New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

X Games 2013 - Page 5

post #121 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

Yes, this is what it's all about.  This is about having a 500 lb sled land on top of you, it's about having your head hit on an icy half pipe edge after falling from a third floor height, it's about hitting a bump head-first after joustling for position in ski-cross with 3 other guys...  And you are doing it all at night under artificial lighting so it can be televised in prime time to make other 15-year old buy more disgusting energy drinks.   Feel anything wrong with this picture?    Remember Sarah Burke?  The whole X-games scene is not about skills, its about who got the biggest balls to make the sickest looking trick and walk away from it without getting maimed for life.  No wonder some people don't make it.  The TV audience does not care a single bit.  BTW, I have TV too, and yes, I don't give a sh&t about tricks.  

 

Your absurd claim that the X-Games are not about skill has already been refuted, but I wanted to add that Sarah Burke died from a freak accident practicing a low risk trick she had completed successfully many times before, and she was by far one of the most skilled female pipe skiers ever, so please don't insult her memory the way you have. 

 

Also WTF are you talking about that the audience does not care about the tricks? Big air events are solely about the tricks, which is why the hardest/biggest ones get the most cheers, medals and notoriety for the athletes.

 

I do agree that energy drinks are garbage that kids should not be drinking.

post #122 of 144

Well, maybe if we could ban anyone from a sport that involves more gear than sneakers until they reach 25.  That way, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEeqHj3Nj2c , no one would take undue or unnecessary risks, right?  -- people will always find ways to challenge themselves.

 

Of course, I look at people like parkours and freerunners and also say, hey, that's not hard, it just takes balls...right?  So, if I go to a gym with a foam pit -- i.e. a safe environment -- I should be able to do pretty much the same thing, be it flipping a dirtbike or snowmobile or trying to do parkours.  Right? 

 

....very wrong.

post #123 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

Agreed, but flipping "460" pound snowmobiles off huge kickers might NOT be a "healthy" way to test themselves.  We're also finding out what the leagues may have known about full contact sports and concussions not being a healthy way to test ourselves either. 

 

The point is there are limits to the limits we sometimes need to dial back within and we shouldn't leave those decisions to adolescents or very young adults to make.  They simply aren't mentally capable of making fully rational choices due to maturity limitations.

 

Who are you to decide that for them? A guy dies trying to flip a snowmobile so no one should try to do it anymore? I'm sick of hearing the communist safety police BS. Everyone is responsible for their own actions, period.

 

Shouldn't let them make those decisions?? They are old enough to take a bullet for their country, but they can't make their own decisions otherwise? There is a reason kids live at home til they are 25 years old nowadays....they are coddled by safety freaks who think the world is this big scary accident waiting to happen.  I have a 13 year old...he has been trying and trying to land his first back flip on a snowboard. Should I tell him no more, cuz he might get hurt?? He knows he can seriously injure himself, he doesn't need any further input from me (other than pointers that is!).

post #124 of 144

"Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose..."

post #125 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvarley84 View Post

 

Who are you to decide that for them? A guy dies trying to flip a snowmobile so no one should try to do it anymore? I'm sick of hearing the communist safety police BS. Everyone is responsible for their own actions, period.

 

Shouldn't let them make those decisions?? They are old enough to take a bullet for their country, but they can't make their own decisions otherwise?

 

Yes, but should they?  Should people proven not to have full mental maturity be sent in to war?  I'm not so sure about that.  They aren't allowed to drink alcohol either.  However, they make much better soldiers than 30 somethings hahaha.  I guess I should be all for naive kids (that don't realize they are naive) dying for me and my property.  But, not really

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mvarley84 View Post
 I have a 13 year old...he has been trying and trying to land his first back flip on a snowboard. Should I tell him no more, cuz he might get hurt?? He knows he can seriously injure himself, he doesn't need any further input from me (other than pointers that is!).

 

Yes, let him progress, with proper coaching and safety equipment.  He should definitely be wearing a helmet, perhaps two of them if you don't want to be a grandfather next year.wink.gif  I'm pretty sure you already know what the consequences are of having a kid while you're still pretty young.  It all becomes a lot more clear as we get older.  Problem is that we're too old to do anything about it by then.

 

Ultimately, it is the parents that should be stepping up to coddle these kids and keep them in their basements (or at least be prepared to bail them out) until their brains are fully developed.

post #126 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

 

Yes, but should they?  Should people proven not to have full mental maturity be sent in to war?  I'm not so sure about that.  They aren't allowed to drink alcohol either.  However, they make much better soldiers than 30 somethings hahaha.  I guess I should be all for naive kids (that don't realize they are naive) dying for me and my property.  But, not really

 

 

All I'm going to say is please don't start that.

post #127 of 144

My point a while back was more like this: 1) Some activities involving machines and humans may not qualify as "sports," in the sense we use the term to talk about hitting sliders, swimming, or doing a SL. Perhaps we could call them "stunts" since they are highly dependent on the physics of a moving machine that are in many cases beyond the neural abilities of a human to control. Eg, too much of the outcome is luck, and we go back and claim it was skill. I'm not saying skill isn't involved, I'm saying there are a lot of variables that are beyond human ability to control, no matter how skilled you are. 2) Some kinds of these stunts, such as flipping a heavy snowmobile, carry a high enough risk of serious or fatal injury if you fail that we should not be encouraging people with still maturing decision making processes to do them. 3) It's all about advertising $$, not some high minded interest in healthy youthful risk taking.

 

I'd only add that I do not include some comparatively risky types of freestyle or boarding because my issue isn't about risks per se (mountain climbing, big wave surfing, DH, or hang gliding are highly risky and I have no issue with those) but about the invention of new forms of risk taking, specifically involving machines, that increasingly focus on young people, and exist for the primary purpose of making money for television. 

 

And yes, I have some of the same issues about Freestyle Motocross. I rode liter class bikes for over 30 years and have a lot of respect for the skills involved in riding, let alone racing, on two wheels. Doing aerial tricks on motorcycles is over the line, IMO, and developing circuits for little kids is waaay over the line. 

post #128 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

My point a while back was more like this: 1) Some activities involving machines and humans may not qualify as "sports," in the sense we use the term to talk about hitting sliders, swimming, or doing a SL. Perhaps we could call them "stunts" since they are highly dependent on the physics of a moving machine that are in many cases beyond the neural abilities of a human to control. Eg, too much of the outcome is luck, and we go back and claim it was skill. I'm not saying skill isn't involved, I'm saying there are a lot of variables that are beyond human ability to control, no matter how skilled you are. 2) Some kinds of these stunts, such as flipping a heavy snowmobile, carry a high enough risk of serious or fatal injury if you fail that we should not be encouraging people with still maturing decision making processes to do them. 3) It's all about advertising $$, not some high minded interest in healthy youthful risk taking.

 

I'd only add that I do not include some comparatively risky types of freestyle or boarding because my issue isn't about risks per se (mountain climbing, big wave surfing, DH, or hang gliding are highly risky and I have no issue with those) but about the invention of new forms of risk taking, specifically involving machines, that increasingly focus on young people, and exist for the primary purpose of making money for television. 

 

And yes, I have some of the same issues about Freestyle Motocross. I rode liter class bikes for over 30 years and have a lot of respect for the skills involved in riding, let alone racing, on two wheels. Doing aerial tricks on motorcycles is over the line, IMO, and developing circuits for little kids is waaay over the line. 

I understand that but how is flipping a snowmobile any more "luck" then landing a triple cork or your confidence that the edge will hold when you come off a jump already in a turn during a downhill?

post #129 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by lonewolf210 View Post

I understand that but how is flipping a snowmobile any more "luck" then landing a triple cork or your confidence that the edge will hold when you come off a jump already in a turn during a downhill?

Reasonable question. Two ways in which it's different. 1) If I'm wearing skis or on a board, the "non-me" part of the system is comparatively light and small compared to my total mass and my muscle strength. So I have a fairly good ability to control the "non-me" with  my body. Obviously, I still have kinesthetic issues as I move through the air, just like a gymnast, but with the added complication of stuff on my feet. Still, I can make all kinds of mid-air adjustments. 2) If I crash and my "non-me" hits the "me," odds are that the worst injury I'll get is a deep bruise or cracked goggles. 

 

But when the "non-me" weighs 3-4X what I weigh, and has the added energy of its speed, basically I'm just hanging on. My kinesthetic adjustments are pretty much limited to gauging the speed and balance at launch, and trusting the machine to have the right trajectory. I may be able to pull up on the handlebars as I launch, or change my angular momentum a little in midflight, not saying that skills aren't involved. But am saying that the sheer size, speed, and mass of the machine, compared to what my body can do with it, makes me a lot more dependent on physics that are beyond my ability to alter in real time. Which for me, takes this outside the realm of sports. It's a stunt. And a stunt that carries high probability of injury if the stunt fails. 

 

Obviously, doing a complicated aerial on skis also involves a decent risk of injury if it fails. And obviously there's an element of chance. Sarah Burke for instance. But at least I have a lot more real time control over what my body's up to in space, and the landing won't also involve a 400+ lb lump of metal hitting me at double digit speeds. 

 

So I'll turn the question around: How is flipping a snowmobile any different than putting on a sequined one-piece and jumping a row of park trucks in Vegas? wink.gif

post #130 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Reasonable question. Two ways in which it's different. 1) If I'm wearing skis or on a board, the "non-me" part of the system is comparatively light and small compared to my total mass and my muscle strength. So I have a fairly good ability to control the "non-me" with  my body. Obviously, I still have kinesthetic issues as I move through the air, just like a gymnast, but with the added complication of stuff on my feet. Still, I can make all kinds of mid-air adjustments. 2) If I crash and my "non-me" hits the "me," odds are that the worst injury I'll get is a deep bruise or cracked goggles. 

 

But when the "non-me" weighs 3-4X what I weigh, and has the added energy of its speed, basically I'm just hanging on. My kinesthetic adjustments are pretty much limited to gauging the speed and balance at launch, and trusting the machine to have the right trajectory. I may be able to pull up on the handlebars as I launch, or change my angular momentum a little in midflight, not saying that skills aren't involved. But am saying that the sheer size, speed, and mass of the machine, compared to what my body can do with it, makes me a lot more dependent on physics that are beyond my ability to alter in real time. Which for me, takes this outside the realm of sports. It's a stunt. And a stunt that carries high probability of injury if the stunt fails. 

 

Obviously, doing a complicated aerial on skis also involves a decent risk of injury if it fails. And obviously there's an element of chance. Sarah Burke for instance. But at least I have a lot more real time control over what my body's up to in space, and the landing won't also involve a 400+ lb lump of metal hitting me at double digit speeds. 

 

So I'll turn the question around: How is flipping a snowmobile any different than putting on a sequined one-piece and jumping a row of park trucks in Vegas? wink.gif

 

The landing rates of professional riders doing a backflip is VERY high.  LIke 99%.    I bet it's not that high for people trying triple corks.    Almost all the riders crashed on the same jump at the X-games and several people feel that jump wasn't set up as well as the others were.

post #131 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

My point a while back was more like this: 1) Some activities involving machines and humans may not qualify as "sports," in the sense we use the term to talk about hitting sliders, swimming, or doing a SL. Perhaps we could call them "stunts" since they are highly dependent on the physics of a moving machine that are in many cases beyond the neural abilities of a human to control. Eg, too much of the outcome is luck, and we go back and claim it was skill. I'm not saying skill isn't involved, I'm saying there are a lot of variables that are beyond human ability to control, no matter how skilled you are. 2) Some kinds of these stunts, such as flipping a heavy snowmobile, carry a high enough risk of serious or fatal injury if you fail that we should not be encouraging people with still maturing decision making processes to do them. 3) It's all about advertising $$, not some high minded interest in healthy youthful risk taking.

 

I'd only add that I do not include some comparatively risky types of freestyle or boarding because my issue isn't about risks per se (mountain climbing, big wave surfing, DH, or hang gliding are highly risky and I have no issue with those) but about the invention of new forms of risk taking, specifically involving machines, that increasingly focus on young people, and exist for the primary purpose of making money for television. 

 

And yes, I have some of the same issues about Freestyle Motocross. I rode liter class bikes for over 30 years and have a lot of respect for the skills involved in riding, let alone racing, on two wheels. Doing aerial tricks on motorcycles is over the line, IMO, and developing circuits for little kids is waaay over the line. 

 

#1, you have obviously never ridden a snowmobile. It's not like driving a car, it involves an incredible amount of core stability (Abs, chest, quads). Just because a machine is the forward momentum, does not mean that you are not exerting huge amounts of energy trying to harness that power.

 

#2 Every sport is based on advertising money, otherwise it would not be televised and no one would give a shit. I guess they should take down all the advertising banners at all the FIS events too...You can't fault the advertisers for wanting a piece of a pie that would exist whether they jumped on board or not...thats just dumb economics.

post #132 of 144

There are several people in this thread who clearly are just talking and obviously don't know the subject matter at hand very well.

 

Saying anything involving a motor isn't sports is just dumb.   They call it MOTORSPORTS for a reason.   It takes, skill, coordination, stamina, muscles, etc, etc, etc...  

post #133 of 144

Here's one that's probably a lot more dangerous than flipping sleds.. 

 

post #134 of 144

http://www.grindtv.com/action-sports/moto/post/x-games-to-discontinue-two-popular-and-dangerous-events/  Looks like the Moto X Best Trick and Snowmobile Best Trick  X games events won't be going bigger or innovating any more.

post #135 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyLikesIt View Post

http://www.grindtv.com/action-sports/moto/post/x-games-to-discontinue-two-popular-and-dangerous-events/  Looks like the Moto X Best Trick and Snowmobile Best Trick  X games events won't be going bigger or innovating any more.

 

Doesn't really surprise me I guess.  Those two events seemed to have more injuries than most of the other combined.   ESPN has obviously had their fill of it for now. 

post #136 of 144

so what i get from this thread is noone here actually skis.  there was literally no discussion of the mindblowing riding that went down at x this year which is a damn shame.  so stoked for henrik and woodsy!

post #137 of 144
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAHRASTAFARI View Post

so what i get from this thread is noone here actually skis.  there was literally no discussion of the mindblowing riding that went down at x this year which is a damn shame.  so stoked for henrik and woodsy!

 

You have to go back to page one from during the actual X Games. Then the whole safety debate that's consumed this thread began. 

post #138 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAHRASTAFARI View Post

so what i get from this thread is noone here actually skis.  there was literally no discussion of the mindblowing riding that went down at x this year which is a damn shame.  so stoked for henrik and woodsy!

 

Sorry, that guy DYING there took the thread off topic a bit...

post #139 of 144

dude there was no mention of ski slope or big air at allz, just vague references to triple corks.....henrik harlaut changed the game that night, and slope was just as sick

post #140 of 144

also if you say that doesnt require skill, you havef NO IDEA WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT

post #141 of 144

This board is full of old people who hate park skiing for the most part, so that isn't suprising.   I loved both those events...

post #142 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by focker View Post

This board is full of old people who hate park skiing for the most part, so that isn't suprising.   I loved both those events...


I am in awe of what those guys and girls do in the parks i know i cant do it, i think most people here dont necessarily spend alot of time in the park therefore dont spend alot of time talking about it not that they hate it or dont respect it.

post #143 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevez33 View Post


I am in awe of what those guys and girls do in the parks i know i cant do it, i think most people here dont necessarily spend alot of time in the park therefore dont spend alot of time talking about it not that they hate it or dont respect it.

I've seen alot of hate
post #144 of 144
I enjoyed the skiing at the xgames this year. I've been snowboarding for the last 20 years and until the last 2-3 years I always fast forwarded the skiing and sleds during the winter xgames. I recently got back into skiing and I'm glad to see guys throwing down on skis in the park and pipe, way more consequences for skis vs snowboards in the pipe and park. It's good to see kids progressing on skis instead of switching to snowboards, it helps keep the demographics fresh for both disciplines.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion