A Guest wrote:You are clearly a reasonably intelligent guy who clearly loves skiing. Ski instructors work for ski schools. Ski schools are run by resorts. Instructors like to make money. Ski schools like to make margin.
Thanks.
A Guest wrote:
Answer four questions sir.
1.Why do you think there is only one tiny ski school at a very minor resort that has endorsed PMTS?
a. 1st I believe there are 2 in this country, not one. That's an excellent question. Inertia and Dogma are the reason I believe.
b. Speculations on other reasons are that PMTS has a cost associated with it to participate fully in the program, but I do not know if that is true or a factor or not.
c. The resorts are all about volume. This view is probably not in their best interest in terms of profit, but a short view of profit it is. It is easier to pop a bunch of kids in a class and throw them down the hill in a wedge then cut them loose on greens. They'll survive. Their skiing will be limited. This looks like a good plan for short-term profits. Not so good a plan for building the next generation of ski population.
d. PMTS works best with a proper alignment (as does skiing in general). Students in this mass environment are not going to pay the cost of a proper alignment. The wedge progression works without a proper alignment. They won't be "skiing" per se - but they'll get down the hill safely. I in prior threads have lamented that some smart binding manufacturer has not come up with the idea for universal alignment in the binding. By doing this, with a proper measurement machine, students could be quickly aligned at low cost since the boots will not have to be custom ground, etc. PMTS still works without alignment, but any method that stresses development of balance to improve skiing alignment is critical for the majority of the population. Only a minority can get by with no alignment. (my brother in law, in fact, was/is blessed with neutral alignment out of the chute - I'm very jealous) (see Witherell - the Athletic Skier - this is an old principle (though he liked a little big toe engagement bias built into his alignment that HH probably doesn't agree with)
A Guest wrote:
2. Let's guess there are one or two hundred PMTS certs out there. Again, the basic premis is that instructors want to make money. Give a good product the word spreads and you give more lessons. Why aren't instructors lined up to learn about PMTS?
a. Obvious answer, because resorts do not pay or care if you are PMTS certified. Thus there is no reimbursement or requirement for the training. ('cept for the 2 resorts in the US whose ski schools are based on PMTS)
b. Actually, lots of PSIA coaches go to PMTS instructor camps just to expand their choices of what to teach. The base of PMTS trained or aware ski instructors goes way beyond the actual count of PMTS certified instructors.
c. The best PSIA instructors already use or are aware of PMTS movement patterns because these movement patterns were common for years in the racing side of ski instruction. It's almost like there were 2 camps: the race side and approach to skiing and the resort ski school side and approach to skiing. From my 3rd party view and owning a library of ski books from many points of view, it appears to me that what PMTS has been trying to do is to bring racing movement patterns to general instruction since the shaped skis opened the door for beginners to experience a carved turn with little pressure needed to reverse camber the ski. (in deference to Ott whose friend's wooden barrel skis also require no pressure to be in reverse camber (or do they - which side do they tie onto their feet?
))
d. Ski instructors are able to incorporated PMTS into their lessons by simply buying the books and/or the videos and trying things out themselves, then adapting things for their own use with their students.
Bottom line, the number of people at the instructor camp or the smaller number actually getting PMTS certification does not reflect on the scope and breadth of people becoming aware of the PMTS progression and using it in their teaching.
A Guest wrote:
3. Isn't it a bit of a concern?
I doubt it. Compare what HH has done with PMTS vs what PSIA has done with their level 1-8 progression. HH sells books and videos you can pick up anywhere. Eric and Rob's book draws on PMTS extensively (their appendix is a copy) and HH gets no royalties, but he doesn't care, they acknowledge HH in the forward and that's all he is looking for. All of HH's stuff is geared for the student or instructor to coach and teach themselves with the progressive drills spelled out in detail (especially the instructor manual). PSIA on the other hand locks up their info. I have tried to see the level 1-8 progression with detail - like a teacher's or student manual spelled out and it appears to not be publicly available. If I'm wrong, please let me know, because I have about 20 different ski technique and instruction books and I can't find anything other than web references (some pretty good) for PSIA progression 1-8.
So, while HH is open to spreading the PMTS gospel of how to ski, PSIA keeps it all locked up with its priests so that people must go to a priest for instruction. Given this approach and openness of HH and what he did with PMTS vs what PSIA has done with their progression historically, I don't think Harold minds at all that his PMTS ski instructor clinics don't have to be lined up for PMTS information to be well disseminated throughout the instructor community.
Back to your opening paragraph
A Guest wrote:Ski instructors work for ski schools. Ski schools are run by resorts. Instructors like to make money. Ski schools like to make margin.
This is an interesting conundrum. Once a ski instructor has learned PMTS either on their own or in a PMTS certified capability, the ski resorts by fiat usually do not allow them to teach it. I ran into this personally as I tried to find a PMTS lesson when I went back to Breckenridge in my 2nd month of skiing. If it is a group lesson they must follow the resort approved progression. Of course, this is no doubt required just to get liability insurance. But, even though PSIA has "opened up" a bit (more on that in a minute) and allows flexibility in what PSIA cert instructors teach, the resorts out of business incentive and fear of lawyers restrict and enforce the curriculum. You can get PMTS taught at the major resorts, but you normally have to get the correct instructor and then tell them that's what you want and not be in a group.
This structural resistance on the part of the resorts is indeed a problem. It's too bad too, since a good DTP method would surely help their bottom line. (or would it - if students have a shorter progression to parallel and comfort on blues where most people stop anyway (10 day a year skiers for example) maybe the resorts don't want a more effective system) I still think the bottom line would be better because of the abysmal retention rates of the current methodology.
Now, even though PSIA has opened up what people can teach (this is only what PSIA people tell me, I'm not in PSIA so I'm repeating what I've heard), their certification process is not changed and the test requirements are still focused on rotary actions that mirror the PSIA level 1-8 progression (that's not speculation because the test requirements are in the public domain on the web in PDF form).
So, the structure of the certification test with their reliance on rotary, and the dogmatic structure of what can be taught at the large ski schools puts a lot of inertia into the ski teaching profession for a superior product to be adopted.
But, that doesn't mean it still isn't being adopted. From my discussions with some PSIA folks high up, Rocky Mountain division is the most backwards (or entrenched) with NW and Central being much more progressive and actually effecting change. Once again, respecting the comments to stay out of the ski instructor world and let them discuss it, these are just my impressions as I'm not in PMTS or PSIA and am just a little 75 day under my belt still 1.5 year skier from the flat lands of Indiana.
I like open and honest discussion. Those were good questions.
I look forward to your reply (go ahead and login - why use "a guest" - how will I know who to look up and ski with in my travels that way!)
(edited for spelling)