or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Responsibility Code Interpretation?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Responsibility Code Interpretation? - Page 2

Poll Results: In the case of a trail merging in a Y shape, based on your interpretation of the code, what actions should 2 skiers take if skier 1 on the right side of the Y is ahead/below/travelling slower than skier 2 on the left side of the Y.

 
  • 7% (2)
    A. Skier 2 has to avoid skier 1 because skier 1 is ahead of him. Skier 1 has no obligations under the code.
  • 0% (0)
    B. Skier 1 has to look uphill and yield to Skier 2. Skier 2 has no obligations under the code.
  • 3% (1)
    C. Skier 1 has to look uphill and yield to Skier 2. Skier 2 has to avoid skier 1 because Skier 1 is ahead of him.
  • 0% (0)
    D. Both Skiers must look uphill as the trails merge. Skier 1 must yield to Skier 2.
  • 15% (4)
    E. Both Skiers must look uphill as the trails merge. Skier 2 must yield to Skier 1
  • 3% (1)
    F. Both Skiers must look uphill as the trails merge. Both skiers have an obligation to yield to each other.
  • 34% (9)
    G. Both Skiers must look uphill as the trails merge. Both skiers have an obligation to yield to each other. Skier 2 must avoid skier 1.
  • 30% (8)
    H. Both Skiers must look uphill as the trails merge. Both skiers have an obligation to yield to and avoid each other.
  • 3% (1)
    I. The skier whose is on the trail that continues after the merge (according to the resort trail map) has the right of way. The other skier must yield to them.
  • 0% (0)
    J. Something Else- Please Explain below.
26 Total Votes  
post #31 of 39

I only watched half ... what happened at the end? Did the kid ever get beat up? 

 

I didn't even notice the video title, interesting ... I'm not sure it implies anything sinister because the guys did seem apologetic, but I didn't watch the whole thing so that's my caveat.

 

Valuable lesson for the young guys ... obviously it was the kid's fault (in case the tongue in my cheek was not visible earlier), but also a lesson on what adrenaline can do to someone whose life flashes before his eyes. 

post #32 of 39

If it was in Canada, everyone would have said Sorry and gone out for beer and watch the hockey game together LOL.

post #33 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorenzzo View Post
 

If it were Canada, based on what I learned from that other thread, the angry guy could have beaten both of the other guys unconscious and walked.

 

and in a John Wayne way, he'd be completely justified.

post #34 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

There's a trail here at Whitefish, Whitetail, where this is constantly a problem. Idiots bursting out of the trees onto a nice cruiser. I try to give that section a wide berth, but sometimes it's not possible, with the result I almost never ski that trail. I hope that employee was fired. Spotters are no substitute for coming to a complete stop and looking. I had a guy seem to materialize from the sky dead in front of me on a cat track, descending from an area that didn't even have lift service to get to it. The spotters were so busy blocking the trail taking pictures of each other that I had no idea they were supposed to be doing some kind of traffic control. This filming buddy was way too far away to be achieving anything.

 

It's also sort of a hill management problem. Patrol could easily string a line at the end of the tree line to stop people from flying down onto a groomer if high traffic warrants the effort.

post #35 of 39

Whatever angry, badass vibe Angry Guy was going for was kind of ruined at the end when he threw the kid's skis down the hill.  

At that point, I thought he went from looking like a would-be badass to a snot-nosed, bratty little kid having a temper tantrum.  

I had to snicker a little at that bit.

 

Just an observation, though, which takes nothing away from the very clear fault of the kid.

post #36 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

There's a trail here at Whitefish, Whitetail, where this is constantly a problem. Idiots bursting out of the trees onto a nice cruiser. I try to give that section a wide berth, but sometimes it's not possible, with the result I almost never ski that trail. I hope that employee was fired. Spotters are no substitute for coming to a complete stop and looking. I had a guy seem to materialize from the sky dead in front of me on a cat track, descending from an area that didn't even have lift service to get to it. The spotters were so busy blocking the trail taking pictures of each other that I had no idea they were supposed to be doing some kind of traffic control. This filming buddy was way too far away to be achieving anything.

It's also sort of a hill management problem. Patrol could easily string a line at the end of the tree line to stop people from flying down onto a groomer if high traffic warrants the effort.

High traffic? :-D
post #37 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skierish View Post
 

Whatever angry, badass vibe Angry Guy was going for was kind of ruined at the end when he threw the kid's skis down the hill.  

At that point, I thought he went from looking like a would-be badass to a snot-nosed, bratty little kid having a temper tantrum.  

I had to snicker a little at that bit.

 

Just an observation, though, which takes nothing away from the very clear fault of the kid.


The throwing of skis was pretty pointless and childish. If he'd really wanted to make a point, he would have taken the ski. Then he could have met the other guy at the base of the next lift with his ski, and most likely with Patrol there as well.

 

It also sounds from the dialogue that the idiot who came flying out of the woods worked at the mountain, because at one point Angry Guy yells, "I'll be talking to your employer". It seemed that only the guys on team Idiot had Aussie accents, so I imagine they were imported instructors in the US or Canada. Any mountain I've worked at, Aussie guy is on a plane home a couple days later.

post #38 of 39

I'd be fired if I came flying out of the woods and clocked a guest, even if it were on my own time. Simple.

post #39 of 39

yea but at least you didn't get beat up or if we are to believe the puffed up macho posters from the other threads shot by the guy.

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 › Responsibility Code Interpretation?