EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Am I really a level 8 skier???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Am I really a level 8 skier??? - Page 2

post #31 of 49
Try these:
http://lib.ru/SKI/skilevel.txt

http://www.jacksonholetoday.com/skiing/skierlevels.html

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...s/skilevel.htm

You are likely a level 8. A level 8 isn't that high, but it sure is a different ski school group than a level 5.
post #32 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonnie
Check that thing at the door!!!

Edit: Hi Dave!
I had a private lesson at one point before I started teaching. I had to ask where I would be rated so I knew what I should list when I take my next lesson.

The response, If you want to breeze through the lesson, go in as an 8. If you want to be pushed, go in as a 9. Most resorts don't even offer 9 as a catagory. You generally need to ask for private lessons or take those "special clinics"

This was about the first time I took a lesson at Alta and I took an afternoon clinic. Not the Black diamond Challenge but the one below it.
I ended up playing tail gunner and picking up skis for many of the other students. That was probably the last "group lesson" I took. I went in to the ski school and got a voucher for another lesson explaining that it did not meet with my expectations. I ended up redeeming it for the Black Diamond Challenge the next season and had a much better time. I also began an ongoing relationship as a private student for Scott and Mark at Alta.

When I started teaching, it was like starting over. Talk about a "reality gap"
post #33 of 49
One of the major problems with self rating, using scales like this, is that there is no good way to verbally (typed) describe a level 8 turn vs a level 7 turn, etc, in less than about 3-4 pages of single spaced 8 point type. And even if they did that, there is no way for the person trying to do the self assessment if that's how they really ski. And even if they thought "yeah, I do that", it's only an internal feeling, and not an objective, trained-eye view. A vast majority of the people out there have never seen themselves ski on video, and even if they have, they wouldn't know what to look for. I'd bet that 95% of the self-procalimed parallel skiers out there are making some sort of wedge or stem on every turn they make.

So I'd think that the rating systems given on the Aspen web site is more of just something to get you to come in the door. However, I feel sorry for the instrucotrs there who have all these students come in saying they are level 7, 8 or 9 and having to decipher their real abilities to put them in compatible groups.

I had a group of 3 people show up one night, saying they were all level 10. Ummm, level 10 doesn't even exist (unless you want to crown WC skiers with that title), and they turned out to be level 7 ish.

It does take years of skiing a lot of days per year to get to level 8. Just to get from 7 to 8 probably takes most people a few years. And getting grom 8 to 9, seems to take an eternity, although the differences in skiing between a level 8 and 9 are almost inperceptable, except that to most people, something just looks better/different with one vs the other, but couldn't figure out what it was if you gave them 5 hours of video and let them run it slow motion.

It's an immensly flawed system, but it's the best they've been able to figure out so far.
post #34 of 49
I have always found that rating system so heavily weighted towards the high end.

Basically, at level 5 you can barely ski, by level 8 you can get down blacks and by level 10 you can ski anything.

How about spreading it out a bit.

I went to Whistler last year with 8 buddies. One day, we all dropped into the Couloir Extreme. We all skied it successfully. It was in great shape, but lots of bumps. One friend of mine did a 10 foot drop off the top of highest cornice point and skied it fast and easily.

I did a smaller drop and skied it well, but not as fast as him. Not once did I feel uncomfortable.

My other buddies all skied it okay, but took varying times to get down and none of them "dropped" in, they all took the carved out ski in way.

According to that scale, we would all be 9s or 10s. However, we all know that we are not. Why? Because we had another friend out there sking back country runs at 50 degrees plus and doing 40 foot drops with confidence. Even he went on to tell us that he has buddies that kick his butt.

It is the same thing when ski companies sell "intermediate" vs "expert" skis. In most cases, intermediate skis should be considered advanced skis.
post #35 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
You are likely a level 8. A level 8 isn't that high, but it sure is a different ski school group than a level 5.
Yeah, if people with 10 days on snow experience run around saying they are level 8, then level 8 is not that high. But then we better have the scale go to level 15. :

To me level 8 is where a Level II instructor should be. And to get there you need at least 300 days on snow, probably more for most people.
post #36 of 49
I have only been skiing for 5 seasons and I am getting into steeper bumps and ungroomed runs recently. It's funny because I used to avoid these runs but now they are my favorates.

I have noticed that I like to ski on groomer blues more then groomed blacks or doubles so I can work on technique. You just can't do drills and play with stuff on steeper runs. I'm also trying to ski steep stuff as slow as possible to make C turns and complete the turns.

I really only consider myself a 7-8 on good days.

I can't imagine skiing on Lange 120s and 6 stars with only 10 days under my belt.
post #37 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canuck34
I have always found that rating system so heavily weighted towards the high end.

Basically, at level 5 you can barely ski, by level 8 you can get down blacks and by level 10 you can ski anything.

How about spreading it out a bit.

I went to Whistler last year with 8 buddies. One day, we all dropped into the Couloir Extreme. We all skied it successfully. It was in great shape, but lots of bumps. One friend of mine did a 10 foot drop off the top of highest cornice point and skied it fast and easily.

I did a smaller drop and skied it well, but not as fast as him. Not once did I feel uncomfortable.

My other buddies all skied it okay, but took varying times to get down and none of them "dropped" in, they all took the carved out ski in way.

According to that scale, we would all be 9s or 10s. However, we all know that we are not. Why? Because we had another friend out there sking back country runs at 50 degrees plus and doing 40 foot drops with confidence. Even he went on to tell us that he has buddies that kick his butt.

It is the same thing when ski companies sell "intermediate" vs "expert" skis. In most cases, intermediate skis should be considered advanced skis.
Yeah, you can progress from a level 1 to a level 3 in about half a day if you have a reasonable amount of athleticism, and you could probably get to a strong 4 or 5 if you spent a week straight in lessons. But to get from 7-8 could take years. And 8 to 9?, it may never happen.

The problem is that it's so easy to define the lower levels - make a wedge turn, level 3, skid them to match at the end of the turn, level 4, etc. But what really is the difference between level 8 and level 9? Since 9 is the top, and I'm no WC skier or even examiner, but I've had my level 3 cert for a while, I'd consider myself a level 8. But I can ski anything, any time, anywhere, in just about any conditions (deep, barely breakable crust might present a problem). So if someone watches me on video, and watches a D-teamer, the differences are so hard to distinguish, except that the D-teamer seems to be in more control, smoother, less time out of balance, etc. But if you try define skiing skills that makes someone a level 8 vs 9, how do you put it in words that are easily understandable by the general public? You can't. You just relate it to the terrain they can ski. Based on that, everyone skiing ungroomed blacks would be a level 9.
post #38 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperSki
Hi, I'm new to this forum and was looking at some posts about carving techinques when I came across this link to determine your skiing level. http://www.aspensnowmass.com/schools...el/default.cfm

According to this I'm a level 8 skier. I love to ski fast and can handle anything up to a single black diamond with no probs. I have skied double blacks but with a little more caution.
I ski almost everything with a great deal of caution. Fast sometimes, but still cautious. And there are many who ski faster.

Quote:
I think I have pretty good carving skills but I do take an occasional spill as I continually push my limits.
Maybe you do have pretty good carving skills. And maybe you're an extraordinary natural athlete. But, as has been pointed out in another thread, very few of those who think they're carving can actually lay down railroad tracks.

Quote:
Now the website says that a level 8 skier probably has skied about 100 days. Well, I haven't skied quite that much. In fact I just started skiing a few years ago and probably have about 10 days under my belt, 5 of those days coming just last year!
Hmmm..."level 8" after 10 days. You're the man!


Go play.
post #39 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
But to get from 7-8 could take years. And 8 to 9?, it may never happen.

...

But what really is the difference between level 8 and level 9? Since 9 is the top, and I'm no WC skier or even examiner, but I've had my level 3 cert for a while, I'd consider myself a level 8. But I can ski anything, any time, anywhere, in just about any conditions (deep, barely breakable crust might present a problem). So if someone watches me on video, and watches a D-teamer, the differences are so hard to distinguish, except that the D-teamer seems to be in more control, smoother, less time out of balance, etc. But if you try define skiing skills that makes someone a level 8 vs 9, how do you put it in words that are easily understandable by the general public? You can't. You just relate it to the terrain they can ski. Based on that, everyone skiing ungroomed blacks would be a level 9.
Same here, except I don't think the differences between me and the D-teamer are hard to distinguish at all!

Level 3 cert just means (if you're realistic) that you now are beginning to have some idea of how much you don't know, and how much you can't do the way you'd like to. Level 3 is an invitation to really start to learn how to ski, not an invitation to hubris.

As for the "skier levels" discussed in this thread, they are indeed rather fuzzy, at best. The whole thing reminds me of the scene in "This Is Spinal Tap" where the guitar player is explaining that that his amplifier is better "because it goes to 11" after he had hand printed an "11" on the volume control.

Aggressiveness alone may suggest that hyperSki should be placed an a rather advanced group. An the other hand, maybe he shouldn't be placed in any group because he's convinced he's already good enough so that he has little left to learn. Such individuals can both interfere with the lesson and come away dissatisfied themselves. A good instructor can deal with it, but there's no guarantee that you'll get an instructor with those particular tools.

Anyway, don't get too proud, and don't take the skier levels too seriously.


Go play.
post #40 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnH
The problem is that it's so easy to define the lower levels - make a wedge turn, level 3, skid them to match at the end of the turn, level 4, etc. But what really is the difference between level 8 and level 9? Since 9 is the top, and I'm no WC skier or even examiner, but I've had my level 3 cert for a while, I'd consider myself a level 8. But I can ski anything, any time, anywhere, in just about any conditions (deep, barely breakable crust might present a problem). So if someone watches me on video, and watches a D-teamer, the differences are so hard to distinguish, except that the D-teamer seems to be in more control, smoother, less time out of balance, etc. But if you try define skiing skills that makes someone a level 8 vs 9, how do you put it in words that are easily understandable by the general public? You can't. You just relate it to the terrain they can ski. Based on that, everyone skiing ungroomed blacks would be a level 9.
I don't think its all that hard to define the upper levels. According to the 96 Alpine manual the minimum suggested for level 9 really is the minimum skiing requirement to pass the level three in the current year. Level 9 is really huge. All the way from minimum level three to FIS atheletes.

Really both level 8 and level 9 ski everything. The difference is that a level 9 has a good command of pressure control skill that shows throughout their skiing where the level 8 has some problems with becoming static.
post #41 of 49
Something I have noticed with watching really good overall skiers is the fluidity - I would say that a Level 9 is able to ski pretty much anything with their turns pretty much flowing from one to the next. Level 8 can probably ski the same terrain, but with turns that tend to be much more sequential.
post #42 of 49
I think people who criticize the rating system forget its purpose. It is not a 1-10, beginner to expert, rating system. It is simply a set of guidelines used to group people for the purpose of providing somewhat meaningful group lessons. It is based on a relatively normal progression, but not everyone follows the normal progression. For example, I just learned to do wedge christies last year after many years of skiing advanced terrain with a strong preference for trees and bumps. It either took me a long time to get to level 4 or perhaps I just didn't own the skill set for that level until I had to learn it for the purpose of instruction. I think most people who complain about the rating system are trying to measure themselves with it, rather than purchase a meaningful group lesson. It doesn't work that way. If you are confused between level 8 and 9, don't worry. Your group lesson will probably be one on one anyway, if you can even get one. If you want the best instruction for you, especially as an advanced skier, you should be purchasing a private lesson so that you can work on the things that are meaningful to you, not some instructors best guess at commonality in weaknesses and goals. If you are not involved with group lessons, the rating system has virtually no meaning to you. Very few of you advanced skiers are buying group lessons.
post #43 of 49
300 days on snow to ski at a level 8?

With modern skis and boots, with a competent instructor, there is absolutely no way it should take any reasonably athletic student that long to ski at a level 8.

I'd bet a comitted student with good, frequent instruction could get there in as little as 30-50 days on snow depending on their natural accuity for balance.

Getting a student proficient at tipping the inside ski first and moving forward during the edge change does not take 300 days on skis. Once a student can do those two things the rest is primarily becomming acustomed to snow conditions.

Getting from level 8 to level 9, however, could easily take 300 days or more. The rift there is rather substantial.
post #44 of 49

Level 8

Hyper-Ski You stated in your post that you've only skied 10 times. It is unrealistic to think you may be a level 8 skier. Actually you need to disregard this numeral designation and just go enjoy yourself. Yes lessons,clinics and racing will help you become abetter and someday an expert or advanced skier but the real telltale sign will be when you've put your time in on the snow. IT IS ridiculous to think you are a level 8 with only 10 days of skiing. Skiing is really to vast and varied to do in 10 days. Most of the real skiers on epic have forgotton more than you've learned in 10 days. Relax forget about labels and enjoy a really great sport and llife.
post #45 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by onyxjl
300 days on snow to ski at a level 8?
I agree that is a pretty steep estimate - but there are people who I see ski that are terminal level 6 and 7, but still have skied at least that many days over the course of 5 to 10 years (which is a decent amount of skiing. I have been skiing 12 seasons now. The first six seasons were spent without any instruction at all (about 120 days on snow). By the time I was in the beginning of my 7th season I was a strong level 8. By the end of that season I was close to a level 9 - and then finally reached level 9 ability the following season quite early on.

Perfecting level 9 skiing is a mission in itself. The last 5 seasons I logged about 60 days on average each season (300 days for those who suck at math). My skiing has improved dramatically from where I was as a high end level 8. The main reason for this has been that 4 of those years have been spent in race training (5 if you count this season). In all reality you START learning to ski when you hit a high level 8 or level 9. You may have goals to attain that, but the real learning happens when you get to that point. I have more to learn and accomplish this season than I ever have before...

Later

GREG
post #46 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier
I agree that is a pretty steep estimate - but there are people who I see ski that are terminal level 6 and 7, but still have skied at least that many days over the course of 5 to 10 years (which is a decent amount of skiing.
I think the important thing is that the student be commited to getting instruction (of some sort via reading/watching if not personal lessons) and not just trying to figure it out on there own. I'm sure it's possible but its got to be a long road.

With modern shaped ski technology the skis do so much of the work for you that linked parallel turns should not be such a difficult to obtain goal. For students in a direct parallel program levels 1 through 7 don't really make any sense at all short of the terrain typically skied.

Curiously Greg, when did you switch to shaped skis? Given that you have skied 12 seasons I assume the first couple were on relatively straight skis. Do you feel that this contributed to your ability improvement?
post #47 of 49
I first skied on shaped skis during my sophomore year of high school. I think (doing quick math) must have been the 1998/1999 season. At the time I was skiing on some straight Rossi slaloms. I had been reading a bit on modern skiing, and had seen a lot of instructors out ripping carves on the "new" shaped skis - so from watching I was able to pick up what I had to do to make the skis actually ski like that. I had also played around with "carving" maneuvers on my inline skates the previous summer - so I had a good idea of how to do it already... but I didn't have the tools yet.

As soon as I jumped on a shaped ski I could carve. There was no learning process, no trial and error... I just did it. I have no idea how though. After that experience I had the feel of it down, and was actually able to get "modern" turns on my straight skis for the rest of that season. The next season I went out and shelled out the cash for the infamous Salomon X-Scream Series (179cm). Those skis really took my skiing to a new level. The following year I got a pair of Rossignol T-Power Viper S skis, with the intention of dialing in my short turns with the new shorty SL skis (but I didn't want a race ski yet because I wanted to learn - plus I didn't know what racing was yet). The combination of the Viper S, a fascinated college ski racing coach, and a carefully placed video camera led to my start into racing and REALLY learning to ski.

So to answer your question: Yes shaped skis contributed... but I feel that they contributed, not because they changed my skiing, but because they have allowed me to make movements on skis that I had been making well before I owned a shaped ski. I never skied like "old school" skiers, but I could never figure out why. I had no training so I didn't really know the difference. As soon as I strapped on my first shaped skis (Volant ZipCarve), everything seemed to "click" or fall into place or something. I just seemed to "get it." After that I started developing my all-mountain skills (taught myself to zipperline bumps, etc.) because I knew it would be easier to learn on straight skis since that was what I was accusomed to - which were a tool I was NEVER going to ski on again after that season.

Now after 5 years of being taught to ski... I'm alright.

Later

GREG
post #48 of 49

Google it

Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperSki
PMTS? What's that :
Google? What's that :
post #49 of 49
The levels exist only to place people into lessons as a rough cut. The reason they are low-end biased is that most lessons are for those levels and the jumps in skill are dramatic. Higher levels mean that the jumps are more difficult to describe, but the solutions to a set of issues that a skier of that level may experience is possible in a group.

Don't worry about your level. If you are going to take a lesson, tell the Ski School interviewer what you're working on and what you ski. If you're not, it matters not at all. Go out and have fun!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Am I really a level 8 skier???