Improvement VI — Clear and pragmatic instruction on the stance width

Introduction

The Austrian School (AS) has another serious discrepancy, concerning the stance width. From the first long turn through the dynamic short turn, it prescribes a hip width stance. An AS teaching plan shows on page 5 what that looks like:

However, an AS demo video on the short turn — the most important mile stone for most learners — shows a substantially narrower stance:

The short turn as taught in the AS. Producer: NOESLV.

The feet and knees are not 'glued together', so it's not the closed stance that mogul skiing requires (see page 19 of the Teaching Plan). But there's little or very little space between the feet, depending on the teacher.

Nonetheless, the hip width prescription is so drilled in the theory part of the AS(-based) educations, that the instruction "Widen your stance" has almost become a mantra. As this instructor-author and this instructor-vlogger confirm. That's a serious problem that must be solved.

Most short turns require a narrow stance

The AS should not make new demo videos, but adapt the theory. There are three reasons for that, which all have to do with skiing other snowdecks than recently groomed, such as bumps/moguls, crud, slush and powder:

1. The 'old school' technique of keeping the feet together may be less necessary due to modern materials and machines, but in skiing the said snowdecks it's still needed.
2. Although the regular competition disciplines require a hip width or wider stance, most learners just want to master recreational skiing, including (some of) the said snowdecks.
3. It's a relatively small step from the dynamic short turn to skiing moguls. The latter requires a closed stance, which would make it illogical that the first would require a hip width stance.

Reasons 1 and 2 are explained below.

1. The 'old school' narrow stance is not obsolete

   In the early days of Alpine skiing, the skis were much straighter (had much less side cut), and the boots were much lower and softer.

   That meant that the skis would only turn well through direct rotation, much worse through edging + loading (more information). That direct rotary force is much better delivered with the feet and knees together. A closed stance even — skiing bumps is largely about that force, much less about edging + loading.

   Another issue was the condition of the snowdeck. Piste bullies were hardly available, if at all. So one was generally skiing either powder or crud, both also requiring a narrow stance:

   With all the new materials and machines, carving and faster skiing become more and more an option — if one would adopt a wider and wider stance. Which is what the AS started to prescribe. However, recreational skiers frequently encounter slopes with an uneven snowdeck, especially later during the day. Those still require a narrow stance.

2. Most learners just want to master recreational skiing

   The four regular competition disciplines often require a hip width or wider stance. Even the Slalom, because of the often 'close encounter' of the outside lower leg with the snowdeck, and because the inside lower leg must aid in knocking down the pole:

   

   However, the vast majority of people taking ski lessons just want to (eventually) learn a short turn with which they can ski all the snowdecks they come across when touring. Including crud, slush, powder and bumps, as already mentioned.

   A number of learners might also want to learn Carving, but that's much easier to learn than a proper Short Turn.

Stance width is a greatly dependent variable

It will be clear by now that whether you should keep your feet together or apart in general depends on a number of factors. These are those factors:

• the forward speed;
• the used turn mechanism: direct rotation (skidded turn) or edging + loading (carved turn);
• how far the skier must lean into the turn;
• the slope's gradient;
• the condition of the snowdeck;
• the width of the ski (ends);
• the skier's balance;
• the skier's preference.

There's no simple formula to determine the optimal width; that's an art. But this is the table with the various factors and their directional influence:

Personal preference

One factor is not listed in the table, the skier's personal preference. That's because it's obvious that if they prefer a narrower stance, the stance should be narrower.

But it's a factor that should be taken into account. Some people have an excellent balance but have difficulties with direct rotation or very sharp turns, others may have the opposite. And personal preference plays a role in successful athletes as well. World Cup champion Dominik Paris for example, prefers a narrow stance whenever possible:

References

1. Wiener Ski- und Snow­board­lehrer­verband/­Snow­sports Academy. Ski Lehrer Buch, 2nd edition. Austria, 2016.

Change log

• V. 1.1: changed the title.
• V. 1.2: changed the order of the sections; edited the text; added section about the history.
• V. 1.3: changed the title; edited the text.
• V. 1.4: added 'Skier's balance' to the list of determining factors.

Continue to Improvement VII →