or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2004 Gathering - Page 4

post #91 of 136

a little better?

[ February 11, 2003, 10:15 AM: Message edited by: ryan ]
post #92 of 136
One problem that needs to be considered is the 'sleep-over' elevation of the proposed lodging. Frisco is at about 9200 ft.. Most of us flatlanders will find that altitude too high for a good night's sleep and a headache free day of skiing. On the other hand Utah, Reno-Tahoe, and Whistler all have convenient 'sleep-over' options that do not pose an AMS risk to seaside travelers. [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #93 of 136
I like the N. Tahoe idea. I like the SLC idea. I like Jackson or Whistler. Or Europe.

Colorado doesn’t do it for me. Denver is at least 90 minutes or more from most good skiing. There is no affordable public transportation – they charge $120 per person roundtrip from Denver to Vail. Lodging can be pricey if you get close to the mountain. There is not a lot of primo terrain. ===

I know I am generalizing here, but I think SLC, Tahoe and Whistler offer much much more:
1) More ski areas to choose from within an easy drive.
2) More lodging options.
3) Better Terrain

If we go to Summit County, I believe that the distances are great enough that we will end up skiing at mostly one resort. This will be a great contrast to the many options found in SLC.
post #94 of 136
post #95 of 136
Chiming in once again. Ryan's Map and Fox's Hot tub had me thinking about Winter Park/Mary Jane. Any interest in doing Berthoud?

I would think that those 3 areas would have to have something for everyone. Has anyone been to Berthoud? I would love to hear about it.
post #96 of 136
I thought Berthoud closed its lifts this year and is now only $nowcat skiing?
post #97 of 136
Colorado works for me. As does Tahoe, SLC, and Taos.
post #98 of 136
Berthod did close its lifts this year but still offers Cat skiing which for cat skiing isn't that pricey, and guided BackCountry skiing. Or you can do what I have done many times, Get out of the car, hike a few hundred feet and ski for miles through trees and rocks down the pass and catch a ride back up. Cheap lift tickets there Bob! [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
post #99 of 136

I get this feeling that you are not in favor of having the gathering in Colorado.

What is wrong with Colorado? Why does everyone not like Colorado? To be honest with you, It doesn't really matter where the Gathering is. I'd try to make it if Gonzo would. The fact is, Colorado would be easier for me. I have Family there, that's why I'm pushing it.

Whistler scares me because of the Weather problems. It's no fun skiing when it's pouring and you can't see a freakin thing.

Jackson is nice but could you do the Academy there? The weather gets iffy there too.

If you want Weather consistancy, Colorado has 300 plus sunny days a year. Good odds. Same with Utah.

Truth of the matter, there's a lot of time to make a choice. And a long time for discussion.
post #100 of 136
I would be in favour of a Canadian site. Whistler, Kicking horse, or Red. All have that killer terrain and poses no favour to most Bears as far as travelling goes. There is also the exchange rate issue that a CAN site would favour all of the Bears traveling from out of Canada.
post #101 of 136
Lars, I'm merely encouraging a broad discussion. Colorado has some great options -- among my favorites are Snowmass, Telluride and Steamboat. But I am remaining on the sidelines at this point and not taking a specific advocacy stance on any resorts or areas, and seeing what comes up. I want to see no stone unturned here, partially because I like the this conversation and partially because I think it will help lead to a better Gathering. Interestingly, I'm getting lots of side PMs on this debate (keep them coming!) which makes the discussion even more fun.

When I have chimed in it has either been to correct misconceptions (sometimes just plain false info - such as the rain myth at Whistler), or to encourage wider debate when I think a more imaginative push would be helpful -- but even then I'm not advocating a resort, just a broad discussion.

So keep it rolling... [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #102 of 136
I think you should all consider coming to Steamboat. Sure, the lodging is expensive since there aren't an abundance of nearby towns with economy motels. Sure, you wouldn't be able to easily sample the other ski hills in Colorado since the nearest one, Vail, is about an hour and a half drive in good weather. But, the really intrepid among you would be able to gain bragging rights by partaking in gelande (look that one up if you don't already know) at Howelsen -- the "other" ski hill in town. I wouldn't partake, but I'd promise to take photos and post the disasters, I mean results, immediately on the Internet. And that would create discussion that would last at least until the 2005 Gathering.

Actually, most any and all places mentioned would be fine -- actually, more than fine -- with me.

For the person who said that the distances between resorts in Summit County are great enough that we'd probably end up skiing at mostly one resort... I don't think so. Keystone, Breck, and Copper are easily as accessible from one location as the ski hills around Salt Lake City.

Now, if the Gathering can be as enjoyable and diverse as this thread, it'll be a great success!


[ February 11, 2003, 07:47 PM: Message edited by: stmbtres ]
post #103 of 136
To make it more affordable for everyone, particularly international Bears, what about headquartering the Gathering in Banff? Sunshine, Lake Louise, and Norquay are close by, while Castle, Kicking Horse, Panorama, and many others are within easy reach.

Since winter is low season there, accomodations can be just as cheap as SLC.

[ February 12, 2003, 05:05 AM: Message edited by: jamesdeluxe ]
post #104 of 136
Nice place, so I'm told.
Would that mean flying in to Calgary?
What are the transfer times?
Is there ski in/ski out there? (I can't remember where it is around there, but I seem to recall one of the resorts there is about 30-40 minutes from the ski area)

How about Stowe or Killington?

As for the comments about rain in Whistler, I've never had rain on the mountians, and I've only had rain in the village a couple of times.

post #105 of 136
There is some on mountain lodging, but most of the resorts are about half hour away. Sunshine is a great mountain!

Places like Stowe can be considered for a NE gathering, but I don't feel its appropriate for an all bears gathering.
Killington? No comment!
post #106 of 136
Originally posted by AC:
I thought Berthoud closed its lifts this year and is now only $nowcat skiing?
Yes you are right AC. What I was thinking is that Winter Park/Mary Jane for most folks but those interested in something a bit different might want to try Berthoud for a day. Just thought I would throw it out there.
post #107 of 136
I once again bring up the issue of where you have to sleep and how high it is. Summit County and Winter Park both require you to make a trip across a high altitude pass each day, or sleep at altitudes in the mid 8000 to 9000 foot range. The exception to the Colorado nominees is the Aspen Group which gives the option of staying in the Carbondale/Glenwood Springs area below 6000 feet. This option also has a very good bus service from down valley to the ski areas, and the road is a gentle all weather situation with manageable traffic levels.

I like Colorado, but I think it only prudent that planning include the needs of people who will be encountering extreme changes in altitude and considerable fatigue associated with long journeys. [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #108 of 136

i hear ya, really, but to plan a skitrip while trying to avoid elevation seems...i don't know...odd. a little. i keep thinking "well, yeah, skiing happens in the mountains."

i hope this doesn't come across as obnoxious or unsympathetic to the adversity some might encounter the higher they go. just that avoiding altitude is about the last thing i'd be considering.

that's just me.

anyway, w/b is pretty low, of course. i'm sure there are others.

wonder where Alyeska sits...

[ February 12, 2003, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: ryan ]
post #109 of 136
feal, drink some (a lot) water, take asprin. Starting out in decent athletic shape helps too. You will be amazed on how big of a difference it makes when you head up high!

But I am with ryan here, all factors considered, we really should not rule a place out due to altitude. Just don't hike for any turns.

[ February 13, 2003, 11:30 AM: Message edited by: AltaSkier ]
post #110 of 136
I'll third the motion from ryan and second from Alta. Skiing is in mountains - high mountains. We'll find a way to survive [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ February 12, 2003, 06:07 PM: Message edited by: oboe ]
post #111 of 136
Originally posted by AltaSkier:
feal, drink some (a lot) water, take asprin.
and sleep with a humidifier in the room. These suggestions won't prevent all problems, but they'll lessen altitude-related problems for some who aren't accustomed to the altitude.
post #112 of 136
Anything Canadian is looking good. A good exchange rate will help out the international Bears.

I found it difficult to ski with other Bears at the Gathering. We did have people in groups by ability (?) on Friday, but after one run, that was all over. People just kind of drifted apart.

There was no way to find people during the Gathering either. There was no list of where Bears were staying and room/phone numbers. I wanted to find someone for Sunday skiing, but hadn't a clue how to find them. It seemed like there were people at every resort in the area, and in order to ski with Bears, you had to be in Deer Valley, Alta, Snowbird, and Snowbasin in a single day, or pick one and hope someone else was going there.

Especially at large areas like Utah, people seemed to hang out in two's and three's, and you never really saw a lot of people. At a smaller area, or just one mountain, it may be easier to ski with others.

I'm babbling, but if the gathering were at one place, like Steamboat, at least you'd know you could find someone, at least by days end.
post #113 of 136
Bonni, there was a leadership void in this last Gathering (mainly cuz Powdigger wasn't there [img]smile.gif[/img] ), but we will resolve this next year and there will be better planning and coordination at the Gathering.
post #114 of 136
Ah!!!!! To be missed. Well I thought we had started a tradition somewhat like to the victor goes the spoils. So those who showed up get to set the agenda for the next gathering. Someone who was at the Utah gathering must get the other who were there to set the agenda and take the bull by the horns. Summit County is good, Canada is good (plus we have experience going for us), Tahoe is cool, and a return trip to Utah would be great I missed it.

The Committee of Three must gather information. People who are advocating certain places must gather mountian info, lodging info, dinning info and travel info and make their case to committee. For Fernie it was myself, JW and I believe AC. Anyway, we set up an e-mail address and people would send us info. Based on the info people sent us we made the decision. I belive the Utah choice was made by most of us at the Royal in Fernie.

So who is going to be the chairman of the Committee of Three or better yet who is the Chairman.

post #115 of 136
How far do you consider long distance, and what is high altitude?
I live at about 150 feet above sea level. I've survived the likes of Winter Park, Breck, etc.
Oh, and it takes me 10 hours direct flight to Denver, 12 to Vancouver or 16 + changes to SLC, which kinda puts a 5-7 hour flight into perspective.


P.S. Pow, we've agreed that the next gathering be in Milton Keynes, as it meets all the requirements - low altitude, resort based cheap accomodation, no strange drinking laws, guaranteed snow, and no problems with weather on the slopes. Since it is my home hill, I guess I should be in the Gang of Three.
post #116 of 136
Ski Alberta

and neighboring British Columbia

[ February 13, 2003, 07:33 AM: Message edited by: ryan ]
post #117 of 136
I hope you guys don't get the idea that I don't want to ski on TOP of mountains. The problem is that I don't want to sleep on top of mountains, and wind up ruining what could have been a flawless trip if planned a little better. I have been to Summit County a half dozen times or so with groups from the coastal area, and every time several of the attendees wound up with a lot of terrible symptoms that caused them to not enjoy the trip and have a 'bad attitude' about subsequent trips. ..I really hate to see that happen, and have now found out that it is all avoidable with the right kind of planning. Epicski is all about the comradery of present day skiers, but wouldn't it be great if this "idea" of AC's became a significant part of a growth in the sport of recreational skiing. I know I don't speak for a lot of the folks here, but I for one would like to see this entire concept polished well enough that everyone in the industry sees the potential here for what it really is.

It probably starts with doing what all of the PR people at large resorts in the sport do. Make it appealing to the largest number of people possible, without diluting the finished product to a point that it is no longer acceptable to the 'core' group. My point is that this can be done, and in a way that gives excellent results for EVERYONE involved. I hope I haven't trampled on anyone's feelings; I just feel that some of the places that are 'near and dear' to a few of the bears have weak points that don't contribute to the common good.

$0.02 worth
post #118 of 136

I agree that meeting the requirements and desires of participants should not be an impossible task. And I'm sure you speak for more than just yourself in voicing your particular request. I think all the input here is good, whether in the "minority" or otherwise.
post #119 of 136
Here is my case...

This is me resting it.

post #120 of 136
"this is me resting it."

we shall see about that. [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img]

[ February 13, 2003, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: ryan ]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home