Val d'Isere blue in to village

I was in Val d"sair last year and would like to warn anyone who's never been.....If you aren't at least intermediate don't take the blue run back into the village. This is NOT a blue. I don't know how they can class it as one. At the end of the day when your legs are tired it's hell on earth. It is a narrow half pipe full of moguls and scared people trying to get down, which in turn makes it very difficult for faster skiers to pass. Then you have to bomb it at the bottom otherwise you are polling for ten minutes to get to the lifts. Was it just me or has anyone else had this experience?

Yes, we've all had this experience!

I've skied it in reasonably pleasant conditions and then it's great fun (other than the flat section at the end).

On a bad day, it's really bad.

I don't think it's been opened yet this season. Not enough snow and now too much. Someone sadly died in an avalanche last week on the very same piste.

I didn't realise it was that piste. Always sad to hear or see a fatality. Hits home when it's somewhere you've skied

Another reason not to go. When will people learn!

Just to be clear skier was offpiste, Val did not have an onpiste avalanche fatality.

Is interesting how resorts grade their runs, there seems to be two main issues:
The battle for piste KM has resulted in so many off camber narrow green and blue paths in the Alps is ridiculous. Perhaps what is needed is a real definition of a piste vs. just being pisted. I would suggest something like does not deviate from the natural fall line of a mountain by more than 25 deg. That way people ski terrain vs. paths which is far more enjoyable and stops resorts engineering mountains.
Countries are very inconsistent. Italy is far too conservative and the North Americans felt the need to add a grade, so no wonder people are confused.
Probably best people chose their resort by fatmap to really understand where they are heading and the likely quality of the skiing.

Ranchero_1979 wrote:Just to be clear skier was offpiste, Val did not have an onpiste avalanche fatality.

Is interesting how resorts grade their runs, there seems to be two main issues:
The battle for piste KM has resulted in so many off camber narrow green and blue paths in the Alps is ridiculous. Perhaps what is needed is a real definition of a piste vs. just being pisted. I would suggest something like does not deviate from the natural fall line of a mountain by more than 25 deg. That way people ski terrain vs. paths which is far more enjoyable and stops resorts engineering mountains.
Countries are very inconsistent. Italy is far too conservative and the North Americans felt the need to add a grade, so no wonder people are confused.
Probably best people chose their resort by fatmap to really understand where they are heading and the likely quality of the skiing.

It would be great if some universal standard could be agreed upon but I don't see it happening anytime soon :twisted: .

It seems to me that the classification is as much determined by the marketing department as the health and safety department. Most resorts aim for what they consider the optimum mix of slopes to attract the greatest number of visitors - this seems to be to get as close to 40:40:20 (Blue, Red, Black)as you can :shock:. The 2nd element is perhaps even more worrying - the absolute need for a Blue home run. Again, the marketeers will pretty much insist on this no matter what the terrain.

Unfortunately lots of mountains are shaped like an inverted bowl which can mean that the slopes lower down are steeper than those higher up. This can mean very tricky home runs :x. This is fine if they are properly marked but disastrous if not. As the poster has indicated, it is common in many resorts to find relatively difficult home runs which are full of tired, inexperienced skiers, who definitely do not enjoy the experience and can be a danger to themselves and to others.

Sometimes it's discretion being the better part of valour and just take the gondola down at the end of the afternoon. That way you can also (legitimately) end your afternoon with a drink or two on the mountain without feeling you're being reckless.

billip1 wrote:Sometimes it's discretion being the better part of valour and just take the gondola down at the end of the afternoon. That way you can also (legitimately) end your afternoon with a drink or two on the mountain without feeling you're being reckless.

I vote for this. I'm now at an age where I value my limbs and their ongoing functionality! It's actually quite pleasant to ride down on a chair or gondola at 4pm or 4.30pm after a long day on the slopes. Rightly or wrongly I perceive risks to be highest on a crowded mogulled red or black run at the end of the day. We watched someone slide about 200m down Le Face from the telecabin at the end of one afternoon......