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 |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
"Your Responsibility Code" Interpretation...Ugh
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:11:25 -0500, VtSkier
wrote: wrote: Thanks to all for the great discussion. As an instructor, the code has been deep-rooted in my mind for a long time, so, my original interpretation is that, when passing or overtaking anyone, the person being overtaken has the right-of-way, regardless of their line or change in line. However, as an instructor, I am responsible for the safety of my students first and foremost. In that role, I would say that I look up the hill and across the hill just as much as I look down the hill and toward my students. On any given run, I feel as though I know exactly where everyone is at all times, both below and above me...sort of an inherent personal and class safety code. I very much inherently behave as Marty stated above, "4) If you are going to make a line change, look up the hill to make sure that: a) an out of control dumbass isn't heading down that same line while heading for the trees or lift pole, or b) a good skier that just happens to be going faster than you isn't about to pass you in that line." Interestingly, I found the following in the Colorado "Ski Safety Act of 1979" (revised in 2006): 33-44-109(2) - Each skier has the duty to maintain control of his speed and course at all times when skiing and to maintain a proper lookout so as to be able to avoid other skiers and objects. However, the primary duty shall be on the person skiing downhill to avoid collision with any person or objects below him. The wording here does not seem to pin down all the blame on the uphill skier, just places a majority of the responsibility on the uphill skier. The line, "...maintain a proper lookout so as to be able to avoid other skiers..." could be interpretted to mean that people should even check over their shoulder once in a while for people coming down behind them. So, it seems that the Responsibility Code would indeed place blame for the collision on Skier #2. However, it seems that there is an unwritten "safety" code that says, if you are skiing defensively, like driving (hopefully), you'll be aware of the environment all around you (i.e. uphill, downhill, side, etc.). Finally, the Colorado Statute, actual law, seems to lend more ambiguity to the problem to the scenario...very interesting. Where did all of this occur? What was the rating of the trail? From the rating of the trail is it just possible to judge the rating of the skiers on it? In other words, the stated problem doesn't give enough information. I *assume* that this a green or blue because skier #1 IS an idiot. No question. That's a key point for assigning real-world blame (as opposed to "who violated the written code?" which would be skier#2). If this were a green run, I would hold skier #1 pretty much blameless; asking a beginner to remember all the bizarre bits of instruction and advice while actively managing four edges and two poles is already a lot to ask Forget about asking them to also be aware of what's coming up behind them. If you're going to rip a green run or an easy blue, you should be able to avoid all other skiers even if they're actively trying to get hit. If you can't do that, you''re ripping the wrong slope at the wrong time. But on anything marked "advanced" or higher, it's reasonable to expect a minimal level of competence, awareness and predictability from those downhill. bw |
Ads |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
"Your Responsibility Code" Interpretation...Ugh
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:40:11 -0500, VtSkier
wrote: bdubya wrote: On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:11:25 -0500, VtSkier wrote: wrote: Thanks to all for the great discussion. As an instructor, the code has been deep-rooted in my mind for a long time, so, my original interpretation is that, when passing or overtaking anyone, the person being overtaken has the right-of-way, regardless of their line or change in line. However, as an instructor, I am responsible for the safety of my students first and foremost. In that role, I would say that I look up the hill and across the hill just as much as I look down the hill and toward my students. On any given run, I feel as though I know exactly where everyone is at all times, both below and above me...sort of an inherent personal and class safety code. I very much inherently behave as Marty stated above, "4) If you are going to make a line change, look up the hill to make sure that: a) an out of control dumbass isn't heading down that same line while heading for the trees or lift pole, or b) a good skier that just happens to be going faster than you isn't about to pass you in that line." Interestingly, I found the following in the Colorado "Ski Safety Act of 1979" (revised in 2006): 33-44-109(2) - Each skier has the duty to maintain control of his speed and course at all times when skiing and to maintain a proper lookout so as to be able to avoid other skiers and objects. However, the primary duty shall be on the person skiing downhill to avoid collision with any person or objects below him. The wording here does not seem to pin down all the blame on the uphill skier, just places a majority of the responsibility on the uphill skier. The line, "...maintain a proper lookout so as to be able to avoid other skiers..." could be interpretted to mean that people should even check over their shoulder once in a while for people coming down behind them. So, it seems that the Responsibility Code would indeed place blame for the collision on Skier #2. However, it seems that there is an unwritten "safety" code that says, if you are skiing defensively, like driving (hopefully), you'll be aware of the environment all around you (i.e. uphill, downhill, side, etc.). Finally, the Colorado Statute, actual law, seems to lend more ambiguity to the problem to the scenario...very interesting. Where did all of this occur? What was the rating of the trail? From the rating of the trail is it just possible to judge the rating of the skiers on it? In other words, the stated problem doesn't give enough information. I *assume* that this a green or blue because skier #1 IS an idiot. No question. That's a key point for assigning real-world blame (as opposed to "who violated the written code?" which would be skier#2). If this were a green run, I would hold skier #1 pretty much blameless; asking a beginner to remember all the bizarre bits of instruction and advice while actively managing four edges and two poles is already a lot to ask Forget about asking them to also be aware of what's coming up behind them. If you're going to rip a green run or an easy blue, you should be able to avoid all other skiers even if they're actively trying to get hit. If you can't do that, you''re ripping the wrong slope at the wrong time. But on anything marked "advanced" or higher, it's reasonable to expect a minimal level of competence, awareness and predictability from those downhill. bw It's been a while since I posted what you are responding to. While you are correct, I do wish you hadn't snipped what I wrote to look like I was blaming Skier #1. Sorry - intent was to snip to put the focus was on the trail type, i.e. the context of the incident, not to misrepresent your stance. Also because I don't think it's fair to call skier #1 an idiot if this happened on an easily accessible green run where you'd expect to find a lot of people with no clue what they're doing. bw |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
"Your Responsibility Code" Interpretation...Ugh
On Jan 16, 5:40*am, VtSkier wrote:
bdubya wrote: On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:11:25 -0500, VtSkier wrote: wrote: Thanks to all for the great discussion. As an instructor, the code has been deep-rooted in my mind for a long time, so, my original interpretation is that, when passing or overtaking anyone, the person being overtaken has the right-of-way, regardless of their line or change in line. *However, as an instructor, I am responsible for the safety of my students first and foremost. In that role, I would say that I look up the hill and across the hill just as much as I look down the hill and toward my students. *On any given run, I feel as though I know exactly where everyone is at all times, both below and above me...sort of an inherent personal and class safety code. *I very much inherently behave as Marty stated above, "4) If you are going to make a line change, look up the hill to make sure that: *a) *an out of control dumbass isn't heading down that same line while heading for the trees or lift pole, or b) *a good skier that just happens to be going faster than you isn't about to pass you in that line." Interestingly, I found the following in the Colorado "Ski Safety Act of 1979" (revised in 2006): 33-44-109(2) - Each skier has the duty to maintain control of his speed and course at all times when skiing and to maintain a proper lookout so as to be able to avoid other skiers and objects. However, the primary duty shall be on the person skiing downhill to avoid collision with any person or objects below him. The wording here does not seem to pin down all the blame on the uphill skier, just places a majority of the responsibility on the uphill skier. The line, "...maintain a proper lookout so as to be able to avoid other skiers..." could be interpretted to mean that people should even check over their shoulder once in a while for people coming down behind them. So, it seems that the Responsibility Code would indeed place blame for the collision on Skier #2. However, it seems that there is an unwritten "safety" code that says, if you are skiing defensively, like driving (hopefully), you'll be aware of the environment all around you (i.e. uphill, downhill, side, etc.). Finally, the Colorado Statute, actual law, seems to lend more ambiguity to the problem to the scenario...very interesting. Where did all of this occur? What was the rating of the trail? From the rating of the trail is it just possible to judge the rating of the skiers on it? In other words, the stated problem doesn't give enough information. I *assume* that this a green or blue because skier #1 IS an idiot. No question. That's a key point for assigning real-world blame (as opposed to "who violated the written code?" which would be skier#2). *If this were a green run, I would hold skier #1 pretty much blameless; *asking a beginner to remember all the bizarre bits of instruction and advice while actively managing four edges and two poles is already a lot to ask *Forget about asking them to also be aware of what's coming up behind them. *If you're going to rip a green run or an easy blue, you should be able to avoid all other skiers even if they're actively trying to get hit. *If you can't do that, you''re ripping the wrong slope at the wrong time. *But on anything marked "advanced" or higher, it's reasonable to expect a minimal level of competence, awareness and predictability from those downhill. * bw It's been a while since I posted what you are responding to. While you are correct, I do wish you hadn't snipped what I wrote to look like I was blaming Skier #1. It was quite clear in the REST of what I wrote that I felt ALL the blame rested with Skier #2, if for no other reason than he didn't assume Skier #1 was an idiot. This is pretty much what I was getting at when I said the problem as stated didn't have enough information. I ski like I drive - I assume that everyone else is an idiot. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
"Your Responsibility Code" Interpretation...Ugh
Dave Cartman wrote:
In article , "ant" wrote: MoonMan wrote: Dave Cartman wrote: In article , "ant" wrote: It was always interesting, being in a group of instructors from all over the world, all of whom could discuss all kinds of things in complete understanding of the words used or subjects discussed. Invariably, an American would demand to know what X word was, or what was this thing we were talking about? My first guess is that the American is more likely to admit he doesn't know everything in a group of pretentious ski instructors who believe that they can "discuss all kinds of things in complete understanding of the words used or subjects discussed." But I'm guessing your pint is it's because the Norteamericano ski instructors aren't as smart or educated as the European ones. Does that say more about the American education system or the European job market? (Quick question: Are Australians considered European, or do they just lump themselves with them when it suites them?) Another possible explanation might be the phenomenon of "ethnocentrism." A comparison: if a group from the US were discussing American football (a bit of trivia, American football is actually known as "American soccer" in the other 15% of the world and played with racquets shaped like pool skimmers) and the conversation shifted to "safetys." You might ask "Oi! Wat's a soiftee!!!" (Because all Australians precede all statements with an excited "Oi!") and the American might think, "wow! what a poorly educated and uncultured individual, this Australian doesn't even know what a "safety" is. Similar examples could be provided using apple pie, baseball, and American Idol. You do realise "American Idol" is a version of a British program "Pop Idol" don't you? What!? Next you'll be claiming that the process of mixing apples and sugar in a pastry isn't a unique American invention either! Why not lay claim to all our original ideas like "Who Wants to be a Millionaire," "Friends," and "The Office." Hell, you may as well try to claim "The Star Spangled Banner" as your own too. I think you missed some, but luckily Holywood remembers them for you, for example capturing an enigma machine first. -- Chris *:-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
burton's "twin-like" vs "directional twin" | TacoJohn | Snowboarding | 0 | December 21st 07 02:46 AM |
Seeing Reference to "Backcountry Magazine" article on Bill Briggs | [email protected] | Backcountry Skiing | 0 | April 27th 07 04:45 PM |
Another old Post of Scott lobbing "Insane Whacko" names at people | Yabahoobs | Alpine Skiing | 6 | March 2nd 07 04:37 PM |