Levels of skier revisited - come on, admit it - we all do it, but why?

A snowHead

We've had the definitions of different levels of skiing ability discussion lots of times before in various flavours. Usually mayhem has ensued. I've never really understood why. I know it's partly because some think we simply shouldn't do it - perhaps a bit like talking about money - but I think it's also partly because we don't all agree on why we're doing it. After all if the definitions are going to be valid to a person they have to be fit for that person's purpose. So why do we do it? Is it

1) to find people of a similar standard to ski with
2) to be able to hire the right skis/boots
3) to sell a client the right ski/boot
4) to give you a goal for improvement or sense of achievement
5) to get a rough idea of which ski school group you should be in, or help decide what sort of lesson would now be the most helpful to make progress
6) to be able to make comparisons with other people
7) to tell people how good/bad a skier you are

Or is it right that we simply shouldn't do it Puzzled

Is it such a hot potato that no-one will say? Toofy Grin

A snowHead

Doing it gives me absolutely no problem. 1) and 5) for me all the time, with a fair bit of 4) to know whether 5) is paying off (although now I'm doing a bit of racing the timing board provides an even more direct, and uncompromising, feedback).

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Mainly because people keep asking the question, and you have to say something to make them go away.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

slikedges

1) No need my friends and I ski with people of many different levels.

2) don't hire boots

3) ummm I know advanced skiers in softer boots and less advanced in stiffer boots ...
ditto to tightness

4) They are pretty coarse grading I tend to take my improvements as they come - I know what they are.

5) Sounds good but the ski school gradings I know are all geared at the lower level... on my home one I've been at the top level for a couple of years or so I'm told

6) who gives a! I LIKE TO COMPARE TO ME

7) Doesn't tell anything like the whole story and again who cares.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

OK, I'll admit it I'm a 4!!

You'll need to Register first of course.

The problem is it doens't work too well!

1) It doesn't differentiate style difference. Some people like to ski fast, others prefer to "take in the scenary". Some likes to put down 2 sets of railroad tracks on smooth snow while other prefers to bounce from bump to bump. They may all be intermediates but together someone is getting bored while others getting scared.

Much better just ask where the group is heading and what kind of terrain is expected.

2) Majority of people can ski pretty well on average "intermediate" skis. Advance skiers tend to have their own ski, or able to name the model they want to hire.

3) No experience in there so I won't comment.

5) What level of ski school were you on the last time you took lesson?

4, 6, 7) One can say anything to suit one's vanity. wink

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

1.5) so you dont end up skiing with idiots who think they are WAY better than they remember. Happened to me last year and we spent 2 hours going down a simple blue run with a guy who "ski's reds and blacks well". ruined my first morning of the season with fresh powder everywhere and me picking the loser up every ten feet.

After all it is free

spyderjon, yeah but he was helping me fix up my flat for a few days so i had to have some sympathy. Funny thing is that after at least 40-50 falls i got him to have a coffee and relax a bit, later he says "did pretty good for my first time in eight years, only fell 3 times". rolling eyes

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

This tale brings up the point that we've made before several times as well - it's important that the judgement is made by an external/indpendent judge. This is a major strength of the SCGB system - you're graded by the holiday leaders when you go on one of their holidays and don't make it up yourself. But from what I've heard they've now got things a bit confused with assessing the higher levels (since abolishing formal tests) - and who judges the judges?

Other schools also use their own grading systems - but none of them seem to know how each of their systems matches with anyone else's.

GrahamN, The childrens ski school seems to teach different schools each year and my kids are not allowed to progress until these are mastered. I see nothing wrong with this premise although I take the point that the ability to perform the skills in practice is probably condition dependant.

You know it makes sense.

So if levels are so irrelevant, why do the Snowlife Snowsport Awards exist?

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

slikedges,

I think the question you have raised is a very good one and one I have occasionally wondered about myself.
I think all the points you have addressed are sensible reasons for attempting to assess different levels of ski ability, a few scales in existence help for some of them.

1) If you are planning to ski with people unknown to you it is pretty important to know that you will be compatible. If the level is seriously different you could be either bored or potentially terrified and exhausted or even in some danger. Anecdotally and from the one holiday I have been on the SCGB scale works pretty well for larger parties where you can shift people around between groups but partly relying on self-assessment it is maybe not sensitive enough for smaller groups.
It has been argued previously on snowHeads that the scale does not go high enough but for its purpose of devising appropriate holidays it seems to work reasonably.

2&3) The existing scales such as S&R’s seem to be as much to do with marketing as anything else Whether or not they help that much in equipment choosing I am not sure. I am swimming in a sea of ignorance where choosing my own equipment is concerned. I guess they must figure they help or they would not use them.

4)For me this is one of the things a really good objective scale could do that is currently lacking. There is no real objective measure of skiing ability other than timed down a course that seems to work . I would find it useful to be able to measure any improvements made and to be able to set realistic targets to achieve. There does not seem to be anything that serves this purpose at the moment. I think if someone could devise a realistic objective scale it would serve the ski schools well as people would find it easier to measure progress and assess their needs for further lessons.

5) Where ski schools have different group levels they usually work pretty well but the majority of European ski schools often only offer group lessons up to a relatively low level for much of the time.

6) I certainly think an accurate objective scale would help communication between people who have not skied together for instance when describing the difficulty of certain slopes.

7) Ostensibly this seems very unenglish but I don’t see anything wrong with it. People will often state their golf handicap when discussing golf this is a reasonably accurate measure of how good someone is at golf if kept up to date.
If skiing had something similar it would allow better communication and give some knowledge to others as to whether or not they were similar to you if describing a resort slope piece of equipment lessons etc. There is no shame at being at any ability level and there will always be people better or worse than yourself.. When occasional snowHeads have attained teaching qualifications or a high level of ability demonstrated in trip reports I don’t think they are being boastful on the contrary I am full of admiration.

My answer to your last question is I don't think levels are entirely irrelevent. In a skill like skiing it is good to meaure your ability and the awards are possibly filling this gap. Puzzled

A snowHead

What people think and what they say are two entirely different things.

The reality is, humans rank everything. Consciously and subconsciously.

Everyone does it. Whether they admit it or not.

Ranking helps to inform us what is good, average or bad. It assists in making decisions.

Skiing is no different.

Grading a skier's ability is designed to assess their value to society and their status within the immediate group.

It gives a 'visual indicator' as to whether they have good, average or bad genes.

Consequently, an above-average skier will be a winner. They have high status. They have sound physical and mental skills. They, particularly men, will find it easier to attract friends and mate.

A below-average skier will be a loser. They have low status. They have questionable physical and mental skills. They, particularly men, will find it harder to attract friends and mate.

In short, rating skiers boils down to evolution. Survival of the fittest.

A snowHead

Whitegold, classic Toofy Grin

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

So, sH bash race winners, is this true?! Toofy Grin

You need to Login to know who's really who.

i think you guys do it because your so insecure in your own abilities, having someone re-affirm your oppinon must be boosting your egos

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Whitegold, Laughing

nice one.

The only thing is that some would actually believe that to be true Confused

You'll need to Register first of course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

I'll look forward to last years E0sb winner to comment on that one wink

After all it is free

Whitegold,
That is all true but it does not state at which level of skiing you get to mate.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Comes after 'smooth in bumps'

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

T Bar, yep, couldn't disagree with any of that. You make clear, succinct and honest arguments for all of those. I especially share your view over 4), 6) and 7). I'd really like a system that's fit for purpose to help me peg my progress and offer me both attainable challenge and satisfaction of achievement. I'd also like to be able to compare experiences with other skiers more easily which is where 6) comes in - it could for instance help me decide if I was up to something or more likely biting off more than I could chew. 7) is part of me. It's part of you. I think it's part of pretty much everyone, except you're right, this is the talking about money thing, it's un-English, rather tacky, simply not done, or if forced to, must be done with just the right amount of false modesty necessary to let everyone know you're really better than you say ("I'm not bad.")! Laughing

Dare I say it but I think Whitegold's points have some truth in them. True to form bluntly expressed generalisations, but not without some truth. Glib yes but necessarily so to be pithy. *note to self: why am I getting this feeling of deja vu? Confused

* Come on folks - isn't this the truth? Not the bit about being leader of the pack getting you the pick of the poodles so much, but I think we do all compare, we just lie about not doing it and not needing to do it, don't we? Toofy Grin

You know it makes sense.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

graeme, I know its rather shallow, but I see nothing wrong with having your ego boosted. It's very difficult to thrive without encouragement - I know I do much better with it. snowHead

Edit

The above doesn't read quite as I intended - that is not to say graeme, that I think your comment suggested that there was something wrong with boosting someone's ego.

A snowHead

abc, do you do it? Do you think it's not quite PC? What do you mean by not quite PC? What are you uncomfortable with about it? Puzzled

A snowHead

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

comprex, I'm sure abc will have his say, but how so?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

slikedges, "her" methinks.

a) constantly reminded of their own inadequacy, inability to measure up, second rate status at best
b) lack of external suggestions and framework for meaningful challenges, and inability to truly share emotional response to self-devised challenges whether met or failed at.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

abc, ok, so you don't think it's not quite PC, but missing why I should read your original post again Puzzled

comprex, why can't the "losers" just see themselves as where they are on the ability scale? Do they have to see themselves as "losers"? Should they be ashamed? There's always someone better than you and always someone worse. Can't see why anyone should be a "loser" personally. Not even if the "winner" is a prat. You've completely lost me wrt to the "winner". Challenges in what circumstances exactly are you referring to? Social circumstances? Can't quite see there being a reason for the "winner" to feel isolated or directionless either. Puzzled

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

After all it is free

alex heney, they are not a necessary consequence, but everyone doesn't have what it takes to avert the consequence, whether it be personal charm or a safety net of friends or a safety net of good manners or a safety net of other things in common.

Why on earth? I've seen it happen in skiing, climbing, skating, paddling, hiking "groups", absolutely no compunction against forming exclusionary ability cliques.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Help!!

Levels of skier revisited - come on, admit it - we all do it, but why?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste