Bump vs speed con't

joegm

joegm

New member
new thread to load faster...anon, to say that because some professional ski team members skied down a bump line with apparent ease shows that racers are necessarily better skiers than bumpers is silly. ( side note, i am not a pro mogul skier... quite to the contrary, i labor at bumps but i love it and try to improve with every turn, but one thing i can say is that one most definitely is not supposed to ski moguls with ARCING G.S TURNS !!!thats how i would expect an alpine racer to (improperly) ski them . like i said in the previous post, the top level skiers in any discipline are the best.. to argue wether the u.s. alpine team should be classified as better skiers than the u.s. freestyle team is an absurd proposition... my contention is based on a recreational level...what you and i and the rest of the masses who do not get paid to ski can realistically expect to be able to attempt... i offer up the following evidence/opinions for your rebuttal... 1) regardless of how much you insist that mogul skiing is a specialized type of skiing, good solid fundamental new school mogul skiing requires a high degree of competancy in just about all of the universally accepted fundamentals of skiing... if any of these are lacking, the mogul skier is immediately exposed... like glen plake says, " with moguls you can't fake it... there is no where to hide "... 2) i've stated this one before but i'll repeat because of tony c's anecdote about the powder test... steeps, ice , powder, trees, jibs/air... attain good solid fundamental new school mogul technique and you will ski all of the above with relative ease and confidence... i dispute the same can be said ( NECESSARILY ) for alpine racers 3) last time i checked, the amount of recreational race leagues in existence trounced the number of recreational mogul race leagues ( i know of none!!!) little kids from ages 5 up to 70 yr olds ( all of widely varying degrees of skill ) compete in nastar races all over the country on a recreational level.. some i would guess for fun , some maybe a little more serious.... to contend that the amount of skill level required to race around some gates set up in the ground excedes the amount of skill required to get through even the tamest mogul line... i must respectfully disagree, again. i offer up the above opines not to disparage racers in any way at all ( although i am of the opinion that they to often have suck attitudes when traveling through the general public to get to the starting gate ). racers are very talented and have a lot of courage to commint to the fall line with the speed with which they have to...i just think moguls are tougher and mogul skiers are just more well rounded and can apply their required skills to more practical situations all over the mountain
 
i kinda lost track of the last discussion due to the length of the last thread and long load times. glad to see a new topic. <BR> <BR>fwiw, i was a crappy bump skier (crappy skier period) until i got schooled in technique as a racer. i then applied skiing technique that i learned while racing to bumps and bingo, not only can i ski them but ski them well after a few years of practice. <BR> <BR>granted, i could have learned proper ski technique through lessons or through working at another aspect of skiing (bumps, powder, etc). but the intensity of virtually free training would take a thousands dollars worth of lessons to match. suffice to say that i could have become a decent bump skier without being trained in racing; however, i credit my general skiing and bumping technique to lessons i learned while race training. <BR> <BR>regarding point 3 made above, recreational leauges and nastar i hesitate to equate with solid race training. nastar courses are generally pretty flat and the local "beer leagues" are nearly straight lines. if this discussion is in specific regards to "recreational skiers," i question whether recreational skiers would gain much in technique from racing unless they are receiving proper training. if no training is taking place, than racing gates will probably do little to improve one's bump skiing. <BR> <BR>essentially, training for gates is just one of many ways to learn the fundamentals of good skiing. they are simply being applied to a particular aspect of skiing (racing) in that situation. once those priciples are learned (in any aspect) they can easily be transfered to the other. my guess would be excellent bump skiers could probably be readily trained quickly to be solid racers. in either case, coaching or lessons or training is required and regardless of bumps or gates you are still being taught the same essentials, just a different application. <BR> <BR>in any case, after i left racing i quickly came to the conclusion that the best way to go, is to become an all mountain skier. being able to ski bumps, natural snow, steeps, powder, AND carve a sick fast line on a wide open groomer are all worthy aspects of skiing to try to master. regardless of which training method makes you a better skier, the truly sick skiers are the one's that can throw down on anything, any conditions, at any time, on any trail. that is my goal as a skier. <BR> <BR>i think we should let go of the bumps vs. racing discussion and focus on what we can all agree on: the jibbers! those guys that only ski the park and can do big air fine, but can't ski the rest of teh mountain be it hard pack ice, bumps, or natural snow *LOL* i'm starting trouble now i can feel it ;) tis' a joke!
 
C'mon River... we love the jibbers !! <BR> <BR>Yep, while they're paying the ski areas that stay alive a little bit with their contribution, they don't track the woods and let the bumps softer... so we should love them a lot <IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)"><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)"><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)"> lololol <BR> <BR>I can understand the fun of flying.... but come on... not a complete day long... and a complete season long. You just have to miss one jump in a day to have serious aches and possible troubles forever... At the end of season, when the snow is super soft, I do few days of big airs, but not more than that... <BR> <BR>When all the jibbers will have some problems with their back, in 10-15 years max, I wonder what will be the reaction about the snowparks.
 
If a person can ski bumps well,they can ski anything.Bumps teach us to turn when we have to,not when we want to.Gate skiing is all about momentum and how to carry it through turns without scrubbing speed.True,it teaches good gliding skills and how to really stand on ones edges,but fails to prepare the well rounded skier for variable conditions and terrain.I learned to ski in the woods from the skills I learned in the bumps.Mogul skiing gives perhaps the most important quality in skiing,confidence.I know that because I ski bumps well,that almost nothing on the mountain will intimidate me.Bring it on! <BR>((* <BR>*))NHPH
 
As I said before, I am not a racer, but if you guys think It's all about gliding and that bump skiers are better all around... then you're just plain wrong. Try tucking a DH course at speed. Try making sharp GS gates on a steep rock-hard FIS course. Not easy. Now try to do it and carry some speed through. The example I gave earlier of the ski team carving smooth GS turns through a mogul field was meant to illustrate their ability not to say that's the proper way to ski bumps. But, I doubt many bumpers could ski them that way if they tried. This brings me back to an earlier theme about skiing being an individual sport and my dislike of ski instruction that says there's a right way and a wrong way, because, truth be told, there are many right ways to ski. Someone here also said that the right way was to have fun and I couldn't agree more. As long as you're enjoying the sport and not endangering others on the hill - it's all good. Just dont make zorros across untracked powderfields and you'll be ok.
 
Alright, <BR> <BR>I have stayed quite long enough on this topic. You guys are all arguing about which type of skiing is better, and how a racer can ski bumps better than anyone else, or a how a jibber can only ski the park. I agree with most of you to some extent. All of us here are the well rounded type of skiers that are able to ski most anywhere on the mountain so it is not like we are insulting each other by saying that jibbers can't ski ice or freestylers can't ski the trees. <BR> <BR>If you limit yourself to one type of skiing be it bunps of jumps you will be better at that type of skiing. But if you are able to spread yourself out and learn proper technique on the hard pack you can translate it to the gates,bumps, rails, trees, cliffs you name it. <BR> <BR>If you are able to ski all of those areas then you have to be a good carving skier. You have to be able to generate energy on the flats, you have to be able to pick the best fit line through gates, you have to be able to turn when the moguls tell you to. <BR> <BR>It is not a matter of how good you are at gates or bumps or in the park, it is a matter of how good you are at plain corduroy skiing because your skills there transalate to all of the other parts of the mountain. <BR> <BR>At least that is my opinion. <BR> <BR>Porter in NH
 
Have fun is #1!Absolutely!I must agree with Porter in the DH theory.IMHO DH skiers are some of the most physically and mentaly fit athletes in the world.There arent many sports where so much is on the line.I always argue with my football loving friends to stand on top of my truck at 75mph while i'm in a turn for 2+minutes.
 
Have fun is definitively #1 for me too <BR> <BR>As competition = NOT fun in my opinion, I almost never look to the ski competitions on TV and we always go to another mountain, when we know there will be a major competition in the ski area we wanted to go. SO : in my deep thoughts, I don't really care of determining who are the best ? Bumpers, Gate / Downhill, Jibbers, etc. The bests are the ones able to do all that almost perfectly <IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)">
 
anon , couple of points then i drop it 1) no one ever said alpine racing is just about gliding 2) try tucking a rock hard fis gs course( not easy for sure ).. now toss in 4 foot rock hard bumps w/ 2 - 4 foot booters 1/3 of the way down throughout ( much harder ) ... there's your world cup mogul run... 3) saying that you doubt many bump skiers could ski a mogul line with gs turns is like saying one doubts a racer could ski a gs line with short radius mogul turns... of course they could, if they were good enough... but what's the point?.. why would they want to? 4) why is it that there are fundamentally universally accepted principles that are applied to hitting a baseball, shooting a basketball, swinging a golf club, firing a rifle, shooting a bow and arrow and just about any other athletic endeavor, yet skiing, or the art of turning skis, maintain some, does not require any basic fundamentals in order to be enjoyed? it is totally misleading to say that there are many right ways to ski... that is a red herring if there ever was one... sure there are many STYLES of skiing... and all of them, be it racing , bumping, powder, are wrong unless they are being executeD with the " right " fundamentals... mogul skiing is the style of skiing that requires the largest number of these fundamentals to be executed properly AT THE SAME TIME...there is no disputing this... a much larger percentage of recreational skiers can make it through a line of gates and have " fun" than can make it through a mogul line and have " fun"... this is my basis for contending that RECREATIONAL mogul skiers are the best RECREATIONAL skiers on the hill... i really do not see how that can be disputed... yes yes yes , of course, it is all ultimately about having fun.. i just contend that in order for a skier who skis more than 10 times per year to really have fun, they need some competancy in the fundamentals... i think one of the reasons more people do not ski is that initially , skiing produces an instant sensation of not being in control.. people do not like not being in control.. most people hate it... control in skiing is achieved when one has good " correct " or right technique... it is not achieved, regardless of what pete the shop guy says by outlaying a grand or so for the new super hi quad x triaxle double laminate, torsion box x screamers fattys that will "practically turn themselves"... why is this such a dirty concept? golf is a perfect example... do you actually think there are golfers who go out and play more than 10 rounds a year who really either have no fundamentals or who really could care less about learning the proper way to swing a club and have the face square when hitting the ball and still can say they are having fun? why should skiing be held to a lesser standard? 5) being fundamentally sound is not going to automatically make you less of a danger to others... but it sure as heck is gonna make a substantial impact all right... 6) in terms of one dimensional, specialized skiing.. good solid race technique is good for one thing... racing on steep, groomed terrain.... good solid mogul technique is instantly applied across the board to powder, trees, air, hardpack/ice, steeps, chutes, corn, mush, slush, ect ect... none of which are (generally) skied with gs racing turns...again , I DO NOT DISPARAGE RACERS... moguls skiers are just more well rounded skiers and are more adept at handling various terrain and conditions
 
I think that you hit a point, Joegm, on the fact that racing with GS turns is just good on the groomed terrain. <BR> <BR>I mean, considering all the positions and technique for this part of the sport, it can only bring you on a groomed terrain. There is no GS turns possible in 99,99999999999% of the skiable places in the world. There is not more moguls, but at least, the mogul skiers are more likely to ski on tough, wild terrain, IMO. Anyway, my vision of skiing is still to have <B>fun</B>.
 
frank, i really don't expect to get a lot on support on this because the fact is moguls are really not at the top of most peoples list.. they are just to hard.. and i understand that, and that's fine... but it just seems to me that the alpine racing style of the sport gets a majority of the attention from everyone from the media to the public... i guess it stems from the original days of the original hot dog bumpers like plake and wayne wong, mike hattrup and john clendenin and the freespirit freestyler less serious attitude... but along the way came jean luc brassard, sergie supletsov and edgar grospiron and john smart and brought the style to another level... they passed it on to janne latela, moseley, bloom and mayer but it can only go so far becasue bumps are unattainable for most people cause they are to tough... wally the weekend warrior though, can go and pay a buck or two and race his buddy bobby budweiser down the nastar gates and get a kick out of it... which is great, as long as they are having fun... you just are not gonna see wally and bobby goin head to head down the icy bumps at the outer limits at k-mart in january...but the most talent skiers are in the bumps for sure.
 
About the attention to the sport, here I must say that mogul skiing beats every other categories... <BR> <BR>I must say we got Jean-Luc Brassard, Stéphane Rochon, P-A Rousseau and a dozen of other super bumpers in the last years, while we just had a couple of good speed skiers. <BR> <BR>Bump skiing is very easy, as long as it's on soft stuff and not with competition moguls (like you love them). Personnaly, when the moguls are very few distanced, I change of line, cause I don't like to always "tip" to be able to ski them and generally, they're completely in ice, here. <BR> <BR>However, I admit that doing this kind of bumps may help you a lot to ski on extreme terrain, cause it brings better reflexes than on some moguls "just ungroomed".
 
frank, i had p-a rousseau as a coach at blackcomb 4 years ago, glad to see he had a good year last year after breaking his neck trying an invert air the year before... that boy had some smooth style for sure.. i always remember being amazed at how he could spin the skis through piles of deep mush with his feet and knees pinned together... great skier for sure.. he started off well in w.c this year but kind of petered out at the end
 
I had the honor of meeting several "legends" beck in the 90's at the River during a Legends of Freestyle weekend.I rode a chair with John Clendenin(who won the event later that day),Wayne Wong and my favorite,Scottie Brooksbank(who I addressed as Mr. Brooksbank).Nice bunc of bumpers that were still promoting skiing in thier older years. <BR>Sorry this is a little off topic but they were all famous skiers who displayed sound ability in all mediums of snow. <BR>((* <BR>*))NHPH
 
Hmm, me, I never had the chance to take a ride up with a world cup skier, but at least, I talked few minutes with Nicolas Fontaine (freestyle) at the press conference for the chondola of Orford. it was cool <IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)">
 
I also admire Scotty Brooksbank, but let us keep this little debate raging. One guy I shared a ride from Gunnison to Crested Butte is a former racer named Scott Schmidt. I think he can ski anything he wants to. Also got to watch Bode Miller, Chad Fleischer and a few others skiing at a training camp at Loveland and seeing those guys up close is amazing. I've seen a pro mogul competition as well. It was ok.
 
I share the fun is priority opinion. I was never attracted to ski competition as I had my fill of that at the bridge table. <BR> <BR>Scott Brooksbank made my Superfeet custom orthotics at Snowbird in March 1981. They are still going strong, 22 years, 579 ski days and 4 pairs of boots later! <BR> <BR>At the 2002 Olympics I attended both the Men's Moguls and the Men's Combined Slalom/Downhill. The moguls were the better spectating event as you could be closer to the course. I was on the terrace next to the second jump, and watching Moseley's Dinner Roll at close quarters was pretty incredible. I could discern the higher speeds of the 3 medallists from that vantage point, so Moseley was not deprived by the judges, but by the FIS scoring system. It then gave minimal credit to the complexity of his air, and that part of freestyle scoring has since been revised. <BR> <BR>Bode's Combined comeback was certainly exciting, and you could tell how good his second slalom run was even from the grandstand. But you had to watch the upper half of slalom and the upper 3/4 of DH on the big video screen. And the terrace at Snow Basin didn't go up the course very far as at Park City or Deer Valley. Before the Games, I had visions of skiing to a vantage point in the middle of the DH course, but security arrangements prevented that. <BR> <BR>At the RECREATIONAL level, I agree with joegm that moguls provide better all around training, and instant feedback when your technique is poor. But at the elite level, it does seem that a lot of the big mountain freeskiers that Frank and Adam's generation admire most have some racing background. <BR> <BR>And while we're on the subject of spectating, the 2001 Crested Butte Extreme Contest was quite interesting too. Spectators can mingle with the competitors, and Adam and I could later ski some of the terrain they used to gain an even better appreciation of their talent.
 
anon, i just don't get your point taking a shot at a pro mogul comp... i don't know how many times i can say it the debate was not and is not about whether bode is better than johnny... obviously schmidt can rip just about anything and so couldn't mike hattrup his mogul skiing partner in blizzard of ahhh's... THAT'S NOT THE POINT... you keep trying to make it the point becasue you know that overall , moguls are relatively harder to become competant at than racing on flat terrain
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top