Originally Posted by JoeUT
Just quit while you're ahead, man. You're making less and less sense and showing your true colors.
Generalizations like "boarders move faster than skiers" don't help anyone, especially not the person making them. I'm pretty sure that every skier and boarder moves at his own pace. In fact, a single boarder or skier moves at many different paces, depending upon run, conditions, crowds, etc. I've seen skiers blow past boarders the same way I've seen the reverse. Your statement is so overgeneralized, it's straight up false. It's not always the fast boarder taking over the poor, schussing skier that causes collisions.
I can't believe I have to say this, but no, snowboarding isn't a contact sport. Open up your eyes wide enough to see past your preconceived conclusions, and you may even notice younger skiers bouncing up after falls and collisions (read: youth gives you more energy and resilience, not so much the snowboard).
The only thing I expressed above about a skier being at fault had to do with when they're hiding behind a blind curve or hill top. Read the rules that you're so curious about; they cover that pretty explicitly.
Bottom line: Stick to skiing at Alta, Deer Valley and MRG. Those are about the only places where your outmoded, crotchety way of thinking still makes sense.
This is just ad hominem b.s. (If you don't know what that means, suggest you go look it up. You're a poster child for it.) It's easy - and sounds impressively self-assured - to go on about how I'm making less and less sense, blah blah, preconceived conclusions, give up while I'm ahead, and so on, but under the bravado, what are bringing to the table here? Your entire argument can be distilled down to, "any conclusion you make that draws a distinction between boarders and skiers is wrong because it's an overgeneralization." News flash: Plenty of distinctions in the world can be drawn between sample groups. People, breakfast cereals, cars, resort snowfalls. It's not overgeneralizing, it's how the sciences and social sciences work. To just say, "Well, I can think of hypothetical counterexamples," or "I have a different experience" doesn't mean I'm overgeneralizing, it just means you disagree with my conclusions. Which is fine. I'm not asking you to agree. But why are you so threatened that you have to go all personal?
Originally Posted by freeski919
Have to agree with JoeUT here, you have ceased making any sense whatsoever. I ski and ride, and I'm more likely to hit the sides of the trails on my skis than on my board. And many skiers are on the sides of trails as well.
Riding is a contact sport? Um no. Just no.
And riders go faster than skiers? Again, not true. By the very nature of the equipment, skis are faster than boards. Skis are generally longer than boards based on the height/weight of the person on it. Also, a board always has much more surface area than skis. More surface area=more friction, which means going slower. So no, riders don't go faster than skiers. That's plain false.
And your snarky "Go argue with Newton" comment is ridiculous as well. You're telling me that a 110lb snowboarder is going to carry more mass than a 220lb skier? That obviously isn't true. And if you're trying to say that a board weighs more than skis, wrong again. I just weighed my wife's board and her skis. Her board is a heavy carving board, and her skis are light beginner skis. They both weighed 7.5lbs. So you're pretty much looking at the heaviest boards are going to be about as heavy as the lightest skis. I know my carvers with the plates weigh at least 14lbs. Oh, and ski boots are much heavier than snowboard boots.
So here's your Newton: With all other things being equal, skis are heavier than snowboards, and skiers can travel at faster speeds than snowboarders. So mass times acceleration equals force. More mass, more acceleration equals more force. That's Newton for you.
OK, did I cease making sense, or do you just have a different experience? Also, you're miscasting my argument and misunderstanding the science. Never said skis or boards run faster because of length. Said that boards run faster, period. IMO it's largely due to 1) their lower friction (one edge versus two) on a groomer, where fluid mechanics (maybe you're thinking about boat hulls?) are not very relevant, so length isn't an important variable, and 2) to a decent boarder's tendency to stay closer to the fall line. And no, I'm not telling you that a 110 lb snowboarder is going to carry more mass than a 220 lb skier; like anyone, I would assume equal weights. Unless you have a data base that shows skiers are twice as heavy as boarders. Which apparently two of you believe. As far as F=Ma, not at all clear about why or how "skiers can travel at faster speeds than snowboarders." Are you talking about world speed records or average speeds on recreational slopes, or are you basing that on the earlier false premise that skis are faster because they're longer? So the point remains, that I'm arguing the average boarder travels faster than the average skier of a similar weight. You're saying no. OK, fine. Doesn't mean I ceased making any sense, means you and I disagree. If I'm wrong about the actual mass of a board vs. skis, then I'm wrong. Doesn't invalidate the rest of the argument.
Originally Posted by Toecutter
Holy cow, that is so off base in so many ways.
Have you and you family been hit skiing at any certain area or in any certain region? Maybe it has more to do with east coast people being involved? Were you hit by males or females? Maybe it has to do with their gender? How old were they? Maybe it had to do with their age? Maybe you're just looking for some vague group upon whom to focus your ire and you decided that the only common feature was that they were on snowboards?
I both ski and ride and I promise you I go far faster on skis.
Contact sport? That idea is just so weird that I'm not sure what to do with it other than dismiss it.
All of my boards weigh less than my skis. Besides, how many 250# fat snowboarders do you see versus 250# fat skiers? I'm going to go with a 1:10 ratio.
We have been hit at places as varied as Mt. St. Anne, Whistler, Stowe, Killington, and Breckenridge. But we do 3/4 of our skiing back east, so the bulk of the collisions have occurred back here. Every time it was by a male, in all but one case he appeared to be under 25 years of age. So I guess it could be a characteristic of younger males who board in the east on trails also used by children and their ski schools, wouldn't want to overgeneralize, obviously.
My contact sport idea was not meant to be pejorative; my sister in law boards, and several friends. It's actually based on conversations with her, in fact. My use of the term "culture" means literally, a somewhat different set of values about what's enjoyable, about group identity, and a different set of expectations about the experience. Boarders literally spend more time in/on the snow, partly because it's more relaxing to sit down than to stand, reverse is true on two skis. Moreover, when I fall, I take a while to collect my stuff, wipe off the snow, etc. My sense, and that of people I know who board, is that boarders are more likely to tumble, often in a roll, come up and fairly quickly ride off. This may reflect the gear quotient; boarders don't have poles to fish out of the snow or (unless they've come out of their bindings, rare) skis to collect. Our bindings are designed to come off fairly easily because of the torque a ski can exert against the knee. As you realize, boards are associated with different sets of injuries, the bindings and boots tend to flex more and release less. So the argument that younger skiers also "pop back up" seems wrong on its face. If you've lost your skis and poles you don't pop back up. You go look at the yard sale.
So I think that one outcome, that I've observed, is that boarders are expecting to make contact with the snow more than skiers are. And it's less of a big deal. I also notice that boarders clip or run into each other more, or at least in ways that would make skiers get tense. Now you can say that because skiers collectively have sticks up our behinds, if that makes you happy, but it constitutes a "cultural" difference in acceptable behaviors whether you think it's no biggie or is.
Overall, I find the three "boarder" reactions more interesting than my argument. I was just reporting some facts, and suggesting that boarders and skiers have some distinctions in their gear and their behavior that has produced some issues along the sides of runs. Rather than think, hmmm, different than my experience, wonder why he sees it that way, or maybe wonder what it's like to see your kids repeatedly leveled by people who, uh happen to be boarders (assume none of you have kids), you guys need to rip into me personally. Wow.
Oldgoat, thinking that there's a problem on the slopes based on personal experience, rather than singing Kumbaya as the lifts close, doesn't equal hate. Nor does spirited disagreement. I could do without the personal attacks, but that's not my doing, is it?