If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"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". |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
prettiest view in the world? | Ken Roberts | Nordic Skiing | 20 | April 26th 04 09:40 AM |
Near fatal ski incident | Me | Nordic Skiing | 22 | February 27th 04 01:47 PM |
Updated Stowe trail maps | Lew Lasher | Nordic Skiing | 0 | February 16th 04 03:10 PM |
Pre BIrkie/Birkie trail conditions | Bruce Fiedler | Nordic Skiing | 0 | February 7th 04 09:59 PM |
Has anyone ever skied the WB trail in Underhill, Vermont? | Lew Lasher | Nordic Skiing | 8 | September 22nd 03 01:38 AM |