Park Jumps with "kick" are no more
- Thread starter 4ReeL_
- Start date
beardstatus
Member
such a good idea that there should be park certification that way we wont have shit parks like craigleith did last year, the takeoffs had huge divots in em and they wrent even flat either
poofartpee
Active member
Resorts of the Canadian Rockies
i agree with the whole park pass thing, it would stop people from suing. but our mountain is small and they alreayd build the jumps without a big lip, really hard to clear the jumps, you gotta go fast. plus the inrun is small so you have to bomb it and turn hard on your edges. its pretty ridiculous but i guess thats just how things turn out because of dumbfuck people that hurt themselves, and shitty park builders, and people who like to sue other people.
![IMG]](http://www.fallline.com/img/24x36freeterrain.gif[I/IMG])
BMskier
Active member
MadSteezin
Active member
Exactly.
CooksCorner
Active member
I agree with most of you that this case must seems unfair and unreasonable. However, the reasoning delivered in these two paragraphs from the Denver Post article are nearly undeniable:
Connelly said there were 15 accidents on
that jump this season. In the 17 days before Salvini fell 37 feet and
landed on flat, hard snow beyond the jump's landing, 10 people were
injured from similar landings off the same jump, including eight riders
who had to be carried down the mountain by ski patrol, he said. "There was a man a week before who broke his back on the
jump. There was an accident 2 1/2 hours before this accident. The jump
was never changed," Connelly said. "The failure to even look at the
landing area when you have 15 prior injuries I think certainly
qualifies as gross negligence."
The case isn't that some kid got worked on a jump. The case is that 8 riders were badly injured in the two weeks prior to the incident in question, and not one thing was changed to fix what was clearly a PROBLEM.
If one kid goes out and gets worked on a jump, fine, fuck 'em. Chalk it up to lack of skill, lack of concentration, or just plain old bad luck. But when that many people are getting injured and no one's doing anything about it, that is definitely grounds for a gross negligence case.
Its analogous to the McDonald's coffee case, insofar as the critical component of the lawsuit is context. Most people don't know that before McDonald's was sued for its coffee being two hot, 47 distinct complaints had been filed with the corporation about that very problem. In fact, the coffee was so hot, it was only a handful of degrees short of boiling; way beyond a reasonable "hot beverage" temperature. Moreover, the 22 million dollars in damages awarded to the plaintiff was so conceived because thats how much money McDonald's makes on coffee in a single week. The money was awarded to the woman on the grounds of pain and suffering, but the real intent of the ruling was punitive action against McDonald's negligence.
I dunno. I'm not saying the kid is right for doing what he did. But if it really was negligence on the part of the resort, then we should be just as pissed off at Snoqualmie for being irresponsible and disrespectful of our sport as we should be at people like Kenny Salvini who don't respect it on a personal level.
Connelly said there were 15 accidents on
that jump this season. In the 17 days before Salvini fell 37 feet and
landed on flat, hard snow beyond the jump's landing, 10 people were
injured from similar landings off the same jump, including eight riders
who had to be carried down the mountain by ski patrol, he said. "There was a man a week before who broke his back on the
jump. There was an accident 2 1/2 hours before this accident. The jump
was never changed," Connelly said. "The failure to even look at the
landing area when you have 15 prior injuries I think certainly
qualifies as gross negligence."
The case isn't that some kid got worked on a jump. The case is that 8 riders were badly injured in the two weeks prior to the incident in question, and not one thing was changed to fix what was clearly a PROBLEM.
If one kid goes out and gets worked on a jump, fine, fuck 'em. Chalk it up to lack of skill, lack of concentration, or just plain old bad luck. But when that many people are getting injured and no one's doing anything about it, that is definitely grounds for a gross negligence case.
Its analogous to the McDonald's coffee case, insofar as the critical component of the lawsuit is context. Most people don't know that before McDonald's was sued for its coffee being two hot, 47 distinct complaints had been filed with the corporation about that very problem. In fact, the coffee was so hot, it was only a handful of degrees short of boiling; way beyond a reasonable "hot beverage" temperature. Moreover, the 22 million dollars in damages awarded to the plaintiff was so conceived because thats how much money McDonald's makes on coffee in a single week. The money was awarded to the woman on the grounds of pain and suffering, but the real intent of the ruling was punitive action against McDonald's negligence.
I dunno. I'm not saying the kid is right for doing what he did. But if it really was negligence on the part of the resort, then we should be just as pissed off at Snoqualmie for being irresponsible and disrespectful of our sport as we should be at people like Kenny Salvini who don't respect it on a personal level.
molsongolden
Active member
they could have atleast stuck those stupid orange sticks across the kicker and closed the jump after the first 8 people got hurt
molsongolden
Active member
pack a shovel
BCKicker540
Active member
What we need is for important people in the freeskiing community, especially park builders, pros, camp directors, and filmmakers (berman, johnny, and the like) to meet with some lawyers and resort representatives to figure out some kind of a solution that will represent everyone's interests. I see park passes becoming mandatory at every resort, and I think Doug has a good idea with a park building certification. We need a sort of ecumenical council of freeskiing to figure out a way for parks to continue to exist. I hope somebody important reads this and really considers why it will probably be necessary.
aznpcskier
Active member
well I'm alittle angry and feel like eating babies. THANK YOU KEVIN SLAVINI NOW INNOCENT BABIES WILL BE DIGESTED AND IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!!!!
solitaryman
Active member
i hate bad park builders, those assholes.
cobra_commander
Active member
first of all you know that the incident in question happened 4-5 years or so ago. parks were different then. This was back in the age of 13ft pipes being the shit and before 'terrain park crews' that on on the mountain during the day was the norm.. And the reason people got hurt was that it was icy that day. The guy could have made a better decision. (he straightlined form much higher then most people do and it was icy). Yes fuck him
But I want to see the legislation that this lawyor was talking about.
But I want to see the legislation that this lawyor was talking about.
Check this thread - i found it so Ironic to find Gunnerson's name in the Denver post article, this is my concern here at Crested Butte, we have similar jumps that can kick you to dead flat, i wrote our VP and "Gunnerson" was his answer,
Check it out
https://www.newschoolers.com/web/forums/readthread/thread_id/319356/
Check it out
https://www.newschoolers.com/web/forums/readthread/thread_id/319356/
doGelyst
Active member
"all of this engineering shit is ridiculous. no matter how many
variables they plug into that program and how much they try to emulate
an on-hill environment, they're not going to get a true
representation. i'd really like to see some published reports of the
research and testing."
Yea, science is just a bunch of made up useless shit.
True rep? no. Close enough that someone will know they are fine first hit? Definitely.
Maybe you should go back to school.
variables they plug into that program and how much they try to emulate
an on-hill environment, they're not going to get a true
representation. i'd really like to see some published reports of the
research and testing."
Yea, science is just a bunch of made up useless shit.
True rep? no. Close enough that someone will know they are fine first hit? Definitely.
Maybe you should go back to school.
molsongolden
Active member
im not joking, im tired of getting made fun of for wearing my racing suit and carving between the rail features. in the park.
molsongolden
Active member
damn i fucked that up how do you post images hahaha
SnowRidgeParks
Active member
didn't take the time to read the whole thread, but as far as this being a "nationwide law" i'm gonna have to call shinanigans... i play a large role in the design of my home mountains terrain park and if anything i found last year that we can do more than most people think as far as risk levels are concerned. there was a rumor going around for a while that we could square off the sides of jumps, the had to be smooth and rounded so people couldn't fall off, not true... so in this case of properly shaping a takeoff, i certainly haven't heard of any restrictions (atleast through our insurance company) that are anything like this. the most they seem to care about is keeping the park separated from the general public and having a terrain sign on each feature. this is all i've seen in my personal experiences...
doGelyst
Active member
bump! haha
Is it going to be better if a physicist builds it instead of an experienced park builder? Not necessarily
Is it going to be worse? Not likely.
Hell, if you are in school for engineering, then you should know that science does one thing, it works.
I think the two involved parties should work together to build jumps. Just because a physicist hasnt hit a jump, doesn't mean he cant design one. An experienced park builder more or less uses the same ideas that a physicist would use....but probably isnt too concerned with crunching numbers / angles while doing it.
Is it going to be better if a physicist builds it instead of an experienced park builder? Not necessarily
Is it going to be worse? Not likely.
Hell, if you are in school for engineering, then you should know that science does one thing, it works.
I think the two involved parties should work together to build jumps. Just because a physicist hasnt hit a jump, doesn't mean he cant design one. An experienced park builder more or less uses the same ideas that a physicist would use....but probably isnt too concerned with crunching numbers / angles while doing it.
*freeskierpj*
Active member
Well if this is true then its gonna suck...Jumps with kick are way more fun than flat jumps...Anyone got any proof for or against this?
Therealbillus
Member
Yeah Wachusett has a park pass and its good because it keeps out everyone who isn't willing to pay $5 and watch a 10 minute movie for a season park pass. It's just to keep out people who shouldn't really be on a large park anyway.
skfreestyler
Member
this will be much better, wedge jumps are already the best jumps going--way less consequence. if you have ever skied at pc and then gone to summit county colorado you should know what i mean. if the landing is twices as long then there shouldnt be a problem with overshooting the jump- unless your a dumbfuck like 75% of the kids on this site
EastSteez.
Active member
very true
