J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by verbier_ski_bum

9 now, 12 injured:(. Just read in 20minutes. The deadliest avalanche in 10 years.

I have no problems with people practicing and skiing switch on 'normal' slopes as long as it's not busy and they can see where they are going. Many people learn 360s on snow and switch on wider and flatter areas of regular slopes because there is simply not enough room for it in terrain parks. Parks are mainly for jumps, you don't ski long enough distance without hitting a kicker or a box or whatever else is there. 'Tricks' in a way is not very different from on-slope drills. You have to be able to see where you are going and make sure you don't cause problems to others. I have never seen anyone skiing backwards on busy slopes, but I do see it in quiter areas. Of course it's possible to imagine a hypothetical accident even on a quite slope, but accidents typically happen when one or two skiers lose awareness or at least one skier skis recklessly, whether 'traditionally' or switch.

I think if they were saying that he killed her the verdict would have been quite different. Going off piste is a joint decision and responsibility, but starting on the slope before the partner clears it is not. as a skier I have very little influence on skiers above me and even that no-one forces me to go off-piste, if someone cuts the slope above they put my life in more danger than it would have been otherwise - regardless of the avy equipment I may or may not carry on me. I haven't heard of equipment or lack of it starting avalanches but I heard plenty about skiers doing it and unfortunately I heard of skiers doing it when there were other skiers below them. Ignoring the case and letting the man off completely just because he suffered a personal loss would send a wrong signal and promote irresposible behaviour. There was a case a few years back when a boarder caused an avalanche which caught the group below killing one person and his sentence was more severe - and the group below made their own decision to go off-piste, the only thing they had no influence over was this boarder above them. The difference between two cases is slight, and if in this case a man and the dead woman were not skiing together he would've got more than 3 months suspended sentence. There is a certain duty to care when skiing off-piste which was neglected in this case, and taking everythihng into consideration IMHO the response was very balanced and fair.

This is really interesting, I always thought that getting in/off the chair lifts was the easiest thing ever but my experience is limited to lifts in Europe. I heard that in States there are even lifts without safety bars or foot bars which makes me appreciate that it may not always and everywhere be so straightforward. But even over here older chairlifts are quite evil and may hit you behind the knees if you are not paying attention. Luckily they are getting replaced and there are not many of them left - I think there are no more than 3 in Verbier now and I am only using one of them - the 3-man that goes to the top of Chassoure.

I am not the biggest fan of T-bars though, last year I got really frustrated in Saas-Fee after I fell off 3 times in a row from one of the T-bars. It was quite steep and icy at the access point plus there was something on the surface so that one of my skis kept getting stuck, before I could move them, and quickly pulling me off the lift, before I finally managed to clear the spot. It was almost embarrassing as I hadn't ever fallen off the lift until then.

A friend was trying to convince me to go to South America for couple weeks skiing, but while it sounds tempting, I can pay the season rent in Verbier with the same money these two weeks will cost me and I don't want to lose two weeks of holidays that I can spend in winter in the Alps. If I could have extra two weeks of holidays... that would have been another matter.

While I like "versatility" but I often saw this term describing suitability for a range of conditions, and different terrain, not skiers. But it still seems closer to the idea than "accessibility".

Even that I am not a native speaker, but I've never heard the word "accessible" used in this context. The term often used is "forgiving" or for the opposite - "demanding", though it's not exactly the same. "Accessible" to me is very close in meaning to "available", "accessibility" - ease of access, ability to access, not ease of use. Could the word you are looking for be "usability"? At least when I search for user-friendly wiki redirects to "usability". Or maybe a more general term "handling"? With "1" being very demanding and "5" - least demanding? In ski reviews the most common characteristics that I met are: turn initiation, forgiveness, edge hold, short turns performance, long turn performance, performance in moguls.

BTW, I love Volkl skis:) They are on a stiffer side and little bit demanding but I find they reward a good effort while not being totally unforgiving.

The fact that she wasn't wearing the transceiver (and it was indeed her choice) didn't play big role in her death, but it seems the fact that her husband started skiing before she cleared the slope did. Responsibility would have been hers if it was she who set off the avalanche, but it was her husband who did it while she was below him. General rule is to avoid sking the slope when you are putting at risk third parties. This court ruling seems to be very important as it stresses the fact that decision making should not be affecting third parties, and as she was below him technically she was the third party. Yes, they were skiing together but it's not that he got a heavy sentence. I am sure her responsibility and participation in the flawed decision making were duly taken into account; but acquitting the man would have been totally wrong and could create a very dangerous precedent. This is the public good from this case. Think of those below you when in avalanche terrain.