From the perspective of a Pisteur. A closed piste is a closed piste. The flip board closed and one closed banner in the middle of the piste vs a fence across it.
A run can be acceptable as passable one day, not the next, but the following if OK. Depends on the snow conditions, where and when the refreeze is etc.
In Europe in general a piste that is closed is closed because it's dangerous, it hasn't got enough snow or the lift you need to get back is shut. Unlike in other parts of the world where it might be to preserve the snow for the coming weekend. It's a bad idea to ski a closed run unless you are accessing something off it and you know the conditions. e.g. Skiing back to your own chalet.
If a run is being closed to facilitate a rescue it will be very temporary and there will be someone at the closure. We do this for Helicopters.
From a legal perspective (France) we are not going to stop you skiing a closed run, if you are a pro being paid (ski instructor etc) you are breaking a law. But if we've shut a run and you end up at a closed lift, even if it's still turning you will be told to walk home!
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@under a new name, Still questioning their relevance as pisted runs - and if you're a pro then perhaps the exception rather than the norm. I've skied both Le Tunnel and Shilthorn in 'good' conditions (minimal bumps / either fresh snow or freshly groomed) and they were good fun - I've also skied them and wished I hadn't gone anywhere near - the Schilthorn in sheet ice was a near miss once - Le Tunnel with monster iceberg moguls from top to bottom was pretty much impossible so I walked the middle section irrespective of the 'shame'!
IME and as a holiday skier to find these runs (Wall & Tunnel especially) in good condition is the exception rather than the norm and to experience this as such is a lucky occurrence . . .just don't understand the obsession with inexperienced skiers (like the dutch guy in the vid for example) having a go full stop; this level puts both themselves and other skiers at risk - its just daft decision making when its open let alone when its a closed run . . .
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Belch wrote:
Still questioning their relevance as pisted runs
They're not pisted runs, AFAIK they're itineraries which is a different thing.
Look at this Dutch muppet skiing it. He’s utterly hopeless but still managed to get down. But that’s in good chalky snow conditions. Completely different kettle of fish if it’s ice
To me that isnt fun. Nor can you say you have "skied" the Swiss Wall.
At best you have descended in a barely in control manner.
Feel for the guy who died and his family. Yes he was a muppet, but it's still tragc and not the way you want a ski holiday to go.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@Kramer, The Wall is technically an itinerary but the Shilthorn is a pisted black as is the Tunnel . . . its not like a true itinerary IMO as its directly lift served and easily accessible
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Belch wrote:
@Kramer, The Wall is technically an itinerary but the Shilthorn is a pisted black as is the Tunnel . . . its not like a true itinerary IMO as its directly lift served and easily accessible
That's not quite correct, the Swiss Wall is also a black run, has been for at least the last five years since we've been here. Yes, it's marked on the map as not being pisted, and the black line is on a yellow background to indicate this, but it is signed, patrolled and secured.
Edit: yes, there are lots of older piste maps that show it in yellow as an itinéraire, and I'm not certain exactly when it was changed, but it's a distinction I was keen to clarify a year or three back in the context of whether we were allowed to take ski school groups down it. I never have, but some of the other instructors I talked have, and it was indeed made clear that legally speaking it's considered on-piste.
After all it is free
After all it is free
The slope is often closed and many people ignore the sign. I skied the slope twice on Monday in the afternoon when it was open. When I’d looked in the morning it was closed but a steady stream of people going down it anyway. Terrible accident but it isn’t a rarity this skier went down it when closed. A skier goes down there every few minutes even when closed. The impression is not one of great danger. If very icy the slope needs more than a sign saying piste closed. RIP to the skier and condolences to the family.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
One has to feel very sorry for the family and friends of the skier killed.
But I really don't understand people thinking it shouldn't be a run or it's just there to boast about.
Skiing would probably be better for having more runs like it.
I find it a strange controlling/ woke or whatever the term is to suggest otherwise
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Hells Bells wrote:
I have no idea why anyone would want to ski that.
For later boasting with a fictional tale of masterful technique.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@Snow&skifan, I can think of better ways of boasting about my masterful technique.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Maybe that but maybe also because it’s challenging and fun!!! How the fck would you know all skiers reasons?
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Be wise fellow skiers - it's not worth the risk. Stay safe.
Last edited by So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much on Mon 12-02-24 9:55; edited 1 time in total
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@Stevelancs, sounds like a very traumatic experience for all involved.
@GoodVibes, where did I say that I claimed to know all skiers' reasons? I simply expressed my own opinion of it.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
@Stevelancs, what a very grim first post on Snowheads. A chastening account - sounds like a family group. What a terrible decision they made and will have to live with for ever.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Mods
This has become distasteful with sordid / salacious detail which may or may not be true
Please delete the thread in respect to the actual people involved and their friends
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
frejul wrote:
Orange200 wrote:
Moorzee10 wrote:
In my opinion, when open, this piste is an ego flex and one for the absolute specialists otherwise you are literally playing roulette.
I think you are literally playing pinball.
When it's open and the snow is good - it's nothing like routlette or pinball..
.
Yes, I was considering the word “otherwise”.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
red 27 wrote:
Mods
This has become distasteful with sordid / salacious detail which may or may not be true
Please delete the thread in respect to the actual people involved and their friends
I must have missed that part...
You don't have to read the thread, not does anyone else. I don't find speculation distasteful, it's completely natural and stirs up healthy discussion about safety and accountability.
But I really don't understand people thinking it shouldn't be a run or it's just there to boast about. Skiing would probably be better for having more runs like it. I find it a strange controlling/woke or whatever the term is to suggest otherwise
How would skiing be better exactly when 'accessible' runs like this are clearly borderline dangerous for the majority that attempt them. Other than less people on the slopes (which I get could be an advantage) there's far better / more interesting challenges for skiers to attempt if they genuinely want to improve / are already a decent standard looking for kicks.
I'm proudly anti-woke (according to my kids) at the best of times and don't support blanket bans and overt controls for the sake of it however I still believe these type of runs are in reality no more than a novelty act; most experts don't ski them by choice as they're too busy off piste / skiing with guides away from the potential bucket list mayhem . .
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Thomasski wrote:
red 27 wrote:
Mods
This has become distasteful with sordid / salacious detail which may or may not be true
Please delete the thread in respect to the actual people involved and their friends
I must have missed that part...
You don't have to read the thread, not does anyone else. I don't find speculation distasteful, it's completely natural and stirs up healthy discussion about safety and accountability.
+1
Just debate/bickering about others risking it or similar runs when icy canyons.
But I really don't understand people thinking it shouldn't be a run or it's just there to boast about. Skiing would probably be better for having more runs like it. I find it a strange controlling/woke or whatever the term is to suggest otherwise
How would skiing be better exactly when 'accessible' runs like this are clearly borderline dangerous for the majority that attempt them. Other than less people on the slopes (which I get could be an advantage) there's far better / more interesting challenges for skiers to attempt if they genuinely want to improve / are already a decent standard looking for kicks.
I'm proudly anti-woke (according to my kids) at the best of times and don't support blanket bans and overt controls for the sake of it however I still believe these type of runs are in reality no more than a novelty act; most experts don't ski them by choice as they're too busy off piste / skiing with guides away from the potential bucket list mayhem . .
Firstly they are not by and large novelty acts they are features of the mountain, have been their for years and often are the most practical way down. What are novelty acts are runs like the Harikari which are heavily marketed as steep but are intensively groomed and require little skill to descend but encourage a culture of speed.
Danger is always relative and I would suggest that they are in fact a lot less dangerous than the jumps in terrain parks or say Mountain biking black run. Having them as marked pistes allows them to be officially closed when they are at risk from avalanche or are too icy to be safe. You cannot close a run that does not exist all you can do is close lifts that access them.
Black runs are meant to be difficult or that is the way they are described. In fact since I have started skiing they have generally been widened more intensively groomed and made easier so that they have become accessible to many people on their first or second week on skis. From observation people are taking these runs at high speed with little skill creating further dangers . There have been may reports on Snowheads of people being taken out by out of control skiers . This would I suggest happen a lot less if the slopes particularly steeper ones were less intensively groomed. As it is people are now forced to look away from pistes for challenges on slopes that cannot be assured of being avalanche free and cannot be closed when conditions make them genuinely dangerous.
We would not expect a second week mountain biker to attempt a black run but marketing and grooming has made this a frequent occurrence on the ski slopes.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@T Bar, Sorry but I put the 'Swiss Wall' (being honest its a great name for a ski run!) in the same cat as Harikari etc irrespective of whether its been groomed or not - they're both marketed (with daft % gradients) to attract and inspire the average holiday maker just like an extreme roller coaster at Disneyland . . .people are stupid and ease of access just encourages problems IMO.
Re off-piste I do not see the comparison - would your average punter at L2A for example attempt La Grave on a random Wednesday without a guide / previous knowledge etc? I'm sure some do / have, but they must be the exception.
Your point re terrain parks is an interesting one - they are a pure expression of my 'Disneyland' analogy but they're so visually overt in the danger level they present that I don't believe even the average skier would attempt the larger mounds without repeated practice . . .they're also generally less busy so perhaps 'safer' in terms of collision accidents . . .Again there are of course exceptions (people with the wrong kit let alone ability that should be nowhere near parks) but I'd be interested to see some data in terms of ski park accidents vs disneyland blacks . . .
After all it is free
After all it is free
Lots of runs are called mur in France /French speaking areas but it is not a novelty it is quite simply the way down between Avoriaz and Champery otherwise you have to download. Having it marked allows you to close it.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
@Belch, From a Pisteur in Tignes. “If you are going to have an accident in Tignes, have it on the Palet Sector. The pisteurs at the top of Grattalu (above the Parks) are much more practiced at first aid, particularly serious first aid, because of the number of accidents in the Park.”
It’s also why some holiday insurances are not valid for Park skiing.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@chocksaway, Interesting! I'm skiing Tignes for the first time in March so will bear that in mind; will not be skiing the parks however lol . . .
Maybe in hind-site Parks & Disneyland runs are one in the same; but I'm also assuming that a lot of the Park related accidents are to be 'expected', even with experienced rats who are constantly pushing their skills / abilities to the next level. Comparing an equally accessible pisted black is still different IMO as the danger levels on face value might not be perceived to be as overt . . .
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@Belch,
A black run is described as difficult. The terrain will still exist whether or not you describe it as a run, where it is a natural link as in the Chavanette it will be frequently skied, marking it allows you to control it . Personally I think the 'disneyfication' has been in over grooming black runs and allowing people to believe that ostensible difficult runs are easy as now we have no moguls. The idea that you should have to go off piste to access anything vaguely tricky is I think a retrogressive step.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
T Bar wrote:
... A black run is described as difficult. ..
Gradings are generally relative. That is: describing a run as black means mostly that it is more difficult than a red run.
Ski a lot and eventually you'll find resorts with black runs which are easy, either because you learned to ski better[ha ha], or because they're simply the most difficult that resort has to offer.
But the Swiss Wall isn't black. Most people would look over the edge to determine that it's "difficult", although there is signage to assist the dim.
T Bar wrote:
..the 'disneyfication' has been in over grooming black runs .... the idea that you should have to go off piste...
But the Swiss Wall isn't black, and it isn't groomed.
And itineraries, like the Swiss Wall, are not the same as "off piste".
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
@phil_w,
I know it isn't groomed. It has been black in the past although now officially an itinerary. My point is that we should have such runs marked and not groomed.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@T Bar, On a point of detail Chaletbeuroc (I'm assuming a local) confirmed that it no longer holds itinerary status and is therefore a 'formal' marked black piste . . .
To phil w's point on blacks in general they obviously can and do vary widly - it's a fair assumption for an average skier visiting a resort for the first time that a black should be trickier than a red irrespective of relative 'levels'; but to your point T Bar then should they not also by default be groomed if they are a formal pisted black like every other pisted run (this does not account for pisted runs that have degraded / formed moguls over the course of any day)?
Whether they're groomed or not (and also to your point T Bar) maybe a more effective classification system is required to further assist the dim and to remove assumption and subjectivity. Again (boringly) I'll reference the states as their system is generally more transparent - black / black diamond / double black diamond. A lots of dbd's in America are also criss crossed with 'trails', not only as an escape mechanism for the eejits that have made an error of judgement in attempting to tackle them, but also to allow families of differing levels to keep together on the mountain during their ski day and hopefully ensure they all end up in one piece at the bottom. . .
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
@Belch,
I have no problem with adjusting grading classifications if it more explicitly distinguishes between different runs and difficulty, my fundamental point is that it is appropriate and useful to have such runs marked on the mountain.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Belch wrote:
@T Bar, On a point of detail Chaletbeuroc (I'm assuming a local) confirmed that it no longer holds itinerary status and is therefore a 'formal' marked black piste . . .
Just double-checked, and I see that on the Croset/Champery piste map it is still marked in yellow, which the legend describes as an Itinéraire,, but the overall PdS map on the other side of the paper shows it as black on a yellow background, which latter is just labelled as 'non balisée' in the legend. So to all intense and purposes yes, it is a black run and yes, it is an itinéraire.
And on reflection I think that the other point I made about it being OK to take skischool groups down is perhaps moot, as even an officially marked and patrolled itinéraire would not be considered "off piste" which is what we (non patent-holding instructors) would not be allowed to do.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@T Bar, Ok get this and we are essentially aligned! Woke or not skiing is dangerous but to the luckily enabled its an exciting activity holiday rather than a formal sport; on this basis peeps like the poor chap and his daughter should be better protected from themselves - it won't stop everyone making daft decisions (like ducking barriers) but even if it saves a few that's progression and good practice by any resort management business IMO . .
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
No amount of "grading" can do away with individual responsibility and commonsense. I've seen some signs on "official" black runs that they are for expert skiers only. There is (or was) one in Notre Dame de Bellecombe. I remember skiing it one day - it was not very difficult on the day, with good snow, and though I skied it perfectly competently, better than some of those on the run, not as good as others, I did actually feel rather foolish at the implication that I thought myself an expert skier, which I don't.
What annoys me is the implication by some posters that if someone comes to grief skiing a piste clearly marked "Closed" it is somehow somebody else's fault, perhaps because access to the piste was not physically blocked. I've not stood at the top of the Swiss Wall for many years now, but I do remember looking down there and deciding quite quickly to go down on the chair. There is absolutely no need to ski it to "get anywhere".
@Chaletbeauroc, Out of interest would you take any group that you instruct down such a run (even if they were all level 8-10 on the inside out scale) . . .?
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@Belch, I don't think I would choose to do so, no, as I'm really not sure what one would be trying to achieve, teaching wise. Even for the best of skiers it's pretty much survival skiing and you're never going to be able to get anything like a rhythm going, so for learning proper mogul skiing it would be a complete waste of time. #
But that's just me, aware of my own abilities both as a skier and a teacher. (And conscious of age and previous injuries).
From the perspective of a Pisteur. A closed piste is a closed piste.
All the posts after this are (like this one ) superfluous really. Anyone arguing that it's ok or optional or only advisory; or plays the 'Rules are for the guidance of...", card is plain stupid.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Origen wrote:
What annoys me is the implication by some posters that if someone comes to grief skiing a piste clearly marked "Closed" it is somehow somebody else's fault, perhaps because access to the piste was not physically blocked. I've not stood at the top of the Swiss Wall for many years now, but I do remember looking down there and deciding quite quickly to go down on the chair. There is absolutely no need to ski it to "get anywhere".
On the other hand I’ve found some of the judgements of the deceased on here pretty distasteful. Yes, skiing a closed slope is taking a risk and you shouldn’t do it but we don’t know anything about the group’s decision making, their skill level or what caused the fall. The scariest incident I’ve been involved in had multiple contributing factors (with the benefit of hindsight) but the most proximate cause was an equipment malfunction and there’s only so much you can do about that
After all it is free
After all it is free
Charliegolf wrote:
Idris wrote:
From the perspective of a Pisteur. A closed piste is a closed piste.
All the posts after this are (like this one ) superfluous really. Anyone arguing that it's ok or optional or only advisory; or plays the 'Rules are for the guidance of...", card is plain stupid.
And yet I see qualified guides regularly going down Col des Mines / Vallon d’Arbi itinerary when it’s closed. Granted they will have inside info but it doesn’t set a great example to the people that then follow their tracks.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Arno wrote:
but the most proximate cause was an equipment malfunction and there’s only so much you can do about that
Your whole post was very balanced. But on this bit of it ^^^; 'hoping' that your gear will perform is not a plan.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Charliegolf wrote:
Arno wrote:
but the most proximate cause was an equipment malfunction and there’s only so much you can do about that
Your whole post was very balanced. But on this bit of it ^^^; 'hoping' that your gear will perform is not a plan.
Do you exhaustively test your gear each time you use it?
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
) superfluous really. Anyone arguing that it's ok or optional or only advisory; or plays the 'Rules are for the guidance of...", card is plain stupid.