Light gear does a good telemarker make?

[Lhartley]

Interesting new article in Powder today by forum member @JackO of telemark voices

https://www.powder.com/gear/how-old-thr ... tter-skier

"Wanting to continue progressing, I began reading up on technique and philosophy, and in seldom visited corners of the internet I found a piece of advice repeated as refrain: find some crummy older skis, get a soft, low boot, and you will find a more skillful groove. Completely spellbound by telemark in its entirety, I eagerly went forth and followed this guidance."

Which supports statements made in this thread

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7062

And and a response to said post in another dark corner of the internet for an alternative opinion

And then:

"A question remains in my mind, wondering if the performance rabbit hole can be traveled down too far. The undying cable-lover in me still asks a classic telemark question; with more rigid bindings, don’t we just end up at alpine skiing? Isn’t the most resistive free-heel binding not a telemark one at all, but one with a locked heel?"

And

"But apocalyptic musings about telemark progression gone too far aside, the fact remains that this evolution in the gear has been an amazing thing for telemark, and we’re lucky to bask in it. The fact remains that the stouter gear is here for a reason."

Using all that info, I do wonder what is good info and what is not? I've been enjoying my 95mm waisted skis with switchbacks and t2's at the resort and contemplating trying some lighter gear, but I only have so much time on my hands at the resort and would rather not mess with gear if it's to my detriment. I feel like some gear consistency is key when learning but there's a lot of chatter about lighter stuff "helping" technique. In Japan there is a company producing classic skis for this purpose.

https://neoclassics.jp/

On the other hand there's certainly a lot of support on this page pointing to developing technique on fatter boards and more supportive gear, seeing opposition from the forums founder. I understand there's differing philosophy, just looking at all my gear and wondering what's going to make me the best skier I can be

Thoughts?

[changed]

I'm learning on 78mm skis, "floppy boots and bindings" (Alaskas and 3 pins), and having a pretty damn good time.

Anybody that has to get so serious about a pointless pursuit like skiing, on the internet, is probably not somebody you want to listen to, or hang out with anyway...

[JohnSKepler]

I spent the first two years on Alaska Alpina XP, Xplore bindings, and a range of skis, with the widest being an FT62. I learned very slowly despite putting in a lot of time. When I got a heavy set up with TXPro, Meidjo, on big skis, I don't feel like anything I learned on Xplore translated at all. The heavy set up was way too much for me at the time and I don't feel like I progressed much that year. I'll call it my dragoon set up.

I only began to get comfortable with the turn when I mounted Transit bindings to Atomic Maverick 86 and skied them with old, green Scarpa F1 boots at the end of last year. While a fairly heavy set up it's a lot lighter than the dragoon rig. In the late winter and early spring I did a half-dozen lift served on this rig and learned more than I had the previous three years in either gear. When I got the gear back out this winter I felt like my lift-served experience translated well to my low-angle and I've been able to ski a lot more terrain with a lot less effort regardless of gear. Still can't ski ice for beans.

I agree that the techniques are completely different and I'm not saying that heavy gear and lifts is the same as low angle with skinny skis. Just saying it crossed over better, for me. The added confidence sure didn't hurt either. You also get a LOT more turns in using a lift to climb the mountain.

As the tele turns, this weekend I solved a major problem I was having. My left turn has been quite nice but my right turn not nice. I spent a lot of time examining and thinking about this and I found I was over-weighting the right ski in the right turn. It would cause my skis to separate laterally and the right ski would then turn in as the left began to swim. Simply transitioning my weight more effectively to the left really cleaned up my right hand turn.

[fisheater]

I am a firm believer in it all makes you better, and for me it does. Resort gear makes me better on BC gear, and being on light gear, points out my flaws, and forces me to improve my form.
I think everything from step turns on a single track single trail, to a steep double black in the icy East makes you a better skier. That would include riding lifts out West in 2 feet plus, to 6” of ungroomed on fire roads with a base underneath.
I embrace it all, I think it all makes me better.
BTW I know you mentioned that Alberta? forum before. I am not impressed either by there skiing videos or comments.

[Lhartley]

Negative, the multi personality forum is all American. That AlbertaTele handle was just a Raventele bot

[lowangle al]

I think so. Light gear takes more mental and physical input to ski well. You need more weight on the rear ski with a three pin then you do with a big boot and active binding. You also need to carve better to control your skis. Although TeleHiro does it with controlled skids, but that requires the right snow and it might be harder to learn.

With the stability you get with heavy gear you don't need to be as precise to stay upright. I wonder if heavy gear makes you a better skier, or if it just make you ski better. Probably or possibly both.

[Bavarian Cream]

I agree with what’s been said already, but I’ll add my personal take anyway, for what it’s worth:

I can say I’ve benefited from skiing a range of setups. I think the skinny stuff helps you develop feel, finesse, and lightness on your feet, while the heavier gear gives the power, stability, and confidence to gradually put it all together at higher speeds and slope angles. Skinny skis also need to be turned (require skier input) almost against their will, whereas wide, turny skis need to be reined in (require upper-body discipline) lest they turn too much—in either case, a valuable lesson. Active and neutral boot/binding connections will give you different feedback regarding your weight distribution fore/aft or if you are getting too spread out. Using skis of different lengths or camber/rocker profiles will also give you a better sense of how tight/spread to be.

In short, I think it’s worthwhile to go back and forth between light and heavy gear to help round out your conceptualization of how technique (body position and movement) affects balance and turning.

[telerat]

I have done telemark turns, or at least tried to, on skis with waist from 42 to 88mm and side-cuts from 4 to 55mm. My first lift based try 30 years ago was on long and stiff cambered skis with low leather boots, and was a complete failure. My next try on low leather boots, but with telemark skis was a bit better. I afterwards bought the original Terminator and Tua Montets MX with Riva 2 or 3, and it worked fine and I had fun. I did however not fully understand the mechanics of the turn until I got carving skis, and those require a supportive boot with a suitable binding to keep them on edge and have control.

Today I can do telemark turns on most skis, depending on conditions and with varying degrees of control. My cross country wax skis with NNN combi boots can work as long as the surface is firm and smooth, but the stiff camber/wax pocket makes it much harder and only work for skidding turns. Åsnes Ousland and Fischer E109 turns much better, but the camber for wax turns still is not great for telemark turns, but they work well if conditions are good. My Åsnes Falketind 62X with Alfa Free with free pivot plate and the hard flex, are very light and great fun on both hard and soft snow and I can do telemark turns up to 25 degrees hills in decent conditions. Lastly my Scarpa TX, Meidjo and 88 mm all-mountain skis are the heaviest, but have the highest support and will outperform all of the above on downhill performance, and especially so in steeper and more demanding conditions. (I also have some older 75mm gear, and it works fine too.)

On lower angle terrain and forgiving snow anything will work and be fun, but speed and control will vary. On more demanding conditions and tours, high performance gear will be superior. Each have to decide what is most fun for him/her. I enjoy most skiing, but some type more than others.

[fgd135]

I'm happy to be so infamous ...per the commenter on the other forum. I'm surprised by the vitriol from some whacko who doesn't sport the cajones to contact me or post on this forum in a discussion...I guess there's assh*les all over the interwebs.

I stand by what I said...besides that, his quoted statement by me was taken entirely out of context, as it was a discussion on this forum from a member considering picking up some old 60mm skis to try the sport, which indeed does require differences in technique.

[Lhartley]

It's just Raventele, you've probably crossed paths before, he was "banned" from this forum. He has a thread on his page called "a conduit to telemarktalk". I don't find it effective, so I put him out on front street here. My favorite hockey players are the Tkachuk bros, I like chaos