 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
People ski like they drive. Making good decisions is more important than being good.
|
+2
My son passed his driving test last Spring and commented, when we were skiing at new year, that having passed his test made him a lot more "hazard aware" on the blue runs down to resort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
People ski like they drive. Making good decisions is more important than being good
|
I'm not sure this is actually true. The way a lot of folks ski they'd be dead on the roads, no spacial awareness, pulling out before looking, too much speed for their ability and that's without all the riding switch/popping off bumps and stuff. But I'm a biker so quite used to the appalling standards of driving on our roads!.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Driving is like skiing in that it is car/ski control and decision making on the road/piste. Some people have amazing control but poor decision making. Some the other way around. Some have poor control and poor decision making. Some are amazing at both. This also changes with time/experience/age. Accidents on piste tend to be poor control with a bit of decision making thrown in. Off piste tends to be poor decision making. But that is looking from the outside especially off piste. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
IME. The better you get, the faster you are inclined to ski and the more difficult runs that you are inclined to tackle - So the need for control becomes ever more important...which is why IMV. there is a very good argument for continuing with lessons as you become more and more advanced.
Confidence is a vital ingredient - but the problems occurs where it greatly exceeds ability ie. Over Confidence. Generally, it is more a male trait.
One of the best instructors I had was from a racing background....and everything started with Control. One of his mantras was, "Start skiing every run of any difficulty as if if is steeper than you think it is".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I am (mostly) in good control of my skis. I wish that meant I was a good skier...
A fairly recent problem I've encountered is a deterioration of vision in my left eye. It's not very bad (and I've been medically declared perfectly fit to drive) but it's affected me psychologically a good deal when skiing or driving. In fact, just over a year ago, misjudging the distance between us, I had a collision - at very low speed, no harm done - with a beginner I was trying, safely, to overtake. It was definitely my fault and I was absolutely mortified. My ability to make the correct decision, as described above, let me down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
In fact, just over a year ago, misjudging the distance between us, I had a collision - at very low speed, no harm done - with a beginner I was trying, safely, to overtake. It was definitely my fault and I was absolutely mortified. My ability to make the correct decision, as described above, let me down
|
Were you aware of your vision issue at the time? Or was that a retrospective analysis?
Once one is aware of an issue/limitation, it’s time to come up with adapting strategy. I had cataract developing in one of my eyes for many years, to the point I had trouble navigating in low light. I was aware of it though. So I ski/drive slower to allow myself time to react. Also modify where I ski in flat light days. It’s annoying to have to limit myself but that’s better than getting injured (or worse injuring others).
Once I had my vision restored with cataract surgery, I can tell the difference between my “adapted” way of driving/skiing vs “normal” (aka, my previous habits). Though I was surprised how relatively minor any negative impact of my “adaption” resulted. In fact, I’m now more aware of all low light situation thanks to that period of adaption. With back to normal vision, I can see much better. But low light is low light. Even with normal vision, low light is time to slow down and pay extra attention. A situation I wasn’t particularly sensitive to prior to my temporary vision change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@abc, I thought I was adapting pretty well by then, but obviously not well enough. I've done more adapting since.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to the driving analogy.... I'd guess most people will have met someone who complains about "other drivers". They get parking tickets; are caught by speed traps; and will crash into other cars. They'll crash into the back of cars and explain that somehow that wasn't their fault. They might even use some half remembered but of the highway code to try to justify their carelessness. They complain about their insurance premiums. None of it's ever their fault. They might even come out with the misogynistic/ racist nonsense we've seen here.
I'm not saying that everyone whose car is crashed into is one of those guys, obviously.
But if someone has a series of problems, whoever might be "to blame", the only rational solution is to change their own behaviour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| phil_w wrote: |
But if someone has a series of problems, whoever might be "to blame", the only rational solution is to change their own behaviour. |
What percentage of the population do you think are “rational”? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did we come to any conclusion on the data? Are pistes getting more dangerous?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@Origen, no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Yes, I suspect it's "no".  So - why this very widespread perception? One reason (especially for Snowheads!) is that we hear about so many collisions (and avalanches, too). As with plane crashes - we have probably all read about who was killed in that second smaller plane crash in Philadelphia. We didn't hear about the deaths and life changing injuries on the highways in Philadelphia in the same week.
Similarly, people homed in some accidents "caused by" the lack of hard shoulders on smart motorways. They were not set off against the perception that accidents avoided because people were in the much safer emergency areas, rather than stopped on the hard shoulder. So the erroneous impression that smart motorways were more dangerous gained traction and people ranted about it (even on Snowheads.....).
In all the weeks and months I've trundled around skiing I've seen VERY few collisions and even fewer that were anything other than a minor bump. Perhaps some of that is because I've generally skied in more civilised surroundings than the Tarentaise at half term!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Origen wrote: |
| Yes, I suspect it's "no". So - why this very widespread perception? |
I think you are totally on the money. Most people have no real comprehension of statistical risk and concepts such as exposure adjusted risk and regression to the mean. So, our perception is driven by what we experience, both in real life and, in this case, vicariously via social media rather than actual risk level. To really understand that you need objective and reasonably comprehensive data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| no? |
Edit to add that France had 52,000,000 total skier-days in 2023/2024 season.
Skiing and snowboarding injuries, while generally rare, occur at a rate of around 2.6 per 1,000 skier days, with lower extremity and knee injuries being most common. Head and neck injuries, while less frequent, can be severe, with 22% causing loss of consciousness or concussion.
Here's a more detailed look at ski accident statistics:
General Injury Rates:
Overall Injury Rate:
Studies indicate an overall injury rate of around 2.6 injuries per 1,000 skier days.
Serious Injuries:
While serious injuries are rare, they do occur. One study found that 1 in 3 collisions involved the responsible skier/snowboarder leaving the scene.
Fatalities:
The risk of dying from skiing is low, with an average of 0.7 deaths per 1 million skier visits.
Catastrophic Injuries:
The National Ski Areas Association (NSAA) compiles data on on-mountain fatalities and catastrophic injuries (life-altering injuries like paralysis).
Common Types of Injuries:
Lower Extremity Injuries:
These are the most common type of skiing injury, with knees being the most frequently injured area.
Knee Injuries:
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are a significant type of knee injury, accounting for 17.8% of all skiing injuries in France in 2021/22.
Head and Neck Injuries:
Head and neck injuries are less frequent than lower extremity injuries, but can be severe.
Upper Extremity Injuries:
In snowboarding, the hand and wrist are the most frequently injured areas.
Factors Influencing Injury Risk:
Skill Level:
While individuals with limited experience are at a higher risk of sustaining injuries, no statistically significant disparity was observed regarding the specific body parts affected among individuals of varying skill levels.
Age:
The highest injury rate was among children (age 7-12) and teens (age 13-17).
Gender:
A study found that 58% of significant injuries (those requiring physician care) were in males.
Terrain:
The majority of both on-mountain fatalities and catastrophic injuries occurred on intermediate terrain.
Tips for Staying Safe on the Slopes:
Wear a Helmet: Helmets can significantly reduce the risk of head injuries.
Be Aware of Your Surroundings: Pay attention to other skiers and snowboarders, and be mindful of your speed and surroundings.
Take Breaks: Skiing and snowboarding can be physically demanding, so take breaks to avoid fatigue and improve focus.
Stay Hydrated: Dehydration can impair judgment and coordination, so stay hydrated before, during, and after skiing or snowboarding.
Be Physically Fit: Overall fitness and regular cardio exercises can help you prevent injury.
AI generated 8ollox - 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
The most dangerous can be spotted from a mile off.
Jacket zipped open all the way, flapping in the wind, a sort of standing half squat, legs wide apart, straight lining down the piste, looking like any slight bump or lump of snow could take them out at any moment, an out of control, style free zone.
Horrific.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@Super Tennents, France (alone) had over 125,000 injuries on the slopes in 2023/2024. Plenty of FFFF-somethings there. More skiers equates to more injuries, slopes are busier but skiers/boarders are not necessarily better skilled. Straight-lining flappers out of their depth are only part of the problem. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@BoardieK, two things spring out at my from that report:
"Collisions may make headlines, but the majority of accidents — 77.6 per cent — in the Dolomitesare caused by skiers losing control and taking tumbles on their own"
"a rise in the number of skiers this season was a factor in the number of incidents.... The slopes are increasingly busy"
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Moreover,
| Quote: |
"a rise in the number of skiers this season was a factor in the number of incidents.... The slopes are increasingly busy"
|
The number of accidents needs to be normalized by the number of skiers + days skied.
Is the incident “RATE” higher? Or are there simply more skiers? If the latter, there will be more number of injuries even if the rates remain the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| BoardieK wrote: |
| Article in the Times which factually confirms the thread title, should be able to read it here... |
No.
Rates per skier day are what you really need to look at, and you need to look at the source data. The previously posted data deals with all that. Or just read the report you quoted more carefully.
I think the answer to the question above, about why people believe things which are demonstrably not true, is at least sometimes "confirmation bias".
That report mostly talks about people crashing, not "collisions", at least some of the time.
I'm not sure what they're really trying to do there, other than perhaps wind people up. Murdoch wouldn't do that, would he?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
USA injury stats are significantly under reported by ski areas there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect a major part of the perception bias here is that we probably all become less reckless, more cautious and risk averse, and better skiers (I like to think so anyway) as we get older. So skiing behaviour that seemed normal to us and we'd ignore when we were younger now looks dangerous and out of control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@olderscot, that's a fair point. Part of the fun when I started (mid-20's) was crashing and burning.
It's difficult isn't it - the lives of the young are so sanitised these days in many ways. It's no wonder they go nuts when they get a bit of freedom in the mountains.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@phil_w, So there are more accidents per kilometre of piste, ie it is more dangerous.
Would I prefer to drive on the same stretch of motorway with twice as many accidents but twice the number of cars? No.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| BoardieK wrote: |
| @phil_w, So there are more accidents per kilometre of piste, ie it is more dangerous. |
No, that's not how you measure risk. If the risk stays the same then doubling the number of people exposed to that risk will double the number of accidents.
A 50% chance of an accident, applied to 100 people, will generate 50 accidents. The same risk applied to 200 people will generate 100 accidents.
That's probability and exposure adjusted risk. In practice, of course, if you double the density of skiers in a given area you will increase the risk of collision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Blackblade wrote: |
| BoardieK wrote: |
| @phil_w, So there are more accidents per kilometre of piste, ie it is more dangerous. |
No, that's not how you measure risk. If the risk stays the same then doubling the number of people exposed to that risk will double the number of accidents.
A 50% chance of an accident, applied to 100 people, will generate 50 accidents. The same risk applied to 200 people will generate 100 accidents.
That's probability and exposure adjusted risk. In practice, of course, if you double the density of skiers in a given area you will increase the risk of collision. |
You can't fault BoardieK for getting it wrong. That's exactly what the article is doing. "MORE" accidents. Didn't say much about the "rate" of accident.
It gets my goat when every country accuse China for generating the most pollution per country. Hell, China also consumes a lot more resources, by virtue of having the highest population! But soon, they'll be off the hook, as India surpass them in population number. As long as Europe's birth rate keep on falling, they can hide safely behind the faulty math.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Blackblade, I understand that perfectly but I'm not interested in "measuring" risk, I'm interested in riding at smaller less congested resorts because it's more fun to be able to choose an unrestricted line.
The thread title is "Pistes are getting more dangerous, more people out of control".
The article reports that in Belluno hospitalisations were up 18%, is anybody stating that overall skier numbers were up 18% ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| olderscot wrote: |
| I suspect a major part of the perception bias here is that we probably all become less reckless, more cautious and risk averse, and better skiers (I like to think so anyway) as we get older. So skiing behaviour that seemed normal to us and we'd ignore when we were younger now looks dangerous and out of control. |
I don't doubt there is bias introduced by the process of experience. We might understand more the consequences of falls or "accidents", have been hit personally or seen others hit and yes, develop a more conservative attitude to risk vs reward. I think we also develop more of an eye for what "control" is. I saw plenty of fast skiers my last trip but I could easily grade them controlled or not based on their position on their skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| BoardieK wrote: |
The article reports that in Belluno hospitalisations were up 18%, is anybody stating that overall skier numbers were up 18% ? |
But without the skier numbers, the injury number doesn't say much!
The slope may be more dangerous, or even less dangerous!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| BoardieK wrote: |
| @Blackblade, I understand that perfectly but I'm not interested in "measuring" risk |
Fair point; but you did say that the piste was more dangerous ... and that's not a conclusion that the data quoted would support. I know it's being a touch pedantic, so apologies, but it's very important with such an emotive topic to be clear what the data is really saying. The media is notorious for selectively quoting statistics which generate a reaction but are sometimes highly misleading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| olderscot wrote: |
| I suspect a major part of the perception bias here is that we probably all become less reckless, more cautious and risk averse, and better skiers (I like to think so anyway) as we get older. So skiing behaviour that seemed normal to us and we'd ignore when we were younger now looks dangerous and out of control. |
I don't doubt there is bias introduced by the process of experience. We might understand more the consequences of falls or "accidents", have been hit personally or seen others hit and yes, develop a more conservative attitude to risk vs reward. I think we also develop more of an eye for what "control" is. I saw plenty of fast skiers my last trip but I could easily grade them controlled or not based on their position on their skis. |
So if they're still attached to their boots then reasonably in control ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
...well for certain minimal values of control....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Probably been mentioned before, but two aspects that I observe on my 'home' turf (Oberstdorf/Kleinwalsertal) seem to exacerbate the situation.
Firstly, with smaller, low lying resorts increasingly struggling to provide adequate snow cover people are crowding into the more snow sure places.
Secondly, with much better transportation up and on the hill (fast 6 or 8 man chairs, 10 man gondolas) the crowds are on the piste and not in a queue.
Hence overcrowding on the pistes.
I have literally given up even trying to ski a couple of times this season, mainly because the off piste was not usable and the pistes were just downright dangerous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Steilhang wrote: |
Probably been mentioned before, but two aspects that I observe on my 'home' turf (Oberstdorf/Kleinwalsertal) seem to exacerbate the situation.
Firstly, with smaller, low lying resorts increasingly struggling to provide adequate snow cover people are crowding into the more snow sure places.
Secondly, with much better transportation up and on the hill (fast 6 or 8 man chairs, 10 man gondolas) the crowds are on the piste and not in a queue.
Hence overcrowding on the pistes.
I have literally given up even trying to ski a couple of times this season, mainly because the off piste was not usable and the pistes were just downright dangerous. |
Totally agree.
Personally, I've not noticed the average skiers on the hill today are significantly less skilled than any other times since I started skiing (that's quite a few decades). They may be skiing a little faster, but not by much IMO.
However, I've noticed the slopes are considerably more crowded, especially since the pandemic!
The trend of more skiers on slope had been going on for a long while. More high speed lifts puts more skier on the slope instead of waiting in the lift queue. But in general, there're just more people all over!
I used to teach at a small hill near home. But on some major holidays, it was unbelievably busy. I couldn't help but see my little students, in decent control, getting too close to other little ones in other classes than I'd like!  If I really want the kind of separation I'd prefer, my students wouldn't get half the skiing time! Perhaps the mountain should have stopped selling tickets! But where had you heard of that? When I was learning, I didn't remember it being quite so crowded!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting, thank you. Always better to hear from those who deal with the reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
Interesting, thank you. Always better to hear from those who deal with the reality. |
The "reality", as painted by the article, is there're more incidents and accidents. It even hinted there're more people skiing.
But where is the supporting evidence that the skiers are "unprepared-and-out-of-shape"???
Last edited by After all it is free  on Thu 13-03-25 23:33; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Laughably poor journalism. Selectively quoting folk to confirm your bias isn't "reality": the data are freely available.
10 people were injured "in Whistler" yesterday, two critically. All of them on the highway in one single incident. Reality bites.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| phil_w wrote: |
Laughably poor journalism. Selectively quoting folk to confirm your bias isn't "reality": the data are freely available.
10 people were injured "in Whistler" yesterday, two critically. All of them on the highway in one single incident. Reality bites. |
You are so right. The article also clearly states something that suggests a Regression to the Mean situation. Accidents have been rising 5% per annum for a while but there is a sudden much bigger rise of 18% in one year. It's therefore likely that subsequent years are much more likely to show a 5% rise than an 18% one. This fundamental logical fallacy was used often in the past to justify the installation of speed cameras because of the claim that they had reduced the KSI figures by huge percentages when, in reality, they hadn't at all ... the road in question had simply reverted to the mean after an exceptional event.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
