Skid, slip, and carved turn

"Jeff" wrote in message
news:hFpPd.35332$QS5.19837@trndny06...


I understand. While I'm new to this group, I'm a seasoned usenet
vet. In
all the groups, in all the towns, he has to be the biggest dick
I've
ever encountered. I've seen flame wars in computer language groups,
in a
woodworking group and all over football groups. In all that time,
I've
never met anyone more annoying. In order to be entertaining, he'd
need
to acquire at least some wit. Rather he's from the broken record
school
of rebuttal. pathological liar! pathological liar! pathological
liar!

But since you mentioned newsgroups about trunky perhaps you should go
look up the ones that have already been created.

Bob Lee wrote:
yunlong wrote:


If the English speakers don't distinguish the difference between
slipping and skidding, why do they create two different words?


Why? Well, it certainly isn't so that you can assign whatever meaning
*you* want to them.

Look, **** and crap mean the same thing, right? And tits and boobs and
breasts and hooters. Mmmm, tits.

Bob

I agree with this poast.

yunlong wrote:
VtSkier wrote:

yunlong wrote:

VtSkier wrote:

yunlong wrote:


Based on the quality of a turn, a downhill ski turn can be
classified in three categories: carved turn, skidded turn,
and slipped turn.

Based on the "quality" of a turn? Foot, help me out here.
Quality supposes "good", "bad", and other subjective
descriptions. I think we need to get back to the mechanics
of skiing.

Fast line, smooth transition, and clean, yes, these are some
desired "quality" of a turn.

True, but not what you were talking about in the original
(your) paragraph.


So what do you think I was talking in the original (my) paragraph?

It seemed like you wanted to get at "bad", "good" and
"qualities" like that and then wanted to talk about
mechanics of skiing.

"A turn can be initiated by skidding, slipping (we are going
to have a discussion on the difference between these two,
but I think I know what you are talking about) or by rolling
the ankles and bending the ski into a 'carve'." Is this what
you want to say?

Not exactly, I was saying there are three kinds of turn in
downhill skiing, and each has its usage and shortfall.

Ok, but later on I argue that slipping, as you described
may not fit into the definition of a turn. And now I
understand why you used "quality".

A carved turn is made by the technique called "carving,"
where the ski is made traveling along the curvature of
reverse chamber of the ski without any slippage; i.e. the
tail of the ski follows the tip of the ski along the
curved path in a synchronized manner.


A carved turn is made by carving.

Exactly, I might have used "like carving a piece of wood" to

describe

it, as if you have ever done wood-carving, you'd know what that

means;

however, how many of you have ever done wood-carving?


No, you would describe/define "carving a piece of wood" as
cutting the wood in certain ways using a knife. That's
defining "carving a piece of wood". Notice that I DID NOT use
the word "carving" in the definition.


And it is no longer about skiing either.

No, it's about definitions, but you brought up wood-carving.

Yeah, right. I actually
think you can do better than this with the language. It is
considered a mistake to define a word with the same word or
a different form of the word.

You do get the meaning, don't you?


Yes,


That's to say there's communication;

Perhaps, but because I have some experience with
what you are talking about, I can make some heads
or tails of it. But I'm not a universal audience
and you would do well to keep THAT audience in mind
when you make explanations, since, as a ski teacher
those folks who have no experience are your audience.

but you are not necessarily talking to me. Aren't
you talking to students or potential students? I'm asking
for clarity in your description.


"Get the meanings of the words, and forget about
words"--Chuang-Tzu--that's to say when the meaning of the words is
transmitted and received, the correct usage or the structure of
language is no longer important. Move on.

I agree that when you can "show", "demonstrate",
even "cajole" and "physically push" a ski into the
desired position, that words become less necessary and
maybe even undesirable at times in the teaching of
something (skiing in this case). But here we are
required to use language in a manner that is
consistent and non-confusing. Because of this
correct usage AND structure are vitally important.

Your statement above is a lame attempt to weasel
out of statements made by you that don't hold water.

In fact the quote you used I would interpret a
slightly different way. I might say that Chuang-Tzu
is telling us to listen to the explanation and
then do the task. No more, no less. Once you can
do the task, the words (explanation) are unnecessary.

But I'm not so sure. "where the ski is made TO TRAVEL along"
the path described by the curve of the ski, either the
sidecut radius or as reduced by bending. The tail of the
ski follows the tip of the ski along the curved path
described above. (forget "synchronized manner".)

What are you not so sure about?


I'm not so sure about your use of the language.


I'm not here to talk about the use of English.

But you are speaking English, or sort of anyway.

A skidded turn
happens when the tail of the ski moves downhill with a
slightly faster rate than the tip of the ski,

That's mechanics, OK.

which causes the ski over-turn.

wrong choice of words. "over-turn" can mean either to turn
too much or tip over. Neither meaning is what you wanted.

"Over-turn," as used to describe in skiing turn, would naturally

mean

"turn too much," don't you think? As you used "tip over" what "tip"

do

you mean? Wrangling the words.


"Over-turn" implies "too much".


Where did the meaning of "turn" go?


What you are looking for
is the sense that the tail is turning MORE THAN the tip.
I know, it might me mincing words here, but it's the sense
that you want to convey.


That was the sense I tried to covey,

but your words didn't convey this sense.

tip over, turn over, go upside-down, empty the bucket.


it sure takes a long time for you to get the point.

I'm not going to rise to this one.

No, I'm not "wrangling words."


Yes, you are "wrangling words."


You may be thinking of "over-steer" and "under-steer" as
applied to driving a car, it doesn't work for skiing.
Yup, we know how your partitioned thinking works; however, skid and
slip are actually physics terms, and the phenomena scientific

facts.

Uhm, where do skid and slip enter into into under-steer and
over-steer? And I agree that skid and slip are physics terms.
They are also aerodynamics terms to define somewhat different
phenomena.


Skid and slip are physics terms used to describe a circular motion, any
circular motion.

Oh, yeah? You'd better find THAT definition for me.
Also if both words are used to describe a "circular
motion, any circular motion." Then don't they both
mean the same thing? I also challenge your definition
of skid and slip meaning circular motion. You may
find it somewhere in some physics text, but I insist
on a common usage dictionary definition since you
didn't set up this "circular motion" definition at
the beginning of your screed.

But in the case you yourself have defined, skidding
and slipping are the same except for the part of the ski which
does it.


Not true, not that skidding and slipping are not the same, and the
skidding and slipping I defined is consistent and works for any
circular motion.

Yes it is true. Try reading what you write.

In your definition, skidding is when the tail is
moving outward faster than the tip of a ski.


Correct.


A slip is where
the tip of a ski is moving outward slower than the tail.


Maybe you should read carefully.

No, a slip is where the tip of a ski is moving outward "faster" than
the tail.

Talk about me wrangling words.

The skid can be the entire turn until you set your edges
to stop turning (or initiate a skid in the opposite direction).
Or it can be the beginning of a carved arc where the skid gets
you turning in the direction you want to go, you set your edges
and apply pressure to the outside ski and carve an arc. Very
effective in the days when skis didn't have much sidecut.

Not sure what you're getting at; wherever you have your ski tail

moved

faster than you ski tip during a turn, you are skidding.


I'm saying that a turn can be skidded all the way around or a
carved turn can be initiated by a skid.

And a slipped turn is when the tip of the ski moves
downhill faster than the tail, which straightens the
curved path somewhat, is an under-turn.


I'm not sure about this. If the slip reduces the amount the
ski is turning, isn't it an "ANTI-TURN"?

Yes, as it is an "ANTI-TURN," the "line" would be
straighter, thus faster.


Then it's not a turn, why call it one? It's a "correction".


No, it is still a turn, as it continues to change direction and
generates a curved line.



I can think of one way to make a "turn" by moving the tips.
It's called a step turn. While moving downhill, weight one
ski sufficiently so that you can pick up the other ski, tip
and all. Point the tip of the raised ski in the new direction,
put it down, weight it enough to pick up the other ski and
bring it parallel to the one moving in the new direction.
Step turn. Common in cross country skiing. May be the only
thing which will work at very low speed. Note no "slipping".


When you "raised" the ski off the snow, the ski is no longer "working,"
yes, it is an inferior technique.


I can't imagine a
situation where allowing the tip to slip out is desirable
EXCEPT in "falling leaf" which is a survival, extreme
braking move when you are deep do do.

When you wash-out on skidding, only way to recover is to slip the

tip

downhill. And when you slip the tip, the line would be straighter,

so

you gain a better "downward"/"forward" speed.


Slipping the tip downhill IS washing out. The reason
it happens is because you are in the back seat.


Yup, you are confused slipping with skidding.


If you perceive that you are turning or have turned too
much in a skidded turn, the correction is not to allow
the tips to wash out (because this will put you in the
back seat) but to set your edges to stop turning.


No, when you skid too much, the tail wash out, and you fall backward.
As you fall backward, you are on the back seat, there's no recovery,
and that's why excess skidding is a bad practice/form.


This edge set makes a perfect "platform" to initiate a turn
in the opposite direction.


Slip the tip makes the turn quicker and more stable.


What makes the carved turn so special is that, while both skidding
and slipping rob the speed/energy of the ski, carving maintains
its turning ability without losing its speed.

True, the carved turn itself does not cause braking. It will
help to control your speed by causing you to take a longer
path down the mountain which, by definition is a less steep
path down the mountain.

No, the carved turn slows itself down, or balances against
gravity by continuing turning uphill, yes, the longer path.


Say the same thing I did a different way. Doesn't
make either of us wrong.


Longer the path, slower the forward speed.

Longer the path AND the less the slope, the
slower the forward speed.

The caveat is, nevertheless, that the
skier must continue to turn to carve, thus reduces the
skier's forward speed.

I'm not even going to try to translate this. You might
be saying that the longer path slows you down.

That's true, too, as the forward speed goes.


See?


Do you?

Yes

Most of parallel turns are done with skidding turn, where
skidding serves dual purposes of breaking and turning.

True, especially on steeps.


Though flatboarding employs all three techniques to
maintain a proper/desired line,

Okay...


it generally utilizes flat board and slipping turn
for faster speed and straighter line downhill.

As above, I can't imagine a situation where slipping
the tips is a good thing. Further, for me to slip the
tips of my skis as described, I need to be in the back
seat. Is this what your are proposing?

You cannot slip the tips by sitting back seat; you can only do skid
with that posture. Slipping the tips is done by pressing the uphill
edges--the little toe side edge of the inside ski and the big toe

side

of the outside ski--downward (away from the hill), which can only

be

done with the pressure on the little ball of foot and little toe

side

edge of the inside ski, which can only be done by moving your knee

so

much forward to press the boot that your heel is actually suspended
inside your boot.


You can ONLY slip the tips from the back seat. If you are
in the back seat, you tips will slip (skid) because there
isn't sufficient weight on them to keep them from skidding.


You are talking about skid, not slip.

You can only slip, as you have defined it, from the
backseat. Yes, your tails can wash out. Here in the east
it's common enough from hitting ice. If you allow the
washing out tails to put you into the backseat, which
is a very real possibility, you are in grave danger of
not being able to make the next turn in the opposite
direction and could well not be able to avoid some
obstacle. Being in the back seat is always BAD (sorry
for the subjective word, Foot).

If you are in a neutral to weight forward position, you
can skid your tails, easily. If you are back you can't.


I see what you are saying, I call it "wobble," which is caused by the
ski is not under [good] control, which may produce the skid or slip you
described.

However, skidding and slipping as I described are deliberately
controlled action that directs the ski to perform the function. For
which, to control/manipulate the ski, you need to put your weight on it
to make it effective.


Five-year-old Andrea asked, why she had to turn when she
only wanted to go there/straight?

Is it time for something a little steeper? But with a
bunny berm at the end.


That little girl, now 6, is actually a black diamond skier
at the Heavenly.


Kewl, now, how much did you bombard her with words?
Or, did you do what other instructors do with kids,
show her what works?


No, I didn't teach her, she skied with her parent.


Interesting,
IS


My question to you is...
Why do you post these word pictures of skiing that may
or may not be accurate,

Skid, slip, and carved turn are physics terms and scientific facts;
only thing inaccurate here is your knowledge about it.


Yeah, right.

including inaccuracies in the
understanding of the language?

Spare me your comment on language, your half-baked
understanding does not impress me.


I can see that we agree to disagree. Since you seem unable
to use the language and its word meanings in a consistent
and agreed upon way, don't talk to me about "half-baked
understanding".


So you are saying that because you don't agree with my way of using the
language that I'm unable to use the language? "half-baked
understanding" it is.

As discussed above, you MUST NOT use words in any other
than their common usage definition UNLESS you give your
definitions first. I agree that you DID define "slip" as
something different that "skid" and have used your
definition throughout our discussion. I do not agree that
"slip" as you defined it is a desirable way to turn nor
that it is even a turn.


This is a newsgroup made
up of skiers who mostly have a decent understanding of
the mechanics and who don't need instruction at this
very elementary level.

Maybe you should go back to the basic so you may actually
learn something new?

I learn something new every day. In skiing and life.


How useful of that something new?


How do you slip the tip again?


By moving my weight back, of course.


That's called "wobbling."

No, it's called getting into the back seat.
Wobbling is what my skis do when they are
trying to move forward in a straight line
with my weight back. From that back seat
position, I can make the tips "slip" in a way
that reduces the radius of a turn that *I
am already making.*

Are you trying out explanations for your teaching on us?

I am talking about how I ski, what, feel that you are been taught?


Actually I know how to ski, the impression I got was that you
were trying out your method of explanation on us.


Not sure how do you get your impression, I'm pretty sure it's not
"method of explanation" but "explanation of method."

I have disagreed that your method of skiing is anything
special, new or even desirable. I have not disagreed that
you may be a successful ski teacher. Your explanations of
method haven't shown me a thing as I have tried to fathom
what you are talking about. Therefore I got the impression
that you were/are trying out explanations of how you
ski/teach on us.

If so, you might enlighten us

Yes, I have provided you information on these scientific facts,


You have not provided a single insight into scientific
fact.


That's to say you are ignorant of scientific facts,

I am hardly ignorant of scientific facts as
they relate to the mechanics of skiing.

You have provided explanations that might be
useful in talking about these scientific facts to
beginners, but I really doubt it.


maybe you have yet begun to be a beginner?


and ask for our input

you have no input but babbling.


Sheesh.


Yes, you keep saying my way is for beginner as your ploy to putdown to
elevate yourself, and you don't even know how did I do it.

If I don't know how you do it, then you haven't explained
yourself very well, have you?

rather that insult us when we say you are not making
sense.

As I said, you can only be insulted by your own incompetence.


It is a sure thing that the folks who post here are not
going to adopt your method as an end-all be-all skiing
technique for ourselves.

It's your skiing, not something I care.


Then why are you trying to convince me?


Where do you get this idea? Self-important? No, I just describe how I
ski, and flatboarding is good skiing.

As you have described it, and even what you have shown
us in pictures and videos, it sure is not good skiing.

And the other
good skiers who read and post here?


So you think you and "the other good skiers" know everything there is
about skiing?

No, of course not, but we don't pretend to as you seem to do.

Many of us could do perfectly
what you have shown us in your videos.

Yeah right.

Actually, you have seen nothing yet.


But why would we want to?

To enjoy the thrill of the ultimate "free" skiing?


Y'know what? I skied today.


A Sierra-at-Tahoe checker scanned my pass couple weeks ago and
surprisingly found out I was there for 39 days for the season already,
but he didn't know I ski Heavenly most the time. I ski everyday,
almost.


I did my "job" that I do
on a volunteer basis for the area where I "work". I
ski pretty well, I love the thrill and the freedom
that skiing gives me. I ski pretty well for an old
duffer and I can ski the legs off many people half my
age.


Never did say that you cannot do that; nevertheless, flatboarding is
another story.

No, I don't believe that flatboarding IS another
story. That's part of my disagreement with you.
You might go back and look at some of the footage
taken of so-called "ballet skier" in the 70's
Suzi Chaffee comes to mind. You might remember
Suzi Chapstick.

Your method may well be of value to skiers just
beginning to get the hang of it. I've been skiing
for many more years than you've been on this earth
and while I haven't "seen it all" I've seen most of it.


If you have skied for thirty years, you should know where I am; you
don't know/cannot see it only because your egotism.

I've got a few more years than that.

Foot, OTOH, is suggesting words and methods for teaching
and is trying to convince us to teach without ego (if
indeed any of us are teachers). One of the things you
have shown us here (I said shown, not proven that you
own) is a huge ego. You have also shown us that at best
you have a barely adequate grasp of the mechanics.

That's what you said, or maybe you just don't know enough?


See above.

This last may well be a failure in language, not actual
knowledge. But the ego is still there.

Ego isn't a problem, we all have one; it is egotism that is
the problem.


Now you are mincing words.


No, just to make the meaning of the words more clearly.


You clearly know what I'm saying.


I know what you are trying to say, but don't think it is accurate.

Your opinion, you may certainly have that. As I am
welcome to my opinion. I'd suggest that you go back
and read some of Foot2Foot's posts regarding taking
the ego/egotism out of the language a ski teacher
uses. It may not be possible for all of us, I certainly
use judgment language (it's bad to be in the back
seat), but maybe I should say move your hands forward
so you won't be in the back seat. I think foot may
have overstated a bit, but I also think he has a lot
of good things to add to a ski discussion, particularly
about teaching and getting ideas across to less than
expert skiers.

"My way is the
only right way and you are an idiot if you don't agree."

That's your egotism talking.


Is it really?


Yes, you sounded like, "My way is the only right way and you are an
idiot if you don't agree."

I think you did a little judicious snipping here and there.


IS


This is what you sound like.

Egotism is one who boasts beyond one's own ability/knowledge
to make oneself [self-]important.

That's what you sound like.


IS


VtSkier

yunlong wrote:
Walt wrote:

Sven Golly wrote:

"yunlong"

No, don't think you can make line adjustment with carving; i.e.

carving

only goes one direction--follows the turning track--if you make a

line

adjustment to the other direction, you'll be slipping.

Then you aren't a good enough skier. Stop by for a lesson.

This is probably as good a proof as any that Mister flat-mouth
doesn't have the foggiest idea what carving is


Or just you a loud-mouth babbling.


(well, other
than those embarrassing home videos he's posted, of course.)


Sorry that you don't have talents to discern the video clips.


Contrary to what he implies, a skier is most definitely *not*
locked into one radius for a carved turn. One can carve short
radius turns, long radius turns, or any radius in between. Or
change radius mid turn.


That's to say turning is a function of "reverse chamber," not carving;
in the "real" world, all carved turns skid, to some degree, and pure
carve doesn't exist. Or, on the other hand, if no skidding is carving,
flatboarding carves infinite radius turns.

Not a all. Carving turns is the function of the side
cut radius AND the decrease of turning radius from
the static turning radius of a ski with sidecut and
no bending created by "reverse camber".

It is also certainly possible and often desirable to
allow a carved turn to skid to some degree.


IS


--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy

yunlong wrote:
Sven Golly wrote:

"yunlong" wrote in
groups.com:


No. However, my inclusion of sidecut as a major factor is
more complete and accurate.

Maybe, or you just draw a snake with legs? (unnecessary and

clumsy.)

No, it's not unnecessary. Sidecut is vital to how a ski turns.


What happens to the skis without sidecut, do they still carve?

Of course. But not anywhere near as easily as skis with sidecut.


As long as a ski without sidecut carves, your inclusion of sidecut is
like a leg on a snake, unnecessary and clumsy.

Ain't nobody here EVER said that a ski without sidecut
will carve, although I think it may be possible through
the use of bending (reverse camber) The only skis made
in the last 50 years without sidecut are/were cross
country skis. Nowadays you can even get some cross
country skis with a little sidecut.


2. Slipping / skidding / sliding / whatever - they're
all the same.
NO ONE in the entire world makes any distinction except
apparently you.

"The entire world" maybe an exaggeration, nevertheless,
to skid the tail to brake and to slip the tip to go do
have a definite distinction and different function.

No they don't.

Yes, they do.

Using the terms SKID and SLIP as distinct and different
actions have no meaning to the skier.


You want to be an ignorant is your business; nevertheless, to skid the
tail to brake the speed and to slip the tip to speed up are functional
skiing techniques.

I don't believe it or at least slipping the tip has
a very limited usefulness, and I've said why.

You have contrived a highly artificial meaning for them.


Thanks for the compliment, no, SKID and SLIP has existed since Newton
time, may be even older than that.


No wonder you confuse people.


Some people just like to confuse themselves.


If the English speakers don't distinguish the difference between
slipping and skidding, why do they create two different words?

Hmm. Because they can?


No, just your ignorance, "skid" and "slip" are physics terms and
scientific facts.


Are you telling me Chinese has absolutely NO words
that mean the same thing? I find that hard to believe. Regardless,

these

two CAN have slightly different meanings but only IN context. In this


case, they do not. Certainly if you tell a beginner or intermediate

to

SLIP your skis don't SKID them, they won't have a clue mechanically

what

the f*** you are talking about.


They don't know because they've never learned it?


That's to say you know little and talk big.

Heh. You're the one redefining English for the rest of us.


Maybe you don't know English well enough? The meaning of the words I
used can be found either in a dictionary or a physics textbook.

a dictionary definition is OK for general use, but a physics
textbook definition is NOT, UNLESS you give the definition
BEFORE you use the word. This is jargonizing and creates
confusion.

To eliminate confusion you must say, this is the word I'm
going to use and here is the meaning I'm giving it which
comes from a Physics 101 textbook. Other wise only the
common use dictionary definitions are permissible. Of
course if the common use dictionary agrees with the
physics book definition, then OK for that.

The "over turn" here is to describe the ski turns/changing
direction more than the carved/standard turn.

Then pick some better words.

What do you suggest?

It used to be called "steering".


Nevertheless, VtSkier said, "it doesn't work for skiing," and a carved
turn doesn't steer.

Huh? I said that "over steering" as applied to automotive
usage doesn't work. In a later post I talked about toe
steering, which is a way to make a carved turn on skis.

Unlike slipping, if you skid, you are turning/changing direction.

Wrong again. You can skid and simply go sideways.


The track of the skis would have already turned. What do you mean by
"turning" in skiing again?



No, don't think you can make line adjustment with carving; i.e.

carving

only goes one direction--follows the turning track--if you make a

line

adjustment to the other direction, you'll be slipping.

Then you aren't a good enough skier.


Or just you, are ignorant of physical facts. Learn some basic physics.

I've already discussed this in another post.

Stop by for a lesson.


No, thanks, I don't turn up and down like a yo-yo just because it is
carved turn; maybe you should learn that there are more skiing than
just carved turn.

Well there certainly is, and most of us here agree. I, for
one, just don't see a "slipped" turn as you have described
it as being something out of the ordinary, something new,
or even something desirable. As you described a slipped turn,
actually an "anti-turn", because, as you describe it, you
are in fact increasing the radius of a turn you are already
making. Slipping, as you describe it, can only be done
effectively with your weight biased to the rear. You are
in the back seat. There are better, safer, more effective
ways to "increase the radius of a turn" or in an older
definition or way of describing "stopping the turn" which
is just as it says, making the turn become a traverse or
a straight shot down the fall line. These last two, a
traverse or a straight shot down the fall line are the
only two conditions skis can have if they are not turning,
by definition.

I sure hope no beginners or intermediates are paying
attention to you.

They are.

Damn.

Can't stand others making progress?

No, that they are listening to you. Progress must come in
spite of what you teach.


That's good enough.


IS


--
Sven Golly
Trolling as usual
Remove "_" to reply

VtSkier wrote:
yunlong wrote:

Walt wrote:

Sven Golly wrote:

"yunlong"


No, don't think you can make line adjustment with carving; i.e.


carving

only goes one direction--follows the turning track--if you make a


line

adjustment to the other direction, you'll be slipping.


Then you aren't a good enough skier. Stop by for a lesson.


This is probably as good a proof as any that Mister flat-mouth
doesn't have the foggiest idea what carving is



Or just you a loud-mouth babbling.


(well, other
than those embarrassing home videos he's posted, of course.)



Sorry that you don't have talents to discern the video clips.


Contrary to what he implies, a skier is most definitely *not*
locked into one radius for a carved turn. One can carve short
radius turns, long radius turns, or any radius in between. Or
change radius mid turn.



That's to say turning is a function of "reverse chamber," not carving;
in the "real" world, all carved turns skid, to some degree, and pure
carve doesn't exist. Or, on the other hand, if no skidding is carving,
flatboarding carves infinite radius turns.


Not a all. Carving turns is the function of the side
cut radius AND the decrease of turning radius from
the static turning radius of a ski with sidecut and
no bending created by "reverse camber".

It is also certainly possible and often desirable to
allow a carved turn to skid to some degree.

Man, am I sick of skiers obsessing about carved turns. Yeah, learn how
to do a carved turn, then move on. Yikes. Its like skiers really think
that the carved turn is the pinnacle of skiing. What a bunch of
rubbish. I was out with one of my instructor friends last week and we
bombered down a nice groomer, laying down parallel grooves in the snow,
stopping every once in a while to try and find a skid (slip?) mark in
each other's tracks (I lost mostly). This was fun for two runs. We
were laughing about it up and down the hill and making fun of how skiers
take it so seriously.

Then we went skiing for real: bumps, trees, a nice cornice drop and
some cut up powder. Twas fun. Sometimes I was carving, sometimes
skidding (slipping?), sometimes flying [are you slipping, skidding or
carving when catching air??]. I didn't really give a flying **** what
kind of turn I was doing as long as I was making the turn when, how and
where I felt like turning.

So get over it, shut up and post about skiing.

RAC

VtSkier wrote:

yunlong wrote:

Sven Golly wrote:

As long as a ski without sidecut carves, your inclusion of sidecut is
like a leg on a snake, unnecessary and clumsy.

Ain't nobody here EVER said that a ski without sidecut
will carve, although I think it may be possible through
the use of bending (reverse camber) The only skis made
in the last 50 years without sidecut are/were cross
country skis. Nowadays you can even get some cross
country skis with a little sidecut.

snip lotsa bull

Shane McConkey designed some skis a few years back that were *wider* in
the waist than the tails or tips. I don't remember the details or the
name, but I think he thought they made for big mountain skiing. Too
lazy to google it, but you're welcome to try.

RAC

Sven Golly wrote:

VtSkier wrote in news:377jalF58lv5qU1
@individual.net:


Your statement above is a lame attempt to weasel
out of statements made by you that don't hold water.

In fact the quote you used I would interpret a
slightly different way. I might say that Chuang-Tzu
is telling us to listen to the explanation and
then do the task. No more, no less. Once you can
do the task, the words (explanation) are unnecessary.


In fact, I think Ichin has totally misunderstood the original text.
Google is your friend....

The bait is the means to get the fish where you want it,
catch the fish and you forget the bait.
The snare is the means to get the rabbit where you
want it,
catch the rabbit and forget the snare.
Words are the means to get the idea where you want it,
catch on to the idea and you forget about the words.
Where shall I find a man who forgets about words,
and have a word with him?
- Chuang Tzu

Carving is a way to get down a mountain,
Get down the mountain and you forget about carving.

RAC

VtSkier wrote:
yunlong wrote:

As long as a ski without sidecut carves, your inclusion of sidecut is
like a leg on a snake, unnecessary and clumsy.

Ain't nobody here EVER said that a ski without sidecut
will carve, although I think it may be possible through
the use of bending (reverse camber) The only skis made
in the last 50 years without sidecut are/were cross
country skis. Nowadays you can even get some cross
country skis with a little sidecut.

Make that 100 years plus. You have to go back to the long board racers
in the 1860 gold fields here in California to find skis without sidecut
in the museums. All skis made for alpine (downhill) skiing in the last
100 years at least have had sidecut (and most have camber - don't forget
blocking your wood skis and tying the shovel and tail in order to
preserve the camber circa 1950 for you and me, but earlier for the
earlier folks.)

I'd like to someday examine some of those ancient skis found in peat
bogs and such for construction details. Actually Volant produced a ski
recently with reverse sidecut - wider underfoot than ends - good only in
soft snow where you ride the bottoms and not the edges. No sidecut, no
carved turns on flat hard snow - only skidded turns.

(We should find a film of Stein 1950ish to prove to the wuss brigade
that carving was done on wood skis in the good ol days - or just about
anyone else - Tony Sailer, Toni Mott, Dick Durrance, thousands of them
carving away in the 1930s and on...)





2. Slipping / skidding / sliding / whatever - they're
all the same.
NO ONE in the entire world makes any distinction except
apparently you.


"The entire world" maybe an exaggeration, nevertheless,
to skid the tail to brake and to slip the tip to go do
have a definite distinction and different function.


No they don't.


Yes, they do.


Using the terms SKID and SLIP as distinct and different
actions have no meaning to the skier.



You want to be an ignorant is your business; nevertheless, to skid the
tail to brake the speed and to slip the tip to speed up are functional
skiing techniques.

I don't believe it or at least slipping the tip has
a very limited usefulness, and I've said why.


You have contrived a highly artificial meaning for them.



Thanks for the compliment, no, SKID and SLIP has existed since Newton
time, may be even older than that.


No wonder you confuse people.



Some people just like to confuse themselves.


If the English speakers don't distinguish the difference between
slipping and skidding, why do they create two different words?


Hmm. Because they can?



No, just your ignorance, "skid" and "slip" are physics terms and
scientific facts.


Are you telling me Chinese has absolutely NO words
that mean the same thing? I find that hard to believe. Regardless,


these

two CAN have slightly different meanings but only IN context. In this



case, they do not. Certainly if you tell a beginner or intermediate


to

SLIP your skis don't SKID them, they won't have a clue mechanically


what

the f*** you are talking about.



They don't know because they've never learned it?


That's to say you know little and talk big.


Heh. You're the one redefining English for the rest of us.



Maybe you don't know English well enough? The meaning of the words I
used can be found either in a dictionary or a physics textbook.

a dictionary definition is OK for general use, but a physics
textbook definition is NOT, UNLESS you give the definition
BEFORE you use the word. This is jargonizing and creates
confusion.

To eliminate confusion you must say, this is the word I'm
going to use and here is the meaning I'm giving it which
comes from a Physics 101 textbook. Other wise only the
common use dictionary definitions are permissible. Of
course if the common use dictionary agrees with the
physics book definition, then OK for that.


The "over turn" here is to describe the ski turns/changing
direction more than the carved/standard turn.


Then pick some better words.


What do you suggest?


It used to be called "steering".



Nevertheless, VtSkier said, "it doesn't work for skiing," and a carved
turn doesn't steer.

Huh? I said that "over steering" as applied to automotive
usage doesn't work. In a later post I talked about toe
steering, which is a way to make a carved turn on skis.


Unlike slipping, if you skid, you are turning/changing direction.


Wrong again. You can skid and simply go sideways.



The track of the skis would have already turned. What do you mean by
"turning" in skiing again?



No, don't think you can make line adjustment with carving; i.e.


carving

only goes one direction--follows the turning track--if you make a


line

adjustment to the other direction, you'll be slipping.


Then you aren't a good enough skier.



Or just you, are ignorant of physical facts. Learn some basic physics.

I've already discussed this in another post.


Stop by for a lesson.



No, thanks, I don't turn up and down like a yo-yo just because it is
carved turn; maybe you should learn that there are more skiing than
just carved turn.

Well there certainly is, and most of us here agree. I, for
one, just don't see a "slipped" turn as you have described
it as being something out of the ordinary, something new,
or even something desirable. As you described a slipped turn,
actually an "anti-turn", because, as you describe it, you
are in fact increasing the radius of a turn you are already
making. Slipping, as you describe it, can only be done
effectively with your weight biased to the rear. You are
in the back seat. There are better, safer, more effective
ways to "increase the radius of a turn" or in an older
definition or way of describing "stopping the turn" which
is just as it says, making the turn become a traverse or
a straight shot down the fall line. These last two, a
traverse or a straight shot down the fall line are the
only two conditions skis can have if they are not turning,
by definition.


I sure hope no beginners or intermediates are paying
attention to you.


They are.


Damn.


Can't stand others making progress?


No, that they are listening to you. Progress must come in
spite of what you teach.



That's good enough.


IS


--
Sven Golly
Trolling as usual
Remove "_" to reply

"rosco" wrote in message
Man, am I sick of skiers obsessing about carved turns. Yeah, learn how to
do a carved turn, then move on. Yikes. Its like skiers really think that
the carved turn is the pinnacle of skiing. What a bunch of rubbish. I
was out with one of my instructor friends last week and we bombered down a
nice groomer, laying down parallel grooves in the snow, stopping every
once in a while to try and find a skid (slip?) mark in each other's tracks
(I lost mostly). This was fun for two runs. We were laughing about it up
and down the hill and making fun of how skiers take it so seriously.

Then we went skiing for real: bumps, trees, a nice cornice drop and some
cut up powder. Twas fun. Sometimes I was carving, sometimes skidding
(slipping?), sometimes flying [are you slipping, skidding or carving when
catching air??]. I didn't really give a flying **** what kind of turn I
was doing as long as I was making the turn when, how and where I felt like
turning.

So get over it, shut up and post about skiing.

This is so true. I have watched people teach classes of first timers how to
"carve" (rail). It's not such a big thing, it just requires a bit of
balance. Good skiing is being able to mix it up and use whatever works and
whatever feels good.

ant