Trail Difficulty Ratings
 

We all know about single black and double black difficulty ratings.
Occasionally rumors surface as to the existence of some nefarious
triple blacks. Rarely, if ever, do I see beginner and intermediate
trails with intercolor distinctions.

My local ski area contains single and double greens, single and double
blues and single and double blacks. I always thought this was quite
useful. The double difficulty hills offer a nice introduction to the
next level. A double green might have some intermediate levels of steep
at short intervals. A double blue might be a cruiser with a short but
steep drop at the top of the hill.

Jeff

"Jeff" wrote in message
oups.com...
We all know about single black and double black difficulty ratings.
Occasionally rumors surface as to the existence of some nefarious
triple blacks. Rarely, if ever, do I see beginner and intermediate
trails with intercolor distinctions.

My local ski area contains single and double greens, single and double
blues and single and double blacks. I always thought this was quite
useful. The double difficulty hills offer a nice introduction to the
next level. A double green might have some intermediate levels of steep
at short intervals. A double blue might be a cruiser with a short but
steep drop at the top of the hill.

Jeff

It is a good idea, yes?

I've sometimes thought that they should post the actual
degree of the slope at the steepest part, maybe even a vertical
profile. It wouldn't take much, and it wouldn't leave any doubt
as to what the difficulty of the slope really is.

Then as opposed to saying, "I can do blues and easy blacks",
a skier might say, "I'm good up to about twenty five to thirty
degrees, on steeper than that I'm not comfortable yet".

"foot2foot" wrote in message

It is a good idea, yes?

I've sometimes thought that they should post the actual
degree of the slope at the steepest part, maybe even a vertical
profile. It wouldn't take much, and it wouldn't leave any doubt
as to what the difficulty of the slope really is.

Then as opposed to saying, "I can do blues and easy blacks",
a skier might say, "I'm good up to about twenty five to thirty
degrees, on steeper than that I'm not comfortable yet".

Too much information I think. It's an activity, fun, sport. If
someone is so timid that they have to analyze down to the nth degree
maybe it's not for them.

I get sick of everything being reduced to having to appeal to
everyone, made risk, and thought free.

I think the way it is works fine.

pigo

pigo wrote:

Too much information I think [...]

Unless bodily fluids are involved, I don't think there is such a thing
as "too much information." I'm not sure how additional statistics will
spoil the fun. It would be nice if the information foot2foot mentioned
was included on the trail map. I'm often curious as to how steep the
steepest section was...

Cheers,
Jeff

"pigo" wrote in message
...
Too much information I think. It's an activity, fun, sport. If
someone is so timid that they have to analyze down to the nth degree
maybe it's not for them.

Why is that too much information, they do it for climbing routes all the
time and the system works just fine. When you tell someone you are
comfortable with 5.9's and can lead 5.7's, everybody has a good idea of what
your skills are.

snoig

Jeff wrote:
We all know about single black and double black difficulty ratings.

You realize "double black" is a fairly new phenomena. I suppose it's
possible the first couple of areas to post a "double black" did so as a
genuine warning to skiers, but the rest of them jumped on the
advertising bandwagon - can't be the only area with just weenie single
black runs, now, can we?

Used to be skiers learned how to work their way down a mountain - trail
maps were guides - and how to mange untamed snow. Now with the Brutal
Grooming of everything in sight, skiers want a detail map of the
sidewalk in front of the ticket window.

IMO, mountains are already too cluttered with signage, and trail maps
contain too little of the mountain and too much about the manmade and
grooming.

pigo wrote:

Too much information I think. It's an activity, fun, sport. If
someone is so timid that they have to analyze down to the nth degree
maybe it's not for them.

I get sick of everything being reduced to having to appeal to
everyone, made risk, and thought free.

I think the way it is works fine.

Well, it feels good to finally agree with you on something. ;-)

I think green, blue and black are totally adequate ratings since the
condition of the slope (groomed, packed, powder, moguls, crud, ice,
etc.) affect the difficulty of the slope as much, if not more, then
the steepness. And the conditions can changed drastically from top to
bottom... especially on larger mountains such as Whistler/Blackcomb.

Hell, next they'll want weather conditions, slope angle profiles and
snow conditions in 100 ft increments posted at the top of every run.

Armin

On 24 Feb 2005 04:45:13 -0800, "Jeff" wrote:

We all know about single black and double black difficulty ratings.
Occasionally rumors surface as to the existence of some nefarious
triple blacks. Rarely, if ever, do I see beginner and intermediate
trails with intercolor distinctions.

My local ski area contains single and double greens, single and double
blues and single and double blacks. I always thought this was quite
useful. The double difficulty hills offer a nice introduction to the
next level. A double green might have some intermediate levels of steep
at short intervals. A double blue might be a cruiser with a short but
steep drop at the top of the hill.

I think that's overboard, once you consider the variability of
weather, snow conditions and crowds. A skied-out, scraped-up green
run full of newbies can be a lot more difficult (and dangerous) than a
deserted steep black with 6" of fluff over fresh corduroy,
f'rinstance. A given trail at 3PM can be much harder to ski than it
was at 9AM (or vice versa); given that kind of variability, I just
don't see the point of getting into such fine distinctions.

bw

bdubya wrote:
given that kind of variability, I just
don't see the point of getting into such fine distinctions.


Except perhaps for litigation. I can see it now:

"But your Honour, I'm oficially certified as a level 6.3.2.1b skier.
The run was graded 6.3.1.1a, well within my certification level.
However, I caught an edge and sprained my left index finger, causing me
pain, suffering and mental anguish that has scarred me for life."

Armin

bdubya wrote:
On 24 Feb 2005 04:45:13 -0800, "Jeff" wrote:

We all know about single black and double black difficulty ratings.
Occasionally rumors surface as to the existence of some nefarious
triple blacks. Rarely, if ever, do I see beginner and intermediate
trails with intercolor distinctions.

My local ski area contains single and double greens, single and double
blues and single and double blacks. I always thought this was quite
useful. The double difficulty hills offer a nice introduction to the
next level. A double green might have some intermediate levels of steep
at short intervals. A double blue might be a cruiser with a short but
steep drop at the top of the hill.


I think that's overboard, once you consider the variability of
weather, snow conditions and crowds. A skied-out, scraped-up green
run full of newbies can be a lot more difficult (and dangerous) than a
deserted steep black with 6" of fluff over fresh corduroy,
f'rinstance. A given trail at 3PM can be much harder to ski than it
was at 9AM (or vice versa); given that kind of variability, I just
don't see the point of getting into such fine distinctions.


Agreed that conditions change enough so that micro-categories are not
terribly useful. But it would be nice to have some way of gauging the
relative difficulty of the terrain from resort to resort. The
green/blue/black system is only useful for comparing trails within each
resort. It would be useful to have some kind of universal standard to
compare across resorts. (Note that I find such a hypothetical rating
system less useful as I get more miles under my bases, but it would have
been a help a couple of years ago when I was starting out.)

BTW, there are trails rated triple black. And BW was skiing at a place
that has them last week. Maybe he can eighteen us....

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