EXPN.com Article On Skiing Going Bigger than Snowboarding

ThaLorax

Active member
I wasn't a big fan of how they made it out to be a rivalry but liked the fact that we're getting the exposure. And I know you'll all be too lazy to click on this link so I'll post the article below it.

http://expn.go.com/expn/story?pageName=wx11wank

Two-Plank Wanks Go Bigger Than You end pagetitle By Tim Mutrie for EXPN.com

end left col

CONTENT COLUMN

Skiers go bigger than snowboarders.

070105_mutriepierre_v.jpg


Wade McKoy/focusproductions.com

Jamie

Pierre threw this 255-footer off Fred's Mountain near Jackson. An act

of free will? Doubtful. Fred must have shoved him off.

Did

I say that out loud? Depending on present company, this kind of

statement might land you at the cold end of a snowball barrage or dunk

tank. So, for clarity, this refers strictly to amplitude, not image or

pop-culture relevancy, where nothing is bigger than snowboarding these

days.

The divide in this freeriding arms race is most

evident in the halfpipe. Skiers like Simon Dumont, Candide Thovex,

Tanner Hall and C.R. Johnson routinely super-size the best efforts of

the best snowboarders, and often in the same pipe on the same day. At

competitions, spectators and TV viewers are invited to draw their own

conclusions with help from demarcating wands that show, in feet, the

height above the deck of the pipe. Dumont usually orbits somewhere into

the neighborhood of 25 feet, depending on conditions, pipe specs and

proximity of helicopters or geese in adjacent airspace.

"In

the pipe and backcountry cliffs, skiers go bigger, but in natural,

powder terrain—backcountry gaps and man-made booters—snowboarders can

go just as big as skiers," says freeskier Seth Morrison, focusing in

the theorem.

Snowboard halfpipe Olympic silver medalist

Gretchen Bleiler confirms, "I hate saying these things because it

usually gets me in trouble, but in general, yes, I think it's true and

you see it most in the pipe. You can't totally generalize, though.

Nothing is absolute."

What remains unclear about this

phenomenon is the reason why. Can it be explained by science? While

scientific papers have been written on both the physics of skiing and

the physics of snowboarding, it seems physicists have yet to probe the

differences and similarities of each group of snow-sliding brethren in,

say, the superpipe.

070105_mutriedavenport_v.jpg


Christian Pondella

Chris

Davenport has skied 51 of Colorado's 54 14ers since last January. Three

more, and he'll have furthered his bragging rights over snowboarders.

"One

thing I've noticed over the years," continues Morrison, 33, a veteran

of 25-plus films, "is that it's difficult for snowboarders to go

super-big off cliffs because they take all the impact on their back

leg. We can land equally on both feet. Imagine jumping something big

and landing on one foot."

Neal Beidleman, a decorated

climber, skier and author of the new Aspen Ski and Snowboard Guide, is

also a mechanical engineer and something of a "rocket scientist" (by

virtue of his work as an aerospace designer for rockets and

satellites). He thinks the answer lies in part with skiers' increased

in-flight dexterity (furthering Morrison's independent-suspension

belief). "You've got four extremities to throw around for balance, as

opposed to having both legs locked in on one axis," he says. "I

couldn't do the proof, but it would be appropriate to say that, in my

opinion, the 'oh shit' factor favors skiers."

Thanks to

the niche sport of speed skiing, it's long been established that, when

both groups are adorned in skin-tight plastic suits, skiers are faster

than snowboarders in straight-ahead, mass-hauling descents. This is the

result of friction, mass, aerodynamics, slope angle, and, of course,

the skill and experience of the pilot (as well as other things like wax

and tune and so on).

Physicist and longtime former New

Yorker writer Jeremy Bernstein explains: "I claim they will speed down

at the same rate and the only issue is air resistance. I can give you

the physics, but I'm sure you don't want to know. Newton's Law says

force equals mass times acceleration. The friction forces depend on the

mass so it cancels. Air resistance does not. . ."

Um, okay. Got it? Big mountain skier and former X Games medalist Chris Davenport breaks it down in laymen's terms.

"There's

definitely something to be said for facing straight-ahead downhill,"

says Davenport. "You're more agile with two feet working independently,

pressing and milking the terrain for more energy, you're more

aerodynamic on equal-footing to react and you get a lot more pop out of

stiff plastic boots on two skis in the fall line."

070105_mutriefinch_v.jpg


Markus Paulsen/ESPN Images

Finch goes pretty damn large...for a snowboarder.

Bleiler

might just agree. "Sure, in slow conditions, skiers can go bigger

because they can skate and use poles. You've got two skis, four edges

and more ability to manipulate your own speed. On a snowboard, you're

locked in and you can't rely on edging as much. It's all about edging,

the line you take and the speed you're able to carry."

Back

in the pipe, another angle to consider is take-off and landing. The

rider or skier who goes biggest will transition diagonally up and down

the pipe walls on each hit, thus carrying more speed throughout a run

(by going up, down and across like a big wave surfer, rather than

straight up and down like a vert skater). Morrison also notes that

skis, which are generally longer than snowboards, might also enhance

skiers' abilities to capture more energy from pipe transitions than

snowboarders.

Skiers like Dumont and C.R. Johnson have

laid down pipe runs so huge they can only incorporate four or five hits

into them, instead of the six to eight hits other skiers and top

snowboarders can pull. Snowboarders, according to Bleiler, haven't

always been encouraged to amp it up, and this concerns Bleiler more

than the latest reading on the huge-ometer.

"At the

Olympic qualifiers Andy Finch was penalized because he wasn't getting

as many hits as everyone else—maybe just four absolutely huge ones—and

that's definitely a problem with the sport now. It's inhibiting

progression."

"He goes huge—I saw him at Tahoe, probably

22 feet out on his first hit. That's pretty damn big, and I don't think

skiers are going bigger than Andy," she says.

And so continues the rivalry, and the quest for knowledge, power and the latest in anti-gravity counter-measures.

 
What I want to know is if even the X Games writers (the author was obviously a snowboarder or neither) will admit that skiers are going bigger in the pipe, then why the hell isn't there more talk about it being in the Olympics?
 
gretchen bleiler is such a bitch, she keeps coming up with excuses why snowboarders cant go as big but then she turns around and says that andy finch is going higher then everyone else.
 
already been posted. it's obviously bullshit anyway. don't take anything seriously that comes from them, they have NO idea what they're talking about. I guarantee you that the point of this article is to get skiers to buddy up to ESPN so its easier to exploit the sport in a few years when its big enough. 100 percent sure.
 
hey, i never said i liked the article, i just liked the exposure. i agree though, the writer was either an ignorant snowboarder or has no idea what he's talking about.
 
"He goes huge—I saw him at Tahoe, probably 22 feet out on his first hit. That's pretty damn big, and I don't think skiers are going bigger than Andy," she says.

stupid hoe
 
haha she may not have been the best snowboarder to interview on the topic, but whatever, and i'm definitely not liking the rivalry emphasis throughout the whole article... o well, cool article i guess
 
Back
Top