Simons Overshoot VS. Tanners Chads Gap

ReptarYolo

ReptarYolo

New member
I know both are terrible bails, but putting yourself in their shoes, if you had to choose one, which would you take?
 
depends on how the fall went. would it be the exact same result? because i feel like people could actually die from a dumont-esque overshoot, whereas someone else without little pussy girl ankles would have been fine on tanner's bail.
 
I would take Tanner's bail at Chad's Gap. Tanner got off with a few broken bones, Simon was lucky to survive his. I would rather take Tanner's crash twice than Simon's. Plus just imagine how scary it must be knowing you are about to plummet 80 plus feet to flat and knowing you might now make it. Tanner barely had time to realize he was gonna crash.

They were both gnarly crashes but Simon's was worse, and could have killed him, i would take Tanner's ever day of the week
 
I think a more appropriate comparison would be Tanner's crash on Chad's gap vs. Mike Wilson's crash on that ridiculous jump (Mike's was way worse than Tanner's IMO) just because they both come up short.

 
wilson's is waaay worse. he almost died, collapsed lung, had to learn how to walk again.

i think the OP's point is, would you rather short it or overshoot. both are bad..just in different ways.
 
actually i think i remember reading something by jon saying that he took it like a champ

i think ive mentioned this before but jon had a badass year that year but also was present at both those crashes... dude mustve been SHOOK
 
that jump has gotta be the dumbest thing ever constructed. oh yeah, snowmobile tow in to a 90 foot gap with a 3 foot landing, looks legit guys, hold my beer
 
Not even a question. Tanner's crash by far. Tanner broke both ankles but I know Simon fractured his pelvis and possibly more bones.
 
Simon should have died...and had a TON of time to think about that. Tanner wasn't really thinking about what was coming until he hit the wall. On the other hand, Simon was back skiing way sooner than Tanner, so there's that to consider. Not really sure who I would pick...but for sure not Spong or Wilson...those two were WAY worse, in my opinion.
 
simon lucked out i think as far as injuries go. he still got bucked around real bad but he could of been a vegetable easily.
 
Who was it that undershot that step up (I believe) and just disappeared into the powder beneath the landing? It's not the worst crash but it sure was funny
 
I would rather do tanners since the feeling of undershooting is far less scary then shit I'm going to fast better flap my arms violently and hope for the best...
 
Imo overshooting is worse because you have more time to realise that youre about to die compared to undersshooting where sometimes you dont know until the last second. Overshooting hurts more imo aswell
 
simon is such a short ball of muscle that he can eat shit and not die, put a skinny tall kid in his position and it couldve been much worse
 
Ii think Simons was worse than tanners but I don't know about compared to candide big bertha crash. Simon might have fallen a bit longer but he still landed on a bit of a slope. Candide went like 45 feet to straight flat. Either way they were all gnarly bails
 
This is how you survive 80 feet to flat; with the very faintest of mustaches...

FITRX-x-GAMES-WORKOUT-INS2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top