or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Terrible tragedy in Wyoming
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Terrible tragedy in Wyoming - Page 6

post #151 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

I thought that when Rusty used his credentials to characterize (with righteous bias) something I said as simply nonsense he was out and ready to play. he was personal first in the conversation, drifting off the point to toss out an insult. I would never have noticed his existence in the thread otherwise.

 

no harm intended rusty, it's just your cred doesn't really mean anything in some circles, so just leave it out of it and make your point naked, like the rest of us mortals.

 

and CT, since you're so confident that quibbling was my bad, I have to say: anything you said is simply nonsense. we good?

 

since the thread is part tribute, back on track, regards and respect to the little girl.

I was out and ready to play. No harm taken. But, unlike the emperor, I prefer to remain clothed in public. My cred was meant to establish that I know emergency maneuvers are possible  on a snowboard. I know this because I can do them. You know that they are impossible because? Wait, I withdraw the question as irrelevant. It's asking you to prove a negative. So even if you do ride, you could not prove the point. So at this point I'm more than happy to just laugh the "debate" off.  Bears can make up their own minds who the bigger BS'er is.

 

I stand behind my cred. But I will beg off on the Jackson praise. Mikey was just being kind to one of his students. I believe his exact words were "we'll go around next time". One might describe navigating some of the runs at Jackson as a series of linked emergency maneuvers, but I just threw that in to see if I could get a laugh out of davluri.
 

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #152 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Posthow does uncool become cool. when the leaders of the sport start doing it.


Boarders are frowning on boarder crossers who wear racing suits to be faster instead of traditional loose clothing. It's at the point where it's about to become "the rules". Dress codes for boarders? That's how the uncool becomes cool.

post #153 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UGASkiDawg View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

ais it time to learn and teach a system of signals for skiing with other skiers? cyclists signal everything to one another, a pebble, water on the road, glass fragments, car doors opening on the side of the road, and many more. many cyclists also ski. it would be an easy thing to start for skiers. I'm guessing boarders on the whole would resist it as uncool. how does uncool become cool. when the leaders of the sport start doing it.


roflmao.gif

roflmao.gifroflmao.gif

 

What world do you live in?  I ride a lot and with a lot of different groups......a large percentage of them do not do this.    I don't go back if they don't and I don't point out things to riders I am not in a group with.  Road cycling is either a group event or a solo event.  Skiing is always solo event you do not slide 3 inches from someones backside to gain the benefit of the draft


what are you reading that I didn't say. suppose you are going down a trail and plan to turn off that trail to get in a lift line. would signaling your turn be a bad idea. your sarcasm is not well based.

I live in a world where I can ski 55 seasons and never hit or be hit by anyone.

the group you ride with is not doing a rotating pace line, or they'd have to do this to stay safe. the point wasn't how you ride, but you could try to bring it around to being about you. rolleyes.gif


You missed my point which in rereading wasn't very clearfrown.gif... but there is no analogy in skiing to a rotating pace line.  We don't do anything like a rotating pace line in skiing.  I see lots of cyclists riding in groups that are not rotating pace lines and they generally don't do what you are saying.  

 

 

I do point out at several spots on my home hill where I am going to turn off of a trail so no one tries to slip by me on that side....not sure it works but I do it anyway

post #154 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MojoMan View Post

I aggree with the sentiment but I don't think incidents like these should ever be portrayed as just an unfortuate incident or something that is statistically improbable. It just fruthers the feelings of invicibility many people have and reinforces the 'it can't happen to me' attitude.  I think that's why there are strong feelings in this thread. People dying from high-speed collisions is not part of skiing nor is it an unfiortunate accident. It's the result of someone doing something or being somewhere they shouldn't have been.  

 

 

Actually, Cirque was absolutely correct. This really is an unfortunate isolated incident and it really is statistically very improbable to die in a skier collision. The only thing that prevents this form happening more frequently is the careful behavior and risk management that virtually every skier uses when enjoying our sport. Skiers are not going out enmasse and skiing recklessly, crashing into and killing each other, quite the opposite.

 

You should show some compassion to this person. I have not seen any account that suggests that this was anything but a young man who is very passionate about his sport and who made a tragic mistake. And he paid the price for it. No one needs you to tell them the lessons of this tragedy.

I think most here are in violent agreement with you...myself included 

 

Here is where we seem to diagree.  In this case (assuming the appearance of the facts we have so far and the alleged eyewitness report is true) this was not an unavoidable tragic mistake.  It was clearly avoidable had the young man in question been going slower...end of story.

 

Several years ago we had young lady here in Colorado hit and kill a cyclist while she was texting and driving.  You and many others (including the courts here) may call that a tragic mistake.  You would be correct but it is also a completely avoidable mistake...don't text and drive.  That doesn't mean that accidents still won't happen..they will.    I suspect thought that we would still have one cyclist with us if that young lady had not CHOSEN to text and drive at the same time.  IMO she should have done jail time for criminally negligent behavior and to send the message to other drivers that this behavior is NOT acceptable.

 

In this case the collision may have been unavoidable due to some info we have not yet been given (it certainly doesn't appear that way from what we know now) but the death and/or serious injury was likely avoidable by one snowboarder SLOWING DOWN.  It is completely inappropriate to be going upwards of 40 mph on slopes that have other people on them that are anywhere near you..

 


 

post #155 of 207

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones! Boy that is the pot calling the kettle black!

No one forced you to read the entire thread and you are totally free to stay out of any continuing online discussion, NOT MANDATORY!

WHO APPOINTED YOU ARBITER OF EPIC DISCUSSIONS?confused.gif

 

PITIFULmad.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by tch View Post

I have just had the unfortunate experience of reading this entire thread. I'm sorry I kept reading .

I am disgusted.

 

The level of arrogance, ignorance, self-righteousness, contentiousness, and egotism here is appalling.

 

Many of you are good, even great, skiers.

But a whole lot of you come across as painfully unpleasant human beings.

 

Shame on you -- and all of us -- for indulging in this "discussion".

post #156 of 207

 

       Dawg, When I'm skiing at Squaw, I'm often in a group of 4 to 8 skiers, skiing close in a line, everyone making the same turns. We have learned to ski together because we are all friends and the group is established. As you know from riding a bicycle in a group, things go more smoothly when egos are put away. Believe it or not, even I do so, in the interest of fun and safetywink.gif. We don't pass once we're in line, we don't change the line, trusting the guy in front with the best vis to find the best line, things like that, which are similar to cycling. The signals I use are similar to what you are saying works for you when skiing off the trail. My signal to stop is similar to cycling, a hand to the side with palm open. I wish an elbow flick were recognized as a turn signal. not yet. I hold my arm a little more to the side and point with my index finger. I think it works (in my world, habiggrin.gif)

 

      Rusty I missed the joke. my bad thereredface.gif. I clearly need to trust people's intent  and meaning (when making a complicated point) and keep a sense of humor. The reason I say boarders can't stop quickly unless they are of expert level is the many times I'm on a blue/green run and hear that loud scraping and chattering sound that goes on for about a hundred feet.

      I went over the top to disparage your qualifications. Just got a little miffed at the "complete nonsense" characterization of this  point, which I think is the case where I ski.

     On the other hand, once I was skiing West Face with a group of Squaw's finest who had been partying a little on the last day of KT for the year. I stopped without warning, bad, bad, badnonono2.gif, and heard this huge scraping sound behind me on a 35 degree pitch. It was Marco Sullivan, making a totally impossible evasive maneuver to save my bacon. He was on skis and I think only skis would provide enough edging and force and balance to stop where we were, and a world cup speed event skier's skills.

 

      I'm repeating this as I believe it is part of the answer: want adrenaline rush? ski really hard, steep, and dangerous exposed lines. they will slow you down without taking away the thrill, and you only endanger yourself. Jammed up with traffic? go to the side and do a drill that involves lower speeds as part of the difficulty, noodling turns, small carved turns, extreme angles lower body separation, side slipping neutral, forward, backward, stuff like that. Of course, you'll have to keep an eye in the back of your head wide opensmile.gif

 

       It's great that all of us have gotten over yesterday's antagonism. We may be deeply saddened and being guys would rather express that emotion as anger than grief; it's easier and no lump in the throat. On a certain level psychologically,  all of us are affected by such a tragedy more than we realize. Peace. thoughts to all the survivors of this terribly sad event.

post #157 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Posthow does uncool become cool. when the leaders of the sport start doing it.


Boarders are frowning on boarder crossers who wear racing suits to be faster instead of traditional loose clothing. It's at the point where it's about to become "the rules". Dress codes for boarders? That's how the uncool becomes cool.


That is very interesting. It suggests that boarders are following a (secret?) code which is part of their value system. It also suggests that (young?) boarders may dislike skiers across the boardnonono2.gif, and will "divebomb" them intentionally. Now THAT is a very scary thoughteek.gif.  If I'm paranoid, sorry.

post #158 of 207

OK, to pursue my politically incorrect stance: Avoiding causality here with a "no blame, shit happens, it's a (fortunately rare) part of the sport" stance may be appealing for its soothing qualities - no need to make anyone question their own behavior, let alone anyone else's -  but here it seems flat indefensible. I'm not an engineer or physicist, but I've been around a lot of recently dead bodies. One death or serious injury might be attributable to an anatomical fluke, like a line drive hitting you just so in the temple. TV shows like Bones or House build scripts around such anomalies, the NYT has a column devoted to patients with misdiagnosed diseases, and defense lawyers thrive on convincing juries that flukes are common. We've come to assume that most death or disease is essentially a lightening strike. We have no control over such weirdness. 

 

In real life, though, almost all people die from the the most obvious cause. It is often a cause in which their behavior played a direct casual role. Moreover, three people cannot be killed or injured by flukes of anatomy or "shit happens." An expert skier was stopped on a slope to help her fallen daughter. Only one person was in motion. The physics of one injury and two deaths, with only that single vector of force - virtually REQUIRES that person to be moving at very high speed, and obviously outside his ability to control his board. Period. Yep, they'll be backstories and caveats and sorrow all around, but the simple math is incontrovertible.  So is the responsibility.

 

Now this is not easy to face up to in a society that likes third person passive constructions ("mistakes were made...") and leaves causal responsibility up to the courts. And as I said in an earlier post, it's more comfortable to see this as isolated, uncontrollable, a blip that affects other people. But it was eminently controllable, even predictable.

 

IMO we first need to face up to a distasteful fact: We may not be perfect skiers, in perfect control of each turn, 100% of the time perfectly able to react to any event near us. Eg, we have human reaction times, human musculo-skeletal systems, and human concentration spans that vary with blood sugar, how our spouse or friend treated us last night, and how many days late we are on that credit card. We might start with you instructors, unless you want to claim divine exemptions, and then jump to the large number of high intermediates here who think they're experts.

 

Second, we need to face up to a politically awkward concept: That humans are social animals, and as members of various groups, we become influenced by the value systems, expectations, and collective identities of those groups. And while, yes, there are plenty of perfectly fine boarders out there, and plenty of perfectly idiotic skiers, and added PC qualifiers of your choice, "board culture" is in fact embarrassingly identifiable, right down to the appropriated hip hop referents and physical aggressiveness, and it tends to promulgate and even valorize behaviors that cause accidents on the slope. If TheRusty and other older boarders want to believe otherwise, go right ahead, I'll warn you when to avert your eyes when the teens cruise by.

 

Third, this was NOT a fluke, and it should NOT be an intrinsic risk of skiing. It came about because of a culture that teaches us that like the denizens of Lake Wobegone, we're all above average, we're all so special that we can do stuff other people shouldn't, and there is no responsibility, only lawyers. So, skiing may not be an intrinsically dangerous sport like mountain climbing, but it is becoming more injurious year by year, more people are venturing into the backcountry and getting killed by avalanches year by year, and I suspect that deaths and serious injuries by collision on groomed are going up too. We need more acknowledgement of this, and less self-soothing shrugs about the "nature" of the sport, or how it could never happen to us.


Edited by beyond - 12/29/10 at 11:54am
post #159 of 207



 

Quote:

Originally Posted by UGASkiDawg View Post

 

Here is where we seem to diagree.  In this case (assuming the appearance of the facts we have so far and the alleged eyewitness report is true) this was not an unavoidable tragic mistake.  It was clearly avoidable had the young man in question been going slower...end of story.

 

Several years ago we had young lady here in Colorado hit and kill a cyclist while she was texting and driving.  You and many others (including the courts here) may call that a tragic mistake.  You would be correct but it is also a completely avoidable mistake...don't text and drive.  That doesn't mean that accidents still won't happen..they will.    I suspect thought that we would still have one cyclist with us if that young lady had not CHOSEN to text and drive at the same time.  IMO she should have done jail time for criminally negligent behavior and to send the message to other drivers that this behavior is NOT acceptable.

 

In this case the collision may have been unavoidable due to some info we have not yet been given (it certainly doesn't appear that way from what we know now) but the death and/or serious injury was likely avoidable by one snowboarder SLOWING DOWN.  It is completely inappropriate to be going upwards of 40 mph on slopes that have other people on them that are anywhere near you..

 

I would agree. My use of the word tragic was intended to not only mean sad and disaterous as defined in some english dictionaries, but also to imply that this was the result of questionable judgement and avoidable mistakes as in a classical greek tragedy. 

 

Frankly I was unaware that the word tragic as defined in the dictionary really was dumbed down to the point of just a synonym for a sadness or a disaster. I was under the impression that tragedies were always seen as being avoidable where a person's down fall is the result of a choice or mistake he made.


Edited by tromano - 12/29/10 at 11:53am
post #160 of 207

good. tragedy also means driven by a flaw of character, making the event inevitable, a chain of events put into motion by decisions that are determined by human nature (or an individual's nature) I'll tell you my recent life event that seems destined. If I were not a skier, I would be dead. My aorta aneurysm tore open on the ski hill. I ski so much that the likelihood of that occurring on the mountain is likely in terms of odds/probability.   Had it happened anywhere else, a place without ski patrol and helicopter evac, I would have been dead. so for me, skiing means life. It is so terrible that it would not be true for these people.

 

 

post #161 of 207

 First of all- yeah you bet- this a staggering tragedy. I'm frankly amazed at the level of ignorance displayed on this thread vis a vis downhill skier always has the right of way....sure, shit happens! Manslaughter shit happens.

 

Wasatch County Utah Law:

No person shall ski or snowboard in a reckless or negligent manner so as to endanger the life, limb, or property of any person, or so as to display a willful or wanton disregard for other persons or property. The primary duty shall be on the Skier or Snowboarder to avoid collision with any person or object below him.

 

 

Colorado Law:

In a decision noted to be the first of its kind in the nation, 1 the Colorado Supreme Court held that an out-of-control skier whose recklessness kills another person could face criminal charges. 2 In this landmark case, People v. Hall, 3 the State of Colorado charged Nathan Hall with reckless manslaughter after a collision on the ski slopes above Vail Mountain in 1997. 4 Had Hall been convicted, 5 he would have faced up to six years in prison and fines of up to $ 500,000. 6 This is significant because in addition to the threat of civil liability, 7 skiers can now find themselves serving time in prison for their behavior on the slopes.

post #162 of 207

I really am not trying to pick on you personally.

 

But talk about being lulled into a false sense of security, WOW!

 

"We have learned to ski together because we are all friends and the group is established" 

 

 Isn't what you are implying is that you are safer because you "know these people and somehow know what they are or ar not going to do on the slopei"?

 

 

I ride a motorcycle and often times with folks I have ridden with a lot. Cardinal sin acting like you know what the other skier/rider is going to do becuase you know them and they are friends.

 

Do yourself a favor! Ski like you have never seen them before!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

 

       Dawg, When I'm skiing at Squaw, I'm often in a group of 4 to 8 skiers, skiing close in a line, everyone making the same turns. We have learned to ski together because we are all friends and the group is established.

post #163 of 207

Let's not ignore 2 important rules of the Skiers Code of Responsibility.

 

I am in no way relating these rules to the Jackson incident.

 

 

  • You must not stop where you obstruct a trail, or are not visible from above.
  • Whenever starting downhill or merging into a trail, look uphill and yield to others.



I will assume that if you break either of these rules your Wasatch County quote is out the window!  And I see alot more of the above behavior going on then the occasional out of control or reckless straight runner!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Crab View Post

Wasatch County Utah Law:

No person shall ski or snowboard in a reckless or negligent manner so as to endanger the life, limb, or property of any person, or so as to display a willful or wanton disregard for other persons or property. The primary duty shall be on the Skier or Snowboarder to avoid collision with any person or object below him.

 

 

post #164 of 207


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

Let's not ignore 2 important rules of the Skiers Code of Responsibility.

 

I am in no way relating these rules to the Jackson incident.

 

 

  • You must not stop where you obstruct a trail, or are not visible from above.
  • Whenever starting downhill or merging into a trail, look uphill and yield to others.



I will assume that if you break either of these rules your Wasatch County quote is out the window!  And I see alot more of the above behavior going on then the occasional out of control or reckless straight runner!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Crab View Post

Wasatch County Utah Law:

No person shall ski or snowboard in a reckless or negligent manner so as to endanger the life, limb, or property of any person, or so as to display a willful or wanton disregard for other persons or property. The primary duty shall be on the Skier or Snowboarder to avoid collision with any person or object below him.

 

 


No, I think this keeps it in the window.

post #165 of 207

Atmc, Of course I feel safer skiing with a group whose average age is around 45 or 50, who have been skiing 100+ days a year for more than 20 or 30 seasons, are all expert level, who have a mature relaxed non-ego driven attitude on the mountain, and have skied together without mishap for hundreds, and in some case, thousands of days. How could I not? This group does numerous things to enhance safety and fun at the same time.  Both of us make the point that with courteous and mindful skiing, the sport is very safe.

 

And you're right on this one: skiers must look up the hill before entering the piste, trail, bowl, fall line, chute etc. The idiotic phrasing of the skier's code makes this very unclear.

 

The gnarliest of all skiers announce when they are starting their run in a steep confined narrow chute. "dropping" is the verbal cue. It is in common use and can also indicate entering into any ski line where others are also ready to ski into the same area.

post #166 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

Let's not ignore 2 important rules of the Skiers Code of Responsibility.

 

I am in no way relating these rules to the Jackson incident.

 

 

  • You must not stop where you obstruct a trail, or are not visible from above.
  • Whenever starting downhill or merging into a trail, look uphill and yield to others.

 


Curious what standing these code rules actually have. Especially given that they appear to forbid falling except in designated zones along the sides. Oh wait, that's where the boarders like to rip when they're not catching air off rollers in the middle. OK, does the code then forbid falling, period? 

post #167 of 207

Don' t be ridiculous.

 

It is talking about intentionally standing  in the middle of and blocking  trail. if you do fall you have a responsibility to gather your goods and get to the side of the run and put your gear back on there as quickly as possible and get your stuff back on.not stand in the middle of a trail trying to clean your self off while bragging to your buddies what a cool wipeout you just had! And even if you do that if some one clocks you from above it is the skier from above's fault.

 

But if you are standing around blocking a trail or are standing on the back side of a ridge out of sight or pull out from a complete stop without looking uphill first, you have a much grayer incident that will be decided on the particular circumstances.

 

If you go by the letter of what you have quoted, it would be impossible to ever ski without the fear of fault anytime any idiot did anything and happened to be below you on a piste.

 

So I am skiing along and a moron below me jumps out of the woods and I clock him.

 

I don't believe that law will prevail.

 

all this must be tempered with a dose of common sense.

 

the law is seldomly if ever cut & dried. And there then  there are degrees of responsibility regardless of the "Primary" wording.

post #168 of 207

Ok- AM, it was the little girl's fault. Tell it to the judge, I'm sure he'd be very sympathetic. It'll be interesting to hear what the post event report will say. I can scarcely imagine what speed the guy must have been going to cause this tragedy. With all due respect, I hear he was a nice guy. Everybody's a nice guy. He'd give you the shirt off his back. I hear that about every kid who wraps his car around a tree. Too bad he took a little girl with him. Downhill skier has the right of way, period. Learn how to stop or don't start.

post #169 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

Don' t be ridiculous.

 

It is talking about intentionally standing  in the middle of and blocking  trail. if you do fall you have a responsibility to gather your goods and get to the side of the run and put your gear back on there as quickly as possible and get your stuff back on.not stand in the middle of a trail trying to clean your self off while bragging to your buddies what a cool wipeout you just had! And even if you do that if some one clocks you from above it is the skier from above's fault.

 

But if you are standing around blocking a trail or are standing on the back side of a ridge out of sight or pull out from a complete stop without looking uphill first, you have a much grayer incident that will be decided on the particular circumstances.

 

If you go by the letter of what you have quoted, it would be impossible to ever ski without the fear of fault anytime any idiot did anything and happened to be below you on a piste.

 

Thanks for making my point. When was the last time you say anyone, let alone a 5 year old, fall or lose gear, and immediately drag all their stuff over to the edge? (Where incidentally, both skiers and boarders love to shoot down through remaining soft snow) NO ONE who falls obeys this rule because it's completely at odds with human behavior. We fall, we take a moment to see if we're broken, we get up, dust off, and put back on our skis. Then we ski off. Have not heard such people referred to as "idiots," but then I guess you never ever fall, huh? Or if you do, you do a boot camp scramble on your belly over the side before even sitting up. 

 

The "rule" was designed for comparatively narrow runs that were typical when the code was written, for comparatively slow speeds that were typical when the code was written, and it was meant for people who stop to sightsee, adjust their googles, or chat with friends. I don't recall it was ever intended for downed skiers, especially on modern width runs. In fact, downed skiers are commonly encouraged to gather themselves, make sure they're OK, before they attempt to start skiing. And that's what they do, whether you folks maching along uphill like it or not. So...even though you exempt the current incident from your interpretation, you keep hammering at people who might impede you; they're the idiots. So let's get it right out on the table: Were the girl and her mother responsible? Are they idiots? 

post #170 of 207

Beyond,

 

When you learn to read, I may respond to you with more civility. But you just made an ass of yourself, since I said  my comments  had no relation or bearing on the Jackson Incidient.

 

Also let's be reasonable.

 

I don't believe  nor did I say anyone should belly crawl the minute they fall to the side of the run. I said all of this must be tempered with common sense. I also said if i ran into the downed skier from above it would be my fault.

 

No,  take a minute get yourself together and yes be sure you are not maimed or have broken body parts and either start skiing or get out of the way for your own safety and that of others. And most of comments if not all were not in regard to fallen skiers. No, just skiers and boarders who insist on milling around and sometimes 4 or 5 across a slope blocking the hill. I SEE IT EVERY SKI DAY!!!!

 

All this additional interpretaion of the skier's code is just your own folly & fantasy. It does not mention the width of the slope, what is at odds with human behavior, or what speed the code had in mind. Very often the code is on the back of your ski ticket or season's pass and you agree to abide by it and yes I understand this is the resorts attempt to wash thier hands of all liability.

 

And yes in many of these cases it will be decided by a judge or jury and you never know what is going to happen in court. The important thing is most of these incidients are not cut and dried as you guys say. We have a legal system in this country and your are inicent until proven guilty of the law. And often times there are degrees of responsibility assigned. I read a few cases nothing as ever as simplistic as you are trying to make it!

 

And by the, you are correct, I have not fallen in years. Can't even remember when the last time was. But it could be 10 years or more  since I fell on a groomer!ski.gifbiggrin.gif


Edited by Atomicman - 12/29/10 at 6:13pm
post #171 of 207

I skied today after 11 days of nursing my shoulder.  So glad I didn't spend the day participating in this (and other) thread(s) as I have been the last few days.

 

Skiing is so much more fun.  

post #172 of 207

 Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

 

Let's not ignore 2 important rules of the Skiers Code of Responsibility.

 

I am in no way relating these rules to the Jackson incident.

 

 

 

Crab, you need to do a better job of reading too!

post #173 of 207

It is a terrible tragedy and I think it is wrong to blame anybody without knowing all of the details.

 

  • You must not stop where you obstruct a trail, or are not visible from above.
  • Whenever starting downhill or merging into a trail, look uphill and yield to others.

 

 

 

But being back after a long time of the slope (and coming from abroad) I can see that these rules are abused far more often than I can see a skier out of control. . If you don’t believe in common sense – these are rules too.

I remember a when I was a kid one guy got expelled from the team for crossing a run in a blind spot after other guy going downhill broke both legs trying to avoid the collision.

Just look down from the lift and count boarders just sitting on the snow anywhere the decide to do so. There are also way too many skiers who can’t ski the run they choose, but barely get downhill at slower speed they could ski on a “bunny hill”. I personally think it is a very selfish, unsafe and moronic behavior and is not any better than speeding.

I think nothing will completely eliminate the risk of having a collision, but simple common sense would help a lot.


 

post #174 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Posthow does uncool become cool. when the leaders of the sport start doing it.


Boarders are frowning on boarder crossers who wear racing suits to be faster instead of traditional loose clothing. It's at the point where it's about to become "the rules". Dress codes for boarders? That's how the uncool becomes cool.


That is very interesting. It suggests that boarders are following a (secret?) code which is part of their value system. It also suggests that (young?) boarders may dislike skiers across the boardnonono2.gif, and will "divebomb" them intentionally. Now THAT is a very scary thoughteek.gif.  If I'm paranoid, sorry.


Uh, no. Boarders have had a sterotypical fashion choice of baggy clothing for quite some time now. Boarder Cross is a speed competition for boarders only. (Skier cross is the equivalent  event for skiers.) Wearing baggy clothes is slightly slower than wearing speed suits. There is no secret code. There is no suggestion in the comment about disliking skiers.

post #175 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

Beyond,

 

When you learn to read, I may respond to you with more civility. But you just made an ass of yourself, since I said  my comments  had no relation or bearing on the Jackson Incidient.

 


Apparently anyone who takes your words in a different way than you'd like doesn't know how to read, makes an ass of themselves, and gives you permission to be uncivil. Impressive. But even my rudimentary reading skills noted that while yep, you had a disclaimer about the topic of this thread, your other language was peppered with phrases like: 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

"it would be impossible to ever ski without the fear of fault anytime any idiot did anything and happened to be below you on a piste.

 

So I am skiing along and a moron below me jumps out of the woods and I clock him.

 

This led me to believe that perhaps there was a contradiction between your heartfelt disclaimer and your feelings about "idiots" and "morons" who are below you on the slopes. After all, the mom and little girl were below the guy who hit them. And they were stopped. Probable moron material. If he had survived, I wonder if he would have viewed them as you do; a hinderance to his perfect high speed arcs. Disclaimer aside, do you actually have any clue how coarse and self-centered you come across about your skiing perogatives? nonono2.gif

 

post #176 of 207

Just admit,you were wrong. You are looking worse everytime you post.

 

As I have said through the entire thread. NONE OF MY COMMENTS WERE IN REFERENCE TO THE JACKSON INCIDIENT, CAPICHE? Only one way to read and understand that.

 

You apparantly can't differentiate between innocernt actions and moronicactions  All one in the same to you, huh?

 

Let me spell it out for ya. The mother helping her daughter on the slope were innocent victims. The boarder that jumped out of the woods and clocked me was a moron. GET IT???

 

 

I EVEN SAID THAT IF I HIT SOMEONE FROM ABOVE WHO HAD FALLEN AND WAS GETTING THERE STUFF BACK ON IT WOULD BE MY FAULT!!!!

 

 

WHAT FOCK IS THE MATTER WITH YOU!  YA GOT A DOUBLE DOSE OF FOKKER IN YA!


Edited by Atomicman - 12/29/10 at 7:23pm
post #177 of 207

^^^^ It would be tough to make myself look worse than you're making yourself look right now. Notice that you didn't reply to my comment about you calling people downstream in the wrong place morons and idiots. So let me get this straight: It would be your fault if you hit a downed skier. OK, but if they're idiots or morons, then they're fair game? Hmmm, after the fact I can usually differentiate between an innocent mistake that leads to a skier in the wrong place, and a lousy decision on the part of someone coming out of the woods. Or a skier who fell and is getting up versus a skier who is adjusting his googles. But can you, at speed? Glad you're that good, and sorry about all the morons and idiots who get in your way on the slope...

post #178 of 207

Well 47 years of skiing and I have not run into any one yet.

 

Apparantly, I am a good judge of character from a distance!ROTF.gif

post #179 of 207

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

As I have said through the entire thread. NONE OF MY COMMENTS WERE IN REFERENCE TO THE JACKSON INCIDIENT, CAPICHE? Only one way to read and understand that.

 


 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

 

 Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

 

Let's not ignore 2 important rules of the Skiers Code of Responsibility.

 

I am in no way relating these rules to the Jackson incident.

 

 

 

Crab, you need to do a better job of reading too!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

Beyond,

 

When you learn to read, I may respond to you with more civility. But you just made an ass of yourself, since I said  my comments  had no relation or bearing on the Jackson Incidient.

 

 

What Jackson incident?  This happened in Casper, WY.  Nowhere near Jackson.  Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you start calling people out on their reading comprehension.

post #180 of 207

JA,

 

I stand corrected! But with all due respect that is just petty as hell since where this took place matters not and is not germaine to the discussion.

 

At least I was in the right state!  Sue me!rolleyes.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaobrien6 View Post

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

As I have said through the entire thread. NONE OF MY COMMENTS WERE IN REFERENCE TO THE JACKSON INCIDIENT, CAPICHE? Only one way to read and understand that.

 


 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

 

 Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

 

Let's not ignore 2 important rules of the Skiers Code of Responsibility.

 

I am in no way relating these rules to the Jackson incident.

 

 

 

Crab, you need to do a better job of reading too!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

Beyond,

 

When you learn to read, I may respond to you with more civility. But you just made an ass of yourself, since I said  my comments  had no relation or bearing on the Jackson Incidient.

 

 

What Jackson incident?  This happened in Casper, WY.  Nowhere near Jackson.  Might be a good idea to get your facts straight before you start calling people out on their reading comprehension.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion

Gear mentioned in this thread:

EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Terrible tragedy in Wyoming