# Stupid question out of curiosity



## lhowemt (Apr 5, 2007)

Ski areas are arbitrary and sandbaggers when it comes to classifying a run. It actually is most useful in comparing runs within a given ski area, not comparing tuns between areas. Some areas don't even use double black, while others have blue runs that most other areas would call black. And, now so much more is skied than used to be considered un-skiable that the ratings are even more worthless. Picture if all of a sudden 60 kayakers a day were running palouse falls, and that's how far skiing had come and changed. Yes kayaking has too for sure. I just don't thunk skiing classification is as rigorous, especially because a few managers are responsible for it, vs a debate among users.


----------



## Flying_Spaghetti_Monster (Jun 3, 2010)

Sounds about as ridiculous as kayak ratings.


----------



## Peelsauce (Jul 15, 2011)

I don't think most in bounds ski terrain could be comparable to big shit like the NF. Growing up at a ski resort I would compare a black or double black to something like gore where if your not ready you might get your ass beat but nothing super threatening and then a solid class V would be more like backcountry or big mountain where I wouldn't dare go unless I had the skill set to do so. Just my thoughts.


----------



## MT4Runner (Apr 6, 2012)

lhowemt said:


> It actually is most useful in comparing runs within a given ski area, not comparing tuns between areas.


Just like river classifications are somewhat comparable in a smaller geographic region--or on different stretches of a river--and less accurate across a region and not accurate at all across the nation.




Peelsauce said:


> I don't think most in bounds ski terrain could be comparable to big shit like the NF. Growing up at a ski resort I would compare a black or double black to something like gore where if your not ready you might get your ass beat but nothing super threatening and then a solid class V would be more like backcountry or big mountain where I wouldn't dare go unless I had the skill set to do so. Just my thoughts.


Well said.


----------



## dirtbagkayaker (Oct 29, 2008)

There sure aint a whole heck of a lot of in bounds stuff. I'd say the A-Z at BigSky has the risks of the lower five at moderate to low flows. Tree skiing the doudles does come with some risk too! But other than that, you'd need a heli to get in the goat range or something.

People huck, wicked gaps, cliffs, avalanche danges, cravas, unstable snow pack, and don't discount the dangers of the "Tree well" people have drowned in tree wells.


----------



## dirtbagkayaker (Oct 29, 2008)

BigSky A-Z.


----------



## BrianK (Feb 3, 2005)

I don't think you can ever compare in bounds skiing to Class V. There is this artificial safety net at ski areas that takes out a lot of the real risk and commitment. Not to say you can't get hurt or worse in bounds - and obviously some places have very difficult in bounds skiing (whistler, jackson, etc) - but in my opinion the difference between the risks of the average double black run and even a class IV run like Bailey or Gore is huge. 

The big and obvious difference is that help is always very close at a ski area, and assuming you don't trigger a very rare in bounds avalanche or fall in a tree well, you will probably be ok even if something goes wrong. (I think it's actually the blue and green runs during peak season that cause the most injuries during ski season because of skier collisions.) 

Also the relative skill level needed, mind set, preparation, etc is much less for a typical "double-black" than class V whitewater. I, for example, would never think twice about skiing what most ski areas call a double black off the couch, but I never run class V after a long break from kayaking. Every new kayaking season I always take a couple of easier kayaking runs to get back into the feel of kayaking. (I don't run class V a lot anyway, but you get the point). I think, for me, this is because the risks of whitewater are much bigger and more likely than in bounds skiing.

Out of bounds skiing is more comparable to whitewater. But, as people mentioned, ski ratings are just ways for a particular ski area to communicate the relative difference of their own runs. People don't take the time to rate out out of bounds lines.


----------



## hojo (Jun 26, 2008)

There is a much greater "legal" emphasis on resort ratings in comparison to river ratings. That they're labeled by a corporate entity creates a situation where the liability factor, not necessarily the difficulty factor, drives the classification. This can be seen in contrast to Europe where they label only a very few (and usually groomed) pistes. Everything else is typically unlabeled and considered natural and at your own risk even if it's what we would consider inbounds.

You can think of most runs as being rated based on pitch, width, groom status, patrol status, and accessibility. Pitch and groom status seems to drive the bulk of the rating. Steeper but always groomed might be labeled a blue where as the run next to it that they never groom is a black. Double black is usually an attempt to suggest that the consequences and rescue difficulty are increased, not strictly because it's super hard. Double blacks are also a way to state that they are limiting their liability by stating that this run is for the mythical "expert."


----------



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

To me it's a little too apples and oranges. 

I'm of the impression that kayaking requires fewer skills but a much higher level of accuracy and consistency for success. Also personally I find kayaking a much much larger head game. On the other hand skiing/snowboarding lets you get away with mistakes all the time, and not executing at the highest level maybe means you don't style the line, but survivability is much easier. 

When you bring in the snow stability side of it, I think it gets weird. The consequences start coming into play like whitewater, but it's much less about skill as in kayaking, but knowledge, decision making processes and quite frankly luck if you push it on your assessments plays a much bigger role than in kayaking. Also in kayaking rescue ability is a major part of putting on, and many of us have been part of successful rescues from the mundane to the gripping. On the other hand snow slide rescues are rare and don't have a great track record for positive outcomes, although they do happen. Not to say lots of survivable slides don't happen, but rescues don't play a major role in survivability on the whole.

Feet to the fire though here's how I would stack it up:

River - Ski ratings

I : Cross country
II : Hilly cross-country
III : Green Circle
IV : Blue Square - Black Diamond
IV+ : Black - Double Black
V : Double Black with mandatory straight lines, airs or exposures surrounded by additional double black terrain
V+ : Beacon only inbounds super gnar, permanent closures, backcountry super gnar. (Big potentially back to back mandatorys or exposures).


----------



## benpetri (Jul 2, 2004)

I think another big difference is that in kayaking, the intensity of skill required is mostly dictated by the run and flow, whereas in skiing, the terrain is just a factor, and not necessarily the biggest one. For example, take Gore at 800 or Gore at 8000. Same run, two very different intensities, and you either have the focus, skill, precision and mettle to execute it or you don't. But in skiing, a lot of your choices in how you ski a run determines the intensity. For instance, take the Birds of Prey run at Beaver Creek. Most skiers of reasonable skill could carve wide turns down it and it would be nowhere near the intensity or consequence of a class V. But to a downhill racer cranking it at 60 mph, I can see how the focus, skill and precision needed to do that now approach a class V intensity (and consequence). The same could be said for the terrain park, a glade run and so on. Its mainly at the really high level of the sport (big mountain riding, gap jumps, cliffs, etc.) where the terrain starts to completely take over the intensity required.

As for Avy danger, its sort of the wild card uncertainty that is just thrown into everything. Usually not an issue inbounds, but since all kinds of different terrain can slide depending on conditions, it doesn't have an easy kayaking analogy. Skill and intensity is involved in avoiding it, but its mostly just a big deadly surprise. Kind of like cranking around a blind corner and finding the river blocked by a strainer.


----------



## idahofloater (Feb 23, 2011)

I'd say that most of the double diamonds that are on normal ski hills are class 3 skill and risk at best. So, these guys who say they are solid double diamond skiiers roughly relates to solid class 3 boaters. And yes I am comparing apples to oranges so take it with a grain of salt please.


----------



## BrianK (Feb 3, 2005)

> I'd say that most of the double diamonds that are on normal ski hills are class 3 skill and risk at best. So, these guys who say they are solid double diamond skiiers roughly relates to solid class 3 boaters.


This is exactly what I meant to say - instead I just decided to spend 4 paragraphs not saying it.


----------



## hojo (Jun 26, 2008)

BrianK said:


> This is exactly what I meant to say - instead I just decided to spend 4 paragraphs not saying it.


Well, you are a no good whiny hole hogging pro. This one time, at Vail, this brian K guy totally cut in front of me on the lift. SOOOOOOOOO uncool. hahahaahah.


----------



## idahofloater (Feb 23, 2011)

hojo said:


> Well, you are a no good whiny hole hogging pro. This one time, at Vail, this brian K guy totally cut in front of me on the lift. SOOOOOOOOO uncool. hahahaahah.


Ouch!! The burn! I'll bet you've been sitting on that one for just the right time. ;} later.


----------



## BrianK (Feb 3, 2005)

That's what happens when you run into a pro skier brah. I was in the middle of training, and I'm not about to wait in line behind you gapers.


----------



## hojo (Jun 26, 2008)

idahofloater said:


> Ouch!! The burn! I'll bet you've been sitting on that one for just the right time. ;} later.


Eh.. it just sort of seemed to fit at the moment. Too soon?


----------



## idahofloater (Feb 23, 2011)

hojo said:


> Eh.. it just sort of seemed to fit at the moment. Too soon?


No.. Perfect timing.  If ya can't laugh at yourself...

I'm just glad you and Brian can roll with it too..


----------



## blutzski (Mar 31, 2004)

My 5 year old skis double black diamonds, but is still kayaking in a lake... 

Züri skiing Pallavicini - YouTube


----------



## Phillips (Feb 19, 2004)

Solid boaters have died in Gore. Most people who run gore regularly rarely set enough down-river saftey. If you swim outta ginger after a wild surf your gonna go for a long swim. Especially if your crew is scratchin their balls up by the tracks. chances are you might not get a breather until post pyrite. I've never swam Gore and I don't want to. That rapid has so many hazards. Still its no NF of the Payette but thats a different conversation and one I will never be involved in. Anyway I don't really know why we are having this conversation. Its like comparing apples to oranges really.



Peelsauce said:


> I don't think most in bounds ski terrain could be comparable to big shit like the NF. Growing up at a ski resort I would compare a black or double black to something like gore where if your not ready you might get your ass beat but nothing super threatening and then a solid class V would be more like backcountry or big mountain where I wouldn't dare go unless I had the skill set to do so. Just my thoughts.


----------



## idahofloater (Feb 23, 2011)

Phillips said:


> Anyway I don't really know why we are having this conversation. .


Because we can. 



Phillips said:


> Its like comparing apples to oranges really.


Oranges are more juicy that apples. What wrong with that???


----------



## Peelsauce (Jul 15, 2011)

I was kinda talking about the whole run in general but yeah I know that you're saying. But with the possibility to walk stuff and at low flows like some firstimers (me) run it it's the first thing that popped into my head as a comparison.


----------



## Theophilus (Mar 11, 2008)

Anything inbounds with minimal to no avy danger I'd call Class 3. The Class V is in the backcountry and you need a solid crew where solid avy training is somewhat the equivilant of SWR. Your life may depend on it.


----------



## hojo (Jun 26, 2008)

blutzski said:


> My 5 year old skis double black diamonds, but is still kayaking in a lake...
> 
> Züri skiing Pallavicini - YouTube


Ag! You have children?


----------



## dirtbagkayaker (Oct 29, 2008)

blutzski said:


> My 5 year old skis double black diamonds, but is still kayaking in a lake...


 
First off, sweet video and supper neat kid.

But its not like he is actually skiing the run. Its more like he is sliding the run. I'd say your solid green circle kid is in over his head on that run and pushing his limits. Kinda like a solid class 1 kayaker running a class 3 rapid. Slow and lead by very close capable skilled supervision. The right way to advance.


----------



## blutzski (Mar 31, 2004)

dirtbagkayaker said:


> First off, sweet video and supper neat kid.
> 
> But its not like he is actually skiing the run. Its more like he is sliding the run. I'd say your solid green circle kid is in over his head on that run and pushing his limits. Kinda like a solid class 1 kayaker running a class 3 rapid. Slow and lead by very close capable skilled supervision. The right way to advance.


Yeah, I agree she was pushing her limits. My point was, if someone says they are a double black diamond skier, that may only mean they are as good as a five year old. Just getting down an "Experts Only" run does not mean you are an expert. Most double black diamonds are certainly not "Expert Only" terrain, especially in Summit County. 

She has skied several double black diamonds (Summit County difficulty - not Crested Butte or Jackson difficulty). I take her on that terrain occasionally because she then thinks blacks and blues are easy by comparison. Its kind of like, in order to be a REALLY solid Class V boater, I think you have to occasionally do a Class V+, so that Class V looks easy by comparison.


----------



## Phillips (Feb 19, 2004)

Your absolutely right. I was being a scrooge. This sometimes happens when you are over 40. . .



idahofloater said:


> Because we can.
> 
> 
> 
> Oranges are more juicy that apples. What wrong with that???


----------

