A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Nordic Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

10 seasons back : quick introduction to skate skiing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 26th 06, 03:05 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 10 seasons back : quick introduction to skate skiing

A 1996 perspective in the Seattle Post.

I came across this nice article when searching for reading food to
understand skating technique better. As I'm so new to XC skiing, it's good
to read where skating came from. A bit sad that revolution is sort of
complete already, it must have been exciting times.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/getawa...696/ski26.html

Have big things changed since, apart from all biathletes skating and half
the XC event in the Olympics to become skating? Are poles still super long,
is the speed difference with classic still growing, or has classic fought
back?

Jan Gerrit "J" Klok


Ads
  #2  
Old April 27th 06, 12:56 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

poles definitely have become shorter.

Jan Gerrit Klok wrote:
A 1996 perspective in the Seattle Post.

I came across this nice article when searching for reading food to
understand skating technique better. As I'm so new to XC skiing, it's good
to read where skating came from. A bit sad that revolution is sort of
complete already, it must have been exciting times.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/getawa...696/ski26.html

Have big things changed since, apart from all biathletes skating and half
the XC event in the Olympics to become skating? Are poles still super long,
is the speed difference with classic still growing, or has classic fought
back?

Jan Gerrit "J" Klok


  #3  
Old April 27th 06, 12:59 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

did not want to comment on the technique istelf, but what is shown in
this pciture is definitely outdated. And the poles are strikingly long.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/getawa...6/skipix2.html

  #4  
Old April 27th 06, 03:16 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 26 Apr 2006 17:59:28 -0700, wrote:

did not want to comment on the technique istelf, but what is shown in
this pciture is definitely outdated. And the poles are strikingly long.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/getawa...6/skipix2.html


Purple is kinda played out too.

JFT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
  #5  
Old April 27th 06, 12:48 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On 26 Apr 2006 17:59:28 -0700, wrote:

did not want to comment on the technique istelf, but what is shown in
this pciture is definitely outdated. And the poles are strikingly long.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/getawa...6/skipix2.html


Purple is kinda played out too.

JFT


Man, you crack me up. Now I gotta clean my screen.

Joseph

  #6  
Old April 27th 06, 09:27 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I read an article in a skimagazine from 1986. someone from the state
ski fed had given av presentation about future skiing. the article
author said it was scaring to hear... they talked about skating "to
BOTH sides (both legs)" and sometimes without poling, like a
ice-skater. and then skating for miles on miles.

what's next? a man walking on the moon. haha...

  #7  
Old April 28th 06, 04:38 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jan Gerrit Klok wrote
A bit sad that revolution is sort of complete already


The revolution is complete in the sense that skating is established as
faster than classic on anything but very soft or sticky snow and extremely
steep climbs. In most countries whose big national race does not _require_
Classic technique, most athletic and advanced skiers prefer skating over
classic on groomed tracks when they're skating for fun.

It is complete in the sense that the elite World Cup racers now use fairly
similar skating techniques in most situations.

It is not complete in the sense that the _concepts_ or theory of what the
elite racers are doing in their skating is agreed on. Just look at the
archives of this r.s.n newgroup for the past six years and you'll see that
almost any conceivable point about skating technique has been disagreed
about. You can find Nose-Knees-Toes rejected as hopelessly outmoded on this
newsgroup and in North American magazine articles, and then find NKT
recommended by a recent European CD-ROM that's being promoted by some North
American experts.

I think what hinders further debate over the _concepts_ of skating on this
newsgroup is not agreement, but exhaustion.

is the speed difference with classic still growing, or has classic fought
back?


What surprised me is that skating is faster than classic even for climbing
up fairly steep hills.

The comparison between skating and classic as performed in elite races could
be somewhat tricky, because for several years the racers would find every
excuse to use Skating techniques in supposedly Classic-only races
(notoriously around curves, also for "changing lanes"). I heard recently
they changed the rules to restrict these excuses, so perhaps the gap between
Classic and Skating results will get wider. But Classic double-poling
technique can be amazingly fast, partly because with advanced technique it
makes substantial use of the leg muscles.

Ken


  #8  
Old April 28th 06, 07:48 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ken Roberts" schreef in bericht
...

The revolution is complete in the sense that skating is established as
faster than classic on anything but very soft or sticky snow and extremely
steep climbs. In most countries whose big national race does not _require_
Classic technique, most athletic and advanced skiers prefer skating over
classic on groomed tracks when they're skating for fun.

I was actually more going after the skate-specific gear where the revolution
seems complete, and also the way it's taken over biathlon and 50% of teh
rest of the Olympics.
Everyone makes skate boots and bindings, and there seems to be 99.9%
consensus between ski manufacturers how to make a skate ski. I for one can't
tell one from the other.

The introduction of skating for me certainly must have made the difference
to get into this sport. I don't think I could be bothered to change my
lifestyle and look totally dorky (more so even) on rollerski's, all just to
glide through tracks in the winter. Skating is just so more sexy, and
incredible fun when you feel you're getting it right. Slow fluent motions
that somehow make you end up going quite fast. We shot some video of me
skating the streets, and I was amazed to witness how fast cars and buildings
shoot by while I seem to move effortlessly in slow motion. I learnt about
the effortless part though, and now understand why racers don't make it far
after crossing the finishline.

It is complete in the sense that the elite World Cup racers now use fairly
similar skating techniques in most situations.

Yes, and what kind of change could make racers to use new and different
techniques to go faster still? Ski's that somehow glide even faster, perhaps
thanks to a longer lenght, or something like greatly improved cornering if a
manufacturer managed to make a ski that could be skated fast but also carved
around corners in Hocker position. Extreme changes, which are not to be
expected.
I get the impression that if you'd vacume-store a bunch of good 2006
ski's+wax+boots, in 2016 a podium contender won't be without a chance of the
podium using it.

What surprised me is that skating is faster than classic even for climbing
up fairly steep hills.

Would this be thanks to full glide wax jobs vs the grip pocket on classis
skis?
Where was this difference measured? I'd like to read about it.

But Classic double-poling
technique can be amazingly fast, partly because with advanced technique it
makes substantial use of the leg muscles.

Yes, I noticed how on more or less flat Loppets, average speeds are pretty
impressive, if racers manage to stick to double-poling. Are classic ski's
faster at double poling thanks to slightly longer ski's, or do skating ski's
hold the advantage thanks to their full glide wax job?
I think I read somewhere here about world cup racers using skate ski's for a
classic race, because the course could be double-poled all the way around?

Thanks Ken and others for the nice additions. So I guess the purple XC suit
I bought on clearance won't score me cool points when I take part in my
first race? :-)

J


  #9  
Old April 28th 06, 11:02 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Are classic ski's
faster at double poling thanks to slightly longer ski's,
or do skating ski's hold the advantage thanks to their full glide wax job?


classic skiing is faster on double poling because the classic poles
have optimal length for parallell ski position. DB with longer poles
might feel comfortable for beginners but classic poles are best for
speed.

why some use skate skis on classic sprint is because the track was very
short and all flat. but they used classic poles anyway. (Drammen)

faster than classic on anything but very soft or sticky snow
and extremely steep climbs


and add double poling

  #10  
Old April 28th 06, 01:01 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jan Gerrit Klok
I was amazed to witness how fast cars and buildings
shoot by while I seem to move effortlessly in slow motion.


But really what makes skating exciting is the _feeling_ of making the
motions more than the speed. Otherwise on pavement I'd just ride my bicycle.
On ice and pavement and indoor rinks, I think the majority of skaters aren't
much interested in speed, focused more on feeling and showing off cool
moves. Even on snow, classic double-poling can make the scenery shoot by
plenty fast enough for me, but I just don't like the feeling of my head
going up and down so much as it does in double-poling. And I spend lots of
my time on groomed snow skating up hills where I'm moving fairly slowly --
but still enjoying the magic of skating.

skating is faster than classic even for climbing up fairly steep hills.


Where was this difference measured?


Measuring it could get tricky because it's not even true that skating is
always faster. There's lots of different steepnesses of hills and lots of
different snow conditions. Actually for most of the hills and snow I ski on
the majority of my skiing days (which are on ungroomed snow), skating is not
very effective. So more important than measuring is to work out for yourself
what's appropriate for you in each situation.

For me the really convincing part was an unofficial uphill rollerskiing
"fun" race held some years in October to the top of a mountain which has
lots of sustained steep-ish climbing. Back then I figured the advantage of
skating was in the long glide, and there wasn't much glide up steep hills.
So I tried to be really clever by using Combi rollerskis, so I could do
Classic up the steep sections and then skate this one flat section in the
middle. The result that my time was completely inferior to this guy who
skated the whole thing. And he did not even carry any poles, just swung his
arms from side to side.

Later I read an article in a scientific book about cross-country skiing
which said that for skating up hills, over 50% of the power must come from
poling. Too bad the author wasn't at the race that day.

Would this be thanks to full glide wax jobs vs the grip pocket on classis
skis?


I think skating can be faster than classic for climbing up (many)
groomed-track hills, because skating uses propulsive forces in full 3
dimensions, so advanced racers discover clever tricks to engage more muscles
than 2-dimensional Classic. The classic ski design has more gliding
friction, but skating also has inherent inefficiency losses -- in the
physics of transforming sideways push-forces into forward work.

I think expert racers can engage more muscle mass in skating than classic,
by clever use of sideways moves. The energy from those additional moves is
not transmitted as effectively as classic (because of losses in the
directional transformation), but it still comes out as a net gain (in many
situations).

The physics of the interactions of all the different moves in skating are so
complicated, it's not an obvious result or something that a scientist should
have been able to predict. It's just the sign of the result happens to come
out from adding up a whole bunch of pluses and minuses (except when it's
different).

Ken



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Crossover and Crossunder foot2foot Alpine Skiing 288 May 14th 05 06:09 PM
Skid, slip, and carved turn yunlong Alpine Skiing 96 February 22nd 05 08:27 PM
Near fatal ski incident Me Nordic Skiing 22 February 27th 04 02:47 PM
Skate technique USST two cents Pete Vordenberg Nordic Skiing 52 January 22nd 04 03:31 PM
Back To Hard Wheels Fot Skate Roller Skiing. Douglas Diehl Nordic Skiing 4 August 10th 03 07:14 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.