 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@EasiskiLDA, you certainly were last time we met up too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| zikomo wrote: |
| Mjit wrote: |
| zikomo wrote: |
| The argument that the lift company is not in control of the land is simply not true. |
Well it depends on which country you're talking about. Certainly in France in a lot of cases it very much IS true. Hell in the Morzine-Les Gets area there's one lift that's not even owned by the lift company but by the famer who owns the land (from memory the Fys chair, which is why it's still a slow old fixed 2-man - the land/lift owner would get the same cut of lift pass takings just doing basic maintainence as he would replacing the chair so just does the basic maintainence).
And even if the lift operating company was given some authority to 'police' the pistes exactly what 'enforcement' action do you expect them to take - for example against someone who's skined up so doesn't have a lift pass? |
Fine. Ignore the fact that the lift company leases the use of the land under licence. And that the lift company creates the pistes. And maintains them. And many pistes have snowmaking infrastructure which is also owned and run by the lift company. Do you really think all that happens with no "control" over the land that infrastructure is on? Probably a good idea to educate yourself on how this all actually works before espousing here (or anywhere else for that matter). In general the lift company does not own the land, that is true. But they do lease the right to use it for periods of the year. |
They don't lease the land in most European countries. that is in N America/Canada. The lift company, while managing the pistes and paying farmers to install snow cannons, actually have no 'rights' over the land.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| davidof wrote: |
| @Macey1975, I haven't really noticed an issue but I'm usually skiing pretty fast myself so relatively the youngsters may even be going backwards. Or maybe I'm part of the problem. I can imagine it is a bit fraught for ski instructors especially with the poor snow conditions this year. |
Be fair David - when were you last teaching on a green/easy blue run? + you actually CAN ski!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Richard_Sideways wrote: |
If you are happy with instructors or some other random on-mountain official doling out immediate and righteous justice to plonkers, idiots and yoofs-wot-need-an-propah-'aircut, then will you quiescently offer up your pass when they deem YOU to have been out of control or going too fast or whatever infraction based on the evidence of 10 seconds or less of observation without right of reply?
...Aaaand before you go all "Well I would NEVER do such a thing!" that's irrelevant - this is an arbitrary 3rd persons opinion. |
since it takes about 20K or more and 4 -10 years to get fully qualified as a ski teacher, and since the ski patrollers also have to pass exams, I object to your term of 'random' - we ARE experts and you, sir, clearly are not!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| EasiskiLDA wrote: |
| zikomo wrote: |
| Mjit wrote: |
| zikomo wrote: |
| The argument that the lift company is not in control of the land is simply not true. |
Well it depends on which country you're talking about. Certainly in France in a lot of cases it very much IS true. Hell in the Morzine-Les Gets area there's one lift that's not even owned by the lift company but by the famer who owns the land (from memory the Fys chair, which is why it's still a slow old fixed 2-man - the land/lift owner would get the same cut of lift pass takings just doing basic maintainence as he would replacing the chair so just does the basic maintainence).
And even if the lift operating company was given some authority to 'police' the pistes exactly what 'enforcement' action do you expect them to take - for example against someone who's skined up so doesn't have a lift pass? |
Fine. Ignore the fact that the lift company leases the use of the land under licence. And that the lift company creates the pistes. And maintains them. And many pistes have snowmaking infrastructure which is also owned and run by the lift company. Do you really think all that happens with no "control" over the land that infrastructure is on? Probably a good idea to educate yourself on how this all actually works before espousing here (or anywhere else for that matter). In general the lift company does not own the land, that is true. But they do lease the right to use it for periods of the year. |
They don't lease the land in most European countries. that is in N America/Canada. The lift company, while managing the pistes and paying farmers to install snow cannons, actually have no 'rights' over the land. |
Oh FFS. I keep repeating myself. But that's ok. It seems that some are so convinced of this (with no basis) that it is a waste of time even discussing it. If you really think it is impossible to have a legal construct that WOULD give the necessary control to the operator then continue to fool yourself with that rather than engaging in the substance of the debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Blackblade wrote: |
I have never claimed to be a legal expert. I stated that I have personal experience of dealing with very similar issues in the past.
I also didn't say that only the owner could impose conditions; if the land is leased then the owner has given rights to the lessee which can then be contracted. I said that if all you have is a LICENCE to conduct certain activities then you cannot give any rights not conveyed to you. If the land is public then right of access is almost certainly not something the licensee can restrict or control.
I really don't know why we're even arguing this; there is case law on it. Val d'Isere removed a skiers pass for allegedly dangerous skiing. He sued them, and won, on precisely these grounds. |
Actually you did try and pretend you bare some sort of legal expert, choosing to tell me it is a "fundamental aspect of law". And you did say only the owner of the land can place and conditions on the use of the land. When that was challenged you chose to try and have a semantic argument about license vs. lease, which was frankly irrelevant to the point. I actually do lease some public land, and I absolutely have control over it's use you see. And I also know the legal construct is different in France and other places, and is often different resort to resort even. But I also know that in all those constructs it is entirely POSSIBLE to amend it such that the operator would be able to impose restrictions on usage. It is not a matter of whether it is possible, but whether it is a good idea and whether the parties actually want to.
This is what you actually said, as you seem to have forgotten how you lectured us all about how only the owner of land has any possibility of controlling it's use. Note the "because they don't own it" part especially.
| Blackblade wrote: |
... because of a fundamental aspect of law; you cannot 'bind' any third party. The lift company can't enter into a contract to allow you to ski on the mountain and behave in a certain way because they don't own it. They have a licence to do certain things on it ... but that is not ownership. They can contract for your behaviour on their property but they can't do it for public land. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
right - I'm putting my last oar in here! Out of control is anyone who is skiing at a speed where they are unable to see, not just in front of them, but to take in everything around them. If you can't do that, you're skiing beyond your ability, and hence out of control.
FYI the whole thing started last wednesday when a group of 5 or 6 large young men schussed straight down the Cretes blue, which joins in with the green. they must have been doing at least 60Kph - they didn't hit anyone fortunately but they came very close to one of my students. It was terrifying. Later another 2 did the same thing. Of course skiing is an inherently dangerous sport, but that doesn't give anyone the right to put others in danger of being killed or seriously injured.
apart from the number of times I've been wiped out in queues on nursery slopes, apart from the guy who broke my jaw because he thought he could go fast looking at his feet to be less afraid of speed  apart from the 2 deaths that I've already heard about this year in France .... apart from when out of control lads have shot right through my class of 7 year olds, when we carefully left half the piste open for others, apart from the numerous times kids skiing with me have had to take emergency avoiding action because and adult skier was heading straight for them at speed... I could go on and on, after 50 years of ski teaching I can say, without a doubt, it's got MUCH worse in the last few years. those who think they have the right to ski straight down learning slopes (at least one poster seems to think he has) because they are 'good' skiers; I suggest in fact that they are not 'good skiers' they confuse speed with ability - it's not the same thing.
so I'm trying to get all the random campaigns and bodies into one umbrella so there can be some power exerted. How many have to die? Even one death is too many - skiing is supposed to be fun for everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@EasiskiLDA, all power to your elbow.
The quibbling on here is nothing compared to the gulf between those here who are at least aware of the rules and somewhat skilled (albeit we can all be fallible) and those who are not aware or simply don't care.
And re everyone parading N America as some paragon in this area - go on a US forum and see how they'll talk about it not being so much an issue in Europe because Euro skiers are all taught well etc, while patrollers tell how mgt instructs them not to interfere in "the guest experience".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| EasiskiLDA wrote: |
right - I'm putting my last oar in here! Out of control is anyone who is skiing at a speed where they are unable to see, not just in front of them, but to take in everything around them. If you can't do that, you're skiing beyond your ability, and hence out of control.
FYI the whole thing started last wednesday when a group of 5 or 6 large young men schussed straight down the Cretes blue, which joins in with the green. they must have been doing at least 60Kph - they didn't hit anyone fortunately but they came very close to one of my students. It was terrifying. Later another 2 did the same thing. Of course skiing is an inherently dangerous sport, but that doesn't give anyone the right to put others in danger of being killed or seriously injured.
apart from the number of times I've been wiped out in queues on nursery slopes, apart from the guy who broke my jaw because he thought he could go fast looking at his feet to be less afraid of speed apart from the 2 deaths that I've already heard about this year in France .... apart from when out of control lads have shot right through my class of 7 year olds, when we carefully left half the piste open for others, apart from the numerous times kids skiing with me have had to take emergency avoiding action because and adult skier was heading straight for them at speed... I could go on and on, after 50 years of ski teaching I can say, without a doubt, it's got MUCH worse in the last few years. those who think they have the right to ski straight down learning slopes (at least one poster seems to think he has) because they are 'good' skiers; I suggest in fact that they are not 'good skiers' they confuse speed with ability - it's not the same thing.
so I'm trying to get all the random campaigns and bodies into one umbrella so there can be some power exerted. How many have to die? Even one death is too many - skiing is supposed to be fun for everyone. |
Is it particularly a post 2020 thing in your opinion?
Social commentators etc sometimes talk of a “I’m going to do what I want, when I want” attitude by a not insignificant minority now in a reaction to the lockdowns, masks etc. Ranging from playing music loudly on public transport to telling heads/teachers where they can go on their kids school attendance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Have reverted to you by PM as I think we’ve done this to death in the thread and bored others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
Is it particularly a post 2020 thing in your opinion?
Social commentators etc sometimes talk of a “I’m going to do what I want, when I want” attitude by a not insignificant minority now in a reaction to the lockdowns, masks etc. Ranging from playing music loudly on public transport to telling heads/teachers where they can go on their kids school attendance. |
Really, got a ref? Not arguing but I’d be really curious. I agree there seems more recently but hadn’t pinned it to lockdown, thought it might be Brexit/Trump…
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Orange200 wrote: |
thought it might be Brexit… |
Taking back a loss of control? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've quickly scanned through the thread so forgive me for people who've already made lots of valid points.
In France, the mayor is responsible for security in his community and he has police powers he can delegate these to the police municipal. This is fairly limited. You also have the Police National (in big towns), CRS and Gendarmerie. The national parks agents also have police powers - they carry a warrant card like other policemen/women.
He can also pass bye-laws and levy fines. For example in many areas going on foot on ski pistes or going uphill is against a local bye-law. I think the lawyer case mentioned, which I vaguely remember, is correct. You can't seize a lift pass but he/she or the prefect could take action if speeding skiers were causing a significant security issue. The ski domain is also a bit special, for example accidents are not covered by the general free rescue.
As for case law, in 2022 the Paris appeals court found that a skier is committing an offense if they ski too fast on an open ski run. The court found "That inattention led the defendant to engage (without taking into account a presence on his trajectory) and the imprudence led him to excessive speed which did not allow him to stop, brake or modify his trajectory."
The French court relied on the FIS rules finding that "In the event of a collision, the upstream skier will be considered at fault in relation to the downstream skier. He/she will not have given way. If the skier at fault is identified, the civil liability coverage in his or her policy may cover the costs of the accident. The judge will base his decision on the rules laid down by the International Ski Federation. There are ten of them, of which the two most important are: each skier or snowboarder must remain in control of his or her own speed and behavior. They must therefore adapt their speed and behavior to their personal abilities, as well as to the conditions of the terrain, the snow, the weather and the density of traffic on the slopes. Second: every skier or snowboarder must control his or her direction and respect the right of way of the skier or snowboarder behind."
These rulings might give the authorities more scope to act on dangerous skiers but not to do speed checks (like in Italy) or pull lift passes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Orange200 wrote: |
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
Is it particularly a post 2020 thing in your opinion?
Social commentators etc sometimes talk of a “I’m going to do what I want, when I want” attitude by a not insignificant minority now in a reaction to the lockdowns, masks etc. Ranging from playing music loudly on public transport to telling heads/teachers where they can go on their kids school attendance. |
Really, got a ref? Not arguing but I’d be really curious. I agree there seems more recently but hadn’t pinned it to lockdown, thought it might be Brexit/Trump… |
Reports/stats on marked increases in unauthorised school absences, littering, a free for all of shoplifting.
Then anecdotally and recently, both BBC radio and LBC have covered the schools issue, taken calls from heads and teachers confirming this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@EasiskiLDA, What can we do to help you?
@davidof, Really interesting and helpful post. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@EasiskiLDA, count us in, you already know my thoughts on this one.
A broken neck and several screws to show for hubby after being hit from behind by an out of control skier who vanished into thin air while hubby was on the ground.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| French court, via davidof wrote: |
| "... Second: every skier or snowboarder must control his or her direction and respect the right of way of the skier or snowboarder behind." |
Not sure if I am misinterpreting this, but it seems to suggest that the downhill skier has some responsibility to allow a passage for the uphill ("behind") skier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| .. And re everyone parading N America as some paragon in this area - go on a US forum and see how they'll talk about it not being so much an issue in Europe because ... |
The North American accident statistics are a matter of easily accessible public record, and don't support that at all.
That a US internet forum contains people who are wilfully ignorant of easily obtained facts is perhaps not something we ought to be surprised about?
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| .. while patrollers tell how mgt instructs them not to interfere in "the guest experience". |
Which patrollers? Not these, whose t-shirts boast openly of "interfering":
You claim to be repeating someone else's argument, but you've been entirely uncritical of what's obviously just misleading nonsense:
- Speed cops and patrollers are in general different groups of people with different training.
- Of course resort management will train people on the balance between safety and "guest experience". That's the entire issue.
- Your incredible suggestion - by implication - that an organization like VR might order staff to do something negligent has zero supporting evidence.
- The available data suggests the opposite conclusion is correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Blackblade wrote: |
| ... Same as if you were climbing Ben Nevis; no private individual can throw you off that land as it's publicly owned.... |
Bit of an aside, but Ben Nevis isn't publicly owned. I think the top is owned by the John Muir Trust, which is a charity, and the rest is private. Being Scotland there are "right to roam" laws if you act responsibly, but if you do something that endangers others, like start a fire or drop rocks down the face, the landowners or their agents can almost certainly take some form of action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| ecureuil wrote: |
| French court, via davidof wrote: |
| "... Second: every skier or snowboarder must control his or her direction and respect the right of way of the skier or snowboarder behind." |
Not sure if I am misinterpreting this, but it seems to suggest that the downhill skier has some responsibility to allow a passage for the uphill ("behind") skier. |
I thought the same?
@philw. I'm not sure what the argument is. All I'm saying is US skiers seem to think problems with reckless users are bad over there as well. And when it comes to integrity of statistics:
https://coloradosun.com/2021/04/15/colorado-ski-area-safety-reporting-fatalities-bill/
Yes yellowjackets and the like do some enforcement/education but it's a drop in the ocean and has done nothing to prevent e.g. The deaths of industry pros like Ron LeMaster and Peter Wuerslin, an instructor at Jackson Hole.
The point that the particular patroller I'm thinking of was making was that sometimes as individuals they would like more powers to strip passes but SAM tells them it's not their core job. Probably influenced by legal exposures as much as anything - what if they establish a precedent of rigorous policing then let someone slide who goes on to kill someone else? Plus ski areas are protected under various indemnifications like the Colorado Ski Safety Act so strictly skier collisions aren't their problem.
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Fri 14-02-25 12:03; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| ecureuil wrote: |
| French court, via davidof wrote: |
| "... Second: every skier or snowboarder must control his or her direction and respect the right of way of the skier or snowboarder behind." |
Not sure if I am misinterpreting this, but it seems to suggest that the downhill skier has some responsibility to allow a passage for the uphill ("behind") skier. |
Yes, or at least not actively block them, either intentionally or recklessly. The two referenced rules mean nobody has the 'right' to stop people overtaking them but equally nobody has the 'right' to overtake others either. If there isn't space the uphill skier doesn't have a right to pass someone downhill and should wait till it's safe rather than forcing their way past. And if there is space a downhill skier doesn't have the right to ski a 'blocking line', changing line to always put themselves in the way of an uphill skier.
As with most things in life - don't be a dick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you have all misinterpreted this, as the original phrase has been mistranslated. They did not say "behind" as we would understand it, more like "below". It is now established in French law that the skier coming from behind is at fault in a collision. The "right of way" refers to the downhill skier. This is aparrent if you read the actual judgement referred to.
There is always equivocation on this point here. Which always surprises and disappoints me. But it does explain the behaviour I see on the slopes. You have a responsibility to control your line and speed such that you do not engender those below you on the slope, regardless of what they do. Just accept that responsibility and all will be fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ecureuil wrote: |
| Blackblade wrote: |
| ... Same as if you were climbing Ben Nevis; no private individual can throw you off that land as it's publicly owned.... |
Bit of an aside, but Ben Nevis isn't publicly owned. I think the top is owned by the John Muir Trust, which is a charity, and the rest is private. Being Scotland there are "right to roam" laws if you act responsibly, but if you do something that endangers others, like start a fire or drop rocks down the face, the landowners or their agents can almost certainly take some form of action. |
I stand corrected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Mjit wrote: |
| As with most things in life - don't be a dick. |
Shame you can't just write that into law ! Would make things so much simpler.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| zikomo wrote: |
There is always equivocation on this point here. Which always surprises and disappoints me. But it does explain the behaviour I see on the slopes. You have a responsibility to control your line and speed such that you do not engender those below you on the slope, regardless of what they do. Just accept that responsibility and all will be fine. |
It won't because those that you like to scold here are only a tiny fraction of those on the slopes.
And with that in mind and from a self defence perspective I do think not enough attention is paid to FIS rule 1 - A skier or snowboarder must behave in such a way that he does not endanger or prejudice others.
That isn't a responsibility only on uphill skiers but on everyone including those deliberately shutting the door or insisting on their "right" to selfishly use slope space or stand where they want etc.
While Rule 3 is of course the only practical way to avoid utter chaos on the slopes clearly there is also a need for everyone to do their best to honour the respect and other rules. A collision" accident" usually takes the actions or in actions of 2 parties. One is likely to be more to blame but blame doesn't correlate with injuries.
That isn't equivocation but looking at how else the system can be mitigated. When I have to brake hard in fast moving traffic I always try to allow for a secondary forward movement if the vehicle in my rear view looks like it's struggling with braking distance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| zikomo wrote: |
| I think you have all misinterpreted this, as the original phrase has been mistranslated. |
yes it is a mistranslation. I didn't have my glasses on when I copied the story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
The very idea that someone going right to the edge of the piste is shutting the door is more than a little strange and more than a little arrogant.
Often the best snow is found right at the edge of the piste, is this reserved for faster skiers? Not as far as I know.
Is the 'slower therefore must be lower ability' skier actually aware of your presence above them, if they are then it is likely they have had the crap scared out of them by 'superior' skiers before because they certainly shouldn't be actively turning their heads to look uphill before every turn (of course if they are about to do something different i.e. change turn size, stop etc. then they should check first).
Maybe if they are having instruction the instructor is making use of the available terrain features to make it easier or more difficult to ski that piste. That may necessitate traversing the slope then making turns down the edge to make it shallower or to take in a steeper pitch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Chris_n, I think we are back to the safety corridor idea discussed in other threads. In the absence of clear published rules and even suggestions whatever instructors consider to be the norm just doesn't cut through to the general skiing populace.
If I'm intending to traverse to the very edge of the piste absolutely I'm safety checking for who above me might not have anticipated that. Sometimes I'll even hand signal.
Absolute beginners shouldn't have to of course but as soon as they've got basic balance and control I still think it's a good idea to check in the interests of self preservation. And part of self preservation is knowing that if you use all the fullest extent of the width there might be someone coming down who hasn't anticipated you might because 90+% of people don't.
It doesn't have anything to do with "superior" skiers. A highly skilled skier might be arcing GS turns across the full width of the slope travelling 4 or 5 times the distance of the underskilled straightliner who catches and hits him because he wasn't expecting an ahead skier to be moving so fast laterally. Either people have awareness, anticipation and an avoidance plan or they don't. And as we've seen in a couple of videos here, certainly there are those who cut it rather too fine.
Again this is all about mitigation of the problem not seeking to reverse any "rights" developing skiers may have.
And to be honest I have admiration for instructors, it's hard enough triangulation for one's own safety let alone trying to keep a group of pupils out of harm's way too. And you have a very specific risk of life impacting personal injury caused by others because of where your workplace is. How many near miss incidents do your classes have over a season?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Blackblade wrote: |
| Mjit wrote: |
| As with most things in life - don't be a dick. |
Shame you can't just write that into law ! Would make things so much simpler. |
I always wonder whether the people who we perceive as not adhering to the "don't be a dick" principle know they're being a dick, but don't care, or whether they simply have a different perception of what dickish behaviour is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Dunning-Krueger on snow.
I believe the discussions about land rights are a red herring. Either people can use the lifts or they can’t, lift companies decide (and if they can’t, just rewrite the TnCs so they can). Sure someone could skin up and bomb selfishly down, but how often is that likely to be in practice?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
| Orange200 wrote: |
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
Is it particularly a post 2020 thing in your opinion?
Social commentators etc sometimes talk of a “I’m going to do what I want, when I want” attitude by a not insignificant minority now in a reaction to the lockdowns, masks etc. Ranging from playing music loudly on public transport to telling heads/teachers where they can go on their kids school attendance. |
Really, got a ref? Not arguing but I’d be really curious. I agree there seems more recently but hadn’t pinned it to lockdown, thought it might be Brexit/Trump… |
Reports/stats on marked increases in unauthorised school absences, littering, a free for all of shoplifting.
Then anecdotally and recently, both BBC radio and LBC have covered the schools issue, taken calls from heads and teachers confirming this. |
Visited Borovets w/c 11 Jan (no school holidays in Europe, according to the sticky) and was shocked at just how many families with school age youngsters were on the plane out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, It is simple, yet you persist in trying to make it complicated.
Yes I look in my mirrors when driving, and yes I would take account of cars close behind me when I have to brake sharply. It is sensible to try and avoid damage and injury by taking sensible precautions. I do the same when skiing, being aware of those above me on the slope and avoiding actions that might cause an incident if they behave like a dick. I don't have any idea why you think anyone would argue with that. But it would still be your fault, and you would be liable for the damage and injuries, if you were driving the car close behind me and rear-ended me because I braked sharply. The same applies in skiing. Why are you so reluctant to accept that absolute responsibility to adapt your speed and line such that you do not endanger slope users below you? The rule is actually quite specific for a reason, and mentions any voluntary or involuntary movement by the downhill slop user. So yes, you are required to make allowance for those below you being a dick. And if they do behave like a dick and you hit them, it is your fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, It is simple, yet you persist in trying to make it complicated.
Yes I look in my mirrors when driving, and yes I would take account of cars close behind me when I have to brake sharply. It is sensible to try and avoid damage and injury by taking sensible precautions. I do the same when skiing, being aware of those above me on the slope and avoiding actions that might cause an incident if they behave like a dick. I don't have any idea why you think anyone would argue with that. But it would still be your fault, and you would be liable for the damage and injuries, if you were driving the car close behind me and rear-ended me because I braked sharply. The same applies in skiing. Why are you so reluctant to accept that absolute responsibility to adapt your speed and line such that you do not endanger slope users below you? The rule is actually quite specific for a reason, and mentions any voluntary or involuntary movement by the downhill slop user. So yes, you are required to make allowance for those below you being a dick. And if they do behave like a dick and you hit them, it is your fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| bryan6 wrote: |
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
| Orange200 wrote: |
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
Is it particularly a post 2020 thing in your opinion?
Social commentators etc sometimes talk of a “I’m going to do what I want, when I want” attitude by a not insignificant minority now in a reaction to the lockdowns, masks etc. Ranging from playing music loudly on public transport to telling heads/teachers where they can go on their kids school attendance. |
Really, got a ref? Not arguing but I’d be really curious. I agree there seems more recently but hadn’t pinned it to lockdown, thought it might be Brexit/Trump… |
Reports/stats on marked increases in unauthorised school absences, littering, a free for all of shoplifting.
Then anecdotally and recently, both BBC radio and LBC have covered the schools issue, taken calls from heads and teachers confirming this. |
Visited Borovets w/c 11 Jan (no school holidays in Europe, according to the sticky) and was shocked at just how many families with school age youngsters were on the plane out there. |
The new normal. Not just Brits, in recent holidays in Schladming, Corvara and Colfosco (last 15 months), our hotels and also gondola rides saw lots of families with school age kids. Italians, Hungarians, Czechs and Skovaks. In early December and late January. Chatting with some folk, the message was that the schools can do one, much cheaper hotel costs come first.
Perhaps Austrians, the Dutch and Germans as a society put a greater premium on education and/or keeping to society’s rules?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@zikomo, I get and accept the simple rule quite happily. You haven't skied with me and have no idea how I follow that. Just because I'm interested in holistic solutions as to how everyone can improve their own safety as potential victims doesn't mean I deny your basic rule although I note that respect from everyone is positioned No 1 ( yes I know it's not a hierarchy).
What I am sure is that being pompous about Rule 3 doesn't actually protect anyone bar those who are below anyone who follows it ( maybe 50% max on a busy holiday week - the rest seems more like entropy) . That's easiski's basic point - an up tick in those who don't know or care about the rules.
And at the extreme being really pompous about the rule to the extent someone takes it upon themselves to "block" over takers really amps up the danger
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
| bryan6 wrote: |
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
| Orange200 wrote: |
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
Is it particularly a post 2020 thing in your opinion?
Social commentators etc sometimes talk of a “I’m going to do what I want, when I want” attitude by a not insignificant minority now in a reaction to the lockdowns, masks etc. Ranging from playing music loudly on public transport to telling heads/teachers where they can go on their kids school attendance. |
Really, got a ref? Not arguing but I’d be really curious. I agree there seems more recently but hadn’t pinned it to lockdown, thought it might be Brexit/Trump… |
Reports/stats on marked increases in unauthorised school absences, littering, a free for all of shoplifting.
Then anecdotally and recently, both BBC radio and LBC have covered the schools issue, taken calls from heads and teachers confirming this. |
Visited Borovets w/c 11 Jan (no school holidays in Europe, according to the sticky) and was shocked at just how many families with school age youngsters were on the plane out there. |
The new normal. Not just Brits, in recent holidays in Schladming, Corvara and Colfosco (last 15 months), our hotels and also gondola rides saw lots of families with school age kids. Italians, Hungarians, Czechs and Skovaks. In early December and late January. Chatting with some folk, the message was that the schools can do one, much cheaper hotel costs come first.
Perhaps Austrians, the Dutch and Germans as a society put a greater premium on education and/or keeping to society’s rules? |
Time to up the deterrent perhaps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Snow&skifan wrote: |
The new normal. Not just Brits, in recent holidays in Schladming, Corvara and Colfosco (last 15 months), our hotels and also gondola rides saw lots of families with school age kids. Italians, Hungarians, Czechs and Skovaks. In early December and late January. Chatting with some folk, the message was that the schools can do one, much cheaper hotel costs come first.
Perhaps Austrians, the Dutch and Germans as a society put a greater premium on education and/or keeping to society’s rules? |
I'm not sure that one week of family holiday might not actually be of greater value to some kids ?
Prior to 2013 headteachers had the power to authorise absences for such purposes. They tended to, where the child was doing well at school and had a good attendance record, permit it.
Plus, if you home-schooled your child then you could choose to call it a 'Field Trip' and then it would also be permitted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I nearly hit someone hard about two years ago. I was going fast and they came in from the side of the piste which was in the shade on a sunny day. Took evasive action, scared them and me. Now don’t go fast when there is too much glare to see in the shadows or just ski on the sunny side.
Also just witnessed a clown on a snowboard clothesline himself due to too much speed avoiding some stationary Skiiers. He proceeded to mouth off about where they were standing. If you can’t avoid things that are static without blaming someone else go back to the nursery slope.
Take care peeps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@motdoc, and perhaps best to point out that you're presumably skiing at Whitewater possibly the most mellow yoghurt knitting hill in all of N America.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I’ve honestly not noticed a deterioration in the understanding of the skier code. But, unlike @EasiskiLDA, I don’t spend my days teaching others on the bunny slopes.
When I was learning, the hill was pretty much self policing. Anyone who acted like a dick was pretty sharply and roundly put in their place.
I think, to my shame, I’m not as vocal away from home due to the language barrier (I’m pretty handy at French, but never ski there now… my other languages are sadly lacking). And European ski resorts attract so many tourists from such a range of languages that, I think, we all lose a little authority. Maybe that is, in part, why is seems tighter across the pond to us Brits??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
