Telemark Gear Has Improved Dramatically Over Time. But Some Insiders Think It's Getting Too Stiff

For years, telemark skiing had a problem. As the also-ran of the snowsports world emerged from decades of retrograde, a small but impactful flourish of new, modern norms and innovative if niche bindings came to the fore, breathing life into the sport and its scene. But perhaps the most important part of the equipment equation–telemark boots–remained untouched by this wave of progress. As 2024 came around, telemark footwear hadn’t seen meaningful evolution in some fifteen years, an interlude so long that many thought it may never come; a decade-and-a-half span of stagnation that was perhaps unheard of in any other category of the outdoor industry.

But when free-heel linchpin Scarpa at last released telemark’s first modern boot last fall–its revamped TX Pro–a sport long in ebb celebrated. Telemark finally had a complete, contemporary gear paradigm that, combined with a rising new guard, injected fresh energy into the sport. Anxious knee-droppers long prone to hoarding discontinued models now clamored to preorder the new boot. And as snow fell and ski resorts opened, the free-heeling throngs were soon on the boot in numbers, ushering in a new era. Telemark was back. 

But as the TX Pro saw widespread use, something began to happen. While many enjoyed the new boot immediately, others were rebuffed by the new, rigid model. Sputtered turns and awkward growing pains reignited a long smoldering, to some pesky argument, one that has long dogged telemark: that the innovation of free-heel gear had become so focused on keeping up with the alpine world, that, over time–in boots and bindings–the equipment had sacrificed its soulful, supple, telemark sensation.  

As ever, some scoffed at this line of reasoning, casting these arguments off as grumpy and anti-progress. But as the months passed by, and the telemarking masses found their footing on the new boot, the pattern solidified. Though difficult to quantify, a seemingly large minority of skiers seemed to be struggling with the new boot’s stiffness. Though the boot eventually broke in for most, mods aimed at softening its flex flowed from internet forums as more users wrestled with finding their balance on the new, more rigid model.

Was this reemergence of an old argument–that telemark gear had become too stiff without offering softer options–on to something?

From Leather to Plastic and Into the Future

The notion that telemark gear has moved too far forward is an old argument. And it is often characterized as curmudgeonly. Leathernecks have long espoused that the truest form of free-heel skiing takes place via cowhide and 3-pin binding, while those opposed to the ascendance of the new telemark norm have long equated it to loose-heel alpine skiing, declaring that NTN, the modern free-heel norm and its more rigid platform, lacks the sweet telemark sensation granted by the gear of old.

For years, most of these takes have been dismissed. Heady declarations of leather’s esoteric feel have been lost on more than a few newcomers simply looking for decent gear to start on. And the notion of NTN’s supposed inferiority has been fodder for many a dissonant Facebook forum discussion, often spiraling into a cacophony of subjectivity. The penchant for some to view telemark’s forward movement with knee-jerk disdain has stained the conversation, leading many to cast it off.

But as telemark ever enters the modern fold, sober, mindful arguments–some coming from leading voices in the scene–have lent credence to the thought that modern telemark gear may be missing the sweet sensation of the previous generation’s equipment, and not for the better.  And with the late-coming release of modern, paradigm-shifting boots–something that in its new, stiffer form is still absolutely crucial for the sport–the discussion has entered new territory, one where declarations that something is indeed missing from the new equipment aren’t just subjective nostalgia, but instead often offer compelling cases.

The latest evolution of this argument has been put forth most strongly by Craig Dostie, creator of the legendary Couloirmagazine–the first dedicated backcountry publication, founded in 1988–and long one of telemark’s leading opinion leaders. His less-than-mellow take that something was amiss in Scarpa’s revamped TX Pro goes back to his time testing the early prototypes of the model, and became a quiet flashpoint for online banter. 

That discussion broadened in late 2023, nearly a year before the boot would be released, when telemark message boards lit up as rumor, conjecture and excitement around the new model swelled. That included Dostie’s own forum, BackcountryTalk.com. His argument centers around the notion that in the name of pursuing parity with alpine touring features, the new TX Pro eschewed the sweet telemark flex that earlier Scarpa models had so legendarily had.

“My skepticism on the new boot from Scarpa has been consistent regarding the flex of the boot. As I said earlier, it will probably break in and be okay, but my experience with the prototypes was it never broke in,” Dostie stated on BackcountryTalk in November of 2023, months before testers and reviewers received the final production version. “All versions [over the last four years] have focused on mods to ‘optimize’ the flex of the boot with increased torsional rigidity. IMO there is no need for extra torsional rigidity with NTN bindings, so it remains to be seen if the final version yields an acceptably sweet flex. I remain skeptical.”

A few weeks later, as spec info and photos of the new boot leaked and filtered through the telemark information superhighway, Dostie reiterated his stance. “The Torsion Bridge Frame is what makes me nervous about the flex of the boot,” he wrote, referencing the boot’s additional robustness in the scafo. “I remain skeptically hopeful it isn’t as stiff as it once was.”

Months later, Dostie, having skied the production model, doubled-down on his assertion, stating that the boot’s flex was unbalanced, and that “equipment shouldn’t get in the way of the turn, it should enhance it. Scarpa will shift when a competitor shows ’em what they missed.”

While Dostie’s eminence seemed to grant him wide latitude to put forth these notions, the discussion was not immune to counterpoint. That came on the same forum from a user by the name of “hop”–a handle that so happened to be used by the legendary pro telemark skier Adam Ü.

“I’ve only skimmed the thread so could be missing something but it seems like there’s at least one person here that’s skied the new boot and has written it off as not having ‘proper’ qualities (whatever that means),” he wrote on BackcountryTalk in the spring of 2024 after himself skiing the new model. “Maximum resistance to anything new or different seems to be a common thread amongst freeheelers and I’ve never understood why. Happened when plastic boots first came on the scene, then NTN, and many other times,” he concluded.

Later, and seemingly directly pointed at Dostie’s takes, Ü wrote “I don’t get along with baseless conspiracy theories, perpetual misinformation, and I don’t appreciate people telling me that their way is the only way.” 

The debate had brought to the fold not only the classic free-heel argument that as time had moved along the gear had lost its way, but also its modern corollary; that the new vanguard of telemark equipment was an asset, and that requisite acceptance, adaption and break-in was a necessary part of the evolved telemark gear fold. 

As Ü noted, these notions had long been operative in the discussion on the new telemark norm (NTN). Many struggled with adapting to the new platform after it was released in the 2000s, with a corps casting it off as “un-telemark” with its rigid, unfamiliar flex in both boots and bindings.  

Still, many others excelled on the new norm, not only praising its stronger edge engagement and modern features, but also accepting its nature of requiring a specific, long thought of proper backfoot-oriented technique, one the elder 75mm platform didn’t necessitate. This debate eventually catalyzed another now classic telemark perspective–that the skier has a responsibility to adapt to new gear, perhaps more so than manufacturers should be tasked with making equipment that telemark skiers might already prefer.

But soon Dostie wasn’t alone. After the new boot was released to the public, and as more skiers had more days on them, people came out of the telemark forum woodwork. And several of those with critical takes did so not just with grumpy dismissals, but nuanced takes on the new boot. 

That included distinguished telemark DIYer John Brody, who in typically analytical fashion stated his own perspective on the new boot’s stiffness. “Here’s my theory. The new boot, despite having soft bellows after break-in, has a very torsionally stiff scaffo,” he wrote. “If you’re used to skiing low with F1, F3 [Scarpa’s long-since discontinued soft-skiing, bellowed AT boots], old TX Pro, or any 75mm boot, you likely use the torsional flex in the scaffo to apply edge pressure, in addition to angulation of your inside leg and hip. The new boot removes that degree of freedom, requiring the skier to use mainly angulation to apply edge pressure.”

Moreover, referencing an experiment he posted to BackcountryTalk.com, Brody noted how the softer 75mm boots he skied to compare to the stiffer modern models had been something of a revelation. “It had been around 8 years since I was on 75mm, and holy crap, those T2’s are some sweet flexing boots,” he noted, referring to Scarpa’s classic duckbilled boot. “I need to bring them out a few times a year just to remember what that feeling is like.”

Simple dismissals these opinions were not, marking a quietly turbulent crossroads for a sport that had long pined for modern equipment, not least of all, boots.

Are we headed in the right direction?

As time has gone by, this discourse has evolved from a moratorium on a single telemark boot model to a broader discussion on the general direction of telemark gear innovation. From a perspective that is both opinionated but not completely averse to the new guard, Dostie has continued to evangelize for softer boots. “I love the NTN setup because it adds a resistance at the ball of my foot, so it’s really easy, I think, to get that sensation–if the boot will give a little,” Dostie said on Josh Madsen’s Freeheel Life Podcast #192. But Dostie still sees the new TX Pro as confining in its flexibility, especially in the ankle–a pliancy many free-heelers prefer–saying “that is what is missing in the new boot.”

Dostie concedes that many do and will continue to like the new vanguard in rigid telemark boots, but notes that as telemark footwear moves more and more toward stiffer models, the previous paradigm of boot flex may be lost.

“I think a lot of people are going to be totally happy with it, because–and I’m not trying to bag on their technique–but there’s nothing they’re missing,” Dostie noted in the podcast. “They’ve not experienced what I’m talking about therefore they don’t need it.”

“On the other hand, if they knew it, I believe, if they had experienced it, they would want it,” he noted.

And it’s not just Dostie making this case. Josh Madsen–former owner of the influential Freeheel Life telemark shop in Salt Lake City–has himself taken up this mantle, regardless of his hard skiing past.

“I think this can easily get played off with a lot of people in terms of ‘well, technology is moving forward, and you old dudes are just, like, trying to be nostalgic, and you don’t want to let go of stuff,’” Madsen said on his February 4th 2025 subscriber-only podcast, an episode titled My Predictions & Opinions on Telemark Bindings 2025. “Quite honestly I think it’s good to be skeptical.”

Madsen’s take was all the more provocative given his former shop’s resort-oriented, NTN facing. Though the store sold a wide range of telemark gear, Freeheel Life’s videos and vibe always led hard with the aggressive, modern boot/binding paradigm.

Regardless, Madsen spoke in strong language in support of softer boots and bindings. “The more I’ve gone through my arc of my own telemark journey and skiing so much different gear over the course of the last thirty years, is that I think we are moving away from the ability for people to feel certain aspects of the turn that are so, so important,” he noted.

“It’s what makes people fall in love with the turn. And from an athletic standpoint some people need less in terms of activity and stiffness and lateral stiffness because it’s going to give them sensations that they actually need to enjoy the process.”

John Brody has himself noted how telemark gear has evolved along ever more rigid lines, the computer engineer adding an almost scientific nuance to the discussion.

“What I’ve seen is that the way sort of mainstream telemark bindings and boots have progressed is towards the shorter travel, stiffer, more active spring tension. And that necessitates a certain approach from the skier, right? Because it’s all one system,” Brody noted last May.

Brody–who prefers more pliant, longer travel springs and softer boots for his backcountry and resort skiing–found the new TX Pro to be initially unbalanced. That led him to side-by-side experiments with an array of boots and bindings of different vintages, and also instigated his own mods to the new TX Pro.

“I think what I discovered through testing different boots and bindings in various combinations is the boot/binding system–and really the terrain, ski, boot, binding, skier system–I mean, it’s all one system. They need to complement each other. And when you have a mismatch anywhere in that system, it becomes very apparent.”

Brody sees the evolution of telemark gear as broadly moving toward more rigid models due to the advent of the new telemark norm. He theorizes that the leap from 75mm’s attachment at the heel via a cable/cartridge assembly to NTN’s underfoot connection “caused a sort of cascading chain of events.”

“When you look at the springs and the activity of 75mm versus NTN, you see that with NTN the springs started getting smaller and shorter and the bindings were getting more active. And I think the reason for that is when you put the boot/binding connection under the foot, you lose real estate, it becomes a packaging problem,” Brody notes.

“The binding manufacturers address the packaging problem with the boot/binding connection being under the foot with smaller diameter springs, shorter springs. Then that necessitates having a more active binding because if your springs don’t have as much travel, if you’re going to run out of travel more quickly, you have to ramp up the spring tension. Otherwise, you’re going to hit the end of your spring travel and rip the binding out of the ski.”

But the notion that telemark bindings and boots are getting too stiff has a strong counterpoint in the many happy users of the new gear paradigm, not least of all the leading telemark figures themselves not averse to the new guard. That includes Adam Ü, perhaps telemark’s most prolifically photographed athlete of all time, and long one of its most visible freeskiers. He even graced the cover of POWDER magazine when the sport was at amongst its lowest points in the 2010s. Ü has long transcended the telemark skier label, and feels that the critical reaction to the new boot is due partly to the long interlude between new releases, as is telemark’s legacy of pushback against innovation.

“I do understand that there may be a learning curve to new gear,” Ü says. “I also know that many tele skiers are very stuck in their preferences–witness people refusing to switch up their gear for decades based on their personal preferences; those same people are often the ones that shift the baselines so that anything that came after their personal gear evolution stopped ‘isn’t telemark’ anymore–so big changes are going to be tougher to manage.”

Ü also notes that while resort telemark gear may have become more rigid, and that the sport’s modern gear options offer precious few alternatives, its tendency toward more restrictive models simply reflects a broader sea change pervasive in the entire outdoor industry.

“I’m not sure I totally agree that telemark gear has gotten more resistive,” he says. “Sure, the heavier resort/inbounds gear has, but that’s across the board for all skiing.”

“I’m not biking on my rigid 1996 26” mountain bikes anymore, even if they’re lighter than my 29er. I’ll take the weight penalty for the technological advantage,” he notes.

Moreover, Ü often professes the personal nature of the free-heel turn, that each skier feels it differently, in turn affecting what gear works best for each individual. “Telemark turning and preferences are 100 percent subjective and there are no absolutes; what works for one may be garbage for the other,” he notes. “So, for me, and my style and preferences, I don’t see the resistive nature of modern gear to be a hindrance. I do understand that my experience may not be applicable to everyone else, and that’s ok.”

“I think the biggest problem with gear is that there aren’t enough options (specifically in the boot department) to satisfy everyone,” Ü says.

Undoubtedly, this is a discourse that could only happen in a niche sport that relies on technology but only has so many gear options. It’s something telemark has long suffered from, and likely will continue to. But perhaps the future may hold more free-flexing equipment in both bindings and boots. Josh Madsen noted as much in his Predictions & Opinions on Telemark Bindings 2025 podcast: “Prediction for the future is I think less is more when it comes to the bindings. It’s not the bells and whistles, it’s the ability to have less going on with the bindings so you can feel what’s going on.” 

Still, some on the leading edge of telemark tinkering and philosophy see a fraught future if the equipment stays its current course. “Telemark is starting to get dangerously close to that point where if you start to make the gear too close to alpine gear people are going to say ‘well why am I paying these penalties of weight and cost and limited supply and limited options to buy a boot that I’m just going to make parallel turns on?’” says John Brody.

“That’s not a value judgment. If people want to make parallel turns, that’s fine. I just think that the people making the gear need to be very careful about getting too close to that point where the reasons to telemark and to use telemark gear start to go away.”