Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
R.I.P
After all it is free
After all it is free
The number of extreme-skier deaths has doubled in recent years.
Everyone taking bigger risks to find the next big thing in a mature industry.
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.
Whitegold wrote:
The number of extreme-skier deaths has doubled in recent years.
Everyone taking bigger risks to find the next big thing in a mature industry.
That could possibly be a reason, though I suspect the numbers of extreme skiers have also been rising - as you say, it is a mature industry - which in itself will raise numbers.
An early online comment about the release of Steep said "Needs avalanches" - which might not be a bad idea if these are related to topography and weather in as realistic a way as possible. We have the digital modelling technology.
Any avoidable death is tragic, and I don't know to what if any degree Matilda Rapaport's might have been avoided - I know no details - but I don't think this is the first which has occurred during a commercial undertaking this year. At the back of my mind are questions about subtle or not so subtle pressures - but I have no knowledge of how such companies actually operate. I would hope and expect that the number one concern is maximum possible safety in the circumstances but who owns this responsibility?
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
It's difficult. I recall the father of an extreme skier who had died in a avalanche, saying that he considered his son had a mental illness and/or addiction, because he was so committed to dangerous situations and risk taking. The father considered his son was ill in the same way as an alcoholic or drug addict.
This brave man lost his legs in Afghanistan from an IED. Now his is a racing driver.
"It makes you feel more alive — being close to death"
And I'm not sure I'm that comfortable with companies like RedBull pushing people into more dangerous and extreme situations so they can promote their products.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
PeDaSp wrote:
And I'm not sure I'm that comfortable with companies like RedBull pushing people into more dangerous and extreme situations so they can promote their products.
That's the question really. To what degree do they push? To what degree is it collaborative? Who makes the call on whether to proceed and how is that decision reached?
(Also in this instance I gather Matilda was working for a company marketing Ubisoft's Steep, rather than for RedBull)
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.
I suspect Red Bull may well cause more lost quality-life-years through the people who consume the large amounts of sugar in their products. They advertise it with thin people, but if you drink it you'll not be thin for long.
--
With speed ski/snowboard, they avoided the "taking insane risks wins prizes" problem by setting a limited course. You're not trying to go faster than anyone in the world, ever, you're trying to do the best time on that course, on that day. It's hard to see how that approach would work with "extreme", as there are presumably no "points" available for a sensible refusal to take a particular risk.
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
motyl wrote:
PeDaSp wrote:
And I'm not sure I'm that comfortable with companies like RedBull pushing people into more dangerous and extreme situations so they can promote their products.
That's the question really. To what degree do they push? To what degree is it collaborative? Who makes the call on whether to proceed and how is that decision reached?
I know one guy who skis for RedBull. As far as I'm aware, they support his ideas and ambitions rather than pushing.
It's terrible news about Rappaport - she was only recently married. The last post on her FB page is about Estelle Balet - just tragic.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@clarky999, Thanks. It really is terrible to see such a young, vibrant person die like that. Of course we all take risks in order to enjoy and experience life.
Indeed: LIFE = RISK
The only time you will have no more risk is when you are dead.
But I guess we have to examine to what extent RedBull and others are creating and financing a culture of increasing risk and one-upmanship, that could be fuelling such deaths. And of course for the subject themselves it's a great life and they can make a good living.
Maybe it's just a case of examining the deaths and injuries from different sports; and then removing support for the outliners. That said, off-piste skiing does seem to be dangerous for everyone; and yet I think that horse riding is more dangerous statistically, as is just driving a car in many countries.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
It would probably be the job of a sociology PhD to work out the relationship between teams and athletes. And many extreme skiers do die and have done since before Red Bull. I think they probably consider death a price worth paying and if they didn't finds those rushes life wouldn't be worth living.
I should know: I shooed a spider out of the bathroom this morning. That adrenaline rush has got to be lived to be believed.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Tragic, RIP. I don't suppose people need much encouragement, if any, to do more extreme things. It's human nature to push the boundaries. Sponsorship and growth of the sport just means more people are doing it, which results in more fatalities. To say just how dangerous extreme skiing is compared to say, horse riding, motor sport etc, you'd have to look at how many people are doing it etc. Although extreme sports, must be, by definition, dangerous. The difficult part must come in making the call on safety. In work and everyday life you do stuff, that in hindsight wasn't the smartest. Humans are not good at assessing risk. With cameras, crew, and a limited window, there will be pressure to do it. But ithere are similar pressures in many jobs, which is why companies put in safe systems of work, have near miss reporting etc to have a more systematic approach. Still people ignore it and die. I think the question is more what framework in terms of assistance, support, competence do the sponsors provide to assess the risks? Ultimately the call is always your own on your own life.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
After the many deaths in F1 in the 70s and 80s, safety was improved in cars and courses - driven by the drivers (a kind of HSE approached - like Themasterpiece points out). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_fatalities
In skiing we all like a little thrill, but safety has been improved for us going to ski resorts.
I do think sponsors do have some responsibilities to improve safety or demand that certain standards to improve survival when accident happens.
Often this places where the shooting is taking place can only relay on their own resource for rescue.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
