Post by LoveRonnyRavenSC! on Apr 18, 2024 22:56:28 GMT
Something of a legend in backcountry skiing and though he preferred alpine turns to Telemarks, he achieved legendary status either way.
I'll post in 1 or 2 of his 7 methods at time.
1) The Reverse Telemark.
He mentions that though he prefers alpine turns that (because heels are free on xcD/Nordic skis) fore/aft stability is less than desirable on freeheels when doing alpine parallel turns. Solution? He suggests it is to do alpine turns but in the finish of each turn to simply move the uphill/lead ski a bit more aft and to sink into a Telemark stance with the the outside leg bent rather than having the uphill/inside leg flexed down as in a normal Telemark stance. And that is a reversed or inverted Telemark. I assume (his writing is not clear) that once the desired balance is achieved, the skier is to transition again into a parallel alpine turn and cross the fall-line and then sink into another Reverse Telemark.
Does this really make any sense? No,not to me. Why not just push the parallel lead out a few inches and call it good?
On today's gear, I see nor real benefit in this. Seems like a lot of hoo-ha over nothing unless you only summer-ski the Cascade volcanoes at 3pm on 90-degree days.
2)The Telemark Wedlen. No lead change, wiggle straight in the fall-line. It's essentially the same way a lot of powder or deep or crusted snow or heavy snow often gets skied. Minimal turning. He says there's no time for the Telemark lead change so you ski it with a fixed lead but the Telemark lead is preferred for better fore/aft balance BECAUSE you are on free-heel skis.
This is essentially what we would now call monomarking the run. But does it make a whole lotta sense? Yes and no, the Telemark lead changes add complication to the slight transitions, and the only reason he advocates doing this with a Tele stance is because the free-heel gear of his day was less stable fore/aft than what we have to ski on now. So I would say, depending on your Telemark gear, it could be more stable to just alpine-freeheel ski such conditions today.
I'll post in 1 or 2 of his 7 methods at time.
1) The Reverse Telemark.
He mentions that though he prefers alpine turns that (because heels are free on xcD/Nordic skis) fore/aft stability is less than desirable on freeheels when doing alpine parallel turns. Solution? He suggests it is to do alpine turns but in the finish of each turn to simply move the uphill/lead ski a bit more aft and to sink into a Telemark stance with the the outside leg bent rather than having the uphill/inside leg flexed down as in a normal Telemark stance. And that is a reversed or inverted Telemark. I assume (his writing is not clear) that once the desired balance is achieved, the skier is to transition again into a parallel alpine turn and cross the fall-line and then sink into another Reverse Telemark.
Does this really make any sense? No,not to me. Why not just push the parallel lead out a few inches and call it good?
On today's gear, I see nor real benefit in this. Seems like a lot of hoo-ha over nothing unless you only summer-ski the Cascade volcanoes at 3pm on 90-degree days.
2)The Telemark Wedlen. No lead change, wiggle straight in the fall-line. It's essentially the same way a lot of powder or deep or crusted snow or heavy snow often gets skied. Minimal turning. He says there's no time for the Telemark lead change so you ski it with a fixed lead but the Telemark lead is preferred for better fore/aft balance BECAUSE you are on free-heel skis.
This is essentially what we would now call monomarking the run. But does it make a whole lotta sense? Yes and no, the Telemark lead changes add complication to the slight transitions, and the only reason he advocates doing this with a Tele stance is because the free-heel gear of his day was less stable fore/aft than what we have to ski on now. So I would say, depending on your Telemark gear, it could be more stable to just alpine-freeheel ski such conditions today.
