In 1995 Mike Nick, Eric Pollard, Griffin Cummings, Frazier Griffin & I were all skiing with no poles (inspired by snowboarding which we also all did) because we realized you don't need them in the park if you simply adjust your style away from relying on them & used more of the sidecut to turn which previously skis didn't have.
Pollard was actually disqualified in the 2000 or 2001 X Games qualifier because he didn't have poles in his hands even though he easily threw the sickest run (after realizing the BS of comps he stopped competing). Seeing Nick win X Games & Henrik last year with no poles is blowing my mind. People's perception in the past 3 years went from: "skiing with no poles isn't skiing!" TO "hmm, no poles, yup that was a winning run!" Even though lots of skiers helped pave the way, I 100% feel like Henrik put the final nail on the coffin so we could all move on and ski with or without them and still call it skiing.
Obviously poles are awesome for pushing yourself around no matter what style skiing you're doing but 100 even 30 years ago poles they were literally required to initiate a turn because the skis had no sidecut & so "proper skiing form" was then built around using them which is now tough to shake visually & physically. Now the only reason you need them is because you want to be able to push around better OR you got use to the feel and body movements of holding poles while skiing & it's awkward to re-adjust your entire form to ski well without them. Watch an Olympic downhill ski race, they only use poles during the first 20feet to push off, after that they use their skis to turn, not a damn stick!
If skis were invented today, no one skiing off a chairlift would be using poles & everyone would be skiing 10-20cm shorter skis. Longer skis & poles would be considered a specialty tool for "backcountry skiing".
