or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › How much vertical is a "good day"???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# How much vertical is a "good day"??? - Page 3

People have mentioned snow conditions, terrain, etc...Does anyone think altitude plays a factor?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff2010

I, for one, have found this thread useful. I have never been heli skiing (yet), and was confused by ads that promised 30,000 feet of vertical over 3 days, yet I was getting that much in a single day. Now I understand that despite having a helicopter to carry you around heli skiing provides less vertical but more fun getting it.

So, what we need is a way to quantify the amount of fun, and then the amount of vertical can be appropriately weighted. Something like

(stoke) = (vertical feet) x (fun factor)

"Fun factor" is obviously subjective and difficult to quantify. Perhaps a starting point would be based on run designations: FF=1 for green, 2 for blue, 3 for black, 4 for double black, 5 for backcountry. Maybe an additional boost for powder, say +1 for each foot. Thus, a 1000 foot black run with 1 foot of powder would yield

stoke = 1000 x (3+1) = 4000 stoke points for that run. Total Stoke for the day is the sum of the stoke for each run.

Only partly in jest,
Jeff

I would argue that blues, blacks and double blacks can all be equally as fun depending on the mountain, terrain, conditions, and how the run is laid out.  Additionally double blacks in CO frequently are no different than single blacks in Utah.  There's also a triple black at lutsen (a short 40 degree groomed run LOL!!!)....so basically using these designations is pretty useless.  Also don't forget about trees which should add at least another couple points.  Sometimes the right bumps increases the fun factor, sometimes the wrong bumps decreases the fun factor.  With fresh untouched powder conditions...would backcountry really be any better than inbounds?  I'd also say 1st foot of powder doubles the fun points, if not triple.  2nd foot doubles that and any additional feet don't significantly improve the fun factor.  Finally, don't forget a couple shots of jag always improves fun factor. =)

I'm shocked that the heliski ads promised only 30,000 ft over 3 days...that's nothing.  I always hear you get 3-4 times the vertical doing heli skiing than normal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by majortato

I would argue that blues, blacks and double blacks can all be equally as fun depending on the mountain, terrain, conditions, and how the run is laid out.  Additionally double blacks in CO frequently are no different than single blacks in Utah.  There's also a triple black at lutsen (a short 40 degree groomed run LOL!!!)....so basically using these designations is pretty useless.  Also don't forget about trees which should add at least another couple points.  Sometimes the right bumps increases the fun factor, sometimes the wrong bumps decreases the fun factor.  With fresh untouched powder conditions...would backcountry really be any better than inbounds?  I'd also say 1st foot of powder doubles the fun points, if not triple.  2nd foot doubles that and any additional feet don't significantly improve the fun factor.  Finally, don't forget a couple shots of jag always improves fun factor. =)

I'm shocked that the heliski ads promised only 30,000 ft over 3 days...that's nothing.  I always hear you get 3-4 times the vertical doing heli skiing than normal.

I agree... for me perfectly groomed blues and blacks with no extra snow are wonderful.  If there is a flat run with small soft moguls, I enjoy skiing them as thats not too much on my legs (since I never ski moguls at my home "mountain" and don't do that much traveling its tough to really dial in those movements and get those muscles accustomed).  I agree that untouched deep powder is golden, of course if you have the right skis.

Out west they don't groom blacks... WTF?  In the east blacks and even some double blacks are groomed (like Liftline at Stowe and then a couple north-side runs right above the lodge at Trebmlant).  I enjoy steep groomers, but those are harder to find it seems in the west.  Perhaps their solution is "double-blue" or "blue-black."  And then Whiteface which many agree has legitimately steep terrain grooms most of their steep black runs.

I believe trees add points for ambiance only... just a nice cozy christmas tree feel in there...  this is why tucked-away groomers deep below tall pine trees have a nice ambiance as well.

Of course the point is: what is believed to be fun is different for each person based on ability and preference.

Edited by Vitamin Ski - 4/7/11 at 7:11pm

Totally dependent on the vertical of the place you ski, and what you plan to do with it, since the limiting factor is the lift. When I was at Whistler, which has a mile of vertical, literally, one day when I didn't hike or use high lifts, just cruising with my friends, I did 15 runs top to bottom. That's 78,000 feet. OTOH, another day I mostly hiked and did laps on the high lifts. So maybe 10,000 ft. At my home mountain, about 2,000 vert, I can get maybe 18 runs if I have a short lunch, the lines are short, and ski by myself, hard. That's 36,000 ft. I usually do more like 15 runs. OTOH, back in the day at Mammoth, when they had one main lower lift and lotsa folks from LA to step on each other's skis in line, 6 runs was outstanding. And the lifts only went part way up the mountain. Call it a 10,000 ft. day.

We occasionally have groomed "blacks" at Whitefish on the following trails:  Moose (arguably a blue IMO), Heap Steep, No Name, and VERY RARELY Marmot and Black Bear.  Oh, and Kodiak.  Grooming them usually moves them down an ability notch, I think, say from a level 8 skier down to a level 7 skier.  MOST of our blacks are treed runs, so not groomable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredAtBMBW

Is somebody bragging about anything in this thread?  And, are you saying you would brag about some other kind of skiing?  Hmmm, I don't think bragging of any kind is good.  I think people at Epicski like to share their skiing adventures, whatever that means to them.  And I find it hard to believe that would ever tick somebody off, unless they were--as you put it--bragging.

Posting a TR or thread to talk about how much vertical you skied at [insert resort here] is pretty much the definition of bragging. I don't have a problem with it. You went out and had a good day now you are sharing the stoke, nothing wrong with that.

Just saying that not all vertical is created equal. If you ski 30k' fast cruising on groomers running laps on a fast lift is alot different than 30k of bumps, trees, off piste, hiking to stuff, or just exploring, etc...

If I lived elsewhere I'm sure groomers wouldn't be my only idea of a good time, but I'm kinda forced to be obsessed with them.  My skis are unsuitable for really any "off-piste" skiing, so attempting it is irresponsible... I've also lost some adventurous attitude.  And because of where I live purchasing a perfect ski for vacations that account for 10% of my ski days hasn't yet happened, but I hope to get there next year (i.e. your midwest all mountain ski isn't a thing like your rocky mountain all-mountain ski).

One thing that ratcheted my "fun level" up a few notches was skiing the above-tree-line Parsenn Bowl at Winter Park.  It was chalky wind-blown crud, but I went up there in 66mm skis and did it anyway.  It was so exciting and exhilarating skiing down that (as doing that is infinitely different from any other skiing I get to do).

But I must say it is the whole experience up there that counts.... skiing down the steeper part of the bowl toward the glades was fun, but were that 500 ft vert transplanted to a portion of say Holiday Valley (W NY) it wouldn't be nearly as fun.

Sometimes it is those 55 mph harmonic runs on blues that can really be thrilling.   Especially if you angulate excessively and feel the g-forces, feel the amplified snap in the skis.

What is nice about skiing is there are so many ways to get down... you never have to do the same thing twice, and you can descent the mountain any way you please.  No rules, just turns.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tromano

Posting a TR or thread to talk about how much vertical you skied at [insert resort here] is pretty much the definition of bragging. I don't have a problem with it. You went out and had a good day now you are sharing the stoke, nothing wrong with that.

Just saying that not all vertical is created equal. If you ski 30k' fast cruising on groomers running laps on a fast lift is alot different than 30k of bumps, trees, off piste, hiking to stuff, or just exploring, etc...

Actually I did not "brag" about anything.  It is only perceived as bragging to those making a competition out of it (perhaps yourself?).  I made reference to a number of vertical I skied doing quite the opposite, because I was disappointed at how little it was based on how much fun I had and how much of the resort I thought I skied in one day.

What is bizarre and calls some things into question is why you would jump in, in response to a number, and intimate that I am in bad shape, shouldn't be skiing groomers, and not making reference to it on an internet forum.  I think you are reading WAY too much into the purpose of this thread.  There are ways to communicate some of thsoe things without pointed statements.

I would also point out that many forum posters besides myself have made reference (oh no wait, are they "bragging"?) to skiing a specific number of vertical feet at specific locations.  That is kind of the point of the "General skiing discussion" forum.

All that said, you are right I am not in great shape, especially since I live at 600 feet, and racked up those feet at 9000+ plus.  I did have some difficulties getting lost, taking pictures, visiting the warming hut, taking a liesure lunch, etc.  But I have a long way to go until I can consider myself in "good shape."  That's partly why I started the thread, I wanted to see how much vertical expert skiers get, many of whom are locals.

I would only be impressed with my own vertical if I registered 50,000 plus.  Right now my 30K is perhaps--by Utah standards--the vert of a capable dilettante, not a seasoned skier.  Even so my reference to that--would it happen--would be as matter-of-fact as anyone else's reference to such things here.

But then again, it either doesn't matter, or it does.. you can't have it both ways... perhaps those noting that vertical "doesn't matter" should not be making judgements about vert of another, which in and of itself indicates it does matter enough to the person to make a comment.

If you are so convinced that I "brag," just search through my post history where I note repeatedly that I can't ski bumps.  There is only one kind of skiing I excel at right now, though I hope to expand on that.  Nevertheless, that's not the point of this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredAtBMBW

If I lived elsewhere I'm sure groomers wouldn't be my only idea of a good time, but I'm kinda forced to be obsessed with them.  My skis are unsuitable for really any "off-piste" skiing, so attempting it is irresponsible... I've also lost some adventurous attitude.  And because of where I live purchasing a perfect ski for vacations that account for 10% of my ski days hasn't yet happened, but I hope to get there next year (i.e. your midwest all mountain ski isn't a thing like your rocky mountain all-mountain ski).

One thing that ratcheted my "fun level" up a few notches was skiing the above-tree-line Parsenn Bowl at Winter Park.  It was chalky wind-blown crud, but I went up there in 66mm skis and did it anyway.  It was so exciting and exhilarating skiing down that (as doing that is infinitely different from any other skiing I get to do).

But I must say it is the whole experience up there that counts.... skiing down the steeper part of the bowl toward the glades was fun, but were that 500 ft vert transplanted to a portion of say Holiday Valley (W NY) it wouldn't be nearly as fun.

Sometimes it is those 55 mph harmonic runs on blues that can really be thrilling.   Especially if you angulate excessively and feel the g-forces, feel the amplified snap in the skis.

What is nice about skiing is there are so many ways to get down... you never have to do the same thing twice, and you can descent the mountain any way you please.  No rules, just turns.

People used to ski powder/off-piste without fat skis perfectly fine.  Fat skis sure make things easier, but don't be put off by ungroomed terrain just because you don't have the best equipment.  Give me a pair of race stocks and have me choose between waist deep powder or perfectly groomed run..I'd go with powder any day.  Heck, I have skied zipperline down the manmade ice moguls here in midwest using race skis even....definitely a rough ride, but still fun.

If you're taking yearly trips out west...definitely worth it to get a pair of fatter skis though.  All things considered, it's pretty insignificant compared to cost of vacations themselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoredAtBMBW

Out west they don't groom blacks... WTF?

My skis are unsuitable for really any "off-piste" skiing, so attempting it is irresponsible...

Better not tell Rick this- he skied his full blown race skis as Gathering group leader at Breck on Monday which was a powder day...I wasn't in his group, but suspect he did alright off piste.

Around here most blacks are left ungroomed, but Keystone and Copper typically have a few groomed blacks- Go Devil down to Mnt House and the run under Santiago come to mind at KS and several of the runs under/off Super Bee (and sometimes Formidable going to A lift or Cross Cut going to Reso) at Copper.

As I found out Wednesday at Vail when the ungroomed was very crusty, it is definitely easier to rack up the vert taking groomed cruisers- we had a fun time trying to keep up with one of our friends who didn't believe in turning (even in the moguls).  Gandi Dancer, a black, was groomed that day.

Not sure what to make of your rant. If you don't want people to tell you what they think, then don't directly ask them  those sorts of questions. No offense intended.

Edited by tromano - 4/8/11 at 7:23am
Tromano unless you are completely oblivious you know there are ways to communicate a thought about physical fitness that doesn't involve accusations of bragging, which was totally off the wall to the scope of this thread.

Shouldn't the question really be how many turns is a "good day" if the goal is to measure fitness instead of just bragging how you are better than everyone else?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredAtBMBW

Quote:

Actually I did not "brag" about anything.

I would only be impressed with my own vertical if I registered 50,000 plus.

If you are so convinced that I "brag," just search through my post history where I note repeatedly that I can't ski bumps.  There is only one kind of skiing I excel at right now, though I hope to expand on that.  Nevertheless, that's not the point of this thread.

Who cares?  All I ski are bumps, and powder if available.  Often, I am done for the day after around 10,000 feet of waist-high bump runs and I suspect that skiing 10k bumps is more tiring than curising 50k of green gloomers.

Agent dude I'm not sure what you are reading but I never said I was better than anyone else quite the opposite.

The fact you and tromano need to gratuitously point out I suck is pretty lame.
BoredAtBMBW, instead of bringing skinny skis out West, why not leave them home, bring your BOOTS, and come with a list of skis you want to demo?  Demo at the hill itself and you can try things all day long.  I used to do this when I lived in NJ as I realized pretty quickly that "groomed" out West means it was groomed LAST NIGHT right after the lifts closed and that when they reopened the next AM there was 8 inches of snow on the run....which to me, skiing the mid-Atlantic area, was NOT "groomed"!!  If you rent when you come out here, you can ski on skis that are right for the day, the area, and the conditions.  Much nicer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredAtBMBW

Tromano unless you are completely oblivious you know there are ways to communicate a thought about physical fitness that doesn't involve accusations of bragging, which was totally off the wall to the scope of this thread.

Dude, I never said anything about your skiing or your fitness level. You seem to have mis-interpreted my statement, about how easy and efficient it is to rack up vertical skiing groomers, as some kind of a dig against you personally. My intent was to say exactly wha tI said, skiing groomers is easy. No More not less. I have never seen you ski. I don't know how you ski or where you ski. This was not an attack on you or your skiing, or anyone else.

As for accusing you of anything, my stance on bragging on the internet is very clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano

I don't have a problem with it. You went out and had a good day now you are sharing the stoke, nothing wrong with that.

I really don't see why you are reacting so negatively here or what this argument is even about. I suggest we drop it.

When I read the thread title, I thought: there's a problem here. no one can participate without bragging,

and there will be people who opt out (modest, private types, and experienced skiers who abhor tooting their own horn),

and people that take on insults for giving information.

fair enough Tromano... I agree we should drop it.  perhaps a misunderstanding.

Getting back to the topic of this thread, is there a better way to track vertical than an iPhone GPS app?  Or I should say more accurate?  (as I said in another thread I found when testing it at a small hill in NY that is was up to 50% incorrect)???  Or should I trust all the stats on my "Ski Tracks," including speed, pitch, and stuff like that?  I refuse to pay 500 bucks for those goggles to see how fast I'm going.  (by the way I am kind of interested in all these stats for purely personal reasons

What is very impressive about the app is that it tracks your location on your runs and if you overlay it with an aerial photo, it knew exactly where you ski.  What I don't know though is the refresh rate and stuff when you are going 50 mph, if it has time to figure everything out.

It sounds like most of you are tracking via some method tracking lift rides at your local hill.

What is epic mix?

Edited by comprex - 4/19/11 at 4:15pm

I use an altimeter, the Brunton ADC Summit.  I may have posted this already, but in early season skiing over a 13 day period, I found the "descent" footage to be within 1-2% of my notes of which lifts I rode all day and dead on (of course) with the number of runs.  YMMV.  I also compared those two sets of stats with the resort stats and added in where they didn't scan my pass for one reason or another and it was still accurate.  You don't get all that other stuff like trail overlays and such, but since I constantly ski the same mountain, it's really not important to me which routes I took.

And for the nay-sayers, I find it helpful to judge fitness progression, etc.  Some days, telling myself "you can't stop YET" has pushed me beyond a mental problem and into what later turned out to be a terrific day because I felt I needed another run or two.  Whatever works for you.

Edited by comprex - 4/19/11 at 4:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri

When I read the thread title, I thought: there's a problem here. no one can participate without bragging,

and there will be people who opt out (modest, private types, and experienced skiers who abhor tooting their own horn),

and people that take on insults for giving information.

Agree, but think that title selects for intermediate skiers. Closed out my season yesterday at local mountain, lots of 16-18 year old Obsethed-class freestylers straightlining blue runs, COM like they were in immediate need of a bathroom, hitting a few wobbly feet of air along edges, tips flailing, bet they had the most net vertical on the mountain. Also recall that when I was that age, my idea of skiing was something along the same lines, but on Head Standards.

At my age (60yrs) I really can't boot pack more than a couple thousand feet in a day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgrandy

At my age (60yrs) I really can't boot pack more than a couple thousand feet in a day.

Good info. I'm in the same boat.  Sr. discount season pass, in ok shape and after a 8 mile / 2500 vert day I was about, no, I was done. Wondered what the norm was.

See my "ear to ear" grin after breaking out of the BC and onto the blue groomer home. We'll, I thought I was beaming.

Squaw has a lot of in bounds boot packs. prior 2010, I would do about 1500 in a good day, 3000 in a great day.  Lots to chose from, fit it in between a full day of lift served runs. This year I'm max 1500, typically more like 800, and not every day by any means. Good thing skiing is a gravity sport.

Edited by davluri - 4/10/11 at 8:33pm

I logged 70,000 feet of bump skiing early in the year. Most normal day off I guess around 20k of mized skiing.

As of today I have the most runs/ and most vertical out of anyone at Stowe Mountain Resort.

VS, I think we all get the question, but speaking only for myself, skiing is very much both a right and left brain activity. Yours seem exclusively left. I've never counted vertical other than planning touring routes for people. In that case, it's only way to set realistic and reasonable expectations for a group you're leading. 7000' is a really nice day skinning/hiking/climbing. Much much more than the vertical, what I remember are particular days. What the best have in common are great friends, a very cool mountain, stunning lines, and phenominal conditions. For chosing an area to visit whether lift skiing or touring, asthetics play an important role as well. Could be cool geology like skiing in a volcano crater or caldera. Once it was the first time skiing "fernspiegel"... sounded like a dump truck of broken glass coming down the hill behind us. Once it was doing laps in about 6" of grapple which was just crazy fast and fun. Today it was hiking out the ridge for fresh snow. Could have gotten a ton more vertical skiing groomer laps, but it just doesn't cut it when there's 22" of fresh for the taking if you're willing to do some hiking. Maybe it's waist deep snow through perfectly spaced beech trees. Oh sure, there were a couple of groomer madness days earlier in the season, but no one counted vertical. I for one don't think you're bragging, but when we read that your jaw is too powerful and big to fit in a helmet, and that your legs are so massive that underwear holds you back, well, I think you can understand why some are skeptical. Then you mention specific distances. In Europe you might do one or two runs a day, maybe 3 if all goes well. How many kilometers? No idea, but maybe a couple of borders get crossed which is kind of fun. Honestly, if vertical is your gig, then why not sign up for a 24 hours type charity event? Put it to good use. Ski with both the right and left side of the brain pan. You'll be richer for it.

If you don't keep track, you don't get a belt buckle.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › How much vertical is a "good day"???