or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Epicski Academy II - Page 4

post #91 of 211
Thanks Lisamarie, I wasn't sure what the system was this year. (last year now?)
This should definetly be baseline for us wherever it turns out to be.
Because you can't have an Academy without Instructors, and if they're all based in and around Utah and Colorado then surely these are the places we should be focusing on?
I must admit from what I know (which i suppose isn't all that much...)Winter Park is looking good.
Correct me if I'm wrong but is it not big enough for the needs of the Gathering as well?
post #92 of 211
Lostboy, good points, though if you look at this one I'm not sure Brighton would still qualify:

There should also be sufficient room at the base lodge or elsewhere for those attending to congregate as a group in the morning, during lunch and at the end of the skiing day.
If Brighton does qualify for that than almost any place would. I think it would be really great if we were able to get our own meeting room. Maybe there is somewhere at Brighton, or we could consider renting at least one of those condos/houses. Perhaps some of the coaches could stay there and it could be used as a meeting place.

In terms of cost it's very hard to beat Extended Stay. I know for me that I probably wouldn't have been able to go this year if lodging was real expensive. I still think it's worth looking into alternate lodging though.

I think one of my main points to improve the Academy would be to try and have a central meeting place and even central meals together. The meals option may be annoying for some but it saves a lot of time and allows informal interaction and easy formal presentation.
post #93 of 211
The meals option would work if we could do something like they do at the Okemo women's spree. There is a separate room for the particpants to eat breakfast and lunch, served buffet style, to eliminate the hassles of slow service.
If something like this could be included, it could work rather well. What would really be nice is if we could have a place where we could have the evening gatherings, followed by the evening meal. I seemed to notice people looking a bit "hungry"! [img]smile.gif[/img]
Of course, we would pay extra for this, but it may be cheaper than a whole lot of restaurant meals, and it also eliminates the need to carry a lot of cash.

This may be possible at Brighton, or at other mountains. Keep in mind, we have no idea of what type of on mountain lodging Brighton would have offered us, since we went to them at the last minute.
post #94 of 211
I would think Snowbird would have significantly more options for meeting room space. And you'd keep the conveniences of SLC.
post #95 of 211
My experience with the meal thing was in France. (though the hotel was run by Italians). It really becomes a good place to see people, talk and then you can go out after. We also had lunch which to me was something of a pain because it was too early and you had to leave skiing about a half hour before I would have stopped normally. (Summer skiing stopped at 1 or 1:30) We wouldn't have that problem.

You're idea about lunch on the mountain is a good one. Maybe we could get the mountain to do a buffet or something reasonable. If not then just having a room to bring the lunch to would be good.

altagirl recommending snowbird?! just don't let those "friends" find out

[ February 12, 2003, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: Tog ]
post #96 of 211
By WTFH: "Colorado is not just Summit County, so, please, consider other quality resorts in Co e.g. Winter Park. Fly into DIA and you can get a train to WP. Don't need to spend big bucks on airport transfer, etc, and can get ski in/ski out, or free resort bus when there, so no car rental required. Oh, and they do great deals on lift tickets if booked in advance."


My apologies for omitting Winter Park as a potential Colo. site. [img]redface.gif[/img] I do recognize that there are resorts in Colo. outside of Summit County. Tom Burch told me so ( although some would argue that Wolf Creek has been annexed by Texas).

By a multi-resort venue I meant that whether it's the terrain, snow condtitions, or ambiance some people seem to enjoy the opportunity to sample seveal different resorts. I know that Whistler/Blackcomb has plenty of variety. If you want fog you can ski at the bottom, rain you just ski at mid-mountain and for snow go to the top. Just kidding. Whistler/Blackomb would cetainly qualify as multi-resort.

By Tog,

"though if you look at this one I'm not sure Brighton would still qualify:" [that there should be sufficient room at the base lodge or elsewhere for those attending to congregate as a group in the morning, during lunch and at the end of the skiing day].

Tog, I agree that it would be better to have a dedicated space to congregate although the Brighton cafeteria seemed to work for congregating mornings and lunch in that it was not very crowded. I agree that the cafeteria would not work as well for formal presentations or discussions.

At all events, there is no magic to the criteria I suggested. I am very open to other possibilities. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Edit: Typo

[ February 12, 2003, 04:53 PM: Message edited by: Lostboy ]
post #97 of 211
Well, I heard it through the grapevine that they are interested! Has Alta been ruled out. That could be spectacular for both advanced and intermediate skiers. Even for novices, the Green trails are really really green! And its so much easier to learn stuff without those darn boarders....
post #98 of 211
Originally posted by Lisamarie:
Well, I heard it through the grapevine that they are interested!
LM, Not really sure who "they" are.

In a couple of different post it has been mentioned that the organizers are contacting resorts to see of their interest in hosting the academy. If that is so it might be helpful to know which areas are being considered. I get the feeling that asking for input is just a feel good exercise that some decisions have already been made.
post #99 of 211
Originally posted by Tom Burch:
To all,

The first Academy came about because the memebers of EpicSki asked for it. Everyone please feel free to add suggestions for time, place, number of days, etc. Several areas, both big and small, have expressed an interest in hosting a future academy. Brighton would like for us to return while Aspen, Copper, and Wolf Creek have expressed interest. With a success under our belt we should be able ot negotiate very reasonable terms with any area that is decided upon.

The first Academy was successful because it was memebr/participant driven. The organizing commitee means to keep it that way so all of your input and ideas are necessary. Post them here or start new threads as necessary.
So we have these 4, plus the ski school director of The Bird is a friend of some of coaches, and has also expressed an interest.
Other options are also being considered. As I've said, the sucess of this Academy gives us incredible bargaining power. There is no reason whatsoever to settle for a less than optimal arrangement.
post #100 of 211
In a couple of different post it has been mentioned that the organizers are contacting resorts...I get the feeling that asking for input is just a feel good exercise that some decisions have already been made.
Kima - No, that process has not started. And we are listening closely to the input. No decisions have been made -- not even close.

[Later edit -- I should qualify this by saying that some of our coaches may (I'm not sure) be talking informally with their home mountains to see if they can toss their resort in for consideration, but this is not the same as the organizing committee approaching a resort with an actual request/proposal. Other well connected EpicSki members have told us about their industry relationships and offered to use them if we would like, but we have not acted upon any of these yet.]
post #101 of 211
I want to chime in and emphasize what AC has just posted. Please continue to post to this thread and others in the forums with your thoughts, input and reactions to the suggestions of others. The Academy and the Gathering are participant and member driven propositions.

For the information of this group, we have distributed post-Event evaluation questionnaires to the coaches and participants who attended the 2003 Academy and the responses have only begun to start coming in. Those responses and the discussions in these threads are going to drive the selection process, when it starts.

In the rumor mill there may have been some jostling for position but to my knowledge nobody has even crossed the starting line yet. AC posted a request that individuals not start approaching resorts for a good reason. We learned from this year's experience that we needed to be very careful and professional in reaching an understanding with a host resort. We plan to be careful and professional next time, and it would be counterproductive for various individual Bears to start balls rolling in different directions.

One other matter--if you would like to be on the distribution list for next year's Academy, send me your email address and I'll put you on the list. Regular updates won't start for a while, but I suspect that some of the organizers will want to send information out sporadically.

That said, I'm going to shut up and listen.
post #102 of 211
I'm beginning to see in this, and in other threads, such as Si's, is that there may be a need to increase the scope of whom the academy would appeal to. On the one hand, it would be great to attract newer skiers such as Delta who are catching the bug and catching it bad! On the other, we have the skiers who want to run gates, ski steeps, off bounds, etc.

Although skier levels are somewhat ambiguos nowadays, our group were the lowest level. We probably started at a high level 5, low level 6. I can't say for sure, but in my 1st year of skiing, I may have felt a bit timid about attending an event where the lowest level skier was a 5/6, no matter how confident I felt.
Just a commentary, here. I had taken the Whistler Ski E'Spirit 2 years in a row. They are very good at getting relatively new skiers onto Blue terrain within about 3 days of lessons.
I used to think that was a really big accomplishment. But what I learned at the Academy was that I had been taught how to SURVIVE, blue or easy black terrain, without really skiing it.

So it would be great if we could appeal to a lower level skier who could be taught the SKIING techniques, as opposed to the SURVIVAL techniques needed for more challenging terrain.

Then we have the other end of the spectrum. I suspect that the higher end groups were, what, high 7s, low 8s. That's nothing to sniff at, but if you take a look at the posts by Bob Peters and Si, it seems like we have a few on this forum who are close to expert caliber. We may need to look at something that would be appealing on that level, also.
post #103 of 211
Lisamarie has hit the nail right on the head: As an inclusionary event, the EpicSki Academy is open to - and should be appealing to - the broadest range of skiers possible. An area that is great for true experts and extreme skiers but scarey for more intermediate skiers would therefore be less than ideal. At the same time, an area like Brighton - that was (in my view) perfect for the group of intermediates with whom I skied - may be lacking in the features desired by upper level skiers [I'll leave that up to those experts, as I'm not even close to qualified to make that judgment].

Considering the broad appeal we need for this great event, a prime criterion for selecting an area should be the range of terrain - from the greenest green to the blackest double black. If such an area has historically reliable conditions, is affordable, and is the same as, or close to, the area selected for the gathering, then it should be in the running.

ON ANOTHER SUBJECT, what sno'more said is of first importance. A painful lesson learned from the first EpicSki Academy was that informal approaches to potential Academy venues can be disasterous. It is of utmost importance that all Bears speak here and express their thoughts and preferences for selection of the 2004 venue. It is of at least equal importance that the Academy speak with one voice - the organizing committe - and that the organizing committee operate within the usual and ordinary course of business.

Every Bear can help the 2004 EpicSki Academy to be a success in at least two ways: First, participate in this process by expressing your thoughts and preference here in the EpicSki Forum. Second, do not approach any potential area or other business participant yourself. If you have some special thoughts or knowledge about one of these businesses, provide that to the operating committee by private message or e-mail to sno'more or another member of the organizing committee, and allow us to deal with it.

I understand that this may be somewhat redundant after sno'more's post above. Nevertheless, it is sufficiently important to emphasize.
post #104 of 211

Who is the operating committee? What are thee-mail addresses?

post #105 of 211
Originally posted by PowDigger:
Who is the operating committee? What are thee-mail addresses?
post #106 of 211
Well, if we're to have terrain suitable for a very advanced group than Brighton is indeed lacking. It's good to have some trails where the heart rate goes up and fear becomes a big factor. With the lack of snow and the Millicent bowl being closed Brighton didn't have much of that. I'm not sure even with the snow it would really qualify. Not that you can't work on a lot of stuff but people are often looking for advancement in very difficult terrain.
Now Alta on the other hand....
Oh, but then our traverse to ski ratio might be too high...
post #107 of 211
Its important to explore the pros and cons of every option. I realize that people may feel as if their ideas or being shot down in some instances. But pointing out the problems with a given scenario does not automatically eliminate it as an option. It just makes us have to think harder about ways to get around the problem.

The first instinct will always be to suggest what's best for you. That is natural, and there is nothing at all wrong with it. But for this academy to be sucessful, we have to look at the big picture. The academy's intermediate skiers, myself included, would be more than happy to return to Brighton, but that may not attract a more kick butt type of skier.

Many people are interested in on mountain lodging. In order to get a really good group rate, there would have to be large enough group willing to stay on mountain. But if the rates they offer are not low enough, some people will opt to stay off mountain, which will make the group too small to get a good discount. Like I said earlier, for the academy, more so than the gathering, we need to be more careful about lodging rates. Some people cannot afford both the academy fees as well as $100 a night lodging, especially if they are combining it with the gathering. 10 nights at $100 a night is more than some people can afford.

We also need to strike a balance between not jumping at offers too soon, and procrastinating too long. Last year, there were people who were interested in attending both events, but eventually got frustrated waiting for the details. Frequent flyer tickets fill up quickly.
post #108 of 211
How about $25 a night?
post #109 of 211
PREFACE: Yes, I did not attend the Academy or Gathering this year. Yes, that might cause you to think me hypocritical. Yes, I can be strident. Now, with that said...

...the selection of terrain should hold until firmer commitments arrive. I see no reason to let the lowest common denominator control the choice of ski area to host the Academy. My technique issues tend to arise in the more difficult terrain, and a LCD-directed terrain choice will make it hard to get me to consider the 2004 Academy. I would guess there are others in the Level 7 or 8 abilities who feel likewise.

There are LOTS of mountains that have sufficient diversity of terrain. As to the LCD effect, we should bear in mind that for the bottom rungs of the skiing skill ladder, there really isn't any need for any particular type of terrain -- just a lift to get them back up to the top of their practice slope. Fundamentals are best learned on easy terrain.

As LM wisely has recognized, learning to "survive" a run is nothing. We should be skill-directed, and not simply chasing colors or symbols (blue squares, black diamonds, or whatever the symbols in your home country). I don't care to learn how to "survive" a narrow chute or steep powdery glades. I want to flow them, ski them with grace and a huge grin on me gob.

just like that, or maybe like this

post #110 of 211
ok, fox posted this in the gathering thread, and people are actually agreeing.

What do you think? Centralliized meals. on mountian lodging. Do you think it would fill the needs of the academy, terrain wise? Would they let us, considering they already have a Bob Barnes?

we can take the ski train to get there!
post #111 of 211
lm, perhaps. I know nothing of Winterpark. Back to gonz's point, Brighton is fine for level 7 or 8 depending on the 8's desire. There's people who are 8's who totally desire radical terrain and those that don't. Still, it be nice to have something real difficult.

oh, we're wondering if you exist or not....(it's a rumor, but I don't think I started it)
post #112 of 211
Lisamarie, that Beaver lodge is worth looking into.

The location near the hill, the shuttle, the inclusion of dinner, amenities - I like it!

Also fertile material for the Barking Beavers [nolo's group at 2003 EpicSki Academy].

What about terrain at the mountain? How does it work out for the folks seeking tough terrain, and how does it work out for folks like the Barking Beavers?
post #113 of 211
post #114 of 211
Originally posted by Tog:
oh, we're wondering if you exist or not....(it's a rumor, but I don't think I started it)
I exist, see my picture in my profile. That picture also explains (in a very indirect way) why I wasn't at the Gathering or Academy this year. I decided last Spring to make 2002-2003 my year for quantum leaps in MTB skills. It's working. Since I spend 8 months focused on riding, and in the other 4 months my focus is 50-50 riding and skiing, it was easy for me to opt out of this year's stuff when I ran out of money at the last minute.

Proof of my existence? Well, if you ask nolo to ask Yoda about me, you will get proof not only of my existence, but also of my skiing, and of my ability and potential for improvement. Yoda knows all. I've chatted with him twice this season, he knows my mtb distraction as do all my buddies at Club LT. They've been teasing me about being absent from Club LT this season.

If the Academy looks promising for 2004 (and it does, so far) I can budget the $$ now, set it aside, and have it available come next winter.
post #115 of 211
Your appearance and actual attendance at the 2004 Academy may have a salutary affect upon your currency here.
post #116 of 211
I don't think anyone is advocating that we appeal to the lowest common denominator. My thoughts are that we broaden the appeal, so that it goes beyond the scope of the traditional ski school.

Its been my experience that even mountains that are known for their highly challenging terrain have something that is skiable for the level 3-4 skier. Quite often, these are the people who want to ski with a more advanced spouse or S.O. , who in turn ends of feeling frustrated by the fact that the lower level skier only wants to go to "easy" mountains. Showing this type of skier how to actually enjoy a more challenging mountain, can actually be pretty beneficial.

Level 3-4 is often where many people get "stuck". Its been my experience that traditional ski schools often do not have a sucessful plan to get students out of this level. So the student either stops skiing, or stops taking lessons.

The other neglected group is the "high 8s". This has often been discussed on this forum. We definitely have the caliber of coaches that could appeal to this group, so perhaps we can think of something that they would find appealing.

Once again, I really believe that the future sucess of the academy depends on its range of appeal . There is only so much our superb ski coaches can do out of the kindness of their hearts. Eventually, they will need to recieve a reasonable income, not one that merely lets them break even, from Academy revenues.
So ultimately, what is best for the majority of people will end up being the best for the individual.

WHEW!!! Who knew that the academy would turn ME of all people into a socialist?????

Tongue firmly in cheek, lest anyone takes that too seriously!
post #117 of 211
I believe there was a suggestion ot have it in North Lake Tahoe area? - I'm all for it.

And one more question: will teenagers and young kids be trained as well, or will they just be along for the ride? My older daughter is a 14-year-old (will be 15 by the time of Academy II) Level 8-1/2 skier / intermediate rec racer who wants to be an instructor (and we both want her to do better in racing), and my younger daughter is 3-1/2 (will be 4-1/2) who has just started to ski and already wants to ski like her sister.

Will there be classes for such juniors and in between? If yes, then IMHO the academy should be held at a small resort (to avoid lift lines) and during a school vacation. Otherwise, I am sure some families with kids will have to pass on participation.

Out of Lake Tahoe resorts, I would recommend Alpine Meadows and Sugar Bowl - plenty of terrain for all levels, and good snow. They are big, but I never saw a line there longer than for 5 minutes, even right after lunch and during the Christmas vacation (even the day after Christmas). Another great place in CA is Kirkwood - the best snow in CA, never any lift lines (although I haven't been there for a few years; maybe they have lines these days, judging by the amount of residential construction they have around the resort : ).
post #118 of 211
Alex, all the posts on page 2 of this topic address the issue of kids. [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #119 of 211
ok, fox posted this in the gathering thread, and people are actually agreeing.

What do you think? Centralliized meals. on mountian lodging. Do you think it would fill the needs of the academy, terrain wise? Would they let us, considering they already have a Bob Barnes?
Far out man, mogul clinics on Outhouse! [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img]
post #120 of 211
Lisamarie - Thanks for the reference. I went through the whole thread and didn't get an impression on what the decision was wrt the school vacations and kid/teen participation.

Originally posted by Lisamarie:
One more thing to keep in mind, we would have a good bargaining chip with whatever mountain we choose if anyone enrolled their kids in the local ski school. If we put in our own ski school program, they may percieve that to be competition.

Bob also raises a good point about levels of proficiency. Just because they are kids, it does not mean that they are at the same skiing level.
That's a good idea wrt enrolling the kids at the local ski school as a bargaining chip.

I think teens can be treated as adults as far as training. I am sure my teenage daughter would not mind skiing in the same class with me (I certainly would be pleased to be in the same class with her [img]smile.gif[/img] )

Kids is a different story.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Epicski Academy