Why not the telemark?

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
User avatar
MikeK
Posts: 3516
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 2:12 pm

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby MikeK » Thu Feb 16, 2017 5:23 pm

Quit monkeying around and go ski with Al - I'm sure he will show you how to arc those S Bounds :lol:

User avatar
anrothar
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 4:52 pm

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby anrothar » Thu Feb 16, 2017 5:29 pm

lowangle al wrote:Anrothar, where are you located? I'd be happy to ski with you.



I'm in Anchorage. I'll probably be available to play sometime later next week. Su 100 this weekend, then barely moving for a few days.

User avatar
lowangle al
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby lowangle al » Thu Feb 16, 2017 5:51 pm

Good luck at the race and hopefully we'll hook up sometime soon. My schedule is pretty open so PM me your # and I'll give you a call.

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby lilcliffy » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:04 pm

frickus wrote:Question: Is there an official name for turning by grabbing a tree as you go by, in a futile attempt to get back on a good line?

I like both of Anrothar's suggestions:

the Gibbon Turn
Brachiating

They are both good- and one is a noun the other a verb- perfect!

I'll tell you one thing though: I don't think I'll ever get tired of carving a well executed Telemark turn.

Oh yes- I am with you here. I don't mean to suggest anything against the telemark turn.

It is my favourite turn- PERIOD. And- inside I smile at all of those poor Alpine skiers that make fun of those that ski down-hill on Nordic tech- if only they knew what they were missing.

I am not presenting against the telemark turn- very much the opposite.

I am simply suggesting that the telemark is just one turn of many, and that there are contexts where the telemark may not be the most effective technique.
Last edited by lilcliffy on Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
fisheater
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby fisheater » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:45 pm

I am simply suggesting that the telemark is just one turn of many, and that there are contexts where the telemark may not be the most effective technique.[/quote]

I agree that backcountry skiing requires many different techniques to safely traverse interesting terrain. I skied pretty challenging alpine terrain years ago. I would not want to be in those areas without a good falling leaf. You always need to be able to skid, wedge, parallel when necessary.
I ski a bridle trail that is really worn in. There is one downhill that I really don't have a good technique in my bag of tricks. It is about 60- 70 yards of mid 20 degree downhill. The wedge is ineffective as the trail is worn in from decades of use as a horse trail. The high sides are of great help climbing, but descending they make the wedge useless. My technique is to yell loudly from the top that I am about to come down, and I will be going really fast around the corner at the bottom. I give a couple of warnings. I then just bounce from lead change to lead change staying centered, and trying to throw a bit of edge skidding in there. At the bottom I lay into the banked turn, and do my best to ignore the impulse to bounce my shoulder off the tree on the inside. I can't tell you why I think I can bounce into a tree to slow down, just know every time I come down that hill, that is what I think. I did it the first time I went down, the tree didn't budge, I hurt for a good week plus. So if anybody has some tips for those situations let me know. The only things I have seen skiers do there is walk, slide on their butts, or fall down halfway. I saw a guy older then me, bomb it alpine style on some skinny skis maybe 50 mm, made the turn, but got twisted up and fell. He actually yelled up all clear. I made it in the s-112's, he suggested we could switch gear at the top next time. He dropped me pretty quick after that.

I know for me it is about the telemark turn, although I am starting to appreciate striding more. I probably have more work to do on my striding than some guys have to do on their telemark. We all arrive from different directions. I have learned a lot about leather boots, kick wax, different Nordic ski configurations. We're pretty Nordic here, and I enjoy the turn. It is good to talk about other ways to control the skis as well; but I don't think the guys on the backcountry, steep chutes, cliff band hucking site are talking about the falling leaf, it sure is a good way to descend sometimes.

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby lilcliffy » Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:30 am

I am a free-heel Nordic skier. The telemark is most definitely my favorite downhill turn- which is why I would lug heavy Telemark gear up a mountain (as opposed to lighter more powerful AT tech)- but, I am going to use whichever techniques suit the immediate context when downhill skiing- not willing to get stuck in any one turn or position.

Despite my love for the telemark- it isn't all about the turn for me.

In order to use a telemark turn in all downhill conditions, I need a powerful, rigid plastic boot, and a powerful torqy binding. (I would suggest I am not alone here considering how many Nordic downhill skiers push plastic Telemark tech...)

When the skiing context dictates that light BC-XC tech is the most efficient, then that is what I choose. When the conditions allow me to use the telemark turn on XC tech then I will use it- otherwise, I will use alternative techniques.

If some skiers choose to XC tour in big-mtn plastic Telemark tech- so that they may always carve the perfect telemark in all conditions- then power to them. I am not going to criticize, nor offer them a "lesson".

The point of my original post is to pose the question of whether the telemark turn is always the most effective turn.

And if not- when is it the most effective turn? When is it not the most effective?

And- perhaps many skiers' struggles with the telemark turn is the zealous insistance that it must be used even when it is not most effective?
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
fisheater
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby fisheater » Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:04 pm

[quote][/quote]
The point of my original post is to pose the question of whether the telemark turn is always the most effective turn.

And if not- when is it the most effective turn? When is it not the most effective?

I think we can all agree that the Telemark turn is definitely not always the most effective turn. It is the most effective turn in those softer snow conditions where the greater fore and aft balance offered by the Telemark turn offers the greatest advantage to the skier. As terrain becomes steeper and icier the alpine turn becomes more effective. There is certainly a point, where locking the heel is more effective.
I started Telemarking to make skiing at my low vertical, local ski hill more interesting.I have loved the Telemark turn from the very first turn. I started to backcountry ski my local public land to get away from the resort, ski for free in the woods I love, and make turns. I like to go downhill and turn on skis. In this process I have grown very fond of Nordic kick and glide skiing. I am very surprised how much I enjoy that aspect of Nordic skiing.
Lilcliffy, your passion for Nordic skiing, comes through your posts. It has inspired me, but I am always goings to be the guy that started going down the that didn't want to turn at all because it was faster. I learned to love turns, and then when I reached a point, I tried the Telemark turn and really loved it.
Call me out anytime I am dismissive of a member because they don't Telemark. I also freely admit my gear is still a bit heavy, but I am quite comfortable on surplus skis and boots. I greatly enjoy the freedom of movement and the speed I have on that gear, but for me the pleasure is doubled because I can Telemark with that gear. None of that gives me a right to criticize another's gear, or technique.
There are many aspects of Nordic skiing covered on this forum. I was encouraged by Anrothar's post to look up his 100 mile race. That is an incredible undertaking. One hundred miles, non-stop, no stopping after 25 miles to have a couple beers and relax, take a hot shower... I liked where the organizers stated, when in doubt of the correct trail follow the other skier's tracks, you don't want to get lost! I guess the point is that this is a pretty cool forum, with many different interests and that makes it so interesting. I also certainly appreciate seeking the most out of cross country and downhill on Nordic gear. I will continue to become more efficient with the Telemark, and continue to push my ability to make the turn on lighter gear (because I can cover more miles, and get more turns), and to make resorts more of a challenge (I live in Michigan, there are small mountains, but not close to home).
Darned long winded... I guess I would say I started Nordic because of the turn, it is still my first love. This forum has certainly helped me grow in other things Nordic. I will most likely always have my love of the turn come through my posts, but not to be braggart or dismissive of more efficient techniques. I just like doing it. And... I certainly all the other Nordic techniques I have learned here.

User avatar
lowangle al
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby lowangle al » Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:49 pm

Sometime the best turn is the one you are most proficient at, not being an Alpine skier it was always the T turn because that's what I knew. Whenever I got an alpine skier into tele I always recommended they do alpine turns as well as Tele.

The good thing and what I think is the beauty of the T turn is the variety of ways to make a turn.

frickus
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:32 am

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby frickus » Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:57 pm

I've learned two new terms today!
Brachiating (anrothar) and Falling Leaf (fisheater).
I've used both of these "techniques" in the past without knowing what to call them.

I think my signature technique is the falling baboon. I'm really good at that one...

User avatar
lowangle al
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Why not the telemark?

Postby lowangle al » Fri Feb 17, 2017 8:18 pm

If a person can make turns without having a problem with their for\aft stability there is no need for telemark turns. I skied with a guy who had a state of the art heavy tele set up and had no desire to ever do a tele turn.

If you are having for\aft stability issues I don't know of any other remedy but the telemark position. Sometimes if it' gets real rough I just ride something out in the tele position until I can make a turn or stop.

Telemark turns can be done in all conditions on light xcd gear, from rock hard to breakable crust, but it takes a big bag of tricks. There are many different types of T turns and the lighter the gear the more you need know. They may not be pretty but they can keep your face out of the snow.


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests