Serious Vert

Topics of a general nature regarding snowsports, which don't easily fit into one of our other Liftlines categories. This is also the place to post Letters to the Editor.

Re: Serious Vert

Postby rfarren » Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:25 pm

Tony Crocker wrote:I do, by the way, agree with soulskier that the marathon fall line cruisers like Revelstoke and Sun Valley do not constitute "serious" terrain by most skiers' definition. All they require is a lot of stamina and some intermediate carving skills.


I agree with that.
Tony Crocker wrote:What soulskier does not seem to get is that 30 degrees at MRG among dense trees and variable snow is at least as demanding upon one's ski skills as high alpine at 40 degrees, and also similar in consequences if you screw up

I agree with that statement, except in that I'm not sure the consequences are as bad in that type of terrain compared to falling down little or main chute at Alta. In a wide open bowl of 40 degrees I suppose the consequences are similar in that in one you could hit a tree pretty fast and that could suck, whereas the other you could fall and end up doing cartwheels for a couple hundred feet. Both seem pretty sucky, not sure which is worse as neither has happened to me. Has anyone got experience with both? If so, which one sucks less? :-D
Rob
User avatar
rfarren
 
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Serious Vert

Postby Patrick » Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:54 pm

Tony Crocker wrote:I'm very surprised Patrick is still on board with soulskier after all the snarky comments dissing eastern skiing and alienating much of his target audience.
Patrick wrote:There is no Big Mountain skiing near any ski areas in the East

I suspect icelantic would remind us that there is Big Mountain skiing in the East if you're willing to hike for it in the Presidentials or the Chic-Chocs..


Surprised? I agree with the principle goal that soulskier is trying to bring. Not getting tripped up by the small details versus comparing with other places, good, bad, better... He has his vision and ideas that a simple ski area in awesome terrain can work. I've seen places like that in the Andes. There are club fields in NZ.

My quote was...near any ski areas (ie. slackcountry). Are there any ski area access to the Presidential as in Slackcountry. The last time I checked there weren't a peak-to-peak Gondola from the top of Wildcat to Mount Washington. Chic Chocs? Katadin? Gros Morne? Torngat? Baffin Island?

Tony Crocker wrote:I have observed that the eastern skiers who are comfortable in MRG-type terrain (in 3rd gear?) like Patrick and rfarren can almost immediately translate their skills to the 40+ high alpine.


Definitely not due to MRG. I skied Saudan Couloir (when it was called that) and Tuckerman a few times before I ever skied at MRG.
Ski Mad World
A blog of MadPat's World: A History of Skiing Geography
http://madpatski.wordpress.com
User avatar
Patrick
 
Posts: 4777
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 6:19 am
Location: The Great Trip 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

Re: Serious Vert

Postby flyover » Mon Dec 13, 2010 2:31 pm

Consequences and challenge are related but separate concepts. I agree that MRG-type terrain generally lacks true DFU zones in the sense that one is not going to slide several hundred feet, or launch off of a certainly deadly drop after making a mistake. (On the other hand, if soulskier wants to try a little 4th gear down Paradise or much of MRG's unmarked terrain in standard mid-winter conditions, having a good health insurance plan would be a very good idea).

Soulskier, however, has gone out of his way to assert that MRG lacks challenging skiing. He has done so based entirely upon his prejudices and his review of MRG's trail map, and in the face of arguments to the contrary from skiers on this forum who have actually skied MRG as well as documented their descents of some very gnarly terrain in Europe, the West, and in his own South American stomping grounds. In doing so he has squandered a great deal of his credibility, which is his most important asset if his truly wishes to sell the MRA concept.

I can only think of two reasons for his doing this. At first I suspected he had a tin ear to the culture of this forum and was deploying a TGR-style of banter to keep his project front-and-center in every discussion in which he participated. However, his apparent withdrawal from the discussion and the forum makes me seriously wonder if his need to convince the world of his prowess in high-alpine terrain is ultimately more important to him than being a good ambassador for MRA and its goals.

I find this troubling because I would really like to see more low-infrastructure, high-adventure ski areas in the world and I fear that soulskier's demonstrated inability to be flexible and to think critically when it counts most will torpedo his project. Many of soulskier's posts on this board give me the feeling that: (1) MRA is an "alliance" of one, and (2)that he can't handle trees. :wink:

One final word on trees. High alpine is great, but in flat light or a storm, or if it has been a while since the last dump it sure is nice to have some good tree skiing around.
flyover
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:17 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Serious Vert

Postby rfarren » Mon Dec 13, 2010 2:59 pm

flyover wrote:
One final word on trees. High alpine is great, but in flat light or a storm, or if it has been a while since the last dump it sure is nice to have some good tree skiing around.


Amen!!! Also, if you want powder 2 or 3 days after a storm, you should most definitely like the trees.
Rob
User avatar
rfarren
 
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:02 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Serious Vert

Postby berkshireskier » Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:39 pm

flyover wrote:Consequences and challenge are related but separate concepts. I agree that MRG-type terrain generally lacks true DFU zones in the sense that one is not going to slide several hundred feet, or launch off of a certainly deadly drop after making a mistake. (On the other hand, if soulskier wants to try a little 4th gear down Paradise or much of MRG's unmarked terrain in standard mid-winter conditions, having a good health insurance plan would be a very good idea).

Soulskier, however, has gone out of his way to assert that MRG lacks challenging skiing. He has done so based entirely upon his prejudices and his review of MRG's trail map, and in the face of arguments to the contrary from skiers on this forum who have actually skied MRG as well as documented their descents of some very gnarly terrain in Europe, the West, and in his own South American stomping grounds. In doing so he has squandered a great deal of his credibility, which is his most important asset if his truly wishes to sell the MRA concept.

I can only think of two reasons for his doing this. At first I suspected he had a tin ear to the culture of this forum and was deploying a TGR-style of banter to keep his project front-and-center in every discussion in which he participated. However, his apparent withdrawal from the discussion and the forum makes me seriously wonder if his need to convince the world of his prowess in high-alpine terrain is ultimately more important to him than being a good ambassador for MRA and its goals.

I find this troubling because I would really like to see more low-infrastructure, high-adventure ski areas in the world and I fear that soulskier's demonstrated inability to be flexible and to think critically when it counts most will torpedo his project. Many of soulskier's posts on this board give me the feeling that: (1) MRA is an "alliance" of one, and (2)that he can't handle trees. :wink:

One final word on trees. High alpine is great, but in flat light or a storm, or if it has been a while since the last dump it sure is nice to have some good tree skiing around.


Nice analysis and well said. I hate to be cynical but I believe anyone who thinks they are going to be able to start up a new ski area (or even rehabilitate an existing or closed ski area) as some sort of utopian "pure skiers" dream mountain, in today's economic and legal environment, has been smoking some very strong weed.
berkshireskier
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: Western Massachusetts

Re: Serious Vert

Postby Tony Crocker » Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:00 pm

rfarren wrote:Has anyone got experience with both?

I got blown over by the wind in the throat of Hangman's ~45 degree slope in December 1982. Skis and poles came off immediately and I slid ~800 feet to Saddle Bowl. I was not too worried because there were no rocks below me and I knew the slope eventually eased off. Mammoth is a superb training ground for steep skiing because the 40+ slopes are rarely as much as 500 vertical before they start easing off, and with a mid-season snowpack quite a few of them have no obstacles below as in my example case. There are several with more constricted lines and fall consequences, and with the current early season snowpack some of those otherwise smooth aprons are peppered with rocks here and there.

I'm a bit more wary of the trees than the experienced easterners. I stay out of steep trees if the snow is hardpacked: risk/reward ratio does not seem worth it to me. I have similar attitude toward the steep and constricted lines like Main Chute. I want favorable snow conditions for skiing runs like that.

Patrick wrote:...a few times before I ever skied at MRG.

I said MRG-type terrain. Jay, Sutton, Orford, etc.
http://bestsnow.net
Ski Records
Season length: 21 months, Nov. 29, 2010 - July 2, 2012
Days in one year: 80 from Nov. 29, 2010 - Nov. 17, 2011
Season vertical: 1,610K in 2016-17
Season powder: 291K in 2011-12
User avatar
Tony Crocker
 
Posts: 10549
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:37 am
Location: Avatar: Charlotte Bay, Antarctica 2011
Location: Glendale, California

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests


All content herein copyright © 1999-2017 First Tracks!! Online Media

Forums Terms & Conditions of Use