FasterSkier Forums » Coaching

1. Jon44
   Member

   Standard procedure at center where I teach is to start new adults off with V1. It's always awkward and a bit unnatural, especially for those people used to skating on their downhill skis. (But I guess the rationale is that it gives them a tool to go everywhere.)

   I noticed that Bill Kocher's in our area start the kids with V2 alternate (from videos on Youtube). I'm just wondering if there is any consensus for adults on best approach (?). Or, if no consensus, what's the progression for starting them with V2 alternate (one question is how do you get them up a hill?)

   Thanks,

   Jon

   Posted 1 year ago #

2. James Kyes
   Member

   I always start everyone with V1. from my experience you can change timing easier from V1 to others, but it can be very difficult for the other way around... just my experience.

   Posted 1 year ago #

3. jsxcsnow
   Member

   I generally would start with V2. Once V2 is learned it's easy to bring it down from there. If you start with V1 it's hard to get them to try the others since V1 is easy and that is all they will want to do. Has worked for me.

   Posted 1 year ago #

4. FlintHillsXC
   Member

   Funny this post came up ... I've been wondering the same thing as my wife is learning to skate this year. I started her with V1, and so did an instructor she took a lesson from. I think this makes sense, but as far as I can tell starting with V1 also seems to create a problem; after someone initially proceeds from V1 to V2 Alternate they tend to suffer from what I call hybrid skatig -- that is, they tend to oddly conflate V1 and V2 Alternate (doing each poorly). I see this conflation especially in poling too far in front of the skis when trying to use Alternate.

   The suggestion of starting with V2 is interesting, but maybe sometimes infeasible. I was out the other day with a friend just learning to skate -- an ultra marathoner and good tele skier no less -- and he literally could not have his hands catch up to his feet quick enough to poll on both sides.

   Posted 1 year ago #

5. Trollhaugen
   Member

   My wife and I took skate lessons in Colorado about 3 years ago, and our instructor said that she had been taught to get people doing V2 first. She admitted that there were differences of opinion on this. My wife had never skated (except once when I tried to show her - it was not good!), and I had gone a few times on my own just trying to flail about. I am convinced that teaching us V2 first was right (for us). After an hour working on the balance and timing needed for V2, V1 was a breeze.
   I don't know enough about teaching to say that V2 first is always right. I imagine that a skilled instructor should be able to discern if the student can handle V2 or if it just isn't working and switch to V1.

   Posted 1 year ago #

6. campirecord
   Member

   Answer, start them with BALANCE, SYMETRY and FLAT skis. And in that sense, new ski techniques will not really worry about the gears but how you use these gears. If you master V2 and a perfect glide, you master everything else. I know, I used to abuse V1 with long poles, asymetric polling and skis on edge all the time. Now the hill I used to go up (6km) offset I can basically go up V2 talking with flat skis and forward compression of the upper body. Your teachers are likely going to take time to change this unless you want to partake in a few races. V2 might seem a bit harder at first, no arguing with that, shorten your poles people ! SO many long poles out there. You'll be thanking me when you get in your bathing suit next summer...

   Posted 1 year ago #

7. OEB2ODB
   Member

   i wonder why don't we follow the development of skating? Classical--> marathon skate--> V1--> V2? That's how we learned it waaay back in the bent-over-no compression-wrist-flicking 90's.

   That marathon skate was a crucial learning transition, with the flat ski, and crazy poling, and balance - but it did act as a little oasis until you figured out V1.

   campirecord: totally agree about the shorter poles. your pole length is connected to your speed, not your height.

   Posted 1 year ago #

8. John Forrest Tomlinson
   Member

   "your pole length is connected to your speed, not your height."

   Really? So if two people generally ski the same speed, and one is 5' and the other 6', they should have poles of the same length?

   Posted 1 year ago #

9. OEB2ODB
   Member

   jt10K:
   Decide for yourself. check out Laura Spector or Andrea Henkel - both seem to favor really tall poles as shorter but stronger skiers. While a tall Helena Ekholm seems to use shorties to keep her tempo up. They all go about the same speed.

   This opinion might hold better for downsizing poles. I see a lot of people with really tall poles going slow because they can't turn them over. I think speed is a result of tempo and strength, and too tall poles will kill your tempo if you are not strong enough to use them right.

   WhatI think campirecord and I agree on is that a slower skier might not want to blindly follow the "mustache" rule. You might sacrifice a bit of body position for better tempo, but might that be the lesser of two evils?

   Posted 1 year ago #

10. John Forrest Tomlinson
    Member

    OEwhatever,

    My point is that pole length is a function of both the height of the skier AND the speed (plus other factors). It's not only a function of speed as you said earlier.

    It's just plain wrong to say height doesn't matter in choosing pole length. If Andrea Henkel was taller, she'd use longer poles than she does currently. To think otherwise is bizarre.

    Posted 1 year ago #

11. OEB2ODB
    Member

    way to keep it classy jt10000.

    Posted 1 year ago #

12. John Forrest Tomlinson
    Member

    Harsh is better than wrong.

    Posted 1 year ago #

13. tradesmith45
    Member

    As noted, there are mixed views on the answer to this question. It may also be that the answer is different for an instructor giving a paid 1-hr lesson than for me coaching new skiers. I always start w/ no-poles skating & double pole drills both on roller skis & on snow. From my experience, starting by teaching a complete stroke obscures the fundamentals of good weight transfer & forward hip position.

    After doing no-poles/DP drills, I've tried all the apporaches for a next step- V1, V2 & marathon skate. Since weight transfer is nearly always the most difficult thing to learn, teaching V1 or marathon skate is usually a bit easier for complete beginners. When @ an area w/ tough hills, I'll teach single sticking pretty early. But after the basic intro, I always start follow-up sessions with no-poles & DP drill and then move to low cadence full V2 - i.e. weight transfer & forward hip drills. Then later come back to V1, V2 alt., tucks, single sticking & etc.

    But I had a former ice skater & downhill skier who I started out w/ full V2. It was a natural place to start for her.

    Posted 1 year ago #

14. Train Wreck
    Member

    Thanks for this thread. I've recently taught a few first-time skaters and thought "oh crap, I have no idea what to teach first!".

    I vaguely remember my first few times skating and it was like doing the impossible blindfolded. Shoot, I remember also thinking that a few years ago about some parts techniques! Much sympathy..

    Posted 3 weeks ago #

15. T.Eastman
    Member

    Build from the technique they seem to go to from their first few moments with poles.

    All techniques used in skating can be a starting point.

    A generalization is that alpine skiers seem to already do lots of alternate skate and even some V2, so start there.

    Occasional XC skiers will find the diagonal and V1 more similar to their skiing experiences.

    With snowshoers, have them hold biathlon targets...

    Posted 3 weeks ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.