Marc_C":21ul4lrg said:As far as snide remarks, we've all hurled and received our share of daggers and hand grenades, but no one should ever be surprised at being called on it.
I nominate BobbyD. :lol:soulskier":3kc7yieg said:And consider this an open invitation to the board. If anyone is in Tahoe this winter, let's meet up for a few runs on KT-22, where even the second and third tier skiers are in 4th gear.
just seems ridiculous as the baseline of what is serious vert. Granted that everyone has their own thing that makes them tick, this just seems like overkill. It looks to be at least 45 degrees if not steeper and quite dangerous, perhaps even DNFZ.soulskier":2irtw45t said:
soulskier":1k3x0id3 said:Homie mentioned a 25 degree slope in a serious vert thread, that warrants a crack. 25 degrees isn't even steep enough to slide, which is where a slope then becomes "serious".
Geoff":16lpg7pi said:soulskier":16lpg7pi said:Homie mentioned a 25 degree slope in a serious vert thread, that warrants a crack. 25 degrees isn't even steep enough to slide, which is where a slope then becomes "serious".
It was a stake in the ground as minimum criteria. Of course, I'm fairly convinced that such a point is completely lost on you. You want the whole world to know how freakin' great you are.
Tony Crocker":ag3ox4su said:I would still be interested in soulskier's response to flyover's and my comments on the previous page.
soulskier":ag3ox4su said:KT-22, where . . . You can see first hand the speed these days.
Tony Crocker":1rtu3bfa said:I would still be interested in soulskier's response to flyover's and my comments on the previous page. Soulskier's pics from Las Lenas are nearly always from the powder days when he can put it in 4th gear or more. But we all know that Las Lenas can go weeks with no new snow and that the wind can pack it pretty hard. That vertical becomes a lot more serious in terms of consequences in those circumstances and the technical demands upon one's skiing ability much higher. I would be much more inclined to trust, say, Patrick's well-honed hardpack skills in those situations than the "4th gear" I see at Mammoth and LCC from Adam and BobbyD.
When you dismiss places like MRG as being a relevant model for the MRA b/c of some ill-informed perception with respect to the terrain and challenge, then the above statement is exactly what you are saying, albeit unwittingly.soulskier":2grc7yfx said:Geoff":2grc7yfx said:soulskier":2grc7yfx said:Homie mentioned a 25 degree slope in a serious vert thread, that warrants a crack. 25 degrees isn't even steep enough to slide, which is where a slope then becomes "serious".
It was a stake in the ground as minimum criteria. Of course, I'm fairly convinced that such a point is completely lost on you. You want the whole world to know how freakin' great you are.
Dude, I'm so rad, check me out!
Mike Bernstein":atk7kij9 said:When you dismiss places like MRG as being a relevant model for the MRA b/c of some ill-informed perception with respect to the terrain and challenge, then the above statement is exactly what you are saying, albeit unwittingly.
Avalanche control, not cheap in terms of labor and other costs. It was interesting discussing this issue last July at the New Zealand club areas. With limited resources often the response is to wait it out and let the snow settle. I believe this is common at Silverton also. Depending upon weather, often the snow isn't powder anymore by the time you're allowed to ski it. Soulskier should be quite familiar with this situation from Las Lenas.soulskier":11p9taau said:This is more conducive to the type of terrain we are looking to work with.
Since when should we judge a mountain by its trail map? If we did that Steamboat's back bowl would provide a "big mountain" experience, which it doesn't.soulskier":e2x05tnv said:Ill-informed perception of the terrain and challenge? Here's the trail map.
I have stated numerous times that we want to provide lift access to big mountain skiing (similar to Silverton), which this is not. No offense or disrespect, but it's not the type of terrain or snow pack that we are looking for.
I love it. Your only response is to post the trail map? Really? That's the extent of your knowledge of the place? That's pretty well indicative of the depth of thinking that's characterized the MRA and its predecessors thus far. I can state with a high degree of confidence that a significant % of MRG skiers would absolutely dust you on that hill, irrespective of how badass you think you get when you kick it into 4th gear. Tight, steep EC trees with chutes, waterfalls and occasional bobsled tracks for the full 2000'. The more you dismiss it, the more clueless you appear.soulskier":22g8ajku said:Ill-informed perception of the terrain and challenge? Here's the trail map.
Apparently you don't, if your previous statements in the Shames thread are any indication. You came out and flatly stated that MRG wouldn't be a good model for Shames b/c of the terrain/snowpack. This is despite the fact that, within an EC context, they practice EXACTLY the type of business model you claim to aspire to: big terrain, deep snows, environmentally sensitive, collective vibe, focused on long-term sustainability and not short-term profits.I have stated numerous times that we want to provide lift access to big mountain skiing (similar to Silverton), which this is not. No offense or disrespect, but it's not the type of terrain or snow pack that we are looking for.
Please note I do have a ton of respect for MRG and the business model they practice.