Big drops rule! haters don't.

Drail

Drail

Active member
alright. so there's been a lot of talk on the forum lately about the folks out there doing big drops. Sadly most of you have nothing better to do than hate on these dudes for doing triple digit drops, and I don't get it.
these guys are out there dropping up to 350ft and all you have to say is "that so gay" and "dropping big cliffs takes no skill" "anybody can fall off a cliff".
I just have to wonder: How big of a cliff have you kids dropped? I mean I consider myself a decent "big mountain" skier and have been working on it for a couple years now (I am from ontario and like most of you was a park rat for 6 or 7 years by default before moving out to the mountains of BC) and the biggest I've skied away from is 40 to 50ft. Trust me - it was scary and it took a lot of skill to not only to land it, but confidently convince myself to huck it. All you kids hating on skiers for going for the 100+ drops, what's the deal? Is it just because you don't understand, and therefor must hate (much like the general public hates on gays and whatnot), or do you just not like skiing as a whole and can only like park rats.
Please let me in on your little world, why hate those you don't understand?
 
Couldn't agree more. Its just another part of the sport whether you like it or not. Personally I think its a lot more badass than fucking paraglideskiing. Fred's line into that thing was sooo ballsy.
 
i think just because it doesnt really appear to be "skiing". arguably, it would be just as easy to hike to the edge of that cliff and jump off, and do the same thing. its not the same as stomping a 60-70 to your skis and riding away from it. its sick, but theres very little actual skiing involved.
 
good post my mani agree its not necessarily skiing, but it certainly takes skill and ballsand is far from lameplus the guys that are doing those are ripping skiers anywaysim a backcountry guy and my biggest is about 40 as well
huge props to guys droppin triple digit, especially skiing out
 
I completely agree!! Guys who drop over 100+ cliffs are just nuts. I cant even fathom 100+. Like the guy from above i have dropped about a 40 footer and it was still scary as fuck! I dont even know what 350 drop would look like and I probably would think that it wasnt even possible to drop something that big! I give huge respect to any guy who drops cliffs over 100+ and its so impressive!
 
Big mountain skiing is all about skiing a solid line with style. How does landing on your head make your drop have any style. Don't get me wrong i think big drops are fucking sick, but people hate on them for the same reason they hated on doubles when people first started doin em, lack of style.
 
what the hell does style have to do with anything? you're saying if you throw a switch cork 12 without a grab and put your hands down on landing it doesn't count? fact of the matter is everyone doing these big drops (with the 350ft one the exception) put lots of thought into it to know if it's even possible to begin with. it doesn't matter weather they landed on their feet or their head, they found the cliff, realized it's possible and skied off the thing - landing in one piece unharmed. that is skill, you can't ignore it.
do you know what a 255ft droppable cliff would look like if you saw it? i'd say 90% of us wouldn't even know what to look for in a cliff that big.
 
completely agree with you....plus how would you even know if it is possible to hit. We can all sit here and nit pick at big cliffs and hand drags and ski racers and all aspects of skiing. I think we just need to remember its all skiing and we should respect all aspects of it. Not hate on certain aspects of it!
 
Just a little perspective for you... the road deck on the Golden Gate Bridge is 220 feet. If anyone hates on dropping a 350' cliff go stand on the edge of that and ask yourself if you could willingly ski off of something that is over a hundred feet taller than what you are on.
 
yeah, i just hate how they have to land on their heads. i'd rather watch someone ride away from a 60 foot drop then watch someone get dug out of a 300 foot drop.
 
i agree, but you just know the same people who hate are gonna come up in this thread and suddenly agree with you because they don't wanna get flamed for hating. happens all the time.

seriously, if a guy wants to huck a massive cliff, he should go ahead. i have absolutely no problems with people trying new things for their own personal reasons. it's a hell of a lot better than doing the same old stuff just because everybody else thinks it's "cool." not to mention the fact that all the haters aren't going to change anything, the man is still going to jump regardless of what some 13 year old on the internet has to say about it.
 
deffinetly true. i thought for years that the beggest cliff on my hill was 70 ft but its only like 35. thats a 35ft foot deffrence from my perspective to actuality. thats huge! 350 ft is 35 STORIES thats like jumping off a fucking skyscraper! thats just rediculous and would take so much balls and confidence. and when your sitting up there about to drop in your bound to be thinking about what would happen if you hit a rock at the bottom or landed bad.....DAMN..
 
yeahh. i completely agreee. if someone is hucking huge cliffs, good to them. its furthering the sport. like im sure back 15 years ago people were saying the same thing about park. like whats the point of sliding down rails and launching yourself 30ft into the air. its all for the better of skiing ,

thats the thng about skiing , you can dowhatever you want, there are no rules on what you HAVE to do. but that is just my opinoin. feel free to disagree but lets not bicth and whine about this stupid thing.
 
Yes. Park skiing has never been about a trick 'counting'. Nobody wants to watch someone do an ungrabbed unclean sw 12.

 
For the most part I agree with you, however what I don't agree with is the hucking for the sake of hucking, when guys like carr go and find supper big cliffs to jump off, just for the sake of jumping off. When the cliff gets so big that they arn't even planing on riding away, because face it, your not going to ride away from a 150+ft clif. let alone 200+, yes it takes skil to maintain your ballence and position in the air, but no matter what when the cliff gets that big you will be landing on your back or head. When the guys like Jullian Carr, go to those cliffs they are planing on landing on their back, they are not even thnking about landing it, the only goal is that their skis stay on and they are still breathing at the end.

There not doing it for anything but the drop, there is no line above it and no line below it. Just for the sake of jumping. Its like the game is to go as high as you can with out dieing. and when you play games like that eventually your going to die, sure they probably get a huge rush from it, but why not go bigger and use a chute?

I don't understand it, but if they want to do it fine, I won't hate on them for it, but I sure as hell won't be giving them props for it either. Its not my style.

 
Although I have never been a big fan of cliff dropping I definitely give the people that do it respect. Except Jamie Pierre sometimes is just plain stupid and I cannot respect that sorry.
Anyways, it just never really appealed to me, perhaps this is partly due to my growing up skiing on the east coast. But I think it's just a matter of preference. Yes, dropping huge cliffs takes great skill, and yes it is truly jaw-dropping to see Jamie launch himself off a rock the size of a tall building. However, in my eyes, this has never been done "smoothly" and that is not appealing to me.
To the thread creator: it is a lot more entertaining for me to watch an exquisitely executed pretzel than a huge cliff drop. Also, I would much rather see a gorgeous motionless zero spin than a ugly switch cork 12 with no grab all pencilled out.
spark notes: to me style is everything (and by style I mean what I find is stylish)
 
so every cliff you jump is part of a continuous line? you never stop scope a cliff, drop it, stop and see what you just did and think "awesome".
what's the only rule in skiing? having fun. I think what they are doing falls under that criteria. I mean, at least they're landing. ski base jumping is less skiing then what these dudes are doing - when was the last time anybody hated on McConkey for his shananagins? I'd like to see you even try.
 
Fuck style. If i'm in the park and i'm thinking of trying a new trick, i'm not going to back out because it might not be uber stylie, that's bullshit. That kind of thinking will get you stagnant in your progression and probably make you quit skiing over time.
There's a huge different between doing a trick and not doing a trick. weather you like it or not, style only makes certain tricks better than others, it doesn't mean the trick with ugly style never happened. Just 'cause these dudes arn't landing on their feet (which would kill them if they did) doesn't mean they arn't actually doing it. don't get caught up in image - if you want to quench your thirst - drink water, don't get sucked into the marketing of what is and what should be.

 
Hahaha, what you said about park and rails is what my dad used to be like before I started skiing park.
He would always be like. Why would anyone want to do rails? It's not skiing and it ruins your skis. For jumps he was more just uninterested with them. But now he accepts that they are a part of skiing and is cool with them.
With that said, mad props to my dad, he shreds the mountain (not the park though) We have pics on our wall of him straight outta college dropin some huge cliffs (not Jamie Pierre huge, like 50 footer huge) out in Utah when he was ski bumming. I have mad respect for that cus he was on mad skinny, mad long skis cus the pics were prob taken early 80's late 70's. I'll upload the pics later. Prob over the weekend.
 
You completely missed my point. To me, style is everything and you have no right to tell me otherwise. My skiing is progressing quite well too thank you very much. Of course the first time you try a trick it's not going to be perfect. But I make it a point to smoothen out and perfect all my tricks. This is enjoyable to me and I believe it to be an important part of my skiing. So no, not fuck style. I never said that the cliff drop never happened because it wasn't stylish, I said it didn't look good to me.
You're drinking water analogy makes no sense by the way. I never once mentioned what is and what should be skiing, I said I enjoy style. End of story. My thirst is stylish, smooth tricks, and that's what I quench it with.
 
I give huge props to the dudes who drop 100+ foot cliffs or any cliffs for that matter. I cannot possible fathom going off a 100+ foot cliff and can't even see how the fuck you would land it. I was on a like 150ft tower this summer and just thought "I wonder what it would be like to jump off this thing into pow" and that thought alone scared the shit out of me. That stuff takes soo many balls its insane and should be respected.

My 2 cents
 
First off, that dude who hucked that 300+ft cliff had no huge plan to huck his carcass off such a huge cliff unlike Jamie Pierre, it was an accident. But what is amazing is the fact that even though it was an accident, he thought quickly enough to save his life. Aside from that, the guy didn't go right to his back either, he hucked it, and stayed tucked for a while. It takes a lot of balls to be able to keep cool in that situtiation, everyone should thow that guy respect. 99% of people, including most pro's, would probably not know how to properly handle that situation and would be killed.
 
What mainly gets me is the jumping off the cliff for jumping off the cliffs sake, If I am going to take time to scope out a cliff (which I do), I am going to try and land on my feet/skis and ride away. I have a tough time saying that falling on your back is landing. Its just jumping off something really big and hoping/trying not to rotate all the way to your head. They often need people to help dig them out of their bomb hole.

And the whole reason McConkey, Holmes, Roner and those guy started ski-base jumping, is so they could ski the lines that they could not have before. Yes, the way MSP started to portray it was that they just went and jumped off stuff, but the origional reason they started doing it (and still do it) is so they can ski the line above the cliff.

and the biggest I have gone is about 40ft, and skied away from 30-35ft cliffs. just for the record. The biggest I ever see myself going is 80.
 
I agree with this post.At first I agreed with the post that you quoted, but as I read on and read your quote I agreed with yours more. I agreed with him about the learning new tricks, but then I read on and disagreed more and more. In your post when you said "Of course the first time you try a trick it's not going to be perfect. But I make it a point to smoothen out and perfect all my tricks. This is enjoyable to me and I believe it to be an important part of my skiing" I couldn't agree more.We have a similar mind set in that way. I love smoothing out a trick so it doesn't look hucked.
 
i personally can't ski BC, cause i don't have any of it around here. i know it's fun and all, but i just dont get super stoked watching it

i mean i don't hate it, but PNW wasn't one of my favourite movies cause there was waaaay to much BC in it for me.

i'm a park rat myself, so i think we enjoy more of what we do, ya know eh?
 
great point man, sure it takes balls, but it doesnt take skill to fall off a cliff and land on your head. sure i respect pierre but that's not skiing, thats just being fuckin suicidal
 
i wouldnt even say it doesnt take skill. it still takes insane skill to manage to land where/how you want off something that tall. but not SKIING skill. much respect for the balls, and the talent, but not really skiing talent
 
do you need SKIING talent to do spins, flips and rails in the park? you can do that on a skateboard, bike, rollerblades, snowboard........ You could argue that racing, moguls and big mountain are the only parts of skiing that take skill.
 
so what do you think of urban rails then? you slide on the 10 foot inrun to a rail and then slide on the sucker to land on a tiny patch of snow again at the end...not too much "skiing" involved with that either. pretty much if you have skis on your feet your skiing. AND the guys going for those huge drops are straight up badasses...shits gnarly as fuck!
 
yea man. most arial skiers in the world aren't skiers, they're gymnasts - and lets look at the park shall we? park skiers ski straight into the jump, pop and throw some acrobatic maneuver, land and ski away in another straight line (or just stop right away). How much skiing ability is really involved in that?
hell, the only real disciplines in skiing that actually involve any skiing ability is racing, moguls, and big mountain. Pipe skiing requires some knowledge of your edge, but nothing compared to racing.
 
I still just don't like the ridiculous drops. Don't get me wrong, i have respect for the people who do it (except jamie, i can't fucking stand him) because i realize it takes crazy balls to do it and i never would. But i would much rather see seth stomp a hundred footer than see jamie just fall 200 something feet. If you know you can't ski away from the cliff and your just gonna make a huge bomb hole when and wait for your crew to dig you out i just don't really see the point. Eventually someone is seriously gonna fuck themselves up doing this and i just don't see the reasoning behind it.
 
gah finally someone agrees with me! I may get flamed but I don't give a shit anymore.

honestly. there's not much actual ski maneuvering that goes on while you are on contact with the snow in a park, unless you're doing a hand drag or a butter, which does require you to know how to get off your edges and to use the flex of your ski. carving into jumps could somewhat be considered that...but to do a small carve like that isn't hard. This is why rollerbladers get right into park and not into big mountain or backcountry: the shit is HARD if you have no prior experience.

Still, park is a LOT of fun, and I won't give up skiing the park and I won't trash talk it. I'm just saying you could compare a huge cliff drop done by a crazy fucker in skill level to a gymnast hitting a jump and throwing a double front full...if that makes any sense. Although if you consider skiing to be anything on skis, all my logic falls apart.
 
dude, i've seen people seriously fuck them selves up in the park and we all know there have been more than a handful of deaths in the terrain park from people fucking up on park jumps.
What do you think is going to have more of in impact on the industry (and general public): someone dying from dropping a big cliff in the backcountry, or someone screwing up a double (or triple) cork during the x-games slopestyle and die on LIVE National Television?
Don't kid yourself, there are huge risks in every aspect of skiing, dropping a calculated 300ft off a cliff is just as safe, if not safer than hitting the big jumps in the park.
 
no. thats not true.

if were to go off a 300ft cliff with no vertical velocity. (your momentum was all moving in the horizontal plane) you would have an impact velocity of about 30 m/s vertically down, this is roughly the same as 220 miles and hour. (theorretical with no air resistance, although you would still be moving pretty damn fast) If you had a mass of say 8o kilos (~175lbs) and the impact took 0.05 seconds (powder landing) and assuming you come to rest (which they all do on cliffs that size, they never ride it out) the force exceterd on your body (in the vertical plane alone would be) 48000 Newtons or about 192000 pounds.

now if you were on a park jump, you will fall about 6 meters (on a big jump with a nice landing) (this is about 20ft). you will land with a vertical velocity of 7.67 meters a second. (as apposed to 30, again neglecting air resistance) again let the subject be 80 kilos. however the landing is not powder so your impact would be 0.03 seconds. The force on your body would be about 20,000 newtons, less then 1/2 that of the big cliff. This is assuming the landing is flat, however this is almost never true. A good jump will have a landing of 30 degrees from horizontal. lets assume you had a landing velocity of 5 m/s, in the 30 degree direction. the vertical vector of this is 2.5meters a second. so the total change in veloctiy is only 5.17 m/s. the force on your body is then only going to be around 14000 newtons, less then 1/3 that of jumping off the cliff. Jumping off the cliff is 3 times as dangerous. physics says so.

 
You forgot the downhill component of the cliff drop landing.
But it is still retarded. Watch Jamie. He "calculated" a lot of stuff, and still landed on his head. Air resistance on your skis is impossible to fight. With park jumps, those dudes train so much and worst case scenario they don't commit and maybe land on their side or something. Full on landing on your head is unlikely with the skill of these skiers in the air.
 
it would be way more bad ass if they just jumped off those cliffs without skis on. think about that, some dude jumping off of a 250 foot cliff and landing on his back, no skis attached.
 
i would believe you, but there are some major holes in your math. your calculations are for vertical drop, while in both dropping cliffs and hitting jumps there is quite a bit of forward motion to add to the equation. you neglected to add the angle of landing for cliff drops (which can be way steeper than a 32* park landing.
and the risk in park jumps isn't landing on your side on the landing, how about fucking up on a crazy trick and landing on your head (like jamie pierre lets say) while overshooting the "long" landing of the park jump - dude, i don't care how strong you are or how hard you train - that shit will fuck you up. and don't tell me people (and pros) don't overshoot the big jumps because there are tons of examples to throw at you (Simon Dumont a couple years ago in park city was it? that japanese dude at the JOI who overshot the whole landing on one of the biggest jumps ever made. I can refer to more if you would like.
statistics alone show that hitting a park jump is way more dangerous than dropping cliffs. ask the insurance companies that insure ski hills (and their parks) and they will laugh you out of their office if you try and tell them a park jump is safer than a cliff drop. I mean, when was the last time you heard of a skier dying from pure impact (in the snow - not landing on rocks, because remember - we're talking calculated drops, not just blindly hucking into oblivion) after dropping a cliff.
 
i have no hate for anyone who can huck a 200+ cliff but when you need to be dugg out... i mean come on . imo a cliff landed is one you can ride away from by yourself, not one where u need to be dug out of your bombhole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top