Why is Snowboarding considered more dangerous than Skiing?

A snowHead

Applying for my ski insurance I noticed that it will cost £8 more if I choose to board rather than ski.

The Snowcard 8 day premiums break down as follows

Level 3 Skiing (on and off piste) - £35
Level 3 Boarding (piste only) - £43

Do I suddenly become 22.8% more dangerous once I strap a board to my feet?

Is the risk that much higher when insuring boarders or is it merely a way of maximising revenue by exploiting a perceived extreme sport?

Any actuaries out there wish to comment?

Note - Level 4 Boarding (off piste) is also £43 so why they differentiate between boarding on and off piste is beyond me.

A snowHead

I've never boarded but a friend of mine who skis and boards says that if you wipeout on skis you have a chance of recovery before you hit something, whereas if you wipeout on a board, you wipeout on a board with no chance of recovery ... please correct if i'm wrong.

Also reckon it's something to do with age. Most boarders are younger than your skier and like car insurance etc the younger dudes suffer.

Cheers

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Bored At Work, has I think got it pretty accurate, as I understand it snowboarers have either higher claims or more of them which is why policies are weighted against them

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Looking at it as a possible third-party claimant, I think I would rather get hit by a skier than a boarder because skiers come to bits on impact and the nasty hard sharp bits fall off. Boarders seem to be fairly permanently attached to their injuring device. I'm not trying to be unfair here and quite willing to be told I am wrong.

Don't forget the really expensive things to insure are people.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Its Simple.

Over the last few years the claims for Snowboarding incidents have outstripped Skiing incidents by about 10 fold. The type of long term injuries from Snowboarding are expensive ie; Neck,Back .

I think they should pay even more & reduce the premiums for skiers Very Happy

You'll need to Register first of course.

I think it's the usual insurance analysis. Higher number of claims for snowboarders equals higher premiums.

However I would have to question the "10 fold" claim. Any proof or references for this??

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

I think it's the usual insurance analysis. Higher number of claims for snowboarders equals higher premiums.

However I would have to question the "10 fold" claim. Any proof or references for this??

After all it is free

I remember an article where the boss of snowcard hinted at higher premiums for boarders as a result of more claims from boarders than skiers. I think this has to do with the fact that boarding popularity accelerated a few years back but the level of tuition never reached a standard of that of skiing. After mastering the basics of riding progression can be quick and young riders in particular will try to ride beyond their ability levels and also attempt jumps at an early stage of their development leading to a high rate of injuries. I remember being taught back in 98 and it was a case of as soon as you can get down a blue - you had cracked it as far as the instructor was concerned.

You may have more chance of recovery after wiping out on skis but I don't agree with having no chance with a board. I have personally recovered from losing edges several times and even on some occasions after tumbling managed to recover and continue riding. Snowboarders due to the nature of being strapped in the way they are take hits in the upper body. Forward falls can commonly end in broken wrists whilst losing your heel edge means a hefty wack on the back. Twisted knees happen occasionally but not as much as skiers I understand.

Boardski, I can see why the insurance companies might think that: when you fall when boarding you tend to slam rather than slide, beginners tend to go faster than the equivalent beginner skiers before they are truly in control, fewer boarders will take a course of lessons, boarding attracts the more reckless youngsters, etc, etc.

however, that is the first time that i have heard of insurers making the distinction. My policy with Columbus Direct just refers to snowsports in general. The distinction also raises the question of what happens if you are neither skiing nor boarding???? are you uninsured?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

However, for a different view, see kuwait ian's quotation in this thread http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=4665

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

I'm not sure it's because of more injury claims, but i've heard there are a huge number of insurance claims on kit by boarders compared to sk=ers. It just seems more boards get stolen than skis??

snow reports

Dan, that could well be the case - esp as regular boarders tend to own their own stuff because hire boards are generally rubbish, whereas many good skiers are happy to rent the latest models in the resort.

Here's the full link from the other thread Great Divide to make it easier. Well worth a read through.

You know it makes sense.

As a fan of both skiing and boarding I reckon it's down to the fact that more riders crave the off-piste experience than the average skier. Off-Piste accidents are probably more costly (hence the outright ban, premium or guide restrictions with general wintersports insurance) and more often than not end in death. Any boarder with any sense/no sense (depending on how you look at it) will head straight off into the unknown at the first sniff of powder...... and I mean the frozen stuff, not the other...

Anyone who's mastered the basics of boarding can head into the back country.... (more often than not without shovels, rods or transceivers) however I doubt many intermediate skiers would get very far before finding the experience a struggle and not too enjoyable.

Help!!

Why is Snowboarding considered more dangerous than Skiing?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste