What is the ratio of AT to Telemark skiers?

Thanks for the responses. I was hoping you'd respond Lowell.

I'm going to weigh in at 60 /40 with Telemark skiers being the 60. of course this is in Flux. My guess on the future is 70 /30 with AT taking the lead. <br> My own personel anecdote is I started out XC Went Downhill,Then AT ,next full on telemark and currently swapping back and forth between the two. I enjoy both and and one skill set seems to feed the other as I progress. <br> I'm happiest doing both tele and parallell on a modern shaped ski and a tele rig that accepts ski crampons,Releases and has forward pivot.!<br> <br>

Since AT is easier it makes sense more newbies are choosing AT.

<br><br>That's an interesting observation. Fifteen years ago, I think the opposite was true. I remember some lively debates on Usenet about which was easier to learn, parallel or telemark. I used to argue that the telemark turn was the quickest way for a beginner to get into backcountry skiing. The reason is that at a basic level, the telemark is a steered turn. By contrast, stem/parallel turns in unpacked snow require carving. That's a harder skill to learn than steering. <br><br>Or at least it used to be. Shaped skis have made the difference. Shaped skis have made learning to carve parallel turns easy enough that the telemark turn no longer offers the same advantage for the beginner that it used to.

I'd say 50/50, with both growing ... in different places. Tele is growing more at ski areas as alpine skiers try something new and AT more in the backcountry as non-tele skiers invest in new toys to broaden their horizons.<br><br>I'll go out on a limb and predict that 5 or 10 years from now there will be no distinction between the two. AT and Tele will merge when systems become available that allow both techniques with the same equipment.<br>

... I used to argue that the telemark turn was the quickest way for a beginner to get into backcountry skiing. The reason is that at a basic level, the telemark is a steered turn. By contrast, stem/parallel turns in unpacked snow require carving. That's a harder skill to learn than steering. ...

<br>That's a very interesting perspective, Lowell. I've never heard anyone make that argument before. Did the consensus at the time agree with you?<br>

<br>That's a very interesting perspective, Lowell. I've never heard anyone make that argument before. Did the consensus at the time agree with you?<br>

<br><br>I don't remember. But I kinda doubt it, knowing how the Net works.  <br><br>Digging around in my mail folders, I found several of my Usenet posts on this subject from the late 1980s. Here's one:<br><br>

<br>Subject: Which is easier, telemark or christie<br>Path: fluke!lowell<br>From: lowell@tc.fluke.COM (Lowell Skoog)
Newsgroups: rec.skiing
Message-ID: <5500@fluke.COM&gt;
Date: 10 Oct 88 18:21:42 GMT
References: <5925@columbia.edu&gt;
Sender: news@tc.fluke.COM
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 48
Status: RO

Ken Roberts caught me in a gross simplification when I said:

>   Nordic (telemark) technique is easier to learn
>   than alpine (christie) technique.  

This statement was based on my experience in observing other skiers.  I have generally seen alpine skiers pick up nordic technique faster and more successfully than nordic skiers pick up alpine technique.  I attribute this to several factors.

First, the telemark is fundamentally a steered turn (except when it isn't).  In a steered turn, you can use muscle power to make the turn happen.  You don't have to rely on the design of the ski and use edging and pressuring make the turn.  While using the design of the ski (in other words, carving) is much more efficient (in other words, less strenuous), it requires a level of confidence, balance, and feel for the skis that takes longer to develop.  My assertion is that the telemark turn gives the novice skier more feeling of control over the skis.  The turn can be applied in more varied conditions, in a shorter time, than the parallel turn.  (Note that I'm not saying that ultimately the telemark gives the greatest control, only that it feels that way when you're starting.)

Second, as the telemark skier improves, the turn becomes more and more carved.  (That's why I say that a telemark isn't always a steered turn.)  This progression is a continuous one.  That is what makes the telemark easier to master in varying snow conditions.  While an alpine stem turn may be just as easy to learn as a telemark stem turn, it is a big jump from an alpine stem turn to a parallel turn, and you have to make this jump in order to ski cruddy snow.  With a telemark turn, there is a gradual transition from steering on packed snow to carving on soft snow, so the same movement patterns can be applied throughout.

The final factor is a cultural one.  (Here, I'm afraid my alpine chauvinism is going to show.)  In nordic skiing, the performance expectations are lower.  In other words, you don't have to ski as fast or as steep on nordic gear to be considered a good skier.

Ultimately, I believe that the christie (alpine technique) is a higher performance turn than the telemark (nordic technique). So if you want, in the long term, to be the best possible skier, learn alpine technique.  (Ah...let the holy wars begin. :-) ) But if you want to get out in the backcountry this winter, instead of two years from now, learn nordic technique.

Lowell Skoog, Seattle
lowell@tc.fluke.COM

<br>