or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DH vs. Telemark - Page 2

post #31 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven
Pierre, your Tele turns are solid. I saw you in Ootah and you don't need to cheat. So why switch to AT for BC travel if not for more efficiency?
Now I must admit to never having done BC travel in the last 15 years. Not that I wouldn't like to try though but I don't posses the rest of the gear.

Right now I am thinking of taking a late season trip to Ootah eh.
post #32 of 76
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telerod15
You mean I'm working harder and going slower than some one skiing DH!? Thanks for telling me, I feel so foolish. (Don't wait for me.) I wonder why nobody noticed that telemark was more physically demanding and slower than DH before. How do you think it compares to SL or GS? I'm guessing Daron Rahlves works harder skiing DH than I do telemarking, but maybe he got sold some hype too. How about running DH on telemark gear? Maybe you should try that before jumping to any conclusions!
What a stupid statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Capacity
Boy, that didn't take long.

Don't get me wrong, I have friends who tele, and do admire someone who can do it well. They are a joy to watch.

It's just not something I want to do. I'm just lazy.
There's the crux of the appeal of Tele. It attracts show-offs and prima donna's interspersed with serious atheletes. I'm not saying that DH can't become boring. Otherwise I would never have taken up telemark skiing. I just think it is rather narrow-minded and stupid to give it up to become a >>purist<<. Futhermore, alpine skiing doesn't necessarity make your day less of a work-out.
post #33 of 76
Yeah Max, I'm beginning to wonder if this guy has ever raced DH or successfully completed a telemark turn. He appears to be comparing two things he has no zero knowlege of either. I guess if he sees someone linking telemark turns he thinks it's "showing off".

AT, turn your head if you don't want to see me showing off as a blow past you doing your "DH". And put me on your ignore list. Go practice your uphill stem turns now.
post #34 of 76
Quote:
How will you know that's why she's talking to you?
She? If only =)

It is usually some dude smelling like dirt talking about being in tune with the mountain.
post #35 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATskier
What a stupid statement.
There's the crux of the appeal of Tele. It attracts show-offs and prima donna's interspersed with serious atheletes. I'm not saying that DH can become boring. Otherwise I would never have taken up telemark skiing. I just think it is rather narrow-minded and stupid to give it up to become a >>purist<<. Futhermore, alpine skiing doesn't necessarity make your day less of a work-out.
I think you meant to say can't.

No where in your OP did you mention anything about the narrow-mindedness and stupidity of only telemark skiing for purist reasons.

(commonly referred to as Nordic Downhill when one is speaking specifically of the descent aspect of telemark turning)

So, we're 35 posts into this thread and I still don't understand what you are trying to communicate.

Could you clarify for all of us what the crux of this post is really all about?
post #36 of 76
Everybody skis for their own reasons, but for me it is mostly because it feels so damn good. I have always felt that I never became a really good skier until I abandoned worrying about technique and started to concentrate almost completely on the feel of what the ski (and me) was doing. After doing this for a long time on alpines I started to tele. Yes it is more physically demanding. Yes it is the wrong tool for some jobs, but the bottom line is that when you do it right it feels so damn good.

In alpine skiing you are primarily focused on balancing on the carving ski. A feeling I never tire of experiencing. In tele you are balanced on this weird magic spot between your skis. If feels completely different and in my opinion much cooler than a carved turn on alpines. I had to take a lot of lumps to get to where I was good enough to experience and appreciate the tele mode, but I feel it was worth it. Obviously there are others here that do not, but so what. I think the biggest irony is that alpiners have focused on the one ski carve for so long that they generally find it harder to trust the totally different feel of tele turn more than someone who has never skied.

I am area skiing this weekend for the first time this year, I plan on doing one day of tele and one alpine, and I don't know which I am more excited about. Gawd, I love to ski!
post #37 of 76
guys and girls; this ignorant jerkoff is just trolling.
post #38 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
guys and girls; this ignorant jerkoff is just trolling.
+1.
post #39 of 76
All this from a guy who calls himself ATskier and doesn't know what a kick turn it. There is a pattern.
post #40 of 76
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven
I think you meant to say can't.

No where in your OP did you mention anything about the narrow-mindedness and stupidity of only telemark skiing for purist reasons.

(commonly referred to as Nordic Downhill when one is speaking specifically of the descent aspect of telemark turning)

So, we're 35 posts into this thread and I still don't understand what you are trying to communicate.

Could you clarify for all of us what the crux of this post is really all about?
Sorry for the typo, I corrected it. However, perhaps you might want to give us your opinion of what the post is about? If you don't get it, is that my fault? Besides, as it has attracted the usual amount of sick, snide, and vulgar lowlife attacks on the man and not the ideas along with some posts which reaffirm my stance, I think that it has actually made a statement that's clear to the intelligent. Sitting there when you should be working and expressing the arrogance of office just doesn't make for much. I find it funny that someone would feel a superior sense of knowledge of skiing because he knows the names of various turns. This would prabably be due to a lack of being able to execute them. If you can't see that skiing is a dynamic and fluid activity which isn't mastered by knowing the names of static manouevres, then you shouldn't be posting with that smarmy idea of your own expertise. Mudfoot, that was an excellent post. However, if you have ever experienced the thigh burn of telemark, you might not see skiing as all fun and no work.
post #41 of 76
Thread Starter 
Sorry, I hit the wrong button. No sense in trading insults with a pack of ignorant losers, either.
post #42 of 76

Beginning

I have little experience with tele, so can some of you "pros" help with a recent discussion I have had with my 15 year old daughter? She is a returning "Ski school assistant" at the local mountain. She can not understand why anyone would tele. Her view is that since DH equipment is the only logical evolution of skill building ;-) why would anyone waste their efforts learning to tele. Now I thought that even a beginning skier might progress well if started on tele gear.
The boots are way more comfortable and the total kit can be much lighter. Simple skills like poling, walking, skating, lift line management, etc could be developed more rapidly with the more natural flexibility of the tele boots (My opinion) Then there is the reality that "bad habits" such as "getting in the back seat" are difficult to develope in tele gear.

I will qualify my position that all "learning" takes place on slopes that do not instill fear. I think tele technique on difficult terrain is more difficult than DH.

Now, all these "expectations" of the benefits of learning on "soft" gear might be a bunch of jumbo, but what do you think?

Regards

CalG
post #43 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATskier
Sorry, I hit the wrong button. No sense in trading insults with a pack of ignorant losers, either.
Seems like all we get from *YOU* are the insults. Let's see, from you we have:

- An unprovoked OP: "I think a lot of people have been sold a lot of hype regarding it."

- "What a stupid statement."

- "It attracts show-offs and prima donna's...."

- "I just think it is rather narrow-minded and stupid to give it up..."

- "I find it funny that someone would feel a superior sense of knowledge of skiing because he knows the names of various turns. This would prabably be due to a lack of being able to execute them."

- "...then you shouldn't be posting with that smarmy idea of your own expertise"

- "No sense in trading insults with a pack of ignorant losers, either."

7 insults in 4 posts. Not a single post bereft of insult. Now in the ensuing 38 posts by others we have:

- "So freakin' stupid it's not even worth commenting on." <-Ibid

- "I'm beginning to wonder if this guy has ever raced DH or successfully completed a telemark turn. He appears to be comparing two things he has no zero knowlege of either. I guess if he sees someone linking telemark turns he thinks it's "showing off"."

- "AT, turn your head if you don't want to see me showing off as a blow past you doing your "DH". And put me on your ignore list. Go practice your uphill stem turns now."

- "guys and girls; this ignorant jerkoff is just trolling."

- "All this from a guy who calls himself ATskier and doesn't know what a kick turn it."

So we got 5 insults fired back at him in 38 posts. Every other post was trying to be funny or trying to explain we we tele. You tell me who's the one leveling insults here. It's clear that there is some sort of chip on this guy's shoulder and he just can't leave it alone.

Powdr
post #44 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATskier
Sorry, I hit the wrong button. No sense in trading insults with a pack of ignorant losers, either.
I feel the same way about you *******
post #45 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgrandy
I have little experience with tele, so can some of you "pros" help with a recent discussion I have had with my 15 year old daughter? She is a returning "Ski school assistant" at the local mountain. She can not understand why anyone would tele. Her view is that since DH equipment is the only logical evolution of skill building ;-) why would anyone waste their efforts learning to tele. Now I thought that even a beginning skier might progress well if started on tele gear.
The boots are way more comfortable and the total kit can be much lighter. Simple skills like poling, walking, skating, lift line management, etc could be developed more rapidly with the more natural flexibility of the tele boots (My opinion) Then there is the reality that "bad habits" such as "getting in the back seat" are difficult to develope in tele gear.

I will qualify my position that all "learning" takes place on slopes that do not instill fear. I think tele technique on difficult terrain is more difficult than DH.

Now, all these "expectations" of the benefits of learning on "soft" gear might be a bunch of jumbo, but what do you think?

Regards

CalG

That's really the main thing about tele'ing inbounds. It rewards good technique and punishes sloppy technique.

Alpine and tele gear are converging in comfort and weight so that's really not a reason; unless she learns to tele in soft light boots and skis in which case she's going to need to learn excellent technique and balance to become a good skier.

However, tele takes more time to learn generally. Only patient beginner skiers should learn on tele gear imo.
post #46 of 76
Cgrandy: An interesting phenomena I have notice with several of my teleing friends that have started their young kids (who have never skied alpine) on tele skis is that they all ski parallel with their weight pretty evenly distributed, except when trying to specifically imitate their parents. It appears that the tele turn may not be as "natural" as many people claim.

Most of the people I know who tele but have never alpiined came to the sport from nordic skiing, so it felt more natural for them. As to your question about it being easier to learn on soft gear, I think the crux of skiing is learning to feel physically connected to the snow, and I think this would be more difficult to experience for most beginners on teles because you are less connected to your gear. The reason so many novice alpiners are "in the back seat" is because the biggest natural fear is falling forward, which is greatly hightend when teleing by not having your heels clamped down.
post #47 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot
they all ski parallel with their weight pretty evenly distributed, except when trying to specifically imitate their parents. It appears that the tele turn may not be as "natural" as many people claim.
I'm not sure I understand your point.

I do understand that the weight of a "balanced" skier varies ever so slightly between even distribution between heel and ball-of-foot at turn initiation to weight slightly more dominant on the heel as the skier engages their "stacked" pressure through the skeletal system ...through the tib/fib and down to the heel as they complete the turn.

I don't find that there is any difference in brilliant weight distribution between alpine and telemark.

Are you sayin that even weight distribution is a bad thing?
post #48 of 76
Seven: I am not making any judgments on weight distribution. My point was that just putting a kid on tele skis and letting them do what comes naturally appears to produce a technique of parallel skiing with the weight equally on both skis (a natural stance). Even when following their parents who are teleing the kids tended to ski parallel in an alpine techique, but not carving hard on just one ski. I believe that is the intent of the snowplow turn, it teaches turning by presuring one ski, as opposed to a tele turn, which is a whole different system of forces on both skis simultaneously.
post #49 of 76

Ok

Ah, ha. I misunderstood. Weight between skis, not on one ski. I see.

Yeah, good telemark skiing really emphasizes a strongly weighted trailing foot ...as you know.

I can see that being carried over to alpine ...not necessarily a bad thing... I think. Someone with more alpine technical savvy would be better to comment.
post #50 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgrandy
I have little experience with tele, so can some of you "pros" help with a recent discussion I have had with my 15 year old daughter? She is a returning "Ski school assistant" at the local mountain. She can not understand why anyone would tele. Her view is that since DH equipment is the only logical evolution of skill building ;-) why would anyone waste their efforts learning to tele. Now I thought that even a beginning skier might progress well if started on tele gear.
The boots are way more comfortable and the total kit can be much lighter. Simple skills like poling, walking, skating, lift line management, etc could be developed more rapidly with the more natural flexibility of the tele boots (My opinion) Then there is the reality that "bad habits" such as "getting in the back seat" are difficult to develope in tele gear.

I will qualify my position that all "learning" takes place on slopes that do not instill fear. I think tele technique on difficult terrain is more difficult than DH.

Now, all these "expectations" of the benefits of learning on "soft" gear might be a bunch of jumbo, but what do you think?

Regards

CalG
The biggest reason for switching to tele from alpine at a resort is boredom. Here in the flatlands, tele is a welcome shift for all this short run alpine. Another reason for some is their friends do not know if they are skiing poorly or not. Even an intermediate tele skier looks good to most alpine skiers.

There are pros and cons to Alpine, AT, Tele and Touring. They all have there place and best fit conditions. I like alpine and tele both for different reasons.

Thigh burn in telemark skiing is an indication that something is wrong. Its your bodies way of telling you to change something. Thigh burn should be very minimal if things are right.

Things that will cause thigh burn are:
Improper fore and aft alignment in the boots
Some bindings are more prone to thigh burn than others
Bindings mounted to far to the rear of the skis
Sticky wax or bottoms
Wrong length of poles
Sloppy oversize boots and/or loose bindings.
Any one of these will cause back seat skiing in telemark. BUT the idea that back seat skiing is not part of telemark is a myth. Back seat skiing is common and caused by both equipment and poor technique.

As far as efficiency of turns. Alpine turns on telemark gear are more efficient than telemark turns on telemark gear. Also, alpine turns on telemark gear are superior to telemark turns in both edge grip and edge to edge speed. That would also include steep inclines. I suppose that is why 90+% of my turns on telemark gear are alpine turns. I much prefer alpine turns to telemark turns in bumps on telemark gear. I much prefer alpine turns to telemark turns on steep icy conditions on telemark gear.

If we are rippin steep moguls that are solid blocks of ice the size of VW's with trees and rocks all over the place expect me to be in full alpine mode when on telemark gear.

That said, there is nothing like telemark turns to make a foot of powder seem like three feet of powder. There is also nothing like a good tele turn to really feel the upper and lower body separation feel. Tele carves are also way cool on blue/green groomers.

In Sierra Cement or broken crust, give me a pair of alpine boards.
post #51 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven
Ah, ha. I misunderstood. Weight between skis, not on one ski. I see.

Yeah, good telemark skiing really emphasizes a strongly weighted trailing foot ...as you know.

I can see that being carried over to alpine ...not necessarily a bad thing... I think. Someone with more alpine technical savvy would be better to comment.
Weight between the feet is turn appropriate. You can have anywhere from most of the weight on the outside ski to most of the weight on the inside ski. Anything from telemark should carry over fine to alpine and vis vesa.

Weight on the rear foot is necessary to effect appropriate inside ski edging and angulation of the body. Weighting the rear foot also helps the body core coordinate balance and control between both feet. Weighting the rear foot is a key skill and is quite necessary for most telemark skiers, however, it is possible to go beyond and develop excellent balance and control on either foot at any time.

What I find lacking in most telemark skiers is efficient alpine skills. Without efficient alpine skills, it is usually necessary for skiers to be more evenly weighted and have some fore & aft split in their skis. Without these skills, its very difficult to maintain a good athletic stance that is in balance fore & aft in telemark gear. Poor fore & aft balance makes it difficult to ski on one ski in telemark gear.

Developing the ability to ski on either foot in telemark gear is the key to total freedom on telemark gear. There is a whole host of hybrid turns that have elements of both.

There are all sorts of exercises that skiers can use to develop these skills.

One more thing. Good alignment in telemark gear is a big bonus. If fore & aft alignment or canting is off all bets on one footed skiing in telemark gear are off.
post #52 of 76
great post, Pierre eh!
post #53 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
The biggest reason for switching to tele from alpine at a resort is boredom. Here in the flatlands, tele is a welcome shift for all this short run alpine. Another reason for some is their friends do not know if they are skiing poorly or not. Even an intermediate tele skier looks good to most alpine skiers.
Sorry, but this is a couple lousy excuses. If you've ever gotten bored with skiing it's because you gave up improving... and if you really need to impress your friends, then you need new ones.

I think the reason many alpiners take up tele and snowboarding is to get more well rounded. More tricks, more options, wider point of view. Some of these people stick with the new tool because it better suits their needs. My major problem with tele was I took it up 10 years after all my friends and couldn't keep up with them. It also hurt my knees a lot... the tele turn does not stack your weight in alignment with your feet, but rather in alignment with Mudfoot's "weird magic spot" between them which, to be honest, is not physically efficient in the slightest.

It's the wrong tool for people who like to get the most out with the least amount of input.

Like a long board surfer, I also love to use the whole board because each spot on it is superior for certain situations. Powering onto the tips of my skis is great for speeding up turn initiation, easy rotary movements, subtle braking, and a great recovery mechanism for unexpectedly being thrown forward. These are all things not available to telemark skiers except as an illusion.

That said, most of my friends are very good telemarkers and _sometimes_ it makes me jealous
... even if I do usually have to wait for them
post #54 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
Sorry, but this is a couple lousy excuses. If you've ever gotten bored with skiing it's because you gave up improving... and if you really need to impress your friends, then you need new ones.
Oh man its been a while. Come on Cheaps I started telemarkin back in me drinkin times. Why did you have to point out the obvious reason for the boredom.
Quote:
Powering onto the tips of my skis is great for speeding up turn initiation, easy rotary movements, subtle braking, and a great recovery mechanism for unexpectedly being thrown forward. These are all things not available to telemark skiers except as an illusion.
I use to think this but not anymore. With properly set up equipment I have little trouble powering into the tips and do not get thrown off balance forward even when in alpine mode while hitting a pile of fresh snow gun snow that is heavy and wet.

And what is with this 23 posts and a Sept 2004 join date. You can get your old information back.
post #55 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapseats
...Powering onto the tips of my skis is great for speeding up turn initiation, easy rotary movements, subtle braking, and a great recovery mechanism for unexpectedly being thrown forward. These are all things not available to telemark skiers except as an illusion.

That said, most of my friends are very good telemarkers...
Pressuring the tips, i'll give you that, but can't your friends do rotary and braking? We can thrust one ski forward to recover from unexpectedly being thrown forward, what mechanism do you have? Achilles' tendon?

The magic spot is between your skis. Centrifugal force will inevitably move more weight to the outside ski, but a weighted, active inside ski has been part of alpine technique for at least a decade now. The magic spot is not between the skis as much as on both skis, it's not unique to telemarking.
post #56 of 76
It sounds like many of the people here discussing telemark skiing aren't very good at it. The very best telemarkers where I ski (mostly Vail, and Beaver Creek, CO) can easily keep up with very good alpine skiers. Many of these folks belong to both groups. The steeper and gnarlier the conditions the better they seem to do. It may take a great deal more energy to do so, but they don't seem to mind that. Still I can understand that the average mere mortal who doesn't ski much may have troubles keeping the brutal pace on telemark equipment.
Most people who rip are having a ball doing so regardless of the equipment they use. If you are struggling all the way down the mountain you might choose to blame the equipment. Get good at it or else do what you are best at.
post #57 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by dam beer
The very *best* telemarkers where I ski can easily keep up with very *good* alpine skiers.
Haha. Isn't that so true.

Pierre, always like to take the jab.

Quote:
I use to think this but not anymore. With properly set up equipment I have little trouble powering into the tips and do not get thrown off balance forward even when in alpine mode while hitting a pile of fresh snow gun snow that is heavy and wet.
Okay, when I see you roll forward into a tipstand with tele bindings, I'll be a believer.

...am "old information seeking" illiterate. Trying to turn a new leaf but failing miserably.
post #58 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by dam beer
It sounds like many of the people here discussing telemark skiing aren't very good at it.
Yeah it probably seems that way reading the random discussion about, what, I'm still not sure. This thread has been hijacked in a few different directions.

I can say that I've seen Pierre genuflect. He taught the Nordy Downhill segment for the ESA at Brighton several years ago. I think his tele skiing is very solid.

I passed my PSIA Nordic Downhill Exam 4 years ago as a non-PSIA pro. I scored 7,8 and 9 on my skiing and 4,5 and 6 on my teaching . So, I would like to think I don't sux as a tele skier ...just as a teacher.

There's a big difference between being able to dissect with verbal acumen and just doing it. For my part, I don't own the skill of teaching tele. So I can see why you'd say that of me.
post #59 of 76
Dam beer, I've been reading posts by the telemarkers here and in other threads and I get the impression that they are almost all VERY good skiers. ATskier admits to struggling, but he's out there trying, learning, he'll get better. We all struggled, read Pierre's post about his first time.

The "very best" can keep up with a "good" alpine skier. I'll buy that. I'm not the among the very best but I'm a good telemark skier and I ski a bit slower than most good alpiners and a lot of not so good alpine skiers. I ski between 3000 and 5000 vertical feet per hour depending on the speed of the lift, 15000 to 30000 per day including snowboarding. I'm not trying to go any faster at this point. ...At least I'm enjoying the ride!
post #60 of 76

tele tricks

[quote=cheapseats] when I see you roll forward into a tipstand with tele bindings, I'll be a believer.

I don't know about tipstands on telemark, but I have seen some guys riding tele skis switch on the groomers (big deal). Last spring I stopped for a ferw seconds at the bottom of over yonder at vail's back bowl's. A guy came out of the woods, hit a catwalk kicker and launched it, did a 360, landed it in a telemark turn and skied away. Just an anecdote.
Going back to the initial thread. That telemark can be a lot of work and is an outmoded and slower technique. I agree that it is a workout on the legs. That is part of the attraction for many of its enthusiasts. It also has a new school following who may like the to be part of an alternative group. Like snowboarding 15 years ago. But that it is inherently slower for all mountain free skiing I must disagree. Depends on the ability of rider.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home