Offset was what I struggled the most with, these videos have been very useful. Thanks! Poling to my "bad" side is the next hurdle. It's useful for when the trail has a sideways slope, but I'm not so sure it's a health hazard to not be ambidextrous. Many great skiers have strongly preferred one side. And speed skaters only turn left, they seem pretty healthy to me! But self-taught might have some other bad habits.
It looks to me that it requires a lot of leg strength to push (with a bit of a hop even) compared to using momentum to glide on a flat ski. What is your opinion since you’ve tried to adopt the new technique?
Are there power/motion/results numbers to indicate the new is better? It looks short and choppy to me, even poor technique! For short skiis and really hard snow, maybe limited time on snow! Being ambedextrious is always the goal, keeping lower half symmetrical despite the top is how i was trained (NCAA racer in the 90s)
Likewise, while I love this video and it makes great intuitive sense, I'm curious to know if there's research showing that it's more efficient; and more efficient for every skier vs some skiers. For that matter, how was the modern V1 developed? Even watching the World Cup, it seems there are variations in technique and tempo among skiers.
Good explanation of various ways to do v1. Perhaps narrow versus wide has more to do with skier strength and steepness of hill, rather than modern versus old. Here is a video displaying. narrow, wide, and wider. ruclips.net/video/dbURlWyXHQo/видео.html Marilio De Zolt was called the human Cuisinart because he often used tempo rather than strength.
Why don't recreational American skiers switch immediately from V1 to V2 once the terrain is flatter and they can spend more time gliding and poling with both arms? I commented to another skier this point and he said V2 was more effort? Huh?
My take on this comment, being a fellow beginner, is that possibly this other skier is like me. Flatter terrain varies on perception and momentum of the skier. My v2 does take considerable effort still. My balance and glide still need to be better, so as I come out of a v1 uphill and get into a flatter terrain, I’m so tired in my transition that I prefer to go into a v2-alternate (similar motion to v1) to keep my momentum going.
I learned how to ski when I was in high school, and for the first year I only did V1 because that was hard enough for me to learn. So for me it’s kind of just comfort or habit, because I’ve done V1 so much longer than V2. Although the more that I practice the more that I get used to V2.
Initially V2 may take more effort than V1. If you practice V2 frequently, you will develop the musculature utilized in V2 and you will become more efficient, provided you also pay close attention to the frequency of force application, skiing at a tempo where you are maintaining speed and momentum. In V2, you want to pole and push before you start to decelerate. Experiment with your V2 frequency/tempo on a shallow uphill - this will provide immediate feedback in letting you know if you need to have faster turnover. Hope this helps!
@@toddstiers3814 The asymmetrical V1 may be more difficult for people than V2, from a coordination standpoint. In V2, the pole plants and leg pushes are the same on each side.
I have started the transition from the old to the new offset and I noticed a drastic reduction in my speed . By having a wider stand in my offset I cannot push as long with each legs. Now i just realized that the weight transfer from one ski to the other become a big source of propulsion when skiing with a wider stance. Thank you for clearing that up. In short in the new off-set you skate and glid uphill and not walk up-hill. Why should I beleive you versus what is currently thought by CANSI? who decides what is the rigth offset to use?
Впечатление, что эти ролики для спорта высших достижений. Такие тонкости хороши для занятий с опытным тренером, с лыжами, подготовленными сервис командой уровня сборной, на идеальной трассе, с видео фиксацией ... Вобщем для избранных.
@@koljasik1 А вы конечно уловили и чётко определили для себя разницу в технике подъёмного хода лыжников левого и правого варианта. Объясните и мне, если вам не трудно.
@@user-ns4tf3xb1t нет выхода на прокат на опорной ноге, малый разворот корпуса. См. Предыдущее видео. Главный посыл моего сообщения -- другие и такого не снимают
Тонкости всегда хороши. Тут бесплатно наваливают такого контета, который не каждый платный тренер знает и умеет. На любом уровне всегда лучше знать технический нюанс и стремиться его освоить, чем не знать вовсе и ездить как получается. А уж видеофиксацию нынче организовать - даже второй пары рук не нужно. Телефон к берёзке пригвоздил и вперёд. Так что низкий поклон авторам.
Без занятия в детстве в спорт школе «не правильный» ход сложно достижим во взрослом возрасте даже с тренером, а для «правильного» легкого хода нужна невероятная мощь и выносливость.
Вообще отличий не вижу, если и есть минимальные. Любитель вообще ничего не увидит, а профессионалам с их физической подготовкой вообще плевать как в подъем залетать. Особенно когда частота движений высокая, мне кажется там не до нюансов 😂
в том и суть, чтобы при высокой частоте сохранять технику, а не просто напрягать все имеющиеся мышцы. у профессионалов много силы, но из сильных победит тот, у кого лучше техника
@@alekseyivanov8988 посмотрите видео как Клэбо или Большунов в подъем залетают там и близко похожего нету. Любая техника будет считаться правильной которая даст максимальный результат. Плюс у каждого свои антропомитрические данные к примеру как можно сравнить технику Рэте и Устюгова что удобно одному другому не подойдёт
В "старой", как тут ее называют, технике, толчковая нога подносится к опорной близко, как в равнинных ходах. В "новой" нога ставится сразу, не подносясь к опорной. Такой вариант по сути из спринта, когда нет времени на поднос ноги, посмотрите спринт/финишные ускорения в гору того же Клебо, там это видно будет.
This is ur graet nordic technic in usa greatly destroy ur great usa nordic kneels. Look in ur video and see thats ur kneels have rotation then u didnt rotate ur chest. I wanna advice to newnies, dobt think about modern word "new techic" - learn normal lechnic (old if u want) then u want be healthy but not fashineble. However new technic does not exist...not yet. It is quintessence normal technic movments for exstra professionals and some doppings
Offset was what I struggled the most with, these videos have been very useful. Thanks! Poling to my "bad" side is the next hurdle. It's useful for when the trail has a sideways slope, but I'm not so sure it's a health hazard to not be ambidextrous. Many great skiers have strongly preferred one side. And speed skaters only turn left, they seem pretty healthy to me! But self-taught might have some other bad habits.
Perfect, thank you! Tried to adopt the new technique after 1st video. Doing this sharp push indeed makes a lot of difference
It looks to me that it requires a lot of leg strength to push (with a bit of a hop even) compared to using momentum to glide on a flat ski. What is your opinion since you’ve tried to adopt the new technique?
Hey! Another great video! Thank you all for the content.
That's totally what I was doing. Self taught, looking for some coaching on my technique. RUclips mainly. Thank you for the video.
How do I stop the feeling of falling from edge to edge when doing this technique? Falling forward somewhat also
Are there power/motion/results numbers to indicate the new is better? It looks short and choppy to me, even poor technique! For short skiis and really hard snow, maybe limited time on snow! Being ambedextrious is always the goal, keeping lower half symmetrical despite the top is how i was trained (NCAA racer in the 90s)
Likewise, while I love this video and it makes great intuitive sense, I'm curious to know if there's research showing that it's more efficient; and more efficient for every skier vs some skiers. For that matter, how was the modern V1 developed? Even watching the World Cup, it seems there are variations in technique and tempo among skiers.
Good explanation of various ways to do v1. Perhaps narrow versus wide has more to do with skier strength and steepness of hill, rather than modern versus old. Here is a video displaying. narrow, wide, and wider. ruclips.net/video/dbURlWyXHQo/видео.html Marilio De Zolt was called the human Cuisinart because he often used tempo rather than strength.
Why don't recreational American skiers switch immediately from V1 to V2 once the terrain is flatter and they can spend more time gliding and poling with both arms? I commented to another skier this point and he said V2 was more effort? Huh?
My take on this comment, being a fellow beginner, is that possibly this other skier is like me. Flatter terrain varies on perception and momentum of the skier. My v2 does take considerable effort still. My balance and glide still need to be better, so as I come out of a v1 uphill and get into a flatter terrain, I’m so tired in my transition that I prefer to go into a v2-alternate (similar motion to v1) to keep my momentum going.
I learned how to ski when I was in high school, and for the first year I only did V1 because that was hard enough for me to learn. So for me it’s kind of just comfort or habit, because I’ve done V1 so much longer than V2. Although the more that I practice the more that I get used to V2.
Initially V2 may take more effort than V1. If you practice V2 frequently, you will develop the musculature utilized in V2 and you will become more efficient, provided you also pay close attention to the frequency of force application, skiing at a tempo where you are maintaining speed and momentum. In V2, you want to pole and push before you start to decelerate. Experiment with your V2 frequency/tempo on a shallow uphill - this will provide immediate feedback in letting you know if you need to have faster turnover. Hope this helps!
Well if you never learn to get your skiis under you dojng V1 this “new” way, a good V2 is even further away (flat skis and balance) IMHO ;)
@@toddstiers3814 The asymmetrical V1 may be more difficult for people than V2, from a coordination standpoint. In V2, the pole plants and leg pushes are the same on each side.
I have started the transition from the old to the new offset and I noticed a drastic reduction in my speed .
By having a wider stand in my offset I cannot push as long with each legs.
Now i just realized that the weight transfer from one ski to the other become a big source of propulsion when skiing with a wider stance.
Thank you for clearing that up. In short in the new off-set you skate and glid uphill and not walk up-hill.
Why should I beleive you versus what is currently thought by CANSI?
who decides what is the rigth offset to use?
Впечатление, что эти ролики для спорта высших достижений. Такие тонкости хороши для занятий с опытным тренером, с лыжами, подготовленными сервис командой уровня сборной, на идеальной трассе, с видео фиксацией ... Вобщем для избранных.
Хорошо, что дают такие видео
@@koljasik1 А вы конечно уловили и чётко определили для себя разницу в технике подъёмного хода лыжников левого и правого варианта. Объясните и мне, если вам не трудно.
@@user-ns4tf3xb1t нет выхода на прокат на опорной ноге, малый разворот корпуса. См. Предыдущее видео. Главный посыл моего сообщения -- другие и такого не снимают
Тонкости всегда хороши. Тут бесплатно наваливают такого контета, который не каждый платный тренер знает и умеет.
На любом уровне всегда лучше знать технический нюанс и стремиться его освоить, чем не знать вовсе и ездить как получается.
А уж видеофиксацию нынче организовать - даже второй пары рук не нужно. Телефон к берёзке пригвоздил и вперёд.
Так что низкий поклон авторам.
Без занятия в детстве в спорт школе «не правильный» ход сложно достижим во взрослом возрасте даже с тренером, а для «правильного» легкого хода нужна невероятная мощь и выносливость.
Вообще отличий не вижу, если и есть минимальные. Любитель вообще ничего не увидит, а профессионалам с их физической подготовкой вообще плевать как в подъем залетать. Особенно когда частота движений высокая, мне кажется там не до нюансов 😂
в том и суть, чтобы при высокой частоте сохранять технику, а не просто напрягать все имеющиеся мышцы. у профессионалов много силы, но из сильных победит тот, у кого лучше техника
@@alekseyivanov8988 посмотрите видео как Клэбо или Большунов в подъем залетают там и близко похожего нету. Любая техника будет считаться правильной которая даст максимальный результат. Плюс у каждого свои антропомитрические данные к примеру как можно сравнить технику Рэте и Устюгова что удобно одному другому не подойдёт
В "старой", как тут ее называют, технике, толчковая нога подносится к опорной близко, как в равнинных ходах. В "новой" нога ставится сразу, не подносясь к опорной. Такой вариант по сути из спринта, когда нет времени на поднос ноги, посмотрите спринт/финишные ускорения в гору того же Клебо, там это видно будет.
This is ur graet nordic technic in usa greatly destroy ur great usa nordic kneels. Look in ur video and see thats ur kneels have rotation then u didnt rotate ur chest. I wanna advice to newnies, dobt think about modern word "new techic" - learn normal lechnic (old if u want) then u want be healthy but not fashineble. However new technic does not exist...not yet. It is quintessence normal technic movments for exstra professionals and some doppings