Why did we do Telemark turns?

 

Advancements in ski design made the Telemark turn a pointless affectation by the middle of the first decade of the 21st Century.With Telemark designs basically reinventing Alpine skis, free-heel skiers could rely on parallel turns and spend their whole session without ever doing a tele turn. Nevertheless, it persisted for a few more years, with more and more downhill-only adaptations to boots and bindings. A few people still do it, apparently. But the original purpose of the "Telemark revival" that began in the latter half of the 1980s had been completely obliterated.

Telemark turns used to give cross-country skiers downhill maneuverability on what passed for wide skis at the time. When I got into cross-country skiing in 1984, the set I bought was a whopping 56 millimeters wide at the shovel -- really more of a trowel at that width -- and was described as suitable for backcountry skiing. Since my interest was winter mountain exploration, I hoped to gain skills on ungroomed snow.

Traditional cross-country ski fitting could be crazy long. I started on 205cm skis with the low-topped "bowling shoes" that were common at the time. My Telemark efforts on those were hindered by the flexibility of the shoes and the cumbersome ski length as well as my complete inexperience in any form of skiing in my youth. But everyone was experimenting to some degree. Early backcountry "experts" recommended getting a ski longer than your in-track fit, to support the weight of your heavier load when venturing away from genteel touring centers with amenities nearby. If you have to rely on yourself, perhaps for multiple days, you need a few extra pounds of gear. However, the long ski trend quickly led to the shorter ski trend.

The refined standard for backcountry skiing on traditional length skis said to knock 5-15cm off your in-track length. It's still in the traditional fit range of 10-20 percent over your height, so you can stride if conditions allow it, but the skis grip better for more secure climbing, and are easier to turn because they're that little bit shorter. And the other part of the equation was heavier, taller boots. Asolo and Merrell, among others, offered a range of models in traditional leather that eventually included plastic cuffs on the heaviest models used by skiers most interested in finding downhill opportunities. This was before all-plastic boots appeared.

Telemark racers were limited to a maximum ski width of 70mm. Wow! Fat boards! For a few years, that was about the widest Nordic ski you could get. Then in the 1990s, Rossignol came out with the Black Widow, an unabashedly illegal ski intended strictly for fun. I don't remember the width, but it was before parabolic skis hit the downhill world. Eighty-four or 88mm maybe. Race rules were relaxed, and other companies hurried to add their own wider skis. But lengths were still in the traditional range, shrinking a little at a time as plastic boots arrived and grew more and more height and buckles.

Even before the ski width rebellion, all of the companies servicing the Telemark market had single-cambered models. The Karhu Supreme was only about 68mm at the shovel, but had a wonderfully soft flex for softer snow. Rossi had the TRS for icy conditions, and the Haute Route for softer snow. Both models were sized long, and still at or under 70mm wide.

On the ski field, Telemark skiers originally took pride in their difference, enticing jaded alpine skiers to try it out not because it was a superior tool for the steeps, but because it made the whole mountain more challenging again. But once the novelty wore off, skiers only interested in going downhill wanted to be able to show off more, with less practice. Touring capability was completely discarded in favor of turning. At that point it was inevitable that alpine touring gear would take over the backcountry niche, because it was adequate to plod uphill, and far superior for descent.

I still go out on my equipment from the 1990s, because it still does its job. Compact skis came in at that time, offering ski tourists more maneuverability in a simplified fitting system, but compact skis don't stride very well. I have a set of compacts, but I like to use the 200cm, 60mm touring skis most of the time, unless I go where the 175cm, 73mm compacts fit the slope angle, snow density, and tree spacing better. But they're also bright orange, and I hate to be visible out there. The long skis happen to be black. You might think that white would be the best color to blend in, but there's usually plenty of black, gray, and brown in the scene. Not much bright orange.

Of course as I age I have to think about whether I will injure myself doing something that I used to be good at. But that includes taking a shower, shoveling the snow off the deck, or taking out the garbage. You gotta keep moving or you'll rust in place.