Total skiing: ski the whole ski

Alan Baker wrote:
snip

Is this guy serious? It has to be a troll. Instead of Taichiskiing, he
ought to call himself Kum-phall-on-phace. He sort of look likes a
fledging trying to leave the nest for the first time with all that
flapping. Does he quack?

down_hill wrote:
taichiskiing wrote:

down_hill wrote:

taichiskiing wrote:

Flatboarding is a great open cruiser; when compares to carving turn
technique, it's like Me262 (German jet fighter of WWII) vs. P51.

P51 shot down and destroyed more Me262 so your analogy like
your techique is flawed

Yup, most Me262 were shot down by a mob of P51. Nevertheless, Me262 was
a superior and faster airplane than P51.


IS

It less of an airplane and more like a rocket with small wings, after
the fuel was consumed they were easy targets, at least the ones that did
not explode during launching. The P51 was the best all round fighter of
WWII.

Yes, but its (P51) technology was outdated at the end of WWII.

But you subscribe to strange and bizarre theories so I do not
expect you to accept this fact or much that is rational.

Yup, like Me 262 jet engine, though bizarre at the time, was better and
more powerful engine than the propeller engine. Do you have the wisdom,
at the end of WWII, to see that only ten years after the WWII, the jet
fighters would have dominated the sky?

And the flatboarding matches on.
IS

taichiskiing wrote:
down_hill wrote:

taichiskiing wrote:


down_hill wrote:


taichiskiing wrote:


Flatboarding is a great open cruiser; when compares to carving turn
technique, it's like Me262 (German jet fighter of WWII) vs. P51.

P51 shot down and destroyed more Me262 so your analogy like
your techique is flawed

Yup, most Me262 were shot down by a mob of P51. Nevertheless, Me262 was
a superior and faster airplane than P51.


IS


It less of an airplane and more like a rocket with small wings, after
the fuel was consumed they were easy targets, at least the ones that did
not explode during launching. The P51 was the best all round fighter of
WWII.


Yes, but its (P51) technology was outdated at the end of WWII.


But you subscribe to strange and bizarre theories so I do not
expect you to accept this fact or much that is rational.


Yup, like Me 262 jet engine, though bizarre at the time, was better and
more powerful engine than the propeller engine. Do you have the wisdom,
at the end of WWII, to see that only ten years after the WWII, the jet
fighters would have dominated the sky?

And the flatboarding matches on.
IS

YES but it does not matter how much you twist words
it is still ****ing FLAT & BORING

"taichiskiing" wrote in message
oups.com...
Yup, like Me 262 jet engine, though bizarre at the time, was better and
more powerful engine than the propeller engine. Do you have the wisdom,
at the end of WWII, to see that only ten years after the WWII, the jet
fighters would have dominated the sky?

And the flatboarding matches on.

Please gimme a notice before starting your flatboarding supersonic stuff so
I can seek emergency refuge at the first beer bar.

dizzy wrote:
"taichiskiing" wrote

Yup, like Me 262 jet engine, though bizarre at the time, was better and
more powerful engine than the propeller engine. Do you have the wisdom,
at the end of WWII, to see that only ten years after the WWII, the jet
fighters would have dominated the sky?

And the flatboarding matches on.

Please gimme a notice before starting your flatboarding supersonic stuff so
I can seek emergency refuge at the first beer bar.


Yeah, even Texans have the decency to yell "YEEEEEEEHAAAAAAWW!" when
they're schussing the hill out of control.

//Walt

down_hill wrote:
taichiskiing wrote:
down_hill wrote:
taichiskiing wrote:
down_hill wrote:
taichiskiing wrote:

Flatboarding is a great open cruiser; when compares to carving turn
technique, it's like Me262 (German jet fighter of WWII) vs. P51.

P51 shot down and destroyed more Me262 so your analogy like
your techique is flawed

Yup, most Me262 were shot down by a mob of P51. Nevertheless, Me262 was
a superior and faster airplane than P51.


IS

It less of an airplane and more like a rocket with small wings, after
the fuel was consumed they were easy targets, at least the ones that did
not explode during launching. The P51 was the best all round fighter of
WWII.

Yes, but its (P51) technology was outdated at the end of WWII.

But you subscribe to strange and bizarre theories so I do not
expect you to accept this fact or much that is rational.

Yup, like Me 262 jet engine, though bizarre at the time, was better and
more powerful engine than the propeller engine. Do you have the wisdom,
at the end of WWII, to see that only ten years after the WWII, the jet
fighters would have dominated the sky?

And the flatboarding matches on.
IS

YES but it does not matter how much you twist words
it is still ****ing FLAT & BORING

Or just you boring mind goes flat?


IS

In article .com,
"taichiskiing" wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article .com,
"taichiskiing" wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article . com,
"taichiskiing" wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article .com,
"taichiskiing" wrote:

Alan Baker wrote:
In article
. com,
"taichiskiing" wrote:

.....
A "soft/variable board" is a "board" that varies in shape.
Given
two
skis, there are infinite different shapes/configurations that
we
can
make; we can spread them lengthwise and together (look at
their
outline) they form one skinny long "board"; or we can spread
them
sideways to make one wide short "board." Each "board"
configuration
reflects its unique characteristic--i.e. a "long" board is
better
for
gliding, and a "short" board is better for lateral balance,
and
etc.
By
shuffling the feet/skis to seek an optimum
shape/configuration
for
the
given balance and speed, a flatboard skier is actually skiing
on
infinite numbers of "board." By moving the weight/CoG (ride)
to
control
the shuffling of skis and weight placement over the skis,
flatboarding
is to "ride the skis" and "surf the gravity."

The principal principle and technique in flatboarding is
quite
simple,
"ride the flat bottom to go [straight], and ride on the edge
to
turn."
Now, on a pair skis, we have two flat bottoms and four edges,
and
a
total skier utilize/ski all of them.

Total skiing is to ski the whole ski.

What a pity, then, that you only ski the tails...

Where do you get that idea?

"the whole ski" = "the tails"?

I don't have that idea. It's just the way you ski.


What a pity is that in your denials, you are no longer
to tell what is the truth, or your fantasy.

What a pity you ski so poorly that you can't go down
anything difficult...

"There's nothing more foolish than one who deceives itself
to deceive others," suit yourself.

I couldn't agree more, and I will.

But you...

...you come back when you've got a video of you skiing
something other than a bunny hill!

You are pathetic.

Nope. Posting videos of oneself skiing down bunny hills is pathetic..

"Or just a gaper's denial."

Nope.




http://www.taomartialarts.com/ski/ski_v_is_boardl.wmv

See?

Yes, "green" MA,


You made to ten turns on an easy section of hill covered in enough snow
to keep your speed down to a crawl and you still lost your balance eight
times!

You did ten times on MA, and missed ten times. Without any proof other
than your "green" MA and pretend that you know?

Try saying that again, and using English...


You are pathetic.

Nope. Your boarding is.

--
'It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix.'
"It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix'
(Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)

taichiskiing wrote:
down_hill wrote:
taichiskiing wrote:

Flatboarding is a great open cruiser; when compares to carving turn
technique, it's like Me262 (German jet fighter of WWII) vs. P51.


P51 shot down and destroyed more Me262 so your analogy like
your techique is flawed

Yup, most Me262 were shot down by a mob of P51. Nevertheless, Me262 was
a superior and faster airplane than P51.

The is something flawed. Either your definition of
"superior", or the quality of the pilots (the Me262
came out very late in the war), or part of the
statistics are missing.

Read the following logical statement.

Most US fighters in Europe toward the end of WWII
were P51's.

Most Me262's were shot down by P51's. Makes sense
since the P51 was the available plane to do so.

The question left begging is, "How many P51's were
shot down by Me262's?"

If the answer is:
More P51's were shot down by Me262's than were Me262's
shot down by P51's, then the conclusion is that the
Me262 was a better plane. If the reverse is true, then
the conclusion (base solely on the first part of the
statement) is that the P51 was the better plane.

There are reasons a prop-job could be better than a jet.
This might have to do with maneuverability, pilot ability,
rate of climb, ability to slow down very quickly and
others I can't think of off hand.

Early in the Vietnam war, the Navy was using a carrier
based, propeller airplane, whose name I can't remember,
but the pilots all called them "spads" in imitation of
the WWI plane. These planes were very successful against
NVA jets. This was due almost solely to pilot ability.

In a drill over the South China Sea, a "Spad" pilot
sneaked up on a Voodoo pilot, took a picture with his
gunsight camera and radioed the Voodoo pilot to tell
him that he "had been had by a spad, dad."

taichiskiing wrote:
down_hill wrote:
taichiskiing wrote:

down_hill wrote:

taichiskiing wrote:

Flatboarding is a great open cruiser; when compares to carving turn
technique, it's like Me262 (German jet fighter of WWII) vs. P51.
P51 shot down and destroyed more Me262 so your analogy like
your techique is flawed
Yup, most Me262 were shot down by a mob of P51. Nevertheless, Me262 was
a superior and faster airplane than P51.


IS

It less of an airplane and more like a rocket with small wings, after
the fuel was consumed they were easy targets, at least the ones that did
not explode during launching. The P51 was the best all round fighter of
WWII.

Yes, but its (P51) technology was outdated at the end of WWII.

But you subscribe to strange and bizarre theories so I do not
expect you to accept this fact or much that is rational.

Yup, like Me 262 jet engine, though bizarre at the time, was better and
more powerful engine than the propeller engine. Do you have the wisdom,
at the end of WWII, to see that only ten years after the WWII, the jet
fighters would have dominated the sky?

This statement does not make the Me262 a great airplane, only
an innovative one.

See my post on this subject a bit earlier, and the lore of the
Korean war says the first MIG shot down over Korea was by a
Chance-Vought Corsair, a Navy carrier based, propeller driven
airplane, left over from WWII.

And the flatboarding matches on.

Only if it can be shown to be superior in all conditions. Otherwise
it will be a change up from other methods and another tool in the
quiver.

In article ,
down_hill wrote:

taichiskiing wrote:

down_hill wrote:

taichiskiing wrote:



Flatboarding is a great open cruiser; when compares to carving turn
technique, it's like Me262 (German jet fighter of WWII) vs. P51.



P51 shot down and destroyed more Me262 so your analogy like
your techique is flawed


Yup, most Me262 were shot down by a mob of P51. Nevertheless, Me262 was
a superior and faster airplane than P51.


IS

It less of an airplane and more like a rocket with small wings, after
the fuel was consumed they were easy targets, at least the ones that did
not explode during launching. The P51 was the best all round fighter of
WWII. But you subscribe to strange and bizarre theories so I do not
expect you to accept this fact or much that is rational.

Ummm...

You're thinking of the Me163. The Me262 was a true jet.

--
'It is Mac OS X, not BSD.' -- 'From Mac OS to BSD Unix.'
"It's BSD Unix with Apple's APIs and GUI on top of it' -- 'nothing but BSD Unix'
(Edwin on Mac OS X)
'[The IBM PC] could boot multiple OS, such as DOS, C/PM, GEM, etc.' --
'I claimed nothing about GEM other than it was available software for the
IBM PC. (Edwin on GEM)
'Solaris is just a marketing rename of Sun OS.' -- 'Sun OS is not included
on the timeline of Solaris because it's a different OS.' (Edwin on Sun)