Agree
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Ankle Flexion--Active or "Passive"?
- Thread starter AmyPJ
- Start date
Understandable. However, I cannot engage the anterior tibialis without my toes raising somewhat. And I cannot raise my toes without the ant. tibialis engaging. But that may be just me. Either way, feeling my toes rise a little in the boot is one cue for me that things are going 'according to plan'. A bit off topic but a big piece for me was learning to stop clenching/gripping with my toes - concentrating on relaxing my toes was critical for me to improve my skiing.
My cue.. I raise my instep, not my toes. FWIW.
I know
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2017
- Posts
- 1,625
For me, the cue "close the ankle" leads me to lifting the top of my foot, which I guess is the instep, towards the boot. The times that I've lifted my toes, the rest of the foot doesn't come with it in a way that closes the ankle.
Hmmm.
We all agree that attempting to lift the foot inside the boot does nothing to pressure the tongue or the shovel all by itself, right? That tibial muscle is way too weak to do that. Instead it's basically a way to clear the decks of muscular obstruction - i.e. of any unconscious counterproductive plantar flexion - so that the ankle can bend and permit the knees and hips to move forward, putting the mass of the body in a place where the boot can be flexed effectively.
If the ceiling of your boot is really low then, as LF says, your forefoot doesn't actually go anywhere when you attempt to lift it. If your ceiling is a little higher then it DOES. In that case isn't it possible to lift your forefoot and successfully close the ankle a bit without actually succeeding in the goal of moving your mass forward or pressuring the tongue?
For me, the tibialis anterior in the shin works with the abductors and flexors over the metatarsals (toe lift) as a tension cue for the dorsiflexion and, ultimately, the CoM placement we seek. I think it is agreed that these muscles are not strong enough to power the corresponding movements we produce. While I do not use muscle contractions for gross motor movements in skiing, I do manage a network of muscular tension up and down the chain to get me and keep me where I need to be. Ron Kipp also has a video where he touches on the concept of the “cone of tension” regarding the CoM/BoS relationship. As a bootfitter, I have talked about a corresponding cone of tension that we seek from a boot. The boot’s cone of tension is often indicated by putting on a boot without the liner and examining the gap to the front, back and sides between the shin and shell during a neutral stance. If our boot’s cone of tension does not correspond with the cone of stability sought, we have work to do on our boots.
In the above video, he discusses all the misinterpretations we can make about movement analysis. I might add that some of the problem is all the ‘movement’ analysis people like to do on ‘still’ photographs which, to me, highlights the issue of making such assumptions with video. One example may be how HH keeps saying that Hirscher uses “pullback”. But, as far as all my perusing would suggest, he never asked him what he does regarding this assumption or has even ever interviewed him face to face. What is Hirscer’s intent? How does he muscularly derive this outcome? Does he even use a muscle to do this? Does he even need to worry about it in the first place? How would anyone know without going to the horse’s mouth? I read a lot and watch a lot of video and have never read or heard any worldcup racer discuss pullback at all yet it is a key piece of dogma spread far and wide … based on what an athlete is assumed to be doing. The truth is that a skier’s individual biomechanics (strengths, weaknesses, mobility and skeletal measurements) for skiers competing in the same discipline make up most of the differences in aesthetic output than their intellectual expression of technique. I certainly agree with his list of fundamentals, the top three of which I have promoted elsewhere: Simultaneous edge release, skis move together, skis stay parallel and so on. While these don’t always happen, they do when things are working as expected.
The “crux”of the OP being how people could be describing the same technique with different words and even competing frames of reference has me thinking. In order to be able to reconcile all these different concepts, tips, instructions, movements and cues from different frames of reference and schools of thought, a skier needs to have a specific goal that this information will help lead them to. Like robbing a bank, we want to think about all those bags of cash in our hands then work our way backwards. Otherwise, what’s the point? For me, this is the management of the CoM to BoS relationship which should ultimately lead to a wealth of ski to snow interaction outcome.
We all tend to refer to our balance through the management of the relationship between our center of mass and base of support. This balance is not just for keeping from falling over but also to give the skier control over their skis. It is typical to imagine the CoM and BoS as areas the size of a basketball, one near our feet and the other near our hips. An instructor or any external observer can visually detect how a skier is managing this relationship. However, have you ever seen a skier with good CoM/BoS management but with a paltry output from the ski? Well balanced but low end performance? Good flexion but no zing? That is because their sense of balance alignment may be limited to making macro movements that are externally visible. Now, imagine a more refined sense of balance. Micro movements for balance that can not be seen by the naked eye because this level of control is in the ankle and hidden under the boot shell. Imagine a single point the size of a centimeter that moves around within these spheres the size of a basketball. Let us refer to the small point floating around within the top ball, or the CoM, as our center of gravity (CoG) and another small point within the bottom ball, or the BoS, referred to as the center of pressure (CoP) that lies on the snow surface anywhere within the footprint of both skis. Now, while the CoM/BoS may be well aligned, the CoG/CoP may not be quite aligned with the returning force from the ski, also referred to as the Ground Force Vector (GFV). We can refer to the CoG/CoP alignment as the Line of Gravity (LoG).
Why is it important to have the LoG aligned with the GFV one may ask? An example of this balanced based control would be how, the more centered a person standing on a large ball is, the more control (freedom) they have to depart the ball in any direction. The further the person is off the top center of the ball, the more reduced the directional options of departure from the ball there would be. Now, let’s imagine that ball sitting on a platform that is swinging from side to side, a little back and forth while the subject maintains the ability to depart the ball in any direction at any moment and now we return to the complicated machinations of an advanced skier’s alignment. When a skier’s LoG remains aligned with the GFV and it’s constant volatility, they have the most options regarding how to pressure the boot and apply the ski and its edges to the snow, which, in turn, creates that responding GFV and continuing the cycle. A skier with a well aligned LoG has the level of control needed to “juice” the ski when it comes to acceleration, impulse and deflection thus achieving the highest level of power and efficiency from the ski. However, in order to remain over this constantly shifting fine tuned alignment, the LoG needs to be able to lead the GFV in the direction it is going. One degree ahead and you are rocking. One degree behind and you will be struggling to make the ski do what you want. Two, three, four degrees? Ugh!
A skier needs to be able to feel this fine tuned alignment and whether it is present by the way this efficacy over the skis fluctuates. If a skier does not know what they are ultimately seeking with CoM/BoS, LoG/GFV and ski to snow interaction outcome, they may not be able to navigate the benefits of all the many instructions, tips, patterns, and concepts coming from different frames of reference and schools of thought. Anytime you need to assess what you are being told, the frame of reference and school of thought from whence it came won’t matter much if you can just funnel it through a screen of knowledge regarding the Com/BoS relationship, LoG/GFV alignment and ski to snow interaction outcome.
In the above video, he discusses all the misinterpretations we can make about movement analysis. I might add that some of the problem is all the ‘movement’ analysis people like to do on ‘still’ photographs which, to me, highlights the issue of making such assumptions with video. One example may be how HH keeps saying that Hirscher uses “pullback”. But, as far as all my perusing would suggest, he never asked him what he does regarding this assumption or has even ever interviewed him face to face. What is Hirscer’s intent? How does he muscularly derive this outcome? Does he even use a muscle to do this? Does he even need to worry about it in the first place? How would anyone know without going to the horse’s mouth? I read a lot and watch a lot of video and have never read or heard any worldcup racer discuss pullback at all yet it is a key piece of dogma spread far and wide … based on what an athlete is assumed to be doing. The truth is that a skier’s individual biomechanics (strengths, weaknesses, mobility and skeletal measurements) for skiers competing in the same discipline make up most of the differences in aesthetic output than their intellectual expression of technique. I certainly agree with his list of fundamentals, the top three of which I have promoted elsewhere: Simultaneous edge release, skis move together, skis stay parallel and so on. While these don’t always happen, they do when things are working as expected.
The “crux”of the OP being how people could be describing the same technique with different words and even competing frames of reference has me thinking. In order to be able to reconcile all these different concepts, tips, instructions, movements and cues from different frames of reference and schools of thought, a skier needs to have a specific goal that this information will help lead them to. Like robbing a bank, we want to think about all those bags of cash in our hands then work our way backwards. Otherwise, what’s the point? For me, this is the management of the CoM to BoS relationship which should ultimately lead to a wealth of ski to snow interaction outcome.
We all tend to refer to our balance through the management of the relationship between our center of mass and base of support. This balance is not just for keeping from falling over but also to give the skier control over their skis. It is typical to imagine the CoM and BoS as areas the size of a basketball, one near our feet and the other near our hips. An instructor or any external observer can visually detect how a skier is managing this relationship. However, have you ever seen a skier with good CoM/BoS management but with a paltry output from the ski? Well balanced but low end performance? Good flexion but no zing? That is because their sense of balance alignment may be limited to making macro movements that are externally visible. Now, imagine a more refined sense of balance. Micro movements for balance that can not be seen by the naked eye because this level of control is in the ankle and hidden under the boot shell. Imagine a single point the size of a centimeter that moves around within these spheres the size of a basketball. Let us refer to the small point floating around within the top ball, or the CoM, as our center of gravity (CoG) and another small point within the bottom ball, or the BoS, referred to as the center of pressure (CoP) that lies on the snow surface anywhere within the footprint of both skis. Now, while the CoM/BoS may be well aligned, the CoG/CoP may not be quite aligned with the returning force from the ski, also referred to as the Ground Force Vector (GFV). We can refer to the CoG/CoP alignment as the Line of Gravity (LoG).
Why is it important to have the LoG aligned with the GFV one may ask? An example of this balanced based control would be how, the more centered a person standing on a large ball is, the more control (freedom) they have to depart the ball in any direction. The further the person is off the top center of the ball, the more reduced the directional options of departure from the ball there would be. Now, let’s imagine that ball sitting on a platform that is swinging from side to side, a little back and forth while the subject maintains the ability to depart the ball in any direction at any moment and now we return to the complicated machinations of an advanced skier’s alignment. When a skier’s LoG remains aligned with the GFV and it’s constant volatility, they have the most options regarding how to pressure the boot and apply the ski and its edges to the snow, which, in turn, creates that responding GFV and continuing the cycle. A skier with a well aligned LoG has the level of control needed to “juice” the ski when it comes to acceleration, impulse and deflection thus achieving the highest level of power and efficiency from the ski. However, in order to remain over this constantly shifting fine tuned alignment, the LoG needs to be able to lead the GFV in the direction it is going. One degree ahead and you are rocking. One degree behind and you will be struggling to make the ski do what you want. Two, three, four degrees? Ugh!
A skier needs to be able to feel this fine tuned alignment and whether it is present by the way this efficacy over the skis fluctuates. If a skier does not know what they are ultimately seeking with CoM/BoS, LoG/GFV and ski to snow interaction outcome, they may not be able to navigate the benefits of all the many instructions, tips, patterns, and concepts coming from different frames of reference and schools of thought. Anytime you need to assess what you are being told, the frame of reference and school of thought from whence it came won’t matter much if you can just funnel it through a screen of knowledge regarding the Com/BoS relationship, LoG/GFV alignment and ski to snow interaction outcome.
following for when I have more time to process this discussion
Yeah, totally. We all learn skiing backwards, regressing from WC to noob. From deeply knowing exactly what we seek, what interaction to the outcome of every 3-letter acronym, to not knowing squat. From making some sense with little entropy, to not making any sense at high entropy...
I sympathize, actually: all these noobs, should first ski really well to deeply know what they seek and only then come to us for instructions, tips, patterns and concepts. It's so annoying when they try to do it the other way around and ask for advice before knowing what they are seeking... as if they think us instructors know what to seek... so weird!
p.s. So in 3 out of your 3 posts on this thread, you're fascinated with HH and his stuff. Which nobody else brought up so far. Do you have any other actual interests, i.e. the subject of this particular thread, or ski technique in general, outside of how it is described by this or that person? Not that it should make a difference, but FYI: HH did talk directly to Marcel. Or his dad/coach, I forget. Whatever. Since you were wondering. And Hirsher's intent was to be the best and win everything. And my intent is to ski better. Can we get over that?
p.s.2 Ron Kipp is wrong
like we all are sometimes. He says skis are in the fall line at gate passage and then shows this. Does that look like gate passage to you? Or fall line?Also, there's snow spray from the inside ski
. And the skis are not parallel, since the outside is bent while the inside is not. And we know the skis don't move together, because the outside does a bigger arc, on the outside of the banana... For instance. Was he right at all? Shall we split this in more detail? (mind you, this is in the middle of a video about not looking for absolutes...) so what are the absolutes? Are there any? Now what? Is there even a tomorrow?Attachments
Last edited:
When I lift my instep while standing statically on my skis (and I don't have excess ceiling height at all), my TA fires, ankle closes, and my CoM moves forward just a bit. It's that bit where the magic happens. I don't need to crush the cuff, merely engage it. While sliding slowly forward and doing the same, my feet might move back a bit, or my body moves forward (chicken and the egg). Teaching someone the cues to close their ankles without engaging muscles unnecessarily high up the chain ( a la toe lifting) is a game changer for a lot of folks. If one can move their CoM relative to the BoS even two - three inches down the hill through linked arcs, much good will happen, then refinement can be worked on i.e., timing, opening and closing of ankles, etc... if I could show you this on snow, I think you'd find it useful for finding balance with and over the skis, both in fore aft, and laterally blended movements. That's all I've got for now. Start small as close to the snow as you can, then work up.... eventually with mastery, everything happens concurrently.
Last edited:
@Tony S no, the TA is not weak. It can be weaker if not used or not exercised / no awareness on using it, here are some ideas to improve it, off snow: https://www.wikihow.com/Exercise-Tibialis-Anterior
To @markojp point, the body may move forward, if the ski is weighted/engaged (lot of effort to move that much mass) or the foot may move back, especially if the foot/ski is not weighted/engaged, say I jumped up
. Often, I find it useful to think of its function as "keeping things in the right place".
Last edited:
Often, I find it useful to think of its function as "keeping things in the right place".
^^^^ that! ^^^^^
Thread Starter
TS
Yes, this is what I was feeling! That tiny shift in COM forward just from that has been enough to make things feel a lot more effortless.
Maybe describing it as closing the ankle from inside the boot vs. closing the ankle from outside the boot makes more sense?
I found the Ron Kipp video on tension. Yes, it describes exactly what I'm working on, right down to the equivalence to riding a horse with the heels down. Tomorrow's word of the day while skiing will be TENSION!
... think 'functional tension'. And yes! Think of working inside the boot! That's where great stuff starts.
WOW 
. This discussion is amazing and kind of blows my mind! So much to learn and so little time. When I ski, I tend to think about 3 things:
1-How can I maximize powder and/or smooth (creamy and dreamy) turns on this run
2-How am I going to get to the accident/injury location in the quickest/safest way and what resources will I need to safely extract the patient
3-When, Where and What will I have for lunch! (Recess and lunch have always been my favorite part of my day since kindergarten)
. This discussion is amazing and kind of blows my mind! So much to learn and so little time. When I ski, I tend to think about 3 things:1-How can I maximize powder and/or smooth (creamy and dreamy) turns on this run
2-How am I going to get to the accident/injury location in the quickest/safest way and what resources will I need to safely extract the patient
3-When, Where and What will I have for lunch! (Recess and lunch have always been my favorite part of my day since kindergarten)
Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm all about the #1 as well... just finding the flow and let the terrain and gravity open the door.
Great video. And of course as in any sport movement is created by engaging muscles and that creates tension. However, in actual performance this should not be perceived as tension but as relaxation. When Steph Curry shoots a basketball from 30 feet, his body feels relaxed and by that the movements will be fluid. That is of course the result of specific practice and dedicated training. Fixation on “feeling tension” will probably not result in good skiing.
It is not. Heel push requires rotary but rotary does not require nor necessarily leads to heel push.
Sponsor
Members online
- HardDaysNight
- robertc3
- AUdicky
- Eleeski
- NAC
- bbinder
- Posaune
- GregK
- Chuck danache
- Philpug
- wtrskir
- Zirbl
- textrovert
- Mendieta
- LuliTheYounger
- deadheadskier
- bisikaufmann
- SKI-AJM
- Andy Mink
- Wasatchman
- BLiP
- trailtrimmer
- Jerez
- Rich McP
- SpeedyKevin
- MissySki
- Gina D
- zircon
- Marker
- BigSlick
- Chris V.
- David Chaus
- Jamesnn
- raytseng
- aveski
- COSkier87
- AngryAnalyst
- LBK454
- Methrensah
- saboteur
- da-cat
- Crank
- AlanR
- xiskiguy
- JoeSchmoe
- Mattadvproject
- BeiJiHu
- jmills115
- Ivan
- doc