toe there either.

Ken
________________________________________________
Comcast wrote
. . .
2. You need to move your hips up and forward and lean more forward at the
ankle. You are sitting back a bit too much which is keeping your whole
body
back. Notice that your poles are planting around your mid-foot or behind.
In V1, you should be planting way farther forward, somewhere in front of
your toes at the very least. Probably more like 15-30cm in front of your
toes. The forward step is also contributing to this.
3. You are collapsing your upper body before the pole plant. If you can
stand up and lean forward more, you should be able to land more "on top
of"
your poles. This will give you a huge boost in power.

Good Luck,

Nathan
www.nsavage.com
______________________________________________

I've taken two skating clinics from Nathan, and I believe he has helped my technique alot.

I think this forum is quite lucky to have someone like Nathan answering questions, commentiing, and evaluating (Ken's) form. To respond to his comments and suggestions in a somewhat passive aggressive argumentative fashion is rude. Sure, the distance you plant your pole in front of your toe depends on the gradient of the terrain. But if Nathan looks at your video after you solicit his opinion, and suggests you are not planting your pole far enough in front of your toe then you are probably not.

The aspects of technique that Nathan teaches are FUNDAMENTAL and can be learned by anyone - not just podium finishers.

For what it is worth Ken, I think you are intiating your V1 with a step forward. Try skating from ski to ski, using both legs equally. Also, you have a lot of extraneous upper body and head movement (V1) that is probably wasting energy and thus inefficient.

Jim


Maybe that's right for the athletes at the level that Nathan coaches.
So for skating up a steep hill, I just don't think I have the strength to
get an effective pole-push if I plant my pole-tips 6-12 inches (15-30 cm) in
front of my toe. When I work out the geometry and physics of poling, I find
out that the "low-gear" angle to best deliver high force at low speed is
with the pole angled further back. Maybe that angle is better for me (and
lots of other non-podium skiers). Also maybe my poles are too long for me
for that steep a hill.

Ken, your upper body strength has nothing to do with it. If you move your
hips forward and get more ankle lean, you will plant your poles farther
forward and without any change in the strength you push on the poles, the
"falling" on the poles will move you forward much more efficiently. You
can't just plant your poles farther forward without changing anything
else...

When you sit in the back and you are "behind" your poles, you use more
arm energy to get less forward push due to the biomechanics. Your using
100% arms and from a disadvantage biomechanically. When you get "on top of
your poles", your body weight and core muscles push on the poles, and you
are using your skeleton to hold the position and push, rather than only your
muscles.

My point about coaching was not to try to rag on you for doing what
you're doing, it was to point out that if you find a good coach, you should
be able to fix many of these things almost instantly. Technique advancement
does take a long time and a lot of practice, but anyone can do it. I coach
athletes of all abilities - from people who have never skied before to
intermediate-level master skiers to elite juniors and seniors. Everyone can
change their technique, and it is the "intermediate" skiers who I see
improve the fastest. Elite skiers are dealing with subtle changes and often
have very ingrained habits, so it often takes longer for them to make
changes.

Nathan
www.nsavage.com

"Ken Roberts" wrote in message
...
Nathan wrote also
In V1, you should be planting way farther forward, somewhere
in front of your toes at the very least. Probably more like
15-30cm in front of your toes.

Maybe that's right for the athletes at the level that Nathan coaches. And
I
can see how planting my pole-tips out in front could work for me on flat
or
gentle terrain. But I do not train with poling workouts over the summer
any
more. I tried it one or two years, getting real serious about
double-poling
on rollerskis. I bet that's what most of the athletes coached by Nathan
do,
and as a result I became a tremendously strong poler, and I found it
delivered a tremendous gain for my classic skiing the next winter. But I
refuse to do that any more.

So for skating up a steep hill, I just don't think I have the strength to
get an effective pole-push if I plant my pole-tips 6-12 inches (15-30 cm)
in
front of my toe. When I work out the geometry and physics of poling, I
find
out that the "low-gear" angle to best deliver high force at low speed is
with the pole angled further back. Maybe that angle is better for me (and
lots of other non-podium skiers). Also maybe my poles are too long for me
for that steep a hill.

Strangely, when I look at Ole-Einar Björndalen making his second
pole-plant
at time :03 of the skateClimbSlomo.mpg video on JanneG's Technic page, it
looks to me like he's planting his pole-tip right next to the toe of his
boot. And in the SkateFeetSlomo.mpg video, I'm not finding the 15-30cm in
front of toe there either.

Ken
________________________________________________
Comcast wrote
. . .
2. You need to move your hips up and forward and lean more forward at
the
ankle. You are sitting back a bit too much which is keeping your whole
body
back. Notice that your poles are planting around your mid-foot or
behind.
In V1, you should be planting way farther forward, somewhere in front of
your toes at the very least. Probably more like 15-30cm in front of your
toes. The forward step is also contributing to this.
3. You are collapsing your upper body before the pole plant. If you can
stand up and lean forward more, you should be able to land more "on top
of"
your poles. This will give you a huge boost in power.

Good Luck,

Nathan
www.nsavage.com
______________________________________________

"Gene Goldenfeld" wrote in message
...

I agree that Ken is not planting his poles nearly far enough forward;
he's not on each ski long enough to do so. I do think your statement
about where the tips should be planted is subject to misunderstanding,
however. Assuming reasonably good technique, isn't the position a
function of individual poling style and terrain?

Yes, pole plant will change with terrain, speed and among individuals. But
in general, if you are poling behind your toe, then something is probably
not right with your body position. My point was not to say that his pole
plant was incorrect, but that his poles are not planting in the correct
position because his hips are back and he is not leaning far forward enough
at the ankles. In other words, his poles land too far back because his body
position is too far back. Not because he is planting incorrectly.

Does that make sense? He can use the pole plant as a cue to see if he
is getting forward, but the pole plant itself is not the problem.

Nathan
www.nsavage.com

Hi Ken,

I don't know why I keep getting lured into this, but here goes:

I'm not saying that learning techique is not fun in itself, nor am I
saying that technique improvement is not a lifelong pursuit. It is a very
worthwhile way to waste one's time.

I will say it again, though: if you had a good coach with you for two
hours you probably could have made more progress in those two hours than you
have in the past year working on your own. To me, it seems a shame that you
spend probably hundreds of hours reading and writing and analyzing
technique, but when you get out on snow, you are still struggling with some
of the fundamentals. That may be fine with you, and that is OK with me, but
if you spent some time with good coaching, you could quickly master those
fundamentals and use your intense interest of technique analysis to refine
subtleties instead of struggling to ski uphill.

I'm not trying to discourage you from pursuing technique improvement or
learning on your own. I'm just trying to point out that with some good
help, you could probably improve much more rapidly. And I should probably
just donate two hours of lesson time myself so I don't keep getting sucked
into these discussions.

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com



"Ken Roberts" wrote in message
...
Nathan wrote
if Ken Roberts had stood there with a good coach
for two hours, he could have made more progress
in those two hours than he has in the past year

I'm at best an ignorant amateur in coaching athletes, but in this case I
do
have a special perspective to offer -- so here it is:

I had a great year of learning new techniques of ski-skating, and I had a
lot of fun learning it. The improvements in performance that I achieved
were
way beyond anything I ever expected. In the latest weeks since I got those
tips from Andrew and Jim and JanneG and Jay based on my recent videos,
I've
skated really tough hilly courses -- sometimes the whole course for
several
hours with my Legs only, no poles -- where a year ago I would have said
was
only possible for elite athletes with amazing VO2max.

Playing with new motions and new perceptions has been really fun in
itself.
Even if some of the motions were wrong, they were still interesting and
fun
to play with. I guess some people think that "working on technique" is
some
unfortunate necessity to achieve better race-finish-order results. For me
it's a chance to discover new joyful motions, or new amazement on arriving
at the top of a hill without having worked so hard.

And while I am an ignorant amateur about the coaching process, I have
heard
something different -- from very experienced coaches, some on this
newsgroup, another that I paid for face-to-face coaching -- heard that
achieveing a fundamental deep change in one's XC ski technique can take a
long time -- like "months" is not unusual. Possibly standing there "with a
good coach for two hours" works instantly for the gifted athletes that
come
to Nathan for coaching, but perhaps my rate of progress is not a failure
for
the rest of us "less gifted" merely normally athletic skiers.

If you are really into learning to ski well, you will
do yourself a lot of good by joining a local club
program, going to a few clinics in your area, and perhaps attending a
camp.

I've done all those things. (Well almost, since we don't have a local
"club"
with a "program" -- but I've gotten the local face-to-face coaching which
is
available.) My skiing technique has benefited from all those things.

I find it rather odd to be trigger for a warning against "trying to figure
this out without any coaching" -- since I support all those coaching and
instructional things, including very much our local and regional
face-to-face coaching.

Many times in conversations I've recommended that a person get
face-to-face
coaching from a professional, and suggested specific places to find that.
I
could believe that my website on XC ski technique has more instances of
phrases like "this is difficult to learn without an instructor" or "best
to
get an instructor to work on this" than any other website or book on XC
ski
technique.

Now I do also like to analyze videos of my own technique -- and inviting
other people to help me analyze them. It's another prong of my overall
learning strategy. I don't think it's a "magic bullet" for me or anybody
else. Analyzing video is very tricky -- and so is every other approach to
XC
ski technique. And for me what I've found is that both of these rounds of
public video analysis have lead to deep new insights which I didn't get
from
other coaching approaches.

Ken
_________________________________
Comcast wrote
I have coached a lot of people who do not have World Cup fitness and
they have all managed these techniques very well. It is not that the
techniques themselves require a huge engine and enormous strength;
getting
them down takes a lot of practice and repetition. I have taught this to
16-year-old girls and 50 year-old 5th-wave master skiers. They struggled
with it at first because it does take a lot of coordination and
repetition
to break old habits. But with good coaching (I'll pat myself on the back
here), anyone can do it and once they get it, they ski much faster and
more
efficiently.

I think the problem is, and probably most of the coaches who are
paying
attention here will agree, that many of you are trying to figure this out
without any coaching or help from the outside. I can't believe how often
we
hear "I learned more in the last two days than I have in the past five
years" at clinics and camps.

Ken has a great idea here to get video analysis from all over the
world,
but to be honest, if he had stood there with a good coach for two hours,
he
could have made more progress in those two hours than he has in the past
year, even with all the effort he puts into studying technique on his
own.

Technique is a fascinating thing, and I'm not suggesting that you
give
up this passion for figuring it out, because that is an important part of
making it happen. If you are really into learning to ski well, you will
do
yourself a lot of good by joining a local club program, going to a few
clinics in your area, and perhaps attending a camp. You will be amazed
at
how much you will get out of it.

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com

"Ken Roberts" wrote in message
...
Nathan wrote
1. You are stepping too far forward with your V1.

I agree that I'm landing my next ski significantly in front of my previous
ski. The funny thing is that I'm against the "forward step" move, and I've
several times posted notes to this newsgroup explaining why I don't think
it's a good idea.

The question I have is: Is it the distance of how forward I land the ski
that's the main problem, or is it the biomechanical method that I was
using to get it there?

This is chicken/egg and irrelevant. The biomechanics is directly affected
(negatively) by how far you step forward. By stepping forward, you cut off
power because in order to step forward, you have to straighten your back
leg. Once that leg is straight, you can't push off of it very hard. If you
can make more of a sideways push, your leg will push through a longer
stroke. You still step forward, but only after you have completed the kick,
and certainly not as dramatically as you are doing in your video.

The other possibility is Andrew Lee's idea is that the key is in the
biomechanics -- to make the forward move from higher up in my body, like
under my rib cage. And Jim Grau's observation that Bjorndalen is not just
"stepping" his foot, but advancing his non-pushing hip.

Yes. This is what I was trying to say when I said that your pole is
planting too far back. If you get your hips and ankle bend right, you can't
step forward easily and therefore your hip and upper body go with your leg
forward. That way you don't have to drag your body back and forth each
stroke. When you get forward, your pole plant will come with you. The pole
plant is not the problem, just an easily observed symptom of body position
issues. You can use where you plant your poles to see if you are improving
your body position.

2. You need to move your hips up and forward and
lean more forward at the ankle.

I agree that I wish I had more forward-flex in my ankle than what I see me
doing in that V1 side-view video. And again it's funny that I'm a big
believer in forward ankle flex and forward hips, and have posted about it
to
this newsgroup. I do think I detect a distinct "knee-drive"
forward-ankle-flex move in my Legs-only side-view video, but mostly in my
last two stroke-cycles in the second half of it.

You need to be much more aggressive with the knee drive and follow it up
with a push. Right now you do a very abbreviated knee drive followed
immediately by standing up on your push leg. You can get much more out of
both of these actions.


You are sitting back a bit too much

Yes, instructors have been pointing that out to me for years, and I
figured
out the physics of why too much sitting back is ineffective -- and I've
been
working to lessen it for years.

*** Mystery ***
How can it be that I believe in these things Nathan is saying -- and have
been told most of them before by previous instructors both face-to-face
and
remote by video --
Yet I'm still not doing them right
???

This is not a mystery. Not enough good coaching? Overanalysis? A good
coach can not only tell you what you're doing wrong, but how to do it right.
In the past few years of coaching, I've learned hundreds of different ways
to say the same thing because not everyone understands the same approach.
Even though I'm always teaching the same techniques, I have different
approaches depending on who is listening. When you are standing there
working with someone, you can see how they react to what you've said and how
his/her skiing changes in response to it. Sometimes, you even see patterns
in people and you know what to say that will make it click.

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com

Yes, it makes sense. I just think one has to be especially careful
about spelling things out with someone like Ken. I do think, tho, from
a pedagogical standpoint that his poling can't be straightened out until
he learns to skate from ski to ski instead of stepping or running
forward; i.e., until he gets the sense of how to stay on each ski longer
and use his edges to help get up the hill. Right now (video), he's
planting about as far forward as his legs are giving him the time to do.

Gene

Nathan Schultz wrote:

"Gene Goldenfeld" wrote in message
...

I agree that Ken is not planting his poles nearly far enough forward;
he's not on each ski long enough to do so. I do think your statement
about where the tips should be planted is subject to misunderstanding,
however. Assuming reasonably good technique, isn't the position a
function of individual poling style and terrain?

Yes, pole plant will change with terrain, speed and among individuals. But
in general, if you are poling behind your toe, then something is probably
not right with your body position. My point was not to say that his pole
plant was incorrect, but that his poles are not planting in the correct
position because his hips are back and he is not leaning far forward enough
at the ankles. In other words, his poles land too far back because his body
position is too far back. Not because he is planting incorrectly.

Does that make sense? He can use the pole plant as a cue to see if he
is getting forward, but the pole plant itself is not the problem.

Nathan
www.nsavage.com