why bump skiers rule

[JimG.]

former cannon,nh ski instructor dan dipiro says it better than i can
interesting site/blog for anyone interested
http://www.mogulskiing.blogspot.com
he has some interesting things to say about cannon mountain and their 1) closemindedness towards terrain management and 2) the outright hostility he got from the PSIA rumpswabs in the "ski school"...
i'm really gettin antsy here so i figured i would stir up the soup

Dan is at Waterville Valley now. And Joe, the treatment from PSIA is standard at most ski schools. I went through the same thing.

[joegm]

with all due respect to ryan, getting a mogul lesson from a psia sanctioned instructor who blindly drinks the kool aid is just not going to happen, with the rarest of exceptions...
i have seen the source material that psia uses in it's ratings of instructors and in what it exposes the instructors to for them to study and teach. it's not far off from the baloney that is in the nov issue of ski magazine ( the one with " how to master moguls " on the cover ( can the demo skier in those photo sequences get any more tilted over and unstacked? can he be staring down any more at his feet?...how's that chumley gonna make out on paulies in january at cannon on 4 foot ice bumps ) and the same one that misquotes dipiro's point about absorption " . anyone who has a chance and is looking for a good laugh, pick up that issue and look at some of the pictures and bullcookies they talk about for the psia version of bump skiing.
a popular sentiment in the ski community seems to be " there are many ways to ski moguls ", implying that one way is or can be just as good as another. well that's a load of horsespam. just like it would be a load of horsespam to say there are many techniques to flat ski ( ie race gates ). there is one way to ski moguls and it's like dipiro says, the proper way. now there are certainly different STYLES that can come out of the proper technique.. but the technique- the essence, the fundamentals- there is no deviation... bode miller and daron rahlves have different styles of racing, but they both have the same fundamental techniques. and without these techniques they wouldn't be as good as they are... from bode to some 12 yr old kid in a ski academy, they learn the same basic techniques. individual styles then emerge from that, but no matter how different the styles , the technique is the same.. but for some reason, when it comes to bumps, some people, PSIA raise your hand and plead GUILTY. seem to think they can come up with " an easier way ", " a better way " , a less " stressful way on the knees "... please. dipiro says there is only one proper way to TRY AND ski bumps- the way world cup competitors do.. and he is 100% right. ryan, my friends and i wasted a ton of money and, more importantly time, and took many moguls lessons from PSIA staff before the truth set us free and we found john smart. and 99% of what we we were told was just plain useless or wrong. if you are one of the guys out there in PSIA land who are fighting the system and teaching the proper fundamentals, then i take my hat off to you, because from what we have been able to dig up, what we've seen from this crowd in their on hill drills, the leadership of the PSIA does not look kindly on those who stray from the book. their problem is that for them, it's all about race technique and everything else can/should/is derived from that . they are so brainwashed into this wide stance, let the ski shape make the turn nonsense, they just apply it to everything. the ironic part is that it is just about the least useful technique to apply to many types of conditions... ever watch a brainwashed racer try and ski trees, or powder or corn or bumps. it's like they can't put their feet together at all for any amount of time. and anyone who has ever taken a boot psia lesson knows that one of the first things they indoctrinate into people is " get your feet apart ".... well guess what, to ski powder, and trees and spring corn and bumps, you can't ski with your feet apart... or i should i say , you can't ski very well with your feet apart....
remember the popular phrase a few years back " f.i.s sucks "?
i say " PSIA sucks " . wel maybe they don't suck, but they aren't very openminded.

[JimG.]

But Joe, tell us what you really think.

I wish you could read some of the backchannel mail Dan and I have been exchanging. Actually, you pretty much summed it up in your post here. All I'll say is that maybe Ryan does teach bumps the right way...there are a few PSIA guys and girls who actually do despite the abuse we sometimes take from our fellow instructors.

The key is the following...PSIA tries to teach bumps using the same techniques used to teach groomed run skiing. They'll say skiing bumps uses the same techniques, just different tactics. WRONG! Skiing bumps properly requires techniques PSIA doesn't teach, period. In fact, they discourage some of the skills required to ski bumps well (feet together, extremely tall stance, rotary powered turns with little emphasis on carving).

So, it's no wonder that so many PSIA bump lessons end in failure and disappointment.

[sheahunter]

Amen to that.

[JimG.]

Amen to that.

I'm gonna give you my copy of Dan's book to read; when you're done, tell me this isn't the type of handbook that PSIA ought to be selling to instructors to show them the right way to ski and teach bumps.

[salida]

Um... no offense to PSIA, but honestly, they aim to "make skiing better" but by being close-minded and exerting their influence to discourage technique that they feel are antiquated, they actually set skiing back.

Yet, in my opinion, as a member of the younger guard, PSIA is just a way for old guys to feel like they know a lot, thus imparting it on "unwilling victims" trying to go out and have fun, while learning to ski. It appears as if there are so many layers of certification, and so many stipulations that PSIA has effectively taken out the creativity of skiing. Granted, I'm sure PSIA instructors can teach valuable and well oriented lessons, but overall I have a negative perception of the organization.

[Ryan]

The key is the following...PSIA tries to teach bumps using the same techniques used to teach groomed run skiing. They'll say skiing bumps uses the same techniques, just different tactics. WRONG! Skiing bumps properly requires techniques PSIA doesn't teach, period. In fact, they discourage some of the skills required to ski bumps well (feet together, extremely tall stance, rotary powered turns with little emphasis on carving).

So, it's no wonder that so many PSIA bump lessons end in failure and disappointment.

Dead on point here.

I have been through a PSIA weekender bump clinic and this is a major failing.... I am a certified PSIA instructor but I do not teach the canned lessons in all situations. THere is a ton of great material in PSIA to get people off the ground and moving quickly. The lesson structure for beginers and intermediates is generally fantastic. There are shortcomings in the bump series though if you get the wrong DCL. I had a Division Clinic Leader for my level 1 exam however who was very open minded.

I have ben skiing for 24 years and I will say however that FEET APART IS BETTER. It is more stable and balanced. It makes it easier to stack your weight cleanly and move in any direction faster. Do you walk through the mall with your feet touching? There are times in the bumps and in the trees that your feet have to come closer to be able to move. There are far more situations however where if you get your feet too close you bind yourself up and end up having to force your moves instead of flowing through them. Skiing in general should not be about fighting your equipment and your weight to get down the mt. It should IMHO be about fluid and smooth movement all within clean balance and weight management.

Also to address the statment that there is one and only one way to approach bumps is out of their mind. The same line can be approached from a multitude of different approaches. You can attack the fronts, you can turn over the backs, you can go top to top and spend most of your time in the air. Some people even enjoy carving through the troughs. No one approach is better than any other. The point that I am trying to make is that skiing is not about being closed minded and assuming that your way is better than any other way.

[JimG.]

Also to address the statment that there is one and only one way to approach bumps is out of their mind. The same line can be approached from a multitude of different approaches. You can attack the fronts, you can turn over the backs, you can go top to top and spend most of your time in the air. Some people even enjoy carving through the troughs. No one approach is better than any other. The point that I am trying to make is that skiing is not about being closed minded and assuming that your way is better than any other way.

We agree on alot, but not this.

Yes there are many ways to approach a bump line. But there is only one way to really nail that zipper line; the other options are for survival in the bumps and that's a different story.

Ryan, buy the book and read it...remember that Dan is PSIA certified and is a top 100 instructor. This book is not about bashing on PSIA. It's about identifying what PSIA isn't teaching and addressing those issues specific to bumps only.

I would be very interested in your feedback after you read it. This book is mogul skiing gold.

http://www.learnmoguls.com

[Dan DiPiro]

...I'm asking you, why isn't the technique of bump skiing taught in the east coast?

Uuuh... it is.
I'm a PSIA Certified insturctor and I would guess that about 15-20% of my lessons are specificaly bump classes. You can walk into any Ski School I know of and request a bump lesson and although it may take a couple of minutes longer to grab you an instructor that specialize in it, there should be no problem in getting it done.

Hey, guys. Heard you were talking bumps here and thought I'd join in.

Ryan, I have to firmly disagree with you; while traditional ski schools offer lessons that they call "mogul skiing lessons," most ski schools do not teach authentic, effective mogul technique. They teach little more than mogul survival.

The teaching model used by most ski schools is derived from alpine racing: groomed-trail skiing. But the moguls require special techniques that have nothing to do with groomed-trail skiing. The PSIA does not recognize or understand these techniques, so they are not taught by most traditional ski schools. Most ski schools can teach a student to tweak his or her groomed-trail technique so that he or she can survive the moguls. But most ski schools are unable to teach an expert to ski the zipper line with fluidity, control and confidence (like a real bump skier).

The "Mogul Manual" article in the November issue of SKI is a perfect example of the way most instructors ignore real mogul technique and try to make groomed-trail technique work in the moguls. It's a perfect example of the sub-par mogul instruction offered by instructors who've never spent time in competitive mogul skiing circles.

I hope you'll consider buying my book, "Everything the Instructors never Told You About Mogul SKiing." And I hope you'll tell your instructing colleagues about it.

-Dan DiPiro

[Dan DiPiro]

I have ben skiing for 24 years and I will say however that FEET APART IS BETTER. It is more stable and balanced. It makes it easier to stack your weight cleanly and move in any direction faster....

Also to address the statment that there is one and only one way to approach bumps is out of their mind. The same line can be approached from a multitude of different approaches. You can attack the fronts, you can turn over the backs, you can go top to top and spend most of your time in the air. Some people even enjoy carving through the troughs. No one approach is better than any other.

Wow, things are happening fast here. You guys slipped three or four comments in while I was writing that last one. (Hey Joe. Hey Jim.)

I really don't want to make this pick-on-Ryan day, but, Ryan, I have to disagree with you again.

Firstly, you can get only so far in the bumps with your feet apart, because you can't fit a wide stance into a narrow trough. Try some aggressive, fall-line skiing through deep, tight moguls with your wide stance; one foot will drop low in the trough while the other climbs up high on the bump somewhere. This height-split or altitude-split between your feet will destroy your fluid, coordinated absorption and extension, and without absorption and extension, you lose balance and speed control.

Secondly, moguls can, of course, be skied in a bunch of different ways. If, however, you want to ski moguls with maximum smoothness, control comfort and confidence (and speed, if you like), and with minimal punishment to your body, the methods that competitive mogul skiing has identified and refined over the last 20-30 years are definitely the best methods. I know a 13 year old mogul skier who, because he knows mogul technique, skis moguls faster, more smoothly, more cleanly and with far more control and grace than any instructor / PSIA clinician / PSIA examiner I have ever seen. And aren't these qualities (smoothness, control, etc) exactly what instructors should be teaching aspiring mogul skiers?

Thirdly, true carving down the fall line in tight moguls is a physical, mechanical impossibilty.

-Dan DiPiro

[JimG.]

I really don't want to make this pick-on-Ryan day, but, Ryan, I have to disagree with you again.

Poor Ryan...you're taking some lumps today.

Again, this is not about bashing PSIA for the sake of bashing them. I kind of thought that when I first read the title...just another snot-nosed bumper kid going off because he/she doesn't like PSIA. This book really fills an important niche that was previously unaddressed.

This is a bump skiing handbook...short and to the point. The kind of material you'd like to take out on a lift ride, read a bit, then go practice.

Any time I speak to folks who ski, they always seem to have mastering bumps high on their to-do list. There's a real demand there and PSIA does not do a good job of catering to that demand. I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it again; this book fits right in with PSIA approved teaching/learning guides. It should be required reading, and skiing bumps using the techniques Dan writes about should be the yardstick for passing PSIA certification exams.

I know lots of PSIA level III's who can't ski bumps worth spit. How can they be expected to teach?

[joegm]

What up JG AND DD.
Ryan , again, I don?t know you and I?m sure you are a good guy, but you are hanging yourself with your own rope. You can?t sit there and post that you are a bump skiing instructor and actually say _
? you can go top to top and spend most of your time in the air ?
that could be the single most ridiculous assertion I have ever heard on firsttracks!!!
dude, that comment even exceedes anything in the nov issue of ski mag on the baloney meter. that assertion is so rotten i can smell it over the internet
i defy you to tell me how you can ski rock solid east coast bumps flipping and skipping from top to top. you can't... and no one can for any sustained period of time. unfortunately, i think you are part of the problem. telling people/students that this is a legit way to try and negotiate a mogul line only ends up contributing to people frustrations becasue it is a formula for failure... and if you are doing that, it's a shame... it's not helping us in this mogul war long term.... it is physically impossible to do and cosmetically, since you brought up this idea of looking smooth and not fighting your skis, top bashing bumps is about the ugliest thing i can think of on skis. you want smooth? go to skidebosses.com and look for dale begg smith from down under. that's smooth skiing my friend.
the only way to effectively ski bumps is layed out by john smart in his smartmogulskiing video and supplemented in print very well by dan dipiro in his book. anyone looking to even try to ski moguls even 10% of the time they ski, is wasting their time with anything else like the ski mag article pablum or boot advice about skipping over the bumps ( back satan back ) ... PSIA lessons for the most part , included. i'm sorry but the truth hurts sometimes

[joegm]

i know this is probably going to drvie mark nuts since it's probably in the wrong section, but just becasue it's already started.
jim and dan and anyone else who wants to chime in:
what are your contentions about weight distribution / stacking in % terms when coming down the backside. in other words, what percentage of your weight, if one assumes all your weight totals 100%, do you try and put on the downhill ski after you roll your knee and the lead change takes place and extension is happening, coming down the back side.? this was a pretty good topic of discussion this year at sms camp. i'm curious as to your opinions. i couldn't find it articulated in the book DD. if you are not sure what i am asking, post up and i'll try and re-phrase it.

[joegm]

and another thing ryan,
those guys who skip and flip through bumps by topping them, i equate those guys with the low level intermediate jackass out on his new xscreams haulin ass down some groomed out black getting a slight edge about once every 500 feet or so... i see that guy , and i run for cover becasue disaster is not far off. ryan, are you gonna be comfortable standing one mogul line over from skippy the tippy topper mogul master bashing his way down a bump line ... if you are, your crazy and have a death wish.. somethin tells me though that if DD or JG were skiing a bump line the proper way , i would have no problem being one line over and having them ski by me.
as cosmo kramer once said on seinfeld- " your way, way off "

[riverc0il]

Yes there are many ways to approach a bump line. But there is only one way to really nail that zipper line; the other options are for survival in the bumps and that's a different story.

i think everyone here needs to take a step back and look at this statement. i think we can ALL AGREE that there is ONLY ONE WAY to nail a zipper line. that said, not all bump skiers enjoy zipper lining. i for one don't see the appeal and don't like to ski bumps in that fashion.

using the racer analogy earlier, not everyone that carves likes to race. i think we can draw a comparison between competitive bump skiing and competitive racing. lots of people enjoy high speed carving without aspiring to ski just like bode. like wise, lots of folks enjoy the bumps without wanting to have zipper line form.

to keep going with the racer analogy, groomed skiers aspiring to carve are given many "fundamentals" that racers build upon, but are not taught the finer aspects of racing and really ripping a tight arc that racers get into. i think a likewise comparison can be made for folks who enjoy the bumps but do not aspire to zipper line form. the bump "fundamentals" are all the same regardless of how you ski a bump run. but there are a variety of technical ways to get down a bump run. as JimG mentioned, we can all agree there is ONLY ONE WAY to zipper line a bump run. period. if i enjoy not zipper lining a bump run and occasionally taking some air off a bump, does that mean i am a crappy bump skier? just means i enjoy the sport a little differently than the zipper line folks just like the guy ripping up the groomers that doesn't have race-like form.

i think with regards to discussions on skiing bumps, it is important to frame discussions around whether we are talking about zipper lining or simply enjoying a bump run in the manner we enjoy skiing them most.