assmonkey Posted February 5, 2004 Posted February 5, 2004 Fucking hilarious interview, check it out here. He talks about other stuff too. Glenn Plake is still the master ruler! Quote
iain Posted February 5, 2004 Posted February 5, 2004 heh that's some funny stuff. I wonder if that is a mullet under that toque. Quote
gslater Posted February 5, 2004 Posted February 5, 2004 I liked his comment about having a "pretty fortunate career". THAT'S an understatement if I ever heard one... Quote
thelawgoddess Posted February 5, 2004 Posted February 5, 2004 man, that was long. "ski always!" Quote
vegetablebelay Posted February 5, 2004 Posted February 5, 2004 Yeah, it was long. I kept watching hoping the see the "fucking hilarious" part. Quote
JayB Posted February 6, 2004 Posted February 6, 2004 I thought the revelation that there's some Telemark stuff out there that is so stiff and ungainly that you can't even tour in it anymore was pretty hillarious. Overbuilt tele-gear = skiing's answer to the spork. Quote
thelawgoddess Posted February 6, 2004 Posted February 6, 2004 pretty much, jayb. when i took my avy class one of our instructors actually told us we weren't telemark skiers; we were "freeheel skiers". he said real telemark skiers ski on straight skis without metal edges where the telemark turn is the only way to really turn them. Quote
mattp Posted February 6, 2004 Posted February 6, 2004 I think he is correct that telemark gear is just as heavy as AT these days and, in my view, the telemark fad is largely a historical accident. It does have its advantages (and disadvantages) for backcountry skiing, though. Advantages: 1. telemark bindings make it easier to lift the tail of ski when touring, and stepping over logs and sidestepping around tree-wells and such, 2. telemark bindings are slightly better on rolling terrain and for touring (in my view the "drag" against heal lift is over-emphasized as a drawback by many AT propagandists) 3. telemark boots are slightly more comfortable for hiking 4. the telemark turn yields greater performance in certain types of terrain/snow (largely where slow-speed turns are useful, but also in certain slop and breakable crust conditions) disadvantages 1. telemark gear is not as releaseable and even with release plates it is not as safe in falls and maye not in avalanches 2. a telemark set-up yields lesser performance in almost all technical skiing situations (see above) 3. AT boots are better for technical climbing 4. telemark skiing is more strenuous We've debated telemark v AT on this site at least two or three times before -- run a search to find it. Quote
iain Posted February 6, 2004 Posted February 6, 2004 tele bindings, at least the older ones, seem generally easier to repair in the field. "repair kits" for AT bindings usually involve hauling in replacement plastic toe pieces, etc. Quote
snoboy Posted February 7, 2004 Posted February 7, 2004 4. the telemark turn yields greater performance in certain types of terrain/snow (largely where slow-speed turns are useful, but also in certain slop and breakable crust conditions) Damn, I thought getting a locked heel would help me witht the breakable crust days... Quote
mattp Posted February 7, 2004 Posted February 7, 2004 Most of the time, I think the locked heel WILL help. Just not all of the time. But on such days, most people would be better off staying at home anyway. Combat skiing is not for the faint of heart! Quote
cracked Posted February 7, 2004 Posted February 7, 2004 AT gear only sucks on rolling terrain and when sidestepping with the heel unlocked. For the rest, no comparison. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.