Advanced on-piste carving: 10 key tips to help you achieve higher edge angles

[esteban525]

Hello all, this is a new post I wrote regarding high-level ski technique. What it gets to really increase your edge angle. It's a long one but a complete one. Hope you enjoy it!

https://www.fedewenzelski.com/advanced-skiing-10-key-tips-to-help-you-achieve-higher-edge-angles/

Cheers!

 

[Chris V.]

This is really great. It hammers on all the key points I've been slowly learning over the past few years. Something to read over and over and over.

One thing I'd opine is that early in the turn, the mix of inclination and angulation will differ from what's described here, for mere mortals skiing at slower speeds. Angulation is needed to build edge angles, where speed isn't adequate to allow for balancing against high inclination. But for anyone looking to get really dynamic, pay attention to the changes needed when upping the speed.

 

[JESinstr]

While I totally agree that modern skiing is about building edge angles and that the days of "Rotary First" are long gone, some of the recommendations are not very well thought through.

For instance, the idea that we throw ourselves into the new turn belies the very concept of bottoms up skiing. The goal in initiating a dynamic carved turn is to get the skis on edge and get them on edge early. The flex to release methodology allows the feet to be brought in under the body and projected uphill, "out and away" and at the same time, I am endeavoring to face my upper body in the intended direction of travel. I am in no way (nor do I have the means) of throwing my body down the hill. I am however, trying to elongate (inclination) so as to set up the process of pressure management as the turn develops.

 

[Chris V.]

For instance, the idea that we throw ourselves into the new turn belies the very concept of bottoms up skiing. The goal in initiating a dynamic carved turn is to get the skis on edge and get them on edge early.

I think the advice on this point needs to be read in context. The post very much emphasizes feet up skiing. If you think certain things should be expressed differently, or the emphasis should be adjusted, so be it. Having been reading this forum a long time, I doubt you two would have any serious disagreement were you to have a conversation

 

[geepers]

Hello all, this is a new post I wrote regarding high-level ski technique. What it gets to really increase your edge angle. It's a long one but a complete one. Hope you enjoy it!

https://www.fedewenzelski.com/looking-for-the-highest-edge-angle/

Cheers!

Interesting article - thanks for posting.

Funny thing about the "Schlopy Drill" - according to the man himself it was intended as an extension drill, not an angulation drill.



(Worth listening to the whole audio podcast of this.)

Had a chuckle at the section "Aggressive Mindset" being immediately followed by "prepare to die" (Thomas Fanara).

 

[ThomasD]

Interesting article - thanks for posting.

Funny thing about the "Schlopy Drill" - according to the man himself it was intended as an extension drill, not an angulation drill.



(Worth listening to the whole audio podcast of this.)

Had a chuckle at the section "Aggressive Mindset" being immediately followed by "prepare to die" (Thomas Fanara).

It's a floor wax and a dessert topping.

In one sense the drill can work both ways, as you need to have good angulation to begin to even consider extension. Did a race clinic last December and during video the instructors kept emphasizing pretty much what he was talking about in relation to that shot put motion. Essentially they were telling us mere mortals to just go for it, and that if we went too far and got past square then we could simply ease off a little bit.

We never came close.

 

[Sanity]

Hello all, this is a new post I wrote regarding high-level ski technique. What it gets to really increase your edge angle. It's a long one but a complete one. Hope you enjoy it!

https://www.fedewenzelski.com/looking-for-the-highest-edge-angle/

Cheers!

I thought it was really fantastic, one of the best comprehensive descriptions I've seen. I just have two comments.

First, you send a little bit of a mixed message on the inside ski. You say, "The inside leg is relaxed and just comes along for the ride." but then a little later you say, "While skiing, the inside leg is much more active than the outside."

Next, this is an excellent description of "advanced skiing" with high edge angles, which is fine. But, as written it gives the impression that this is advanced skiing and anything else isn't advanced skiing. But really, this is advanced skiing for a racing style best used on a racing course. There are other styles and mediums that are just as advance, but have a few different principles. For example, mogul skiing is very advanced skiing, but as taught by Olympic mogul coaches, does not use high edge angles. Because there aren't high edge angles, the skier can maintain shin pressure throughout the entire turn in some bump shapes, and that's a technique that's taught because it has certain necessary advantages for particular styles. If your description became the "bible" and you had many accolades, what would happen is that I'd come on a forum and say that there are benefits to constant shin pressure in some situations, then the accolades would reply that that's not advanced skiing. Then I'd argue that mogul coaches which are very advanced teach it, and eventually the thread would get locked, which is the story of my forum life. So, I think it's best to nip it in the bud before you become the ultimate reference for skiers, and to clarify that your description is advanced skiing for racing. For example, your very first sentence is misleading:

"One of the things that expert skiers have in common is that they can create supreme edge angles" If it's impossible for a great mogul skier not to be able to get supreme edge angles then this sentence would be true, but if a top level mogul skier exists that isn't good at getting supreme edge angles then this sentence would be false. Without having tested all the world's best mogul skiers for their ability to get supreme edge angles, I'll just have to call the sentence misleading and likely wrong. The equivalent reciprocal statement would be that all expert skiers can zipperline a mogul course at 25mph. If you can't do that then you're not an expert skier. We know what kind of vitriolic response that kind of statement would bring from the carving community. A better statement would be, "one of the things that expert ski racers have in common is that they can create supreme edge angles in the turn."

 

[JESinstr]

I think the advice on this point needs to be read in context. The post very much emphasizes feet up skiing. If you think certain things should be expressed differently, or the emphasis should be adjusted, so be it. Having been reading this forum a long time, I doubt you two would have any serious disagreement were you to have a conversation

Chris, While I understand your position, the very notion that parts need to be put "in context" speaks volumes about its readiness for prime time.

This is a good effort IMO and I would hope the author realizes that the written word creates visions and would try to avoid situations where a reader (who has come to learn) needs the ability to contextualize in order to gain value.

 

[LiquidFeet]

....
(Worth listening to the whole audio podcast of this.)
....

Got a link?

 

[Chris V.]

Re Sanity's post, I'll wager that a great mogul skier could create supreme edge angles when desired. I can think of one, who's a full time instructor now, in particular. The program outlined by esteban525 is what most students need, albeit maybe not to such extremes, to develop a baseline that's adaptable to a variety of conditions and tasks.

 

[Henry]

While I totally agree that modern skiing is about building edge angles and that the days of "Rotary First" are long gone, some of the recommendations are not very well thought through.

For instance, the idea that we throw ourselves into the new turn belies the very concept of bottoms up skiing. The goal in initiating a dynamic carved turn is to get the skis on edge and get them on edge early. The flex to release methodology allows the feet to be brought in under the body and projected uphill, "out and away" and at the same time, I am endeavoring to face my upper body in the intended direction of travel. I am in no way (nor do I have the means) of throwing my body down the hill. I am however, trying to elongate (inclination) so as to set up the process of pressure management as the turn develops.

I have a few points where I differ:
-Yes, on edge early.
-Yes, flex to release and they come under the body, but not project the feet uphill out of the way. The skis continue in their arc until they're flattened by the flex, then they are edged the other way and arc the other way. They aren't projected up hill.
-Face the upper body toward the outside of the new turn as soon as the skis are on their new edges. Intended direction of travel sounds like staying square to the skis which throws away upper/lower body separation that we learned in those endless pivot slips.
-I'm not trying to elongate--I let my skis ski away from my body and allow my outside leg to lengthen. I don't want pressure, I want angles.

 

[Sanity]

Re Sanity's post, I'll wager that a great mogul skier could create supreme edge angles when desired. I can think of one, who's a full time instructor now, in particular. The program outlined by esteban525 is what most students need, albeit maybe not to such extremes, to develop a baseline that's adaptable to a variety of conditions and tasks.

Certainly many can. But my point is that high edge angles are integral to racing, but not mogul skiing.

 

[LiquidFeet]

Disagree on two points.

-Yes, flex to release and they come under the body, but not project the feet uphill out of the way. The skis continue in their arc until they're flattened by the flex, then they are edged the other way and arc the other way. They aren't projected up hill.

Disagree. It feels like you are projecting feet back up behind you. Or that you are diving downhill. Two sides of the same coin. You get upside down on the hill. However, if by "project" you mean push skis so they skid uphill, I agree, don't do that.

-Face the upper body toward the outside of the new turn as soon as the skis are on their new edges. Intended direction of travel sounds like staying square to the skis which throws away upper/lower body separation that we learned in those endless pivot slips.

Disagree. The strong separation in pivot slips aids in pivoting. The body naturally unwinds as the skis flatten. This conversation does not involve turns that involve pivoting. Pivot slips involve movement patterns that create turns that are the opposite of carving.

 

[geepers]

Got a link?

It's currently 2nd on the list - 24 March 2022.

 

[LiquidFeet]

Thanks. I love that drill, and use it to generate the stretch that he talks about. But it also prompts some counter. I want to hear more from the man himself.

 

[geepers]

For instance, the idea that we throw ourselves into the new turn belies the very concept of bottoms up skiing. The goal in initiating a dynamic carved turn is to get the skis on edge and get them on edge early. The flex to release methodology allows the feet to be brought in under the body and projected uphill, "out and away" and at the same time, I am endeavoring to face my upper body in the intended direction of travel. I am in no way (nor do I have the means) of throwing my body down the hill. I am however, trying to elongate (inclination) so as to set up the process of pressure management as the turn develops.

Hmmm... would suggest that skier who generates a goodly amount of centripetal force (as you appear to do in your posted vids ) has plenty of means of projecting their body down the hill. At the same time throwing does seem a bit extreme.

It's interesting the different takes instructors have on this.

Tom Gellie is very much an advocate for toppling form one turn to the next and it's a concept discussed in the CSIA manuals and vids.


Richie Berger doesn't seem to be a fan of "falling" into the new turn.


Paul Lorenz uses the concept of centripetal vs centrifugal forces and unbalancing in favor of centrifugal to pull the skier across the skis and into the new turn.


Reilly McGlashan has posted that he doesn't think or use the concept of toppling at all.

-Yes, flex to release and they come under the body, but not project the feet uphill out of the way. The skis continue in their arc until they're flattened by the flex, then they are edged the other way and arc the other way. They aren't projected up hill.

The skis may not actually go up the hill but they are on a different trajectory than the body, they are uphill of the body, and it sure feels like they are going uphill.

 

[geepers]

-Face the upper body toward the outside of the new turn as soon as the skis are on their new edges. Intended direction of travel sounds like staying square to the skis which throws away upper/lower body separation that we learned in those endless pivot slips.

This is another interesting point of difference.

in the article there's a pic of Jett Seymour presumably having just completed a turn to the left is about to go into a turn to the right. Those skis are going to have to go through a fair amount of change of direction before he'll even be square let alone facing the outside of the turn.

It's the last frame here (at the fall line) before Paul Lorenz's hips begins to face out of the turn. In the 4th image we see here's well on to the new edges and still very square to the skis.

Reilly remains quite square.


And recently finished watching Projected Productions Tecnica Pura - Stefano Belingheri (ex-racer with GS podiums), Geri Tumbrasz advocate square to the skis, have drills specifically for it and only really exhibit rotational separation after the fall line. There's no early counter that I see.


No promo clip for Geri's PP...


Also on Tecnica Pura is Elena Re (another ex-racer) is square through transition and into the fall line and she has some interesting drills for exploring this.




Tess Worley - can you point out the early counter 'cause I don't see it.

 

[LiquidFeet]

@geepers, you certainly are the researcher. Great finds.

 

[geepers]

@geepers, you certainly are the researcher. Great finds.

It's been a long, dull summer with no skiing and incessant rain/flooding.

 

[LiquidFeet]

It's been a long, dull summer with no skiing and incessant rain/flooding.

You're stuck down under?