# Obviously Incorrect Snow Depth Estimates



## trundog (Dec 6, 2005)

Do any of you have know anyone that seems to always report obviously incorrect snow totals or depths? And I don't mean the ski areas, I mean friends or someone you know that always comes back and tries to tell you that the snow was like waist deep. I mean I watch the snow totals and I know that they have gotten a lot of snow, but I have never ridden waist deep snow. And if the snow was really waist deep, wouldn't you be stuck? I just find it hard to beleive the contradictions that these people make to.....like, "the snow was hard and definantly not bottomless" and then stating in the next breath "but it was waist deep" I mean seriously get your story straight you know. I guess I'm just jealous that I couldn't get up there this week and know everything will be cut up by the out-of-town, holiday ski crowd. Well, thanks for letting me vent.


----------



## Clark (Apr 24, 2004)

its true, fish are never as big, snow never as deep, drops never as high, waves never as huge, waterfalls never as tall.... you are also right that waist deep snow aint that cool to ski/ride unless you can get yourself in some very steep shizle in which case you'll be moving down to fast to ever get in up to your waist... just ask your friend if it was wait deep when actually riding or after they fell.... xoxo
clark


----------



## WhiteLightning (Apr 21, 2004)

I agree, I've been on the lift going "it's waist deep snow!" and then if I stop and look, realize that maybe it is only knee or theigh deep. Anyways, I agree that fish are always bigger, CFS always higher, etc. than probably what it really is. When you are excited. That's part of the fun of it though. That 9 ft wave in the river if you were able to measure it with a tape measurer, might have been only 6...but it sure felt like 9 when I was crapping my pants and trying to get over it!


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Those readings should always be taken with a very big grain of salt. The resorts put their snow stake in a depression in a shaded place that's out of the wind. About the only thing you can use those numbers for is to get a relative idea of how much snow a ski area has.

--Andy


----------



## mankster (Jul 6, 2005)

Well it really depends on the slope you are on. Yes, going down a blue in waiste deep powder would not be that fun.
But going 45 degrees, it is perfect. and on a steeper slope the snow is going to have a deeper feeling, and if you are bending your knees enough on your turns you can get face shots. Unfortunately for you, these are not myths, but very real. good luck getting yours.


----------



## chadmckenzie26 (Jun 23, 2005)

I've only been in waist deep powder once in ten years of skiing. Our first run was a blue. We got stuck. My friend fell into a tree well and was stuck for ten minutes. You have to know what you are doing on that kinda pow. It happens once every five to ten years that you are up there for that kinda pow. :wink:


----------



## jwfast (Nov 12, 2005)

*grab your snorkle and head north!*

a waist deep event in colorado? unlikely. once every decade or three. but enjoy this deeper than waist clip. http://www.coldsmokeawards.com/trailer.html


----------



## mwardgeo (Oct 29, 2003)

*It's out there*

Waist High powder is actually more common than you may think. In fact I got mine this past weekend in the backcountry up by Jackson. 42" in 3 days. We had face shots galore. By the way the only way snow that deep is enjoyable is very steep and very fast.


----------



## trundog (Dec 6, 2005)

Well, I made it up to ride again, so I'm less bitter about not making it up, but I think I need to make a clarification here, I am talking about snowboarding depths. I can see how you could be thigh deep on skis (especially on those newer, cheater short skis) possibly even tele, but not on a snowboard. You will never be waist deep in pow at any steepnees or speed regardless. You just float too much and if your nose was really that buried, you'd be going over the handlebars. And please, I'm talking depth perpendicular to the slope not straight down taking advantage of the slope.


----------

