 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
"guides" need to be IFMGA but you don't need to be a guide to take people off-piste. you only need to be a guide if there is a mountaineering element, as I understand it. ie glaciated terrain; use of ropes etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
DB, you're being a bit of a pain on this. It's already been explained (ad nauseam) that Reps are not Guides, do not pretend to be and do not go into guide-only territory - although I accept that there is a grey area regarding the increasingly commercial nature of the club - and all members are made aware of this in the morning homily. However, there are several reps that have some degree of BASI qualification (although not necessarily the higher grades), and there is at least one that is currently working towards full guide qualification - he is currently qualified as a heli-ski tail guide. All off-piste weeks/courses are additionally staffed with fully qualified guides/instructors - so for those the "leader" has a purely organisational role. I do agree though that that Canadian trip is possibly rather understaffed - I would not go on it for that reason - but it's not a hugely high standard so I doubt they will be going too far into back-country, and those leaders are also very experienced. Also don't Canada also do the "in-bounds off-piste" thing - so there would be no reason for unguided skiers doing it by themselves, so why should they then be prevented from doing so because they have a MORE experienced skier with them?. Remember that Reps are not prohibited from going off-piste, but should stay within a "short ski" (say 10mins) of the piste for the weakest skier in the group - so that would probably be consistent with the advertised standard of that holiday.
I've skied with JF, and whether or not he has a formal guiding qualification, he's a very experienced mountaineer (IIRC he's done a lot of climbing in the Himalayas), and I would have no qualms about his mountain experience - there are people alive now (not SCGB-related AFAIK) who wouldn't be if he hadn't been there. Andreas Bjorkland is a presenter for Henry's Avalanche Talks, and designs their avalanche awareness programmes, so I think we can assume he's also well qualified to lead off-piste in the Tignes area. Remember ISIAs can take groups off-piste, except on glacial terrain - so that's the only restriction if he's not UIAGM qualified.
stephen buck, I think Argentiere is an interesting case. The most extreme terrain is mostly glaciated, so Reps would never have gone there anyway. Of the rest, there's not much I can think of that would fall outside the guidelines, old or new. Possibly the only thing would be the descent to Le Lavancher - which is now clearly outside the "short ski" definition - or the couloirs under the Telepherique, which would be way too difficult for any forseeable group anyway, but I wouldn't see e.g. the Canadian or Lavancher bowls or the lower part of Combe de Rachasse as being outside the guidelines (dependent on prevailing conditions), and I see no reason that they should be, given the hundreds/thousands of individual skiers that ski those areas every day unled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
GrahamN,
I think Bode said it best with ......
| Bode Swiller wrote: |
| 22 pages in and it seems like the fog has only got foggier. |
Glad to hear there are some very good people on the SCGB courses. The Canadian trip is marketed as advanced offpiste although there doesn't seem to be any qualified instructors or guides listed - are the two reps/leaders providing the instruction?
I've been through the "I know him, he's a great leader (but without qualifications)" route before, wish I'd of been a pain in the neck on the run up to that trip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| DB wrote: |
.......Some courses only have instruction for a couple of days so what happens on other days? This course for instance http://www.skiclub.co.uk/skiclub/skifreshtracks/holiday.asp?intHolidayID=1588 has two days of instruction and no ski instructor or mountain guides are listed.  If I had paid 1195 GBP to ski Canadian powder and had a course "leader" I'd be pretty miffed to find two days instruction and not much offpiste "leading" after that. |
Gosh, that looks a great holiday, doesn't it? Never skied with him, but Gerry has an excellent reputation as a rep (as well as a colourful one as an erstwhile snowhead) so I wouldn't mind having the chance some day. I am unclear why you are calling the holiday a 'course' - 2 days powder instruction does not make it so, I think. Anyway, good to see that the membership isn't 'miffed' like you - the holiday is fully booked.
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Mon 7-01-08 18:23; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
DB, Suggest you read the Leaders,Guides, Instructors section on the Freshtracks Holidays site.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Interestingly - I am going on that Canadian trip. I think the deal is that there is 2 days of instruction by local instructors/guides in one of their steep and deep "camps" - a bit like those at Jackson Hole, but that the rest of the time will be spent inbounds. And in Canada - as in the US, there is a lot of inbounds terrain which is properly avi controlled, and piste patrolled, but is ungroomed and in bowl/tree areas which would be considered off-piste in Europe.
I think holidays in Europe present more of a potential problem,
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Mon 7-01-08 18:34; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stoatsbrother, I am actually a bit envious of you. I didn't go for it because of the age limitation thing. I am sure you will have a great time - do let us know how you got on when you return.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| achilles wrote: |
| DB wrote: |
| .......Some courses only have instruction for a couple of days so what happens on other days? This course for instance http://www.skiclub.co.uk/skiclub/skifreshtracks/holiday.asp?intHolidayID=1588 has two days of instruction and no ski instructor or mountain guides are listed. If I had paid 1195 GBP to ski Canadian powder and had a course "leader" I'd be pretty miffed to find two days instruction and not much offpiste "leading" after that. |
Gosh, that looks a great holiday, doesn't it? Never skied with him, but Gerry has an excellent reputation as a rep (as well as a colourful one as an erstwhile snowhead) so I wouldn't mind having the chance some day. I am unclear why you are calling the holiday a 'course' - 2 days powder instruction does not make it so, I think. Anyway, good to see that the membership isn't 'miffed' like you - the holiday is fully booked. |
Are you his mom or just another SCGB rep who posts on here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
DB, Ah we have got to the bottom of it you dont like the SCGB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| GrahamN wrote: |
| Remember that Reps are not prohibited from going off-piste, but should stay within a "short ski" (say 10mins) of the piste for the weakest skier in the group |
10 minutes? Is that the new rule or your interpretation of "short ski"? I'm guessing that's your view of what they mean by "short ski" and it's why SCGB are mad not to get some meaningful definitions agreed. Another rep may have a completely different view of "short ski"... say, 100 metres. 10 minutes in one direction might entail 20 minutes or worse to get back. Who's counting anyway? The whole thing is a mess in my view. As said previously, it's not rocket science to look at each rep resort in turn and agree rules for each resort, define which itineries, draw up a manual etc (and, all the time, taking into account the reps' competence in each case).
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Bode Swiller wrote: |
| As said previously, it's not rocket science to look at each rep resort in turn and agree rules for each resort, define which itineries, draw up a manual etc (and, all the time, taking into account the reps' competence in each case). |
Well that sounds simple enough, Swiller.
Are you aware that at the lower end of Church Road in Wimbledon (not the more mountainous bit occupied by the SCGB) your fellow American once uttered the phrase "You can not be serious".
Would you be willing to draw up these manuals (bearing in mind that snow and weather conditions can make a normally benign slope lethal) and these 'rep competence' parameters?
Would you like to run the Club?
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Mon 7-01-08 23:09; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bode Swiller, it is my interpretation, but one that has not been substantially contradicted when I've suggested to those in the know that that's what it may mean. I happen to think that's the right kind of judgement to make, rather than a hard and fast distance rule. One reason they are not being more specific is to allow a degree of discretion, based on the prevailing conditions and the level of the group that particular day. If you want to be picky, there are of course routes it would be ridiculous to attempt even say 20m from a piste, and other off piste routes that when in a reasonable condition may take you say up to a km away from the piste, without any adverse effects. There is no way you can be hard and fast with distance rules and allow for such variables.
Yes, I do agree it's a mess, but they're in a bit of a no win situation here - particularly with barrack-room lawyers (and the odd real one) popping up all over the place - and agree though that listing typical routes for each resort that would not be allowed would be in general a good thing. That would probably have to be finessed by having a "maybe" list, depending on the grading of the group's worst skier, current snow conditions etc..... then it starts getting very complicated. There does appear to be a feeling that reps are being pressured by members to go places they shouldn't and part of the general warning is to strengthen the Rep's hand in saying no. The downside of a "proscribed list" is that if a route isn't on that list then it opens up the route of "C'mon rep, it's not a no-go area, let's do it", even if the rep doesn't think it's sensible.
I personally have never seen any of this kind of issue though. On the contrary, I have experienced cases where the group was all well capable of doing something that's been disallowed under previous rules but the rep has been constrained by those rules. On occasion we've therefore not skied stuff we would have been perfectly comfortable doing as individuals. I think in one of those cases I think we actually absented ourselves from the group for a short while, completed the pitch and then met up with the rep on the other side of it  .
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
This is getting very silly
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| riverman wrote: |
| DB, Ah we have got to the bottom of it you dont like the SCGB. |
As I have said many moons ago on here, for skiers living in the UK it looks like a good deal with the discounts, holidays etc.
For me the SCGB is a great source of entertainment, most of the members I have met are really sound people with a passion for skiing. Some seem to think skiing starts and ends with the SCGB as if their gold badge, purple heart or whatever it is was manufactured from Kryptonite
One even went as far as to send me an unsolicted PM on here when I poked a little fun at the sacred SCGB, you'd think he was in danger of losing a free holiday or something the way he reacted.
The rules for offpiste is serious stuff be it the SCGB or anyone else, they are not rules made by the SCGB either. What is posted here tends to be for the good of Snowheads and not just the SCGB. We try and help each other here without demanding a fee. People have a right to know how the world not-according to the SCGB operates afterall as it often says in the terms and conditions - it's their risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| This is getting very silly |
That's never stopped you before. Is the skiing on Wimbledon common better on the upper slopes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| DB wrote: |
| Is the skiing on Wimbledon common better on the upper slopes? |
I don't know - I'm not a local. You could ask these bums
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| "You can not be serious" |
I can. Right now there must be a number of reps looking over their shoulders wondering if the next criminal charge might be against THEM. Wooly definitions may be OK to satisfy SCGB's legal advisors (although I'm still shaking my head in disbelief about that one), but it doesn't help the rep in the firing line does it? The club needs to give definitive guidelines to protect (a) the member or guest (b) other people on the mountain (c) the rep and (d) the club. Simple. Hand the rep a clear set of instructions pertinent to the resort they are in. Of course it'll take into account the fact they need to be fully aware of the prevailing weather & snow conditions and the fact that on-piste is just as dangerous as off-piste. Then if a member pressurises in any way a rep to take them somewhere that's outwith the guidelines, the rep can honestly and simply say no and point to the guidlines for that resort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
DB,
| Quote: |
| Are you his mom or just another SCGB rep who posts on here? |
bit of a snide remark to Achilles I think. Doesn't help your argument.
| Quote: |
| Can't you ski backcountry in Fernie? |
- well if you look at the standard of the holiday you will see it is silver/purple - probably way below your ability and that of DG and Bode and ABC - so perhaps the answer is it would be better not too? I have just had a great time in Jackson Hole skiing a lot of fairly fresh stuff, lots of steep stuff, all inbounds (didn't go at the back at all this year) and not too busy despite the holiday season. Maybe there is just more fun to be had inbounds in N. America than there is in patrolled territory in Europe?
I think Bode has it right about how the club ought to work out the limits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Gerry has an excellent reputation as a rep (as well as a colourful one as an erstwhile snowhead)
|
Who he?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
DB, I think ABC is saying you would need the helicopter in N America - not Europe. I think the word "as" should have been in there somewhere.
And as the one person on the thread who has booked that holiday - and as someone who has skied great inbounds trees, steeps and powder in North America - I think it will be great value. See some of the reports from people skiing Fernie in the last few weeks on this site.
where's yer bridge?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swiller, I acknowledge your considered thinking on this but the mindset that a ski club must lead people off piste (and I think the SCGB is the only one in the world that does this) is not one that I share any longer. Do you think it's a big draw?
What you propose is logical, but complex. The Club officially prefers the "woolly definitions" you refer to. Maybe it feels it has handed its reps enough instructions and manuals.
The basic test of determining demand for the activity - charging a premium rate for off-piste repped skiing, rather than imposing the cost on all members - has never been initiated. The fairest arrangement is for the minority of members interested in off-piste repping to cover the cost of it, and its legal liabilities or insurance.
At that point, I think a certain sense of reality might cut in, and greater budgets could be allocated to more populist functions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
The basic test of determining demand for the activity - charging a premium rate for off-piste repped skiing, rather than imposing the cost on all members - has never been initiated. The fairest arrangement is for the minority of members interested in off-piste repping to cover the cost of it, and its legal liabilities or insurance.
|
Can't argue with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Why do you think it hasn't happened? It was first mooted over 3 decades ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David , trouble with your argument is that the reps are -as we have discussed before - the leading reason people join and stay in the club. Now that may actually be a matter of the members perception rather than a reflection of how the members actually use the club. As an analogy - at this time of the year a lot of people are joining gyms. Most wouldn't join if there were no exercise machines, but most won't be using the machines in 6 months time. The point is - that if you take away the reps ( and usually it is the cost of the rep service as a whole you object to - not just the off-piste element) - the club is a website and a few discounts and a travel agent. But we have been here before...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
David Goldsmith, because someone has done the maths. A small % of members end up paying for a large % of the club's overseas activity. Only they don't because they won't, prefering instead to simply hire a local guide as it'll be cheaper. Net result = less members, less income but still the need to provide reps for on-piste stuff. Anyway, less of my hypothetical crap. What's wrong with leading folks off-piste? Nothing, as long as the whole issue is managed properly by the club.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
The health club I belong to offers precisely the option of paying for what you want, so I don't pay for tennis. David Lloyd Leisure allocates a lot of land, infrastructure and lighting to tennis because enough people pay the direct cost of it.
| Quote: |
| ... the reps are - as we have discussed before - the leading reason people join and stay in the club. |
There's no official published data to support that. I'd welcome an objectively designed and randomly sampled survey to prove you right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| DB wrote: |
| achilles wrote: |
| DB wrote: |
| .......Some courses only have instruction for a couple of days so what happens on other days? This course for instance http://www.skiclub.co.uk/skiclub/skifreshtracks/holiday.asp?intHolidayID=1588 has two days of instruction and no ski instructor or mountain guides are listed. If I had paid 1195 GBP to ski Canadian powder and had a course "leader" I'd be pretty miffed to find two days instruction and not much offpiste "leading" after that. |
Gosh, that looks a great holiday, doesn't it? Never skied with him, but Gerry has an excellent reputation as a rep (as well as a colourful one as an erstwhile snowhead) so I wouldn't mind having the chance some day. I am unclear why you are calling the holiday a 'course' - 2 days powder instruction does not make it so, I think. Anyway, good to see that the membership isn't 'miffed' like you - the holiday is fully booked. |
Are you his mom or just another SCGB rep who posts on here? |
Er, who's mum? The many snowheads I have met at Castleford, and last year's MSB and EoSB who have skied with me know who I am. I am not a SCGB rep. Who are you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| The health club I belong to offers precisely the option of paying for what you want, so I don't pay for tennis. David Lloyd Leisure allocates a lot of land, infrastructure and lighting to tennis because enough people pay the direct cost of it.......... |
Oh dear. David Llloyd health clubs. Do as you say about tennis. Also tried to charge me for not giving 3 months notice of leaving them (no, I did not sign their terms and conditions when I joined, they took over the excellent club I belonged to). So I wouldn't hold them up as a shining example of how a club should be run. OTOH, if you don't like how the SCGB is run, I am sure they would accept your resignation immediately, without further charge. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| achilles wrote: |
| So I wouldn't hold them [David Lloyd] up as a shining example of how a club should be run. |
You don't wish you'd bought shares?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
24 pages and we're onto tennis. Tennis; the new off-piste. Tennis players should pay extra for locker space and towel usage as well. And they park badly. And they think they're superior to gym members. Evil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
David Goldsmith, no.
Bode Swiller, DL are extracting a helluva a lot annually from the tennis players. So your tennis mates are entitled to park badly, particularly if their cars are more expensive than yours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
achilles, I have observed them... it's true that the tennis members use 4 towels when 1 or 2 would do, they park their vast racket bags on the benches stopping ordinary gym members from invading their personal space, they... etc etc. I think a 2 tier system at SCGB would work very well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
abc,
Sorry misread your post, it was late.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
