Hi guys, want to see a new better video?

[Blake]

2013 High Level Skiing - YouTube

[norman]

Yes, it is really great.

[snowrider]

Blake - You guys are so ... good! Are you guys competition skiers?

2013 High Level Skiing - YouTube

[pku]

2013 High Level Skiing - YouTube

Well balance, well control, very fast , excellent rhythm：excellent skiing . Exciting to watch

[Blake]

Thanks guys

I'm glad you guys like it.

snowrider: Are you guys competition skiers?

No, we just ski : ) ...and make youtube videos lol

[snowrider]

Thanks Blake! You guys ski bumps so well! It's really enjoyable to watch your videos.

Thanks guys

I'm glad you guys like it.

snowrider: Are you guys competition skiers?

No, we just ski : ) ...and make youtube videos lol

[skier888]

2013 High Level Skiing - YouTube

Your brother is amazing. I like the first sequence where you progressively adjusting your turn size and technique thru the choke, then open up. The lady's is skiing very well and has improved. Does she get a new boot too? Her alignment appeared to be much better.

[Blake]

Thanks guys : )

Katya didn't get new boots, but she got her old ones aligned. You have a really good eye!

[pku]

2013 High Level Skiing - YouTube

You ski very good , quite similar to a professional skier . Do you think a guy can stay home , watch ski videos, practice dryland drills that he think can work on snow, but ski 2-3 days not even once a year, can become a good skier.

[pku]

2013 High Level Skiing - YouTube

Sorry Blake. One more silly question but I need the answer from you since you are the authority

What's the different between " you are at the back seat and you are leaning back "

[Blake]

Being "back seat" and "leaning back" are the same thing.

For your other question, I guess it depends on what you mean by "good skier".

You can probably improve with 2-3 days a year, but your improvement would be very
limited. It would also take MANY years to have a significant amount of improvement. You
might be able to ski black diamonds, but you'd never get to be great at them. I would have
never gotten to the skill level I am at if I didn't ski at least 60 days a year. I have skied for
29 years now. I have skied between 60 and 80 days for most of those years. If for those
29 years I had skied 2-3 days, instead of 60-80 days, I would have 87 days total in my life.
What I actually have is at about 2,030 days total. I think that 'amount of time' on the
snow is the most important thing for determining skill level especially if the amount of effort
is constant. If we assume that effort and instruction (and all other factors) would be the
same for either 87 days or 2,030 days, then 'time on snow' is the only factor that would
make a difference and your skill level would be 100% determined by 'amount of days' and
your skill level would relate directly to 'amount of days'. It is 100% impossible to ski as well
after 87 days versus 2,030 days. Since we are assuming that effort would be the same,
either for 87 or 2,030, then skill should DIRECTLY relate to 'time'. If 87 days is 4% of 2030,
then it makes sense to think that my skill level would be 4% of what it is today. Maybe less
because with only 2-3 days a year of practice you would lose progress in the large amount
of time between practice sessions. TIME matters. There is nothing you could do to get a
lot of improvement with 2-3 days a year. The difference between 87 in a lifetime or over
2,000 in a lifetime is too big of a difference to make up in any way without skiing more.

I live in the mountains and I am poor. I have centered my whole life around skiing in a way
that most people would not do. Even most competitors have quit and decided to do
something else by age 30. I am at my skill level because I have a dedication that 99% of
men do not have and I have never quit and moved on to anything else in life.

[snowrider]

Blake - I really admire your living in the mountain and enjoying skiing almost everyday (in snow season). I logged only 35 ski days this winter, and it was almost beyond my stretch. Mileages do count, and that's one of the reasons that you ski so well! Also I believe that you have many good skiers in your group, so a good learning environment plus a lot of practice makes you a very good skier. Thanks for sharing your high-end skiing video clips with us here!

Being "back seat" and "leaning back" are the same thing.

For your other question, I guess it depends on what you mean by "good skier".

You can probably improve with 2-3 days a year, but your improvement would be very
limited. It would also take MANY years to have a significant amount of improvement. You
might be able to ski black diamonds, but you'd never get to be great at them. I would have
never gotten to the skill level I am at if I didn't ski at least 60 days a year. I have skied for
29 years now. I have skied between 60 and 80 days for most of those years. If for those
29 years I had skied 2-3 days, instead of 60-80 days, I would have 87 days total in my life.
What I actually have is at about 2,030 days total. I think that 'amount of time' on the
snow is the most important thing for determining skill level especially if the amount of effort
is constant. If we assume that effort and instruction (and all other factors) would be the
same for either 87 days or 2,030 days, then 'time on snow' is the only factor that would
make a difference and your skill level would be 100% determined by 'amount of days' and
your skill level would relate directly to 'amount of days'. It is 100% impossible to ski as well
after 87 days versus 2,030 days. Since we are assuming that effort would be the same,
either for 87 or 2,030, then skill should DIRECTLY relate to 'time'. If 87 days is 4% of 2030,
then it makes sense to think that my skill level would be 4% of what it is today. Maybe less
because with only 2-3 days a year of practice you would lose progress in the large amount
of time between practice sessions. TIME matters. There is nothing you could do to get a
lot of improvement with 2-3 days a year. The difference between 87 in a lifetime or over
2,000 in a lifetime is too big of a difference to make up in any way without skiing more.

I live in the mountains and I am poor. I have centered my whole life around skiing in a way
that most people would not do. Even most competitors have quit and decided to do
something else by age 30. I am at my skill level because I have a dedication that 99% of
men do not have and I have never quit and moved on to anything else in life.

[pku]

Being "back seat" and "leaning back" are the same thing.

For your other question, I guess it depends on what you mean by "good skier".

You can probably improve with 2-3 days a year, but your improvement would be very
limited. It would also take MANY years to have a significant amount of improvement. You
might be able to ski black diamonds, but you'd never get to be great at them. I would have
never gotten to the skill level I am at if I didn't ski at least 60 days a year. I have skied for
29 years now. I have skied between 60 and 80 days for most of those years. If for those
29 years I had skied 2-3 days, instead of 60-80 days, I would have 87 days total in my life.
What I actually have is at about 2,030 days total. I think that 'amount of time' on the
snow is the most important thing for determining skill level especially if the amount of effort
is constant. If we assume that effort and instruction (and all other factors) would be the
same for either 87 days or 2,030 days, then 'time on snow' is the only factor that would
make a difference and your skill level would be 100% determined by 'amount of days' and
your skill level would relate directly to 'amount of days'. It is 100% impossible to ski as well
after 87 days versus 2,030 days. Since we are assuming that effort would be the same,
either for 87 or 2,030, then skill should DIRECTLY relate to 'time'. If 87 days is 4% of 2030,
then it makes sense to think that my skill level would be 4% of what it is today. Maybe less
because with only 2-3 days a year of practice you would lose progress in the large amount
of time between practice sessions. TIME matters. There is nothing you could do to get a
lot of improvement with 2-3 days a year. The difference between 87 in a lifetime or over
2,000 in a lifetime is too big of a difference to make up in any way without skiing more.

I live in the mountains and I am poor. I have centered my whole life around skiing in a way
that most people would not do. Even most competitors have quit and decided to do
something else by age 30. I am at my skill level because I have a dedication that 99% of
men do not have and I have never quit and moved on to anything else in life.

[norman]

Being "back seat" and "leaning back" are the same thing.

For your other question, I guess it depends on what you mean by "good skier".

You can probably improve with 2-3 days a year, but your improvement would be very
limited. It would also take MANY years to have a significant amount of improvement. You
might be able to ski black diamonds, but you'd never get to be great at them. I would have
never gotten to the skill level I am at if I didn't ski at least 60 days a year. I have skied for
29 years now. I have skied between 60 and 80 days for most of those years. If for those
29 years I had skied 2-3 days, instead of 60-80 days, I would have 87 days total in my life.
What I actually have is at about 2,030 days total. I think that 'amount of time' on the
snow is the most important thing for determining skill level especially if the amount of effort
is constant. If we assume that effort and instruction (and all other factors) would be the
same for either 87 days or 2,030 days, then 'time on snow' is the only factor that would
make a difference and your skill level would be 100% determined by 'amount of days' and
your skill level would relate directly to 'amount of days'. It is 100% impossible to ski as well
after 87 days versus 2,030 days. Since we are assuming that effort would be the same,
either for 87 or 2,030, then skill should DIRECTLY relate to 'time'. If 87 days is 4% of 2030,
then it makes sense to think that my skill level would be 4% of what it is today. Maybe less
because with only 2-3 days a year of practice you would lose progress in the large amount
of time between practice sessions. TIME matters. There is nothing you could do to get a
lot of improvement with 2-3 days a year. The difference between 87 in a lifetime or over
2,000 in a lifetime is too big of a difference to make up in any way without skiing more.

I live in the mountains and I am poor. I have centered my whole life around skiing in a way
that most people would not do. Even most competitors have quit and decided to do
something else by age 30. I am at my skill level because I have a dedication that 99% of
men do not have and I have never quit and moved on to anything else in life.

really nice.