25 Feb 2005 17:16:26
rosco
Death by Snowboarder

It is rumored...

Today a 27 year old skier died of internal injuries from being hit by a
boarder at the bottom of Rendezvous Bowl at Jackson Hole. Supposedly
the skier was stopped at the bottom of the bowl and was taken out by a
16 year old boarder going at excessive speed. She was helivaced to
Idaho Falls and pronounced dead during emergency surgery. The boarder
walked away from the clinic.



25 Feb 2005 17:43:52
Wayne Decker
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Tragic. I witnessed a similar event some years ago right here between towers
3 and 4 on chair 2.

Were was the code? The family should consider "wrongful death" proceedings.
This has to stop.

--
I ski, therefore I am
"rosco" <sockeyeboy@tetontel.com > wrote in message
news:111vgbbdbv3f85@corp.supernews.com...
> It is rumored...
>
> Today a 27 year old skier died of internal injuries from being hit by a
> boarder at the bottom of Rendezvous Bowl at Jackson Hole. Supposedly the
> skier was stopped at the bottom of the bowl and was taken out by a 16 year
> old boarder going at excessive speed. She was helivaced to Idaho Falls
> and pronounced dead during emergency surgery. The boarder walked away
> from the clinic.
>




26 Feb 2005 12:01:12
Jim Strohm
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Wayne Decker wrote:
> Tragic. I witnessed a similar event some years ago right here between towers
> 3 and 4 on chair 2.
>
> Were was the code? The family should consider "wrongful death" proceedings.

Actually, state of Wyoming should file manslaughter charges.


26 Feb 2005 17:22:26
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



Wayne Decker wrote:

> Tragic. I witnessed a similar event some years ago right here between towers
> 3 and 4 on chair 2.
>
> Were was the code? The family should consider "wrongful death" proceedings.
> This has to stop.
>

Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.

RAC



26 Feb 2005 22:49:18
Jim Strohm
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:

> Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
> conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.

Hmm, prevention is probably preferable to body recovery.

Has any ski hill ever considered taking a proactive approach to safety
training, like exchanging attendance at a 20-minute safety lecture at 8
am for a $5 discount coupon on that day's lift ticket?

I mean, we can keep slamming 16-year-old natural born snowboard-riding
killers into jail until hell freezes over, but it won't bring back one
single fucking dead victim.

This should not be an observation limited to the ken of the few
rocket-science practicioners on this NG.

And at last count there were about 20 of us.


27 Feb 2005 10:55:24
thinnmann
Re: Death by Snowboarder

When I read this I thought of a friend who was at JH with his family
with 2 daughters. I emailed him. Here was his response:

"I saw the crowd around this girl... it wasn't on Rendezvous but below
it on a 'convergence area' where lots of people were funneling to get
to lift... it's not that narrow but definitely not a good place for
'anyone' to be steaming down too fast... the boarder obviously
clobbered this girl... you've seen it... they are rediculous... I don't
know if she died for real but I could believe it since there were about
6 ski patrolers around her and a big crowd... it looked bad..."



27 Feb 2005 18:52:24
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On 2/27/2005 12:55 PM, thinnmann wrote:
> When I read this I thought of a friend who was at JH with his family
> with 2 daughters. I emailed him. Here was his response:
>
> "I saw the crowd around this girl... it wasn't on Rendezvous but below
> it on a 'convergence area' where lots of people were funneling to get
> to lift... it's not that narrow but definitely not a good place for
> 'anyone' to be steaming down too fast... the boarder obviously
> clobbered this girl... you've seen it... they are rediculous... I don't
> know if she died for real but I could believe it since there were about
> 6 ski patrolers around her and a big crowd... it looked bad..."
>

Unfortunately, JH does not have ski out areas...


27 Feb 2005 17:56:37
AstroPax
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:52:24 -0600, dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:

>JH does not have ski out areas...

I don't understand, what do you mean by that?

-Astro



27 Feb 2005 20:35:19
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Jim Strohm wrote:

> rosco wrote:
>
> > Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
>
>> conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.
>
>
> Hmm, prevention is probably preferable to body recovery.
>
> Has any ski hill ever considered taking a proactive approach to safety
> training, like exchanging attendance at a 20-minute safety lecture at 8
> am for a $5 discount coupon on that day's lift ticket?

In a fashion, yes. At Stratton, people are required to sit through a
safety video before they can enter the terrain park. Not sure how
enforcement is done, but from what I've heard, they've got a yurt right
there so people can't argue that it's inconvenient. I have no data on
whether this policy has coincided with a decrease in injuries or
accidents, but that information might be out there somehow.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



27 Feb 2005 22:33:31
TrueWest
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:16:26 -0700, rosco <sockeyeboy@tetontel.com >
wrote:

>It is rumored...
>
Link to recognized source please...
sounds like rsa rumor.


27 Feb 2005 22:41:05
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



Jim Strohm wrote:

> rosco wrote:
>
> > Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
>
>> conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.
>
>
> Hmm, prevention is probably preferable to body recovery.
>
> Has any ski hill ever considered taking a proactive approach to safety
> training, like exchanging attendance at a 20-minute safety lecture at 8
> am for a $5 discount coupon on that day's lift ticket?
>
> I mean, we can keep slamming 16-year-old natural born snowboard-riding
> killers into jail until hell freezes over, but it won't bring back one
> single fucking dead victim.
>
> This should not be an observation limited to the ken of the few
> rocket-science practicioners on this NG.
>
> And at last count there were about 20 of us.

I'm with you on the proactive approach. Death on the hill by heart
attack or natural selection is acceptable but getting mugged is not part
of the deal. I was on some hard & fast blue groomers today and was
scared to death of getting blind-sided. I'm not used to skiing looking
behind me. Ski patrol has my support on this one.

Very creative idea, that about the safety lecture. And the target
market of this idea is most likely very appropriate. Now if the risk
managers and insurance companies would step off the straight and narrow
and take a chance, it could happen (HA!).

RAC



27 Feb 2005 23:04:14
AstroPax
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 22:33:31 -0500, TrueWest <truewest175@excite.com >
wrote:

>Link to recognized source please...

The boarder (a minor) has in fact been charged him with manslaughter:

http://www.jacksonholeradio.com/news.htm

-Astro



28 Feb 2005 01:07:43
JQ
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote in message
news:nsWdnUOggbzG6L_fRVn-hw@bcn.net...
> Jim Strohm wrote:
>
> > rosco wrote:
> >
> > > Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
> >
> >> conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.
> >
> >
> > Hmm, prevention is probably preferable to body recovery.
> >
> > Has any ski hill ever considered taking a proactive approach to safety
> > training, like exchanging attendance at a 20-minute safety lecture at 8
> > am for a $5 discount coupon on that day's lift ticket?
>
> In a fashion, yes. At Stratton, people are required to sit through a
> safety video before they can enter the terrain park. Not sure how
> enforcement is done, but from what I've heard, they've got a yurt right
> there so people can't argue that it's inconvenient. I have no data on
> whether this policy has coincided with a decrease in injuries or
> accidents, but that information might be out there somehow.
>
> --
> Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
> Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.
>

I think that may be an Intrawest thing, they are also doing it at Mountain
Creek and there is a $5.00 fee. Mountain Creek has one section of the
mountain that is a dedicated terrain park. The other terrain parks is open
to anyone and there is no safety video that you need to watch. I like the
idea that the resorts give discounts lift tickets to all those that watch
the safety videos. This way many of the youth skiers/boarders can be told
may of the do's and don'ts. They certainly aren't learning them from their
parents.

JQ
Dancing on the edge




28 Feb 2005 06:33:27
Jeff
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:
> It is rumored...
>
> Today a 27 year old skier died of internal injuries from being hit by
a
> boarder at the bottom of Rendezvous Bowl at Jackson Hole. Supposedly

> the skier was stopped at the bottom of the bowl and was taken out by
a
> 16 year old boarder going at excessive speed. She was helivaced to
> Idaho Falls and pronounced dead during emergency surgery. The
boarder
> walked away from the clinic.

Does anybody have a link to this story? Google is letting me down thus
far...



28 Feb 2005 08:09:40
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Jeff wrote:
> rosco wrote:
> > It is rumored...
> >
> > Today a 27 year old skier died of internal injuries from
> > being hit by a boarder at the bottom of Rendezvous Bowl
> > at Jackson Hole. Supposedly the skier was stopped at the
> > bottom of the bowl and was taken out by a 16 year old
> > boarder going at excessive speed. She was helivaced to
> > Idaho Falls and pronounced dead during emergency surgery.
> > The boarder walked away from the clinic.
>
> Does anybody have a link to this story? Google is letting
> me down thus far...

Google just turned up this link:
<http://www.jhzone.com/viewinfo.cfm?ObjectID=E58FB94F-BED1-488A-8947D5FC2E031B20color=#0000FF> >
or
http://tinyurl.com/6tv3e



28 Feb 2005 11:24:18
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:
>
>
> Jim Strohm wrote:
>
>> rosco wrote:
>>
>> > Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
>>
>>> conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmm, prevention is probably preferable to body recovery.
>>
>> Has any ski hill ever considered taking a proactive approach to safety
>> training, like exchanging attendance at a 20-minute safety lecture at
>> 8 am for a $5 discount coupon on that day's lift ticket?
>>
>> I mean, we can keep slamming 16-year-old natural born snowboard-riding
>> killers into jail until hell freezes over, but it won't bring back one
>> single fucking dead victim.
>>
>> This should not be an observation limited to the ken of the few
>> rocket-science practicioners on this NG.
>>
>> And at last count there were about 20 of us.
>
>
> I'm with you on the proactive approach. Death on the hill by heart
> attack or natural selection is acceptable but getting mugged is not part
> of the deal. I was on some hard & fast blue groomers today and was
> scared to death of getting blind-sided. I'm not used to skiing looking
> behind me. Ski patrol has my support on this one.
>
> Very creative idea, that about the safety lecture. And the target
> market of this idea is most likely very appropriate. Now if the risk
> managers and insurance companies would step off the straight and narrow
> and take a chance, it could happen (HA!).
>
> RAC
>

Do you really think the kid hadn't been lectured before? My two bucks
says the kid knew he was skiing too fast, had been warned before, but
just didn't care. He probably thought "nothing's ever gone wrong before,
so it won't now either.... WHAM!". Typical teenage invincibility complex.

Let me guess, was he racing a friend, pretending he was doing "boarder
cross" like he's seen on TV? I've seen an awful lot of that this year
for some reason. The worst part of it is now you've got two (or more)
boarders bombing straight down a trail, and those who'd like to carve
turns have no where to go to avoid them.


28 Feb 2005 11:31:30
tg
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com > wrote in message
news:1109601207.665270.262700@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> Does anybody have a link to this story? Google is letting me down thus
> far...
>
Try www.jacksonholenews.com and click on Today's News.





28 Feb 2005 11:38:11
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

TexasSkiNut wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
>
>>rosco wrote:
>>
>>>It is rumored...
>>>
>>>Today a 27 year old skier died of internal injuries from
>>>being hit by a boarder at the bottom of Rendezvous Bowl
>>>at Jackson Hole. Supposedly the skier was stopped at the
>>>bottom of the bowl and was taken out by a 16 year old
>>>boarder going at excessive speed. She was helivaced to
>>>Idaho Falls and pronounced dead during emergency surgery.
>>>The boarder walked away from the clinic.
>>
>>Does anybody have a link to this story? Google is letting
>>me down thus far...
>
>
> Google just turned up this link:
> <http://www.jhzone.com/viewinfo.cfm?ObjectID=E58FB94F-BED1-488A-8947D5FC2E031B20>
> or http://tinyurl.com/6tv3e
>

Maybe if ski patrols started yanking lift tickets from people skiing or
boarding out of control, instead of verbal warning after warning, we
wouldn't have accidents like this. I mean, you do it once, you're off
the mountain for the day. You do it twice, your done for the season.
Third time, don't ever come back here. The problem I keep seeing is a
few bad apples get warned over and over and absolutely nothing seems to
be done.


28 Feb 2005 10:49:37
Jeff
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:
>
> I'm with you on the proactive approach. Death on the hill by heart
> attack or natural selection is acceptable but getting mugged is not
part
> of the deal. I was on some hard & fast blue groomers today and was
> scared to death of getting blind-sided.

Is this what happened on Friday - the blues were extra fast and he was
in over his head? If that is the case, then it still excuses nothing.
If he was going fast enough to break his board and if he's out of
control, then he's *got* to take himself out before he hurts someone
else. Period.

>From everything I've seen, they were near or at the lift area at the
end of Rendezvous trail. It this is true, then he has no excuse for
excessive speed. You can't scream into the lift area. At that point,
courteous people are slowing down.

Disgusted with this incident,
Jeff



28 Feb 2005 11:01:05
foot2foot
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"AstroPax" <astro@astropax.com > wrote in message
news:tuc5211ened6jgnhtlis74ri4s8ia9c6ik@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 22:33:31 -0500, TrueWest <truewest175@excite.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Link to recognized source please...
>
> The boarder (a minor) has in fact been charged him with manslaughter:
>
> http://www.jacksonholeradio.com/news.htm
>
> -Astro

Yes, and now we have a bit of a different account of the incident.
That is the woman was not *stopped* at the bottom of
a run.

So, it was in fact a collision of two moving people. Having
just discussed this very point, to me it seems that all might
be jumping a little quick at this point. The witnesses would
all have to be evaluated, and so on.

I'm not saying there's no "fault" here, only that it needs a
fair and careful determination.

It's way too soon to be so sure of who did what.






28 Feb 2005 19:45:55
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On 2/27/2005 6:56 PM, AstroPax wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 18:52:24 -0600, dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:
>
>
>>JH does not have ski out areas...
>
>
> I don't understand, what do you mean by that?
>
> -Astro
>

I thought the accident happened by a lift area. I meant "ski out area"
as a place at the end of a trail where speed demons can slow down. Sad
story.


28 Feb 2005 12:40:41
Fritz M
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Chuck wrote:

> My two bucks
> says the kid knew he was skiing too fast, had been warned before, but
> just didn't care

Or he thought he was okay going too fast.

I was approaching the lift at Loveland earlier this season when *wham*
I got clobbered by a boarder. The boarder berated *me* for going "too
slow" in the slow zone. I was going "too slow" because it was a busy
day.

RFM



28 Feb 2005 22:10:32
Jeff Davis
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <XUtUd.23686$Sq5.19513@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com >,
<dxyzc@nospam.com > wrote:
>On 2/27/2005 12:55 PM, thinnmann wrote:
>> clobbered this girl... you've seen it... they are rediculous... I don't
>> know if she died for real but I could believe it since there were about
>
>Unfortunately, JH does not have ski out areas...

But we have a Sheriff's Department. The snowboarder in question has been
charged with manslaughter.
--
According to John Perry Barlow, "Jeff Davis is a truly gifted trouble-maker."



28 Feb 2005 22:15:31
Jeff Davis
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <87452113ela34pskmtko4b7ufg68t50d89@4ax.com >,
TrueWest <truewest175@excite.com > wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:16:26 -0700, rosco <sockeyeboy@tetontel.com>
>wrote:
>>It is rumored...
>Link to recognized source please...
>sounds like rsa rumor.

Captain Jim Whalen of the Teton County Sheriff's Department announced that
manslaughter charges were filed in this case. You can probably read all
about it at Http://www.jhnewsandguide.com Wednesday. Its a weekly paper.`
--
According to John Perry Barlow, "Jeff Davis is a truly gifted trouble-maker."



28 Feb 2005 22:20:33
Jeff Davis
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <1126qiu4vo6dc37@corp.supernews.com >,
foot2foot <foot2foot@notatjuno.com > wrote:
>
>It's way too soon to be so sure of who did what.

Jim says the snowboarder from MD, who was wearing a helmet, had ample
opportunity to turn away from the poor unfortunate 28 year old woman
from MA, who was *not* wearing a helmet, and didn't, according to several
witnesses who saw the accident at the bottom of Laramie Bowl by the
Sublette quad lift. The TCSD is on the ball and sure of who did what...
--
According to John Perry Barlow, "Jeff Davis is a truly gifted trouble-maker."



01 Mar 2005 15:00:41
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Fritz M" <nospam@masoner.net > wrote in message
news:1109623241.851901.86550@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Chuck wrote:
>
>> My two bucks
>> says the kid knew he was skiing too fast, had been warned before, but
>> just didn't care
>
> Or he thought he was okay going too fast.
>
> I was approaching the lift at Loveland earlier this season when *wham*
> I got clobbered by a boarder. The boarder berated *me* for going "too
> slow" in the slow zone. I was going "too slow" because it was a busy
> day.

At least you didn't "turn right in front of him". I was having my usual
early morning run down an easy front blue at keystone, run was deserted and
I was on the extreme edge of it, and I was amusing myself doing turns within
one groomer width ie they were very regular, short, equal turns. Suddenly
Blam I was hit from behind. I turned to find a large angry snowboarder lying
on teh ground, furious because I'd "turned right in front of him".

ant




28 Feb 2005 21:06:04
Wayne Decker
Re: Death by Snowboarder

So far this is not a requirement at either Mammoth or June--so I don't think
it is an "Interwest thing"--yet. But it is a great idea. I wonder what
Carl or Rusty will think. It's too bad I hadn't read this sooner. I rode a
couple of chairs and skied a couple of runs with Carl on Sunday. If I have
the chance, I'll mention it to him or at least drop a "comment card" with
the suggestion.

--
I ski, therefore I am
"JQ" <jq@wadenet.com > wrote in message
news:YMSdnYGg8NeYKL_fRVn-vA@comcast.com...
>
> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote in message
> news:nsWdnUOggbzG6L_fRVn-hw@bcn.net...
>> Jim Strohm wrote:
>>
>> > rosco wrote:
>> >
>> > > Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
>> >
>> >> conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.
>> >
>> >
>> > Hmm, prevention is probably preferable to body recovery.
>> >
>> > Has any ski hill ever considered taking a proactive approach to safety
>> > training, like exchanging attendance at a 20-minute safety lecture at 8
>> > am for a $5 discount coupon on that day's lift ticket?
>>
>> In a fashion, yes. At Stratton, people are required to sit through a
>> safety video before they can enter the terrain park. Not sure how
>> enforcement is done, but from what I've heard, they've got a yurt right
>> there so people can't argue that it's inconvenient. I have no data on
>> whether this policy has coincided with a decrease in injuries or
>> accidents, but that information might be out there somehow.
>>
>> --
>> Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
>> Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.
>>
>
> I think that may be an Intrawest thing, they are also doing it at Mountain
> Creek and there is a $5.00 fee. Mountain Creek has one section of the
> mountain that is a dedicated terrain park. The other terrain parks is
> open
> to anyone and there is no safety video that you need to watch. I like the
> idea that the resorts give discounts lift tickets to all those that watch
> the safety videos. This way many of the youth skiers/boarders can be told
> may of the do's and don'ts. They certainly aren't learning them from
> their
> parents.
>
> JQ
> Dancing on the edge
>
>




28 Feb 2005 21:11:28
Wayne Decker
Re: Death by Snowboarder

YES!

--
I ski, therefore I am
"Jeff Davis" <eagle@armory.com > wrote in message
news:422396d8$0$46535$c0de3616@dsl.net...
> In article <XUtUd.23686$Sq5.19513@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
> <dxyzc@nospam.com> wrote:
>>On 2/27/2005 12:55 PM, thinnmann wrote:
>>> clobbered this girl... you've seen it... they are rediculous... I don't
>>> know if she died for real but I could believe it since there were about
>>
>>Unfortunately, JH does not have ski out areas...
>
> But we have a Sheriff's Department. The snowboarder in question has been
> charged with manslaughter.
> --
> According to John Perry Barlow, "Jeff Davis is a truly gifted
> trouble-maker."
>




01 Mar 2005 00:09:47
Mark A Framness
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Mary Malmros wrote:

> Jim Strohm wrote:
>
>> rosco wrote:
>>
>> > Confirmed the rumor today, same scenerio. With the hard & fast
>>
>>> conditions, ski patrol is being extra Nazi. Too bad, this.
>>
>>
>> Hmm, prevention is probably preferable to body recovery.
>>
>> Has any ski hill ever considered taking a proactive approach to safety
>> training, like exchanging attendance at a 20-minute safety lecture at 8
>> am for a $5 discount coupon on that day's lift ticket?
>
> In a fashion, yes. At Stratton, people are required to sit through a
> safety video before they can enter the terrain park. Not sure how
> enforcement is done, but from what I've heard, they've got a yurt right
> there so people can't argue that it's inconvenient. I have no data on
> whether this policy has coincided with a decrease in injuries or
> accidents, but that information might be out there somehow.
>

Whitecap doesn't let people ski on their nastiest runs until they are
cleared. I don't know what the process is but my guess is they send someone
out to ski with you and judge if you are capable of going down the runs
without killing anyone in the process (self included).


--
E-mail decoding instructions. Your keyboard is the key. Shift the letter on
the keyboard one position to the right for the plain-text. If the letter is
a w,s, or x then shift one position to the left for the plain text. For
example: "srg" (the first three letters of the host) is "ath" in plain
text.


01 Mar 2005 09:27:06
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
mph



01 Mar 2005 09:29:26
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Witnesses say the 16 yr snowboarder descended the intermediate slope at
an extremely high rate of speed. He hit the 28 yr female who was
skiing slowly infront of him. Witnesses also say the boarder did did
not alter his direction to avoid Donahue, even though there was ample
room to do so.
***********************************************************************

Teen charged in Ski Death


A 16-year-old Maryland snowboarder was charged with manslaughter Friday
following a fatal collision at Jackson Hole Mountain Resort.

The teen, whose name was not released, was charged in the death of
skier Heather Donahue, 28, of Massachusetts, who died Friday of head
injuries.

Capt. Jim Whalen of the Teton County Sheriff?s Office issued a press
release that gave the following account of the incident:

The crash occurred just after 11 a.m. Thursday near the bottom of
Laramie Bowl, an intermediate run on the upper part of Rendezvous
Mountain.

The snowboarder descended the bowl at an extremely high rate of speed
and hit Donahue, who was skiing slowly, witnesses said. He did not
alter his direction to avoid Donahue, even though there was ample room
to do so, witnesses said.

The force of the collision broke the snowboard in two and sent both
people sliding up to 30 feet down the mountain. Donahue, who was not
wearing a helmet, immediately lost consciousness.

Ski patrol responded and quickly transported Donahue to the Teton
Village Clinic at the base of the resort. From there she was taken to
St. John?s Medical Center in Jackson; that night, she was flown to
Eastern Idaho Regional Medical Center in Idaho Falls.

Donahue suffered numerous internal injuries and a significant head
injury, Whalen said. The snowboarder, who was wearing a helmet, had
only minor injuries.

Donahue died at the Idaho hospital. A preliminary examination indicated
she died of the head injury. An autopsy was to have been performed over
the weekend, but results were unavailable.

After hearing of the woman?s death, deputies arrested the teen. He was
taken into custody for about two hours and released to an adult friend
of the family who had accompanied him to Jackson. It is believed he
returned to Maryland on Saturday and is with his family, Whalen said.

Manslaughter is a felony that carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in
the state penitentiary. The snowboarder was charged under Section B of
the statute for killing somebody "involuntarily but recklessly."

Sheriff?s Sgt. Lloyd Funk said the snowboarder also was charged with
reckless endangering, a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail.
The statute prohibits engaging in "conduct which places another person
in danger of death or serious bodily injury."

Wyoming law governing recreation stipulates that "no person shall ski
in a reckless disregard of his safety or the safety of others." The
snowboarder was not charged under this section of the law, which
carries a misdemeanor penalty.

Funk said the county attorney will decide whether to prosecute the teen
as an adult or juvenile.

Anna Olson, spokeswoman for Jackson Hole Mountain Resort, said she and
her staff was "so shocked and saddened" by the incident. In her eight
years there, the resort had not had a collision of this nature, she
said.



01 Mar 2005 10:27:44
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Sorry, but while it IS his responsibility to avoid you, this sort of
thing DOES happen and is unavoidable statiscally speaking. Before doing
any kind of traversing turns, I always look uphill. Haven't you ever
been walking down the sidewalk, and you and a person approaching have
to do a little "dance" as you both try to decide where to go? His
response of berating you was more wrong than hitting you, in my opinion
- the later was an accident, but he had control of his mouth.

The fact is, sometimes downhill people DO do things that are
unpredictable for uphill skiiers and riders. These accidents happen all
the time, on both sides. I have been hit (as a down hill person) by my
own share of skiiers in my seven years on the hill. When I am, I just
try to smile and dust us both off (when the skiier stops, that is) - it
makes for a much more pleasant atmosphere. Stangely enough, I have
never collided with a rider. This is why I tend to stay in the park
exclusively.

The thing that bothers me most about everyone's attitude is the whole
"us vs. them" mentality that continues to be propagated towards riders.
I am 32, and I doubt you will find a more courteous rider on the hill.
The thought of people cheering the guy getting manslaughter charges
without knowing what *really* happened is just another sick part of
this accident. If this had been a skiier, would you have the same
animosity? Only individual posters here know for sure.

That said, I hope that her family gets through this OK.



01 Mar 2005 13:36:41
JQ
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<dengel72@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1109701664.881083.33170@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Sorry, but while it IS his responsibility to avoid you, this sort of
> thing DOES happen and is unavoidable statiscally speaking. Before doing
> any kind of traversing turns, I always look uphill. Haven't you ever
> been walking down the sidewalk, and you and a person approaching have
> to do a little "dance" as you both try to decide where to go? His
> response of berating you was more wrong than hitting you, in my opinion
> - the later was an accident, but he had control of his mouth.
>
> The fact is, sometimes downhill people DO do things that are
> unpredictable for uphill skiiers and riders. These accidents happen all
> the time, on both sides. I have been hit (as a down hill person) by my
> own share of skiiers in my seven years on the hill. When I am, I just
> try to smile and dust us both off (when the skiier stops, that is) - it
> makes for a much more pleasant atmosphere. Stangely enough, I have
> never collided with a rider. This is why I tend to stay in the park
> exclusively.
>
> The thing that bothers me most about everyone's attitude is the whole
> "us vs. them" mentality that continues to be propagated towards riders.
> I am 32, and I doubt you will find a more courteous rider on the hill.
> The thought of people cheering the guy getting manslaughter charges
> without knowing what *really* happened is just another sick part of
> this accident. If this had been a skiier, would you have the same
> animosity? Only individual posters here know for sure.
>
> That said, I hope that her family gets through this OK.
>

Well said, I also hope the kid and his family heals from this dreadful
event.
Nobody is walking out without some life time scars.

JQ
Dancing on the edge




01 Mar 2005 11:05:01
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect
> someone who is moving or is hit by something moving at more
> than about 12 mph to 15 mph

Did the studies say "prevent" or "protect"? Subtle difference,
granted, but it can make a huge difference to the wearer. Saying a
helmet won't protect your head if you hit a tree going 20mph implies
that it won't make a positive difference at all. Granted, the
difference could be having an open or closed casket (as I used to say
to my motorcycle riding friends), but in my opinion, a helmet will
lessen the severity of head injuries in almost all collisions,
regardless of speed. Doesn't mean it will always prevent injury, but I
believe it's better than no protection at all. The amount of
protection provided by a helmet varies according to the circumstances
of the particular collision, but to say it provides no protection above
a certain speed is inaccurate and misleading. Would a helmet have
saved the woman at Jackson Hole? We'll never know, but you'll have a
hard time convincing me that wearing one would not have improved her
chances of surviving.

As an example, in my one significant collision with a tree, I'm
absolutely positive that wearing my helmet kept my head from getting
injured. I'm not sure how fast I was going as I was in the process of
sliding down a double-diamond chute at Taos, but without the helmet,
that glancing blow would have at least removed some hair or worse. As
it was, my head was fine and the helmet had a nice battle scar. Then
again, it didn't keep my rib from getting busted, so I guess I should
have added a flak jacket to go with it...



01 Mar 2005 14:13:14
JQ
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1109703901.774768.195070@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> > Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect
> > someone who is moving or is hit by something moving at more
> > than about 12 mph to 15 mph
>
> Did the studies say "prevent" or "protect"? Subtle difference,
> granted, but it can make a huge difference to the wearer. Saying a
> helmet won't protect your head if you hit a tree going 20mph implies
> that it won't make a positive difference at all. Granted, the
> difference could be having an open or closed casket (as I used to say
> to my motorcycle riding friends), but in my opinion, a helmet will
> lessen the severity of head injuries in almost all collisions,
> regardless of speed. Doesn't mean it will always prevent injury, but I
> believe it's better than no protection at all. The amount of
> protection provided by a helmet varies according to the circumstances
> of the particular collision, but to say it provides no protection above
> a certain speed is inaccurate and misleading. Would a helmet have
> saved the woman at Jackson Hole? We'll never know, but you'll have a
> hard time convincing me that wearing one would not have improved her
> chances of surviving.
>
> As an example, in my one significant collision with a tree, I'm
> absolutely positive that wearing my helmet kept my head from getting
> injured. I'm not sure how fast I was going as I was in the process of
> sliding down a double-diamond chute at Taos, but without the helmet,
> that glancing blow would have at least removed some hair or worse. As
> it was, my head was fine and the helmet had a nice battle scar. Then
> again, it didn't keep my rib from getting busted, so I guess I should
> have added a flak jacket to go with it...
>
Watch it Texas, you are treading on shallow water. There are a few people
here that believe helmets are just a fashion statement and adds very little
to safety or prevention. A matter of fact they believe helmets gives the
wearer a false sense of security causing the wearer to be more dangerous
than those skiing with out helmets.

JQ
Dancing on the edge




01 Mar 2005 13:50:37
Marty
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109698166.565953.126000@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Witnesses say the 16 yr snowboarder descended the intermediate slope at
> an extremely high rate of speed. He hit the 28 yr female who was
> skiing slowly infront of him. Witnesses also say the boarder did did
> not alter his direction to avoid Donahue, even though there was ample
> room to do so.

Was he capable of altering his direction? Does he have the skills? My
guess would be no. I see this all the time and it's not just boarders.
Skiers and boarders who can do nothing more than go straight until the hill
runs out. They are the most dangerous things at any ski resort. When I see
it, I appraoch the person and kindly ask them to keep their speed down and I
explain to them what can heppen if they were to hit somebody going that
fast. The ski patrol and any worker at the hill will place a punch hole in
the ticket if they see this type of reckless behaviour. If the person is
stopped and they already have a punch hole, they lose their ticket and they
are done for the day.

Also, it's very important for skiers and boarders to be aware of what is
happening above them. We need to be looking for the out of control skiers
and boarders and try to avoid them. Of course this is not always possible,
but it helps.

And, this happens at all levels of skiing and boarding. As much fun as
these sports are, they are dangerous.

My heart and prayers go out to both families. I'm sure this kid did not
mean to take a life. Now he has to live with what he did and her family has
to live without her. It's very sad.
--
Marty




01 Mar 2005 12:47:50
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

JQ wrote:
> "TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> > > Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect
> > > someone who is moving or is hit by something moving at more
> > > than about 12 mph to 15 mph
> >
> > Did the studies say "prevent" or "protect"? Subtle difference,
> > granted, but it can make a huge difference to the wearer. Saying a
> > helmet won't protect your head if you hit a tree going 20mph
implies
> > that it won't make a positive difference at all. Granted, the
> > difference could be having an open or closed casket (as I used to
say
> > to my motorcycle riding friends), but in my opinion, a helmet will
> > lessen the severity of head injuries in almost all collisions,
> > regardless of speed. Doesn't mean it will always prevent injury,
but I
> > believe it's better than no protection at all. The amount of
> > protection provided by a helmet varies according to the
circumstances
> > of the particular collision, but to say it provides no protection
above
> > a certain speed is inaccurate and misleading. Would a helmet have
> > saved the woman at Jackson Hole? We'll never know, but you'll have
a
> > hard time convincing me that wearing one would not have improved
her
> > chances of surviving.
> >
> > As an example, in my one significant collision with a tree, I'm
> > absolutely positive that wearing my helmet kept my head from
getting
> > injured. I'm not sure how fast I was going as I was in the process
of
> > sliding down a double-diamond chute at Taos, but without the
helmet,
> > that glancing blow would have at least removed some hair or worse.
As
> > it was, my head was fine and the helmet had a nice battle scar.
Then
> > again, it didn't keep my rib from getting busted, so I guess I
should
> > have added a flak jacket to go with it...
> >
> Watch it Texas, you are treading on shallow water. There are a few
> people here that believe helmets are just a fashion statement and
adds
> very little to safety or prevention. A matter of fact they believe
> helmets gives the wearer a false sense of security causing the wearer
> to be more dangerous than those skiing with out helmets.

That's definitely one of the drawbacks for certain people with regards
to helmets. However, that has to do with the attitude of the wearer as
opposed to being the fault of the helmet. After all, the helmet
doesn't think for you either. Personally, I'm no more wild with a
helmet than I was without one. I have never stood at the top of a run
and thought, "Gee, I can ski this run cuz my helmet will keep me from
getting hurt". I have, however, finished runs grateful to have been
wearing my helmet. It's up to the individual to assess their actions
and determine appropriate safeguards. My opinion remains that a helmet
can help protect your head, but it will never be a guarantee against
injury. As far as fashion statements go, you obviously haven't talked
to my wife regarding my helmet. It's an old white Jofa with ventilated
tape over the earholes to cut down on wind noise. It looks like I'm
wearing a giant ping pong ball. When I first saw myself in a mirror
wearing it, I was reminded of the movie SpaceBalls, if that gives you a
visual image. However, it keeps my head warm, interfaces well with my
goggles, still allows me to hear sufficiently, doesn't interfere with
my vision, and has proved useful on more than one occasion. YMMV.



01 Mar 2005 13:21:23
foot2foot
Re: Death by Snowboarder

My thoughts on the matter exactly. *If* the facts are strictly
as described, once again a conclusion that needs much more
careful analysis than second hand knowledge, it is quite possible
that the boy got going very fast and wasn't able to regain control,
but was in the process of trying to, or perhaps couldn't see the
skier who might have been on his heel side. Or perhaps he got
"caught" on his heel side and shot sideways.

I really doubt he plowed into her just to have a thrill.
And then "just walked away without injury" probably
laughing at it all.

The fact that the witness accounts as quoted tend to give
this impression makes me wonder.

Something went wrong somewhere, which raises some
question about the quoted accounts, assuming they are
correctly quoted.

It sounds to me like people might be tending to embellish.
"He had time/room to avoid her" is really a rather unusual
statement. Also a bigtime conclusion. Surely if he was able
to avoid her and saw her, he would have.


"Marty" <mpiet@charter.net > wrote in message

>> Witnesses say the 16 yr snowboarder descended the intermediate slope at
>> an extremely high rate of speed. He hit the 28 yr female who was
>> skiing slowly infront of him. Witnesses also say the boarder did did
>> not alter his direction to avoid Donahue, even though there was ample
>> room to do so.
>
> Was he capable of altering his direction? Does he have the skills? My
> guess would be no. I see this all the time and it's not just boarders.
> Skiers and boarders who can do nothing more than go straight until the
> hill
> runs out. They are the most dangerous things at any ski resort. When I
> see
> it, I appraoch the person and kindly ask them to keep their speed down and
> I
> explain to them what can heppen if they were to hit somebody going that
> fast. The ski patrol and any worker at the hill will place a punch hole
> in
> the ticket if they see this type of reckless behaviour. If the person is
> stopped and they already have a punch hole, they lose their ticket and
> they
> are done for the day.
>
> Also, it's very important for skiers and boarders to be aware of what is
> happening above them. We need to be looking for the out of control skiers
> and boarders and try to avoid them. Of course this is not always
> possible,
> but it helps.
>
> And, this happens at all levels of skiing and boarding. As much fun as
> these sports are, they are dangerous.
>
> My heart and prayers go out to both families. I'm sure this kid did not
> mean to take a life. Now he has to live with what he did and her family
> has
> to live without her. It's very sad.
> --
> Marty
>
>




01 Mar 2005 13:32:29
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

foot2foot wrote:
> My thoughts on the matter exactly. *If* the facts are strictly
> as described, once again a conclusion that needs much more
> careful analysis than second hand knowledge, it is quite possible
> that the boy got going very fast and wasn't able to regain control,
> but was in the process of trying to, or perhaps couldn't see the
> skier who might have been on his heel side. Or perhaps he got
> "caught" on his heel side and shot sideways.
>
> I really doubt he plowed into her just to have a thrill.
> And then "just walked away without injury" probably
> laughing at it all.
>
> The fact that the witness accounts as quoted tend to give
> this impression makes me wonder.
>
> Something went wrong somewhere, which raises some
> question about the quoted accounts, assuming they are
> correctly quoted.
>
> It sounds to me like people might be tending to embellish.
> "He had time/room to avoid her" is really a rather unusual
> statement. Also a bigtime conclusion. Surely if he was able
> to avoid her and saw her, he would have.
>
> "Marty" <mpiet@charter.net> wrote in message
> >> Witnesses say the 16 yr snowboarder descended the intermediate
slope at
> >> an extremely high rate of speed. He hit the 28 yr female who was
> >> skiing slowly infront of him. Witnesses also say the boarder did
did
> >> not alter his direction to avoid Donahue, even though there was
ample
> >> room to do so.
> >
> > Was he capable of altering his direction? Does he have the skills?
My
> > guess would be no. I see this all the time and it's not just
boarders.
> > Skiers and boarders who can do nothing more than go straight until
the
> > hill
> > runs out. They are the most dangerous things at any ski resort.
When I
> > see
> > it, I appraoch the person and kindly ask them to keep their speed
down and
> > I
> > explain to them what can heppen if they were to hit somebody going
that
> > fast. The ski patrol and any worker at the hill will place a punch
hole
> > in
> > the ticket if they see this type of reckless behaviour. If the
person is
> > stopped and they already have a punch hole, they lose their ticket
and
> > they
> > are done for the day.
> >
> > Also, it's very important for skiers and boarders to be aware of
what is
> > happening above them. We need to be looking for the out of control
skiers
> > and boarders and try to avoid them. Of course this is not always
> > possible,
> > but it helps.
> >
> > And, this happens at all levels of skiing and boarding. As much
fun as
> > these sports are, they are dangerous.
> >
> > My heart and prayers go out to both families. I'm sure this kid
did not
> > mean to take a life. Now he has to live with what he did and her
family
> > has
> > to live without her. It's very sad.
> > --
> > Marty

Most reports I've read said he walked out of the clinic, not walked
away from the crash site. I've witnessed collisions and
near-collisions where it appeared to me that the skier from above made
no effort to avoid the person below them. I have no logical
explanation as to why they would do what they did. Besides, can
anybody say for sure what goes through the minds of 16 year old boys
these days?



01 Mar 2005 13:53:40
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

dengel72@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> If this had been a skiier, would you have the same
> animosity? Only individual posters here know for sure.

I despise boarding (note the gerund form; implies not necessarily I
despise any particular boarders) but for other reasons. I think boarding
has had catastrophic effects on snow conditions. I imagine some of you
can't remember what the snow was like BB (before boarding) but there is
a world of difference, all for the worst.

But you can expand your observation - it HAS been a skier, in the recent
past right here where I ski - guy on skis collided with young girl and
killed her, on a blue slope. Accidents happen, situations occur. And the
uproar was more of a mummer.

Everyone needs to be careful, and slow down in congested areas (better,
get the hell off the piste and out in the cliffs where you'll be safer.)

Let me point out that this instance AND the instance we had a couple of
years ago had two things in common - our girl was stopped, the Jackson
woman was reportedly going very slowly - and neither was paying any
attention to what was going on above them. Folks, in the interests of
your own wellbeing, when you stop, stop with your attention uphill -
protect yourself.

>
> That said, I hope that her family gets through this OK.

And his; even if he's found not guilty, can you imagine going through
life knowing you kill someone? This kid goes from great innocent fun to
a lifetime as a man-killer, through a moment of inattention. Any time
anything like this happens its tragic for all sides.


01 Mar 2005 13:36:40
Re: Death by Snowboarder

I agree with you. I should have mentioned that I wear a helmet when I
posted that. It certainly can't hurt and as you said it has to be
better than no protection at all. Why take the chance.

As for your flak jacket, competitive horseback riders, in addition to
protective helmets, sometimes wear 'protective vests' made of
high-density foam engineered to maintain the highest level of impact
and shock absorption. Before you laugh... horseback riding carries a
much higher injury rate than motorcycle riding. On average,
motorcyclists suffer an injury once every 7000 hours of riding. By
contrast, an equestrian may have a serious accident once every 350
hours. I don't know of any comparable ratios for skiers or boarders.



01 Mar 2005 13:57:58
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
> is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
> mph

Absolutely - I suggest you not wear a worthless helmet. It's all a bunch
of nonsense. I like the way you think.


01 Mar 2005 13:47:15
Re: Death by Snowboarder

The article said:

A helmet will not protect someone who is moving more than about 12 mph
to 15 mph, Shealy said. Those most at risk of death are
better-than-average adult males who are usually traveling at somewhere
between 25 mph to 40 mph. And despite the high-profile deaths of Sonny
Bono and Michael Kennedy and the resulting publicity, there has been
"no statistically significant difference" in the rate of fatalities in
recent years, Shealy said. At 0.5 to one death per million skier
visits, people are two to four times more likely to die in an
automobile or on an airplane, he said.

Helmet Use: No Safety Panacea
Helmets have become a hot-button issue in the ski industry with the
introduction in the New Jersey legislature of a bill that would make
helmets mandatory for children 14 and under, and would require ski
areas to provide those helmets. Shealy said they have been accused of
being anti-helmet, but that isn't the case.

Shealy did point out some of the fallacies about helmets, though. The
number of head injuries is relatively small--about 3,600 nationally a
year--and most of those are mild concussions, Shealy said. Of the 33 or
39 deaths last year (depending on how you count), six were wearing
helmets.

Ettlinger, president of Vermont Safety Research and adjunct professor
at the University of Vermont Medical College, noted that this is partly
a behavior issue, and compared it to driving a car with anti-lock
brakes or a hockey player wearing heavy padding. In both cases, more
injuries have resulted from people feeling they are indestructible.

"A helmet is not a panacea; it's not a magic bullet," he said. Wearing
a helmet, like the hockey player's padding and the anti-lock brakes,
can lead to "the law of unintended consequences." One needs to ask the
question: "Would I be doing this if I weren't wearing a helmet?" Shealy
pointed out.
*************************************************************************************************************
As far as the feeling indesrtuctable part, I think you hit the nail on
the head when you said, "that has more to do with the attitude of the
wearer as opposed to being the fault of the helmet."



01 Mar 2005 16:52:37
JQ
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109713000.874400.24890@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I agree with you. I should have mentioned that I wear a helmet when I
> posted that. It certainly can't hurt and as you said it has to be
> better than no protection at all. Why take the chance.
>
> As for your flak jacket, competitive horseback riders, in addition to
> protective helmets, sometimes wear 'protective vests' made of
> high-density foam engineered to maintain the highest level of impact
> and shock absorption. Before you laugh... horseback riding carries a
> much higher injury rate than motorcycle riding. On average,
> motorcyclists suffer an injury once every 7000 hours of riding. By
> contrast, an equestrian may have a serious accident once every 350
> hours. I don't know of any comparable ratios for skiers or boarders.
>

Why is the injury rate so high? Is the rider getting thrown off the horse
that frequently?

JQ
Dancing on the edge




01 Mar 2005 14:33:44
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

TexasSkiNut wrote:
> I've witnessed collisions and
> near-collisions where it appeared to me that the skier from above made
> no effort to avoid the person below them. I have no logical
> explanation as to why they would do what they did.

When you focus intensely on your activity you get tunnel vision -
complete loss of peripheral awareness. It's a real effect, not just an
excuse.


01 Mar 2005 14:17:51
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> The article said:
>
> A helmet will not protect someone who is moving more than about 12
mph
> to 15 mph, Shealy said. Those most at risk of death are
> better-than-average adult males who are usually traveling at
somewhere
> between 25 mph to 40 mph. And despite the high-profile deaths of
Sonny
> Bono and Michael Kennedy and the resulting publicity, there has been
> "no statistically significant difference" in the rate of fatalities
in
> recent years, Shealy said. At 0.5 to one death per million skier
> visits, people are two to four times more likely to die in an
> automobile or on an airplane, he said.
>
> Helmet Use: No Safety Panacea
> Helmets have become a hot-button issue in the ski industry with the
> introduction in the New Jersey legislature of a bill that would make
> helmets mandatory for children 14 and under, and would require ski
> areas to provide those helmets. Shealy said they have been accused of
> being anti-helmet, but that isn't the case.
>
> Shealy did point out some of the fallacies about helmets, though. The
> number of head injuries is relatively small--about 3,600 nationally a
> year--and most of those are mild concussions, Shealy said. Of the 33
or
> 39 deaths last year (depending on how you count), six were wearing
> helmets.
>
> Ettlinger, president of Vermont Safety Research and adjunct professor
> at the University of Vermont Medical College, noted that this is
partly
> a behavior issue, and compared it to driving a car with anti-lock
> brakes or a hockey player wearing heavy padding. In both cases, more
> injuries have resulted from people feeling they are indestructible.
>
> "A helmet is not a panacea; it's not a magic bullet," he said.
Wearing
> a helmet, like the hockey player's padding and the anti-lock brakes,
> can lead to "the law of unintended consequences." One needs to ask
the
> question: "Would I be doing this if I weren't wearing a helmet?"
Shealy
> pointed out.
>
*************************************************************************************************************
> As far as the feeling indesrtuctable part, I think you hit the nail
on
> the head when you said, "that has more to do with the attitude of the
> wearer as opposed to being the fault of the helmet."

I've also read articles on studies that have said helmets have reduced
rates of brain injuries significantly. Unfortunately, I can't remember
where they were and am too lazy to research and find them. As best I
recall, they were done by neurosurgeons and ER specialists in Colorado.
Of course, for every study out there, you can find another one that
says the opposite. I doubt there is a definitive answer.



01 Mar 2005 14:49:22
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

TexasSkiNut wrote:
[snip]
> I've also read articles on studies that have said helmets have
reduced
> rates of brain injuries significantly. Unfortunately, I can't
remember
> where they were and am too lazy to research and find them. As best I
> recall, they were done by neurosurgeons and ER specialists in
Colorado.
> Of course, for every study out there, you can find another one that
> says the opposite. I doubt there is a definitive answer.

Found one of them: http://tinyurl.com/6f99c

This one gives some usage statistics, but no specific opinion as to
helmets' usefulness at injury protection:
<http://www.merginet.com/clinical/trauma/SkiHelmetUse.cfmcolor=#0000FF> >

This one's from 2001:
<
http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/pmr/skihelm.cfmcolor=#0000FF> >



01 Mar 2005 17:12:06
vern93
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <L8SdnXP1DLWBebnfRVn-qw@comcast.com >, "JQ" <jq@wadenet.com>
wrote:

>
> <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1109713000.874400.24890@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > I agree with you. I should have mentioned that I wear a helmet when I
> > posted that. It certainly can't hurt and as you said it has to be
> > better than no protection at all. Why take the chance.
> >
> > As for your flak jacket, competitive horseback riders, in addition to
> > protective helmets, sometimes wear 'protective vests' made of
> > high-density foam engineered to maintain the highest level of impact
> > and shock absorption. Before you laugh... horseback riding carries a
> > much higher injury rate than motorcycle riding. On average,
> > motorcyclists suffer an injury once every 7000 hours of riding. By
> > contrast, an equestrian may have a serious accident once every 350
> > hours. I don't know of any comparable ratios for skiers or boarders.
> >
>
> Why is the injury rate so high? Is the rider getting thrown off the horse
> that frequently?

Hi JQ,

I live in horse country and take care of a lot of horse related
injuries. Like anything else, the injury rate is multifactorial. I'll
give you my opinion based on my experience.

Horses are one of the few modes of transportation that can disagree with
your opinion on what to do next. Cars, trains, airplanes, and
motorcycles will stupidly do what you tell them. Horses may decide to
go when you say stop, or turn right when you say left. They might
decide to go straight down a hill instead of following a path.

Horses are also one of the few modes of tranportation that can hurt you
when you're not riding them. If you're in you garage, next to your
motorcycle, you can lean against, sip in a beer and not think twice. A
horse may decide to step on your foot or kick you.

Horses also didn't evolve to fit into our modern world. Pavement is a
substance they aren't made to walk on, anymore than we are made to walk
on ice. And cars coming down the road frequently appear to them as fire
breathing dragons intent on killing them. A horse might decide the
first 999 cars are fine, but that beige Volvo is deadly.

Like many of our transportation, horses easily operate at speeds and
levels of difficulty far beyond what a rider can safely control. They
bounce and buck and are hard for the novice to safely slow down and stop.

Horses also place the rider much higher than on a motorcycle, so that
even if riders fell off both conveyances at exactly the same rate - the
horseback riders would have a far higher injury rate.

Horses look like big, safe, dopey animals. We grew up watching cowboys
ride them easily and a good trail horse can ride all day with no input
from the rider. They engender a false sense of security. So much so
that otherwise sensible people will not think twice about having never
ridden before but putting a child on with them, and riding "two up."

I think back to the severe and fatal injuries I have seen. Not a one
was "freak accident." I remember a 60ish lady riding a well manner
quarter horse in a parade. The Shriners (or whoever was riding the
silly little minibikes) started weaving in and out of the horses, having
a grand time spooking them, until one reared high, and this sweet little
lady slid off backwards and suffered a fatal head injury when her head
impacted the pavement. Just two weeks ago, I saw a gentleman whose
right foot was ripped off by a horse kick right at his ankle.

Anyway... horses are dangerous, mmmkay.

Dave


01 Mar 2005 18:29:56
JQ
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"vern93" <vern93@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:vern93-8F380A.17120601032005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <L8SdnXP1DLWBebnfRVn-qw@comcast.com>, "JQ" <jq@wadenet.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:1109713000.874400.24890@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > > I agree with you. I should have mentioned that I wear a helmet when I
> > > posted that. It certainly can't hurt and as you said it has to be
> > > better than no protection at all. Why take the chance.
> > >
> > > As for your flak jacket, competitive horseback riders, in addition to
> > > protective helmets, sometimes wear 'protective vests' made of
> > > high-density foam engineered to maintain the highest level of impact
> > > and shock absorption. Before you laugh... horseback riding carries a
> > > much higher injury rate than motorcycle riding. On average,
> > > motorcyclists suffer an injury once every 7000 hours of riding. By
> > > contrast, an equestrian may have a serious accident once every 350
> > > hours. I don't know of any comparable ratios for skiers or boarders.
> > >
> >
> > Why is the injury rate so high? Is the rider getting thrown off the
horse
> > that frequently?
>
> Hi JQ,
>
> I live in horse country and take care of a lot of horse related
> injuries. Like anything else, the injury rate is multifactorial. I'll
> give you my opinion based on my experience.
>
> Horses are one of the few modes of transportation that can disagree with
> your opinion on what to do next. Cars, trains, airplanes, and
> motorcycles will stupidly do what you tell them. Horses may decide to
> go when you say stop, or turn right when you say left. They might
> decide to go straight down a hill instead of following a path.
>
> Horses are also one of the few modes of tranportation that can hurt you
> when you're not riding them. If you're in you garage, next to your
> motorcycle, you can lean against, sip in a beer and not think twice. A
> horse may decide to step on your foot or kick you.
>
> Horses also didn't evolve to fit into our modern world. Pavement is a
> substance they aren't made to walk on, anymore than we are made to walk
> on ice. And cars coming down the road frequently appear to them as fire
> breathing dragons intent on killing them. A horse might decide the
> first 999 cars are fine, but that beige Volvo is deadly.
>
> Like many of our transportation, horses easily operate at speeds and
> levels of difficulty far beyond what a rider can safely control. They
> bounce and buck and are hard for the novice to safely slow down and stop.
>
> Horses also place the rider much higher than on a motorcycle, so that
> even if riders fell off both conveyances at exactly the same rate - the
> horseback riders would have a far higher injury rate.
>
> Horses look like big, safe, dopey animals. We grew up watching cowboys
> ride them easily and a good trail horse can ride all day with no input
> from the rider. They engender a false sense of security. So much so
> that otherwise sensible people will not think twice about having never
> ridden before but putting a child on with them, and riding "two up."
>
> I think back to the severe and fatal injuries I have seen. Not a one
> was "freak accident." I remember a 60ish lady riding a well manner
> quarter horse in a parade. The Shriners (or whoever was riding the
> silly little minibikes) started weaving in and out of the horses, having
> a grand time spooking them, until one reared high, and this sweet little
> lady slid off backwards and suffered a fatal head injury when her head
> impacted the pavement. Just two weeks ago, I saw a gentleman whose
> right foot was ripped off by a horse kick right at his ankle.
>
> Anyway... horses are dangerous, mmmkay.
>
> Dave

I had friends that had horses and wanted me to ride them I would always
decline the offer. I never felt right to about the idea of riding them. If
a horse wanted me to ride them they'd ask me too, I knew that was never
going to happen. I don't hold nothing against those that do ride them it's
just not for me.

I do see your point a fall off of something sitting between 5 & 6 feet is
gonna hurt and if the fall is on your head it will not be a laughing matter.
I remember once almost being kicked by a horse, standing to close and to the
rear. I was told never to stand behind them always to the side. I never
thought about how dangerous it could be riding horses but when you think
about it...

JQ
Dancing on the edge




01 Mar 2005 23:42:38
Jeff Davis
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <38k5j8F5qi7bcU1@individual.net >,
lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com > wrote:
>has had catastrophic effects on snow conditions. I imagine some of you
>can't remember what the snow was like BB (before boarding) but there is
>a world of difference, all for the worst.

Hey. I skied Alta in December and January. I can remember. Just 'cause
sometimes I put both contacts in the same eye doesn't mean I have
Altzheimer's... And I'm heading back to Alta the 17th after I do spring
break in Daytona Beach. Jeez...
--
According to John Perry Barlow, "Jeff Davis is a truly gifted trouble-maker."




01 Mar 2005 23:44:55
Jeff Davis
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <38k5raF5puiakU1@individual.net >,
lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com > wrote:
>LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
>> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
>> is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
>> mph
>
>Absolutely - I suggest you not wear a worthless helmet. It's all a bunch
>of nonsense. I like the way you think.

Yeah. I'll remember that next time I'm skiing trees. Gotta think there!
--
According to John Perry Barlow, "Jeff Davis is a truly gifted trouble-maker."



01 Mar 2005 19:13:52
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Marty wrote:

> <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1109698166.565953.126000@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Witnesses say the 16 yr snowboarder descended the intermediate slope at
>>an extremely high rate of speed. He hit the 28 yr female who was
>>skiing slowly infront of him. Witnesses also say the boarder did did
>>not alter his direction to avoid Donahue, even though there was ample
>>room to do so.
>
>
> Was he capable of altering his direction? Does he have the skills? My
> guess would be no.

Unknown at this point. Clearly he _should_ have had the skills, but it
seems far-fetched that anyone would risk the consequences of a collision
like that if they could avoid it...so it seems unlikely that he
deliberately rammed her.

There's an article on this in today's Boston Globe, at
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/03/01/mass_woman_killed_in_wyoming/
that offers a few details beyond what's been posted here.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



01 Mar 2005 19:16:42
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:

> TexasSkiNut wrote:
>
>> I've witnessed collisions and
>> near-collisions where it appeared to me that the skier from above made
>> no effort to avoid the person below them. I have no logical
>> explanation as to why they would do what they did.
>
>
> When you focus intensely on your activity you get tunnel vision -
> complete loss of peripheral awareness. It's a real effect, not just an
> excuse.

The tunnel's more like a cone IME; many people seem to be unable to see
small children who are right in front of them.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



01 Mar 2005 20:12:38
bdubya
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On 1 Mar 2005 10:27:44 -0800, dengel72@gmail.com wrote:
>The thing that bothers me most about everyone's attitude is the whole
>"us vs. them" mentality that continues to be propagated towards riders.
>I am 32, and I doubt you will find a more courteous rider on the hill.
>The thought of people cheering the guy getting manslaughter charges
>without knowing what *really* happened is just another sick part of
>this accident. If this had been a skiier, would you have the same
>animosity? Only individual posters here know for sure.
>

Actually, in the cases of two skiers back around '99-'00 who were
skiing out of control and killed a couple of boarders (one incident
with a liftie at Vail, one with a freestyle-team member at Breck,
IIRC) there was quite a bit of animosity. Tough to judge if it was
"the same", but there wasn't much forgiveness flowing then, either.
Rightly so, IMHO.

bw


02 Mar 2005 13:42:32
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Jeff Davis" <eagle@armory.com > wrote in message
news:4224fe77$0$46582$c0de3616@dsl.net...
> In article <38k5raF5puiakU1@individual.net>,
> lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
>>> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
>>> is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
>>> mph
>>
>>Absolutely - I suggest you not wear a worthless helmet. It's all a bunch
>>of nonsense. I like the way you think.
>
> Yeah. I'll remember that next time I'm skiing trees. Gotta think there!

I'm not into helmets at all. I had a total of 9 horses when I was young, and
only wore a riding hat for events, where they were compulsory. However, the
tree thing is making me wonder if a helmet might make me a bit braver
especially in the tight ones with hard trunks. I'm pretty sure I ski below
15 mph and the trees do too.

ant




01 Mar 2005 20:51:45
bdubya
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:42:32 +1100, "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com >
wrote:

>
>"Jeff Davis" <eagle@armory.com> wrote in message
>news:4224fe77$0$46582$c0de3616@dsl.net...
>> In article <38k5raF5puiakU1@individual.net>,
>> lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
>>>> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
>>>> is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
>>>> mph
>>>
>>>Absolutely - I suggest you not wear a worthless helmet. It's all a bunch
>>>of nonsense. I like the way you think.
>>
>> Yeah. I'll remember that next time I'm skiing trees. Gotta think there!
>
>I'm not into helmets at all. I had a total of 9 horses when I was young, and
>only wore a riding hat for events, where they were compulsory. However, the
>tree thing is making me wonder if a helmet might make me a bit braver
>especially in the tight ones with hard trunks.

If you're looking to a helmet for courage (as opposed to protection),
then you're probably better off sticking with a hat.

bw


01 Mar 2005 22:14:52
Marty
Re: Death by Snowboarder

"vern93" <vern93@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:vern93-8F380A.17120601032005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...

snip...

> Horses look like big, safe, dopey animals. We grew up watching cowboys
> ride them easily and a good trail horse can ride all day with no input
> from the rider. They engender a false sense of security. So much so
> that otherwise sensible people will not think twice about having never
> ridden before but putting a child on with them, and riding "two up."

I learned this the hard way in December with my 9 year old daughter. She
was at her horse riding lesson, on one of the horses. The horse got spooked
by a cat (we think) and started to buck. My daughter just about had the
horse under control when a mom came running out at the horse from behind to
"help", that got the horse really spooked and it broke right, my daughter
fell to the left, her left foot got stuck in the stirrup as the horse took
off. My daughter was dragged until the horse finally stepped on her arm pit
area. She was released at that point, but the flesh from the front of her
shoulder to under her arm was ripped open like a flimsy piece of cloth. I
could see everything inside her arm pit area - it was horrible to see your
baby hurt like that. It looked like her arm was just hanging on by threads
(muscle), but looks are very deceiving, especially to people who are not
used to seeing this kind of injury. I kept thinking thank God it wasn't her
face, or chest, or neck. I have much more respect for horses now than I
ever have. My daughter was back on skis within 5 weeks (children heal
really well). She has not been back on a horse, but she wants to get back
on. I want to see her back on, but maybe in a flack suit.

> I think back to the severe and fatal injuries I have seen. Not a one
> was "freak accident." I remember a 60ish lady riding a well manner
> quarter horse in a parade. The Shriners (or whoever was riding the
> silly little minibikes) started weaving in and out of the horses, having
> a grand time spooking them, until one reared high, and this sweet little
> lady slid off backwards and suffered a fatal head injury when her head
> impacted the pavement.

Yup. People do stupid stuff and cause other people to get hurt and die.
Sucks.
--
Marty




01 Mar 2005 22:35:05
vern93
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <ifbVd.368$k52.361@fe03.lga >, "Marty" <mpiet@charter.net>
wrote:

> I kept thinking thank God it wasn't her
> face, or chest, or neck. I have much more respect for horses now than I
> ever have. My daughter was back on skis within 5 weeks (children heal
> really well). She has not been back on a horse, but she wants to get back
> on. I want to see her back on, but maybe in a flack suit.

I am very glad your daughter is okay. I can't imagine how horrible that
was for you.

Yeah, that's something else about horses - the saddle horns, and
stirrups and reins to get tangled in, even if it doesn't stomp you when
you fall off.

Dave (not anti-horse - just anti-mangling)


01 Mar 2005 23:08:06
J. Urrrk
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"bdubya" <bdubya@interaccess.com > wrote in message
news:cdaa21dgpe1brkd84eeastd8q5iep849un@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:42:32 +1100, "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Jeff Davis" <eagle@armory.com> wrote in message
> >news:4224fe77$0$46582$c0de3616@dsl.net...
> >> In article <38k5raF5puiakU1@individual.net>,
> >> lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> >>>> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect
someone who
> >>>> is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12
mph to 15
> >>>> mph
> >>>
> >>>Absolutely - I suggest you not wear a worthless helmet. It's all
a bunch
> >>>of nonsense. I like the way you think.
> >>
> >> Yeah. I'll remember that next time I'm skiing trees. Gotta
think there!
> >
> >I'm not into helmets at all. I had a total of 9 horses when I was
young, and
> >only wore a riding hat for events, where they were compulsory.
However, the
> >tree thing is making me wonder if a helmet might make me a bit
braver
> >especially in the tight ones with hard trunks.
>
> If you're looking to a helmet for courage (as opposed to
protection),
> then you're probably better off sticking with a hat.
>
Do what I always do--Strap it to your crotch. That way your balls
won't be damaged when you whack a tree trunk at 40 MPH.

-J. Urrrk, Safety first.




02 Mar 2005 07:51:18
Tero Ahlqvist
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1109712749.734959.297230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> I've witnessed collisions and
> near-collisions where it appeared to me that the skier from above made
> no effort to avoid the person below them. I have no logical
> explanation as to why they would do what they did. Besides, can
> anybody say for sure what goes through the minds of 16 year old boys
> these days?

Having been motorcycle instructor for fifteen years now, I know, that
you go/steer where you looking. If your vision gets fixed to an
obstacle you're most likely to hit it.

If the boarder was trying to guess where the slow skier was moving,
he was probably staring the skier instead of trying to look his
way around her.

You probably know the example or a jeep crashing the only palm
tree in a desert. It works like a magnet.

Just a guess from another area of obstacle avoidance techniques.

-Tero-



02 Mar 2005 02:31:53
foot2foot
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Tero Ahlqvist" <tero.ahlqvist@eiroskaa.nokia.com.invalid > wrote in message

> Having been motorcycle instructor for fifteen years now, I know, that
> you go/steer where you looking. If your vision gets fixed to an
> obstacle you're most likely to hit it.
>
> If the boarder was trying to guess where the slow skier was moving,
> he was probably staring the skier instead of trying to look his
> way around her.
>
> You probably know the example or a jeep crashing the only palm
> tree in a desert. It works like a magnet.
>
> Just a guess from another area of obstacle avoidance techniques.
>

Personally, I really appreciate your input on the subject. Thanks.




02 Mar 2005 07:24:58
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Tero Ahlqvist wrote:
> "TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1109712749.734959.297230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
>> I've witnessed collisions and
>>near-collisions where it appeared to me that the skier from above made
>>no effort to avoid the person below them. I have no logical
>>explanation as to why they would do what they did. Besides, can
>>anybody say for sure what goes through the minds of 16 year old boys
>>these days?
>
> Having been motorcycle instructor for fifteen years now, I know, that
> you go/steer where you looking. If your vision gets fixed to an
> obstacle you're most likely to hit it.

Yeah, I saw a horrifying film from Loudon of a track worker who got
nailed dead on by a racer who clearly saw him, tunneled on him, and
nailed him dead-on. Remarkably, both survived, but are still
considerably worse for the wear.

> If the boarder was trying to guess where the slow skier was moving,
> he was probably staring the skier instead of trying to look his
> way around her.

"Left or right, left or right, left or right..." I've done the same
thing with rocks while kayaking. It is a rookie mistake, a survivable
one when you're hitting a rock and not a person and you're inside a
sturdy plastic boat, but you either learn as a rookie how not to do
this, or you get out of the sport.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



02 Mar 2005 04:54:35
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Probably. Thoroughbreds are very a very hot breed and probably the
most popular for 3 Day Eventing and Fox Hunting. The hotter the breed,
the less predictable the behavior of your horse -- unlike a motorbike
which is a machine that you control. Jumping during the cross country
portion of eventing and jumping while fox hunting is seems to be where
most people get seriously hurt because your horse can be traveling up
to 30 mph while jumping 2-4 foot fences along the way.



02 Mar 2005 05:11:02
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Something like this happened to my older sister. It's very frightening
but, unfortunately, accidents like that are not uncommon. I hope your
daughter is ok. Poor thing!

When I was a kid a little girl I knew was galloping her pony in a field
when the pony tripped. The girl lost her balance and fell headfirst
over the pony's shoulder. The pony stepped on her head while still
galloping. The girl lived only because she had on her helmet but she
had was rushed by ambulance to the hospital and had to have a metal
plate put in her head where her skull was smashed. After she recovered
we used to joke that when she walked into the kitchen all of the
refrigerator magnets probably flew off the fridge and onto her head.
She never rode again.



02 Mar 2005 07:31:54
vern93
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <1109768075.614818.204870@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com >,
LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:

> Probably. Thoroughbreds are very a very hot breed and probably the
> most popular for 3 Day Eventing and Fox Hunting. The hotter the breed,
> the less predictable the behavior of your horse -- unlike a motorbike
> which is a machine that you control. Jumping during the cross country
> portion of eventing and jumping while fox hunting is seems to be where
> most people get seriously hurt because your horse can be traveling up
> to 30 mph while jumping 2-4 foot fences along the way.

Hi LeeAnne!

You maek an excellent point. It is a little hard to follow though.
Typically, the convention here is to quote the salient part of the post
you're replying to and then place your response below it. That way,
people who are reading this in different newsreader programs can follow
which point you are responding to.

I'm not sure about AOL, but simply highlighting the text you're rplying
to before hitting "reply" is sufficent to create a response that looks
like this.

****
yesterday a typical usenet poster wrote:
> Anybody who doesn't like vanilla icecream is a nazi and hates america

People who like vanilla icecreaam symbolise everyhting wrong with this
country
****

Hope this helps, and try not to take it too personally if some people
get impatient with you until you perfect your posting etiquitte.

Dave


02 Mar 2005 09:26:28
Walt
Re: Death by Snowboarder

bdubya wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:42:32 +1100, "ant" wrote:

>>... the
>>tree thing is making me wonder if a helmet might make me a bit braver
>>especially in the tight ones with hard trunks.
>
> If you're looking to a helmet for courage (as opposed to protection),
> then you're probably better off sticking with a hat.

C'mon bw. We all know that courage comes in a bottle, not in a hat.


--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy


02 Mar 2005 07:43:49
Bob Lee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Walt wrote:

> bdubya wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:42:32 +1100, "ant" wrote:
>
> >>... the
> >>tree thing is making me wonder if a helmet might make me a bit braver
> >>especially in the tight ones with hard trunks.
> >
> > If you're looking to a helmet for courage (as opposed to protection),
> > then you're probably better off sticking with a hat.
>
> C'mon bw. We all know that courage comes in a bottle, not in a hat.

Don't overlook the compelling Kodachrome courage. You get a couple
drinks in you and have a friend point a camera at you, there's *nothing*
you can't do.

Bob


02 Mar 2005 09:46:02
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<dengel72@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1109701664.881083.33170@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Sorry, but while it IS his responsibility to avoid you, this sort of
> thing DOES happen and is unavoidable statiscally speaking. Before doing
> any kind of traversing turns, I always look uphill. Haven't you ever
> been walking down the sidewalk, and you and a person approaching have
> to do a little "dance" as you both try to decide where to go? His
> response of berating you was more wrong than hitting you, in my opinion
> - the later was an accident, but he had control of his mouth.
>
> The fact is, sometimes downhill people DO do things that are
> unpredictable for uphill skiiers and riders. These accidents happen all
> the time, on both sides. I have been hit (as a down hill person) by my
> own share of skiiers in my seven years on the hill. When I am, I just
> try to smile and dust us both off (when the skiier stops, that is) - it
> makes for a much more pleasant atmosphere. Stangely enough, I have
> never collided with a rider. This is why I tend to stay in the park
> exclusively.
>
> The thing that bothers me most about everyone's attitude is the whole
> "us vs. them" mentality that continues to be propagated towards riders.
> I am 32, and I doubt you will find a more courteous rider on the hill.
> The thought of people cheering the guy getting manslaughter charges
> without knowing what *really* happened is just another sick part of
> this accident. If this had been a skiier, would you have the same
> animosity? Only individual posters here know for sure.
>
> That said, I hope that her family gets through this OK.

Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't have any
problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant bitch
about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent instruction.
Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an instructor
crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for oncoming
traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if instructors
actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35 years of
skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a snowboarder. I
think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier skills.
This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting safety and
harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an instructor
with the attitude she has.

snoig




02 Mar 2005 09:51:45
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"bdubya" <bdubya@interaccess.com > wrote in message
news:bs7a211nvo1kkrvml7gokr5q5l59ereqjl@4ax.com...
> On 1 Mar 2005 10:27:44 -0800, dengel72@gmail.com wrote:
> >The thing that bothers me most about everyone's attitude is the whole
> >"us vs. them" mentality that continues to be propagated towards riders.
> >I am 32, and I doubt you will find a more courteous rider on the hill.
> >The thought of people cheering the guy getting manslaughter charges
> >without knowing what *really* happened is just another sick part of
> >this accident. If this had been a skiier, would you have the same
> >animosity? Only individual posters here know for sure.
> >
>
> Actually, in the cases of two skiers back around '99-'00 who were
> skiing out of control and killed a couple of boarders (one incident
> with a liftie at Vail, one with a freestyle-team member at Breck,
> IIRC) there was quite a bit of animosity. Tough to judge if it was
> "the same", but there wasn't much forgiveness flowing then, either.
> Rightly so, IMHO.
>
> bw

And if I remember correctly, manslaughter charges were never filed for the
incident at Breck. The kid killed a longtime member of the community who
was active in the snowboard outreach program which taught underprivliged
kids to snowboard. It really was a tragic event.

snoig




02 Mar 2005 17:44:45
root
Re: Death by Snowboarder

I am asuming that resorts that don't allow snowboarders do so for this
exact reason. People are not sick of snowboarders, but the vast imaturity
that comes along with them. That being said, and being a snowboarder I
completely understand. I know the type.

Something needs to be done. There needs to be more agressive ski patrol
and riders under 18 need to be acomplated by an adult before buying a lift
ticket (I know they can get them other places).

Parents droping their 16 & 17 group of friends off to board recklessly
is something that has to stop. Then maybe the sterotype will disolve.

Comments welcome.




02 Mar 2005 09:58:48
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't have
any problem avoiding snowboarders". >>>

Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control boarder
hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
hit from behind by him?



02 Mar 2005 10:01:27
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<<<You maek an excellent point. It is a little hard to follow though.
Typically, the convention here is to quote the salient part of the post
you're replying to and then place your response below it. That way,
people who are reading this in different newsreader programs can follow
which point you are responding to. >>>

Dave, Thanks for the help and I'm sorry about not quoting. I'm still
trying to figure this stuff out. (I was highlighting before but it
didn't work so I tink cut/paste might be the next best thing.)



02 Mar 2005 10:16:46
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<< I am asuming that resorts that don't allow snowboarders do so for
this exact reason. People are not sick of snowboarders, but the vast
imaturity that comes along with them. >>>


I agree. I have seen out-of-control skiers and boarders BOTH but they
are almost always young cocky males. It has to be more of a gender &
age issue than a choice of board v/s ski. Young men are more likely to
show daredevil, aggressive tendencies because of factors such emotional
immaturity and misplaced feelings of immortality. Probably the same
reason a female between the ages of 18 and 25 pays a lot less than her
male counterpart for car insurance because as a rule younger women
drivers have much fewer accidents and moving violations than males in
the same age group. It's ridiculous that ski resorts have yet to
address this issue. How many more people have to die before they do
something?



02 Mar 2005 10:16:48
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<< I am asuming that resorts that don't allow snowboarders do so for
this exact reason. People are not sick of snowboarders, but the vast
imaturity that comes along with them. >>>


I agree. I have seen out-of-control skiers and boarders BOTH but they
are almost always young cocky males. It has to be more of a gender &
age issue than a choice of board v/s ski. Young men are more likely to
show daredevil, aggressive tendencies because of factors such emotional
immaturity and misplaced feelings of immortality. Probably the same
reason a female between the ages of 18 and 25 pays a lot less than her
male counterpart for car insurance because as a rule younger women
drivers have much fewer accidents and moving violations than males in
the same age group. It's ridiculous that ski resorts have yet to
address this issue. How many more people have to die before they do
something?



02 Mar 2005 10:57:33
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

snoig wrote:
> Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
> arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
have any
> problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant
bitch
> about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent
instruction.
> Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an
instructor
> crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for
oncoming
> traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if
instructors
> actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35
years of
> skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a
snowboarder. I
> think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier
skills.
> This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting
safety and
> harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an
instructor
> with the attitude she has.

You mean like the instructor I saw at Taos after Christmas this year
who lead his group of young kids out of the trees in a blind, slightly
uphill traverse across one of the most crowded and congested runs on
the mountain? As far as I could tell the instructor, who wasn't some
green kid, never even bothered to look upslope. Naturally, all of the
kids (who looked to be around 8 years old) followed him blindly through
the crowd. For those familiar with Taos, this was where Winkelried
funnels down to the Kachina lift below Baby Bear. It was plastered
with "slow skiing" signs and was nice and slick. It gave me a good
opportunity to work in some quick slalom turns with the kids acting as
unwitting moving gates. Had it not been so crowded, I would have
side-stepped back up and "educated" the instructor some. It's a
miracle that none of those kids got nailed.

Not so ironically, this was the exact same spot where I witnessed a ski
patroller collide with a downhill skier two years before. I had pulled
over to the edge of the run next to the rope waiting for my wife. The
run was a big sheet of "Western Ice" ("packed powder" for you
Easterners) with people sliding all over the place. I saw this guy
come zooming down way too fast for the crowded conditions and was going
to yell at him to slow down when I realized he was a patroller. Sure
enough, by the time he saw the woman in the middle of the run skiing at
a moderate speed, he was right in the middle of the icy patch and slid
right into the back of her. He helped her up and apparently at least
made sure she was ok before he continued down to the lift area, where
he proceded to sit on a snowmobile for several minutes. Probably
contemplating his future employment opportunities. I reported the
incident to both a ski ambassador and a ski patroller. I hated to play
narc, but had that been me I would have had my ticket pulled for sure.



02 Mar 2005 11:01:14
Jeff
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:
> It is rumored...
>
> Today a 27 year old skier died of internal injuries from being hit by
a
> boarder at the bottom of Rendezvous Bowl at Jackson Hole. Supposedly

> the skier was stopped at the bottom of the bowl and was taken out by
a
> 16 year old boarder going at excessive speed. She was helivaced to
> Idaho Falls and pronounced dead during emergency surgery. The
boarder
> walked away from the clinic.

Most early news accounts claimed the woman was skiing at the time of
the incident. Yesterday's story in the Boston Globe is more in line
with roscoe's account:

"A 29-year-old veterinarian from Shrewsbury died last week after a
snowboarder slammed into her *as she waited* [emphasis added] for her
husband at an agreed-upon meeting spot on the slopes of Jackson Hole
Mountain Resort in Wyoming."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/03/01/mass_woman_killed_in_wyoming/

If roscoe and the Globe have it right, then the young douche bag plowed
into a stationary target!

I don't have his name yet, but the boarder lives in Crownsville, MD.

Jeff



02 Mar 2005 11:03:52
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeA...@aol.com wrote:
>> Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly
petty
>> arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
have
>> any problem avoiding snowboarders".>>>
>
> Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control
boarder
> hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
> hit from behind by him?

Let's hope Snoig's just ranting. According to the article from the
Boston Globe, she "had just completed a run and was waiting for her
husband, talking to some friends". While it's not required, it's a
good idea to keep an eye uphill when stopped, even if it's at the
bottom of a run. In this case, she still may have not have been able
to get out of the way, but you never know.



02 Mar 2005 19:23:03
Joe Roach
Re: Death by Snowboarder

>
> I agree. I have seen out-of-control skiers and boarders BOTH but they
> are almost always young cocky males. It has to be more of a gender &
> age issue than a choice of board v/s ski. Young men are more likely to
> show daredevil, aggressive tendencies because of factors such emotional
> immaturity and misplaced feelings of immortality. Probably the same
> reason a female between the ages of 18 and 25 pays a lot less than her
> male counterpart for car insurance because as a rule younger women
> drivers have much fewer accidents and moving violations than males in
> the same age group. It's ridiculous that ski resorts have yet to
> address this issue. How many more people have to die before they do
> something?
>

Well, maybe the teenage girl skier who wiped out my 12 year old son last
year had OD'd on testosterone but then again maybe seeing as he's a boy, it
was probably his fault all along.

I think that the reality is that everyone has to look around irrespective if
they are in the "right" or not.




02 Mar 2005 11:40:08
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<<Well, maybe the teenage girl skier who wiped out my 12 year old son
last
year had OD'd on testosterone but then again maybe seeing as he's a
boy, it
was probably his fault all along. >>

Ok, your son got run over by a teenage girl. There are always
exceptions but it is a statistical fact that young males tend to be
more reckless, have more aggressive tendencies and have more misplaced
feelings of immortality on-average than young females. This is why
young males have higher car insurance rates and why car insurance
compaies can't be sued for discrimination over it. Just because you
don't like this statistic doesn't mean it isn't true.



02 Mar 2005 19:49:29
Joe Roach
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109792408.874866.26690@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> <<Well, maybe the teenage girl skier who wiped out my 12 year old son
> last
> year had OD'd on testosterone but then again maybe seeing as he's a
> boy, it
> was probably his fault all along. >>
>
> Ok, your son got run over by a teenage girl. There are always
> exceptions but it is a statistical fact that young males tend to be
> more reckless, have more aggressive tendencies and have more misplaced
> feelings of immortality on-average than young females. This is why
> young males have higher car insurance rates and why car insurance
> compaies can't be sued for discrimination over it. Just because you
> don't like this statistic doesn't mean it isn't true.

Thanks for your sympathy and understanding. Would you be happy if insurance
companies gathered data based on say race or religion and then discriminated
on that basis?

In the UK, your assertion about women drivers is wrong. They actually have
more accidents per mile than their male counterparts but the cost per
accident is less.

Anyway, which group do you want to pick on next?





02 Mar 2005 12:19:13
foot2foot
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com > wrote in message

And you want his name because?

Regardless of anything else, this kid is not Charles Manson.
In the worst case, he was going way too fast and wasn't
able to avoid the collision for some reason. He used extremely
poor judgement and someone died.

Don't you think you ought to let the courts and agencies do
their job, and abandon your self appointed role as
"executioner?"

You *don't* know the facts. You have several *conflicting*
news reports.

To be quite honest, it might or might not show up somewhere
else, but as far as you go, why don't you just shut the hell up
about his name?




02 Mar 2005 13:38:30
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109786328.853449.207630@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
> arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't have
> any problem avoiding snowboarders".>>>
>
> Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control boarder
> hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
> hit from behind by him?

Are you really that stupid?




02 Mar 2005 13:48:09
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1109789853.654903.310540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> snoig wrote:
> > Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
> > arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
> have any
> > problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant
> bitch
> > about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent
> instruction.
> > Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an
> instructor
> > crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for
> oncoming
> > traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if
> instructors
> > actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35
> years of
> > skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a
> snowboarder. I
> > think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier
> skills.
> > This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting
> safety and
> > harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an
> instructor
> > with the attitude she has.
>
> You mean like the instructor I saw at Taos after Christmas this year
> who lead his group of young kids out of the trees in a blind, slightly
> uphill traverse across one of the most crowded and congested runs on
> the mountain? As far as I could tell the instructor, who wasn't some
> green kid, never even bothered to look upslope. Naturally, all of the
> kids (who looked to be around 8 years old) followed him blindly through
> the crowd. For those familiar with Taos, this was where Winkelried
> funnels down to the Kachina lift below Baby Bear. It was plastered
> with "slow skiing" signs and was nice and slick. It gave me a good
> opportunity to work in some quick slalom turns with the kids acting as
> unwitting moving gates. Had it not been so crowded, I would have
> side-stepped back up and "educated" the instructor some. It's a
> miracle that none of those kids got nailed.

Yep, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I witnessed the exact same
thing several days ago at Breck. To hear instructors bitch about out of
control snowboarders and then witness things like this really make me wonder
how they qualified as instructors. Oh wait, anybody can be an insturctor
for Vail corp. I have a friend who runs one of the childrens program and
he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to fill ski instructor
positions. Seems to be a common problem at all Vail resorts. The buddy
pass is so cheap that no one wants an $8/hour job teaching when they can
work nights at Burger King for $10/hour and buy a $300 pass and ski all day.
It just really peaves me to hear instructors bitching about out of control
snowboarders or skiers and watching them do an inadaquate job of teaching
thoes same people. Maybe if instructors took more responsibility there
wouldn't be such a problem.

snoig




02 Mar 2005 16:10:46
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Jeff wrote:

> I don't have his name yet, but the boarder lives in Crownsville, MD.

Finding his name isn't any of our jobs. The cops and the DA are
handling this one; we don't need to.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



02 Mar 2005 13:55:18
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com > wrote in message
news:1109790074.544609.58590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> rosco wrote:
> > It is rumored...
> >
> > Today a 27 year old skier died of internal injuries from being hit by
> a
> > boarder at the bottom of Rendezvous Bowl at Jackson Hole. Supposedly
>
> > the skier was stopped at the bottom of the bowl and was taken out by
> a
> > 16 year old boarder going at excessive speed. She was helivaced to
> > Idaho Falls and pronounced dead during emergency surgery. The
> boarder
> > walked away from the clinic.
>
> Most early news accounts claimed the woman was skiing at the time of
> the incident. Yesterday's story in the Boston Globe is more in line
> with roscoe's account:
>
> "A 29-year-old veterinarian from Shrewsbury died last week after a
> snowboarder slammed into her *as she waited* [emphasis added] for her
> husband at an agreed-upon meeting spot on the slopes of Jackson Hole
> Mountain Resort in Wyoming."
>
>
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/03/01/mass_woman_killed_in_wyoming/
>
> If roscoe and the Globe have it right, then the young douche bag plowed
> into a stationary target!
>
> I don't have his name yet, but the boarder lives in Crownsville, MD.
>
> Jeff

And maybe she was waiting in a spot where she could not be seen from above?
Let the eyewitnesses and police investigators sort it out. From personal
knowledge of news reports of events I knew about, I can say that the details
of news reports are most often wrong.




02 Mar 2005 13:59:00
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

snoig wrote:
>
> And if I remember correctly, manslaughter charges were never filed for the
> incident at Breck. The kid killed a longtime member of the community who
> was active in the snowboard outreach program which taught underprivliged
> kids to snowboard. It really was a tragic event.

He also killed himself, IIRC. Maybe that's why the powers that be
declined to prosecute? (BTW, someone said Freestyle Team - the kid was a
up and coming racer with good USSA points I believe - taught to be fast
and invulnerable in the course, he took it outside the course to tragic
effect.)


02 Mar 2005 14:34:49
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1109790232.106758.107470@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> LeeA...@aol.com wrote:
> >> Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly
> petty
> >> arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
> have
> >> any problem avoiding snowboarders".>>>
> >
> > Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control
> boarder
> > hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
> > hit from behind by him?
>
> Let's hope Snoig's just ranting. According to the article from the
> Boston Globe, she "had just completed a run and was waiting for her
> husband, talking to some friends". While it's not required, it's a
> good idea to keep an eye uphill when stopped, even if it's at the
> bottom of a run. In this case, she still may have not have been able
> to get out of the way, but you never know.

What I'm saying is that I ski almost daily at one of the busiest resorts in
North America and I have never had a problem almost hitting anybody or
having someone almost hit me. I'm saying that people who are bitching about
snowboarders may need to take a step back and look at their own skills to
see where the problem lies. However, I think the real problem is that they
are complaining just for the sake of complaining. I really feel sorry for
people who need something to complain about after a day of skiing. Maybe
they should be spending more time in the office.

snoig




02 Mar 2005 14:03:48
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
> arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't have
> any problem avoiding snowboarders".>>>
>
> Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control boarder
> hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
> hit from behind by him?

Well, that's not what he's saying.

But *I* will say, "defend yourself" - up your chances of survival by
paying attention to your surroundings at all times. It's not an
amusement park out there, it's a mountain in winter - it's bloody
nature. Even if a kid doesn't come by and smash you, the mountain itself
has numerous ways to kill you. So just pay attention. It might help you
live longer.


02 Mar 2005 14:02:36
foot2foot
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Nice job Mary, I have to agree.

"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote in message
news:KvadnYlv2plGtrvfRVn-uQ@bcn.net...
> Jeff wrote:
>
>> I don't have his name yet, but the boarder lives in Crownsville, MD.
>
> Finding his name isn't any of our jobs. The cops and the DA are handling
> this one; we don't need to.
>
> --
> Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
> Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.
>




02 Mar 2005 14:11:04
foot2foot
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:38mqh4F5r6b37U1@individual.net...

> What I'm saying is that I ski almost daily at one of the busiest resorts
> in
> North America and I have never had a problem almost hitting anybody or
> having someone almost hit me. I'm saying that people who are bitching
> about
> snowboarders may need to take a step back and look at their own skills to
> see where the problem lies. However, I think the real problem is that
> they
> are complaining just for the sake of complaining. I really feel sorry for
> people who need something to complain about after a day of skiing. Maybe
> they should be spending more time in the office.
>
> snoig

Weeelll, I've had a 'few' problems like that, but I've been
able to avoid the collision every time, and it wasn't all boarders.
In general, I try to be above everybody within site, or just wait
till everyone is gone and I have the slope clearly to myself for
a ways, then I stop.

If I'm skiing and I *hear* a board approaching anywhere near
me, I'll stop, straight in the path I'm skiing in.

There is a problem with boarding that all, including skiers need
to be aware of though.

The snowboarder *can not see* much at all behind him or
her as they make a heelside turn. That's the way *lots* of
snowboard to whoever collisions occur.

That and, again, there is such a thing as getting "locked" into
a heel edge, and shooting across the hill. I've seen that
happen many times, for instance in the park when the
boarder doesn't quite stick the landing.






02 Mar 2005 16:37:11
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Anyway, which group do you want to pick on next?


Tired of being picked on as a white male? Go change your diaper and
tell your mommy about it.



02 Mar 2005 16:40:34
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<<< I'm saying that people who are bitching about
snowboarders may need to take a step back and look at their own skills
to see where the problem lies. >>

The problem lies with assholes like you. If you are an example of a
boarder, it's no wonder so many people hate them.



02 Mar 2005 17:01:10
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Are you really that stupid?

Apparently you are, asshole. Go fuck yourself.



02 Mar 2005 18:15:41
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109810434.598845.44770@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> <<< I'm saying that people who are bitching about
> snowboarders may need to take a step back and look at their own skills
> to see where the problem lies.>>
>
> The problem lies with assholes like you. If you are an example of a
> boarder, it's no wonder so many people hate them.

Who said I was a boarder?




02 Mar 2005 18:16:11
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109809499.166103.184210@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Are you really that stupid?
>
> Apparently you are, asshole. Go fuck yourself.

This coming from someone with an AOL address. Figures.




03 Mar 2005 01:51:47
CParker
Re: Death by Snowboarder

So, exactly how is it that someone using AOL is inferior to yourself as a
hotmail user?

C

"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:38n6tfF5oeovrU1@individual.net...
>
> <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1109809499.166103.184210@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> Are you really that stupid?
>>
>> Apparently you are, asshole. Go fuck yourself.
>
> This coming from someone with an AOL address. Figures.
>
>




02 Mar 2005 18:40:25
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

CParker wrote:
>
> So, exactly how is it that someone using AOL is inferior to yourself as a
> hotmail user?

Hotmail is free and enables one to hide one's REAL address, which might
cost as little as $100/year for a decent ISP. AOL costs more than that
and, well, it's AOL. Although lots of respectable people use AOL for
one reason or another, the most common reason that people use it is that
they don't know any better.

OK, or shall I go on?

> "snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote:
> >> Are you really that stupid?
> >>
> >> Apparently you are, asshole. Go fuck yourself.
> >
> > This coming from someone with an AOL address. Figures.

--
Cheers. Bev
===============================================================
It's not true that Lucas, in 1947, tried to get Parliament to
repeal Ohm's Law. They withdrew their efforts when they met too
much resistance.


02 Mar 2005 19:54:53
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"The Real Bev" <bashley@myrealbox.com > wrote in message
news:42267919.7D04E3E2@myrealbox.com...
> CParker wrote:
> >
> > So, exactly how is it that someone using AOL is inferior to yourself as
a
> > hotmail user?

I don't pay 2 or 3 times what it's worth for hotmail.

> Hotmail is free and enables one to hide one's REAL address, which might
> cost as little as $100/year for a decent ISP. AOL costs more than that
> and, well, it's AOL. Although lots of respectable people use AOL for
> one reason or another, the most common reason that people use it is that
> they don't know any better.
>
> OK, or shall I go on?

Plus, does anybody use anything but a throw away address on usenet? I guess
some people do but it doesn't make much sense to me.




02 Mar 2005 22:42:13
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:

> LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
>> arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't have
>> any problem avoiding snowboarders".>>>
>>
>> Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control boarder
>> hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
>> hit from behind by him?
>
>
> Well, that's not what he's saying.
>
> But *I* will say, "defend yourself" - up your chances of survival by
> paying attention to your surroundings at all times. It's not an
> amusement park out there, it's a mountain in winter - it's bloody
> nature. Even if a kid doesn't come by and smash you, the mountain itself
> has numerous ways to kill you. So just pay attention. It might help you
> live longer.

Yeah. Think of a situation that we're all familiar with, that of
vehicular traffic. You know the right-of-way rules, but hopefully you
don't absolutely take them for granted; if a dumptruck comes barreling
through a red light and you're going through the green, you may be
right, but you'll still be dead. Defend yourself.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



02 Mar 2005 22:43:29
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:

> Anyway, which group do you want to pick on next?
>
>
> Tired of being picked on as a white male? Go change your diaper and
> tell your mommy about it.

Oh boy.

*holds head*


--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



03 Mar 2005 15:15:55
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"bdubya" <bdubya@interaccess.com > wrote in message
> If you're looking to a helmet for courage (as opposed to protection),
> then you're probably better off sticking with a hat.

I don't wear a hat.

ant




03 Mar 2005 15:18:51
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Tero Ahlqvist" <tero.ahlqvist@eiroskaa.nokia.com.invalid > wrote in message
news:WfeVd.39206

> If the boarder was trying to guess where the slow skier was moving,
> he was probably staring the skier instead of trying to look his
> way around her.

According to a close friend of the family of the lady who was hit, she was
standing by the side of the run, waiting for her husband.

ant




03 Mar 2005 15:21:18
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:38mqh4F5r6b37U1@individual.net...
>
> What I'm saying is that I ski almost daily at one of the busiest resorts
> in
> North America and I have never had a problem almost hitting anybody or
> having someone almost hit me. I'm saying that people who are bitching
> about
> snowboarders may need to take a step back and look at their own skills to
> see where the problem lies. However, I think the real problem is that
> they
> are complaining just for the sake of complaining. I really feel sorry for
> people who need something to complain about after a day of skiing. Maybe
> they should be spending more time in the office.

you are undoubtedly a fool.

ant




03 Mar 2005 15:27:47
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:38mn6sF5q2v71U1@individual.net...
>
> "TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1109789853.654903.310540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> snoig wrote:
>> > Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
>> > arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
>> have any
>> > problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant
>> bitch
>> > about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent
>> instruction.
>> > Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an
>> instructor
>> > crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for
>> oncoming
>> > traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if
>> instructors
>> > actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35
>> years of
>> > skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a
>> snowboarder. I
>> > think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier
>> skills.
>> > This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting
>> safety and
>> > harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an
>> instructor
>> > with the attitude she has.
>>
>> You mean like the instructor I saw at Taos after Christmas this year
>> who lead his group of young kids out of the trees in a blind, slightly
>> uphill traverse across one of the most crowded and congested runs on
>> the mountain? As far as I could tell the instructor, who wasn't some
>> green kid, never even bothered to look upslope. Naturally, all of the
>> kids (who looked to be around 8 years old) followed him blindly through
>> the crowd. For those familiar with Taos, this was where Winkelried
>> funnels down to the Kachina lift below Baby Bear. It was plastered
>> with "slow skiing" signs and was nice and slick. It gave me a good
>> opportunity to work in some quick slalom turns with the kids acting as
>> unwitting moving gates. Had it not been so crowded, I would have
>> side-stepped back up and "educated" the instructor some. It's a
>> miracle that none of those kids got nailed.
>
> Yep, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I witnessed the exact same
> thing several days ago at Breck. To hear instructors bitch about out of
> control snowboarders and then witness things like this really make me
> wonder
> how they qualified as instructors. Oh wait, anybody can be an insturctor
> for Vail corp. I have a friend who runs one of the childrens program and
> he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to fill ski instructor
> positions. Seems to be a common problem at all Vail resorts. The buddy
> pass is so cheap that no one wants an $8/hour job teaching when they can
> work nights at Burger King for $10/hour and buy a $300 pass and ski all
> day.
> It just really peaves me to hear instructors bitching about out of control
> snowboarders or skiers and watching them do an inadaquate job of teaching
> thoes same people. Maybe if instructors took more responsibility there
> wouldn't be such a problem.

You have no idea how I ski, or how I teach, and yet you can let fly with
some ill-considered tripe like this. you are plainly a fool, and exemplefy
the attitude problem that has caused the dangerous situation that exists on
US ski hills today. Do you bomb down hills in marginal control? Does control
to you mean "not falling over"? Why are you so angry at our reaction to
this accident at Jackson Hole? Do you see your "rights" being infringed upon
as a result?
In 8 seasons of teaching, I have NEVER had one of my students get hurt. Your
posting paints you as an aggressive person and it scares me that people like
you can do pretty-much what they want on the ski slopes.

ant




03 Mar 2005 15:31:48
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder

"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com > wrote in message
> "A 29-year-old veterinarian from Shrewsbury died last week after a
> snowboarder slammed into her *as she waited* [emphasis added] for her
> husband at an agreed-upon meeting spot on the slopes of Jackson Hole
> Mountain Resort in Wyoming."
>
> http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/03/01/mass_woman_killed_in_wyoming/
>
> If roscoe and the Globe have it right, then the young douche bag plowed
> into a stationary target!
>
> I don't have his name yet, but the boarder lives in Crownsville, MD.

According to a person who identified himself as a friend of the lady's
husband, the lady was indeed standing on the side of the run, waiting for
her husband.

ant




02 Mar 2005 22:47:37
J. Urrrk
Re: Death by Snowboarder

"foot2foot" <foot2foot@notatjuno.com > wrote
>
>
> Weeelll, I've had a 'few' problems like that, but I've been
> able to avoid the collision every time, and it wasn't all boarders.
> In general, I try to be above everybody within site, or just wait
> till everyone is gone and I have the slope clearly to myself for
> a ways, then I stop.
>
I've only been hit by skiers, but not recently. It is
surprising how much space you can find for yourself if
you just stop occasionally and let the gomerage pass
you by.

> If I'm skiing and I *hear* a board approaching anywhere near
> me, I'll stop, straight in the path I'm skiing in.
>
I generally ski like I'm trying to kill everyone around me.
Given my strength and ability level, it's a pretty compelling
case. Anybody with any sense at all runs for cover. Especially
when they see the hand grenades.

> There is a problem with boarding that all, including skiers need
> to be aware of though.
>
Don't go there footsie!

> The snowboarder *can not see* much at all behind him or
> her as they make a heelside turn. That's the way *lots* of
> snowboard to whoever collisions occur.

Shhhh! that's the best place to hit them. Lock your skis
up on edge, lower your shoulder, aim for the middle of the
back and BLAMMO! Boarder soufflee! Makes an NFL highlight
reel look tame by comparison.

Cross blocking works really well on beginning boarders
that are heel scraping down the hill. Those poor MF's
never see you coming. Hee hee hee.

Remember to use sound tackling technique. You don't
want to hurt anyone, just ring their bell hard enough
that they go ride on some other loser's mountain.

-J. Urrrk, Just making a modest proposal, y'all!




03 Mar 2005 08:17:19
Joe Roach
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109810231.026460.105970@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Anyway, which group do you want to pick on next?
>
>
> Tired of being picked on as a white male? Go change your diaper and
> tell your mommy about it.
>

as rational as the rest of your posts.




03 Mar 2005 08:39:04
Tero Ahlqvist
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38nhhbF5r9irvU1@individual.net...
>
> "Tero Ahlqvist" <tero.ahlqvist@eiroskaa.nokia.com.invalid> wrote in
message
> news:WfeVd.39206
>
> > If the boarder was trying to guess where the slow skier was moving,
> > he was probably staring the skier instead of trying to look his
> > way around her.
>
> According to a close friend of the family of the lady who was hit, she was
> standing by the side of the run, waiting for her husband.
>
> ant

In my other example (the desert) the palm tree was not moving either.
So the 'target fixation' could still be the reason. But no matter
whatever the reason was it cannot be undone. It is sad these things
happen. My wife was once hit by a boarder. The boarder was mid-aged man.
Luckily nothing more than 'oops sorry' happened that time.

I just bought a board myself, since my 4yr old son spends his time
in the beginners' slopes, and wanted to have something new to do, while
my stiff GS skis aren't the best tools for those slopes. When I did some
slowish linked turns with the board in the green slope I was almost hit
by a skier...

-Tero-



03 Mar 2005 01:31:27
foot2foot
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"CParker" <cparker6@houston.-Remove This-rr.com > wrote in message
news:T4uVd.7780$SE2.1014@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> So, exactly how is it that someone using AOL is inferior to yourself as a
> hotmail user?

Dude, every hacker on earth has a hotmail addy..




03 Mar 2005 03:46:36
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<<<Hotmail is free and enables one to hide one's REAL address, which
might
cost as little as $100/year for a decent ISP. AOL costs more than that

and, well, it's AOL. Although lots of respectable people use AOL for
one reason or another, the most common reason that people use it is
that
they don't know any better. >>>

My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.



03 Mar 2005 03:58:03
Re: Death by Snowboarder

<<<You have no idea how I ski, or how I teach, and yet you can let fly
with
some ill-considered tripe like this. you are plainly a fool, and
exemplefy
the attitude problem that has caused the dangerous situation that
exists on
US ski hills today. Do you bomb down hills in marginal control? Does
control
to you mean "not falling over"? Why are you so angry at our reaction
to
this accident at Jackson Hole? Do you see your "rights" being infringed
upon
as a result?
In 8 seasons of teaching, I have NEVER had one of my students get hurt.
Your
posting paints you as an aggressive person and it scares me that people
like
you can do pretty-much what they want on the ski slopes. >>>

He's angry because he identifies with bullies who bomb down the hill
out of control. He has probably knocked over a few innocent people --
but will never admit to it.



03 Mar 2005 08:14:47
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

ant wrote:

> "bdubya" <bdubya@interaccess.com> wrote in message
>
>>If you're looking to a helmet for courage (as opposed to protection),
>>then you're probably better off sticking with a hat.
>
>
> I don't wear a hat.

Doesn't your head get cold?

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



03 Mar 2005 08:19:12
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:

> <<<You have no idea how I ski, or how I teach, and yet you can let fly
> with
> some ill-considered tripe like this. you are plainly a fool, and
> exemplefy
> the attitude problem that has caused the dangerous situation that
> exists on
> US ski hills today. Do you bomb down hills in marginal control? Does
> control
> to you mean "not falling over"? Why are you so angry at our reaction
> to
> this accident at Jackson Hole? Do you see your "rights" being infringed
> upon
> as a result?
> In 8 seasons of teaching, I have NEVER had one of my students get hurt.
> Your
> posting paints you as an aggressive person and it scares me that people
> like
> you can do pretty-much what they want on the ski slopes. >>>
>
> He's angry because he identifies with bullies who bomb down the hill
> out of control. He has probably knocked over a few innocent people --
> but will never admit to it.
>

Yeah, and I bet he beats up his wife, too. Why, he's probably a closet
satanist who sacrifices cute fuzzy animals and small children at the
dark of the moon every month.

Hey, can we have a "most outrageous newbie" contest, maybe in a couple
of months when most of us will have hung up our skis? I gotta nomination.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



03 Mar 2005 06:56:09
pigo
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote in message
news:bP6dnZ8_a7lIk7rfRVn-pQ@bcn.net...


> Hey, can we have a "most outrageous newbie" contest, maybe in a
> couple of months when most of us will have hung up our skis? I
> gotta nomination.

That's a good idea. But let's have a "pretentious, know nothing,
almost newbie, expert NIMBY" contest too !




03 Mar 2005 15:36:31
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Joe Roach" <joetroach@yahoo.co.uk > wrote in message
news:38mjmdF5op8kdU1@individual.net...
>
> <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1109792408.874866.26690@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> <<Well, maybe the teenage girl skier who wiped out my 12 year old son
>> last
>> year had OD'd on testosterone but then again maybe seeing as he's a
>> boy, it
>> was probably his fault all along. >>
>>
>> Ok, your son got run over by a teenage girl. There are always
>> exceptions but it is a statistical fact that young males tend to be
>> more reckless, have more aggressive tendencies and have more misplaced
>> feelings of immortality on-average than young females. This is why
>> young males have higher car insurance rates and why car insurance
>> compaies can't be sued for discrimination over it. Just because you
>> don't like this statistic doesn't mean it isn't true.
>
> Thanks for your sympathy and understanding.

I think you are in for a big surprise if you came here looking for sympathy.


> Would you be happy if insurance companies gathered data based on say race
> or religion and then discriminated on that basis?
>
> In the UK, your assertion about women drivers is wrong. They actually
> have more accidents per mile than their male counterparts but the cost per
> accident is less.


I find this surprising. Are you able to share a link to this information?


>
> Anyway, which group do you want to pick on next?
>

Its hardly picking on. Its a proven fact and there are well known and easily
understood biological reasons for it. Males tend to be risk takers and much
more so at that age. Think back on yourself at 15 through 25. Unless you
were completely abnormal, you shoud be able to come up with one or two
shitdisturbing actions you would never consider doing now.




03 Mar 2005 11:49:52
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
> arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't have
> any problem avoiding snowboarders".>>>
>
> Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control boarder
> hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
> hit from behind by him?
>

Or my wife's fault that out of control snowboarders have hit her
numerous times, on runouts, on trails no where near an intersection?
Just plain old lack of consideration for the rules and others.


03 Mar 2005 11:55:48
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

snoig wrote:
> "TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1109790232.106758.107470@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>>LeeA...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>>Snoig says: << don't let these people drag you into thier silly
>>
>>petty
>>
>>>>arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
>>
>>have
>>
>>>>any problem avoiding snowboarders".>>>
>>>
>>>Are saying it's this dead woman's fault that an out of control
>>
>>boarder
>>
>>>hit and killed her because she was not skilled enough to avoid being
>>>hit from behind by him?
>>
>>Let's hope Snoig's just ranting. According to the article from the
>>Boston Globe, she "had just completed a run and was waiting for her
>>husband, talking to some friends". While it's not required, it's a
>>good idea to keep an eye uphill when stopped, even if it's at the
>>bottom of a run. In this case, she still may have not have been able
>>to get out of the way, but you never know.
>
>
> What I'm saying is that I ski almost daily at one of the busiest resorts in
> North America and I have never had a problem almost hitting anybody or
> having someone almost hit me. I'm saying that people who are bitching about
> snowboarders may need to take a step back and look at their own skills to
> see where the problem lies. However, I think the real problem is that they
> are complaining just for the sake of complaining. I really feel sorry for
> people who need something to complain about after a day of skiing. Maybe
> they should be spending more time in the office.
>
> snoig
>
>

How can it be the victim's fault when someone is blasting though a "slow
skiing" zone, or into a runout, or into a lift line at warp speed? That
happens to at least one person in my party *every* time we go skiing,
and 100% of the time it's a snowboarder.


03 Mar 2005 09:05:30
Bob
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109810434.598845.44770@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> <<< I'm saying that people who are bitching about
> snowboarders may need to take a step back and look at their own skills
> to see where the problem lies.>>
>
> The problem lies with assholes like you. If you are an example of a
> boarder, it's no wonder so many people hate them.
>
What an obnoxious loser!




03 Mar 2005 09:08:36
Bob
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"CParker" <cparker6@houston.-Remove This-rr.com > wrote in message
news:T4uVd.7780$SE2.1014@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> So, exactly how is it that someone using AOL is inferior to yourself as a
> hotmail user?

It's kind of like the skier/snowboarder arguement. You can clearly tell what
the person is like by what interface they use. NOT!

Bob




03 Mar 2005 10:24:40
Sam Seiber
Re: Death by Snowboarder

ant wrote:
> I don't wear a hat.
>
> ant

Ohh, Ohh, Pick me, Pick me. I DO!

Sam "I always wear a hat while ridin' the twin twigs" Seiber


03 Mar 2005 09:26:19
Bob
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109698026.206278.69360@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
> is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
> mph

I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost always
go faster than that.

Bob




03 Mar 2005 09:41:24
Bob
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109792408.874866.26690@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> <<Well, maybe the teenage girl skier who wiped out my 12 year old son
> last
> year had OD'd on testosterone but then again maybe seeing as he's a
> boy, it
> was probably his fault all along. >>
>
> Ok, your son got run over by a teenage girl. There are always
> exceptions but it is a statistical fact that young males tend to be
> more reckless, have more aggressive tendencies and have more misplaced
> feelings of immortality on-average than young females. This is why
> young males have higher car insurance rates and why car insurance
> compaies can't be sued for discrimination over it. Just because you
> don't like this statistic doesn't mean it isn't true.

Well, finally one of these discussions gets to the real problem.

I always figured the reason some areas ban boarders is because it is a legal
way to ban teenage boys, who are the biggest danger on the slopes, whether
they ski or board. It just happens that more of them board these days.

Bob




03 Mar 2005 10:59:30
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote in message
news:bP6dnZ8_a7lIk7rfRVn-pQ@bcn.net...
> Yeah, and I bet he beats up his wife, too. Why, he's probably a closet
> satanist who sacrifices cute fuzzy animals and small children at the
> dark of the moon every month.
>
> Hey, can we have a "most outrageous newbie" contest, maybe in a couple
> of months when most of us will have hung up our skis? I gotta nomination.

I never hang up my skis 8^)
snoig




03 Mar 2005 10:58:09
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38ni22F5o85dlU1@individual.net...
>
> "snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:38mn6sF5q2v71U1@individual.net...
> >
> > "TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1109789853.654903.310540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> snoig wrote:
> >> > Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
> >> > arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
> >> have any
> >> > problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant
> >> bitch
> >> > about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent
> >> instruction.
> >> > Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an
> >> instructor
> >> > crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for
> >> oncoming
> >> > traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if
> >> instructors
> >> > actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35
> >> years of
> >> > skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a
> >> snowboarder. I
> >> > think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier
> >> skills.
> >> > This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting
> >> safety and
> >> > harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an
> >> instructor
> >> > with the attitude she has.
> >>
> >> You mean like the instructor I saw at Taos after Christmas this year
> >> who lead his group of young kids out of the trees in a blind, slightly
> >> uphill traverse across one of the most crowded and congested runs on
> >> the mountain? As far as I could tell the instructor, who wasn't some
> >> green kid, never even bothered to look upslope. Naturally, all of the
> >> kids (who looked to be around 8 years old) followed him blindly through
> >> the crowd. For those familiar with Taos, this was where Winkelried
> >> funnels down to the Kachina lift below Baby Bear. It was plastered
> >> with "slow skiing" signs and was nice and slick. It gave me a good
> >> opportunity to work in some quick slalom turns with the kids acting as
> >> unwitting moving gates. Had it not been so crowded, I would have
> >> side-stepped back up and "educated" the instructor some. It's a
> >> miracle that none of those kids got nailed.
> >
> > Yep, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I witnessed the exact same
> > thing several days ago at Breck. To hear instructors bitch about out of
> > control snowboarders and then witness things like this really make me
> > wonder
> > how they qualified as instructors. Oh wait, anybody can be an
insturctor
> > for Vail corp. I have a friend who runs one of the childrens program
and
> > he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to fill ski instructor
> > positions. Seems to be a common problem at all Vail resorts. The buddy
> > pass is so cheap that no one wants an $8/hour job teaching when they can
> > work nights at Burger King for $10/hour and buy a $300 pass and ski all
> > day.
> > It just really peaves me to hear instructors bitching about out of
control
> > snowboarders or skiers and watching them do an inadaquate job of
teaching
> > thoes same people. Maybe if instructors took more responsibility there
> > wouldn't be such a problem.
>
> You have no idea how I ski, or how I teach, and yet you can let fly with
> some ill-considered tripe like this. you are plainly a fool, and exemplefy
> the attitude problem that has caused the dangerous situation that exists
on
> US ski hills today. Do you bomb down hills in marginal control? Does
control
> to you mean "not falling over"? Why are you so angry at our reaction to
> this accident at Jackson Hole? Do you see your "rights" being infringed
upon
> as a result?
> In 8 seasons of teaching, I have NEVER had one of my students get hurt.
Your
> posting paints you as an aggressive person and it scares me that people
like
> you can do pretty-much what they want on the ski slopes.
>
> ant

In the past month I have seen numerous situations where Vail Resort ski
instructors were not in control of their classes.

Examples are an entire class stopped below a berm where they could not be
easily seen from above.

An instructor who had his class of children stopped on the side of a trail
and leading that class onto the trail without looking up. It just so
happened that a large group of people were coming down then and there were a
large number of people weaving in and out of that class. If he had looked
up and waited one minute, he would have made it much safer for his class.

The above example where an instructor lead his class across a merging trail
without one person looking up.

A group of about eight instructors stopped on a berm on a high traffic trail
lined up tip to toe so they blocked more than three quarters of the trail.

Maybe you should address this issue at your next meeting. I see examples of
poor instruction all the time on the mountain. It's your ski school
management that should be addressing this issue. I think I would be a good
idea for a company wide safety clinic before the spring break crowds start.
You can claim whatever you want but I see examples of poor safety training
on a weekly if not pretty much daily basis.

I ski in control at all times. I have never in over 35 years come even
close to hitting someone. In the two cases where I have been hit, I was
stopped and both times it was by a skier. I am an agressive skier but only
in places where there is no risk of injuring other people and I never see
instructors in those places.

I am not angry over the accident at Jackson Hole, I am angry at the attitude
people like you who are supposibly in a position of athority berate
snowboarders. If instructors did a better job teaching safety and control,
this so called problem would go away.

And I'll stand by what I said before. The cheap buddy pass has absolutely
lowered the quality of ski instruction in Colorado over the last few years
and the effect is particularly noticable for Vail Resorts. There are very
few good instructors on the mountain and the ones who are good get pushed
into management so they never teach the beginners that they should be
teaching. Instead of bitching about snowboarders, why doesn't the ski/ride
school do a better job teaching them?

snoig




03 Mar 2005 11:00:03
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109851083.078608.150800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> He's angry because he identifies with bullies who bomb down the hill
> out of control. He has probably knocked over a few innocent people --
> but will never admit to it.
>

Yes, I guess you really are that stupid!




03 Mar 2005 14:09:51
vern93
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <42274858.365@sbseiber.com >,
Sam Seiber <Sam.Seiber1234@sbseiber.com > wrote:

> ant wrote:
> > I don't wear a hat.
> >
> > ant
>
> Ohh, Ohh, Pick me, Pick me. I DO!
>
> Sam "I always wear a hat while ridin' the twin twigs" Seiber

I don't believe in hats. They haven't been shown to prevent frostbite
of the head. I think they're just a fashion statement :)


03 Mar 2005 13:26:20
Sam Seiber
Re: Death by Snowboarder

vern93 wrote:
> I don't believe in hats. They haven't been shown to prevent frostbite
> of the head. I think they're just a fashion statement :)

What do you think MY hat is all about?

Warning: Geek skier picture follows:
http://www.iskico.com/ABasinLoveland041217/Img052.html

Sam "Fashion above all" Seiber


03 Mar 2005 12:31:45
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Hotmail is free and enables one to hide one's REAL address, which
>> might ost as little as $100/year for a decent ISP. AOL costs more than that
>
>> and, well, it's AOL. Although lots of respectable people use AOL for
>> one reason or another, the most common reason that people use it is
>> that they don't know any better.>>>
>
> My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.

Really? How do you work that?

--
Cheers. Bev
===============================================================
It's not true that Lucas, in 1947, tried to get Parliament to
repeal Ohm's Law. They withdrew their efforts when they met too
much resistance.


03 Mar 2005 12:37:31
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

vern93 wrote:
>
> Sam Seiber <Sam.Seiber1234@sbseiber.com> wrote:
>
> > ant wrote:
> > > I don't wear a hat.
> >
> > Ohh, Ohh, Pick me, Pick me. I DO!
> >
> > Sam "I always wear a hat while ridin' the twin twigs" Seiber
>
> I don't believe in hats. They haven't been shown to prevent frostbite
> of the head. I think they're just a fashion statement :)

I have thick hair and have never known my scalp to get cold. Ears are
very different, though. I really liked those cute jester hats the
boarders were wearing last year, though. Cute as hell, the more horns
the better.

--
Cheers. Bev
===============================================================
It's not true that Lucas, in 1947, tried to get Parliament to
repeal Ohm's Law. They withdrew their efforts when they met too
much resistance.


03 Mar 2005 12:41:40
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Bob wrote:
>
> <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote:
> > Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
> > is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
> > mph
>
> I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost always
> go faster than that.

MC helmets cover a bigger area with more foam than other helmets. I hit
the ground at ~50 mph and got a nice scrape on my helmet, a goodly bit
of metal rubbed off the bike's rear rack and just under a square foot of
skin rubbed off my body, but no head damage whatsoever and I got up and
rode my bike home.

Then I cried :-(

--
Cheers. Bev
===============================================================
It's not true that Lucas, in 1947, tried to get Parliament to
repeal Ohm's Law. They withdrew their efforts when they met too
much resistance.


03 Mar 2005 12:46:30
Re: Death by Snowboarder

>>> My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.

Really? How do you work that? >>

AOL employees are given a certain number of accounts. I'm not an AOL
employee but a member of my family is.



03 Mar 2005 16:13:31
Walt
Re: Death by Snowboarder

LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:

>>>>My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.
>
> Really? How do you work that? >>
>
> AOL employees are given a certain number of accounts. I'm not an AOL
> employee but a member of my family is.

You're still paying more for it than it's worth.

--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy


03 Mar 2005 16:41:38
Walt
Re: Death by Snowboarder

vern93 wrote:

> I don't believe in hats.

I do. I can see them, feel them, and sometimes even smell them. I
pretty sure they're real.


--
//-Walt
//
// The Solipsist's job is never done.


03 Mar 2005 14:08:29
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

CParker wrote:
> So, exactly how is it that someone using AOL is inferior to yourself as a
> hotmail user?

Top Poster! Look in the right place.
>
> C
>
> "snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:38n6tfF5oeovrU1@individual.net...
>
>><LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:1109809499.166103.184210@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>Are you really that stupid?
>>>
>>>Apparently you are, asshole. Go fuck yourself.
>>
>>This coming from someone with an AOL address. Figures.

I suspect snoig is pointing out the incongruity of a foul mouthed AOL
based Usenet poster, since AOL censures its own internal groups and will
kick this poster off AOL for such language in an AOL based forum.


03 Mar 2005 14:11:15
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Mary Malmros wrote:
>
> Hey, can we have a "most outrageous newbie" contest, maybe in a couple
> of months when most of us will have hung up our skis? I gotta nomination.

Why would you hang up your skis in mid-season?


03 Mar 2005 17:29:54
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:

> Mary Malmros wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey, can we have a "most outrageous newbie" contest, maybe in a couple
>> of months when most of us will have hung up our skis? I gotta
>> nomination.
>
>
> Why would you hang up your skis in mid-season?

In two months, it won't be "mid-season" where I live. It'll be two
months into kayak season (actually not this year since our current
weather forecast shows no signs of thawing for at least the next week,
but you get the idea).

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



03 Mar 2005 16:43:05
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


<LeeAnne@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1109882790.783426.273520@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >>> My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.
>
> Really? How do you work that? >>
>
> AOL employees are given a certain number of accounts. I'm not an AOL
> employee but a member of my family is.

So, still living with the parents?




03 Mar 2005 17:00:52
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38ni22F5o85dlU1@individual.net...
>
> "snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:38mn6sF5q2v71U1@individual.net...
> >
> > "TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1109789853.654903.310540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> snoig wrote:
> >> > Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
> >> > arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
> >> have any
> >> > problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant
> >> bitch
> >> > about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent
> >> instruction.
> >> > Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an
> >> instructor
> >> > crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for
> >> oncoming
> >> > traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if
> >> instructors
> >> > actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35
> >> years of
> >> > skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a
> >> snowboarder. I
> >> > think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier
> >> skills.
> >> > This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting
> >> safety and
> >> > harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an
> >> instructor
> >> > with the attitude she has.
> >>
> >> You mean like the instructor I saw at Taos after Christmas this year
> >> who lead his group of young kids out of the trees in a blind, slightly
> >> uphill traverse across one of the most crowded and congested runs on
> >> the mountain? As far as I could tell the instructor, who wasn't some
> >> green kid, never even bothered to look upslope. Naturally, all of the
> >> kids (who looked to be around 8 years old) followed him blindly through
> >> the crowd. For those familiar with Taos, this was where Winkelried
> >> funnels down to the Kachina lift below Baby Bear. It was plastered
> >> with "slow skiing" signs and was nice and slick. It gave me a good
> >> opportunity to work in some quick slalom turns with the kids acting as
> >> unwitting moving gates. Had it not been so crowded, I would have
> >> side-stepped back up and "educated" the instructor some. It's a
> >> miracle that none of those kids got nailed.
> >
> > Yep, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I witnessed the exact same
> > thing several days ago at Breck. To hear instructors bitch about out of
> > control snowboarders and then witness things like this really make me
> > wonder
> > how they qualified as instructors. Oh wait, anybody can be an
insturctor
> > for Vail corp. I have a friend who runs one of the childrens program
and
> > he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to fill ski instructor
> > positions. Seems to be a common problem at all Vail resorts. The buddy
> > pass is so cheap that no one wants an $8/hour job teaching when they can
> > work nights at Burger King for $10/hour and buy a $300 pass and ski all
> > day.
> > It just really peaves me to hear instructors bitching about out of
control
> > snowboarders or skiers and watching them do an inadaquate job of
teaching
> > thoes same people. Maybe if instructors took more responsibility there
> > wouldn't be such a problem.
>
> You have no idea how I ski, or how I teach, and yet you can let fly with
> some ill-considered tripe like this. you are plainly a fool, and exemplefy
> the attitude problem that has caused the dangerous situation that exists
on
> US ski hills today. Do you bomb down hills in marginal control? Does
control
> to you mean "not falling over"? Why are you so angry at our reaction to
> this accident at Jackson Hole? Do you see your "rights" being infringed
upon
> as a result?
> In 8 seasons of teaching, I have NEVER had one of my students get hurt.
Your
> posting paints you as an aggressive person and it scares me that people
like
> you can do pretty-much what they want on the ski slopes.
>
> ant

And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed. It does
bother me to see you in this newgroup badmouthing snowboarders when some of
my best friends who I trust my life to in the backcountry are snowboarders.
I can also tell you that they all have skill levels magnitudes above what
you can even imagine.

I think that as a professional insturctor, you should be addressing the
safety issues in the classes you teach. I see examples on almost a daily
basis where insturctors from your ski school are not teaching the
responsibility code and setting bad examples for their students. Your own
posts about using poles as weapons to ward off snowboarders shows me that
there is a systemic problem with Vail Resorts teaching. You call yourself a
professional but those are exceedingly unprofessional comments. Would you
like the director of the snowboard school to hear those comments coming from
someone who is supposed to be a professional ski instructor in their ski
school? (And no, that's not a threat. I have no intention of forwarding
your posts to anybody.)

In short, how about being part of the solution instead of being part of the
problem. Snowboarders are not going away. What needs to happen is better
instruction for all of the responsibility code. I know Vail Resorts can do
a better job because I see the bad examples all the time. You say you have
never had a student get hurt but what about after class because the
responsibility was not emphisized? I am not an agressive person but you
have put down friends of mine who are by far your better one to many times.
Why not try acting like a professional?

snoig




03 Mar 2005 19:14:58
J. Urrrk
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Walt" <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com > wrote in message
news:mwLVd.263$Ql3.183@news.itd.umich.edu...
> vern93 wrote:
>
> > I don't believe in hats.
>
> I do. I can see them, feel them, and sometimes even smell them. I
> pretty sure they're real.
>
Well they're not! The bible says so. Or rather the bible doesn't
say so, since it makes no mention of wearing hats, especially
while skiing. And if it's not in the bible it must be satan's
work.

Maybe they meant as a slang for condom. I'll bet Ant doesn't
wear condoms much. And If Vern doesn't believe in condoms,
that's a double shame since he is a snowboarder and might
reproduce with those four heeled snowboard dogs in his glee
club.

I always ski in a crown of thorns, just like my personal
saviour.

J.Urrrk, bloody mess.




03 Mar 2005 21:47:58
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On 3/3/2005 11:58 AM, snoig wrote:
> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote in message
> news:38ni22F5o85dlU1@individual.net...
>
>>"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:38mn6sF5q2v71U1@individual.net...
>>
>>>"TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1109789853.654903.310540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>>snoig wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
>>>>>arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
>>>>
>>>>have any
>>>>
>>>>>problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant
>>>>
>>>>bitch
>>>>
>>>>>about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent
>>>>
>>>>instruction.
>>>>
>>>>>Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an
>>>>
>>>>instructor
>>>>
>>>>>crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for
>>>>
>>>>oncoming
>>>>
>>>>>traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if
>>>>
>>>>instructors
>>>>
>>>>>actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35
>>>>
>>>>years of
>>>>
>>>>>skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a
>>>>
>>>>snowboarder. I
>>>>
>>>>>think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier
>>>>
>>>>skills.
>>>>
>>>>>This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting
>>>>
>>>>safety and
>>>>
>>>>>harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an
>>>>
>>>>instructor
>>>>
>>>>>with the attitude she has.
>>>>
>>>>You mean like the instructor I saw at Taos after Christmas this year
>>>>who lead his group of young kids out of the trees in a blind, slightly
>>>>uphill traverse across one of the most crowded and congested runs on
>>>>the mountain? As far as I could tell the instructor, who wasn't some
>>>>green kid, never even bothered to look upslope. Naturally, all of the
>>>>kids (who looked to be around 8 years old) followed him blindly through
>>>>the crowd. For those familiar with Taos, this was where Winkelried
>>>>funnels down to the Kachina lift below Baby Bear. It was plastered
>>>>with "slow skiing" signs and was nice and slick. It gave me a good
>>>>opportunity to work in some quick slalom turns with the kids acting as
>>>>unwitting moving gates. Had it not been so crowded, I would have
>>>>side-stepped back up and "educated" the instructor some. It's a
>>>>miracle that none of those kids got nailed.
>>>
>>>Yep, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I witnessed the exact same
>>>thing several days ago at Breck. To hear instructors bitch about out of
>>>control snowboarders and then witness things like this really make me
>>>wonder
>>>how they qualified as instructors. Oh wait, anybody can be an
>
> insturctor
>
>>>for Vail corp. I have a friend who runs one of the childrens program
>
> and
>
>>>he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to fill ski instructor
>>>positions. Seems to be a common problem at all Vail resorts. The buddy
>>>pass is so cheap that no one wants an $8/hour job teaching when they can
>>>work nights at Burger King for $10/hour and buy a $300 pass and ski all
>>>day.
>>>It just really peaves me to hear instructors bitching about out of
>
> control
>
>>>snowboarders or skiers and watching them do an inadaquate job of
>
> teaching
>
>>>thoes same people. Maybe if instructors took more responsibility there
>>>wouldn't be such a problem.
>>
>>You have no idea how I ski, or how I teach, and yet you can let fly with
>>some ill-considered tripe like this. you are plainly a fool, and exemplefy
>>the attitude problem that has caused the dangerous situation that exists
>
> on
>
>>US ski hills today. Do you bomb down hills in marginal control? Does
>
> control
>
>>to you mean "not falling over"? Why are you so angry at our reaction to
>>this accident at Jackson Hole? Do you see your "rights" being infringed
>
> upon
>
>>as a result?
>>In 8 seasons of teaching, I have NEVER had one of my students get hurt.
>
> Your
>
>>posting paints you as an aggressive person and it scares me that people
>
> like
>
>>you can do pretty-much what they want on the ski slopes.
>>
>>ant
>
>
> In the past month I have seen numerous situations where Vail Resort ski
> instructors were not in control of their classes.
>
> Examples are an entire class stopped below a berm where they could not be
> easily seen from above.
>
> An instructor who had his class of children stopped on the side of a trail
> and leading that class onto the trail without looking up. It just so
> happened that a large group of people were coming down then and there were a
> large number of people weaving in and out of that class. If he had looked
> up and waited one minute, he would have made it much safer for his class.
>
> The above example where an instructor lead his class across a merging trail
> without one person looking up.
>
> A group of about eight instructors stopped on a berm on a high traffic trail
> lined up tip to toe so they blocked more than three quarters of the trail.
>
> Maybe you should address this issue at your next meeting. I see examples of
> poor instruction all the time on the mountain. It's your ski school
> management that should be addressing this issue. I think I would be a good
> idea for a company wide safety clinic before the spring break crowds start.
> You can claim whatever you want but I see examples of poor safety training
> on a weekly if not pretty much daily basis.
>
> I ski in control at all times. I have never in over 35 years come even
> close to hitting someone. In the two cases where I have been hit, I was
> stopped and both times it was by a skier. I am an agressive skier but only
> in places where there is no risk of injuring other people and I never see
> instructors in those places.
>
> I am not angry over the accident at Jackson Hole, I am angry at the attitude
> people like you who are supposibly in a position of athority berate
> snowboarders. If instructors did a better job teaching safety and control,
> this so called problem would go away.
>
> And I'll stand by what I said before. The cheap buddy pass has absolutely
> lowered the quality of ski instruction in Colorado over the last few years
> and the effect is particularly noticable for Vail Resorts. There are very
> few good instructors on the mountain and the ones who are good get pushed
> into management so they never teach the beginners that they should be
> teaching. Instead of bitching about snowboarders, why doesn't the ski/ride
> school do a better job teaching them?
>
> snoig
>
>

Most teachers I see don't even carve properly. They slide mostly...If
you are sliding you are not in control...


04 Mar 2005 15:30:22
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:38pnjaF5qve1uU1@individual.net...

> And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.

You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.

Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of yourself.

ant


It does
> bother me to see you in this newgroup badmouthing snowboarders when some
> of
> my best friends who I trust my life to in the backcountry are
> snowboarders.
> I can also tell you that they all have skill levels magnitudes above what
> you can even imagine.
>
> I think that as a professional insturctor, you should be addressing the
> safety issues in the classes you teach. I see examples on almost a daily
> basis where insturctors from your ski school are not teaching the
> responsibility code and setting bad examples for their students. Your own
> posts about using poles as weapons to ward off snowboarders shows me that
> there is a systemic problem with Vail Resorts teaching. You call yourself
> a
> professional but those are exceedingly unprofessional comments. Would you
> like the director of the snowboard school to hear those comments coming
> from
> someone who is supposed to be a professional ski instructor in their ski
> school? (And no, that's not a threat. I have no intention of forwarding
> your posts to anybody.)
>
> In short, how about being part of the solution instead of being part of
> the
> problem. Snowboarders are not going away. What needs to happen is better
> instruction for all of the responsibility code. I know Vail Resorts can
> do
> a better job because I see the bad examples all the time. You say you
> have
> never had a student get hurt but what about after class because the
> responsibility was not emphisized? I am not an agressive person but you
> have put down friends of mine who are by far your better one to many
> times.
> Why not try acting like a professional?
>
> snoig
>
>




04 Mar 2005 15:31:36
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote in message
news:bP6dnZw_a7lRkLrfRVn-pQ@bcn.net...
> ant wrote:
>
>> "bdubya" <bdubya@interaccess.com> wrote in message
>>
>>>If you're looking to a helmet for courage (as opposed to protection),
>>>then you're probably better off sticking with a hat.
>>
>>
>> I don't wear a hat.
>
> Doesn't your head get cold?

Nope. that's what hair is for.

ant




04 Mar 2005 15:34:45
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"vern93" <vern93@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:vern93-811B94.14095103032005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <42274858.365@sbseiber.com>,
> Sam Seiber <Sam.Seiber1234@sbseiber.com> wrote:
>
>> ant wrote:
>> > I don't wear a hat.
>> >
>> > ant
>>
>> Ohh, Ohh, Pick me, Pick me. I DO!
>>
>> Sam "I always wear a hat while ridin' the twin twigs" Seiber
>
> I don't believe in hats. They haven't been shown to prevent frostbite
> of the head. I think they're just a fashion statement :)

shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I don't
like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on, this
happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I seldom wear
one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I don't care if
people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset them?

ant




03 Mar 2005 22:35:32
vern93
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <cv2dneYsa_vOUrrfRVn-2w@speakeasy.net >,
"J. Urrrk" <wibblewibblewibble@woogle.wiggle.wom > wrote:

> Maybe they meant as a slang for condom. I'll bet Ant doesn't
> wear condoms much. And If Vern doesn't believe in condoms,

Well, they haven't been proven to be effective in the prevention of
pregnancy or disease. For example, I wore one last Thursday and friday
woke up with a head cold.

I think the people who wear them are just making fashion statements.

> that's a double shame since he is a snowboarder and might
> reproduce with those four heeled snowboard dogs in his glee
> club.


>
> I always ski in a crown of thorns, just like my personal
> saviour.

Crowns of thorns have not been shown to prevent crusifictshuns.

I always ski dressed just like me, as a tribute to my personal savior.


03 Mar 2005 22:09:48
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38q6isF5oj09jU1@individual.net...
>
> "snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:38pnjaF5qve1uU1@individual.net...
>
> > And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.
>
> You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.
>
> Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of yourself.
>
> ant

I never said Vail, I said Vail Corp or Vail Resorts.




04 Mar 2005 06:27:18
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38q6r3F5rfu55U1@individual.net...

>>> Sam "I always wear a hat while ridin' the twin twigs" Seiber
>>
>> I don't believe in hats. They haven't been shown to prevent frostbite
>> of the head. I think they're just a fashion statement :)
>
> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
> don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on,
> this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I seldom
> wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I don't care
> if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset them?
>

Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is no
one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge in but as
an instructor you should be setting an example for the people who take your
word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the school you work for does not
consider some form of head gear as part of the uniform.




03 Mar 2005 23:00:27
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Norm wrote:
> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote in message
> news:38q6r3F5rfu55U1@individual.net...

>>shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
>>don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on,
>>this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I seldom
>>wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I don't care
>>if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset them?
>>
>
>
> Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is no
> one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge in but as
> an instructor you should be setting an example for the people who take your
> word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the school you work for does not
> consider some form of head gear as part of the uniform.


I think ski schools should require an ear band, with wavy flaxon hair
flowing in the wind above the band, a darkly tanned face with pale eye
surrounds, and an Austrian accent. Skiing went to hell when PSIA
eliminated the Austrian accent requirement for level 3 ski instructors.
For one thing, it threw all the accent instructors out of work.

And yodeling. Instructors MUST be able to yodel.

Doesn't anybody understand real skiing anymore?

P.S. When was the last time anyone heard a yodel while skiing? Anybody
remember. I remember yodels at Squaw Valley in the 60s, but don't recall
any more recent; there must have been some...


04 Mar 2005 00:46:42
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



ant wrote:
> "snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:38mn6sF5q2v71U1@individual.net...
>
>>"TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1109789853.654903.310540@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>snoig wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hey Dengel, don't let these people drag you into thier silly petty
>>>>arguments. The fact is, if they learned how to ski, they wouldn't
>>>
>>>have any
>>>
>>>>problem avoiding snowboarders. Personally, I'm tired of hearing Ant
>>>
>>>bitch
>>>
>>>>about snowboarders when the biggest problem is incompetent
>>>
>>>instruction.
>>>
>>>>Just the other day, I witnessed a class of kids being led by an
>>>
>>>instructor
>>>
>>>>crossing a trail and not one of them looked uphill to check for
>>>
>>>oncoming
>>>
>>>>traffic. Not the instructor or any of the kids. Maybe if
>>>
>>>instructors
>>>
>>>>actually taught the code, there may be fewer problems. In over 35
>>>
>>>years of
>>>
>>>>skiing, I have never come close to hitting or being hit by a
>>>
>>>snowboarder. I
>>>
>>>>think the people who bitch about it really need to upgrade thier
>>>
>>>skills.
>>>
>>>>This goes double for instructors like Ant who should be promoting
>>>
>>>safety and
>>>
>>>>harmony on the mountain. She really has no business being an
>>>
>>>instructor
>>>
>>>>with the attitude she has.
>>>
>>>You mean like the instructor I saw at Taos after Christmas this year
>>>who lead his group of young kids out of the trees in a blind, slightly
>>>uphill traverse across one of the most crowded and congested runs on
>>>the mountain? As far as I could tell the instructor, who wasn't some
>>>green kid, never even bothered to look upslope. Naturally, all of the
>>>kids (who looked to be around 8 years old) followed him blindly through
>>>the crowd. For those familiar with Taos, this was where Winkelried
>>>funnels down to the Kachina lift below Baby Bear. It was plastered
>>>with "slow skiing" signs and was nice and slick. It gave me a good
>>>opportunity to work in some quick slalom turns with the kids acting as
>>>unwitting moving gates. Had it not been so crowded, I would have
>>>side-stepped back up and "educated" the instructor some. It's a
>>>miracle that none of those kids got nailed.
>>
>>Yep, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I witnessed the exact same
>>thing several days ago at Breck. To hear instructors bitch about out of
>>control snowboarders and then witness things like this really make me
>>wonder
>>how they qualified as instructors. Oh wait, anybody can be an insturctor
>>for Vail corp. I have a friend who runs one of the childrens program and
>>he's scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to fill ski instructor
>>positions. Seems to be a common problem at all Vail resorts. The buddy
>>pass is so cheap that no one wants an $8/hour job teaching when they can
>>work nights at Burger King for $10/hour and buy a $300 pass and ski all
>>day.
>>It just really peaves me to hear instructors bitching about out of control
>>snowboarders or skiers and watching them do an inadaquate job of teaching
>>thoes same people. Maybe if instructors took more responsibility there
>>wouldn't be such a problem.
>
>
> You have no idea how I ski, or how I teach, and yet you can let fly with
> some ill-considered tripe like this. you are plainly a fool, and exemplefy
> the attitude problem that has caused the dangerous situation that exists on
> US ski hills today. Do you bomb down hills in marginal control? Does control
> to you mean "not falling over"? Why are you so angry at our reaction to
> this accident at Jackson Hole? Do you see your "rights" being infringed upon
> as a result?
> In 8 seasons of teaching, I have NEVER had one of my students get hurt. Your
> posting paints you as an aggressive person and it scares me that people like
> you can do pretty-much what they want on the ski slopes.
>
> ant
>

My brother called me up from the New England to get the skinny on what
went down, cuz the press is giving this big play out there. The victim
being from Mass and all.

Anyways, he and I have a theory: Remember before shaped skis how there
were much more yard sales and how falling was a very common event? Take
a look at the slopes now. There are few people on their asses. This is
not because the quality of skill or teaching has had dramatic gains.
This is because of modern technology.

With the much improved technology, it has become easier to ski/ride
difficult terrain, to maintain balance in changing conditions and to
ski/ride at mach speed. And that is at the root of the increased danger
of our sport. It is not because there are more punks on the slopes now.
We were punks in our day. We just didn't have the advantage of having
two or one very stable plank(s)strapped to our feet. Our sticks were
much more squirrely and if we tried something too outrageous, we were
mostly on our asses. Skiing at the speeds that are now routine was
reserved for racers and big mountain/free skiing was just being born.

Think about it.

RAC



04 Mar 2005 00:55:58
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



Bob wrote:

> <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1109698026.206278.69360@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
>>is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
>>mph
>
>
> I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost always
> go faster than that.
>
> Bob
>

Bob, I think you know there is a big difference between a DOT motorcycle
(snowmachine) helmet and a Snell skiing helmet.

RAC



04 Mar 2005 01:03:34
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



The Real Bev wrote:

> Bob wrote:
>
>><LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
>>>is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
>>>mph
>>
>>I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost always
>>go faster than that.
>
>
> MC helmets cover a bigger area with more foam than other helmets. I hit
> the ground at ~50 mph and got a nice scrape on my helmet, a goodly bit
> of metal rubbed off the bike's rear rack and just under a square foot of
> skin rubbed off my body, but no head damage whatsoever and I got up and
> rode my bike home.
>
> Then I cried :-(

Just today I saw a *dent* in the helmet of a great skier I ski with. He
was going through trees and didn't duck low enough under a branch stub.
Without the helmet, he would most assuredly have had a nice scalp flap
to secure. This has happened to me before, just without the dent.

RAC



04 Mar 2005 01:08:22
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:


> Most teachers I see don't even carve properly. They slide mostly...If
> you are sliding you are not in control...

That is a serious crock of shit.



04 Mar 2005 01:14:38
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



lal_truckee wrote:

> Norm wrote:
>
>> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote in message
>> news:38q6r3F5rfu55U1@individual.net...
>
>
>>> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
>>> don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one
>>> on, this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one,
>>> I seldom wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people.
>>> I don't care if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one
>>> upset them?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is
>> no one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge
>> in but as an instructor you should be setting an example for the
>> people who take your word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the
>> school you work for does not consider some form of head gear as part
>> of the uniform.
>
>
>
> I think ski schools should require an ear band, with wavy flaxon hair
> flowing in the wind above the band, a darkly tanned face with pale eye
> surrounds, and an Austrian accent. Skiing went to hell when PSIA
> eliminated the Austrian accent requirement for level 3 ski instructors.
> For one thing, it threw all the accent instructors out of work.
>
> And yodeling. Instructors MUST be able to yodel.
>
> Doesn't anybody understand real skiing anymore?
>
> P.S. When was the last time anyone heard a yodel while skiing? Anybody
> remember. I remember yodels at Squaw Valley in the 60s, but don't recall
> any more recent; there must have been some...

I think it has been replaced with the WHOOP!! Most prevalent on cherry
pow pow days.



04 Mar 2005 08:19:29
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

ant wrote:

> "vern93" <vern93@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:vern93-811B94.14095103032005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>
>>In article <42274858.365@sbseiber.com>,
>>Sam Seiber <Sam.Seiber1234@sbseiber.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>ant wrote:
>>>
>>>>I don't wear a hat.
>>>>
>>>>ant
>>>
>>>Ohh, Ohh, Pick me, Pick me. I DO!
>>>
>>>Sam "I always wear a hat while ridin' the twin twigs" Seiber
>>
>>I don't believe in hats. They haven't been shown to prevent frostbite
>>of the head. I think they're just a fashion statement :)
>
>
> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I don't
> like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on, this
> happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I seldom wear
> one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I don't care if
> people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset them?

I don't think anybody cares, ant. It's just unusual.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



04 Mar 2005 08:21:11
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:

> Norm wrote:
>
>> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote in message
>> news:38q6r3F5rfu55U1@individual.net...
>
>
>>> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
>>> don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one
>>> on, this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one,
>>> I seldom wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people.
>>> I don't care if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one
>>> upset them?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is
>> no one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge
>> in but as an instructor you should be setting an example for the
>> people who take your word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the
>> school you work for does not consider some form of head gear as part
>> of the uniform.
>
>
>
> I think ski schools should require an ear band, with wavy flaxon hair
> flowing in the wind above the band, a darkly tanned face with pale eye
> surrounds, and an Austrian accent.

"Bend ze knees, twenty dollars pleez!"

> P.S. When was the last time anyone heard a yodel while skiing? Anybody
> remember. I remember yodels at Squaw Valley in the 60s, but don't recall
> any more recent; there must have been some...

I am quite pleased to say that I have _never_ heard anyone yodel while
skiing.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



04 Mar 2005 07:35:06
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"rosco" <sockeyeboy@tetontel.com > wrote in message
news:112g68crh7leq05@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:
>
>
> > Most teachers I see don't even carve properly. They slide mostly...If
> > you are sliding you are not in control...
>
> That is a serious crock of shit.

Not where I live.




04 Mar 2005 09:40:05
Walt
Re: Death by Snowboarder

ant wrote:

> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I don't
> like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on, this
> happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I seldom wear
> one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I don't care if
> people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset them?

WHAT!?! A woman who refuses to cover her head in public? For shame,
infidel! For Shame.

--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy


04 Mar 2005 07:43:23
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38q6isF5oj09jU1@individual.net...
>
> "snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:38pnjaF5qve1uU1@individual.net...
>
> > And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.
>
> You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.
>
> Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of yourself.
>
> ant

As I said Ant, Vail Resorts. You know, Keystone's parent company. The
problem is systemic throught all of Vail's ski and ride schools.

I see quite a few instructors posting to this list yet you are the only one
who I see regularly advocating violence against snowboarders. Foot hates
snowblades as much as you hate snowboards but I don't see Foot making
comments about hurting people riding them.

There is a safety problem on the mountian and I think that problem start
with the ski school. I see examples of unsafe instruction and instructors
not teaching the responsibility on a frequent basis. One thing this sport
does not need is instructors who promote violence against others.

You want to be a professional ski instructor, why don't you start acting
like one? Promotion of safety and harmony on the mountian should be your
number one job. If this is really the way you feel about boarders then
maybe you are in the wrong profession.

snoig




04 Mar 2005 10:11:44
Walt
Re: Death by Snowboarder

snoig wrote:
> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote
>>"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote
>>
>>>And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.
>>
>>You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.
>>
>>Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of yourself.

>
> As I said Ant, Vail Resorts. You know, Keystone's parent company. The
> problem is systemic throught all of Vail's ski and ride schools.

Sounds to me like you're working off of an old RSA scorecard. If you
weren't too cheap to buy this year's edition, you would know that Ant's
not at Keystone anymore.


--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy


04 Mar 2005 08:38:09
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Walt" <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com > wrote in message
news:RU_Vd.286$Ql3.199@news.itd.umich.edu...
> snoig wrote:
> > "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote
> >>"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote
> >>
> >>>And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.
> >>
> >>You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.
> >>
> >>Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of yourself.
>
> >
> > As I said Ant, Vail Resorts. You know, Keystone's parent company. The
> > problem is systemic throught all of Vail's ski and ride schools.
>
> Sounds to me like you're working off of an old RSA scorecard. If you
> weren't too cheap to buy this year's edition, you would know that Ant's
> not at Keystone anymore.
>
>
> --
> //-Walt
> //
> // There is no Völkl Conspiracy

Whatever, it doesn't really matter to my main point anyway. Instructors
should be promoting safety not violence.




04 Mar 2005 11:12:21
VtSkier
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:
> Norm wrote:
>
>> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote in message
>> news:38q6r3F5rfu55U1@individual.net...
>
>
>>> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
>>> don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one
>>> on, this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one,
>>> I seldom wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people.
>>> I don't care if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one
>>> upset them?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is
>> no one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge
>> in but as an instructor you should be setting an example for the
>> people who take your word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the
>> school you work for does not consider some form of head gear as part
>> of the uniform.
>
>
>
> I think ski schools should require an ear band, with wavy flaxon hair
> flowing in the wind above the band, a darkly tanned face with pale eye
> surrounds, and an Austrian accent. Skiing went to hell when PSIA
> eliminated the Austrian accent requirement for level 3 ski instructors.
> For one thing, it threw all the accent instructors out of work.
>
> And yodeling. Instructors MUST be able to yodel.
>
> Doesn't anybody understand real skiing anymore?
>
> P.S. When was the last time anyone heard a yodel while skiing? Anybody
> remember. I remember yodels at Squaw Valley in the 60s, but don't recall
> any more recent; there must have been some...

Hmmm, yer right!

I remember yodeling Muzak at Killington in the 60's.
Also the accents. I think I wrote something about the
imported Austrians in another thread.

And who from that period doesn't remember, "Bend
zee knees, five dollars pleeze."

I actually tried to learn how to yodel. Trouble was
that I wasn't from Austria... or Tennessee.

VtSkier


04 Mar 2005 11:15:01
VtSkier
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:
>
>
> dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:
>
>
>> Most teachers I see don't even carve properly. They slide mostly...If
>> you are sliding you are not in control...
>
>
> That is a serious crock of shit.
>
Clearly written by someone who doesn't ski very well and
who hasn't been reading threads on this NG.


04 Mar 2005 11:18:44
VtSkier
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Mary Malmros wrote:
(snip)
>
>
> "Bend ze knees, twenty dollars pleez!"
>
Mary, you must be a sweet young thing, unaware
of the inflation of the 70's. In my day it was,
"Bend ze knees, five dollars pleez."

>> P.S. When was the last time anyone heard a yodel while skiing? Anybody
>> remember. I remember yodels at Squaw Valley in the 60s, but don't
>> recall any more recent; there must have been some...
>
>
> I am quite pleased to say that I have _never_ heard anyone yodel while
> skiing.
>
Proves my point from the previous paragraph. You
ARE a sweet (well maybe not so sweet) young thing.


04 Mar 2005 08:43:03
Jeff
Re: Death by Snowboarder

foot2foot wrote:
> "Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com> wrote in message
>
> And you want his name because?

Because I can't stand when information is withheld regardless the
reason.

>
> Don't you think you ought to let the courts and agencies do
> their job, and abandon your self appointed role as
> "executioner?"

I realize you scared-quoted it, but I'm still at a loss to explain this
stretch. How did I become an executioner?

> You *don't* know the facts. You have several *conflicting*
> news reports.

I have some facts and some conflicting reports. It's my job as a
consumer of information to piece together an accurate picture.

> To be quite honest, it might or might not show up somewhere
> else, but as far as you go, why don't you just shut the hell up
> about his name?

Why does information scare you?



04 Mar 2005 08:46:45
Jeff
Re: Death by Snowboarder

ant wrote:
>
> According to a person who identified himself as a friend of the
lady's
> husband, the lady was indeed standing on the side of the run, waiting
for
> her husband.
>

I've talked to ppl online who claim they knew her - their geography was
verified by IP address. Both agreed with the version told by the person
you've mentioned. It is the version I've come to accept.

Jeff



04 Mar 2005 16:54:47
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"VtSkier" <VtSkier@nospam.com > wrote in message
news:38rfs6F5a0782U2@individual.net...
> rosco wrote:
>>
>>
>> dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Most teachers I see don't even carve properly. They slide mostly...If
>>> you are sliding you are not in control...
>>
>>
>> That is a serious crock of shit.
>>
> Clearly written by someone who doesn't ski very well and
> who hasn't been reading threads on this NG.

Depends which part of the statement he was referring to.
Most teachers I see do carve at least reasonably well. Perhaps that is the
part he felt was a crock?




04 Mar 2005 09:21:05
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:
>
> Anyways, he and I have a theory: Remember before shaped skis how there
> were much more yard sales and how falling was a very common event? Take
> a look at the slopes now. There are few people on their asses. This is
> not because the quality of skill or teaching has had dramatic gains.
> This is because of modern technology.
>
> With the much improved technology, it has become easier to ski/ride
> difficult terrain, to maintain balance in changing conditions and to
> ski/ride at mach speed. And that is at the root of the increased danger
> of our sport. It is not because there are more punks on the slopes now.
> We were punks in our day. We just didn't have the advantage of having
> two or one very stable plank(s)strapped to our feet. Our sticks were
> much more squirrely and if we tried something too outrageous, we were
> mostly on our asses. Skiing at the speeds that are now routine was
> reserved for racers and big mountain/free skiing was just being born.

Naw - it's the dam grooming making it easy to go too fast and lose
control. There is a vast side-wing conspiracy to convert skiing into an
amusment park activity. Resorts are grooming the crap out of everything
in sight and building disney style Mad Hatter Teacup rides AKA terrain
parks, manufacturers are building skis and boards that work best on
inbounds groomed terrain, newspapers (see $4,177.87 thread) make it
sound the height of insanity to go out of bounds, and ski publications
can only discuss the quality of dinner and the nightlife.

Hey! I feel another related rant coming on - maybe I'll make it a
separate thread.


04 Mar 2005 12:25:28
VtSkier
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:
> rosco wrote:
>
>>
>> Anyways, he and I have a theory: Remember before shaped skis how
>> there were much more yard sales and how falling was a very common
>> event? Take a look at the slopes now. There are few people on their
>> asses. This is not because the quality of skill or teaching has had
>> dramatic gains. This is because of modern technology.
>>
>> With the much improved technology, it has become easier to ski/ride
>> difficult terrain, to maintain balance in changing conditions and to
>> ski/ride at mach speed. And that is at the root of the increased
>> danger of our sport. It is not because there are more punks on the
>> slopes now. We were punks in our day. We just didn't have the
>> advantage of having two or one very stable plank(s)strapped to our
>> feet. Our sticks were much more squirrely and if we tried something
>> too outrageous, we were mostly on our asses. Skiing at the speeds
>> that are now routine was reserved for racers and big mountain/free
>> skiing was just being born.
>
>
> Naw - it's the dam grooming making it easy to go too fast and lose
> control. There is a vast side-wing conspiracy to convert skiing into an
> amusment park activity. Resorts are grooming the crap out of everything
> in sight and building disney style Mad Hatter Teacup rides AKA terrain
> parks, manufacturers are building skis and boards that work best on
> inbounds groomed terrain, newspapers (see $4,177.87 thread) make it
> sound the height of insanity to go out of bounds, and ski publications
> can only discuss the quality of dinner and the nightlife.
>
> Hey! I feel another related rant coming on - maybe I'll make it a
> separate thread.

Heck, this is as good a place for a rant as any.

I'd like to add that I think the biggest reason for increased danger
is the increased number of people ON THE HILL AT ANY ONE TIME. This
is, of course, due to the increase in uphill capacity brought about
by high-speed lifts AND the total increase in the NUMBER of lifts.

Putting 6 people at the top in the same time it used to take to get
two people to the top is a HUGE increase. Add to that the fact
that the 6-pack is a lot faster than the double and you increase it
that much more. Now, put A LOT of 6-packs and quads on the hill and
then look up and see if you don't think it looks like ants on a
wedding cake.

With that situation it's truly amazing that more people don't
get hurt. A busy day anywhere is an exercise in caution if you
have any sense of mortality at all.

I agree with you assessment of trauma parks but I do agree that it
is the height of insanity to go out of bounds UNLESS you are
prepared AND know what you are doing. Now you need to learn sometime,
so complying with my requirements can mean going out with someone
who ALREADY complies with my requirements.

As for new equipment, I'll agree that, at least as far as boots
are concerned, skiing is a lot easier than it was. Of course most
of those changes making this so occurred in the 70's. I thought
my Hanson Riva's were the cat's meow and I skied them into the
90's. Of course the liners rotted out and I got a few more years
with Raichle liners, but when I changed to newer boots (Nordica
rear entry) I found an improvement in comfort but not skiability.

Overlap boots and others which hinge more correctly than rear entry
boots added a bit in the control department, but went backward in
the comfort department. Only my rando boots today seem to give me
the comfort needed for multi-days of skiing and still have a good
compromise for skiability.

Skis? Well yeah, today's skis seem to need to be part of a quiver,
but then us gear addicts needed that anyway.

As for grooming, it's nice after a thaw-freeze cycle but otherwise
over done.

VtSkier


04 Mar 2005 13:07:14
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Walt wrote:
> LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
>
>>>>> My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.
>>
>>
>> Really? How do you work that? >>
>>
>> AOL employees are given a certain number of accounts. I'm not an AOL
>> employee but a member of my family is.
>
>
> You're still paying more for it than it's worth.
>

You're being too harsh. Not everyone who uses AOL is an idiot. I used it
for years when I was a beta tester. Heck I still remember when it was
called PC-Link! When they took away my free account though we parted ways.


04 Mar 2005 13:08:27
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:
> Mary Malmros wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey, can we have a "most outrageous newbie" contest, maybe in a couple
>> of months when most of us will have hung up our skis? I gotta
>> nomination.
>
>
> Why would you hang up your skis in mid-season?

Bite me


04 Mar 2005 11:45:47
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

VtSkier wrote:
> I do agree that it
> is the height of insanity to go out of bounds UNLESS you are
> prepared AND know what you are doing.

Except that's true about every activity known to man. The leopards will
get ya if you're not prepared. Basic fact. In spite of what appears to
be majority preference, life is not safe.

But there seems to be a blatant urge to treat skiing differently from
all the other common unsafe activities, like staying in bed (heart
attack), or say, backcountry hiking. You're going for a wilderness hike,
you prepare, pack necessities, and go. You break your leg and need
assistance nobody gets overly excited. The equivalent to the way people
and papers treat out of bounds skiing would be to report the the "crazy
fool" crossed the boundaries of Central Park and <gasp > went out of
bounds! Holy Turkey Dung, he deserve all the evils that fate can dump on
him, including paying his way out of any unfortunate occurance.

Out of Bounds is often the only real skiing left near most resorts - the
rest of the hill is groomed to cueball status. Out of Bounds skiing
should be treated as normal human use of the wilderness, just like any
other use.

IMO, if the sheriff wants to charge the costs of rescue, it should be
for incidental costs, not costs of salaries (unless the sheriff and the
rest wish to give up their otherwise paid salary) or equipment (which is
amortised) or the costs of organization - all rescue organizations need
to excercise their abilities in order to be prepared; unless they just
returned from this month's excercise most of the costs should be
attributed to the "live excercise" budget. What they are really doing
with these charges for rescue is applying an extrajudicial fine as
punishment for out of bounds skiing. It's part of an out-of-control
paternalized state controlling its subject's every move.

But I don't care. No opinion here. Move along.


04 Mar 2005 15:28:57
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Norm wrote:
> "VtSkier" <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:38rfs6F5a0782U2@individual.net...
>
>>rosco wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Most teachers I see don't even carve properly. They slide mostly...If
>>>>you are sliding you are not in control...
>>>
>>>
>>>That is a serious crock of shit.
>>>
>>
>>Clearly written by someone who doesn't ski very well and
>>who hasn't been reading threads on this NG.
>
>
> Depends which part of the statement he was referring to.
> Most teachers I see do carve at least reasonably well. Perhaps that is the
> part he felt was a crock?
>
>

No doubt he was referring to the 2nd part of the statement. There's a
time to carve and a time to skid. There are lots of tools in the toolbox
and and a proper use for all of them.


04 Mar 2005 15:45:20
Chuck
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Jeff wrote:
> ant wrote:
>
>>According to a person who identified himself as a friend of the
>
> lady's
>
>>husband, the lady was indeed standing on the side of the run, waiting
>
> for
>
>>her husband.
>>
>
>
> I've talked to ppl online who claim they knew her - their geography was
> verified by IP address. Both agreed with the version told by the person
> you've mentioned. It is the version I've come to accept.
>
> Jeff
>

How do you verify someone's geography with an IP address? You can verify
where their usenet, irc, or email server is, but you're more than likely
not even seeing *their* IP. I've had people think I was Asia because I
posted from IRC server over there. Truth was I was in PA all the time.


04 Mar 2005 14:10:18
Walt
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Chuck wrote:
> Walt wrote:
>>LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.
>>
>>You're still paying more for it than it's worth.
>>
>
> You're being too harsh. Not everyone who uses AOL is an idiot.

I didn't say that AOLer were all idiots. It's just that in my
estimation, calculating the TCO, AOL even for free isn't worth it.

Think about it this way: I can ride the purple beginner's chair at Nubs
for free - anybody can, it's a service they provide for the beginners.
But I don't ride the purple chair, I pay for a lift ticket. Why?
Because by the time I've purchased ski gear, driven to the hill, and
paid for a hotel room, the cost of a lift ticket is small potatoes.
Staying on the bunny hill at that point would be a bad deal.


Your calculations may vary.

--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Völkl Conspiracy


04 Mar 2005 13:47:16
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Chuck wrote:
>
> Walt wrote:
> > LeeAnne@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >>>>> My AOL account is free. So you still pay more than me.
> >>
> >> Really? How do you work that? >>
> >>
> >> AOL employees are given a certain number of accounts. I'm not an AOL
> >> employee but a member of my family is.
> >
> > You're still paying more for it than it's worth.
>
> You're being too harsh. Not everyone who uses AOL is an idiot. I used it
> for years when I was a beta tester. Heck I still remember when it was
> called PC-Link! When they took away my free account though we parted ways.

I used it for about an hour way back in 1994 or so when I had a free
Calstate account (the jerks thought they could invent something better
than netscape at the time -- they wanted it to be kid-friendly (meaning
no porn); anybody ever hear of a browser called gina?). Every 10
seconds I got the "downloading new graphics" message (or equivalent) for
20 seconds. Absolutely maddening. Who'd have thought that people would
put up with crap like that?

--
Cheers, Bev
==========================================================
There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.'


04 Mar 2005 14:09:22
Bob
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"rosco" <sockeyeboy@tetontel.com > wrote in message
news:112g5h59eaj0i4e@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> Bob wrote:
>
> > <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:1109698026.206278.69360@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >>Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
> >>is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
> >>mph
> >
> >
> > I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost
always
> > go faster than that.
>
> Bob, I think you know there is a big difference between a DOT motorcycle
> (snowmachine) helmet and a Snell skiing helmet.

And neither will save you if you run head first into a rock wall at 15mph.
But either will greatly decrease your chance of injury from a glancing blow
at way over 15 mph.

Bob

>




04 Mar 2005 14:23:41
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

rosco wrote:
>
> The Real Bev wrote:
>
> > Bob wrote:
> >
> >><LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
> >>>is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
> >>>mph
> >>
> >>I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost always
> >>go faster than that.
> >
> > MC helmets cover a bigger area with more foam than other helmets. I hit
> > the ground at ~50 mph and got a nice scrape on my helmet, a goodly bit
> > of metal rubbed off the bike's rear rack and just under a square foot of
> > skin rubbed off my body, but no head damage whatsoever and I got up and
> > rode my bike home.
> >
> > Then I cried :-(
>
> Just today I saw a *dent* in the helmet of a great skier I ski with. He
> was going through trees and didn't duck low enough under a branch stub.
> Without the helmet, he would most assuredly have had a nice scalp flap
> to secure. This has happened to me before, just without the dent.

That's the kind of attack that can make a poorly-fitting helmet a lethal
weapon.

--
Cheers,
Bev
==========================================================
There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.'


04 Mar 2005 16:28:19
vern93
Re: Death by Snowboarder

In article <uo2Wd.299$Ql3.203@news.itd.umich.edu >,
Walt <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com > wrote:

> > You're being too harsh. Not everyone who uses AOL is an idiot.
>
> I didn't say that AOLer were all idiots. It's just that in my
> estimation, calculating the TCO, AOL even for free isn't worth it.

As much as I hate to admit, there's a copy of AOL sitting on my HD now.
Despite a blue tooth enabled phone and bluetooth in my laptop - the are
times when I travel when that LOCAL AOL access number is invaluable.

But I think it gets molasses stuck in my G4 processor, AOL never gets
any faster and the beach ball just spins and spins and spins....


04 Mar 2005 14:38:25
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Chuck wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
> > ant wrote:
> >
> >>According to a person who identified himself as a friend of the lady's
> >>husband, the lady was indeed standing on the side of the run, waiting
> >>for her husband.
> >
> > I've talked to ppl online who claim they knew her - their geography was
> > verified by IP address. Both agreed with the version told by the person
> > you've mentioned. It is the version I've come to accept.
>
> How do you verify someone's geography with an IP address? You can verify
> where their usenet, irc, or email server is, but you're more than likely
> not even seeing *their* IP. I've had people think I was Asia because I
> posted from IRC server over there. Truth was I was in PA all the time.

Yeah, but not everybody is lying all the time. There's no reason to
assume a person is dishonest unless it makes a difference. Not all
stories are worth the trouble to verify.

OTOH, article linked from Drudge about Dan Rather and Letterman:
"'Although they had four months and millions of dollars, they could not
demonstrate that the documents were not authentic, that they were
forgeries,' Rather said."

All they had to do was find a >60-year-old secretary who worked for or
had dealings with the US government.

--
Cheers,
Bev
==========================================================
There is a fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.'


04 Mar 2005 18:04:30
VtSkier
Re: Death by Snowboarder

lal_truckee wrote:
> VtSkier wrote:
>
>> I do agree that it
>> is the height of insanity to go out of bounds UNLESS you are
>> prepared AND know what you are doing.
>
>
> Except that's true about every activity known to man. The leopards will
> get ya if you're not prepared. Basic fact. In spite of what appears to
> be majority preference, life is not safe.
>
Yahbut...
If I go to where there are leopards, I've taken my
mighty white hunter with me, along with hordes of
natives to carry my bib and tucker (oh, sorry, wrong
decade, wrong century, I'd be doing this motorized
in this day and age and my guide would be a native).
Nevertheless, I'd go prepared.

What is dumb here with going out of bounds at a ski
area IS lack of preparation.

You show up at the ski area dressed for 25 degreesF.
The actual temp is 10 degrees because it's just that
much colder on the mountain. It's December and there
has just been a good bit of snow in the woods BUT it
gets dark about 4:30.

At 3:00 PM you've been skiing the gondola because you
are slightly under dressed and you decide you need
some further adventure and you've seen some tracks
going off near Cooper's Cabin along with ropes which
have been skied under and lots of signs warning you
that this is the area boundary and that if you ski
beyond this point, you are basically on your own and
if you need to be rescued, you might be charged for
the effort. So, never having been here in your life,
you duck the rope and ski down toward Wheelerville
(not a town, just a location on a USGS map). But,
instead of staying high on the ridge, you take the
steeper route into the brook gully.

The gully flattens out and widens long before you
come to a road. You are lost. There are now several
choices of direction you must make and it's now
past 4:30 and dark.

Not really knowing that by basically staying a down-
hill course, you will hit a road, you decide to try
to climb back up to where you came from. Well, there
are lots of tracks going down the mountain and you
don't know which ones are yours, so which do you
follow? Remember this is an area where people do ski
out of bounds and do know where they are going. But
you don't, you now think that backtracking is best.

It's not. It's a huge tree covered wilderness in there
and direction is not easy to see. By trying to back
track you will probably wind up in the area between
Killington and Pico. If you are lucky, after spending
the night in the woods, you stumble out onto the slopes
which comprise the RamsHead section of Killington. If
you aren't so lucky, your parents or drinking buddies
have called in the gendarmes and they have found you.
If you really aren't lucky (or skillful) you have
experienced the fact that it can get to well below
zero in temperature an have frozen to death (hasn't
happened too often) or experienced severe enough frost
bite to require removal of frozen parts (has happened
quite frequently).

This is not an uncommon scenario.

> But there seems to be a blatant urge to treat skiing differently from
> all the other common unsafe activities, like staying in bed (heart
> attack), or say, backcountry hiking. You're going for a wilderness hike,
> you prepare, pack necessities, and go. You break your leg and need
> assistance nobody gets overly excited. The equivalent to the way people
> and papers treat out of bounds skiing would be to report the the "crazy
> fool" crossed the boundaries of Central Park and <gasp> went out of
> bounds! Holy Turkey Dung, he deserve all the evils that fate can dump on
> him, including paying his way out of any unfortunate occurance.
>
Not quite, the hiker, at least has tried to be prepared
for what he faces. He is carrying food and extra clothing,
not to mention sleeping gear adequate to the conditions.
Break a leg? Well you probably have some preparation and
can jury rig a splint and a litter. You probably are not
alone either and you have probably told someone where you
are going.

If you don't get that unprepared skier out in a day or
so, he's probably a goner.

Not too long ago, a person took a walk into the woods
near here. Didn't tell anyone where they were going or
when they would be back. It seems that she found a cabin
in the woods and figured this would be a great place to
meditate. Well 10 hours later, she hadn't returned to
where she was staying (not a local) so the gendarmes
were called in. Someone guessed the direction she had
taken and a search was mounted.

Person found, actually walked out. End of story. But
for weeks afterward discussion of the event punctuated
the "irresponsible" act and how maybe she should have
been charged for the search.

In actuality it was a bit of over reaction. It was
summer and good weather.

Point being this wasn't a skier and the real crime was
not telling anybody where she was going.

> Out of Bounds is often the only real skiing left near most resorts - the
> rest of the hill is groomed to cueball status. Out of Bounds skiing
> should be treated as normal human use of the wilderness, just like any
> other use.
>
Of course. But, as with the hiker, the skier should be at least
minimally prepared to spend a night in the woods and to
TELL someone where he is going.

> IMO, if the sheriff wants to charge the costs of rescue, it should be
> for incidental costs, not costs of salaries (unless the sheriff and the
> rest wish to give up their otherwise paid salary) or equipment (which is
> amortised) or the costs of organization - all rescue organizations need
> to excercise their abilities in order to be prepared; unless they just
> returned from this month's excercise most of the costs should be
> attributed to the "live excercise" budget. What they are really doing
> with these charges for rescue is applying an extrajudicial fine as
> punishment for out of bounds skiing. It's part of an out-of-control
> paternalized state controlling its subject's every move.
>
No, the sherriff is not penalizing for out of bounds skiing, he
is penalizing an irresponsible act which costs the state and
the county a considerable amount of money. I don't have ready
access to the earlier post/thread but I do remember that the
state didn't charge for the helicopter. Think what that might
have been? Isn't renting a copter something like $1000/hour?
That's another $8 or $10k bucks added onto the $12k that the
state is reportedly charging the four. Other items were also
noted as not charged for. These probably fall into your list
of things that shouldn't be charged for.

> But I don't care. No opinion here. Move along.

Bull***t you don't have an opinion.

VtSkier


04 Mar 2005 23:47:06
lal_truckee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

VtSkier wrote:
> lal_truckee wrote:
>
>

CLIP
>
> You show up at the ski area dressed for 25 degreesF.
> The actual temp is 10 degrees because it's just that
> much colder on the mountain. It's December and there
> has just been a good bit of snow in the woods BUT it
> gets dark about 4:30.

Well, now; even tho I was overheating out there I didn't go back and
ditch my parka in the locker - never know when 1) I might get lost or 2)
I might have to join the search for the other guy who got lost: so I'm
usually overdressed with pit zips open and steaming. I noticed you
didn't ditch your shell in the locker either - you kept it with you.
Preparation isn't the same as having a pile of gear; it's being prepared
to spend the night out.

CLIP
>> But there seems to be a blatant urge to treat skiing differently from
>> all the other common unsafe activities, like staying in bed (heart
>> attack), or say, backcountry hiking. You're going for a wilderness
>> hike, you prepare, pack necessities, and go. You break your leg and
>> need assistance nobody gets overly excited. The equivalent to the way
>> people and papers treat out of bounds skiing would be to report the
>> the "crazy fool" crossed the boundaries of Central Park and <gasp>
>> went out of bounds! Holy Turkey Dung, he deserve all the evils that
>> fate can dump on him, including paying his way out of any unfortunate
>> occurance.
>>
> Not quite, the hiker, at least has tried to be prepared
> for what he faces. He is carrying food and extra clothing,
> not to mention sleeping gear adequate to the conditions.
> Break a leg? Well you probably have some preparation and
> can jury rig a splint and a litter. You probably are not
> alone either and you have probably told someone where you
> are going.

Well, I've been alone miles out in wilderness areas - don't much like it
but that's the way it turns out sometimes. But I do like your idea of
rigging a splint and litter and carrying myself out...

CLIP
>> IMO, if the sheriff wants to charge the costs of rescue, it should be
>> for incidental costs, not costs of salaries (unless the sheriff and
>> the rest wish to give up their otherwise paid salary) or equipment
>> (which is amortised) or the costs of organization - all rescue
>> organizations need to excercise their abilities in order to be
>> prepared; unless they just returned from this month's excercise most
>> of the costs should be attributed to the "live excercise" budget. What
>> they are really doing with these charges for rescue is applying an
>> extrajudicial fine as punishment for out of bounds skiing. It's part
>> of an out-of-control paternalized state controlling its subject's
>> every move.
>>
> No, the sherriff is not penalizing for out of bounds skiing, he
> is penalizing an irresponsible act which costs the state and
> the county a considerable amount of money. I don't have ready
> access to the earlier post/thread but I do remember that the
> state didn't charge for the helicopter. Think what that might
> have been? Isn't renting a copter something like $1000/hour?
> That's another $8 or $10k bucks added onto the $12k that the
> state is reportedly charging the four. Other items were also
> noted as not charged for. These probably fall into your list
> of things that shouldn't be charged for.

Problem is that helicopter pilot has to fly so many hours a month to
keep his certificate whether he's looking for someone or just tooling
around. If he's rescue certified he either has to fly a rescue mission
or at least a simulated mission - so he maybe should be paying the dudes
for setting up a really good simulation? Helicopter maybe has to rack
some hours itself just to keep airworthy and checked out - anybody know
for sure?
So, what was charged for? That wouldn't otherwise be paid for. Pro's
salaries are paid regardless, volunteers don't get paid regardless; pro
equipment is paid for whether used or not, and probably has to get used
regularly anyway just to keep it in condition for emergencies. Volunteer
equipment is volunteer. No, I figure it's a punitive extrajudicial fine
made up of items being double paid.

How much did they charge for rescue of those people drowning in the
Potomac when their plane went into the ice? Those folks took a silly
chance - flying in foul weather is probamatical at best.
>
>> But I don't care. No opinion here. Move along.
>
> Bull***t you don't have an opinion.

Still no opinion. <grin >


04 Mar 2005 21:24:54
VtSkier
Preparedness (was: Re: Death by Snowboarder)

lal_truckee wrote:
CLIPEROO
>
> Well, I've been alone miles out in wilderness areas - don't much like it
> but that's the way it turns out sometimes. But I do like your idea of
> rigging a splint and litter and carrying myself out...

So, back in 1996 I took my bicycle to the top of Skye Peak in early
October to check out the views. Rode the lift because I'm basically
lazy. Didn't have cell phone or other communications at the time.
Had water and granola bars, extra shell, a modest first aid kit
and good knowledge of where I was and how to get out. I was planning
to ride over to K-1 and go to the top of K-Peak, a ride of about 1/2
hour and a lift ride of 10 minutes. I had done this before except
that I was alone.

It had rained a bit the day before so trails had open mud on them.

This made things slippery here and there. I was being cautious.
Too cautious it seems. I trying to negotiate a moderately steep
section, I started to topple downhill. I stuck out my leg to
catch myself. I heard the left knee ACL pop with great clarity.

I sat down beside my bike to collect my thoughts and let the
adrenaline settle down.

1) no one else around
2) no ski patrol and no way to call
3) it was late in the day (around 3:00PM)

What to do?

I picked up the bike, coasted down a trail that I knew and wound
up back at my car. Drove myself home, got out my crutches and
called the doctor for a appointment the next day.

Not a broken bone, but fairly debilitating and no way to
get help quickly. I was far enough down so that the lifty at
the top couldn't see me and it was a difficult uphill hike
with a wounded knee to get to him.

I guess I was probably prepared enough. My main error was in
doing this trip alone. I didn't build myself a litter and
carry myself down the mountain, but I did get my injured
ass (knee) out and to help. Moderate amount of time too, the
whole process was less than an hour, less time than it took
for my knee to swell and REALLY begin to hurt.

Clearly I'm not against travel on the good green earth. I
frequently go there to worship. But I know ma nature pretty
well and her moods around here, so I try to go as well
prepared as I can.

>
(And SNIP the rest)

> >> But I don't care. No opinion here. Move along.
> >
> > Bull***t you don't have an opinion.
>
> Still no opinion. <grin>

Yes you do. ;- >


04 Mar 2005 21:25:33
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

snoig wrote:

[snip]
> There is a safety problem on the mountian and I think that problem start
> with the ski school. I see examples of unsafe instruction and instructors
> not teaching the responsibility on a frequent basis.

I'll cop to not teaching the responsibility code all the time, but a lot
of my students are four to six years old, and can't remember the code as
such. What I do with them is start by working on two rules: "Always ski
in control" and "Stop in a safe place". It takes a lot of repetition
with little kids before they can remember those rules, although to be
fair, they can remember to _do_ the first one pretty easily. Rules
about trail merging and looking uphill take a little longer.

We also start the kids off in a controlled-access area, where rule 1 is
the one that matters the most. If you can get them to remember that,
things can proceed safely for everyone. Once they start moving out into
the general public, you need to introduce the others.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



04 Mar 2005 21:28:02
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

VtSkier wrote:

> Mary Malmros wrote:
> (snip)
>
>>
>>
>> "Bend ze knees, twenty dollars pleez!"
>>
> Mary, you must be a sweet young thing, unaware
> of the inflation of the 70's. In my day it was,
> "Bend ze knees, five dollars pleez."

I started skiing in the early '70s, and was scarred by life by the WIN
button shortage of the Ford administration.

>>> P.S. When was the last time anyone heard a yodel while skiing?
>>> Anybody remember. I remember yodels at Squaw Valley in the 60s, but
>>> don't recall any more recent; there must have been some...
>>
>>
>>
>> I am quite pleased to say that I have _never_ heard anyone yodel while
>> skiing.
>>
> Proves my point from the previous paragraph. You
> ARE a sweet (well maybe not so sweet) young thing.

I'm evil, and I have many evil henchmen. Every time I teach teenagers,
I select one to be my evil henchman. They love it.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



04 Mar 2005 21:31:24
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Jeff wrote:

> foot2foot wrote:
>
>>"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com> wrote in message
>>
>>And you want his name because?
>
>
> Because I can't stand when information is withheld regardless the
> reason.

I am withholding from you the following pieces of information: my blood
type, my social security number, and the PIN number of my ATM card. I
know you don't care, but I am withholding these pieces of information
for the good and sufficient reason that it ain't none of your business.

>>Don't you think you ought to let the courts and agencies do
>>their job, and abandon your self appointed role as
>>"executioner?"
>
> I realize you scared-quoted it, but I'm still at a loss to explain this
> stretch. How did I become an executioner?


You didn't, but I also wondered as to why you felt the need to find the
snowboarder's name. To what end?

>>You *don't* know the facts. You have several *conflicting*
>>news reports.
>
> I have some facts and some conflicting reports. It's my job as a
> consumer of information to piece together an accurate picture.

What facts do you have? I don't have any. I've heard, by second- or
third-hand, some witness accounts. Even if I'd heard them first-hand,
they don't amount to facts.

>>To be quite honest, it might or might not show up somewhere
>>else, but as far as you go, why don't you just shut the hell up
>>about his name?
>
>
> Why does information scare you?

"Why do you hate America?"

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



04 Mar 2005 21:33:17
VtSkier
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Mary Malmros wrote:
(SNIP)
>
> I'm evil, and I have many evil henchmen. Every time I teach teenagers,
> I select one to be my evil henchman. They love it.
>

I thought probably. I think I may have seen one
or two of your henchmen from time to time.


04 Mar 2005 21:34:36
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

The Real Bev wrote:

> rosco wrote:
>
>>The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Bob wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>><LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone who
>>>>>is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12 mph to 15
>>>>>mph
>>>>
>>>>I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost always
>>>>go faster than that.
>>>
>>>MC helmets cover a bigger area with more foam than other helmets. I hit
>>>the ground at ~50 mph and got a nice scrape on my helmet, a goodly bit
>>>of metal rubbed off the bike's rear rack and just under a square foot of
>>>skin rubbed off my body, but no head damage whatsoever and I got up and
>>>rode my bike home.
>>>
>>>Then I cried :-(
>>
>>Just today I saw a *dent* in the helmet of a great skier I ski with. He
>>was going through trees and didn't duck low enough under a branch stub.
>>Without the helmet, he would most assuredly have had a nice scalp flap
>>to secure. This has happened to me before, just without the dent.
>
>
> That's the kind of attack that can make a poorly-fitting helmet a lethal
> weapon.

"I got attacked by the tree!"

So don't wear a poorly-fitted helmet. Heck, don't wear poorly-fitted
boots.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



04 Mar 2005 21:13:36
bdubya
Re: Death by Snowboarder

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 21:31:24 -0500, Mary Malmros
<malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote:

>Jeff wrote:
>
>> foot2foot wrote:
>>
>>>"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>>And you want his name because?
>>
>>
>> Because I can't stand when information is withheld regardless the
>> reason.
>
>I am withholding from you the following pieces of information: my blood
>type, my social security number, and the PIN number of my ATM card. I
>know you don't care, but I am withholding these pieces of information
>for the good and sufficient reason that it ain't none of your business.

You should have withheld the reason; that woulda REALLY pissed him
off.

bw


05 Mar 2005 23:55:36
Jeff
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Chuck wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
>
>>ant wrote:
>>
>>
>>>According to a person who identified himself as a friend of the
>>
>>lady's
>>
>>
>>>husband, the lady was indeed standing on the side of the run, waiting
>>
>>for
>>
>>
>>>her husband.
>>>
>>
>>
>>I've talked to ppl online who claim they knew her - their geography was
>>verified by IP address. Both agreed with the version told by the person
>>you've mentioned. It is the version I've come to accept.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>
>
> How do you verify someone's geography with an IP address? You can verify
> where their usenet, irc, or email server is, but you're more than likely
> not even seeing *their* IP. I've had people think I was Asia because I
> posted from IRC server over there. Truth was I was in PA all the time.

If you are the administrator of the server, then you've got access to
the logs in which the source IP is available.

Jeff


05 Mar 2005 18:30:09
rosco
Re: Death by Snowboarder



Norm wrote:
> "VtSkier" <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:38rfs6F5a0782U2@individual.net...
>
>>rosco wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>dxyzc@nospam.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Most teachers I see don't even carve properly. They slide mostly...If
>>>>you are sliding you are not in control...
>>>
>>>
>>>That is a serious crock of shit.
>>>
>>
>>Clearly written by someone who doesn't ski very well and
>>who hasn't been reading threads on this NG.
>
>
> Depends which part of the statement he was referring to.
> Most teachers I see do carve at least reasonably well. Perhaps that is the
> part he felt was a crock?
>
>

What I was referring to is that you are not in control when sliding.
That is pure horseshit.

RAC



06 Mar 2005 15:23:55
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:adTVd.568916$Xk.378906@pd7tw3no...
>
> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote in message
> news:38q6r3F5rfu55U1@individual.net...
>
>>>> Sam "I always wear a hat while ridin' the twin twigs" Seiber
>>>
>>> I don't believe in hats. They haven't been shown to prevent frostbite
>>> of the head. I think they're just a fashion statement :)
>>
>> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
>> don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on,
>> this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I seldom
>> wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I don't care
>> if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset them?
>>
>
> Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is no
> one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge in but
> as an instructor you should be setting an example for the people who take
> your word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the school you work for
> does not consider some form of head gear as part of the uniform.

You are kidding? This has to be a troll.

Why is not wearing a hat a "bad habit"?

ant




06 Mar 2005 15:24:53
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"lal_truckee" <lal_truckee@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:38qeccF5o7dpeU1@individual.net...

> And yodeling. Instructors MUST be able to yodel.
>
> Doesn't anybody understand real skiing anymore?

This is why I haven't gone for my full cert yet. (it's not laziness,
really). I cannot yodel. Can't even yelp properly. It's pathetic.

ant




06 Mar 2005 15:28:13
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"lal_truckee" <lal_truckee@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:38rioeF5rdt2oU1@individual.net...
> rosco wrote:
>>
>> Anyways, he and I have a theory: Remember before shaped skis how there
>> were much more yard sales and how falling was a very common event? Take
>> a look at the slopes now. There are few people on their asses. This is
>> not because the quality of skill or teaching has had dramatic gains. This
>> is because of modern technology.
>>
>> With the much improved technology, it has become easier to ski/ride
>> difficult terrain, to maintain balance in changing conditions and to
>> ski/ride at mach speed. And that is at the root of the increased danger
>> of our sport. It is not because there are more punks on the slopes now.
>> We were punks in our day. We just didn't have the advantage of having
>> two or one very stable plank(s)strapped to our feet. Our sticks were
>> much more squirrely and if we tried something too outrageous, we were
>> mostly on our asses. Skiing at the speeds that are now routine was
>> reserved for racers and big mountain/free skiing was just being born.
>
> Naw - it's the dam grooming making it easy to go too fast and lose
> control. There is a vast side-wing conspiracy to convert skiing into an
> amusment park activity. Resorts are grooming the crap out of everything in
> sight and building disney style Mad Hatter Teacup rides AKA terrain parks,
> manufacturers are building skis and boards that work best on inbounds
> groomed terrain, newspapers (see $4,177.87 thread) make it sound the
> height of insanity to go out of bounds, and ski publications can only
> discuss the quality of dinner and the nightlife.

Actually, I think there's a very fat kernal of truth in both ideas, and both
have occurred to quite a few snow users, judging by converstions I've had.
shapes have made faster skiing and more terrain attainable to people with
less skill and less experience. Grooming, well, we all know about that!

ant




06 Mar 2005 15:32:44
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Walt" <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com > wrote in message
news:ar_Vd.285$Ql3.169@news.itd.umich.edu...
> ant wrote:
>
>> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
>> don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on,
>> this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I seldom
>> wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I don't care
>> if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset them?
>
> WHAT!?! A woman who refuses to cover her head in public? For shame,
> infidel! For Shame.

NOW we discover the true story! Echelon has picked you up and the men in
black will be visiting shortly.

ant




06 Mar 2005 15:35:44
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Walt" <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com > wrote in message
news:RU_Vd.286$Ql3.199@news.itd.umich.edu...
> snoig wrote:
>> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote
>>>"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>>And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.
>>>
>>>You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.
>>>
>>>Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of yourself.
>
>>
>> As I said Ant, Vail Resorts. You know, Keystone's parent company. The
>> problem is systemic throught all of Vail's ski and ride schools.
>
> Sounds to me like you're working off of an old RSA scorecard. If you
> weren't too cheap to buy this year's edition, you would know that Ant's
> not at Keystone anymore.

Judging by the way he's typing, it's probably just as well. He's got
Hoff-itis.

As for violence against snowboarders, I advocate no such thing. but when
they smash into me, they come off second best. I'm sorry if that upsets you
snoig, but when they slam into me, my concern is no longer for their safety,
oddly enough. And no, when they crash into me it is NOT my fault.

You sound like a nasty little piece of work, snoig, with an axe to grind.

ant




06 Mar 2005 15:38:10
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com > wrote in message
news:1109954805.742432.221830@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> ant wrote:
>>
>> According to a person who identified himself as a friend of the
> lady's
>> husband, the lady was indeed standing on the side of the run, waiting
> for
>> her husband.
>>
>
> I've talked to ppl online who claim they knew her - their geography was
> verified by IP address. Both agreed with the version told by the person
> you've mentioned. It is the version I've come to accept.

The chap is posting under his own name, you'll find him on the
www.epicski.com thread about this incident. He was there.

ant




05 Mar 2005 22:11:08
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38vfktF5suob5U1@individual.net...
>
> "Walt" <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:RU_Vd.286$Ql3.199@news.itd.umich.edu...
> > snoig wrote:
> >> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote
> >>>"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote
> >>>>And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.
> >>>
> >>>You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.
> >>>
> >>>Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of
yourself.
> >
> >>
> >> As I said Ant, Vail Resorts. You know, Keystone's parent company. The
> >> problem is systemic throught all of Vail's ski and ride schools.
> >
> > Sounds to me like you're working off of an old RSA scorecard. If you
> > weren't too cheap to buy this year's edition, you would know that Ant's
> > not at Keystone anymore.
>
> Judging by the way he's typing, it's probably just as well. He's got
> Hoff-itis.
>
> As for violence against snowboarders, I advocate no such thing. but when
> they smash into me, they come off second best. I'm sorry if that upsets
you
> snoig, but when they slam into me, my concern is no longer for their
safety,
> oddly enough. And no, when they crash into me it is NOT my fault.
>
> You sound like a nasty little piece of work, snoig, with an axe to grind.
>
> ant

And you sound like a poser who isn't qualified to do what you are doing.




05 Mar 2005 22:36:51
snoig
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38vfktF5suob5U1@individual.net...
>
> "Walt" <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:RU_Vd.286$Ql3.199@news.itd.umich.edu...
> > snoig wrote:
> >> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote
> >>>"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com> wrote
> >>>>And while I'm at it Ant, I have seen you ski. I was unimpressed.
> >>>
> >>>You've seen me ski, huh? And you think I teach at Vail.
> >>>
> >>>Pathetic. Try harder. Right now you are just making a fool of
yourself.
> >
> >>
> >> As I said Ant, Vail Resorts. You know, Keystone's parent company. The
> >> problem is systemic throught all of Vail's ski and ride schools.
> >
> > Sounds to me like you're working off of an old RSA scorecard. If you
> > weren't too cheap to buy this year's edition, you would know that Ant's
> > not at Keystone anymore.
>
> Judging by the way he's typing, it's probably just as well. He's got
> Hoff-itis.
>
> As for violence against snowboarders, I advocate no such thing. but when
> they smash into me, they come off second best. I'm sorry if that upsets
you
> snoig, but when they slam into me, my concern is no longer for their
safety,
> oddly enough. And no, when they crash into me it is NOT my fault.


An instructor with no concern for safety. That is exactly my point, thanks
for enforceing it.


> You sound like a nasty little piece of work, snoig, with an axe to grind.
>
> ant
>
>




06 Mar 2005 05:59:43
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38veuoF5tglt2U1@individual.net...
>>>
>>> shrug. Some people lose their hair early, others have lots of hair. I
>>> don't like hats, and I dont' need one. If it's really cold I put one on,
>>> this happens about 4 times a season, or less. I often carry one, I
>>> seldom wear one. for some reason this does seem to disturb people. I
>>> don't care if people wear hats, so why should my not wearing one upset
>>> them?
>>>
>>
>> Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is no
>> one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge in but
>> as an instructor you should be setting an example for the people who take
>> your word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the school you work for
>> does not consider some form of head gear as part of the uniform.


> You are kidding? This has to be a troll.

Didn't seem to antagonize anyone else.


> Why is not wearing a hat a "bad habit"?

Oh, comeon now. Because its cold out there. As long as the weather is nice
and you are moving around you may be fine, but let it change unexpectadly or
sustain a minor injury and, even inbounds, you get cold in a hurry. 25% (I
think) of your heat loss will occur through your head. Feet cold? Cover your
head. Pretty safe to say everyone here knows that.





06 Mar 2005 17:06:44
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"snoig" <snoig@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:38vhq5F5too8mU1@individual.net...

> And you sound like a poser who isn't qualified to do what you are doing.

Yep, you are undoubtedly a fool.

ant




06 Mar 2005 17:22:52
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message news:j%wWd.579913
>> Why is not wearing a hat a "bad habit"?
>
> Oh, comeon now. Because its cold out there. As long as the weather is nice
> and you are moving around you may be fine, but let it change unexpectadly
> or sustain a minor injury and, even inbounds, you get cold in a hurry.
> 25% (I think) of your heat loss will occur through your head. Feet cold?
> Cover your head. Pretty safe to say everyone here knows that.

I spend 10 months of the year skiing every day. If I am cold, I will wear a
hat. I am not cold therefore I do not wear a hat. Do you want to issue rules
for what you think instructors should wear? I have never heard such a stupid
bone-headed notion in all my life. Do you think people are so stupid, that
despite what we tell them, they will ignore it because WE are not wearing
hats or gloves? I don't wear a thermal layer either, most days, and I think
you should write to my ski school to complain about that, too. I don't wear
boot warmers either. Oh no! However, unlike most of your countrymen, I do
wear sunblock 365 days of the year, so that's good, that means that ALL
americans who take a lesson with me will start to do that. Right? Ha! Not
likely.

I don't move around "out there". Much of the time, I'm not moving much at
all. Do you think that ski instructors spend their time flashign down the
slopes? I suspect you do, you display that level of awareness. I earn my
living skiing, outside, outdoors. I don't wear a hat becuase shocker horror
I don't want one and I don't NEED one. However I do wear sunscreen. Most of
your compatriots wear a hat, but they don't wear sunscreen.

ant




06 Mar 2005 16:57:47
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:38vltpF5tcb4dU1@individual.net...
>
> "Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:j%wWd.579913
>>> Why is not wearing a hat a "bad habit"?
>>
>> Oh, comeon now. Because its cold out there. As long as the weather is
>> nice and you are moving around you may be fine, but let it change
>> unexpectadly or sustain a minor injury and, even inbounds, you get cold
>> in a hurry. 25% (I think) of your heat loss will occur through your head.
>> Feet cold? Cover your head. Pretty safe to say everyone here knows that.
>
> I spend 10 months of the year skiing every day. If I am cold, I will wear
> a hat. I am not cold therefore I do not wear a hat. Do you want to issue
> rules for what you think instructors should wear? I have never heard such
> a stupid bone-headed notion in all my life. Do you think people are so
> stupid, that despite what we tell them, they will ignore it because WE are
> not wearing hats or gloves? I don't wear a thermal layer either, most
> days, and I think you should write to my ski school to complain about
> that, too. I don't wear boot warmers either. Oh no! However, unlike most
> of your countrymen, I do wear sunblock 365 days of the year, so that's
> good, that means that ALL americans who take a lesson with me will start
> to do that. Right? Ha! Not likely.
>
> I don't move around "out there". Much of the time, I'm not moving much at
> all. Do you think that ski instructors spend their time flashign down the
> slopes? I suspect you do, you display that level of awareness. I earn my
> living skiing, outside, outdoors. I don't wear a hat becuase shocker
> horror I don't want one and I don't NEED one. However I do wear sunscreen.
> Most of your compatriots wear a hat, but they don't wear sunscreen.
>

Whoa, Ant, it wasn't that big a deal.
The examples you give miss the point. They are not (normally) visible to the
public. I wasn't suggesting that your school SHOULD make rules, only
expressing surprise they don't provide SOME sort of general guidelines,
including some form of headwear. Are you telling me if you turned up for
work wearing jeans and had no gloves you would not find your supervisors
raising their eyebrows? Why is that? Because its just a bad idea and if
people see you, who should be knowledgeable in all aspects of skiing, doing
it, some are going to feel its an acceptable practice. No headgear may not
be AS bad an idea as jeans, but its a difference of degree, not direction.
Like I said, people, you included, have every right to wear what they prefer
when skiing for themselves, but when you are teaching you are dealing with
people who may be quite new to skiing. They amy or may not follow your
example(s) but the example you set for them should be one of erring on the
side of caution.
What would you think of an instructor who refused to lower the safety bar
when riding the lift with his class? Maybe he finds it a nuisance. As a
private citizen it's well within his rights, but when he is teaching its a
whole different ball of wax.




06 Mar 2005 13:23:25
pigo
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:fEGWd.585011$6l.264911@pd7tw2no...

> Whoa, Ant, it wasn't that big a deal.
> The examples you give miss the point. They are not (normally)
> visible to the public. I wasn't suggesting that your school SHOULD
> make rules, only expressing surprise they don't provide SOME sort
> of general guidelines, including some form of headwear. Are you
> telling me if you turned up for work wearing jeans and had no
> gloves you would not find your supervisors raising their eyebrows?
> Why is that? Because its just a bad idea and if people see you, who
> should be knowledgeable in all aspects of skiing, doing it, some
> are going to feel its an acceptable practice. No headgear may not
> be AS bad an idea as jeans, but its a difference of degree, not
> direction. Like I said, people, you included, have every right to
> wear what they prefer when skiing for themselves, but when you are
> teaching you are dealing with people who may be quite new to
> skiing. They amy or may not follow your example(s) but the example
> you set for them should be one of erring on the side of caution.

Consider that she's doing them *MORE* of a service by giving the
example that life is to be lived. All this helmet, "safety" bar,
bullshit is a result of lawyers and people that have become afraid of
their own shadow. Any idiot that is skiing and doesn't know to put a
hat on when *they* are cold I don't really want out there anyway.

I wear my seatbelt most of the time. When I rode a motorcyle, or my
mountain bike I wore/wear it sometimes. But I don't want a law to
tell me when I MUST.

If a hat is part of the uniform that is a completely different issue.
But I don't see how they could do that because sometimes it's really
hot out there.
> What would you think of an instructor who refused to lower the
> safety bar when riding the lift with his class? Maybe he finds it a
> nuisance. As a private citizen it's well within his rights, but
> when he is teaching its a whole different ball of wax.
>




06 Mar 2005 15:52:10
VtSkier
Re: Death by Snowboarder

pigo wrote:
(SNIP)
>
>
> I wear my seatbelt most of the time. When I rode a motorcyle, or my
> mountain bike I wore/wear it sometimes. But I don't want a law to
> tell me when I MUST.

You wore a seatbelt with you motorcycle and mountain bike?

(snip)


06 Mar 2005 13:22:57
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

VtSkier wrote:
>
> pigo wrote:
> (SNIP)
> > I wear my seatbelt most of the time. When I rode a motorcyle, or my
> > mountain bike I wore/wear it sometimes. But I don't want a law to
> > tell me when I MUST.
>
> You wore a seatbelt with you motorcycle and mountain bike?

When our kids were little they rode behind us on our street motorcycles
-- we used a long seatbelt wrapped around both our waists to keep them
from falling off/ In the dirt they rode in front of us and we didn't
use the belts. The kids held onto the crossbar and occasionally baby
son fell asleep while holding on.

So yeah, it's possible, just different. And we all wore helmets and
boots and leather jackets.

--
Cheers,
Bev
------------------------------------------------------
"Don't bother looking for that key. There is no Esc."
-- M. Tabnik


07 Mar 2005 00:53:17
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"pigo" <pigopowderPANTS@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:kJ-dncz1EIM_-rbfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
>
> "Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:fEGWd.585011$6l.264911@pd7tw2no...
>
>> Whoa, Ant, it wasn't that big a deal.
>> The examples you give miss the point. They are not (normally) visible to
>> the public. I wasn't suggesting that your school SHOULD make rules, only
>> expressing surprise they don't provide SOME sort of general guidelines,
>> including some form of headwear. Are you telling me if you turned up for
>> work wearing jeans and had no gloves you would not find your supervisors
>> raising their eyebrows? Why is that? Because its just a bad idea and if
>> people see you, who should be knowledgeable in all aspects of skiing,
>> doing it, some are going to feel its an acceptable practice. No headgear
>> may not be AS bad an idea as jeans, but its a difference of degree, not
>> direction. Like I said, people, you included, have every right to wear
>> what they prefer when skiing for themselves, but when you are teaching
>> you are dealing with people who may be quite new to skiing. They amy or
>> may not follow your example(s) but the example you set for them should be
>> one of erring on the side of caution.
>
> Consider that she's doing them *MORE* of a service by giving the example
> that life is to be lived. All this helmet, "safety" bar, bullshit is a
> result of lawyers and people that have become afraid of their own shadow.
> Any idiot that is skiing and doesn't know to put a hat on when *they* are
> cold I don't really want out there anyway.
>
> I wear my seatbelt most of the time. When I rode a motorcyle, or my
> mountain bike I wore/wear it sometimes. But I don't want a law to tell me
> when I MUST.


Thats kind of the point, isn't it? We should'nt (we don't) need laws to tell
us that sort of thing. If people who are looked up to as an example would
realize that and do things the way we would like to see everyone who is new
to the sport there would be no perception that any such thing was required.
You are the last person I need to remind there are lots of idiots out there
and they are going to be out there if we want them to be or not. They get in
enough trouble when they have good examples, how much time and resources
would need to be spent helping them if they have bad examples all around?


>
> If a hat is part of the uniform that is a completely different issue. But
> I don't see how they could do that because sometimes it's really hot out
> there.

So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear ballcaps
in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?




06 Mar 2005 20:04:47
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Norm wrote:

> "pigo" <pigopowderPANTS@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:kJ-dncz1EIM_-rbfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
[snip]
>>If a hat is part of the uniform that is a completely different issue. But
>>I don't see how they could do that because sometimes it's really hot out
>>there.
>
>
> So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear ballcaps
> in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?

Hey, Norm, I understand where ant is (maybe) coming from. Yes, _in
general_ when skiing nearly everybody wants a hat or helmet to stay warm
-- but if you're at the bottom of the hill all day, teaching
never-evers, running back and forth, skating up the hill, and picking
people up, it's got to be pretty chilly before you really _need_ a hat,
and on many days you don't want one. Beginner areas tend to be much
more sheltered than the top of the mountain, and teaching beginners can
be pretty aerobic at times, resulting in a head full of sweat if you're
wearing even a fleece airband.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



07 Mar 2005 01:41:33
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote in message
news:0YKdnXpo-e8uNbbfRVn-3Q@bcn.net...


>> So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear
>> ballcaps in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?


> Hey, Norm, I understand where ant is (maybe) coming from. Yes, _in
> general_ when skiing nearly everybody wants a hat or helmet to stay
> warm -- but if you're at the bottom of the hill all day, teaching
> never-evers, running back and forth, skating up the hill, and picking
> people up, it's got to be pretty chilly before you really _need_ a hat,
> and on many days you don't want one. Beginner areas tend to be much more
> sheltered than the top of the mountain, and teaching beginners can be
> pretty aerobic at times, resulting in a head full of sweat if you're
> wearing even a fleece airband.

Hmmm.
OK, fair enough. Thats a description of the job which I hadn't really taken
into consideration. It does make sense. So, point conceded. <grumble > For
instructors with beginners at the bottom anyway. If you're taking
intermediates up the lift to where its cooler, though, you should consider a
token something-or-other on your head.




06 Mar 2005 20:47:30
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Norm wrote:

> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote in message
> news:0YKdnXpo-e8uNbbfRVn-3Q@bcn.net...
>
>
>
>>>So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear
>>>ballcaps in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?
>
>
>
>>Hey, Norm, I understand where ant is (maybe) coming from. Yes, _in
>>general_ when skiing nearly everybody wants a hat or helmet to stay
>>warm -- but if you're at the bottom of the hill all day, teaching
>>never-evers, running back and forth, skating up the hill, and picking
>>people up, it's got to be pretty chilly before you really _need_ a hat,
>>and on many days you don't want one. Beginner areas tend to be much more
>>sheltered than the top of the mountain, and teaching beginners can be
>>pretty aerobic at times, resulting in a head full of sweat if you're
>>wearing even a fleece airband.
>
>
> Hmmm.
> OK, fair enough. Thats a description of the job which I hadn't really taken
> into consideration. It does make sense. So, point conceded. <grumble> For
> instructors with beginners at the bottom anyway. If you're taking
> intermediates up the lift to where its cooler, though, you should consider a
> token something-or-other on your head.

Except when I'm in one of the two bottom-of-the-hill learning areas --
both of which are fenced off from the general public, and are supposed
to only have little kids and instructors in them -- I wear a helmet.
Even on the next-step-up learning hill, which is a really short hill,
chairlift-served -- it's open to the general public, and while I can
control what _I_ do, I can't always control what _they_ do ;-)

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



06 Mar 2005 17:58:41
The Real Bev
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Norm wrote:
>
> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote:
>
> >> So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear
> >> ballcaps in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?

The damn things blow off. Bad enough to have to hike back or go around
again to pick up something useful, much worse to pick up something
totally useless. Didn't it drive you nuts when you were little and your
mom said "Put on your sweater" and you knew damn good and well that you
didn't need it? Guess what -- it doesn't get any better 50 years
later. People know when they're cold, they don't need to be told. If
they do, they have no business participating in outdoor activities.

> > Hey, Norm, I understand where ant is (maybe) coming from. Yes, _in
> > general_ when skiing nearly everybody wants a hat or helmet to stay
> > warm -- but if you're at the bottom of the hill all day, teaching
> > never-evers, running back and forth, skating up the hill, and picking
> > people up, it's got to be pretty chilly before you really _need_ a hat,
> > and on many days you don't want one. Beginner areas tend to be much more
> > sheltered than the top of the mountain, and teaching beginners can be
> > pretty aerobic at times, resulting in a head full of sweat if you're
> > wearing even a fleece airband.

Or if you're skiing on a normal day in SoCal. It's chilly on windy
days, but the only real reason to wear a hat around here is to pull it
down over your face to avoid getting a face shot from the snow-blower.

> Hmmm.
> OK, fair enough. Thats a description of the job which I hadn't really taken
> into consideration. It does make sense. So, point conceded. <grumble> For
> instructors with beginners at the bottom anyway. If you're taking
> intermediates up the lift to where its cooler, though, you should consider a
> token something-or-other on your head.

See my first paragraph above.

--
Cheers,
Bev
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The Marketing Professional's Motto: "We don't screw the customers. All
we're doing is holding them down while the salespeople screw them."
-- Scott Adams


04 Mar 2005 23:10:04
J. Urrrk
Re: Death by Snowboarder

"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote
>
> I'm evil, and I have many evil henchmen. Every time I teach
teenagers,
> I select one to be my evil henchman. They love it.
>
What a good idea. I never thought of that. They were evil, in a
really good way:

Me: Hey you alright? Here's your ski.

Student: I'm okay, Sorry I didn't stick the landing, Sir!

Me: Okay, just don't tell anyone we tried this.

Student: Yes sir. Can we hike up and try it again?

Me: Let's see if Mitch wants to keep spotting the landing
or give it a try. After the way you piled he may just want
to keep spotting.

Dang students, always trying to get me in trouble. They
turned into really good skiers too.

J. Urrrk, Irresponsible adult.




06 Mar 2005 19:24:21
pigo
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:1CNWd.589856$6l.508618@pd7tw2no...


> Thats kind of the point, isn't it? We should'nt (we don't) need
> laws to tell us that sort of thing. If people who are looked up to
> as an example would realize that and do things the way we would
> like to see everyone who is new

No. I don't think people need "those that they look up to" to
reenforce marketing ploys.

> to the sport there would be no perception that any such thing was
> required.

If helmets are reducing injuries there should be a huge reduction in
skiing injuries from the short time ago that no one was wearing them.

> You are the last person I need to remind there are lots of idiots
> out there and they are going to be out there if we want them to be
> or not. They get in enough trouble when they have good examples,
> how much time and resources would need to be spent helping them if
> they have bad examples all around?
>
>> If a hat is part of the uniform that is a completely different
>> issue. But I don't see how they could do that because sometimes
>> it's really hot out there.
>
> So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear
> ballcaps in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?

How about a cowboy hat (a ball cap...jeeeeez)?




06 Mar 2005 19:29:30
pigo
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:hjOWd.588454$Xk.108547@pd7tw3no...

> Hmmm.
> OK, fair enough. Thats a description of the job which I hadn't
> really taken into consideration. It does make sense. So, point
> conceded. <grumble> For instructors with beginners at the bottom
> anyway. If you're taking intermediates up the lift to where its
> cooler, though, you should consider a token something-or-other on
> your head.

You must not get out much.

These days I only go out on powder days and the hat still comes off
on hikes and in the afternoon much of the time. But there are plenty
of days that a pair of shell pants, a long sleeve t, and leather work
gloves are too much. Skiing hard generates alot of heat and loosing
the hat is the best way to get rid of it.

I don't know if I've ever seen Stein with a hat.




06 Mar 2005 21:14:41
David Harris
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Mary Malmros <malmrosnospam@bcn.net > wrote in
news:k_idnVe4G7ArL7bfRVn-hw@bcn.net:

>
> Except when I'm in one of the two bottom-of-the-hill learning areas --
> both of which are fenced off from the general public, and are supposed
> to only have little kids and instructors in them -- I wear a helmet.
> Even on the next-step-up learning hill, which is a really short hill,
> chairlift-served -- it's open to the general public, and while I can
> control what _I_ do, I can't always control what _they_ do ;-)
>
I like the idea of setting good examples. Adults wearing helmets so kids
think helmets are normal is a good thing.

But for Norm's point: adults wearing hats when it's too damned warm is just
silly. Each of us is affected differently by exercise and temperature, and
we should wear what works for us. If we're skiing all over a big mountain,
we should pack some options for changes in altitude, temperature and
weather. I see no point in wearing a hat in spring conditions, even for
the instructors.

dh


07 Mar 2005 09:10:28
Mary Malmros
Re: Death by Snowboarder

David Harris wrote:
> I see no point in wearing a hat in spring conditions, even for
> the instructors.

Depends some on your "spring conditions". They're warmer in Colorado
than they are in Vermont.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



07 Mar 2005 09:36:24
Walt
Re: Death by Snowboarder

bdubya wrote:
> Mary Malmros <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote:
>>Jeff wrote:
>>>foot2foot wrote:
>>>>"Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>And you want his name because?
>>>
>>>Because I can't stand when information is withheld regardless the
>>>reason.
>>
>>I am withholding from you the following pieces of information: my blood
>>type, my social security number, and the PIN number of my ATM card. I
>>know you don't care, but I am withholding these pieces of information
>>for the good and sufficient reason that it ain't none of your business.
>
>
> You should have withheld the reason; that woulda REALLY pissed him
> off.

I'm withholding lots of information, and not only am I not going to tell
you why I'm withholding it, I'm not even going to tell you what it is.

So there.

--
//-Walt
//
// I've got a secret!


07 Mar 2005 18:05:00
MoonMan
Re: Death by Snowboarder

The Real Bev wrote:
> Bob wrote:
>>
>> <LeeAnne@aol.com> wrote:
>>> Studies on ski safety have shown a helmet will not protect someone
>>> who is moving or is hit by something moving at more than about 12
>>> mph to 15 mph
>>
>> I guess they make no sense for motorcyclists then, since they almost
>> always go faster than that.
>
> MC helmets cover a bigger area with more foam than other helmets. I
> hit the ground at ~50 mph and got a nice scrape on my helmet, a
> goodly bit of metal rubbed off the bike's rear rack and just under a
> square foot of skin rubbed off my body, but no head damage whatsoever
> and I got up and rode my bike home.
>
> Then I cried :-(

And so you should, you damaged the bike :)

Chris *<:-)




07 Mar 2005 18:06:48
MoonMan
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Mary Malmros wrote:
> Norm wrote:
>
>> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote in message
>> news:0YKdnXpo-e8uNbbfRVn-3Q@bcn.net...
>>
>>
>>
>>>> So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear
>>>> ballcaps in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hey, Norm, I understand where ant is (maybe) coming from. Yes, _in
>>> general_ when skiing nearly everybody wants a hat or helmet to stay
>>> warm -- but if you're at the bottom of the hill all day, teaching
>>> never-evers, running back and forth, skating up the hill, and
>>> picking people up, it's got to be pretty chilly before you really
>>> _need_ a hat, and on many days you don't want one. Beginner areas
>>> tend to be much more sheltered than the top of the mountain, and
>>> teaching beginners can be pretty aerobic at times, resulting in a
>>> head full of sweat if you're wearing even a fleece airband.
>>
>>
>> Hmmm.
>> OK, fair enough. Thats a description of the job which I hadn't
>> really taken into consideration. It does make sense. So, point
>> conceded. <grumble> For instructors with beginners at the bottom
>> anyway. If you're taking intermediates up the lift to where its
>> cooler, though, you should consider a token something-or-other on
>> your head.
>
> Except when I'm in one of the two bottom-of-the-hill learning areas --
> both of which are fenced off from the general public, and are supposed
> to only have little kids and instructors in them -- I wear a helmet.
> Even on the next-step-up learning hill, which is a really short hill,
> chairlift-served -- it's open to the general public, and while I can
> control what _I_ do, I can't always control what _they_ do ;-)

When I'm teaching is about the only time I don't wear a helmet nowadays,
probably because I cant be bothered to take the chin gaurd off and it gets
in the way when you are trying to talk to someone.

Chris <:-)




07 Mar 2005 10:28:01
TexasSkiNut
Re: Death by Snowboarder

pigo wrote:
> I don't know if I've ever seen Stein with a hat.

Of course not, it would mess up his hair.



07 Mar 2005 10:33:52
Jeff
Re: Death by Snowboarder

ant wrote:
> "Jeff" <jeff@bruce.com> wrote in message
> news:1109954805.742432.221830@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > ant wrote:
> >>
> >> According to a person who identified himself as a friend of the
> > lady's
> >> husband, the lady was indeed standing on the side of the run,
waiting
> > for
> >> her husband.
> >>
> >
> > I've talked to ppl online who claim they knew her - their geography
was
> > verified by IP address. Both agreed with the version told by the
person
> > you've mentioned. It is the version I've come to accept.
>
> The chap is posting under his own name, you'll find him on the
> www.epicski.com thread about this incident. He was there.

Yes. He posted on my blog under an alias but we sorted it out and
concluded it was "Nate." His geographic location adds validity to his
claims, but his information is second-hand. The main discrepancy in
this story involves the skier, namely what was she doing at the time of
impact. As Rosco originally reported, she was "stopped" when he
collided with her. Subsequent news reports had her skiing slowly at the
bottom of Rendezvous trail. With the exception of Rosco, nearly every
report that has her stopped comes from the family. Almost every other
report has her moving down the bottom of Rendezvous comes from
by-stander accounts.

Jeff



07 Mar 2005 10:55:54
thinnmann
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Geeze, go to Vail for a week and you miss all this action in the
newsgroup!

I do have to say that it took less than 2 hours at 9PM to get to vail
via CME van (refers to older thread).

In the meantime, all this helmet talk has prompted me to do some
extensive searching on the subject using Google Scholar and Ebsco
databases for some real studies that are based on data, rather than
articles and web sites with opinion and marketing built into them. The
older studies support the questionable nature of the ski helmet debate.
But the more recent studies support the conclusion that helmets
protect skiers and snowboarders against head injuries. Here are links
to them:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=15632094
http://ip.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/8/4/324
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12394869
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11930598

Yes, I wear one. My two kids do, and my wife does too. It is the
warmest "hat" I ever wore in our typically cold mid-winder east-coast
ski conditions. I thank my helmet every time the lift safety bar goes
down too fast and hits my head (the attendant flips it down sometimes
or my backpack makes me sit up too far); somebody else's poles, usually
my son's, hit me in the head (another lift loading thing), or my own
skis I just flipped over my shoulder hit me in the head (hey, don't
make fun, I am coordinated, it happens when I am carrying 3 people's
equipment).

Usually, it is other people colliding with me or my kids that I feel I
am defending against; it's not about hitting rocks or trees.
Ironically, last week at Vail I fell in the woods and a low bare broken
branch stabbed me on the side of my head - my helmet deflected it into
my forehead, which got a little cut, but at least didn't go through my
temple.

More on topic from the orignal post, I was hit twice while standing
next to a ski rack talking to people outside a lodge this season by
teenage female skiers who were out of control. See this study that
concluded, "The role of collisions in ski-related deaths warrants
further investigation to reduce the risk of this activity for all
skiers." (
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14636729&dopt=Citation
) So, how do you prevent collisions? Many posts here maintain that
awareness of your own position is very important. Also consider many
factors not yet discussed, including slope and lift design, signage,
grooming, snow conditions, visability and light conditions, dehydration
and fatigue, drugs and alcohol.

Skiing is still safer than riding in a motor vehicle - so drive fast to
the mountain and go skiing before somebody gets hurt!



08 Mar 2005 07:36:04
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:hjOWd.588454$Xk.108547@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote in message
> news:0YKdnXpo-e8uNbbfRVn-3Q@bcn.net...
>
>
>>> So wear a light fleece headband. Earmuffs. A ballcap. People wear
>>> ballcaps in the heat of summer, how bad can it be?
>
>
>> Hey, Norm, I understand where ant is (maybe) coming from. Yes, _in
>> general_ when skiing nearly everybody wants a hat or helmet to stay
>> warm -- but if you're at the bottom of the hill all day, teaching
>> never-evers, running back and forth, skating up the hill, and picking
>> people up, it's got to be pretty chilly before you really _need_ a hat,
>> and on many days you don't want one. Beginner areas tend to be much more
>> sheltered than the top of the mountain, and teaching beginners can be
>> pretty aerobic at times, resulting in a head full of sweat if you're
>> wearing even a fleece airband.
>
> Hmmm.
> OK, fair enough. Thats a description of the job which I hadn't really
> taken into consideration. It does make sense. So, point conceded.
> <grumble> For instructors with beginners at the bottom anyway. If you're
> taking intermediates up the lift to where its cooler, though, you should
> consider a token something-or-other on your head.

I promised I wouldn't wade into this stupid discussion again. but I cannot
believe your arrogant assertion that EVERYONE MUST WEAR A HAT. What baloney.
Most guests turn up to lessons wearing hats, even when the sun is blazing
and it's hot (which is often). They are sweating and getting grumpy. I
suggest that they remove the hat, and they are surprised, evidently it is
compulsory to wear a hat.

When teaching, you might have beginners, and you might have level 8s. My day
is usually teaching levels 4 up, but you might get a 3 year old. It's a
lottery.

but how dare you suggest I'm unprofessional or negligent by not electing to
wear a hat? I don't wear a hat because I do not need to wear a hat, most
days. I am not cold. I do not require a hat. Or boot warmers. Or a face
cover. Or the numerous other things people add when they are cold.
I have lots of nice hats. I like hats. but if I wear one, I usually get too
hot. So I do not. What part of this do you not understand?

Further, for many people, hats are not necessary. They are the ones with
sweat rolling down their faces, hat firmly in place. What a pity some
unprofessional instructor did not tell them that hats are optional. Maybe
some loon on the internet told them they were.

Wear a hat every day you ski, by all means. But try to get it through your
skull that what is necessary for you, does not mean it is a universal
necessity.

ant




07 Mar 2005 15:46:18
VtSkier
Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

ant wrote:
> "Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
> news:hjOWd.588454$Xk.108547@pd7tw3no...
>
>>"Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote in message
>>news:0YKdnXpo-e8uNbbfRVn-3Q@bcn.net...

(a lot of drivel)

I'm truly amazed that we had this discussion at all.

Hats are truly optional no matter when and where. It is
and should be the choice of any person to wear or not
wear a hat. It should be the choice of any person to wear
or not wear a helmet for any specific sport.

I wear a motorcycle helmet. It is the most comfortable
head gear available. I even wear one in New Hampshire
where wearing one is not required.

If it's cold, I wear a helmet skiing. Same reason as
for a motorcycle helmet.

When it's warm and nice I usually wear a baseball cap
skiing because the visor shades my eyes and the cap
keeps me from sunburning my bald head.

I have skied and done lots of other things with and
without hats. Except for motorcycles, there are no hat
police around here and I don't consider it a matter of
professional standards to wear a hat when performing
my duties at Killington. The program I'm in "recommends"
that I wear a helmet, but does not insist.


08 Mar 2005 08:04:31
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"pigo" <pigopowderPANTS@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:q8GdnXM7mYUnIrbfRVn-
> How about a cowboy hat (a ball cap...jeeeeez)?

yeah, they're both equally hard to keep on if you are ski faster than
walking pace. And you can't wear goggles with either of them either. At
home they give us giggle hats for spring; soft hats with a brim all around.
I don't mind those and they keep a lot of the sun off, and they don't blow
off as easily. Sometimes I wear them.

ant




07 Mar 2005 17:04:53
Mary Malmros
Re: Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

VtSkier wrote:

> ant wrote:
>
>> "Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>> news:hjOWd.588454$Xk.108547@pd7tw3no...
>>
>>> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote in message
>>> news:0YKdnXpo-e8uNbbfRVn-3Q@bcn.net...
>
>
> (a lot of drivel)
>
> I'm truly amazed that we had this discussion at all.

It wasn't a discussion, it was someone making an issue where no issue
existed.

> Hats are truly optional no matter when and where.

No kidding.

You do realize that you're prolonging the "discussion", don't you?


--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



07 Mar 2005 17:14:07
VtSkier
Re: Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

Mary Malmros wrote:
> VtSkier wrote:
>
>> ant wrote:
>>
>>> "Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>>> news:hjOWd.588454$Xk.108547@pd7tw3no...
>>>
>>>> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:0YKdnXpo-e8uNbbfRVn-3Q@bcn.net...
>>
>>
>>
>> (a lot of drivel)
>>
>> I'm truly amazed that we had this discussion at all.
>
>
> It wasn't a discussion, it was someone making an issue where no issue
> existed.
>
Well then, I'm objecting to that.

>> Hats are truly optional no matter when and where.
>
>
> No kidding.
>
Right.
> You do realize that you're prolonging the "discussion", don't you?
>
And you?


07 Mar 2005 17:49:13
Mary Malmros
Re: Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

VtSkier wrote:

> Mary Malmros wrote:
[snip]
>> You do realize that you're prolonging the "discussion", don't you?
>>
> And you?

I didn't object to it in the first place.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



07 Mar 2005 17:13:29
Walt
Re: Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

Mary Malmros wrote:
> VtSkier wrote:
>> ant wrote:
>>> "Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca> wrote
>>>> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote
>>
>> (a lot of drivel)
>>
>> I'm truly amazed that we had this discussion at all.
>
> It wasn't a discussion, it was someone making an issue where no issue
> existed.
>
>> Hats are truly optional no matter when and where.
>
> No kidding.
>
> You do realize that you're prolonging the "discussion", don't you?



We can dance if we want to,
we can leave your friends behind
'Cause your friends don't dance and if they don't dance
Well they're no friends of mine

Say, we can go where we want to,
a place that they will never find
And we can act like we come from out of this world
Leave the real one far behind

And we can dance

We can go when we want to,
the night is young and so am I
And we can dress real neat from our hats to our feet
And surprise them with the victory cry

Say, we can act if we want to,
if we don't nobody will
And you can act real rude or totally removed
And I can act like an imbecile


Say we can dance, we can dance
Everything's out of control
We can dance, we can dance
They're doing it from pole to pole
We can dance, we can dance
Everybody look at your hands
We can dance, we can dance
Everybody taken the chance

The safety dance
The safety dance
The safety dance

We can dance if we want to,
we've got all your life and mine
As long as we abuse it we are never going to lose it
And everything will work out right

Say, we can dance if we want to,
we can leave your friends behind
'Cause your friends don't dance and if they don't dance
well they're no friend of mine


- Men without Hats "The Safety Dance"

--
//-Walt
//
// There is no Earworm Conspiracy



07 Mar 2005 18:43:47
Mary Malmros
Re: Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

Walt wrote:

> Mary Malmros wrote:
>
>> VtSkier wrote:
>>
>>> ant wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca> wrote
>>>>
>>>>> "Mary Malmros" <malmrosnospam@bcn.net> wrote
>>>
>>>
>>> (a lot of drivel)
>>>
>>> I'm truly amazed that we had this discussion at all.
>>
>>
>> It wasn't a discussion, it was someone making an issue where no issue
>> existed.
>>
>>> Hats are truly optional no matter when and where.
>>
>>
>> No kidding.
>>
>> You do realize that you're prolonging the "discussion", don't you?
>
>
>
>
> We can dance if we want to,
> we can leave your friends behind
> 'Cause your friends don't dance and if they don't dance
> Well they're no friends of mine

Didn't one of the people in that video have a hat?


--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



07 Mar 2005 19:34:03
VtSkier
Re: Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

Mary Malmros wrote:
> VtSkier wrote:
>
>> Mary Malmros wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> You do realize that you're prolonging the "discussion", don't you?
>>>
>> And you?
>
>
> I didn't object to it in the first place.
>
No, but you are continuing the thread, which is
what you were dinging on me for.


07 Mar 2005 19:51:00
Mary Malmros
Re: Hats (was Re: Death by Snowboarder)

VtSkier wrote:

> Mary Malmros wrote:
>
>> VtSkier wrote:
>>
>>> Mary Malmros wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> You do realize that you're prolonging the "discussion", don't you?
>>>>
>>> And you?
>>
>> I didn't object to it in the first place.
>>
> No, but you are continuing the thread, which is
> what you were dinging on me for.

Other people post to a thread, or don't, as pleases them. _You_ make
posts objecting to the continuing of threads. When I point out that, by
doing so, _you_ are continuing the thread, you come back with, "I know
you are, but what am I?"

Forget it. I've already seen this movie, and Pee Wee was funnier in the
original.

--
Mary Malmros malmros@bcn.net
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.



07 Mar 2005 17:51:16
pigo
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:393s9lF5s2gppU1@individual.net...

> I promised I wouldn't wade into this stupid discussion again. but I
> cannot believe your arrogant assertion that EVERYONE MUST WEAR A
> HAT. What baloney. Most guests turn up to lessons wearing hats,
> even when the sun is blazing and it's hot (which is often). They
> are sweating and getting grumpy. I suggest that they remove the
> hat, and they are surprised, evidently it is compulsory to wear a
> hat.

Fuck! Haven't you seen those guys that wear knit caps in the summer
when it's over 100?
Maybe he's one of those?

> When teaching, you might have beginners, and you might have level
> 8s. My day is usually teaching levels 4 up, but you might get a 3
> year old. It's a lottery.
>
> but how dare you suggest I'm unprofessional or negligent by not
> electing to wear a hat? I don't wear a hat because I do not need
> to wear a hat, most days. I am not cold. I do not require a hat. Or
> boot warmers. Or a face cover. Or the numerous other things people
> add when they are cold.
> I have lots of nice hats. I like hats. but if I wear one, I usually
> get too hot. So I do not. What part of this do you not understand?
>
> Further, for many people, hats are not necessary. They are the ones
> with sweat rolling down their faces, hat firmly in place. What a
> pity some unprofessional instructor did not tell them that hats are
> optional. Maybe some loon on the internet told them they were.
>
> Wear a hat every day you ski, by all means. But try to get it
> through your skull that what is necessary for you, does not mean it
> is a universal necessity.
>
> ant
>




08 Mar 2005 03:01:40
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:393s9lF5s2gppU1@individual.net...
>


>>> Hey, Norm, I understand where ant is (maybe) coming from. Yes, _in
>>> general_ when skiing nearly everybody wants a hat or helmet to stay
>>> warm -- but if you're at the bottom of the hill all day, teaching
>>> never-evers, running back and forth, skating up the hill, and picking
>>> people up, it's got to be pretty chilly before you really _need_ a hat,
>>> and on many days you don't want one. Beginner areas tend to be much
>>> more sheltered than the top of the mountain, and teaching beginners can
>>> be pretty aerobic at times, resulting in a head full of sweat if you're
>>> wearing even a fleece airband.
>>
>> Hmmm.
>> OK, fair enough. Thats a description of the job which I hadn't really
>> taken into consideration. It does make sense. So, point conceded.
>> <grumble> For instructors with beginners at the bottom anyway. If you're
>> taking intermediates up the lift to where its cooler, though, you should
>> consider a token something-or-other on your head.



> I promised I wouldn't wade into this stupid discussion again. but I cannot
> believe your arrogant assertion that EVERYONE MUST WEAR A HAT.


Holy shit, take a valium Ant, this went way further than I ever intended.
All I said, in a nutshell, was, I'm a bit surprised your school doesn't
suggest you wear SOMETHING. If you actually read all the way through you
will see that I conceded the point yesterday when Mary pointed out a bunch
of stuff you didn't bother with.

In other words -- > I said you were right <--.
For godsake, I never, ever said anything remotely like "Everyone must wear a
hat."

And I certainly didn't rant and rave like this:

> What baloney. Most guests turn up to lessons wearing hats, even when the
> sun is blazing and it's hot (which is often). They are sweating and
> getting grumpy. I suggest that they remove the hat, and they are
> surprised, evidently it is compulsory to wear a hat.
>
> When teaching, you might have beginners, and you might have level 8s. My
> day is usually teaching levels 4 up, but you might get a 3 year old. It's
> a lottery.
>
> but how dare you suggest I'm unprofessional or negligent by not electing
> to wear a hat? I don't wear a hat because I do not need to wear a hat,
> most days. I am not cold. I do not require a hat. Or boot warmers. Or a
> face cover. Or the numerous other things people add when they are cold.
> I have lots of nice hats. I like hats. but if I wear one, I usually get
> too hot. So I do not. What part of this do you not understand?
>
> Further, for many people, hats are not necessary. They are the ones with
> sweat rolling down their faces, hat firmly in place. What a pity some
> unprofessional instructor did not tell them that hats are optional. Maybe
> some loon on the internet told them they were.
>
> Wear a hat every day you ski, by all means. But try to get it through your
> skull that what is necessary for you, does not mean it is a universal
> necessity.
>
> ant
>




08 Mar 2005 16:41:30
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:oA8Xd.601390$6l.466231@pd7tw2no...

> In other words --> I said you were right <--.
> For godsake, I never, ever said anything remotely like "Everyone must wear
> a hat."
>
> And I certainly didn't rant and rave like this:

oh no! you're not worming out of it quite that easily.
You said that I was acting unprofessionally in my job by not wearing a hat.

I was setting a bad example.

I was letting my guests down.

etc etc etc.

Do you deny it?

ant




08 Mar 2005 05:53:33
Sven Golly
Re: Death by Snowboarder

"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in
news:394s8cF5qs9n3U1@individual.net:

> oh no! you're not worming out of it quite that easily.
> You said that I was acting unprofessionally in my job by not wearing a
> hat.

Just reveiewed the thread, he never said that.

> I was setting a bad example.

Ditto above.

> I was letting my guests down.

Ditto above.

He IMPLIED that there was the potential for it (and I sort of see his
point) but there was no direct slam on you. Both of you need to take
chill pills.

FWIW, I doubt most beginners pay much attention to what the instructor is
wearing unless it involves bikinis and D cups.

--
Sven Golly
Trolling as usual
Remove "_" to reply


08 Mar 2005 07:03:53
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com > wrote in message
news:394s8cF5qs9n3U1@individual.net...


>> In other words --> I said you were right <--.
>> For godsake, I never, ever said anything remotely like "Everyone must
>> wear a hat."
>>
>> And I certainly didn't rant and rave like this:
>
> oh no! you're not worming out of it quite that easily.
> You said that I was acting unprofessionally in my job by not wearing a
> hat.
>
> I was setting a bad example.
>
> I was letting my guests down.
>
> etc etc etc.



> Do you deny it?



Oh, man, you can't take "yes" for an answer can you?

You mentioned something or other about not wearing a hat.
I asked whether your school had any kind of guidelines on that.
You got your back up and demanded an explanation.
I explained why I thought they might have such a thing.
You flipped out taking the whole thing personally.
Mary drew my attention to some of the conditions of your emplyment. Of which
I was not totally ignorant, I just hadn't thought it all the way through.
(shoot him, he posted on usenet without thinking it all the way through!)
I said, oh yeah, I guess so.
After which,
You responded, for 5 paragraphs, putting all kinds of shit in my mouth I
never said.

Yes, I deny it.

If I said anything in such a way as you might have been led to believe that
is what I meant, I'm sorry.
It was not a personal attack. It was a discussion. We should be able to
throw ideas around without worrying that someone will go off the deep end.
And if I can say I was wrong, it would be nice if you would just accept
that and we can move on.




08 Mar 2005 19:27:35
Bob Lee
Re: Death by Snowboarder

Norm wrote:

> ant wrote:
[...]
> > Do you deny it?
>
> Oh, man, you can't take "yes" for an answer can you?

Answer the question, man.

> You mentioned something or other about not wearing a hat.
> I asked whether your school had any kind of guidelines on that.
> You got your back up and demanded an explanation.
> I explained why I thought they might have such a thing.
> You flipped out taking the whole thing personally.
> Mary drew my attention to some of the conditions of your emplyment. Of which
> I was not totally ignorant, I just hadn't thought it all the way through.
> (shoot him, he posted on usenet without thinking it all the way through!)
> I said, oh yeah, I guess so.
> After which,
> You responded, for 5 paragraphs, putting all kinds of shit in my mouth I
> never said.
>
> Yes, I deny it.

Nooooo1 Make her prove it.

> If I said anything in such a way as you might have been led to believe that
> is what I meant, I'm sorry.

Boy, if you ask me apologies like that take all the fun out of usenet.
Actually, I thought your original position on hats was a pretty amusing
troll, but that you could have run it out a little better. I was
startled to see you were serious. Unless...

> It was not a personal attack. It was a discussion. We should be able to
> throw ideas around without worrying that someone will go off the deep end.

You might think that, but it makes you look kind of like a newbie in
this group.

> And if I can say I was wrong, it would be nice if you would just accept
> that and we can move on.

Good enough for me. Boring maybe , but I think we've all reached
closure on the mandatory hat issue. Hey, how do you feel about neck
gaiters?

Bob


09 Mar 2005 07:07:10
Norm
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Bob Lee" <rlee@swcp.com > wrote in message
news:rlee-0F279C.19273508032005@individual.net...
> Norm wrote:
>
>> ant wrote:
> [...]
>> > Do you deny it?
>>
>> Oh, man, you can't take "yes" for an answer can you?
>
> Answer the question, man.
>
>> Yes, I deny it.
>
> Nooooo1 Make her prove it.

What, and have to scroll back and figure out what I actually did say?
Don't know if I have the patience for that.



>
>> If I said anything in such a way as you might have been led to believe
>> that
>> is what I meant, I'm sorry.
>
> Boy, if you ask me apologies like that take all the fun out of usenet.

Haven't seen Ant's response yet. She may just let it go, but I'm not holding
my breath.


> Actually, I thought your original position on hats was a pretty amusing
> troll, but that you could have run it out a little better. I was
> startled to see you were serious. Unless...

It was more of a question than a position. Quiet night, looking for some
discussion, nothing else caught my attention.
I suppose it could be called a trol, but on some level, what isn't?




>
>> It was not a personal attack. It was a discussion. We should be able to
>> throw ideas around without worrying that someone will go off the deep
>> end.
>
> You might think that, but it makes you look kind of like a newbie in
> this group.
>
>> And if I can say I was wrong, it would be nice if you would just accept
>> that and we can move on.
>
> Good enough for me. Boring maybe , but I think we've all reached
> closure on the mandatory hat issue. Hey, how do you feel about neck
> gaiters?
>

Uhn uh.. Not taking that bait. Well, maybe... No.


> Bob




13 Mar 2005 16:18:26
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder

"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:t7cXd.604031$6l.52764@pd7tw2no...
>
> "ant" <ant_kNOT@geocities.com> wrote in message
> news:394s8cF5qs9n3U1@individual.net...
>
>
>>> In other words --> I said you were right <--.
>>> For godsake, I never, ever said anything remotely like "Everyone must
>>> wear a hat."
>>>
>>> And I certainly didn't rant and rave like this:
>>
>> oh no! you're not worming out of it quite that easily.
>> You said that I was acting unprofessionally in my job by not wearing a
>> hat.
>>
>> I was setting a bad example.
>>
>> I was letting my guests down.
>>
>> etc etc etc.
>
>
>
>> Do you deny it?
>
>
>
> Oh, man, you can't take "yes" for an answer can you?
>
> You mentioned something or other about not wearing a hat.
> I asked whether your school had any kind of guidelines on that.

Really? According to Google, you actually said this:

"Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is no
one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge in but as
an instructor you should be setting an example for the people who take your
word and actions as gospel. I'm surprised the school you work for does not
consider some form of head gear as part of the uniform."

and this:

"Like I said, people, you included, have every right to wear what they
prefer
when skiing for themselves, but when you are teaching you are dealing with
people who may be quite new to skiing. They amy or may not follow your
example(s) but the example you set for them should be one of erring on the
side of caution.
What would you think of an instructor who refused to lower the safety bar
when riding the lift with his class? Maybe he finds it a nuisance. As a
private citizen it's well within his rights, but when he is teaching its a
whole different ball of wax."

If you are going to accuse someone of being unprofessional, at least have
the guts to own up to it. Some people find these accusations offensive, I
certainly do!

> You got your back up and demanded an explanation.
> I explained why I thought they might have such a thing.
> You flipped out taking the whole thing personally.

Of course I took it personally! You said I was setting a bad example to my
guests!

(snip more self justification)

> You responded, for 5 paragraphs, putting all kinds of shit in my mouth I
> never said.

oh yeah? Like what? It's all there, bucko.

> Yes, I deny it.

busted.

> If I said anything in such a way as you might have been led to believe
> that is what I meant, I'm sorry.
> It was not a personal attack. It was a discussion.

I think most people would see this as more than a dispassionate discussion:

"Its a bad habit while outdoors in winter. As a private citizen it is no
one's business but your own what bad habits you choose to indulge in but as
an instructor you should be setting an example for the people who take your
word and actions as gospel"

If you are going to blunder around the 'net saying stuff like that, at least
have the courage to own it, and not try to weasel out of it and deny you
said it.
Pathetic.

ant




13 Mar 2005 16:19:51
ant
Re: Death by Snowboarder


"Norm" <normgrant999@yahoo.ca > wrote in message
news:ygxXd.614503$Xk.410498@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Bob Lee" <rlee@swcp.com> wrote in message
> news:rlee-0F279C.19273508032005@individual.net...
>> Norm wrote:
>>
>>> ant wrote:
>> [...]
>>> > Do you deny it?
>>>
>>> Oh, man, you can't take "yes" for an answer can you?
>>
>> Answer the question, man.
>>
>>> Yes, I deny it.
>>
>> Nooooo1 Make her prove it.
>
> What, and have to scroll back and figure out what I actually did say?
> Don't know if I have the patience for that.

don't worry, I saved you the trouble. I didn't quote ALL your utterances on
my shocking bad habits and how I was influencing my guests, btw.

You are a sanctimonious git!

ant