If the student is borderline for L2 then some bigging up might get them to give it a go, part of the bigging up process will be the upsell of prep courses.
But ... I doubt very much (although some may disagree) that anyone would be urged to attempt L2 when they are "clearly" not ready without a further assessment. I do not believe this is what Raceplate inferred - you do?
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
smithski wrote:
If the student is borderline for L2 then some bigging up might get them to give it a go...
Would you prefer that borderline candidates are discouraged from going for the next level and given no information about training opportunities?
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?
This simple thread has certainly moved on from the intial debate which was also quite heated.
My own expierence was that the trainer on my course gave us feedback; when asked if I was considering progressing gave further specific areas to work on.
For me he talked about carving which goes back to the problem of fridge courses but on the written feedback I had much more specific area's to address ( which I only noticed last night a year after the course ffs).
He suggested that I would be capable of passing my level 2 the following year and suggested two days working on the specific areas next time I was away with a Instructor.
The good news was that although we knew he was part of a business he made no attempt to sell his company ( maybe thats bad business on his behalf) or any other course.
Maybe he was the exception but I trust his assessment - although I still worry about taking the plunge and shelling out on a level 2 (or as my wife tells me just do it you only have one life and if goes wrong youve had another two weeks getting better at skiing )
rob@rar, I never said they shouldn't receive encouragemnet, I absolutley think if they are ready, or near to ready, they should go for it and part of the trainers job is to offer encouragment. If further training is needed then this could be recommended, but with impartiallity.
I do not belive they should be encouraged to do something they are clearly not ready for, nor do I believe this happens.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
smithski wrote:
Spyderman, I'm sure you're not alone.
.
But ... I doubt very much (although some may disagree) that anyone would be urged to attempt L2 when they are "clearly" not ready without a further assessment. I do not believe this is what Raceplate inferred - you do?
I'm not going to second guess Raceplate , but that's how I interpreted his comments. They were pretty clear in their intent in my view.
From your subsequent comments, I don't think your views or at least your interpretation are the same as those to which you agreed to.
rob@rar, I never said they shouldn't receive encouragemnet, I absolutley think if they are ready, or near to ready, they should go for it and part of the trainers job is to offer encouragment. If further training is needed then this could be recommended, but with impartiallity.
In that case I think we agree, although I don't believe that impartiality stretches as far as Trainers not being allowed to talk about training opportunities they offer. They should, prompted or unprompted, outline the range of opportunities that are available if the candidate wants or needs some training (which in my experience is exactly what happens).
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
rob@rar wrote:
smithski wrote:
rob@rar, I never said they shouldn't receive encouragemnet, I absolutley think if they are ready, or near to ready, they should go for it and part of the trainers job is to offer encouragment. If further training is needed then this could be recommended, but with impartiallity.
In that case I think we agree, although I don't believe that impartiality stretches as far as Trainers not being allowed to talk about training opportunities they offer. They should, prompted or unprompted, outline the range of opportunities that are available if the candidate wants or needs some training (which in my experience is exactly what happens).
Yes we agree then . Regarding the pimping of their own courses, we may continue to disagree a little - I have no problem with them being 'mentioned' as part of the course delivery or as part of the personal feedback (it would be nigh on impossible for this not to happen), but I would draw the line at handing out company flyers etc.
After all it is free
After all it is free
Oh dear, what did I start when I'd had far too much beer and was being even more cynical than usual?
To clarify a few points:
1/ I am a current BASI member and this is absolutely not meant to denigrate BASI's aims or abilities or bring them or me into disrepute. This was not meant to be a slanging match, I just wanted people who are doing L1 (especially in a fridge) to realise that L2/L3 are a significantly greater challenge and they should exercise due diligence in ensuring they are at the required level before presenting themselves for the next level.
2/ In general I agree with pretty much everything that smithski, has said who's clearly on the same wavelength as me.
3/ Apart from the 3 people failing L2 on carving. I've never known anyone fail on JUST carving, they usually fail on at least variable as well; the ones that are borderline pass carving but still fail variable. This is only my experience, maybe I'm wrong on the big scale of things, but this is why I'm cynical about L1 in a fridge being a guide as to whether the pupil will pass L2 on a complete mountain, because the pupil has not been observed on variable.
4/ I may be unfairly biased because of my own experience - I was taught to carve (and convinced to buy a pair of Rossi 9X's) after about 4 weeks of total skiing on a Phil Smith performance course. Nothing wrong with that in principle; Phil's a ski-god, he taught me well and I love carving but with hindsight it did nothing for my all round ski development. The consequence of this was that I turned up to BASI Foundation (old L1) thinking I was a much better skier than I actually was ('cos I could carve!).
Now I accept that you may think I was naive (but forums like this didn't exist then) but I just wonder how many pupils being assessed in a fridge run the same risk - i.e. being very good piste skiers but rubbish in variable/bumps which is not detected? Therefore they pass L1 no problem, do their hours (in the same environment), turn up to L2 and fail? It's not the Trainer's fault if he passes them on L1; he can only assess what's in front of him - which is 150m of blue piste.
5/ I have no issue at all with the concept of L1 being a qualification just for fridges, my (possible) issue is with L1 passees believing they will pass L2 and the Trainer not being able to give a 100% accurate judgement because he's never seen them ski off-piste.
6/ I do not for one second believe that Trainers are either dishonest or deliberately fail people to engender future business. That is neither what I wrote or implied and is nonsense. If anything, I could support the opposite view which is that they do everything they can to pass a borderline candidate. On my L2 exam day, you were allowed 3 attempts at each discipline to reach the level required. Two candidates that had passed every other discipline were given a 4th and final attempt to pass variable terrain; one passed, the other failed - and complained to BASI about unfair prejudice but that's another story!
7/ My point about Trainers 'bigging up' people's chances of passing the next level (whether L1-L2, L2-L3, L3-L4) is based both on my personal experiences of Trainers being EXTREMELY positive about anybody's chances of moving up and a mere 20 years in sales management. For clarification, my definition of 'bigging up' means being very positive and enthusiastic about their chances. To me, this is not a criticism of them per se, just a statement about human nature. Let's face it, if you walk up to a Trainer and say, "Do you think I could ever pass L2/L3?", he's not going to say "No, you Muppet!" is he? He's going to say, "Well, I think you need to work on this and that and this training course might help.." etc etc. It's a normal part of the sales process. And Instructors have to able to SELL the concept of their instruction long before they can actually demonstrate it otherwise they get no work...
Did I miss anything? Or shall I get another beer in preparation
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.
Raceplate, that's a considerably more balanced post that your earlier coments. One thing I think you're missing though, is candidates taking some personal responsibility for understanding the assessment criteria at each level and attempting the course when they think they are ready (or treating the course as a training opportunity with no expectation of passing). Criticising the L1 qualification because some candidates turn up unprepared for L2 points the finger of blame in the wrong direction, IMO.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Quote:
Apart from the 3 people failing L2 on carving. I've never known anyone fail on JUST carving, they usually fail on at least variable as well; the ones that are borderline pass carving but still fail variable. This is only my experience, maybe I'm wrong on the big scale of things, but this is why I'm cynical about L1 in a fridge being a guide as to whether the pupil will pass L2 on a complete mountain, because the pupil has not been observed on variable.
I have always been under the impression (rightly or wrongly) that the majority of candidates fail L2 and L3 on bumps (although they may well fail on other things as well as bumps but bumps seems to be the one most people have difficulty with).
I should imagine that it's probably flow, or lack of, on bumps that causes fails in that area. Someone might have the movements required, rotation etc but if the flow isn't there then they won't meet the standard?
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
rob@rar wrote:
Raceplate, that's a considerably more balanced post that your earlier coments. One thing I think you're missing though, is candidates taking some personal responsibility for understanding the assessment criteria at each level and attempting the course when they think they are ready (or treating the course as a training opportunity with no expectation of passing). Criticising the L1 qualification because some candidates turn up unprepared for L2 points the finger of blame in the wrong direction, IMO.
That's what I was thinking when I posted this earlier on:-
Quote:
Based on that, surely the most sensible course of action after L1 is to go away and practise whatever it is needs work, then when you think or feel you are ready for L2 next time you are away in a resort with a British ski school get a Trainer from one of the ski schools to spend an hour or two with you and check you are at the right level before you then go and spend £2k on the L2 course (by time you've paid lift pass and accommodation for 2 weeks I mean).
For those on here that have recently gone on a BASI course (L2 or L3) did you get a Trainer to have a look beforehand before you went on the course as that seems like a good idea to me?
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.
So I can understand it (and I'm too lazy to search) does anyone have any links to video clips of reasonable (but not top) L2 pass skiing?
While Raceplate has some resonable points I can't help feeling its all topsy turvey - why would someone attempt to move from a indoor L1 through accumulated indoor log hours straight to a L2 course? That's just nuts. At the very least you'd expect them to take a couple of freeskiing holidays to get themselves in the new performance zone.
Also why the assumption that L1 passes can't really ski? Sure they might lack BASI refinement and have some bad habits but I'd suspect many candidates have done a lot of real world skiing, often beyond blue runs.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Colin B, Regarding Natalie, I just wanted to add that I agree with the recommendations for flexion/extension work and particularly ankle flexion. I would also work on hand/arm position and the lack of a pole plant/touch when cruising.
My tips would be:
Try to get her to project her knees over the binding toe pieces for ankle flexion, this will automatically bring her hips forward so they are centred over her bindings and she is better balanced.
Get her to raise her hands/forearms away from her knees and position her elbows (just) in front of her torso. Encourage her to pole plant forwards of her toe piece (the distance forward varies according to the speed/terrain). This action will automatically generate more ankle flexion because it automatically brings you forward on your skis. This is what I call the 'ESF' position but I can't fault it - watch them ski - they all have exactly the same body position whatever the terrain and I'm very jealous!
Encourage her to see a pole plant/touch as a co-ordination exercise rather than a difficult snow necessity. She has no pole plant at all when cruising (and may not think she needs one) but BASI will view this as 'un-dynamic' skiing which would be a fail at L2 for sure.
Next time she's on a mountain get her to play with edge angles and outer leg extension to see how radical a carve she can get - this is 'dynamic' carving.
Good luck but she should be fine - it's a strong starting point.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Level 1 is an industry lead qualification ie we need them to do a specific job generally teaching kids and beginners at weekends in a fridge. For some people that's all they want to do so level 1 is exactly what they (and I ) need them to have. Most of these people teaching snowsports in not their full time job. I very much disagree that its a way of leading people in to a false dream to take a few quid off them! Rather than speculate, I invite you to come to my centre and speak to the 80 + instructors who enjoy being involved in teaching snowsports as level 1 instructors.
If people want to progress to a level 2 then I am very open with them as to what they need to develop and work on. It's a big difference and people need to know this. However, it is possible as a professional trainer to assess peoples likelihood at being successful and estimating times scales. This is what we call action planning. I can honestly say that people who I have recommended, and have followed my advice have been successful. Equally, I have advised people they are not ready, who have then gone forward and failed. We are there to train, mentor and advise people. It's up to individuals to have big ears, and listen to trainers recommendations.
As for suggesting that trainers have an interest in giving inaccurate information to " grow " the pool of people taking BASI courses, thus increasing work opportunities....no! I love running BASI courses, but they are the least profitable of all my skiing activities.
As a trainer your passion is to develop people for success, there is no logic in pushing people forward who you know will fail. I can't think of one trainer who has this mind set. Trainers are selected following a tough process to insure members get the best. We are also regularly verified through a process to make sure we are still at the level. Remember being a trainer is an appointment, not a qualification. It can be taken away.
Most trainers have some kind of business in snowsports so do offer external training opportunities. Exposing trainees to theses opportunities has to be done with professional judgment. I would hope that BASI trainers have the ability to know when it is professional to do this.
These are my views. Hope they are of use to this debate.
PSG
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
rob@rar,
Criticising the L1 qualification because some candidates turn up unprepared for L2 points the finger of blame in the wrong direction, IMO.
Please tell me where I'm criticising the L1 per se? Just to re-iterate
"5/ I have no issue at all with the concept of L1 being a qualification just for fridges, my (possible) issue is with L1 passees believing they will pass L2 and the Trainer not being able to give a 100% accurate judgement because he's never seen them ski off-piste."
Completely different point.
fatbob,
"While Raceplate has some resonable points I can't help feeling its all topsy turvey - why would someone attempt to move from a indoor L1 through accumulated indoor log hours straight to a L2 course? That's just nuts. At the very least you'd expect them to take a couple of freeskiing holidays to get themselves in the new performance zone."
Of course they'll take holidays but they have to do their 35 hours in a ski school environment. If they passed in a fridge it's most likely they would do their hours as an unpaid volunteer in the same place (at least that's what I'd do).
"Also why the assumption that L1 passes can't really ski? Sure they might lack BASI refinement and have some bad habits but I'd suspect many candidates have done a lot of real world skiing, often beyond blue runs."
As I've already said, it has to do with whether a realistic judgement can be made on their variable terrain abilities based upon their 150m blue piste abilities. Some contributors have contended it is. Maybe they're right. Maybe I'm more cynical
PS Can someone please tell me how I cut and paste those nice quote boxes for other people's comments?
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Raceplate wrote:
PS Can someone please tell me how I cut and paste those nice quote boxes for other people's comments?
quote button to right of post plus a lot of deleting
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Raceplate, to the right of the person's post you will see a speech marks bubble, click on that and then it takes you to a new window where you can either quote the whole thing or take out most of it or whatever.
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?
Raceplate, forgive me if I'm wrong but the whole tenor of your contribution seems to have been more critical of BASI, of Trainers and of the L1 course than of ill-prepared L2 candidates. Are you saying that you think the main problem is with the candidates or with the qualification system and the people who deliver it?
Is it just me but I cannot understand most of the arguments on this page
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
fatbob, VolklAttivaS5, Thank you! I will try to be a better skigeek (should that be snowhead?) in the future
rob@rar, you're just not gonna let this rest are you I don't believe I've been critical of either BASI or their Trainers per se. I do think that the current qualification system 'could' lead to more people turning up to an L2 unprepared than the previous (Foundation) system. But this is an unending debate, a bit like the old one of should an ASSI get an exemption from BASI Foundation (L1)? I know exempted ASSI's that have failed L2 on variable terrain but no Trainer ever had the chance to assess them on variable terrain prior to the course so who's at fault? If you had to make a call it would be the pupil for not having done his due diligence. The same point I made earlier that all L1 fridge passes should do their due diligence and as VolklAttivaS5 pointed out, get assessed on a real mountain prior to signing up for the next level.
What would be interesting (and conclude the discussion) would be to see an L2 pass % analysis for people that got L1 in a fridge compared to on a mountain. I can't remember when the rules changed but it might be too early for any meaningful statistics. However, if Beanie1's monitoring this who knows?
The original tenor of my contribution was actually based on some drunken indignation around some "oh, you're a ski-god now" comments because people had passed L1. As other people have pointed out (rightly), L1 is a starting point. I believe you're an L2 (like me) so I would hope that you would begrudgingly agree that L2 doesn't mean much either, it's another progression point. As far as I'm concerned, you're not really a ski instructor until you're an ISIA. And until that's accepted in France without a Eurotest I shall remain a punter. And yes, I know BASI and the EU Commission or whoever are working really hard to change that situation so no, I don't have a problem with BASI. I just hope they succeed before my liver gives out for good
As far as I'm concerned, you're not really a ski instructor until you're an ISIA. And until that's accepted in France without a Eurotest I shall remain a punter.
oooooo, dont get me started
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
jjc wrote:
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, you're not really a ski instructor until you're an ISIA. And until that's accepted in France without a Eurotest I shall remain a punter.
oooooo, dont get me started
Ha ha! Nice one.
From what I saw of your profile you have the luxury of being way too young and talented. But I have 25 years experience in retail sales - which one of us is the better communicator? For sure you would do far better demonstrations than I could ever dream of but can you explain the theory in a way they understand?
I don't want an answer, it would be the longest thread ever And I hope your knee? gets better.
After all it is free
After all it is free
Quote:
The same point I made earlier that all L1 fridge passes should do their due diligence and as VolklAttivaS5 pointed out, get assessed on a real mountain prior to signing up for the next level.
Whether people get a Trainer in a snowdome to have a look at them beforehand, or when they are on holiday in the Alps somewhere is up to them because one could argue both are equally beneficial. For me personally though, before I shelled out money for another course, lift pass and accommodation I'd want them to have a good look at my bump skiing and off piste skiing at altitude when you have to work a bit harder as well, just like how it's going to be in the real thing with a bit of pressure on. But that's just me. I would work it out so that when I was away for an ordinary week, I'd book someone locally for a couple of hours. That way I know I should definitely be at the right level with another 2 weeks of training on the actual course on top. If you fail, then of course it's still a valuable fortnight's training, but after spending £2k more or less you want to come back with a pass as well ideally.
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.
rob@rar wrote:
taking some personal responsibility for understanding the assessment criteria at each level
Good point. Can anybody else find something similar to this level 4 video for levels 1,2 and 3? OK it's CSIA, but still looks great
Much obliged s
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Quote:
But I have 25 years experience in retail sales - which one of us is the better communicator?
Well i have proven sales experience also, I was Thomas Sanderson Sales man of the month August 2010 I won a bottle of wine, an asda voucher and best of all a certificate to go with my BASI badges!!!
Knee is doing well now cheers, at the annoying stage where it feels good but cant push it.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
ALQ, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of L2 videos on You Tube as far as I can see, but here's one of a demo by a Trainer on short turns to L2 standard according to the info
This video is from a training course for Level 3/ISIA actually, according to the info they are on week 2 of the training course so the skiers in the video must already have their BASI Level 2 (or so you'd think). When I say 'skiers' obviously I mean the course participants rather than the Trainer/L4!
This one is from week 3 of an (pre) ISIA training course so again presumably the skiers all have their L2s, but is helpful because it splits it down into steeps, bumps, long turns etc.
I do think the CSIA videos are quite a good idea as they have them on their website don't they?
Admittedly the training course videos don't show the skiers actually at the level of L3 (some will be, some won't at that stage because it's a pre-course training course, someone else better equipped than myself will probably be able to tell us how far along from L2 to L3 they are in this last video ) but at least it gives an idea of how L2 skiers ski because they already have that qualification.
Last edited by snowHeads are a friendly bunch. on Mon 27-06-11 23:17; edited 1 time in total
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.
jjc, Great, you win a bottle of wine, I ran a $130m turnover company...
and I'd still rather have your BASI badges
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
How's this for bumps standard? Can only conclude teh Seppos have it easy and ought to be made to try what passes for mogul field in much of Europe.
Great, you win a bottle of wine, I ran a $130m turnover company...
Dont forget the Asda voucher and certificate!! Selling me short here
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Holy thread creep batman, I only asked about L1
But this really has been an interesting debate, so keep it coming!
But in all seriousness, I am considering doing L1 in a fridge, with a view to doing L2 sometime after I get my hours in. Is there a way to get assessed as to wether that is realistic or not, prior to going into my L1???
I suspect bumps maybe something I need to work on, but to be honest with myself I've only really skied bumps in wide 98 and 112 mm skis in the past few years so it would be very interesting to try them on a 165 slalomish ski!!
Regards,
Greg
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
kitenski wrote:
Holy thread creep batman, I only asked about L1
I suspect bumps maybe something I need to work on, but to be honest with myself I've only really skied bumps in wide 98 and 112 mm skis in the past few years so it would be very interesting to try them on a 165 slalomish ski!!
Not going to be harder is it but you may not be able to bludgeon as many of the gits into submission I took a couple of bumps classes on 112 skis the year before last and got a charitable "well tried".
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
kitenski, Contact your local slope, I'm sure they've got someone that can have a look at your skiing and tell you where you are. At Hemel there are Instructor development sessions, I'm assuming Castleford do something similar.
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?
Raceplate, I really hope that you are not being serious (my sarcasm meter must be broken) but I know who I would rather have a lesson with and you certainly have not communicated your argument very clearly on this thread. Plus your attitude smells like poo-poo!
Dont shoot me if I should know this but what type of run are the bumps assessed on, if its similar to the tunnel then i'll have no flow and do two hills and then stop to let my knees recover from the metre drop but if its on a blue slope i'll love it.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Curtains, was it you who was going to be doing your L2 in Val D'Isere next Jan? If so, then they typically use the pitch of bumps to the side of the Tommeuse lift, but the lower half only, not from the top. I think L3 and L4 are from the top as there's a steeper section there. That's where I've seen most groups doing them when I've been in Tignes, anyway.
Raceplate, I really hope that you are not being serious (my sarcasm meter must be broken) but I know who I would rather have a lesson with and you certainly have not communicated your argument very clearly on this thread.
Dear Elston
Thanks for your feedback but I think you made your ignorance of the salient matters quite clear earlier.
Elston wrote:
Is it just me but I cannot understand most of the arguments on this page
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Raceplate, you keep going back to bumps being the cause of fails at L2 but several people have said that wasnt their experience. the 2 fails on my L2 were on shorts btw... bumps at L2 level only require the candidate to be at late practice phase of learning and most trainers / senior instructors would easily be able to tell if a skier is approximately at the level for bumps watching them in a fridge or at most asking them to do a few drills that would demo the skills needed in the bumps...
After all it is free
After all it is free
kitenski, Of course! Next time you go on vacation, book a private lesson with a BASI Trainer, tell them what your plans are and ask them to assess you. Believe me they will be very supportive. (I'm assuming you will be vacationing in Europe but if it's North America ask for a PSIA/CSIA 4 to assess you - it will still be relevant).
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.
skimottaret wrote:
Raceplate, you keep going back to bumps being the cause of fails at L2 but several people have said that wasnt their experience.
As I've said before, that's just my experience. Yours is different. Maybe BASI should issue some statistics so students know what to work on? Just a suggestion. I passed my L2 in 2005 and I believe there has been a move away from the old idea that an Instructor (L3 definite, L2 maybe) had to be able to ski a rutline. Certainly, the ISIA prep video above suggests it's ok (not to ski the rutline). If skiing a rutline is not a criterion then yes, students would be more likely to fail on disciplines outside variable terrain.
Frankly, if rutline skiing is no longer a prerequisite to L3 I'd be happy because that's the only thing preventing me from persuing L3. If you have more up to date knowledge than me then please share it.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Curtains wrote:
Dont shoot me if I should know this but what type of run are the bumps assessed on, if its similar to the tunnel then i'll have no flow and do two hills and then stop to let my knees recover from the metre drop but if its on a blue slope i'll love it.
From memory, bumps are normally assessed on 25-30 degrees. Think soft part of a red run rather than blue. I could tell you exactly where to practice in Meribel but it may not help!
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
)
. Regarding the pimping of their own courses, we may continue to disagree a little - I have no problem with them being 'mentioned' as part of the course delivery or as part of the personal feedback (it would be nigh on impossible for this not to happen), but I would draw the line at handing out company flyers etc.
I won a bottle of wine, an asda voucher and best of all a certificate to go with my BASI badges!!!
