suggestions for my technique on video

I put some videos of my skiing up on this page:
http://www.roberts-1.com/t/x07/q/a
Please take a look and give me suggestions for things I can work on next. Or
if you just notice something interesting, I'm glad to hear about it so I can
find it and start thinking about it.

I've been working on my technique for several years, and progress has been
slower than I ever would have guessed -- but comments from other people on
my videos have really helped. The video clips on this page are on rollerskis
last weekend -- because I haven't gotten on snow yet. My focus is on
uphills: V1 skate (a.k.a "offset", "paddle-dance") and Legs-only skating
(with no poles).

The videos are short, just 3 or 4 complete "stroke cycles" of skiing, so I
think it really helps to be able to view them in "single frame advance" or
slow motion. My version of Windows Media Player does not support "frame by
frame" viewing, so I prefer to use the Apple Quicktime player, which easily
does single-frame advance (or reverse) viewing by Pausing and then using the
Right and Left Arrow keys.

The "Low-resolution" videos are in MPEG1 format, which is likely good enough
for most analysis of skiing technique, and is supported by most viewers. The
"Hi-res" videos can be nice for seeing details. They are supposedly in MPEG2
format, but I've had trouble viewing them on some machines and with some
software (including Quicktime) -- I'd be to know how to fix that.

The videos were all taken by Sharon with just a digital camera, not a
camcorder. It's nice what you can do nowadays without special equipment.

Ken

Overall, improving.

No pole - you're running on rollerskis vs. skating ski to ski, which
can be done even with minimal glide. There isn't any glide, however
limited you are by the terrain. My opinion is the hill is too steep and
is distorting your motion. Start on a milder hill and get the
technique down. As the hill steeepens, more leg compression is used
to keep skating.

V1 - Compare yours with better WC skiers. You're timing appears off.
The idea is to set up high so to start poling and ski placement at
virtually the same time. Right now it appears that half the
compression is used before the ski makes it down. Picking up and
carrying the other foot forward exacerbates the problem, as does having
the offside hand out so wide, which limits its contribution and leaves
you on one side. I'd suggest lowering the offside hand a bit, tho there
are different schools on that these days (at least in the States).

rm



"Ken Roberts" wrote:

I put some videos of my skiing up on this page:
http://www.roberts-1.com/t/x07/q/a
Please take a look and give me suggestions for things I can work on next. Or
if you just notice something interesting, I'm glad to hear about it so I can
find it and start thinking about it.

I've been working on my technique for several years, and progress has been
slower than I ever would have guessed -- but comments from other people on
my videos have really helped. The video clips on this page are on rollerskis
last weekend -- because I haven't gotten on snow yet. My focus is on
uphills: V1 skate (a.k.a "offset", "paddle-dance") and Legs-only skating
(with no poles).

The videos are short, just 3 or 4 complete "stroke cycles" of skiing, so I
think it really helps to be able to view them in "single frame advance" or
slow motion. My version of Windows Media Player does not support "frame by
frame" viewing, so I prefer to use the Apple Quicktime player, which easily
does single-frame advance (or reverse) viewing by Pausing and then using the
Right and Left Arrow keys.

The "Low-resolution" videos are in MPEG1 format, which is likely good enough
for most analysis of skiing technique, and is supported by most viewers. The
"Hi-res" videos can be nice for seeing details. They are supposedly in MPEG2
format, but I've had trouble viewing them on some machines and with some
software (including Quicktime) -- I'd be to know how to fix that.

The videos were all taken by Sharon with just a digital camera, not a
camcorder. It's nice what you can do nowadays without special equipment.

Ken

rm wrote
No pole - you're running on rollerskis vs. skating ski to ski, which
can be done even with minimal glide ... the hill is too steep and
is distorting your motion. Start on a milder hill and get the
technique down. As the hill steepens, more leg compression is
used to keep skating.

Yes that hill was kinda steep for demonstrating V1 skate technique. The
downside of getting my technique video shot by Sharon for free is that it
gets squeezed in between lots of other stuff -- so there isn't time to find
the perfect hill. Both of those "No poles skating" videos were on the
second hill we used for shooting: the first hill was even steeper.

Yes I'd like to have more glide. Maybe I should try to feel myself pushing
more sideways across to the other ski, and gliding a little more out to the
side.

btw - Were you able to view those videos in frame-by-frame mode or in slow
motion?

Ken

P.S. "Light and Quick" -- this confuses me.
Seemed like three or four years ago some nationally-known American coaches
were saying that the way to handle steep hills was to skate "light and
quick". Was that another one of those temporary fads? How do you tell the
difference between "light and quick" and "sorta like running up the hill"?

I calculated my cadence frequency on those videos, and it was around 56 rpm
in the No poles skating and in V1 front view, and 50 rpm on the V1 side
view. Then I looked at a video of Carl Swenson doing V1 skate up a hill in a
World Cup race, and it was about 46 rpm on the longer bottom section, and
then 50 rpm on the steeper top. So seems like my turnover frequency is
higher, which fits the "running up the hill" interpretation. And then I
found a video of Johann Muehlegg in a World Cup race climbing a steep hill,
and he was doing over 60 rpm. But maybe cadence frequency is not the point.

rm wrote
As the hill steepens, more leg compression
is used to keep skating.

This idea of getting more "leg compression" is looking very interesting. I
used frame-by-frame analysis on a V1 uphill video clip of Carl Swenson in a
World Cup race, and I noticed that on the steeper section where his turnover
frequency increases, his knee is more bent than mine (especially comparing
on the recovery side, where my knee is bent less).

It looked like this is how Swenson was doing it: He extended his leg-push
further and straighter, which required that his hips fall down further.
Since his hips were closer to the ground, the set-down of his next foot had
to be on a more bent knee. I think his hips had dropped so low that there
wasn't space underneath to plant his foot directly vertically under its hip,
so he planted it further out to the side than I do -- but even that allowing
himself more length between hip and foot, his knee was still more bent than
mine.

Swenson was getting way more range-of-motion extension in his leg-push than
I am.

The funny thing is that in that steeper section of the hill, his glide
length on each leg is significantly less than one ski-length, so around 1
meter. And my glide length in the side view of V1 averages 1 meter or more
(which likely shows that Swenson's hill is steeper). So surprising
implication is that the big difference between Swenson's and my V1
hill-climbing is not that his glide is longer but that his push is longer.

"Leg compression" on hills -- a whole new idea for me to try.
(Do I have the strength for it?)

Ken

Ken, FWIW I think you've really improved from the vids. you posted a
couple of years ago. I might have been one who encouraged you to
decrease the written analysis and increase some direct lessons with a
pro. Either way, you may be discouraged, but you look pretty good in a
functional sense, to me. I love learning and practicing technique, but
really, perfect technique is a goal, not a state and if I skied as
strong with decent technique like you, I'd be pretty damn happy.
Imperfect? yes. But not awful, imho, really pretty decent.

That said, I am still skeptical that you can get meaningful help from
people analysing your videos in writing as opposed to person to person.
I think the real way to improve is for someone to directly observe
your skiing (in person and/or on vid.) and demonstrate directly what
you're doing wrong and what to do right. Directly tweak individual
aspects of your skiing.

I just remain skeptical that a physical skill can be taught by written
or spoken instruction. Of course, it can help and be part of the
program, but that's just my opinion.

Regardless, lookin' good, and good luck!

Yesterday's Europort Biathlon coverage had me amazed. A low camera position
showed the skier from behind, going up a steep hill. A LOT of forward ground
was covered with each next ski landing. The longer forward "step",
regardless of the resulting glide, may well cost a few rpm points?

Camilo wrote:
I am still skeptical that you can get meaningful help from
people analysing your videos in writing as opposed to
person to person.

I think both ways have worked well for me in the past. And it happened
for me again this time . . . like rm's suggestion about using more leg
compression V1 up hills. It contradicted my own theory, but I looked at
some videos of World Cup racers, then thought about the physics behind
it -- changed my theory and started practicing the new way.

Second day on snow I used it to help achieve a goal that had been on my
list for a long time: Skate on snow to the top of Mill Creek Canyon in
Salt Lake City without pausing and without using herringbone skate, and
with some glide in every stride. Mill Creek from the road closure gate
to the turnaround at the yurt by Big Water is somewhere around +445
meters vertical in 7.25km (1460ft in 4 miles) for an average steepness
around 6% grade.
(Probably lots of serious skiers reading this group wouldn't find that
a challenge, but when I tried it around when my last videos were posted
there was no way I could climb it without stopping for rest several
times.)

The main disadvantage of getting suggestions about your technique by
different means from multiple people is that you'll hear different
ideas with conflicting priorities -- and sometimes contradictory ideas
-- so you'll have to be prepared to deal with that. For me that
situation is kinda stimulating (and just what I expect from something
as complicated as human skating) -- but perhaps for somebody else it
could be more like paralyzing. Find out what works for you.

Ken

Hi, ken

I used to teach downhill ski and one of the "rule" is "Don't look
yourself ski (to make sure you're doing well)".
I recently followed a bike course and the teacher said "The bike goes
where the biker looks".

Your overall technique is good but a bit "self-centered".

Perhaps looking ahead could help to go forward.
I had checked this for myself. I look a few meters ahead and regularly
further.


BTW, almost no snow on XC trails in France this year.

wrote:
Hi, ken

I used to teach downhill ski and one of the "rule" is "Don't look
yourself ski (to make sure you're doing well)".
I recently followed a bike course and the teacher said "The bike goes
where the biker looks".

Your overall technique is good but a bit "self-centered".

Perhaps looking ahead could help to go forward.
I had checked this for myself. I look a few meters ahead and regularly
further.

Especially important going up hill. Keeping the eyes up at the top of
the hill rather than at your skis or a few yards ahead helps keep the
hips forward (avoiding toilet seat) and keeps the motions going up.
This needs to be done at the same time as the relaxed shoulders and
neck - in other words, you need to keep that upper body curve and avoid
arching or craning the neck to look uphill.

My way of thinking about this is I call it my "evil eye" position. It
is what my daughters give me regularly. Face and neck kind of slumped
downward, but looking up at me from the tops of their eyes. If that
makes sense. It probably does to fathers of daughters. They all do
it. I've tested it on their friends.

This needs to be done at the same time as the relaxed shoulders and
neck - in other words, you need to keep that upper body curve and avoid
arching or craning the neck to look uphill.

My way of thinking about this is I call it my "evil eye" position. It
is what my daughters give me regularly. Face and neck kind of slumped
downward, but looking up at me from the tops of their eyes.

That's it.
Exactly what I'm doing when skiing.