Sharon's been telling you that all your crashing would lead to no good.my pants basically fell down.
Gore Mtn, NY: 2/20/09 - 2/23/09
- Thread starter Harvey
- Start date
You gotta love the gapers in that photo.
I certainly deserve whatever I get as I opened this can of worms (foolishly after a glass of wine). But it's sad that all the work I put into this thread has to end with that photo. :roll:
Sharon... are you saying that my immodesty or my frugality has lead to lift closure?
I certainly deserve whatever I get as I opened this can of worms (foolishly after a glass of wine). But it's sad that all the work I put into this thread has to end with that photo. :roll:
Sharon... are you saying that my immodesty or my frugality has lead to lift closure?
skimore":atnco9xt said:
Skimore...guess I'm running old tapes. Not a high as I thought. Especially Sugarbush.
I did some checking on prices I thought would be the highest in VT. They weren't that much higher than Gore. Stratton, Stowe, Kmart....were all in the $80s for a weekend single day pass.
Season passes were a different story. I checked no restriction passes. Killington $1350, Stowe $1765, Stratton $1469. Yowza. I paid $650 for my Gore/WF unrestricted, but that was an early deadline price.
That is some serious cash. By comparison...Gore's pass break even is around 11 days and Stowe's is closer to 20.
Now I know you are getting a lot of mountain at both Kmart and Stowe.
I've skied Stratton too. That pricing I just don't get.
ChrisC
Well-known member
jamesdeluxe":qm9vo010 said:
These forums....just becuase Harvey posts here does not mean conditions are better. Gore is generally below average.
Loon is better than Gore on almost any day. Just because Harvay takes a bunch of pics, and joegm does not.....does not make Gore better. It's really one of the worst in the Northeast on any given day.
Gore sucks more than Loon, Waterville, Okemo, Mt. Snow, Stratton, Sunday River.....most anywhere. Most often Nor' Easters bypass Gore.....Look at this last week Stowe - 60", Gore - 10".
I had to ski New York for most of my early years. And that inflicted Gore on me.
Gore is not that great. I would take Loon EVERDAY over Gore.
icelanticskier
New member
ChrisC":hofiy4q2 said:
you would :roll:
rog
I've never been to either, but I have no doubt that Loon gets way more rain. Snowfall is likely similar, in the 150 range. Nonetheless harvey44's pictures are tempered by those percent open stats I've been tracking this season.
icelanticskier
New member
Tony Crocker":2w4567ue said:
loon maybe averages 120 inches. 150 inches is seen on great years like the last 3.
rog
Sharon
New member
I've never been to Loon, so I cannot compare. NH is just too far to go to ski when I'd have to pass the Vt resorts to get there anyway.
Gore has fantastic terrain which is on par with the Vt resorts (on average)...only difference is that Gore just doesn't get the amount of snow that Vt gets, so the epic days are fewer.
Gore's terrain and recent (in the past 15 years since they put in the new gondi) lift layout really spreads people out on busy days. I think the lower mountain is the most crowded, but for the advanced skiers there is so much terrain that crowding is never an issue. Lift lines at the upper mtn lifts are usually less than 5 minutes if any wait at all. Judging by the trail map Gore has more glades than Loon. The glades at Gore are plentiful, varied and awesome. It isn't Stowe or Jay, but for it's size, there are plenty of places to go off the beaten path and lots of potential for fresh tracks after a snow.
Gore has fantastic terrain which is on par with the Vt resorts (on average)...only difference is that Gore just doesn't get the amount of snow that Vt gets, so the epic days are fewer.
Gore's terrain and recent (in the past 15 years since they put in the new gondi) lift layout really spreads people out on busy days. I think the lower mountain is the most crowded, but for the advanced skiers there is so much terrain that crowding is never an issue. Lift lines at the upper mtn lifts are usually less than 5 minutes if any wait at all. Judging by the trail map Gore has more glades than Loon. The glades at Gore are plentiful, varied and awesome. It isn't Stowe or Jay, but for it's size, there are plenty of places to go off the beaten path and lots of potential for fresh tracks after a snow.
Sharon":390bvqpe said:
Aside from lower snowfall, though, Gore suffers from brutal over-grooming and short runs. Recent additions like Double Barrel help a bit, but they groom pretty much everything pretty much every night. I skied Hullabaloo this year for the first time in many years. When I was younger it was a much tougher run. The headwall, while only a couple turns, was somewhat hairy, with the center being almost cliff-like, making one of the sides the only real options, sometimes only skier's left. Now it's a groomed flat thing straight across the trial without any character. And even way back when I skied regularly I thought Gore overgroomed like crazy. The first year Rumor was open it was far harder than it is now. They later widened it, and then started grooming it.
Also, the vertical per-run is just too short. The Straightbrook chair is probably 600-700, and the most of the expert runs (Hawkeye, Rumor, Lies) are well less than the full vertical of the chair. High Peaks chair is equally short, and the expert trails on that lift also only take up a fraction of the lift's vertical. It just doesn't compare to Northern VT areas.
With snowfall, Gore can be a lot of fun despite the above issues. But of course, it doesn't get the snow to keep the natural stuff open regularly. And the grooming issue is totally within Gore's control. It'll always have the problem of short runs though.
I guess this turned into a Gore-bashing post, so I'll conclude with a (semi?-)positive. Gore has better terrain than Okemo.
In possible defense of Gore management, if snowfall is low and surface conditions would otherwise be obnoxious grooming is going to be the first line of defense. This is what I see at Snow Summit where nearly everything is groomed. Not my cup of tea, but if the alternative is no skiing or closed runs I'll take it. If Gore is grooming out powder, then I'll join the chorus of criticism.
I'd also remind people that Harvey44 is on telemark skis. I might think Gore's terrain is tame on alpine, but I'd have my hands full on teles.
The appropriate comparison in the region is Whiteface IMHO. How often does Gore's better snow preservation offset Whiteface's better terrain?
I'd also remind people that Harvey44 is on telemark skis. I might think Gore's terrain is tame on alpine, but I'd have my hands full on teles.
The appropriate comparison in the region is Whiteface IMHO. How often does Gore's better snow preservation offset Whiteface's better terrain?
Sharon
New member
To the defense of Whiteface, they were blowing snow when we drove by on Tuesday on our way home from Jay.
As for Gore, indeed, they need to groom when conditions are like this. You will see more bumps in the spring when things soften.
As for bumps, you'll find them on Lower Steilhang and Double Barrel throughout the season. They will form on Rumor and Lies when things soften. They've been grooming a lot for the busy holiday periods.
I don't like all those groomers, but I can see why they do it...they do it for the masses when the snow is challenging.
As for Gore, indeed, they need to groom when conditions are like this. You will see more bumps in the spring when things soften.
As for bumps, you'll find them on Lower Steilhang and Double Barrel throughout the season. They will form on Rumor and Lies when things soften. They've been grooming a lot for the busy holiday periods.
I don't like all those groomers, but I can see why they do it...they do it for the masses when the snow is challenging.
rfarren
New member
I think whiteface gets a bad rap in regards to conditions. I've never thought that the conditions in northern vermont were vastly superior to that of Whiteface's. As a rule, when it's soft in vermont, it's going to be soft at whiteface, at least in parts. (Wind protected parts.)
Skimore has to be right. Twice as much natural snowfall (last week's storm was totally consistent with the long term average) translates to a bigger natural base. How often do we read about skiing off-trail at Whiteface? Maybe a week or two in the Slides at the end of a big year. We hear from the powderhounds in Vermont about the trees after practically every mid-season storm.
rfarren
New member
If it is scratchy at whiteface it's a sure bet to be scratchy in vermont. Tony, as you've said before: the problem with east coast coast conditions tend to be related to snow preservation not snowfall. Northern vermont gets more snow per storm, especially storms like todays coastal nor'easter. Clipper systems, however, give only a small amount more to northern vermont. Being as Whiteface is far to the west, there are many times where it gets less rain than the vermont resorts. I'm sure the powderhounds get more of their fill in Northern Vermont, but as for trail conditions, they are more often than not comparable.
Snowfall totals don't always tell the whole story. For example:
If there are 30 snowfall events in vermont and a resort gets 300 inches then the average snow amount per storm is ten inches.
If we do the same for 180 then the average snowfall amount is 6 inches. So we could say that on average whiteface gets 4 fewer inches per storm. Over a course of a season that seems like a lot, but the real question is: would I rather ski the 6 inches with less competition vs. the 10 inches on milder terrain with more competition? In between storms does that extra 4 inches make a huge difference? Perhaps, but my experience tells me otherwise.
I also think the snow differentials aren't as drastic as what it's being made out of. On Tony's website he list NoVT resorts average amount as:
Stowe: 230
Sugarbush: 263
Smuggler's Notch:316
Jay:337
Whiteface:174
Smuggs and Jay clearly get more snow than Whiteface, but on average are getting slightly more than 4 inches extra per storm. Stowe and Sugarbush on the other hand are closer to 2 extra inches per storm. We hear a lot about Stowe's tree skiing on this forum. Does that 2 inches per storm make that large a difference in conditions as to allow superior tree skiing? Does that extra 2 inches make a large difference in terms of trail conditions? Perhaps, but IMHO there are probably other factors at work.
I think there are other reasons as to why we don't hear as much about tree skiing in the High Peaks region as compared to NoVT.
Snowfall totals don't always tell the whole story. For example:
If there are 30 snowfall events in vermont and a resort gets 300 inches then the average snow amount per storm is ten inches.
If we do the same for 180 then the average snowfall amount is 6 inches. So we could say that on average whiteface gets 4 fewer inches per storm. Over a course of a season that seems like a lot, but the real question is: would I rather ski the 6 inches with less competition vs. the 10 inches on milder terrain with more competition? In between storms does that extra 4 inches make a huge difference? Perhaps, but my experience tells me otherwise.
I also think the snow differentials aren't as drastic as what it's being made out of. On Tony's website he list NoVT resorts average amount as:
Stowe: 230
Sugarbush: 263
Smuggler's Notch:316
Jay:337
Whiteface:174
Smuggs and Jay clearly get more snow than Whiteface, but on average are getting slightly more than 4 inches extra per storm. Stowe and Sugarbush on the other hand are closer to 2 extra inches per storm. We hear a lot about Stowe's tree skiing on this forum. Does that 2 inches per storm make that large a difference in conditions as to allow superior tree skiing? Does that extra 2 inches make a large difference in terms of trail conditions? Perhaps, but IMHO there are probably other factors at work.
I think there are other reasons as to why we don't hear as much about tree skiing in the High Peaks region as compared to NoVT.