Harald Harb's 2012 Ski Reviews

[jbotti]

Always nice to have a topic that brings out some commentary and some differentiated opinions.

[Gary]

ALways fun JB..

Max...I didn't want it to sound like it's different cause every turn I make with either ski, I try to initiate with as much of my technical skills as I posses, every turn but as I think we all agree, sometimes different conditions warrant a reach for another tool in the ski bag.

all the best, G

[midwif]

Always nice to have a topic that brings out some commentary and some differentiated opinions.

Ditto.
I have really enjoyed reading the differing point of views.
Not so dissimilar, but with distinct flavors on each side.
L.

[LivingProof]

It's somewhat ironic that the participants in this discussion are all technique centered skiers in that "how" each skis is important to the individual. I've skied with Gary and Todd - we could talk technique all day. JB and Max are two of Harald's finest examples of both writing and skiing PMTS. Lynn and Jim are PMTS proponents. Sometime I'd very much look forward to a day with Liam. We are all on the same side of the aisle.

My take on wide skis is limited as I don't get to ski the conditions where "wider works better" that frequently. I've written previously that using my 88 waist skis is detrimental to my technique in that stem. Friends tell me that I actually ski better on them as I just let it go a little more. I don't try to change movements, it just happens.
 
At the Gathering last spring, one day I brought my Supershapes to A-basin, in part because Geoffda and JDM from the PMTS forum were there and I wanted to make some PMTS turns with them. Eventually, we did leave groomed trails and tackled the non-light, skied out, windblown crud. Took me less than 3 turns to know I was on the wrong skis. A better skier, such as JB or Max, would have done much better. Confidence rules in such situations, and, when it goes, get back to groomers. The 'Shapes were retired for the rest of the trip in favor of wider skis.

My view of a "tool" is that it's a piece of equipment, i.e. a hammer. While we can buy tools, we can't buy the skills to use same. I truly enjoy watching a craftsman perform his trade and marvel at the ease they employ their skills. I am driven to become technically competent. I've learned to accept that many who ski simply want to have fun. If a wider ski lets them do it without paying the price of developing skills, so be it. I shake my head while watching many ski....and many of the same outperform me on the mountain.

At day's end, I just want to be smiling from the enjoyment of skiing with friends. But on every turn, there will be some fascinating, technical aspect running through my brain.

[jim-ratliff]

I must be a better skier than most of you, because I have three sets of "skills".

I have proactive skills -- that's the way I would like to ski.
I have reactive skills -- that's when my proactive skills (or my confidence in same) isn't sufficiently developed or refined.
I have survival skills -- that's when I realize that I'm over my head for the current combination of terrain and snow conditions.

JBotti posted excerpts from a racer talking about skivots.  She said they don't practice them, but they do get used in "desperate" situations.

That's where I am. I think I am always balancing two goals.  One is skiing well, but the other is skiing  and enjoying places where I don't ski well. (and the third is safely getting out of places where I'm not enjoying being there).  For me, it would get very boring to only ski those slopes that I can do with good technique -- but something inside of me does require an understanding and a goal of how I should ski.

And I can easily identify with Liam's story of his wife. I have a friend whose husband is on the National Ski Patrol. After 35 years of marriage to a very good skier, her primary ski satisfaction criteria is being outdoors and not falling.  Completely doesn't care about technique.

And I can somewhat identify with the young skier on wide boards.  His primary goal is skiing the steep/deep as quickly as possible. Probably, like my friend, doesn't care much about technique. Whose to argue with that goal, even if it isn't the way we approach the sport. as long as they obey the basic rules of skiing and do no harm.

[Gary]

Great insight from all...

I'd love the opportunity to ski with any and all here sometime this season. Right now I'm planning on being in Park City Dec 8-14th. I spoke with Peter regarding the mistake on the DPS turning radius and I'm hopeing to make some turns with him at Alta then.  Next, we're  out west in Jackson Hole Jan 15-21st.

Let me know if any are in either area. Svend will be there in Dec and I think Perry and his lovely wife will be in Jackson in Jan.

It's nice to see how much passion shows up with these kind of discussions.  Turning that passion into a fantastic ski day is what living is all about.

Here's wishing we all achieve more of what we're looking for this season!  Best, G

[jbotti]

On the equipment issue, I think one of the points that Max and I agree on but maybe haven't said explicitly, is the concept of feedback from the skis. One of the great things about carving skis and the head SS's on groomed slopes is that the second you get the skis on edge from tipping, you get instant feedback as the ski engages and the arc starts. This feedback is essential when someone is improving the carving skills as it helps them to feel when they have done the movements right (and decreases the desire to push on the tails to turn the skis). In many ways it is the same things when going off piste. Fore aft balance is one of the keys to off piste skiing. When you ski on non rockered tails, if you get back you will know it immediately and you will not be able to push the tails from the back seat position. This is great positive feedback from the ski and what it means is that the skier needs to really focus on staying forward and pull the feet back agreesively in each transition (when the skis are flat). These are important skills and ones which I want to continue to develop, and I want a ski that will give me the feedback to contiue to help me hone thses skills. Without the feedback it is very hard to tell if you are forward or back as the ski will turn from either position.

So from my view it is always best to choose and ski on skis that give the feedback the continues to support the right technical movements.

I guess the right move for everyone is to find the balance between feedback and forgiveness. Too much forgiveness and not enough feedback is a very bad thing. Too much feedback and no forgiveness will only work for a select group of skiers. Finding the balance is the key. As has been stated before, I am not sure that rockered tails don't automatically take us into the too much forgiveness realm with not nearly enough feedback. But I think everyone needs to make that decision for themselves.

[jim-ratliff]

I guess the right move for everyone is to find the balance between feedback and forgiveness. Too much forgiveness and not enough feedback is a very bad thing. Too much feedback and no forgiveness will only work for a select group of skiers. Finding the balance is the key. As has been stated before, I am not sure that rockered tails don't automatically take us into the too much forgiveness realm with not nearly enough feedback. But I think everyone needs to make that decision for themselves.

Jbotti, that is very well said, I think. 
And, since an informed consumer makes better decisions, I find all of the contrasting viewpoints and concepts presented here very "educational". 
Thanks to one and all (and especially to Liam for sharing his wife's experience. I think she represents a huge segment of the skiing public).

[Liam]

ok, I'm sorry and I don't wish to start problems--I've removed this post.

[jbotti]

Liam, I am not sure I have said or implied as much as you are finding. What I know I have said is that rockred skis epscially in the tail promote poor technique and don't give the proper feedback when the skier is not using correct movements. The other thing I said is that there is a balance between finding skis that give proper feedback and ones that are forgiving enough and that everyone needs to find that balance themselves.

For those on the site that continue to want to progress with PMTS I pass along what I have learned while working diligently at perfecting those movements. Those that have no interest in PMTS movements or only a passing interest can pretty much disregard my comments (which I assume that they do).

I guess we could get into a long discussion about what defines good skiing but that really would be a waste of everyone's time. In the end I can only talk about skis and equipment that supports or does not support that type of movements that I am trying to produce in my skiing. Of course there are many that have no interest in producing those movements and therefore don't need to listen to my comments on skis and equipment. I'm fine with that and it is as it should be.

[Gary]

JB I've found exactly what you stated regarding feedback..having skied different rockered skis, I must say you CAN without a doubt feel if you're too far back on the skis...the tails on many just disappear. The feedback is MOST certainly there. AND I BELIEVE, rocker skis DO NOT promote poor technique...that's just too broad of a statement for me to agree to. Having said that, my Rocker Rossi S3's have a tail that is way more supportive than the JJ's and actually allows you to feel the support and carved edge when arched....having only flexed the DPS, it has similar tail flex to the S3.

BUT not to confuse my point, Rocker Skis are a specific tool that CAN be skied using PMTS skills as any ski can, some certainly better than others, your point to the SS Supershapes. I would rather state that skiing THE CONDITIONS that I would use the rocker ski in, I use a plethra of ski tools as the conditions dictate and will only ski a fat ski, rockered or otherwise that allows me to use the PMTS and Clendenin tools I own. If I can't apply them to that ski, the ski goes bye bye. Reasons I got rid of the Water 94 and JJ's.

So to the point as it applies to me, if I can't bring the magic to the ski, there's is no magic on the snow.

Best, g

[jim-ratliff]

ok, I'm sorry and I don't wish to start problems--I've removed this post.

Liam:
I think your post was an excellent  and pertinent description of your skiing, and I would prefer that you recreate it (if possible) minus a couple of sentences. And you were making points consistent with what Gary was making as well.

Jim

[Gary]

Max, well said....I think the answer for me is finding the right ski that allows the best application of PMTS and or whatever skills we posses. I have skied the Shamen and honestly, way too much shovel for my liking and for me...not playful enough...at 5'8 and 155 lbs...just to much board underfoot. So to the point...finding the ski that allows us to apply our learned and to be learned skills is righteous!

I can tell you have a dislike for rocker skis and not quite sure how many you have tried but many big manufacturers are incorporating some form of early rise rocker and more extensive rocker. Also mixing up with some only shovel, less tail, all based I'm sure on rider feedback. Not all will work for me, I know this....that's why I've been on the hunt for something about 110 to 115 underfoot that can perform to my liking. To me the beauty of the rockered shovel is that they just making skiing crud, crust and powder so much easier. Square up the body, touch the pole tip, tip the edges and just ride the big smoothy...sweet...a nd bumps too. AND honestly Max, if I have to steer, pivot, swivel a turn now and then through a tree section or around rocks or whatever....there are no PMTS police out there writing tickets....I do not flog myself at the end of the day if not every turn I made was not a perfect PMTS or Clendenin turn.....I want to end the day with a smile knowing I skied the mountain and it didn't ski me.

My first exposure to the wider ski was the Head 75 to the 77 to the 88. Then to the Watea 84 and 94..then the Icelantic Pilgrims 98, JJ's S3's and now DPS. In and between those, I've tried a variety of fatties and still desire the Holy Grail of Fat skis ala Gary.
Heck, I never ever thought I'd be on a 78 underfoot carving ski but the Kastle MX gave me such great versatility, I couldn't resist. This is my 3rd season on it.

So...the joy of supporting the economy (I'm certainly doing my part) and great dialogue with all here, I hope that we inspire others to take a step to demoing and exploring what the new gear can do for you.  OH yeah...find a buddy with the same boot sole as you and double your ski experience.

G

[beastieboy]

Hopefully I'll live long enough to regret saying this, but...  when I get to the point that all I want to do is carve on groomers, I'll probably quit skiing.  From the tree skiing I've done, skinny skis can be downright scary in the wrong circumstances where you break through a couple layers of crust for example.  There are far better tools for some conditions than carvers.  Carvers certainly have their place.  Fat skis with rocker are probably not the best for bumps.  There are tools for many conditions.  Why not use them?

Also, in the end, if some equipment makes skiing easier so that more people do it, it leads to a healthier industry that we all benefit from.  Hakuna Mattatta.

Just my newbie $0.02.

John

[jbotti]

John, I think the point that we have been stressing is not whther rockered skis make skiing certain conditions esier for most, the point has been that for those going the PMTS route rockered skis produce and encourage movements that are counter to what we are striving for in all our PMTS skiing.

The industry has found another advance that for the most part the masses love and it is getting them into terrain that they have never been able to ski before. This is probably a good thing as most of these people will never take the time and dedicate the energy to learning PMTS skiing. For those that do want to go this route we have given countless reasons why rockered skis not only don't support it, but actually are detrimental to ones progress in PMTS.