Potpourri w/ a twist of whistla

I think we should try this in many mountains, Cancat, cause since 10 years, the bumps amount in the ski areas really decreased. I understood how the change was huge, looking to this old brochure pic of Mt Saint-Sauveur. Those 2 trails (middle part of the 70s east/west) are always 100% groomed now, except a narrow section in the very lower part of the right one. I've never seen them with moguls like that of my own eyes, although I went over 30 times in 15 years. (I must say the pic was larger and the other trails beside were also bumped) <BR> <BR><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/messages/8/2650.jpg" ALT="MSS in the late 70s"> <BR> <BR>I absolutely don't like the groomed terrain and I know I'm not alone, so we should all let the ski areas know that it would be good to let more moguls + wild terrain !!!
 
I agree, Cannon is one of my favorites but when I show up and hardscabble is groomed out it makes me real mad. You have to hike over to mittersill to get any real bumps. Send cannon a link to this site and let them read it. <BR>Port
 
I guess I'll throw in my 2 cents worth on mogul skiing, though I might lack credibility due to advanced age <IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)"> and western orientation. <BR> <BR>The challenge of moguls lies in 3 factors: steepness, spacing and snow conditions. <BR> <BR>Steepness is the one I do best, from all my time at places like Mammoth and Snowbird. Paradise at Mad River is the only eastern run I saw which had double-black pitch by western standards. <BR> <BR>Stowe was a nice illustration of the effect of spacing. Goat and Starr are never groomed and very narrow with tight bumps, and thus deserve their double-black ratings despite a less than 30 degree pitch. Liftline and National are much wider, and the bump spacing indicates an intermittent grooming schedule. I think these should be rated single black, but on the other hand are excellent for upper intermediates or non-bump specialists such as myself to practice on. Chin Clip and the woods to its skier's left present similar challenge with tighter spacing but less steepness. <BR> <BR>Mad River had as much bump skiing as I have seen anywhere. And most of the runs below mid-station (Lynx, Beaver, Ferret, etc.) are intermediate in pitch but with lots of moguls for aspiring bumpers. <BR> <BR>I do believe that snow conditions are a key ingredient in the disappearance of many mogul trails. I don't know anyone who likes skiing bumps in hard snow (you easterners can correct me on this if you want). On day 3 of my trip when the temps dropped from 65F to 35F I mostly confined myself to groomers at Jay. <BR> <BR>Then day 4 at Stoneham illustrated (as I have seen at Snow Summit) that motivated management can actually grind up the hardpack, add some snowmaking and recreate a packed powder surface, which is what most skiers want. I did take 2 off-piste runs that day: certainly more interesting terrain, but hardpack or crusty surfaces that didn't make me want to come back for more. <BR> <BR>So what choices do the eastern areas have with their mogul runs when the weather is uncooperative? <BR> <BR>1.) Leave them alone (like MRG) and the skiers just have to be patient and wait for warm weather or a dump to ski them again. <BR>2.) Grind them up and resurface with snowmaking (like Stoneham and presumably many others) on the theory that it's better to have trails skiable than unskiable. <BR>3.) A different suggestion voiced above that only snowmaking be done without resurfacing. I'm not sure how well that would work but it's probably worth a try. <BR> <BR>I think common sense by management should want to keep interesting terrain available for everyone. At most of the large western areas I ski, there is plenty of ungroomed (and often ungroomable) terrain, and moguls will be inevitable with skier traffic anytime it doesn't snow for a few days. <BR> <BR>If there are only trails management discretion is more important. From what I saw I think Stowe had it about right.
 
With your pic of Hangman's on the memorial weekend, I've seen what you exactly mean with western steepness ;) I don't know exactly how it is in degrees, but I think it's only slightly less steep than the Pins Rouges of VSC. May be 5 degrees less steep for the top pitch of Hangman's. I think the PR is about 55 degrees in the rocky middle part. The top and base are between 45 and 50. So the Paradise of MRG is a real joke compared to the Pins Rouges. I just went once at MRG, but there is only Paradise, Fall-line and Liftline (doing the cliff) that I could give a real double black and I must say the conditions were extremely thin in the bad snow year I went there. <BR> <BR>In the east, the real big ones are easy to find, I think. Jay has the top of Tram which looks quite hairy (unskiable the 2 times I went), there is the Tramline Trail at Cannon, The top of Madonna at Smuggs and except that, I honestly rush to find something else in New England. (may be ski Denton in Pennsylvania ! hahaha). MRG has an incredible terrain, but IN the trails, the challenge is honestly low. I skied Burke too = no challenge at all, but nice glades. In Quebec, we have few crazy trails like the Pins Rouges, like all the top of La Réserve, Mt Alta, Mt Orford on the main side + Giroux side, Mt Adstock, Le Massif DU SUD for steepness and Mt Édouard, according to Marc. But our mountains offer quite limited extreme terrain compared to the west, that's sure at 100000%. <BR> <BR>Generally, our mountains offer some less good conditions, but less variable too, than in New England, cause it rarely unfreeze. It may be why there is few ski areas that offer a lot of moguls, compared to some ski areas like Loon, Cannon, etc. (I'm sure the little Mt. Alta offer 5x more moguls skiing than Cannon). There is also the fact that if the conditions are not good and there is some accidents, the people could possibly pursue the ski areas, in USA (not in Canada), so they think grooming all is less dangereous for them. <BR> <BR> <BR>Anyone have some examples of true challenge in the east ?? (inside the official trail network)
 
I received the following question a while back from an editor at SKIING:

Tony: do you track steepness at resorts? Last year when i was collecting data from the resorts, i asked them what their top 5 steepest runs were and what degree of pitch. the results were all over the map and totally unreliable (according to those stats, the steepest resort in the nation was Gore mountain in NY state).

My response: You bet the data is totally unreliable and massively hyped. Part of the confusion/fudging is due to the different between grade/gradient (defined as vertical rise divided by horizontal distance) and degrees (angle as in geometry). This is nicely illustrated on p. 3 of <A HREF="http://www.keigansystems.com/Support/Operations/Grade/Grade.pdf" TARGET="_top">http://www.keigansystems.com/Support/Operations/Grade/Grade.pdf</A>.
100% gradient = 45 degrees
75% gradient = 36.57 degrees
50% gradient = 26.53 degrees
25% gradient = 14.04 degrees

>Many ski area marketing people, especially in the East, will quote gradient numbers.

For some real perspective on slope steepness, I recommend Andrew McLean's ratings in his book Chuting Gallery. This info used to be on a website. I have a printout I could fax to you, as the website no longer exists. I suspect he has done real measurements, and he defines 35 degrees as "expert" runs at ski areas. Note that Little Cottonwood Canyon is his home turf.

Back in the 1980's local journalist Wendell Benedetti climbed every touted expert run here in Southern California and measured them with an inclinometer. He only found a few over 30 degrees, and most of those for only short vertical. Mt. Baldy had more of them than all of the other areas combined, and its steepest sustained run Nightmare is 36 degrees.

Another cautionary perspective is that of comparing length to vertical (this is opposite to hypotenuse, not the same as gradient's opposite to adjacent in geometry) of lifts. Chairs with ratios of 3 to 1 are generally viewed as servicing advanced terrain, yet geometry defines that as slightly less than 20 degrees. 30 degrees is 2 to 1 length to vertical, and there are few if any lifts with that ratio. Chairs do need flat entry and exit points, so there will always be some terrain steeper (and sometimes much steeper) than the chair ratio.

As you may know I had my first mid-season eastern trip this year, skiing Stowe, Mad River and Jay Peak. I have little doubt that Paradise at Mad River is the steepest sustained lift-serviced pitch in New England, and comparing with Nightmare it is likely in the same 35 degree range. It is certainly a more technically demanding run, due to narrowness, twists and turns and more obstacles. Other famous runs, like Stowe's Starr and Goat, are over 30 degrees at the top and then lose some of their pitch, and their challenge also derives from moguls and confined lines only one or two turns wide. Off trail, I could see slopes of 40+ degrees on both Jay and Mansfield, but in general they do not hold snow. In late April 1990 I skied Killington and Tuckerman's. I doubt Killington has anything sustained over 30 degrees, and I believe that Mt. Washington and the Presidentials have nearly all of New England's skiable 40+ terrain.

Within the larger western ski areas (plus Mt. Washington), most of the steepest terrain lies in glaciated bowls and couloirs. Nearly all of these are steepest at the top and the pitch continuously moderates as you go lower. Some have cornices and can thus be completely vertical at the entrance (i.e. Corbet's Couloir). So there will nearly always be an issue of length vs. steepness, as the steepness measure can be raised by shortening the length of the run. There are quite a few lift-serviced runs with 40+ degrees entrances or sections, but very few if any that are 40+ over as much as 1,000 vertical (Big Couloir at Big Sky is probably the only one I've done). If you read Andrew McLean's definitions you will realize anything sustained over 45 degrees is unlikely to be permitted in a North American lift-serviced environment.

I would be very careful about trying to quantify or rank these, and if you try I would recommend setting a minimum vertical, say 500 feet, and perhaps grouping by vertical, 500-1,000, 1,000-1,500, 1500+.
 
Last edited:
I must say something when I try to measure steepness, I always talk of the steepest part of the trail and it's not necessary long, but as soon as it becomes crazy, I count it. <BR> <BR>The steepest continuous trails lift serviced in QC are probably on the far side of the Massif du Sud. I think there was a sign for #5 for 75% from T2B (1000' high). There is some quite steeper sections than others, but it remains steep all the way. (I suddenly wonder if it was not 65... but I think it was 75) As what I remember, the #5 is quite less steep than the PR. In this one, on a <B>plunging</B> view from the supersteep top, you can't see all the big rocks of the middle part and you just see the bottom at the end. But it's just 250 feet high, so in some western perspective, it's just a tiny pitch. The Pirouette of la Réserve is about the same, except it has 1 little flat to rest. I measured the lower part with an inclinometer (homemade) at 60 degrees, but it's very short. Nevertheless, they really have some "fun" to maintain this trail during fall. <BR> <BR>I actually realize that there is a big difference between a trail with 35 or 40 degrees non-stop vs a trail 35-40 degrees with little cliffs. With them, you just go floor by floor and you can ski on some completely crazy steep places without taking too much risks. The Pin Rouge don't have some floors like that and I can figure that I would be scared a lot to take a trail steep like that on 1500' high. A sure thing, PR is hugely steeper than the lines of "Paradise" I skied at MRG.
 
Gradient is usually expressed as a percent, and 75% grade = 36.57 degrees. I'll give heavy odds that's what is being quoted at Massif du Sud. <BR> <BR>Excerpts from Andrew McLean: <BR> <BR>S2: 25 degree slopes. "Intermediate" terrain at ski areas <BR> <BR>S2+: Slopes at or near 25 degrees with some terrain features <BR> <BR>S3-: Slopes up to 30 degrees <BR> <BR>S3: Slopes up to 35 degrees. "Expert" runs at ski areas <BR> <BR>S3+: Slopes at or near 35 degrees with terrain features that require maneuvering around <BR> <BR>S4-: Slopes 35-45 degrees with safe run-outs and little to no dangerous terrain features <BR> <BR>S4: Slopes 35-45 degrees with dangerous fall potential and a few terrain obstacles <BR> <BR>S4+: Slopes just under 45 degrees that are continuously steep, have serious fall consequences and multiple terrain obstacles <BR> <BR>S5-: Slopes that are continuously at or near 45 degrees or slightly over <BR> <BR>S5: Slopes between 45 and 55 degrees. You'd be lucky to live through a fall <BR>... <BR> <BR>S6: Slopes continuously steeper than 55 degrees. Painful death fron falling highly likely <BR>... <BR> <BR>S7: 60 degree slopes Just plain 'ol steep as hell <BR>... <BR> <BR>S8: The future <BR> <BR>My Comments: <BR>A lot of my favorite terrain (Wipe Out/Drop Out at Mammoth, Upper Cirque and Little Cloud Bowl at Snowbird) is in the 4- category. The constrained lines of Hangman's, Great Scott, Corbet's etc. qualify as 4. Big Couloir is a 4+, and note that partner, rescue gear and patrol checkout are required to ski it. I do not believe anything rated 5- or higher is officially permitted in bounds at ski areas. <BR> <BR>What made Andrew McLean define the steepness ratings this way? By my observation 35 degrees is about the point where edge-sets can start to release snow that sloughs down the hill, and thus also the point at which a fallen skier may also slide down the hill. I do realize that when the snow surface is boilerplate that this can occur at a lesser slope angle, but McLean is applying these definitions to his home turf in the Wasatch backcountry. <BR> <BR>Once you get over 45 degrees the vertical drop is greater than the horizontal distance and the likelihood of a "slide for life" probably increases dramatically. <BR> <BR>Also, at 45 degrees plus it becomes much more difficult for a slope to even hold snow. This is the unique attraction of the Chugach. The volume and density of the snow is such that many of these slopes can be safely skied there when they would not exist or be way too unstable in most mountain ranges. <BR> <BR>It is also obvious from McLean's ratings that he does not believe slopes in excess of 60 degrees are skiable at all, and he probably knows a lot more about this than any of us.
 
<B><BLOCKQUOTE>Gradient is usually expressed as a percent, and 75% grade = <BR>36.57 degrees. I'll give heavy odds that's what is being <BR>quoted at Massif du Sud.</BLOCKQUOTE></B> <BR> <BR>I've skied there, and I'd say that's about right overall for #5 for its full 1,000 verts, although there are some sections which are certainly a bit steeper (there are some ledge bands). Some of the gladed area immediately adjacent to #5 is also somewhat steeper, with of course the addition of trees for a bit of "added variety". The place is truly a wolf in sheep's clothing, and is especially rewarding on a Friday after a snowy Monday to Thursday, as they're only open 3 days per week for much of the season. <BR> <BR>If you're in the area (just a bit north of Jackman, Maine, heading toward Quebec City) don't miss this gem. It would be a reasonable side trip for anyone visiting Sugarloaf of Saddleback, and a fun stop for folks from eastern MA and environs heading for Quebec City via I-95/Rte 27 instead of the more traditional I-91/55/20 combo. More info may
 
Hmmm...not sure why that was truncated. The wonders of web browsing on a Palm device, I guess. That last post should have ended, "More info may be found at <A HREF="http://www.FirstTracksOnline.com/qcski.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.FirstTracksOnline.com/qcski.htm</A>.
 
Hmmm...not sure why that posting was truncated. The wonders of web browsing on a Palm device, I guess. That last post should have ended, "More info may be found at <A HREF="http://www.FirstTracksOnline.com/qcski.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.FirstTracksOnline.com/qcski.htm</A>."
 
Tony : Back on my obstinated comparison with my trail. It is a No-Fall trail. The snow absolutely don't hold on it and the only reason why they can open it is that they do snowmaking on it. The snowmaking stick quite easilier to the rock pile that is the trail in fact. <BR> <BR>I think since it's open, there is just one person that really felt down on it. He's been severely hurt... almost died. The ski patrol just hate that trail and when a skier looks to take it too much often, they tell him to relax a little bit... <BR> <BR>I took it 6 times in 1h30, last march 28... and they really didn't looked happy of that <IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)"> <BR> <BR>In fact, for the degrees, I can ensure I was totally at angle taking this pic. You can take an inclinometer or a (hmmmm) "thing to measure the angles" but on both, it gives me exactly 40 degrees, although this is really short, I admit (still a nice little drop). (I talk of the trail in the background) <BR> <BR><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/messages/8/2656.jpg" ALT="Middle Avalanche"> <BR> <BR>The trail of 40 degrees is this part of the left trail on this pic - Avalanche - which is the neighbour of the Pins Rouges. As you can see, the pitch of the PR is at least twice higher and the horizontal lenght of both pitchs are about the same (note that this pic was taken 2 weeks after the closure of the mountain). <BR> <BR><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/messages/8/2657.jpg" ALT="Avalanche - Pins Rouges"> <BR> <BR>The Avalanche is honestly 40 degrees on the pitch (especially skiing on the left side on the pic), but it's a total flat trail, compared to the PR just beside. <BR> <BR>BUT OK, even the Pins Rouges is just a short pitch... but what a killer one.
 
Marc, thanks to second me for the #5 <BR>Also, I must tell you I'm not sure if it will still be on 3 days of operation, this winter. They double (or more) their skier numbers, since few years, so they will soon have to operate all days... and I wouldn't be surprised to see a chairlift on #5 within 5-6 years. <BR> <BR>I think #7 is probably the steepest one of the resort. I just took it once, but it's the only one with a special sign for doing it only with at least 2 other persons. It really rocks and it was the best, so I'm quite sad to just have taken it once !!! #4 was fantastic too when I went. #6 wasn't especially fantastic, like #2, but #3 had 8" of powder, while every ski areas in the east were skiing on ice during the 1st week of march 2002. The #8 was more than incredible of course ! <BR> <BR>Good luck with your palm !! <BR> <BR>(damn the PR doesn't look high on the pic above, compared to when you're in it !!!) anyway, viva Val St-Côme & La Reserve... what a combo
 
STEEPS RUNS <BR> <BR>There are two or three runs that are also very steep in the Outaouis region of Quebec (North of Ottawa in Quebec). Betsy and Formidable at Mt Ste.Marie and (can't remember the name - last one on the right) at Edelweiss. Always seen the first two groomed, the last one is rarely opened. <BR> <BR>However these runs might be very steep and wide and relatively short, the difficulty in skiing them is quite different that skiing Starr, Goat or Paradise (relatively narrow with potential obstacles and fairly long (ie. fatigue factor). I know Frank might disagree with me on this point based on previous discussion of expert trails in Quebec and elsewhere. (Frank, I am planning to go to Massif Sud next winter). <BR> <BR>For this reason, I would considered the last three much greater expert runs. <BR> <BR>I found this in an old Powder mag (Oct. 89).'The Raddest Runs in the East' by David Goodman (in search of the steepest run in the east). Great article. <BR> <BR>Here are the stats from the article: <BR>Name,(where), lenght, vertical drop, average width, Steepness (Steepest/avg in degree), snowmaking, groomed (numbers by ski areas) <BR> <BR>Paradise (MRG), 1600ft, 750ft, 50ft, 45+/33, No, No <BR>Goat (stowe), 3900ft, 1300ft, 45ft, 38/20, N, N <BR>Starr (Stowe), 4600ft, 1650ft, 80ft, 38/20, N, N <BR>National (Stowe), 5700ft, 1700ft, 135ft, 36/17, Y,Y <BR>Liftline(Stowe), 5400ft, 2000ft, 115ft, 35/21, Y,Y <BR>Outer Limits(K), 2853ft, 1215, 250, 31/21, Y,half <BR>White Heat(Sunday R),3550, 1500, 200, 31/21, Y,half <BR>Avalanche(cannon), 2600ft, 1000ft, 250, 25/20, Y,Y <BR> <BR>STEEPS AND S SYSTEM <BR> <BR>In Goodman's (Backcountry Skiing Maine/NH), there is a abbreviated version of the S System Ratings of slopes. For Mount Washington, it has: <BR> <BR>S3: Slopes up to 35 degrees, equivalent to an expert run at a ski area(...) East Snowfields. <BR> <BR>S4: Slopes between 35 and 45 degrees. Falling may be dangerous. Avalanche hazard of route must be evaluated. (...) Gulf of Slides, Oakes and Great Gulfs, in Tucks (Right Gully, Lobster Claw, Hillmans, Lower Snowfields and Little Headwall). <BR> <BR>S5: Slopes between 45 and 55 degrees. Injury may result from falling. Multiple terrain obstacles present, including narrows, rocks and trees. Tucks (Lip, Left Gully, Chute, Center Headwall, Sluice, Dodge's Drop and Duchess). <BR> <BR>I would judge the last two as much harder and actually scary. I love the comments he has for the S6 and S7. <BR> <BR>"The S system currently tops out with the following two grades. Routes of this severity exist in the Northeast, but are not included in this book. If you can ski or ride at this level, you know where to go. <BR> <BR>S6 - Slopes continuously over 55 degrees.Extreme terrain. Rope work may be necessary. In all likelihood, "If you fall, you die." <BR> <BR>S7 - Slopes over 60 degrees. Looks dead vertical to most people, and most people would look dead if they tried it. You need a pilot's license to get down". <BR> <BR>GROOMING VS MOGUL <BR> <BR>I am not sure it in this discussion (maybe Cannon). Avalanche is a great trail, I have rarely seen it with moguls, regardless - I love steep groomed runs (not only groomed, but not all groomed runs are bad). I know I am getting old, however skiing ice solid bumps is not what I enjoy the most. I prefer Avalanche groomed. That why I also enjoy the great steep groomed runs at Mt. Ste.Anne or Sugarloaf. However before you start attacking me, I love MRG the way it is and I agree there should be a better balance between groomed/moguls runs. Some runs can be split 50-50, instead of all groomed. Blame me, my age, my knees or my frequent bad back.
 
Tommy Pic, for the one at Edelweiss, Patrick ;) <BR> <BR>I read in few places that "Betsy" and "Formidable" were normally mogul trails... may be I'm wrong ?? The only time I visited the mountain in the past (2h30 from Laval... for less high than Bromont...), was in summer and we stayed on "Vanier" side. A question for you, Patrick... how is the trail "Klotz" (or so). It's a double black that seems to be extremely long, going from nearly the top of Mt Cheval Blanc to the base of Mt Vanier. Is it a narrow twisty mogul trails like I love so much ?? <BR> <BR>I've seen the Tommy Pic 5-6 years ago, so it's far, but it was effectively looking like a monster. I'm not surprised that it's not often open. It would need snowmaking like the Pins Rouges to be frequently open. I still rush to believe that they're able to groom a little line to get this last one open longer (as you've seen on my 3/28/2003 report.) Even having 2 snowcats with a winch, it seems me just too steep and dangerous. <BR> <BR>What I less like in the "S" system of Mr Goodman is that he only seems to talk about the very high vertical runs. It's totally possible to ski some places of 70 degrees without die... if it wasn't possible, I wouldn't be here today. But ok, you need some edges and not a too long vertical. <BR> <BR>Finally, I admit to wonder if this pic is really on a correct angle (from Loveland)
 
Sorry... I forgot the pic <BR> <BR><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/messages/8/2678.jpg" ALT="Loveland ouch !">
 
Hi Frank, <BR> <BR>I have skiied Ste.Marie maybe 5 times in mid-winter. Don't remember seeing any moguls on Betsy and Formidable. Maybe in the Spring? I don't think Klotz is very steep, it is just looks like a narrow trail in the middle of the wood. I don't think I ever saw it opened, however I believe that this trail wasn't there the first few times I skiied Ste.Marie (moved to Ottawa in Winter 95) - skiied maybe once or twice since I recall seeing the trail on the map. I prefer driving 2h to get to Tremblant or 30min to get to the smaller ones, than the 1hr it takes to get to Ste.Marie from Ottawa. <BR> <BR>Yes, Tommy pic in Edelweiss, very steep pitch...(no grooming or bumps - it is a straight drop. Snowmaking would not help much (too steep). I have seen it open only once (at it was not last year). Once again, days skiied at Edelweiss have been rare. When I go, it is mostly at night (the trail was closed during the day anyways), unless I am with my 5yr old daughter. <BR> <BR>Frank, every expert skiing probably skiied over (in the air) something more than 90degrees (few feets only). You can see why the lenght of this steepness is important, while most expert skiing would be able to ski a part of the trail at 90 for a few feet, no one (still alive) can say they did the same over a few thousand feet.
 
For your last point, yes, of course, I don't talk of the 96 degrees rock of the drop off of la Chute Libre of course. Less than 50' high, there is almost nothing enough steep to be really extreme, unless it's just a 90 degrees cliff. But for real hairy pitches, I think we should begin at 150' high or something like that... <BR> <BR>The Pitch 1 of Chute Libre at la Réserve is something quite hairy. With 90' high, a bad chute could easily be lethal, but anyway, I wouldn't count it so crazy if there wasn't the 2nd pitch just after. But at 150' high, I begin to seriously count. And for the Pins Rouges, I can tell you the feeling is enough incredible on the top of that. It's just like you ski down very very steep and you can't see what's coming near the trees and after, cause it's too steep to see it. <BR> <BR>Look at this : You see the top of the trees in the run, but you don't see the scenery, cause it's a total plunging view... from the upper part of the Pins Rouges. As you can see, even though it's a plunging view, we have a total break in the view and we don't see how it's like, in the trees zone and below that. According to what I see in the pic, the flat after the pitch is begun for a while, at the place we begin to see it. <BR> <BR><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/messages/8/2679.jpg" ALT="Plunging view down PR"> <BR> <BR>If the 1st pic just show some white snow, look at the 2nd, taken the same day few minutes before. I must say that the photograph took the pic with a serious angle in the camera. Anyway, it would be impossible to see the whole pitch with 0 angle on the camera, even for a vertical pic. It's why it doesn't seem as steep as it is in reality. But what is to look is the rocks. Despite they're quite big, they're absolutely not visible on a plunging view pic. <BR> <BR>Taken on march 28, btw... it's why there is just a little track of snow in the middle. <BR> <BR><IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/messages/8/2680.jpg" ALT="PR once again"> <BR> <BR>So, this is just 200-250 feet high, but damn, it's really really scary and it shouldn't need 2000' high to have a big rating in the "S" system, I think. Of course, there is a little bit less rocks in middle season, but it's never all white. As you can also see, Patrick, according to what I remain about Tommy Pic, this last one is very less steep than PR, so they could make snow into it and it would be a super great run in the beginning of spring <IMG SRC="http://www.firsttracksonline.com/discus2/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":)"> <BR> <BR>Finally, about Mt Ste-Marie, yes, Klotz was new when I went in summer in the mountain about 4-5 years ago, so it's sure it wasn't there in 1995. I should try the place in the next seasons... anyway, I don't like Tremblant !
 
Actually, I prefer the 3hr drive to Whiteface, than the 2h to Tremblant!!! <BR> <BR>Frank, I am not talking 2000' verical. In Goodman's book, most of the stuff in Tuck is less than 1000' vertical and lenght. In the Powder mag article, he was just comparing the hype by each area that claim to have the steepest run in the East. <BR> <BR>Tommy's pic is very steep (more on the skier's left). Like skiing off a cliff, I don't about comparing it to PR. I didn't ski it. <BR> <BR>About pictures taken from the bottom that look flat. I have two pictures of me skiing in Saudan Couloir at Blackcomb in June 1988 - the hill looks as flat as le Mt.Laval!!!!
 
Unluckily, I don't know about the Saudan Couloir... but I know what you mean, especially with a non-digital camera. I have one pic of "L'Écore" at le Massif and it looks like a gentle beginner trail... while it was 100% bumped and still have a little bit of inclination. <BR> <BR>For Tommy pic VS Pins Rouges, I should go to Edelweiss this summer to see it and compare it with PR. It's too far away for I remember exactly how it was, but a sure thing, I found incredible that it was a trail. The Pins Rouges didn't exist at that moment, so it wasn't after summer 1998. Anyway, Patrick, we should just ski at VSC next season... the best for PR is the first weekend of spring skiing, while there is not only a little couloir in the middle part, but it's already some nice corn wet snow. <BR> <BR>Since few days, I'm thinking about my 2 runs in Paradise, back in jan 2000. It's curious, everybody seem to see it as one of the steepest trails in the east. I remember to have taken the long pass to reach from the top of Stark Mountain and skiing it very easily. I don't have problem to think it was close to 40 degrees, but I've never felt threatened into it. May be I took the easiest lines ??
 
Back
Top