Talk:Cross-country skiing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] "Classic" vs "Classical"
I've always heard about 'Classic Technique', not 'Classical', but thats probably due to differences in regional jargon. →Iñgólemo← (talk) 06:16, 2004 Nov 20 (UTC)
Same here, it's normally called classic technique Lorddude 20:12, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I agree it should be 'Classic', although I have heard senior FIS officials using the 'Classical' designation so may be things are changing. And by the way it should be Free and not Freestyle (this is the domain of Freestyle skiers who have nothing to do with Cross Country Skiing). SamR Jun 28, 2005
--Classic and Classical are both used interchangably in my experience at all levels of racing. Part of the reason for this confusion is that the origins of the term are distinctivly multi-cultural and multi-lingual, and that the need for such a term only arose 20-30 years ago when the skating technique first came into use so the kinks of its uses and translations are still being worked out. My advice is just don't sweat it, as it is understood what is being talked about in either case. -- SamEB
[edit] Combining with Ski_wax
Do you think we should link to the Ski_wax page? Also, does "kick wax" include klister? --Anonymous
- Klister is a type of "kick wax" (or grip wax) yes, though it is very different in consistancy than regular kick wax. -- SamEB
- Hmm. Where I come from, Norway, we generally classify klister as another category of 'kick stuff' beside wax, i.e. not designating klister as a type of wax. Thus, a typical question before going out to ski in the morning when the temperature is just around freezing point is whether to use wax or klister. Not 100% sure how this is in English---Swix' pages insinuates this difference between "hardwaxes" and "klisters", though. --Wernher 09:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Klister is for warmer humide conditions, other wise you need hard wax over coats for dryer conditons. MJC
[edit] Skate-ski picture
The image of the skate-skier does not clearly convey exactly what the motion is, and it was taken at an awkward enough moment that it seems to lack motion and smoothness. I will see if I have one to upload as an alternative.
I think it does a good job of showing the difference between hockey skating and cross country skating for people who aren't familiar with the difference. Particularity using arms in V1 going up a hill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.188.92 (talk) 20:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sectioning
OK I just got an edit conflict because some people are changing the sectioning which I was in the middle of improving. I don't think it is necessary to use a section heading with links for each type of binding, so I was trying to remove that but still make it clear it was in sections.
This is what I was working on:
Three different binding systems are used in modern cross-country skiing:
- NNN (New Nordic Norm) – including the new R4 NIS variant
- SNS (Salomon Nordic System) Profil
- SNS Pilot
Older styled three-pin bindings (or Nordic Norm), with or without cables, are still used by backcountry and Telemarking enthusiasts.
New Nordic Norm
- New Nordic Norm (NNN) bindings, made by Rottefella, Rossignol, and Atomic, can range from BC (Backcountry) to the R3 Skate and R3 Classic to the NNN R4 NIS, which require a special plate on the skis to be mounted. Boots compatible with these bindings are made by Alpina Sports, Atomic Skis and Rossignol. The R3 and R4 are generally the choice for World Cup Racers using NNN. These are distinguished from SNS (Salomon and Fischer) bindings in that all bindings in the NNN system have two ridges that stick out from the bottom of the binding, with corresponding slots in NNN boots. NNN is said to have better steering than Salomon because these two grooves better distribute the weight, rather than SNS's (both Profil and Pilot) single larger "bar" sticking up from the binding that fits into a slot in the boot. NNN has also been proven to be lighter than SNS bindings. Despite this, the majority of World Cup level skiers ski on the SNS binding system, but that doesn't make one better than the other. Differences between the NNN and SNS binding systems are miniscule to the average skier, and only comes down to personal preference in the ski boot used.
- The R4 NIS binding, made by Rottefella and Rossignol, is the top of the line NNN binding. These bindings are compatible with any NNN boot, but can only be used on Rossignol X-IUM or Madshus Hypersonic Skis—the companies' high-end pro racing skis. Madshus is part of the Rottefella/Madshus/Alpina partnership, and that is the reason for Madshus skis having NIS bindings. The reason for only two different skis being able to use these bindings is that NIS bindings require a special plate only available on these skis. The interesting thing about these bindings is that the rear part can be pivoted back and forth on the plate to match the boots' length, therefore making better power transfer between the boots and the skis. The NIS bindings made their debut to the general public in 2005.
Salomon Nordic System Profil
- Salomon Nordic System (SNS Profil) bindings, made by Salomon and Fischer, however, have their advantages too. Boots that are compatible with the SNS Profil system are made by Salomon, Fischer, Adidas, and Hartjes. SNS Profil bindings are used for both Skating and Classic. As opposed to the SNS Pilot's two axes (or attachment points), these boots have only one axis at the front of the sole. Pilots are used by many different racers on the World Cup Circuit. Profil bindings are the standard binding for SNS users, its only competition being the SNS Pilot system. Profil comes in "Equipe" models for racing, "Active" for recreational racing/combination, Auto Touring, and Back Country.
Salomon Nordic System Pilot
- SNS Pilot bindings, compatible with Salomon, Fischer, Adidas and Hartjes boots, are only used for Skate Skiing. The idea for these bindings came from Bjørn Dæhlie. Pilots are used mostly by elite skiers at the Collegiate, National, World Cup and Olympian levels, although it is not uncommon to find High School or civilian racers with these bindings and their counterpart boots. Pilots are more expensive than Profils at about 100 dollars for a pair, and can only be used for Skating because there are two axes. In Pilot boots, the two axes, one positioned about 1" behind the other, click into two different slots in the Pilot binding. Profil boots only have one axis and therefore, cannot fit into Pilot bindings. However, Pilot boots can fit into any Profil bindings, due to a small space behind the front of the boot for the other axis. Pilots can't be used for Classic because Classic boots need to be able to flex in all directions so that a good "kick" can be achieved. Pilots do not have the kind of flex required for Classic, but they have proven themselves as good Skate bindings due to reduced ski motion in the air.
Under the circumstances of not wanting so many sublevels this made the most sense to me. As they are/have been changed back to I feel the sections are not really consistent. I am open to suggestions on how it can be smoothed out but to me it makes more coherent sense to have all equipment in the same subsection - boots, poles and bindings included. --CokeBear 01:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- No problem, please go ahead with your scheme of one "Equipment" section with "Skis and poles" and "Bindings/boots" subsections, where the latter is without subsubsections for the various binding types---I fully agree! :-) --Wernher 01:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
We need to change the NNN and SNS a bit, because at the end of January Rottefella won a contract to take over from Salomon in providing bindings for Fischer cross-country skis.
There is a need for the SNS Pilot section to be revised because of the release of Pilot bindings for classic.
[edit] Re the ext link to the US Olympic team
When the 2006 Team USA/skiing link was added some time ago, on the outset I opposed it, on the grounds that it was too specific and not very "encyclopedic". Thinking about the issue for a little while, however, has made me consider the link more of a Good Thing, as it may perhaps contribute to heightening the US general public's interest for the sport---which is probably a boon as it may lead to increased media coverage etc. A kind of evangelism, though... Comments? --Wernher 12:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Style
It says in the the free/skate section "Skating is faster and a more intense exercise than classic skiing", but i was watching eurosport and the comentators said that skating is faster and NOT as tiring as classic. Thorml 01:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC) In order to skate properly one has to go faster, so it is more intense.
- Either that or, when skiing at equal intensity, skate is faster than classic. Because when World Cup racers finish a 50k classic, they're still tired.
- Bill Koch (skier) - add to freestyle/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.159.195.10 (talk) 06:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Roller Skis
Watch out for classic roller skis because you don't have to push down to get grip so don't use roller skis too much. MJC
[edit] Differences in Ski types
I've been unable to find differences between Classic, Skate and Combi skis, especially relating to relative lengths, construction, binding position on the ski, etc... This holds true for Google and WP. Perhaps a nordic-fanatic can fill us in? --Yakym 20:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] XC Ski Userbox
I noticed that there was no userbox specific to XC skiing, so I made one up. By adding
{{User:Ahunt/XCski}}
to your user page you will display a userbox like this:
| This user enjoys Cross-country skiing |
Ahunt 04:28, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Hazards and big mistakes
I know that I may be hard to ski just by not walking well, but if you exoierience Hypothermia, and encounter animals, there would be a big risk in taking the skis around. I hope that there we would exercise well to move quickly.User:Virtue account 12:40 AM Central Time, Canada —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virtue account (talk • contribs) 17:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

