If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Technical
I taped the Turin DH from the '06 Olympics and I thought I noticed something
odd in studying it. Viz., that the skiers who were going fastest at the last check tended to finish further back in the pack. Here are the results: Fra Deneriaz 113.2kph 148.80sec Aut Walchofer 114.3 +.70 Sui Kernan - 1.02 Nor Aamodt 115.7 1.08 Usa Miller 111.9 1.13 .... Usa Ralves 112.4 1.53 .... Usa McCartney 116.6 1.88 Table- mc 116 a 115 114 w 113 d r 112 m 111 148 149 150 151 You'd think there would be a line from the 116 to 151; iow the faster the pace the better the time. But there is no correlation; in fact there appears to be the opposite conclusion. So what does that say? The lower skiers are not skiing the right line. You could ski from Turin to Chamonix at Mach 1 but your still going to have a worse time. So you have to balance raw speed and the quickest route between point A and B. If you go too fast you're going to torque yourself out of the best line (or worse, you might wipe out). But if the best speed is not the fastest, then how do you pick the optimal? Do you think racers ever know they skied the best line but didn't go for it enough? Sorry to be so pedantic, but it has been bugging me for a while. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Technical
Mike wrote:
I taped the Turin DH from the '06 Olympics and I thought I noticed something odd in studying it. Viz., that the skiers who were going fastest at the last check tended to finish further back in the pack. Here are the results: Fra Deneriaz 113.2kph 148.80sec Aut Walchofer 114.3 +.70 Sui Kernan - 1.02 Nor Aamodt 115.7 1.08 Usa Miller 111.9 1.13 ... Usa Ralves 112.4 1.53 ... Usa McCartney 116.6 1.88 Table- mc 116 a 115 114 w 113 d r 112 m 111 148 149 150 151 You'd think there would be a line from the 116 to 151; iow the faster the pace the better the time. But there is no correlation; in fact there appears to be the opposite conclusion. So what does that say? The lower skiers are not skiing the right line. You could ski from Turin to Chamonix at Mach 1 but your still going to have a worse time. So you have to balance raw speed and the quickest route between point A and B. If you go too fast you're going to torque yourself out of the best line (or worse, you might wipe out). But if the best speed is not the fastest, then how do you pick the optimal? Do you think racers ever know they skied the best line but didn't go for it enough? Sorry to be so pedantic, but it has been bugging me for a while. This is a snapshot in time. It's a long course and there are lots of variables, including luck. -- Marty |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
LEVEL III THEORY TECHNICAL NCCP | Adam Gale | Nordic Skiing | 0 | November 7th 05 02:41 AM |
Vote in the Bode/Benni shootout | Marty | Alpine Skiing | 9 | March 6th 05 08:55 PM |
Technical Information Needed | johnkuc | Alpine Skiing | 9 | November 17th 04 02:53 PM |
FS: PHENIX Technical Ski jacket | caprice | Marketplace | 0 | June 15th 04 09:28 PM |
[MODPOL] RSAM technical difficulties | klaus | Alpine Skiing | 3 | February 1st 04 02:40 PM |