Rotation and Counter Rotation

foot2foot wrote:

You'd be surprised how many people, including racers,
just don't realize, that to turn right, your body must be
on the right side of the skis, and to turn left, your body
must be on the left side of the skis.

I think you missed my point - that's OK.

"foot2foot" wrote in message ...
If you're in home position, dynamic as it is, and you're able to
stay that way, *you will not fall*.


When I'm in "home position", I'm on my back in the recliner watching
skiing on the boob tube. I've never fallen from that position except
when I've fallen asleep.

Kneale Brownson wrote:
"foot2foot" wrote ...

If you're in home position, dynamic as it is, and you're able to
stay that way, *you will not fall*.

When I'm in "home position", I'm on my back in the recliner watching
skiing on the boob tube. I've never fallen from that position except
when I've fallen asleep.

If you never fall, you're obviously not challenging yourself. Try
watching Masterpiece Theatre instead of ski racing. Or maybe pick up
a book on quantum mechanics or existentialism - your recliner won't
feel quite so safe anymore.

Obski: In less than 12 hours, I'll be skiing again - are you gonna
make opening day ak Schuss tomorrow?

--
// Walt
//
// There is no Volkl Conspiracy

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 09:27:33 -0800, lal_truckee
wrote:

foot2foot wrote:

You'd be surprised how many people, including racers,
just don't realize, that to turn right, your body must be
on the right side of the skis, and to turn left, your body
must be on the left side of the skis.

I think you missed my point - that's OK.

He did. Unless someone has studied this sort of thing, its very
difficult for anyone to grasp the concept of an apparent vertical
that may vary from moment to moment. Post on Epic and you'll have
several people who will understand you (as well as understand about a
nonlinear wave propagating down a tapered, flexible structure, with
the velocity going sonic, but not diverging, etc.)

NE-skier wrote:
Post on Epic and you'll have
several people who will understand you (as well as understand about a
nonlinear wave propagating down a tapered, flexible structure, with
the velocity going sonic, but not diverging, etc.)

Crack that whip.

Walt wrote in message ...
- are you gonna
make opening day ak Schuss tomorrow?

Opening day actually was Friday, Walt. Beautiful sunny day with some
really nice, grippy snow, at least for the first two hours on the only
slope available.

I'm teaching this weekend at Boyne, where I'll probably be working all
winter.

Kneale Brownson wrote:
Walt wrote in message ...

- are you gonna make opening day ak Schuss tomorrow?

Opening day actually was Friday, Walt. Beautiful sunny day with some
really nice, grippy snow, at least for the first two hours on the only
slope available.

The hills opened Wednesday down here - Holly opened at 3pm with slush
that subsequently froze to a hard crust by 6pm, which was slowly
covered with fresh manmade for some pretty good conditions by 8pm. On
the two slopes that were open, that is.

Today they managed to get a third slope open and I somehow managed to
ski for six hours on those three slopes without getting bored. It's
great to be easily amused.

I'm teaching this weekend at Boyne, where I'll probably be working all
winter.

Well, congratulations are in order, I suppose. Walking in the
footsteps of Stein Erickson, are we?.

--
// Walt
//
// There is no Volkl Conspiracy

"NE-skier" wrote in message

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 09:27:33 -0800, lal_truckee
wrote:

foot2foot wrote:

You'd be surprised how many people, including racers,
just don't realize, that to turn right, your body must be
on the right side of the skis, and to turn left, your body
must be on the left side of the skis.

I think you missed my point - that's OK.

He did. Unless someone has studied this sort of thing, its very
difficult for anyone to grasp the concept of an apparent vertical
that may vary from moment to moment.

Also very unnecessary. Also probably non existent.

Post on Epic and you'll have
several people who will understand you (as well as understand about a
nonlinear wave propagating down a tapered, flexible structure, with
the velocity going sonic, but not diverging, etc.)

Oh please. The mechanics of skiing can't be any simpler
in direct application. Rahlves doesn't win because he has
a firm grasp of nonlinear waves. "People who will
understand you". Please. Nearly anyone could
understand you if they cared. They don't. Nor do they
need to.

As far as your last paragraph, why don't you take an
attempt at putting it in simple terms? Just to see if you
can. Explain it to an eight year old. You can't, right?

You're not trying to teach skiing, you're trying to impress
people with terms.

In fact, this is exactly the kind of thing that has caused
some 80 to 90 percent of the people that take a beginning
ski lesson to not return to the mountain.

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 19:02:18 -0800, "foot2foot"
wrote:

Oh please. The mechanics of skiing can't be any simpler...

Sorry for the confusion, Foot. My reply was only intended for Lal,
and not directed at you, and not for general consumption.

My reply was an attempt at a humorous and very oblique "Hello" to Lal
in such a way that he would recognize who sent it. My comment was not
intended as a put down, not being presented as necessary for a deeper
understanding of skiing, an attempt to sound knowledgeable or show
off, etc.. It was just a bit of an "in joke" between he and I, if
you will.

Sorry that you misinterpreted its intent. In retrospect, I can see
that it would have been very easy to do this.

The second comment in my message was a reference to an an interesting
article that I know Lal recently read. As you correctly pointed out,
it indeed has *absolutely* *utterly* nothing to do with the mechanics
of skiing. Carry on.

NE-skier wrote:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 19:02:18 -0800, "foot2foot"
wrote:


Oh please. The mechanics of skiing can't be any simpler...
CLIP


As you correctly pointed out,
it indeed has *absolutely* *utterly* nothing to do with the mechanics
of skiing. Carry on.

Yep. Even Meier didn't go supersonic at Beaver Creek. However, if he
maybe got Knauss and Schifferer to play crack the whip with him as the
cracker, well, just maybe ...

Anyway, Foot2foot, all I was saying was that an outside observer easily
sees what you alude to - the skier cg must be inside the curve in a
turn; however, depending on sophistication, the skier himself could
easily consider himself outside the surve if he identifies
inside/outside by his localize force vector. The angulation that
provides the sense of being outside that vector is easiely observed in
modern racers: (also note how strongly angulated they are, even today)
http://www.audi.com/imgs/com/en/experience/events/winter_sports/audifisskiworldcup/audifisskiworldcup/106760977560732423.jpg
or
http://tinyurl.com/y37m