Is women's slope sustainable?

oil.

Active member
Article from Freeskier:A Man’s Course: Is women’s slopestyle skiing sustainable?

February 4th, 2014by Tess Weaver

It’s late April at Keystone, Colorado, and, under light blue skies interrupted only by a few puffy clouds, Maude Raymond and Tiril Sjåstad Christiansen are sessioning a private park during a rare women’s-only photoshoot. In spite of a breeze, the two ladies are trading tricks on a step over that’s 65 feet to the sweet spot. Christiansen lands a switch 10 tail grab after doing forward and switch 9s. Raymond tries a different grab on her 9s.

The following day, Keri Herman, fresh off the plane from an NBC Olympics shoot in LA, joins them. The trio migrates to a bigger jump. It’s 75 feet to the knuckle and after a few smooth tries, Christiansen goes too big, over-rotates and lands on her hip and hand. Herman and Raymond continue to session, moving from feature to feature until sunset. I miss all that as I drive Christiansen to the Vail Valley Medical Center where X-rays confirm that her hand is broken in three places. She’ll need surgery back home in Norway. The shoot’s over for Christiansen and so is her career long injury-free run.

130427_abbott_keystone_0364-1024x682.jpg


Tiril Sjåstad Christiansen at Keystone, CO. Photo by Nate Abbott.

“It’s part of the game,” says Herman, 30. “It happens to all of us. Injuries make you think twice about pushing the limits, but you get it back.” Last season seemed particularly injury plagued for the women of freeskiing, though.

Megan Gunning, Emilia Wint and Ashley Battersby tore their ACLs; Brita Sigourney broke her collarbone; Eveline Bhend partially tore her ACL; Emma Dahlström suffered a hip injury; Herman broke her hand and suffered a concussion; and Rose Battersby suffered a lumbar spine fracture. Meg Olenick missed the entire season after a fifth knee surgery. Kaya Turski and Kim Lamarre tore their ACLs; Raymond tore her ACL and MCL; Devin Logan tore her ACL and meniscus; and Keltie Hansen partially tore her ACL.

Grete Eliassen was practicing for Dew Tour at Killington, VT on a particularly windy day in January 2012 when she knuckled the bottom feature and blew her knee. “If [the jump] was smaller, it wouldn’t have happened,” says Eliassen. “Jump size is 100 percent the reason why girls are getting hurt. It’s hard to progress the sport when you’re thinking about just surviving. I’d be trying new things if jumps were smaller.”

Wint blew her ACL in December, 2012 at the Dew Tour at Breckenridge, when she came up short on a 67-foot booter. She had already cleared the jump multiple times, and she says the jump’s size wasn’t the issue. The problem was the blizzard conditions during competition.

For the most part, Wint is satisfied with the size of today’s slopestyle jumps, “I don’t think they need to get any smaller, but I don’t think they need to get any bigger.” But she admits there’s a problem. “At this rate, there is zero sustainability in women’s slopestyle skiing. When we get to the end of the season and the top 10 have been reduced to the top three, that’s ridiculous, and it doesn’t happen in any other sport.”

As female slopestyle skiers prepare for their Olympic debut, more and more are advocating for smaller jumps or separate takeoffs to combat the discipline’s growing injury rate, and to promote progression. It’s a controversial topic that some worry is a step backwards after women like Sarah Burke worked so hard to establish equal participation, prize money and exposure.

What are your thoughts on the current state of slopestyle courses?

They are fine; no change needed

Jumps should be bigger

Jumps should be smaller

There should be separate takeoffs on all jump features

There should only be separate takeoffs where largest jump features exist

[/list]

View Results

During the women’s shoot at Keystone, Christiansen and Raymond discussed their contrary opinions. Christiansen is a fan of big jumps. The 18-year-old Norwegian, fresh off an incredibly successful rookie year that included X Games slopestyle gold, hadn’t been injured until the broken hand. She says the only courses she encountered this year in which the jumps were too big were in Whistler and Norway. Raymond, 25, and Freeskier’s 2013 Skier of the Year, started skiing in her native Québec at age 18, after competitively diving and ski racing. Six months after she hit the park, she was landing cork 10s. Six months later, she blew both ACLs and was out for a year and half. She’s broken her ankle, ribs, collarbone and back. She’s undergone eight knee surgeries in six years.

“I think women’s slope is progressing, but not at all like it should be,” said Raymond. “How can you progress a sport with two-thirds of the field out due to injury? The progression is not happening because we have huge jumps. The girls are doing 3s when they could be doing cork 9s. Everyone is for big jumps until they get hurt. If we had smaller jumps, girls would be trying cork 10s instead of just focusing on carrying enough speed to clear the jump.”

The Survey

Almost two years ago, Kristi Leskinen, with the help of We Are Snowboarding and the Association of Freeskiing Professionals, polled top male and female slopestyle skiers and snowboarders to assess their satisfaction with slopestyle courses. Ninety of them completed the anonymous survey with roughly equal representation from genders. “The survey showed that men and women actually want very different things when it comes to jump sizes and would certainly benefit from changes to current courses,” says Leskinen.

The average ideal jump size from the 40 women who filled out the survey was 55 feet, while the men polled wanted an average of 69 feet.

“Sarah Burke always hit the bigger jumps, so others presume she never would have advocated for separate takeoffs.” (See Sarah’s survey responses below.)

Leskinen’s solution was to add 10 and subtract 10 from the ideal sizes to establish a range. “If the jumps are in or below where the ranges overlap, there doesn’t need to be separate takeoffs,” says Leskinen. “Maybe you only need separate takeoffs on a couple of jumps in the course. If the men’s course has three jumps that are 60, 65 and 80 feet, maybe you only need a separate takeoff on the bottom jump.”

Leskinen assumed people would acknowledge the findings as legitimate, but the survey didn’t gain the traction she expected. Even when ESPN published the results, the title marginalized the findings: “Leskinen Vies for Smaller Jumps.” Backlash ensued. Snowboarder and X Games slopestyle medalist Spencer O’Brien argued that building smaller jumps for women would push the sport backwards. And, as is often the case, the loudest voices seemed to overwhelm the majority who had responded anonymously.

The late Sarah Burke was among those whose response was not linked to her name. She suffered many injuries from contests, including a broken back on a slopestyle course and broken nose from decking in the halfpipe. A lot of people guess what Burke would say. She always hit the bigger jumps, so others presume she never would have advocated for separate takeoffs. According to Leskinen, Burke and Turski helped her come up with the survey questions and were the first two people to fill out the form. With her husband Rory Bushfield’s permission, here are Burke’s survey results:

Survey Questions:

Q: What is the most common concern about the course at events?

Sarah Burke: Not enough available speed/can’t clear jumps.

Q: How often do competition runs reflect your best riding capabilities?

SB: Rarely.

Q: What is your ideal contest jump size?

SB: 50 Feet.

Q: How do you feel about the current jump sizes at major contests?

SB: They’re a little big. I would be more likely to do harder tricks if the jumps were smaller.

Q: Do you think having jump options would add to progression for both men and women?

SB: Yes.

“[Burke’s] survey results are right at the average,” says Leskinen. “She was never one to back down and could always step up to the plate, but her answers speak for themselves. It’s about stepping up the level of progression and increasing the number of girls competing.”

“Sarah worked really hard at getting female skiing where it is,” says Bushfield. “If the majority wants it, well then that’s what should happen, but I would hate the girls to not be able to do an event because there isn’t a separate course. I just don’t want anything that Sarah did to move backwards. I don’t know if Sarah wanted smaller jumps. She wanted the sport to progress to the best level it could. Maybe that’s not necessarily smaller jumps, maybe that’s just safer jumps.”

Jump Size and Separate Takeoffs

At the FIS Freestyle World Ski Championships in Voss, Norway, the jumps were 82, 72 and 65 feet. Even Keri Herman, who has an affinity for large jumps, says some contest jumps are just too big. “We don’t need 80-foot jumps,” says Herman. “Big jumps are badass, but yes, having smaller jumps is going to help us not be afraid and try new things. For contest jumps, there needs to be a happy medium that we can all safely ski.”

130428_abbott_keystone_637-1024x682.jpg


Keri Herman at Keystone, CO. Photo by Nate Abbott.

Although some ski competitors promote a maximum jump size, Herman says standardizing anything in freeskiing takes away from the sport’s creativity. Dan Skivington, ski competition director for the Dew Tour agrees. “I think we should leave the free in freeskiing,” he says. “I believe the progression of the sport should never have rules on it.” If a compromise on jump size between the men and women can’t be reached, many female slopestyle skiers see the benefit in building alternative takeoffs—lips 10 or 15 feet closer—to make existing course features safer.

Link: http://freeskier.com/stories/mans-course-womens-slopestyle-skiing-sustainable

Thoughts?

 
I can see the legitimacy of having smaller jumps or separate takeoffs. I know I will often push myself harder on a slightly smaller jump that I am comfortable on whereas on a large jump that has me on edge I will stick to tricks that are safe for me, that I know how to do, rather than progressing. If we are forcing these women to hit jumps that they aren't comfortable with then they won't be able to push themselves as hard as they can.
 
The article seems a tad one sided at points. What about all the men that get injured on those enormous jumps? Are the men not just as scared of injury when they throw a double? I'm obviously not a girl so i don't know what it's like but it seems like they want smaller jumps, so let them have smaller jumps. That being said, progression for them might not happen with smaller jumps. But who knows, at the end of the day its the women, not the jumps, who will ultimately cause progression.
 
men have been hitting huge jumps since like forever. I have never heard anyone complain about a jump being too big. I've heard like "holy shit that jump is fucking big" and guys who are too scared to hit it switch or something. But no one has ever said it's too big. that officially makes you a wimp.
 
It seems weird that the ladies want the same prize money but they dont want to hit the same course. Every one of these ladies started completing somewhere were the jumps were small and the courses were easier and they worked their way up just like all the men competing. But when you reach the dew tour, x games or olympic level you should be able to handle yourself on the course that everyone is expected to perform on. If they dont like how big the courses are in the biggest events then maybe they should take a step back and compete in some local usasa comps.
 
im a fan for progression and trying new tricks. i really think that large jumps should be left to the movies and contest jumps should be lippy jumps that are no longer than 65ft. it would make people get creative as oppose to throwing just a triple to win. the rail sections have gotten more and more technical but people always seem to just do the easy rails to keep speed into the large jumps.
 
After reading the article, I think that woman's slopestyle almost needs their own course. Most of the slopestyle courses are built around the men's comp which is good and all, except when woman's skiing hasn't progressed as quickly as men's has. Many articles have been saying woman's skiing is 4-5 years behind mens, then their course should be similar to what the men were riding back in 2010.

 
that comparison is so far off it's not even funny

2010 x games tignes:

This years X games Aspen (Skip to 11:00 for the winning run):

 
4-5 years behind is a major exaggeration. Tanner's X Games winning run from 2005 is more technical and stylish than what women are doing now in competitions, that's almost an entire decade.
 
yes.

Women are capable of hitting the features in slope right now, but i wish they would build women their own course. That way they will be more comfortable to try new things, and actually get competitive rather than being scared to shit on whether or not they have enough speed to 3 on an 80 foot jump.
 
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Ev4Nlj-E7SM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
This whole women trying new things on the slope course doesn't make sense. Shouldnt they try new things outside of competitions to get more familiar with tricks/features before they drop in at aspen/sochi? I mean come on, i dont think most of the mens first dubs were on hardpack 80 footers. You learn a trick on something relatively small, jump or rail, then you take it to bigger and bigger things, its common sense. Wallisch didnt try his first lip 2 on an urban dfd with stairs and a 10 ft drop on one side.
 
One thing that is worth mentioning is that women are much more likely to tear their acl than men are because of their hip placement and mechanics
 
Or they could practice their runs before hand on the same size jumps they know are going to be in the competition. no one should really be learning/trying new tricks in a slopestyle run if they actually want to win on a regular basis. You should know the run youre going to do, be able to land that run consistantly, and just hope you execute it during your contest runs. And if your worried about the size of the jump your doing a trick on, it sounds to me you dont really have that trick dialed.
 
women dont need there own course they simply need to sack up. im gonna get so much hate but there are 11 and 12 year boys throwing dubs. this isnt a physical thing either. the reason i say that is lindsey vonn she puts up the same times as some of the men.

i think we will start to see more younger women (ex maggie vosin) pushing bigger tricks in the next 3-5 years.
 
This is actually a decent point. I know women freeskiers don't have trading cards with height weight, but I know a few 12-14 year old kids that throw doubles. Most of them seem to be in that 105-125 pound range that would probably define the woman freeskier. They hit it pretty well and don't blow up, but that's on reasonable sized jumps.

Put any of these kids in Sochi without growing an inch or a pound and they'd probably blow up big time. I know there are some bigger women skiers like Devin Logan and I'd probably argue the Sochi course is stacked to her advantage. She's going to carry farther and her safety bag of tricks will likely do pretty well. It may well be that a Rodeo 5 and a 720 win the women's side.

Also, remember that Lindsey Vonn is a pretty big girl. She's 5'10" and has weighed as much as 160lbs. That's more than most of these park rats.

Ted Ligety is 5'11", 190.

 
That video of Cody is pretty fish-eyed and I'd argue that isn't a decent-sized jump. I mean it is good for a 11/12 year old kid, but that ain't no Dew Tour or Grand Prix jump. The height is small and the fish-eye certainly helps the deck look bigger.

I think the argument is 60 foot jumps are well within range. 85 foot jumps for those under 120 pounds...not so much.

Henrik's stats (here, at least) show him at 5'6", 163lbs....plus the dread weight - which is substantial.
http://gromsocial.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=649:henrik-harlaut-perfect-50-wins-gold-ski-big-air-winter-x-games-2013
 
yeah wasn't saying that jump is any where near x games status but for an 11 year old it is decent . how many women are doing dubs regardless of jump size? i can think of 2 off the top of my head. emila wint at coc and i know a girl that was trying dubs on a backcountry booter 2 years ago.

maybe i was thinking of candide. but either way i dont think being small makes women progress less because of the size of the jumps, having a womans mind set makes them progress less.
 
I like how that article highlighted women getting hurt yet not one word was spoken about how many men get hurt as well...
 
Fuck, Norwegian newspapers reports Tiril won't compete in the olympics afterall. Too much pain without her ACL during practice. Her switch 10s and misty 7s would podium for sure..
 
I can't jump very high so we should lower the net in basketball. I mean god forbid I have to go to the gym and actually work on my sport.
 
Woman are doing 4 1/2 dives off ten meter platforms, no one is saying thy can do them. We're all just saying they don't want to do them and why would you, when you can do a 1260 with no cork and you can still get first.
 
Since when is the amount of prize money based on the size of the course? Prize money is based on the depth of the competition, the sponsorship exposure involved, and size of the market involved.

Take a look at World Cup racing. Women do not compete on the same courses as the men. It's totally not fair and it's ridiculous to think they should. They have their own courses because they simply aren't as strong as the men. The LPGA has shorter course distances than the PGA. WNBA has a shorter 3-point line than the NBA. And I'm sure there are other examples in the sports world too, so why should Slopestyle or Big Air (if it happened) be any different?

To think that women should be made to run the same course as the men is completely unfair because they are simply smaller and not as strong as the men.
 
Kelly Sildaru is going to progress the women sport in the next few years. If she carrys on at this rate of progression there will be dubs being thrown in comps in 5 or 6 years.

I think a case can be made for smaller jumps for girls as they are inevitably going to struggle to get enough speed as they will weigh less than guys.

 
If it means that the girls are gunna throw down harder and be safer then i definitely think that there should be another jump option maybe 1 feet smaller for the womens competition. these girls just dont weigh enough to carry the momentum that they need to be able to clear a large jump and still be able to throw a hard trick on. i am all for smaller jumps
 
Just eliminate the male female separation and let whoever brings it win. Obviously the women will get destroyed at first but once the bar is raised and you can't win a major competition with a switch corked 7 they will be forced to improve. If 14 year old kids can do switch 12's and double corks, I think it's rather patronizing to think it would be out of the reach of women, they're likely stronger than 14 year old boys but they don't have any real motivation to be that good.

I think anyone, male or female, aims to at least meet the bar and some people raise it up but if you have two bars and one is considerable lower for a select group there isn't as much motivation to raise their bar so high that it meets the other one. Therefore, have one bar that everyone is aiming for.

Honestly speaking, based on the women's olympic slopestyle runs they suck compared to men, they suck compared to the pretty good but not sponsored kid at most hills and they have professional sponsorships. There are kids who are better than olympic athletes who are being overlooked by the industry because there is a gender separation that allows individuals who evidently haven't put as much work in or taken as many risks, to compete in the OLYMPICS solely because they have different reproductive organs. That's sad, and it doesn't just happen in skiing.
 
From what I saw of the olympic slope, most of the girls chose to hit the big side instead of the small side. With that perspective, it wouldnt only be two different sized hits that would be wanted, but an entirely different course. A big side will put pressure on the girls to continue going big, as their score might be deducted for hitting the small side, and those girls will continue learning their tricks on jumps that they feel are too big.

 
I understand women are physically built differently and thats why I love them. However its bull shit to say all of them aren't as strong as all men. Some women are fucking beasts and could whoop my ass.

The girls in the Olympics are way stronger then I am, and a good amount of NS people. They work out almost every day, train on tramps, and have professional trainers. How many people on this site are working with Olympic trainers, in sick ass gyms? Not many if any.... So I'm calling fucking BS on that argument for freeskiing.

So why are we seeing unknowns kids from a random resort in the Mid West that ski for fun killing it harder then girls that have been training for the Olympics?

I'm sure someone can pull up an example of jumps but it easier to look at rails and make that statement. I have seen random kids while traveling that are better at rails then the best girls. They ski at the same resort every day, go to high school, and just having fun. Its nothing for them to do a 2 pretzel 2 on a down rail, or 450 on a flat down box, but a rare instance for a girl. Jumps yeah it might take more strength but tech rail tricks really dont.

By the way I'm a big supporter for womens rights, and equality across the board. Inequality is what is holding back human kind more then anything else in this world.

 
whenever i think about things like this i come back to thinking that it's less about physical aspects (though women are built differently, not just generally weaker but their center of balance/knees/legs are different etc) and more about the mental aspect.

whenever i think of sports that girls are impressive at, they seem to be the sports that they have been doing on a large scale for a longer time such as gymnastics or ice skating.

this also in my mind partially explains why the US dominates (dominated?) in women's sports, because we have been doing women's sports for a little longer

look at men's skiing 10 years ago, the slope runs are a joke compared to today's. nothing has changed physically, only mentally, and the top skiers' minds are used to the current state of affairs and see their peers doing stuff that makes them realize it's very doable and changes their whole perception of it

the other mental aspect is that women are taught from a young age to not think as aggressive and hardass as us guys are (and are less aggressive thinking etc biologically too right?), and skiing is allll about that so i can't help but think that that is a consideration

PS andy parry you'd get destroyed if you competed on that course, what's your excuse? just kidding, sort of
 
The biological differences aren't concerning strength in this case though. It wasn't a comparison in strength between men and women. It is a given that to compete on a higher level you need to have that core Olympic training that you're talking about. I do think that strength is very important in terms of preventing injury and generally going bigger (in relation to jumps, and power to pop).

What they ARE talking about is the anatomical differences between men and women. The way that men and women are physically shaped, the bone structure, is completely different. The most stated between the two is the pelvic bones and the angle at which the femur connects to the pelvic bones. Considering that the hypothetical "base" of your body is your pelvis then this is crucial in why it's different.

Quick lesson:

Men's hip sockets are more of a straight down, the pelvis hole is pretty small, so the hip joints are free to be pretty straight. So mens hip angles are pretty straight.

Women's on the other hand are not so much. We are biologically made to be able to have babies. So the pelvis is pretty big in order to accommodate the head of a babies (or else we would all die in childbirth). This makes the angle at which our hip connects a little wider out so its more of an angle than straight like the guys.

692169.png

(Female left, Male right)

WHY DOES THIS MATTER?

Well, when hitting rails, its all about your base. Women are dealing with a wider angle so the way in which we hit rails is going to be different than the boys. This isn't an excuse as to why girls aren't better, just merely giving a little insight into the biological differences and why it doesn't always look the same.

PS. There is some give and take, no two bone structures are the same and some people have more male/female tendencies, it would be interesting to look at the structure of the girls who are killing it on rails to see if they are some of the ones with a smaller pelvic inlet.

ALSO, children's bone structure is on it's own, its more neutralized until they hit puberty. Could be the reason Kelly is so good at rails, will be interesting to see her as she gets older and if the changes alter her skiing much.

 
I get that there may be physical differences, or there may not be. Maybe women just need to sack up and go for it. But what does it matter?

We should be supporting the ladies to be rad skiers, not ignoring what they're calling for and just saying "sack up". So what if there isn't any physical difference? As a community, we should be trying to get the ladies doing the raddest tricks possible, regardless of what jumps they hit. Who is it hurting making a second lip?

Also, who is it hurting giving ladies the same prize money? Do you all really think Visa, FIS, Paul Mitchell, or the X Games are strapped for cash?
 
Sack up doesn't work though. You can't tell a WNBA player to just 'sack up' and throw down in the NBA. There's honest to god differences, which (thanks Errrka) were pointed out.

To the point of us supporting the women, fuck yes we should. They should keep pushing each other (because lets face it the shit we are doing does require a little bit of egging on and pressure) and we should push them too - but we don't have to be dicks about it.

What are other girls take on this whole thing? I know you're lurking out there... your opinions would be most helpful.

 
You guys are making pointless, and I mean truly pointless comparisons...

Anything comparing women to men is pointless because there are so many factors that differentiate the two genders in a athletic sense.

A more accurate comparison that could relatively judge the progression of women skiing would be to one compare women skiing 5 years ago to where it is now. And another somewhat useful comparison would be to compare women's snowboarding to women's skiing.

The girl who won gold at slopestyle at the Olympics deserves mad props, that run was so sick and was impressive. Same with the girl who won 3rd... Every other chick who entered that entire competition was just embarrassing to watch. I have no idea what it is, but the rest of the girls seriously need to step it up to the level those aforementioned girls were skiing at in the Olympics.

 
Back
Top