The downhill/Alpine and cross-country/Nordic split

131 views
Skip to first unread message

Phil

unread,
Feb 25, 2022, 9:57:45 PM2/25/22
to hoosac range skiing

Did ski lifts create the split between downhill and cross-country?

The name for cross-country skiing in French is ski du fond. Which, loosely translated, means valley skiing (literally fond = bottom, so it's like saying “skiing of the lowlands” and if you take skiing, by itself, to mean the alpine variant then that's what takes place up high, on the mountain).

I lay the primary split between the two disciplines at the feet of Mathias Zdarsky, back in 1896. You'll remember him if you followed the history threads last year. Called the “Father of Alpine Skiing,” the split was mostly due to the difference in terrain between his home in Austria and skiing's home of Norway. The terrain in Norway was such that skiers there never stressed the necessity to vary their primary technique from “straight running” which, if you think about it, is still the main way of getting along on Nordic skis, to this day.

Straight running was not going to be survivable in steep Alpine couloirs and Zdarsky wanted something he could use in them. Lacking instruction on how to do so, he taught himself a method for it and, because others wanted to also do it, the idea caught on.

He created a system for teaching it. Others copied and modified that system. One of them was Hannes Schneider, and, as has been stated before, Schneider's Arlberg Technique was the majority method for ski instruction in the U.S. during the time that skiing was transitioning from being largely self-propelled to being lift-propelled.

No one missed the graceful Telemark turn because the Arlberg canon had eliminated it and its mainstay, the Stem Christie, worked very well on the slopes that the lifts were serving. Skiing in the U.S. became “downhill” skiing while cross-country was relegated to a niche activity (done in the lowlands) that was encouraged largely because of its historical value. Jumping was dramatic and remained a popular spectator sport, but spectating at a cross-country race was as exciting as watching cement set.

That part of the Nordic discipline went into hibernation until roused from its slumber in the 1960s.

Phil

unread,
Mar 1, 2022, 11:21:10 PM3/1/22
to hoosac range skiing

An interesting anecdote about a challenge between a Telemarker and an Alberger. (from the NESM's Nordic Timeline)

1944: “On a hot fall day, up on Mt. Mansfield, a Norwegian and an Austrian challenged each other to a unique race. The Austrian was Sepp Ruschp... the operator of the Mt. Mansfield Ski Area. The Norwegian was Erling Strom, operator of one of the first ski schools in America and a noted ski mountaineer. Ruschp, Strom and a group of other men, all considered too old for combat duty in the waning days of World War II, were mowing the brambles and brush on the Nosedive, one of Mansfield’s tougher ski trails.

They were preparing it for another season, and Ruschp wanted to finish the job that afternoon. They had already cut the highest part of the slope, where the brush was lowest. Sepp Ruschp was about 36, Erling Strom was in his 40s.

…The course they decided upon, one Strom had apparently already considered as a good race route, was designed to combine both alpine and cross-country racing: the mountain’s four-mile toll road, which winds from near the summit to the foot of the slope, and the valley’s hills and dales; total distance—about 11 miles.

They named it the Stowe Derby, after the Parsenn Derby in Davos Switzerland, one of the oldest and most famous long downhill races.”

Ron Gonzalez

unread,
Mar 2, 2022, 11:54:01 AM3/2/22
to hoosac range skiing
I was reading up on this a few years ago, and stumbled onto the Asnes website. Asnes makes a variety of skis, from 'cross country' to 'Nordic backcountry' to 'Alpine Touring' skis. Looking at it in Norwegian, I noticed these categories have interesting names in Norwegian. 

Tur og markaski - Cross country ski
Fjellski - BC ski 
Toppturski - Alpine touring ski 

As far as I can make out (not knowing anyone who speaks Norwegian), 
'Markaski'  can be translated as 'goal ski', as in 'ski from point to point' -- or cross country skiing. 
'Fjellski' can be translated as 'mountain ski'
'Toppturski' can be translated as 'summit touring ski' 

Markaski and Toppturski are both clear enough. But... 

What's intriguing to me is, what exactly does Fjellski -- 'mountain ski' -- mean? Is it meant to convey what we call 'meadowskipping', touring for turns in more mellow-angled, open, sub-alpine terrain? Or does it mean skiing in the sub-alpine forests in the mountains, negotiating all kinds of steepness through the snowy forests (like some of us do in the Vermont backcountry and the Adirondack forests)?   
 
Being that I really enjoy 'XCD' skiing ('touring for turns' in snowy forested terrain), I'm wondering if that's what 'fjellski' conveys too. Or... Do the Norwegians have enough open subalpine terrain that they have a type of ski devoted primarily to 'meadowskipping'? In other words, are we Northeast US 'puckerbush' skiers alone, or do the Norwegians also do this crazy type of forest skiing? 

Phil

unread,
Mar 2, 2022, 7:31:29 PM3/2/22
to hoosac range skiing

The friendly argument that provoked the Stowe Derby is one that I am familiar with having had the same type of dialogue with the Alpine ski team coach at our school, when I was the Nordic coach. He was less interested in testing the theory than I was, but if we had been able to find a mutually agreeable formula to put it to the test I think we might have tried it.

I said we should hold a race over two different courses, downhill GS and then XC for 5K. Problem was how to measure the results. Combined time would certainly favor the Nordic skiers, since time penalties for poor technique on a sub 2 min. downhill course are probably not going to add up to the same deficits the inexperienced downhill skiers would have racked up against the XC skiers over 5K. There was also the problem of equipment. Would we just trade skis, etc.? The idea was even floated that everyone would stay on their own equipment. Nordic skiers could probably have managed the downhill course, even if they fell at every gate, but the Alpine skiers would have taken a week to cover 5K on their equipment. Could never figure out those details so it never got tested.  

Phil

unread,
Mar 3, 2022, 2:54:21 PM3/3/22
to hoosac range skiing

The Stowe Derby course was well-designed for the kind of test that Strom wanted. The modern course is described on the website as requiring: “...participants to ski approximately 20 km of challenging terrain, racing down Mt. Mansfield’s Toll Road and along the Stowe Rec Path before reaching the finish in Stowe Village. The Course has a total vertical drop of almost 2,700 feet. The winners will complete the course in about 43 minutes, while recreational skiers can take a couple of hours.”

If you look at the profile I created from Plot-a-Route you can see how inefficient it would be to try it on 2022's Alpine gear vs. 1944's. The top image shows the overall profile. The lower image shows the % grades. Even during the downhill segment there is a level stretch and a brief uphill. The remainder of the course along the Rec Path is rolling, slightly downhill, but largely level. From the pictures it seems that standard skate-racing equipment is what the winners are using. It might be worth asking one of our ski mo authorities if anyone tries it on that kind of equipment with any success.

The separation between the two types of equipment was not significant enough in the mid-40s to give Strom the advantage. Here also from the Derby website: “At the time, Ruschp believed that his Alpine skis were the fastest tools for the job, whereas Strom argued Nordic skis would be the better choice. After much debate, the two decided to race. Sepp Ruschp, on Alpine gear, was the winner of the first two Stowe Derbies.”

Stowe Derby.jpg

Jonathan S. Shefftz

unread,
Mar 4, 2022, 9:48:04 AM3/4/22
to hoosac range skiing
I participated in the Stowe Derby many years ago.  On xc skate gear of course.  Despite the interesting history, the race long since ceased to fulfill its original goal, and is instead now just kind of an offbeat nordic race.
(A really fun offbeat nordic race at that -- highly recommended! -- but still, most definitely a nordic race, albeit with a big net elevation loss.)

As for the original intent to see who is the best overall skier for the up, down, and all-around, that is the very definition of skimo racing.

By contrast, for races that place all sorts of skiers and ski gear at equal (or nearly so) disadvantages, the most prominent is:
Despite its newfound reputation as a skimo race, it isn't.  
As should be obvious from the core stats of 40 miles yet merely 6,800' vertical (i.e., less than my typical three-lap outing at Greylock, yet almost the same distance that I *drive* to Greylock from Amherst!), and should be obvious from the "Traverse" in the race name, it is a nordic backcountry race.
For which nordic backcountry race gear would be optimal.  Yet no such nordic backcountry race gear exists!
So the podium has come to be dominated in recent years by skimo race gear.  Yet teams on nordic race gear still do very well.  (Always cracks me up when people try to impress me with having down that race.  So how many people on nordic gear beat you?  My personal guideline is that if skiers on xc skate gear are doing better than me on my skimo race gear, then I must be doing something very wrong!)

Close to home, these races can be a hoot (if you can tolerate waking up at an absurdly early hour):
At the start line, looking at the collection of ski types, or snowshoes, or just trail runners, you'd never think that everyone is about to embark upon the same route!
That leads to wildly varying paces among the leaders.  
I've done the race at Magic twice, which is somewhat more amenable to skimo race gear, since it's a more straightforward up & down ... except one year when they swung us way out on a loop at the summit ... uh oh, super flat, runners are gaining on me while I skin ... but the "snow" is too soft and cover too thin to deskin and skate instead ... lose more time at the summit 30-second transition since the runners have no such transition ... but then pass them on the descent as if they're almost standing still, wuhoo!

Phil

unread,
Mar 4, 2022, 9:02:51 PM3/4/22
to hoosac range skiing
The Grand Traverse is interesting to me since I did a similar route on wooden 3-pin skis from Aspen to C.B. in the winter of '74-5, though we went up through Ashcroft and over Pearl Pass, cutting off some of the distance that the race has to make, and spent a night in a hut, making it a two day journey. Skiing breakable windslab on the CB side of the pass with an overnight pack and light touring gear was a bit of a challenge. The pack was an old 10th Mt. div. surplus item and I could relate to those guys who'd been skiing not far away 30 years before, though I wasn't trying to carry ammo and an M1 carbine at the same time. We flew back to Aspen in a light plane which had to make two trips to get the whole group back to town. There were about 4 or 5 of us. I agree with you regarding the steepness of the descents we dealt with. Nothing that required heavy Alpine set ups. I might have liked metal edges, instead of lignostone. Only one of us had metal edges, a pair of the Fisher Europas which were then coming into vogue. 

Phil

unread,
Mar 29, 2022, 11:22:19 AM3/29/22
to hoosac range skiing
Just saw this on FB. Was a Western State College trip between Crested Butte and Aspen in the winter of '71-2. My trip was the reverse direction, three years later, but the equipment was the same, minus the knickers.
Untitled3.jpg

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages