J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by ise

bandit wrote:ise, I'm not convinced I could pick out a "highest level" ski instructor from a lineup, let alone, prove that I'd consulted them about a place to ski.

You're being asked, as a holidaymaker and amateur, to consult with someone who's a professional. Doesn't matter what level they are, the insurer trusts their judgement over yours. You know that.

bandit wrote:I'm not sure I could be classified as a Holiday Hero, however I do know from my current Insurers' Policy, that if I skin up a piste with my Harness in my backpack, (just in case) that turns me into a Ski Mountaineer and I would not be covered, so I need to leave it behind

well, if you're an experienced ski mountaineer with many years experience travelling in the winter environment then I'm sure you'll have no problem convincing your insurer of that. You ought to give them a little consideratiobn though as when they get your cheque they can't tell it's you and not someone on a package tour who's got no experience at all.

steverandomno wrote:Few people are going to pay 10x on-piste only prices for the same level of cover.

It seems that, at the moment, you get what you pay for. It costs about 300 quid for annual cover for 'out of bounds' skiing in North America and Europe. If you look at a typical policy sold as part of a package, it often contains numerous get out clauses for even basic non-skiing related incidents. There are many policies that contain a clause allowing the insurance company to demand receipts for all of the clothing in your lost baggage before paying out. How likely is anyone to have those?

In a more serious vein, many skiing policies seem to exclude skiing outside of piste markers in Europe. This would include that nice 2m wide untracked slope between two parallel pistes. How they apply Euro-centric rules to north America Skiing, where there is no such thing as a piste, and thus no such thing as off-piste, is anybody's guess. How many policies available in the UK, that are supposed to cover North America, mention the phrases, ski hill, in-bounds, out of bounds, back-country or any of the other North American terms?

If underwriters are a lot better informed than we imagine, then what is their motivation behind being so unclear? Some are clear, generally the most expensive, some are extremely vague, mostly the cheaper ones. In my opinion, this speaks volumes.

At this point the directors of my imaginary insurer are in stitches, we've taken this type of feedback to our AGM and along with the dafter claims & we're looking at putting it in a humorous book.

You know exactly the difference between the US and Europe and exactly how the rules would apply. You know the policy covers you in Europe for open pistes and freeride areas whether they're prepared or not and you know that depends on if the resort authorities have declared them open. You know exactly, precisely to millimetre when you step out of the terrain covered into what isn't.

In North America you know exactly how the rules work as well, in-bound, secured areas regardless of if they're prepared are covered and you know to the 100th of an inch the exact moment you leave that terrain.

steverandomno wrote:In a more serious vein, many skiing policies seem to exclude skiing outside of piste markers in Europe. This would include that nice 2m wide untracked slope between two parallel pistes.

So, anywhere within two metres of any piste is totally safe and should be covered on every insurance policy? Two of our actuaries just collapsed after hysterical fits and needed to be hospitalised. Again you know perfectly well that's not true. And I know what the reply is, you're saying you can tell the difference, maybe you can, what you're not able to explain is how the insurer knows it's you and not Holiday Harry with a new pair of fat skis and no clue.

bandit wrote:ise, this thread was born out of the need to gain clarification in Policy wordings. My own insurer, (for Europe) believes that someone in authority will be along to "open" the off piste each day. Amongst the list of those they consider of suitable stature to perform this task, are ski instructors. This I have in writing.

It's perfectly reasonable, ski instructors, at the right level, are more than qualified to judge if an area is safe. It's quite reasonable that an insurer doesn't think the average skier from Milton Keynes on a week holiday is capable of making the judgement themselves, I don't either. And I see people all the time who fancy themselves a bit knowledgeable in places where they've no grasp of the risk at all.

The policies are perfectly clear, if you think you can rock up from your self catering package tour apartment declare a slope is safe then expect someone else to pay for the helicopter to lift you out then they're telling you it's not on.

I think you'll find insurance underwriters a lot better informed than you imagine. You wouldn't expect to be insured to drive a car without having passed the test and you'd be horrified to share the road with people who'd not passed. It's ridiculous to argue that someone with no formal training or qualifications should automatically be judged safe in this terrain simply on their own say-so.

All the noise is people looking for loopholes because in their own judgement they're some sort of expert. They may well be but it's hardly likely to impress an insurer and it probably wouldn't wash in a court (although that test is a little different).

This is not relevant to the vast majority of skiers apart from it being them picking up the tab for a few holiday heroes who seem to think everyone else is obliged to pay for their potential misadventures.

leavesj wrote:That is exactly the right insurance policy and it can be bought from the post offices in Switzerland. It doesn't just cover Switzerland, but think it is limited to Europe. I have friends that ski about 8 weeks a year in Switzerland and they swear by it.

I'm not sure it's a great idea to recommend insurance where the policy is written in another language. There's a danger you're not understanding the conditions. Air Glaciers insurance is only valid in Switzerland for foreigners, it would not cover you for Europe. I'm pretty certain it's not for sale in the Post Office either, you're thinking of Rega I think which is similar.

As for off piste insurance in general, no insurer is obliged to cover anyone if they don't want to. If I were buying insurance for a ski holiday I'd not be impressed my premiums were paying for someone who'd got out of their depth and needed a helicopter rescue. If I were offering insurance I'd not cover random people to engage in a high risk activity without some indication they were competent.

And if I were offering insurance I'd be alarmed by the number of people, armed with fat skis and egged on by internet forums and videos, in places they lacked the skills to be. I'd structure my polices to make sure I'd not be paying out for their stupidity and focus my product on the vast majority of holidaymakers who behave sensibly and need cover for things actually out of their control like cancelled flights and lost luggage. And when people accused my imaginary insurance company of not understanding skiing I'd have a damn good laugh and reflect that the thing about an idiot stick is to be quite sure which end the idiot is on.

If you think Air Glaciers or REGA will cover you for rescue if you've been reckless in any way then you're mistaken, they won't and you'll get a bill. You might find that the Swiss have a bit a higher bar as well when it comes to working out who's competent to be somewhere.

leavesj wrote:I haven't had altitute sickness, but I have been affected by sunstroke and dehydration. It was horrible. I slept for 24 hours solid. Not a good use of time on a ski trip. I now ski with a 3L camelback so it never happens again.

And you are now everyskier ) Add to that some nasal damage from breathing cold air and you've precisely diagnosed what most people are actually suffering from.

If people had been to extreme altitude and dealt with AMS for real they know the difference soon enough.

bandit wrote:
mild symptoms, frequent headache, poor sleep patterns, snotty nose and nosebleeds. Always during the first week of a two week alpine trip. Both winter and summer. I started taking Gingko Biloba for unrelated reasons and was very pleasantly surprised the next winter, to find that most of my symptoms had gone. It could all be a coincidence, perhaps I outgrew all the symptoms at once


Must be a coincidence then, 20+ years of alpine nosebleeds and the rest, gone in a flash. Or perhaps I'm really unfit )

It's not a coincidence, you didn't have AMS.

"snotty nose and nosebleeds" are not symptoms of AMS. Simply having headaches and poor sleep does not register on the Lake Louise Consensus on the Definition of Altitude Illness scoring system so according to the International Hypoxia Symposium, you don't have AMS.

bandit wrote:
So what would be the effects there?

zero

Patrick Damant wrote:Divers can be a bit vulnerable. They can have type two symptoms for a while on day one ( nervous tissue damage ) Blurred vision and tiredness, often just a bit of a cleanout going on but uncomfortable none the less. fortunately for us humans the body is pretty good at repairing this kind of light damage.

I'd be interested to see some evidence for that and a citation. My understanding was that divers are at immediate risk at altitude or in a high pressure environment and that the effect was around 24 hours with an incidence rate around 0.004%. I've never heard of a long-term adverse impact and I'm struggling to understand what the mechanism might be.

Before everyone gets a bit carried away it's worth pointing that most skiers suffering from altitude sickness simply aren't. Some places like Breckenridge are high enough to give someone living at sea level problems but 99% of ski destinations simply aren't.

The highest ski station in Europe is only 1850m in the village where you have about 80% of what's called partial pressure, as a measure of how thin the air is. Just bobbing up over 2500m for a few hours isn't really going to trouble any normally healthy person. You're not going to have symptoms whatsoever that aren't fixed by going back to village level.

Something you quickly realise if you do deal with high altitude medical problems is that any number of other conditions present just the same as AMS. For skiers it's rather more likely they're suffering with tiredness, unexpected exercise, interrupted sleep from travel and dehydration.

And in answer to an earlier question, no, it-s not going to make any difference what the weather is like. The difference between a low and high pressure front will be worth not much more that 300m of altitude. It won't make your apartment feel like Everest.