# MRG - What about snowboarders?



## SnowRider (Oct 25, 2006)

Being a snowboarder I think it is completly wrong to discriminate and not let riders in. I know there trying to keep the atmosphere bright and I respect that. They may be worried about getting all these bad snowboarders at there mountain but with no park there only going to get powder dwellers and freestyle riders. Not to mention there are a fair amount of "Trouble" skiier's. What do you think?


----------



## ALLSKIING (Oct 25, 2006)

Its about that time...........:flame: :uzi: :smash: :argue: :lol:


----------



## bvibert (Oct 25, 2006)

Can we not go through this again?  There's several threads on the subject already...

http://forums.alpinezone.com/9052-burton-purchase-mad-river.html
http://forums.alpinezone.com/4605-aint-right-i-tell-ya.html
http://forums.alpinezone.com/573-mad-river-needs-hsq-snowboarding.html
http://forums.alpinezone.com/3486-mrgs-single-chair-set-renovations.html

Just to name a few...


----------



## Plowboy (Oct 25, 2006)

Good luck.


----------



## andyzee (Oct 25, 2006)

No comment


----------



## Mad Skier (Oct 25, 2006)

Go somewhere else, its that simple. The mountain is privately owned(by the shareholders) and they voted overwhelmingly not to allow snowboarders. Its not about fairness, or discrimination, or any of that. Its a cut and dry issue that has been hashed over again and again and again. If snowboarders want to make tracks on Gen. Stark Mtn. they can do so preseason, post season, inter season shutdown periods, or buy a share in the cooperative and make a vote to allow snowboarders. Good Luck.


----------



## SnowRider (Oct 25, 2006)

> Go somewhere else, its that simple. The mountain is privately owned(by the shareholders) and they voted overwhelmingly not to allow snowboarders. Its not about fairness, or discrimination, or any of that. Its a cut and dry issue that has been hashed over again and again and again. If snowboarders want to make tracks on Gen. Stark Mtn. they can do so preseason, post season, inter season shutdown periods, or buy a share in the cooperative and make a vote to allow snowboarders. Good Luck.



Look it it from our perscective. Imagine not being able to go to what is known as a very fun mountain because you ride this funny contraption with only one ski.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Oct 25, 2006)

SnowRider said:


> Being a snowboarder I think it is completly wrong to discriminate and not let riders in. I know there trying to keep the atmosphere bright and I respect that. They may be worried about getting all these bad snowboarders at there mountain but with no park there only going to get powder dwellers and freestyle riders. Not to mention there are a fair amount of "Trouble" skiier's. What do you think?
















Mad Skier said:


> Go somewhere else, its that simple. The mountain is privately owned(by the shareholders) and they voted overwhelmingly not to allow snowboarders. Its not about fairness, or discrimination, or any of that. Its a cut and dry issue that has been hashed over again and again and again. If snowboarders want to make tracks on Gen. Stark Mtn. they can do so preseason, post season, inter season shutdown periods, or buy a share in the cooperative and make a vote to allow snowboarders. Good Luck.


----------



## Paul (Oct 25, 2006)

RUN AWAY!!!! RUN AWAY!!!!!!!


----------



## riverc0il (Oct 25, 2006)

ahhh, this topic again. here we go!!!!

:flame: :uzi:  



SnowRider said:


> Being a snowboarder I think it is completly wrong to discriminate and not let riders in


incorrect, it is not discrimination. you are more than welcome to visit MRG, pay for a ticket, ride the lift, and slide. you just can't use certain equipment. that is not discrimination any more than not allowing people to bring baseballs and bats to a golf course instead of golf clubs and golf balls. you can argue against the ban all you want, but this whole "discrimination" thing that many people argue is simply incorrect. you are more than welcome to hike up any time, i bet some skiers would even cheer you on. i sure would, but i support the ban.

carry on!!! :beer:


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 25, 2006)

Cant you just not ride the lifts. I heard you could always hike it. Hell sounds like a good way to get a point across.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

Don't even approach this subject on this site...  You'll just make skiers laugh..

You won't get ANY sympathy from these guys... This is a mainly skier site filled with people that are pretty passive/aggresive about the subject...

Does it suck...??? Yes...  Is it unfair??  sure if you snowboard...
Is the anything that can be done?  not really..

Do any of these people even remotely care?? no....  
In fact they enjoy the argument so they can restate all their crap again and sound off as "harcore" skiers....


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

AdironRider said:


> Cant you just not ride the lifts. I heard you could always hike it. Hell sounds like a good way to get a point across.



Don't even show up...
I had a friend that took a shuttle over from Sugarbush, snowboard in hand, to meet us after a Telefest day..

He got a ton of crap from the "hardcore" skiers...  For just walking up to the lodge to hang out after the lifts closed...  So the problem seems to transcend just "the rule"....   It does wash out as disslike for people that ride...


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> Do *any* of these people even remotely care?? no....
> In fact they enjoy the argument so they can restate all their crap again and sound off as "harcore" skiers....



That's not true and you know it. I stated in a half dozen threads that I thought it was unfair, so has JimmyG and many others.

I am a hardcore skier, and I think everyone should be able to be on any safe equipment they want at an area that sells lift tickets to the public.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> That's not true and you know it. I stated in a half dozen threads that I thought it was unfair, so has JimmyG and many others.
> 
> I am a hardcore skier, and I think everyone should be able to be on any safe equipment they want at an area that sells lift tickets to the public.



Riiiiiight,,,,,OK... So a handfull...  Big deal.... The lions share of the people that post a lot  on this board do not share your views...


----------



## ski_adk (Oct 26, 2006)

I want to hit the horsey too...(Where's the damned horsey???)


Why don't boarders buy up their own mtn. and make it a boarder-only place?


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

ski_adk said:


> Why don't boarders buy up their own mtn. and make it a boarder-only place?




typical....

I personally don't embrace exclusion..


----------



## Greg (Oct 26, 2006)

D - did you get my Emal?


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

Greg said:


> D - did you get my Emal?




no...


----------



## Greg (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> no...



Email me at contact@alpinezone.com and I'll reply...


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

Greg said:


> Email me at contact@alpinezone.com and I'll reply...


check it...


----------



## Greg (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> check it...



Got it and replied.


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 26, 2006)

Screw it, I can handle a couple F-offs while Im hiking up the hill. Ill just blow their doors off on the way down. Ill take pictures this winter if it ever comes to fruition. Hell I could be one of only a handful of boarders to taste this Paradise trail you all speak of. Id laugh the whole time.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

When I started skiing in 1982 snowboarding did not exist, so skiing was the way to go with snowsports. Since then I have watched the snowboarding sport explode with popularity. I was raised with a skiing brother and now I have raised a son that ski's as well.

I have to admit that I have been harrassed by snowboarders at quite a few places, Mountain Creek, Ski Sundown and even at Sugarloaf to name a few places. Usually this consists of catcalls and heckels for being a skier, especially if I am skiing an alpine terrain park or a halfpipe that is open to skiers and snowboarders. At Blue Mountain my son was hit and knocked down by a snowboarder who did not even bother to stop or help him get up when I as downslope of him.

Skiers have a few places that are skier only resorts. I am not opposed to snowboarders having the same thing, in fact I see this in the future, where resorts, ie small hills/mountains are purpose built with halfpipes, etc exclusively for snowboarding.


----------



## Joshua (Oct 26, 2006)

Man, the resorts really need to open because I can't believe the MRG boarder discussion is the Top thread again....

Please G-D, oh please, bless our fine mountains with ample fluffy powder and short lift lines so that we can all be at peace...or at least most of us

Can I get an AMEN from the bobble heads?


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> I have to admit that I have been harrassed by snowboarders at quite a few places, Mountain Creek, Ski Sundown and even at Sugarloaf to name a few places. Usually this consists of catcalls and heckels for being a skier, especially if I am skiing an alpine terrain park or a halfpipe that is open to skiers and snowboarders. At Blue Mountain my son was hit and knocked down by a snowboarder who did not even bother to stop or help him get up when I as downslope of him.



I feel SOOOOOOOOOOOO bad for you...  NOT!!!! :roll: 

Believe me - I get from both sides...
When I tele i get harrased by skiers and boarders..
When I snowboard i get harrassed by skiers...
When I ski I get harrassed by boarders....

AND - I've gotten hit by skiers and boarders..  Who were total asswipes...
But they don't represent everyone...  I won't generalize...  
Jerks are jerks...  Cool people are cool people...

thats just the way life is...


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

Joshua said:


> Man, the resorts really need to open because I can't believe the MRG boarder discussion is the Top thread again....





So what??? why does this bug people so much???
It's obvious that we snowboarders are pissed about it and it's a big issue...  
Should we just leave and start our own board?  Would that make you happy?


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> That's not true and you know it. I stated in a half dozen threads that I thought it was unfair, so has JimmyG and many others.
> 
> I am a hardcore skier, and I think everyone should be able to be on any safe equipment they want at an area that sells lift tickets to the public.



dmc knows how I feel about it...that's all that matters.

Generally speaking, people who are into snow sports are cool and fun to be with. As with any other group of people, there are some assholes.

Assholes seem to come with a variety of sliding tools on their feet. I don't like to slide with assholes. What's on their feet is irrelevant.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> I feel SOOOOOOOOOOOO bad for you... NOT!!!! :roll:


 

That's good because I was not asking for you to feel bad for me:-?


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> When I started skiing in 1982 snowboarding did not exist, so skiing was the way to go with snowsports. Since then I have watched the snowboarding sport explode with popularity. I was raised with a skiing brother and now I have raised a son that ski's as well.
> 
> I have to admit that I have been harrassed by snowboarders at quite a few places, Mountain Creek, Ski Sundown and even at Sugarloaf to name a few places. Usually this consists of catcalls and heckels for being a skier, especially if I am skiing an alpine terrain park or a halfpipe that is open to skiers and snowboarders. At Blue Mountain my son was hit and knocked down by a snowboarder who did not even bother to stop or help him get up when I as downslope of him.
> 
> Skiers have a few places that are skier only resorts. I am not opposed to snowboarders having the same thing, in fact I see this in the future, where resorts, ie small hills/mountains are purpose built with halfpipes, etc exclusively for snowboarding.




This is quite possibly the most ignorant argument you could make about why its ok for snowboarders to be allowed. It doesnt matter whats stapped to their feet, it was the person on top of those boards that made those crude remarks, hit and runs, etc. Believe you me its a two way street. Ive been taken out by racer brats on skis and flipped off after the fact, doesnt mean I hate skiers.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> That's good because I was not asking for you to feel bad for me:-?



Good.... Because - there's no possible way in hell i would...

Jeeeze...  Why don't you try walking in a mans shoes before you start with your "snowboarders did this to me" stuff....

Just comes across as a lame whine to me...


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

AdironRider said:


> This is quite possibly the most ignorant argument you could make about why its ok for snowboarders to be allowed.



:flag:


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 26, 2006)

This is coming up again???  In my three years here, we have had many, many threads on this issue.  How about we focus on those previous threads rather than continuing to spin our wheels?


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

thetrailboss said:


> This is coming up again???  In my three years here, we have had many, many threads on this issue.  How about we focus on those previous threads rather than continuing to spin our wheels?




Maybe you don't have anymore to say about it...
But maybe - just maybe - some of us do...

I've been involved in this discussion on the internet(usenet) since the early 90's..
And it's still relevant to some of us...

I do not understand why you guys get so worked up about snowboarders offering opinions and debating this...   What's the friggin difference???

if you don't like us starting a new thread... just delete it... Your a moderator....
Show your power....


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

hey Trailboss - I just rippled though some current threads...
These issues have already been talked about in previous threads...

go get tiger..!!!!  Let 'em know you want to focus on previous threads!
Come on! Show your skills....


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

AdironRider said:


> This is quite possibly the most ignorant argument you could make about why its ok for snowboarders to be allowed. It doesnt matter whats stapped to their feet, it was the person on top of those boards that made those crude remarks, hit and runs, etc. Believe you me its a two way street. Ive been taken out by racer brats on skis and flipped off after the fact, doesnt mean I hate skiers.


 

First off I am making a statement not an argument, second I have seen snowboarders destroy some of the narrow trails at Sugarloaf by side slipping down them. Third I do NOT hate snowboarders.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> Good.... Because - there's no possible way in hell i would...
> 
> Jeeeze... Why don't you try walking in a mans shoes before you start with your "snowboarders did this to me" stuff....
> 
> Just comes across as a lame whine to me...


 
I guess that means I have to kiss some snowboard @ss? because that's what you seem like you want skiers to do.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> First off I am making a statement not an argument, second I have seen snowboarders destroy some of the narrow trails at Sugarloaf by side slipping down them. .




WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!  Snowboarders side slip at Sugarloaf.... WAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!


Come on...  I've seen skiers tear up stuff too..

All I'm asking for you is to be fair...


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> I guess that means I have to kiss some snowboard @ass? beacause that's what you seem like you want skiers to do.



Do whatever the F you want...

how about just being cool... And not judgemental... 

btw - i ski and tele as well...  So i think I'm qualified to see both sides...


----------



## Greg (Oct 26, 2006)

thetrailboss said:


> This is coming up again???  In my three years here, we have had many, many threads on this issue.  How about we focus on those previous threads rather than continuing to spin our wheels?





dmc said:


> Maybe you don't have anymore to say about it...
> But maybe - just maybe - some of us do...
> 
> I've been involved in this discussion on the internet(usenet) since the early 90's..
> ...


I think TTB's point was that just about everything that could be said about this debate has already been said. It's now just getting redundant, but if you guys want to spin your wheels again, knock yourselves out...:lol:


----------



## bvibert (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> Maybe you don't have anymore to say about it...
> But maybe - just maybe - some of us do...
> 
> I've been involved in this discussion on the internet(usenet) since the early 90's..
> ...



The only reason I don't this topic is that it ALWAYS turns ugly.  It's all been beat to death a million times already on this board alone.  Nothing new ever comes out of it and boarders just get pissed at skiers and vise versa.  If anything the discussion just drives a wedge between skiers and boarders.

I had the option to lock this thread right after it started, but opted not to in the hopes that it could at least be kept civil.  I don't see any reason for folks to start bashing each other and /or generalizing groups.  If you (the AZ public) want to discuss the issue without resorting to such tactics then I see no reason to leave it up for now...


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

Greg said:


> I think TTB's point was that just about everything that could be said about this debate has already been said. It's now just getting redundant, but if you guys want to spin your wheels again, knock yourselves out...:lol:



to you maybe it's spinning wheels...

To me it's an oppurtunity to advance the debate with a new rider - and to show them that the debate is active and a hot topic.....  

And the more the debate gets advanced the closer I get to snowboarding legally down Paradise...   if that makes some people upset... sorry...  it's our battle(boarders)...  And we will continue to persue it...


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

Gentlemen,

I'm going to try to do my job as a moderator here, and I'll probably get killed for it:

It is unfair and irrational to say that snowboarders are the sole cause for all of the ills at any ski area. I've seen more skiers than snowboarders scrape snow off trails, hit other sliders, insult and curse other sliders, or act rude and unapologetic. There is an equal percentage of good snowboarders as opposed to good skiers, and an equal percentage of poor snowboarders as compared to poor skiers when you look at the overall populations.

On the counterpoint, I don't care for exclusion either, but Mad River is privately owned as a coop and as such they can vote to exclude snowboards. That is their right. In a more traditional case, market forces might persuade them to allow snowboards or go out of business, but in the case of the coop they are less dependent on those business forces and as such can afford to ignore them. And there is little anyone can do to change that.

I love MRG, but I'll admit I'd enjoy it more if my snowboarding buddies could ride freely as well. But I'm not part of the coop, so my opinion means little.


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> First off I am making a statement not an argument, second I have seen snowboarders destroy some of the narrow trails at Sugarloaf by side slipping down them. Third I do NOT hate snowboarders.



First, an argument is composed of statements, so whats your point. 

Second, Ive seen gapers on skis pizza sliding all the snow off trails as well. Maybe one day theyll get the hang of french fries but until then they do just as much damage to trails as boarders do. 

Third, you just put your foot in your mouth. Hows it taste?


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

bvibert said:


> The only reason I don't this topic is that it ALWAYS turns ugly.  It's all been beat to death a million times already on this board alone.  Nothing new ever comes out of it and boarders just get pissed at skiers and vise versa.  If anything the discussion just drives a wedge between skiers and boarders.
> 
> I had the option to lock this thread right after it started, but opted not to in the hopes that it could at least be kept civil.  I don't see any reason for folks to start bashing each other and /or generalizing groups.  If you (the AZ public) want to discuss the issue without resorting to such tactics then I see no reason to leave it up for now...



Bashing comes in many forms my friend...  Many forms...  some less evident some in your face...  i just happen to be the later...

Any time someone new comes to the debate - i jump right in...  Because it's one more person to add and one more person closer to riders enjoying MRG....


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> All I'm asking for you is to be fair...


 

If you want me to be fair then do not viciously attack my remarks and start making judgements on what kind of person that I am.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> On the counterpoint, I don't care for exclusion either, but Mad River is privately owned as a coop and as such they can vote to exclude snowboards.



I understand where your coming from
BUT
As I posted before - any time someone comes into the debate I try and keep it going...
It's important to me...


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

AdironRider said:


> First, an argument is composed of statements, so whats your point.
> 
> Second, Ive seen gapers on skis pizza sliding all the snow off trails as well. Maybe one day theyll get the hang of french fries but until then they do just as much damage to trails as boarders do.
> 
> Third, you just put your foot in your mouth. Hows it taste?


 

My foot tastes good, I just took a shower not to long ago.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> If you want me to be fair then do not viciously attack my remarks and start making judgements on what kind of person that I am.



WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!

I'm soooooo viscious...

I consider your remarks to be vicious too!!!


So how about that!!?!?!?!


----------



## bvibert (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> Bashing comes in many forms my friend...  Many forms...  some less evident some in your face...  i just happen to be the later...
> 
> Any time someone new comes to the debate - i jump right in...  Because it's one more person to add and one more person closer to riders enjoying MRG....



I have nothing against you D, and although my post quoted yours it wasn't necessarily directed at you.  I understand that the issue is important to you and many many others.  That's why I decided to let the thread go, even though it's all been discussed in past threads.

I'm just trying to do my job as a mod and keep the peace.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

SnowRider said:


> Being a snowboarder I think it is completly wrong to discriminate and not let riders in. I know there trying to keep the atmosphere bright and I respect that. They may be worried about getting all these bad snowboarders at there mountain but with no park there only going to get powder dwellers and freestyle riders. Not to mention there are a fair amount of "Trouble" skiier's. What do you think?



Dude - welcome to the battle...

Tell your friends to join!  Someday we will ride Paradise!!


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

bvibert said:


> I have nothing against you D, and although my post quoted yours it wasn't necessarily directed at you.  I understand that the issue is important to you and many many others.  That's why I decided to let the thread go, even though it's all been discussed in past threads.
> 
> I'm just trying to do my job as a mod and keep the peace.



There is a AWD vs FWD thread going on now too...  And I know we've talked about this..

But I'm sure you added your thoughts about thread reuse there too...

oh wait... you didn't.... wonder why?


----------



## thetrailboss (Oct 26, 2006)

Greg said:


> I think TTB's point was that just about everything that could be said about this debate has already been said. It's now just getting redundant, but if you guys want to spin your wheels again, knock yourselves out...:lol:



That was my point.  

As for dmc's remarks, I look at this from a practical standpoint.  These are the threads that have been previously mentioned on this same topic:  

http://forums.alpinezone.com/9052-burton-purchase-mad-river.html
http://forums.alpinezone.com/4605-aint-right-i-tell-ya.html
http://forums.alpinezone.com/573-mad-river-needs-hsq-snowboarding.html
http://forums.alpinezone.com/3486-mrgs-single-chair-set-renovations.html

I credit bvibert for finding them.  

Now there is an old saying....that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.  I understand the issue of snowboarders vs. skiers at MRG.  I understand all of the arguments because I've heard them ad nauseum.  My point is partially that another thread on it is *not going to get what you want.*  You can certainly continue talking about it here.....but maybe it is time to choose a different strategy.

I really don't care if you continue to talk about this in many threads.  If anything, it brings more traffic to the site and more interest.  But I think that the energy you are spending here could be used to do things like write editorials to magazines (SKI or SKIING) who have had recent articles on MRG...or to the local papers....or by purchasing a share and getting involved.


----------



## ALLSKIING (Oct 26, 2006)

Lets not make this a mod vs members thing...The thread is open have at it.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!
> 
> I'm soooooo viscious...
> 
> ...


 

I think the WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

thing is getting stale.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> I understand where your coming from
> BUT
> As I posted before - any time someone comes into the debate I try and keep it going...
> It's important to me...



You have no argument here and I trust you understand that. No need for any "BUT's".


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

thetrailboss said:


> Now there is an old saying....that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.  I understand the issue of snowboarders vs. skiers at MRG.  I understand all of the arguments because I've heard them ad nauseum.  My point is partially that another thread on it is *not going to get what you want.*  You can certainly continue talking about it here.....but maybe it is time to choose a different strategy.




LOOK... Anytime someone new comes to the debate - I see it as another person to help advance the cause...   And I will challenge the status quo(Apline Zone) to show them that you can debate and you can challenge the usual passive agressive BS that skier spew...

there ARE currnet threads that are new where the issue has been discussed in previous threads...  But NOBODY challenges them...!?!??!?!

WHY?!?!?!  Because I think people are afraid to add more snowboarders to the debate...  Because the more people join the debate the more likely it is that MRG will become a place we can all enjoy..


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> There is an equal percentage of good snowboarders as opposed to good skiers, and an equal percentage of poor snowboarders as compared to poor skiers when you look at the overall populations.



I have no statistics to back up what i am going to say, but i'll say it anyways.  I think this is incorrect.  It takes a lot longer for a skier to became adequate then it does a snowboarder.  I don't see too many horrible snowboarders b/c they can pick up the basics alot quicker. From my experiences, a few days on the hill and snowboaders can get down much more difficult trails then skiers.  Just my .02 cents.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> I think the WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
> 
> thing is getting stale.




WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!   Jeeze..... :roll:


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

ALLSKIING said:


> Lets not make this a mod vs members thing...The thread is open have at it.



Yes! The issue is obviously still very hot, evidenced by another thread about it.

Enjoy!


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> You have no argument here and I trust you understand that. No need for any "BUT's".




Not directed at you bud...


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

ALLSKIING said:


> Lets not make this a mod vs members thing...The thread is open have at it.



Cool...  But - I don't need moderators telling me not to do something when the same something is going on in other threads....

So in that sense - it is a moderator thing...


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> I have no statistics to back up what i am going to say, but i'll say it anyways.  I think this is incorrect.  It takes a lot longer for a skier to became adequate then it does a snowboarder.  I don't see too many horrible snowboarders b/c they can pick up the basics alot quicker. From my experiences, a few days on the hill and snowboaders can get down much more difficult trails then skiers.  Just my .02 cents.



Fair...I agree the learning curve for skiing is much tougher than snowboarding, at least that's what I understand. You're really just agreeing with me anyway because I don't agree that snowboarders cause all of the problems at ski areas people like to think they do.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> There is a AWD vs FWD thread going on now too...  And I know we've talked about this..
> 
> But I'm sure you added your thoughts about thread reuse there too...
> 
> oh wait... you didn't.... wonder why?



Please see the thread in question.


----------



## Greg (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> to you maybe it's spinning wheels...
> 
> To me it's an oppurtunity to advance the debate with a new rider - and to show them that the debate is active and a hot topic.....
> 
> And the more the debate gets advanced the closer I get to snowboarding legally down Paradise...   if that makes some people upset... sorry...  it's our battle(boarders)...  And we will continue to persue it...





dmc said:


> Any time someone new comes to the debate - i jump right in...  Because it's one more person to add and one more person closer to riders enjoying MRG....





dmc said:


> I understand where your coming from
> BUT
> As I posted before - any time someone comes into the debate I try and keep it going...
> It's important to me...





dmc said:


> Dude - welcome to the battle...
> 
> Tell your friends to join!  Someday we will ride Paradise!!



Your crusade is noble, Doug. Really, it is. And I can certainly appreciate that you want to share your views with other riders. However, there's a point that is made in virtually every other thread on this subject and that is that this is the decision of the co-op, bottom-line. There could be a million riders posting on this forum about the need to allow snowboarding at MRG, but if the co-op doesn't bring it to a vote, it's all wasted breath. Unfortunately for snowboarders, that's the reality of it.



thetrailboss said:


> Now there is an old saying....that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.  I understand the issue of snowboarders vs. skiers at MRG.  I understand all of the arguments because I've heard them ad nauseum.  My point is partially that another thread on it is *not going to get what you want.*  You can certainly continue talking about it here.....but maybe it is time to choose a different strategy.


What he said.

In closing, because I have really nothing else to add to this discussion, you guys can debate this until the lifts start turning or beyond, if you wish. However if this thread degenerates to personal attacks, we take the "lock this thing tighter than a nun's legs" approach.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

All I'm saying is...

If someone new joins the debate - then I will persue the debate...  
One more person engaging this issue takes me one step closer to riding Paradise...  

And who knows...  maybe these new guys CAN add something to the discussion?  I'm not the kind of person that thinks just because something has been discussed over and over again that there still isn't something new to add...


----------



## Big Game (Oct 26, 2006)

Mad Skier said:


> The mountain is privately owned(by the shareholders) and they voted overwhelmingly not to allow snowboarders..



The mountain is owned by private individuals (as opposed to any public or quasi-public agency), but from my understanding it is a publicly held company. Confused? A publicly held company can be held by any member of the public willing to pony up the dough. But a privately held company means that the shares can not be publicly traded. 

A  publicly held company should be able to do what they want, provided it:

(1) doesn't break the law
(2) has the shareholders' best interest and doesn't make arbitrary business decisions.

Now is MRG breaking the law? I don't think so.
So does MRG have the shareholder's best interest? Depends. Is profitability the main goal? OR is it something else? (If it is something else what is it? How do you quantify/qualify it?) Or does decreasing profitability increase the odds that MRG will eventually fold or is at least more at risk for it? 

The point being that if one shareholder does not believe the board (or whoever the controlling body is) is acting in the best interests of the shareholders, that shareholder could bring a derivitive action against MRG. Such a suit would likley be crippling to MRG and liklely, force them to change thier ways. But then, for a shareholder to find a firm willing to bring a SD action against MRG is unlikely --- securities law firms get paid for their work not as a percentage of the award, but rather a straight hourly rate ultimately paid by the company. And because MRG doesn't have the deepest pockets in the world, there is not too much certainly that the securities litigation firm would get paid, thus the case would not be terribly attractive to them. 

In conclusion, unless a shareholder of MRG has deep pockets and is willing to pony up the dough to bring such a suit (and deal with subsequent unpopularity), the status quo will remain. Skiers at MRG will remain as righteous and lily white as the Lord Almighty has made them. Snowboarders will fume impotently.

Of course, what I don't know can fill books and I got a huge library. Anyone with more knowledge, lay it on me.


----------



## Greg (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> All I'm saying is...
> 
> If someone new joins the debate - then I will persue the debate...
> One more person engaging this issue takes me one step closer to riding Paradise...
> ...



Good points. :beer:

Carry on.


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Fair...I agree the learning curve for skiing is much tougher than snowboarding, at least that's what I understand. You're really just agreeing with me anyway because I don't agree that snowboarders cause all of the problems at ski areas people like to think they do.



No, i am really just throwing a jab at snowboarding, insinuating that any old schmuck can ride a snowboard.  Real men ski.

WAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!  I'm just kidding.  It's all good any which way you want to get down the mountain.  

I've never been to MRG, so i don't think its appropriate for me to comment on whether snowboading should be allowed there or not.  I will say this though, that the other place that i know of that doesn't allow riders is Alta (i hold that place very dear to my heart).  IMO, its logical not to allow snowboarders there for this reason; there are a ton a traverses to get to all the goods they have to offer and snowboarders would have a hell of a time getting across those traverses and would most likely cause major backlogs.


----------



## FRITOLAYGUY (Oct 26, 2006)

Uggg rules are rules, they are not saying you cant ride the mountain, just not with certain equipment, there are rules like this in everyday life that you deal with im sure.. You cant take your Rig on a Parkway, but you can take a car "a different piece of equipment" on it if you really wanna drive on it right?  Same thing, stop trying to beat the system.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> No, i am really just throwing a jab at snowboarding, insinuating that any old schmuck can ride a snowboard. Real men ski.
> 
> WAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! I'm just kidding. It's all good any which way you want to get down the mountain.
> 
> I've never been to MRG, so i don't think its appropriate for me to comment on whether snowboading should be allowed there or not. I will say this though, that the other place that i know of that doesn't allow riders is Alta (i hold that place very dear to my heart). IMO, its logical not to allow snowboarders there for this reason; there are a ton a traverses to get to all the goods they have to offer and snowboarders would have a hell of a time getting across those traverses and would most likely cause major backlogs.


 
Taos does not allow snowboarding as well, and to be fair to DMC and other riders I would like to experience any difference that such a ban would have on my resort experience.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> I've never been to MRG, so i don't think its appropriate for me to comment on whether snowboading should be allowed there or not.  I will say this though, that the other place that i know of that doesn't allow riders is Alta (i hold that place very dear to my heart).  IMO, its logical not to allow snowboarders there for this reason; there are a ton a traverses to get to all the goods they have to offer and snowboarders would have a hell of a time getting across those traverses and would most likely cause major backlogs.



The traverse issue isn't a big one at MRG, certainly not like it is at Alta.

Besides, that's what splitboards are for.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

OK Guys get over it  you can't board at MRG its life it seems you have one choice buy it.
As long as the owners are happy with the way its running they won't change it. So either buy it or get over it THE END

MRS LOAFER


----------



## WWF-VT (Oct 26, 2006)

See the Sep 15, 2006 Press Release from Mad River Glen here:

http://www.madriverglen.com/press/Media_Kit/?Page=snowboard.html



....."Whatever the reason, it is unlikely that there will be snowboarding at Mad River Glen any time soon. The only way the policy can change is if a two-thirds majority of the shareholders vote to change it. Don’t hold your breath!..."


----------



## wintersyndrome (Oct 26, 2006)

my thoughts

See also Dr. Suess "Star Belly Sneetches"

In the end we're all trying to do the same thing down the same mountain..thats it

imagine if steel edges received as much flack from the industry "purists" when they were introduced 

or if it was like Dana Carvey's Grumpy old man Segment 
"In my day we didnt use fancy skiing devices...
We Strapped dead people to our feet cause they were the stiffest and fly down the moutains sayin 'look at me Im skiing on dead people!!' "


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> OK Guys get over it  you can't board at MRG its life it seems you have one choice buy it.
> As long as the owners are happy with the way its running they won't change it. So either buy it or get over it THE END
> 
> MRS LOAFER



No... i won't get over it...
*THE END!!!!*


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

WWF-VT said:


> See the Sep 16, 2006 Press Relase from MRG here:
> 
> http://www.madriverglen.com/press/Media_Kit/?Page=snowboard.html
> 
> .....Whatever the reason, it is unlikely that there will be snowboarding at Mad River Glen any time soon. The only way the policy can change is if a two-thirds majority of the shareholders vote to change it. Don’t hold your breath!



That is why when i have an oppurtunity to bring someone into the debate...
I do it...

Baby steps to Paradise!!!!!!


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> Taos does not allow snowboarding as well, and to be fair to DMC and other riders I would like to experience any difference that such a ban would have on my resort experience.




???????????????????


----------



## andyzee (Oct 26, 2006)

I would like to join this discussion by saying that I have no opinion on the subject. I can however understand where others may have a very strong opinion. Now that I have gotten that off my chest I feel much better, carry on.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> ???????????????????


 

Why do Alta, Taos and Deer Valley ban snowboarding. Is it a snow surface concern, lift issue, etc. This is what I mean, what would be the difference. I wanted to go to Taos this winter, but it looked hard to get to, $$$$$, and snowfall is scetchy and not the ideal place to ski with a 7 year old.

I have been reading through alot of website content about why snowboarding was banned in alot of places early on. Alot of it was due to an improper misconception of snowboarding and its effect on the skier/snow surface interaction.

Alot of my bias torwards snowboarding comes from other fellow skiers, alot of them old school, perhaps we are wrong?


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> No... i won't get over it...
> *THE END!!!!*


SUCK IT UP AND QUIT B!TCHING OR BUY STOCK AND CHANGE IT

MRS LOAFER


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Oct 26, 2006)

I know the mods have a job to do when the thread turns nasty but I don't think this is the case here. As long as the discussion is civil this is what these forums are about and should be allowed to continue.

I know several MRG members and while the public reasons are snow/conditions related as to why they ban riders,  I think many of us know it's more of a social stereotype homophobic thing. People are afraid of things they don't understand. Not too cool but that's the way it is. 

I wish someone would start a snowboard only ski hill but with so many ski friendly resorts I doubt skiers would care but I still think it would be cool. 






I remember this report when it came out in 1985. As you can see this subject has been around for many years. Has the overall attitude improved, I think it has but that's just me. If I wasn't such a whoose I would give it a try. Looks like fun.
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDCC-1-41-1727-11917/sports/extreme_sports/


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

ski_resort_observer said:


> I wish someone would start a snowboard only ski hill but with so many ski friendly resorts I doubt skiers would care but I still think it would be cool.


 

I think that there is a mountain close to Denver that is in effect mostly for snowboarders. I believe it was closed down for a long time and now reopened as a predominantly snowboard oriented place. I hope to see/ski this place in February.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> SUCK IT UP AND QUIT B!TCHING OR BUY STOCK AND CHANGE IT
> 
> MRS LOAFER



Ummm...  thats why it's important to engage each and every person new to the debate.. I can't do this alone..  It's going to take a bcunch of us to change your little world...

SO YOU SUCK IT UP YOURSELF!!!! 
CAUSE I AINT GOING ANYWHERE!!!!!!

WOOOO HOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> Alot of my bias torwards snowboarding comes from other fellow skiers, alot of them old school, perhaps we are wrong?




I'm an Old school skier...  
But I have an open mind..


----------



## mountaindude (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> So what??? why does this bug people so much???
> It's obvious that we snowboarders are pissed about it and it's a big issue...
> Should we just leave and start our own board?  Would that make you happy?



bye


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

mountaindude said:


> bye



Thank you for making me remember why I fight this battle...


----------



## Rushski (Oct 26, 2006)

Many good (and some not-so good) points brought up.

True there is disdain from group to group on the slopes.  And it goes in all directions (though snowboarders take the lionshare).  Also, everyone thinks their sport is supreme and everyone elses' pursuits are sacrilege.

BUT, I personally don't see a problem with an area for only skiing.  It wouldn't bother me if a mountain or two went board only.  I equate the argument to a men's club being chastised for not allowing women.

Don't want to get in the middle of everything, just my .02...


----------



## eatskisleep (Oct 26, 2006)

SnowRider said:


> Look it it from our perscective. Imagine not being able to go to what is known as a very fun mountain because you ride this funny contraption with only one ski.


Actually I do belive the monoski is allowed at MRG. Just not the snowboard... but imagine this, it is known as a very fun mountain becasue snowboarders aren't there. The moguls ARE shaped differently by skiers. I used to ski and snowboard so I ahve nothing against snowboarding, but MRG is a skiers only mountain and that is the way it should be... along with places like Alta.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

Rushski said:


> It wouldn't bother me if a mountain or two went board only.



How would you feel in Jay Peak, Snowbird or some other place you really love became snowboard only?


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

Can we try a different approach? Instead of focusing on why 3 ski areas in the United States don't allow sonwboards, why is it that every other ski area in the country does allow them?

Because when snowboarding started in the 80's, most ski areas didn't allow them. What is it about snowboarding that got the vast majority to change this policy?


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

eatskisleep said:


> Actually I do belive the monoski is allowed at MRG. Just not the snowboard... but imagine this, it is known as a very fun mountain becasue snowboarders aren't there. The moguls ARE shaped differently by skiers. I used to ski and snowboard so I ahve nothing against snowboarding, but MRG is a skiers only mountain and that is the way it should be... along with places like Alta.



Who cares about bumps at a place like MRG????  When I tele or ski there..  I'm in the woods..  And if the woods are too bumped..  It sucks...


----------



## FRITOLAYGUY (Oct 26, 2006)

loafer89 said:


> I think that there is a mountain close to Denver that is in effect mostly for snowboarders. I believe it was closed down for a long time and now reopened as a predominantly snowboard oriented place. I hope to see/ski this place in February.



 I think its called Echo mountain, its only 35miles from Denver but i think its just a huge terrain park.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

Rushski said:


> True there is disdain from group to group on the slopes.  And it goes in all directions (though snowboarders take the lionshare).



Totally agree...snowboarders do take the brunt of the disdain.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Totally agree...snowboarders do take the brunt of the disdain.




And we like it that way...  We're still the rebels...  Although the telemarkers are inching their way in now...


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

eatskisleep said:


> The moguls ARE shaped differently by skiers.



Disagree.

Good skiers make good bump lines...and the same is true for boarders. Good boarders rip in bumps too you know.

Bad skiers and boarders make bad bump lines.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> How would you feel in Jay Peak, Snowbird or some other place you really love became snowboard only?



Every skier here would be pissed as hell.


----------



## eatskisleep (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> Who cares about bumps at a place like MRG???? When I tele or ski there.. I'm in the woods.. And if the woods are too bumped.. It sucks...


 
You know you've got a good point there :lol:


----------



## ctenidae (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Bad skiers and boarders make bad bump lines.



Bad skiers and boarders make bad [insert anything here].


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> And we like it that way...  We're still the rebels...  Although the telemarkers are inching their way in now...



At least boarders still smell better than telemarkers.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Disagree.
> 
> Good skiers make good bump lines...and the same is true for boarders. Good boarders rip in bumps too you know.
> 
> Bad skiers and boarders make bad bump lines.




Bad bump lines were around a long time before snowboards...

And now every yahoo out there on shaped skis thinks they are gods gift to skiing...  They get into the bumps way earlier then they should...


----------



## eatskisleep (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Disagree.
> 
> Good skiers make good bump lines...and the same is true for boarders. Good boarders rip in bumps too you know.
> 
> Bad skiers and boarders make bad bump lines.


True true... I still can belive how good some of the guys on Tele's can rip bumps :blink:  Much respect to those guys!


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> At least boarders still smell better than telemarkers.



I NEVER shower before telemarking...


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

eatskisleep said:


> True true... I still can belive how good some of the guys on Tele's can rip bumps :blink:  Much respect to those guys!



I know a few...pretty amazing I agree.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> I NEVER shower before telemarking...



You're still learning.

Expert tele skiers don't shower after skiing either.


----------



## ctenidae (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> At least boarders still smell better than telemarkers.



Hey! That's usually my comment.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> Hey! That's usually my comment.



I love the bumper K2 telemark sticker...

"If it was easy - they'd call it snowboarding"


i totally agree....


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 26, 2006)

I think I've said this in several of the previous threads, and I guess I'll say it again here:

 - MRG currently is doing fine financially.  The shareholders aren't in it for making money, breaking even is just fine.  They are in it to preserve a piece of New England old school skiing and to most shareholders that doesn't include snowmaking, grooming, detachable lifts, or snowboarders.  You can argue those points, but I don't think you'll change many minds of the people who matter.  So, there is no incentive to change from that side.

 - The "vibe" at the place is somewhat different than most other ski resorts.  It's not just about the terrain or the snow (or at times, lack of snow).  It's mostly the people.  For better or worse, most of the patrons there don't want to add snowboards to the mix.  Note, snowboarders are welcome, just not their boards.  At one point snowboarders could get free or discount alpine ski rentals.  I freely admit that the "vibe" issue is purely subjective, but it exists and is the basis for a lot of peoples' devotion to the place.

 - There are some issues regarding snowboarders derailing the Single.  I'm sure, if there was the desire this technical problem could be fixed.  The confrontation between Betsy and some boarders that precipitated the ban is history, and doesn't really relate to the current ban.  While some folks still use argument about boarders scraping off the snow I don't think that argument has any merit.  There are good and bad skiers and good and bad boarders.  Such is life.

 - Until the composition of the shareholders changes the snowboard ban will not be lifted.  If it was lifted, it would IMO end up hurting MRG in the long run.  The core users would leave for a variety of reasons, and the place just wouldn't attract enough "regular" folks to survive the bad snow times (no snowmaking).

 - You can always hike the mountain, many folks do.  I've seen boarders do so and I haven't seen any abuse from the regulars.  In fact, I'm not sure where people are seeing abusive language directed towards anyone based on what they have on their feet.  I've never seen it at any ski area.  I don't doubt it happens, but I've never encountered it.

 - Getting the general public opposed to the ban isn't likely to have any effect.  MRG doesn't really attract the general public (slow lifts, no lodging, no snowmaking, little grooming) so there's no reason for the shareholders to listen to them.  They listen to the people who ski there often and those who have bought shares.  Until the day comes when they are in financial trouble I don't see this changing.  It may happen someday, but MRG is in good shape now so this won't put any pressure on the mountain.

 So, I applaud people feeling passionate about this issue.  I just don't see any reason for the shareholders to lift the ban and lots of reasons for them not to.  I've snowboarded once, and I'd like to do it some more, but I don't expect to ever ride the lifts at MRG on a board.

 -dave-


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> How would you feel in Jay Peak, Snowbird or some other place you really love became snowboard only?



thats different b/c skiers have already had a taste of those mountains.  And both Jay and the bird rock.

It'd be like if Big Jay opened up as a snowboard only mountain.


----------



## eatskisleep (Oct 26, 2006)

Okay, but one thing that does annoy me about snowboarders (and I don't recall doing this when I used to snowboard) is when they slam their boards down on the ground in the lift-line making a loud "bang" noise. Now some may argue that this is to clear the snow off their board, but when their is no snow to be cleared off this is obviously not the case f what is going on.


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> thats different b/c skiers have already had a taste of those mountains.  And both Jay and the bird rock.
> 
> It'd be like if Big Jay opened up as a snowboard only mountain.



If your bothered if Jay or Snowbird banned two plankers then you should be bothered if a resort/hill bans snowboarders. Snowboarders DID already have a taste  of MRG as well. You would make a fine politician....lol


----------



## JPop (Oct 26, 2006)

This is stupid. Snowboarders as a whole don't do any more damage. There are as many hack skiers out there as snowboarders. I like skiing and most skiers, but there's like this elitist thread that runs through skiing, and that's what this is about.

Snowboarders shall overcome!!!!


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> thats different b/c skiers have already had a taste of those mountains.  And both Jay and the bird rock.



I take from this the impression that you think snowboarders have no reason to be upset that they can't ride at MRG because they have never been allowed to.

I don't buy that argument. That's like telling a poor person they have no right to want money because they've never had any.

If anything, never having the chance to try a mountain would piss me off more, not less.


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

ski_resort_observer said:


> If your bothered if Jay or Snowbird banned two plankers then you should be bothered if a resort/hill bans snowboarders. Snowboarders DID already have a taste  of MRG as well. You would make a fine politician....lol



I wasn't counting those early boarders at MRG. Alta has never allowed boarders.  No boarder can really say what it is like to ride at MRG or Alta.  If they banned Jay to skiers, tons of people would know what it was like to ski Jay.  Get my point?

I'm running for office in 08


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

JimG. said:


> I take from this the impression that you think snowboarders have no reason to be upset that they can't ride at MRG because they have never been allowed to.
> 
> I don't buy that argument. That's like telling a poor person they have no right to want money because they've never had any.
> 
> If anything, never having the chance to try a mountain would piss me off more, not less.



My point is that comparing banning skiers from mountains they have skiied for years to boarders being banned from mountains they have never been allowed to ride is apples and oranges.  DMC was trying to compare what it would be like to be banned from a mountain like the boaders are(i think), well like i said earlier, it would be like being banned from a new mountain that skiers have never skiied before.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> My point is that comparing banning skiers from mountains they have skiied for years to boarders being banned from mountains they have never been allowed to ride in apples and oranges.  DMC was trying to compare what it would be like to be banned from a mountain like the boaders are(i think), well like i said early, it would be like being banned from a new mountain that skiers have never skiied before.



I understand, but still disagree.

You call it comparing apples to oranges; to me it's just splitting hairs.

To me the ban itself is the whole issue; whether or not you ever got to taste the forbidden fruit is irrelevant.

You've got my vote though.


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> My point is that comparing banning skiers from mountains they have skiied for years to boarders being banned from mountains they have never been allowed to ride in apples and oranges.  DMC was trying to compare what it would be like to be banned from a mountain like the boaders are(i think), well like i said early, it would be like being banned from a new mountain that skiers have never skiied before.


I'm a supporter of the ban but even I think this argument is without value.

If Jay Peak (my other favorite mountain) banned tele skiers I'd be mad for a while, I'd skin up (like I occasionally do now), I'd spend more time at MRG or another northern VT mountain such as Smuggs or Stowe.  Such is life.  I might work to convince Jay to change their policy, but if I understood the reasoning and accepted that the powers that be have no reason to change, I'd move on.

 -dave-


----------



## wintersyndrome (Oct 26, 2006)

> Can we try a different approach? Instead of focusing on why 3 ski areas in the United States don't allow sonwboards, why is it that every other ski area in the country does allow them?
> 
> Because when snowboarding started in the 80's, most ski areas didn't allow them. What is it about snowboarding that got the vast majority to change this policy?



Snowboarding evolved from in the 60s and 70 with snurfer. 
I think Burton "invented" his snowboard in 74 or 75 (dont quote me on those years)
Stratton was the first to allow snowboarding (1983) 

What is it about snowboarding that got the vast majority to change this policy? 
Snowboarding brings in more money.

What it was about snowboarding is that when it hit the slopes, The popularity of it surged quicker than any change within the history of the ski industry. 
(except perhaps the invention of the chairlift-though that could also be argued)
The mountains who opened themselves up to snowboarding saw the potential untapped market for increased revenue for their mountain ops.

The Demographic was key, young Males (teens and twenties) with disposable income.
So when these mountians reported skier visits nearly doubling from the years before snowboarding was allowed, every other mountain wiped the crust from their eyes and opened their piggy banks because snowboarding changed snow-sports drastically.  

Dynamically snowboarding has a sharper learning curve than skiing, so those who tried were able to pick it up pretty well within the first season (and the gifted ones were linking turns on their first day out) as opposed to the learning curve with skiing.  So those new to the sport were hooked quicker, and increasing visits to the mountains.  

The shape of snowboards has also helped skiers through the advent of parabolic skis, though there are many who will detest that statement, I ask how long would skiers still be skiing on straight skis if not for snowboarding?  

<rant>Avoiding progress at the attempt to remember the "good ol' days" is as senseless as commuting on horse and buggy and typing with a typewriter.

So IF MRG really wants to hold onto classic skiing (as is the "reasoning" for the snowboard ban) I say, lace up yor leather boots, strap into your leather strap bindings on your 15' wooden skis (with matching leather tethers) , grab your single balance pole skin those puppies up and and hike to the top, oh make sure you leave your duo-folds, hot chillys, high-impact helmets, polarized bolle goggles, gore-tex gloves and battery-powered boot warmers at home we wouldnt want any technological advancements ruining the classic vibe here at this is classic mountain.</rant>

(holy crap the idiot has a point) :blink:


----------



## SnowRider (Oct 26, 2006)

I just returned from school...when i left 2 pages. WOW Might as well get going...



> snowboarders destroy some of the narrow trails at Sugarloaf by side slipping down them.



There is this thing in skiing called a "pizza wedge" that screws up trails just as much as a "falling leaf"



> There are good and bad skiers and good and bad boarders. Such is life.



Well put...that is one thing we are trying to get across to people.

Another thing is this. You are a snowboarder. Just an everyday snowboarder. You are looking for a place to go. Will you go to the place with 20 trails or whatever and one single of the 200 trails and 10 lifts. If I talked about MRG to most of the snowboarders in my school they would be like "ya well i did Smith Walton at Wachusett" The point Im saying is I belive you will only get rue snowboarders here. Not posers.


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

David Metsky said:


> I'm a supporter of the ban but even I think this argument is without value.
> 
> If Jay Peak (my other favorite mountain) banned tele skiers I'd be mad for a while, I'd skin up (like I occasionally do now), I'd spend more time at MRG or another northern VT mountain such as Smuggs or Stowe.  Such is life.  I might work to convince Jay to change their policy, but if I understood the reasoning and accepted that the powers that be have no reason to change, I'd move on.
> 
> -dave-



I'm not arguing that snowboarders should be banned from MRG because they have never riden there.  Really, i could care less.  I was just correcting DMC on his comparision...trying to make it more apples to apples.


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> I wasn't counting those early boarders at MRG. Alta has never allowed boarders.  No boarder can really say what it is like to ride at MRG or Alta.  If they banned Jay to skiers, tons of people would know what it was like to ski Jay.  Get my point?
> 
> I'm running for office in 08



I got your point the first time. When it comes to banning snowboarders from a ski hill, that's ok but if your talking about banning skiers, that's not cool at all. :wink:


----------



## SnowRider (Oct 26, 2006)

Do you wanna know why Sugarbush (or Sugarloaf I forget which one) lifted there ban back in the day. Todd Richards in a pro snowber and a true rider from Paxton MA. One day while in his 20's or 30's he was surfing and he met the owner of Sugarbush on the beach. Todd taught him how to surf and the man noticed there is nothing wrong with snowboarders. That winter riders were there shredding it up. Wanna know how I know this? Todd Richards Biography! P3 Parks, Pipe, Powder. GET THE BOOK It will give you so much more of an perspective in what snowbers had to go through to gain the respect. To know that there are still mountains out there that wont let us in.....its just un american.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

wintersyndrome said:


> Simple snowboarding bring in more money.
> 
> What it was about snowboarding is that when it hit the slopes, The popularity of it surged quicker than any change within the history of the ski industry.
> (except perhapsthe invention of the chairlift-though that could also be argued)
> ...



Excellent response!


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

ski_resort_observer said:


> I got your point the first time. When it comes to banning snowboarders from a ski hill, that's ok but if your talking about banning skiers, that's not cool at all. :wink:



I didn't say banning snowboarders was okay.  All i've said about it really is that boarders would have a hell of a time getting around at Alta.  Maybe a new mountain should open up for boarders only, i seriously doubt it would bother me too much.  I guess i wouldn't know until i was on that side of the argument.


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 26, 2006)

I say we have an AZ snowboard hike/gettogether at MRG, hike the bastard, ride down and stake our claim.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Oct 26, 2006)

AdironRider said:


> I say we have an AZ snowboard hike/gettogether at MRG, hike the bastard, ride down and stake our claim.



U a rebel with a cause.


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 26, 2006)

wintersyndrome said:


> What is it about snowboarding that got the vast majority to change this policy?
> Snowboarding brings in more money.


But it's not about money.  MRG doesn't need to make more money, they are doing just fine.  It could be a problem in the future but it isn't a problem now.  And I think you could make a strong argument that snowboards at MRG would be a net money loser, as you'd lose some of the core skiers that keep MRG going in good years and bad and then the place would be in trouble.



> <rant>Avoiding progress at the attempt to remember the "good ol' days" is as senseless as commuting on horse and buggy and typing with a typewriter.
> ...
> (holy crap the idiot has a point) :blink:


I think this line of argument has some merit, but not enough. 8) For whatever reason, the lines have been drawn where they are drawn (snowmaking, grooming, lifts, snowboards).  All else is fair game.  But you do see a higher percentage of old alpine skis, old school tele's with leather boots, and wool at MRG than you do at other ski areas. 

 -dave-


----------



## ctenidae (Oct 26, 2006)

Business decision
Business decision
Business decision.

If you're a boarder who wants to go to MRG, buy a share or get some skis. If you're a skier who wants MRG to allow boards, buy a share or don't go there, and tell them why.

I don't think there's a MRG-wide ethics question here. The majority of shareholders, for each one's own individual reason, has voted to uphold the ban. We can argue each point until we're blue in the face, but we'll still all be wrong. 

I'll guarantee this, though- any mountain that banned skiers wouldn't last long enough to generate a single thread about it. Boarders may be the fastest growing segment, but they're still a minority. MRG doesn't see profits from boarders sufficient enough to overcome each individual shareholder's reason for upholding the ban. That's it. One day the profits will be greater than the perceived costs, and the ban will go away. Until that time, get me my horse and a stick.


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

David Metsky said:


> I'm a supporter of the ban but even I think this argument is without value.
> 
> If Jay Peak (my other favorite mountain) banned tele skiers I'd be mad for a while, I'd skin up (like I occasionally do now), I'd spend more time at MRG or another northern VT mountain such as Smuggs or Stowe.  Such is life.  I might work to convince Jay to change their policy, but if I understood the reasoning and accepted that the powers that be have no reason to change, I'd move on.
> 
> -dave-



It wasn't an argument for or against snowboarding at MRG or elsewhere.  Where's my argument for or against???? It was just a correction on a comparision, thats all.


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 26, 2006)

AdironRider said:


> I say we have an AZ snowboard hike/gettogether at MRG, hike the bastard, ride down and stake our claim.


I don't think you'd get any flack if you did that.  Fine by me, anyone who wants to hike the place is more than welcome  Drive up to the top of Lincoln Gap to gain and take the LT south, that's the quickest way.  

I'm not sure what it would prove, but more power to ya.

 -dave-


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

David Metsky said:


> But it's not about money.  MRG doesn't need to make more money, they are doing just fine.  It could be a problem in the future but it isn't a problem now.  And I think you could make a strong argument that snowboards at MRG would be a net money loser, as you'd lose some of the core skiers that keep MRG going in good years and bad and then the place would be in trouble.
> 
> 
> I think this line of argument has some merit, but not enough. 8) For whatever reason, the lines have been drawn where they are drawn (snowmaking, grooming, lifts, snowboards).  All else is fair game.  But you do see a higher percentage of old alpine skis, old school tele's with leather boots, and wool at MRG than you do at other ski areas.
> ...



Both points are very true. MRG is not subject to the market forces that other ski areas are subject to because of its' unique ownership situation.

And I personally love stepping back in time and looking at all the old equipment and clothes I see there when I ski there.


----------



## Big Game (Oct 26, 2006)

David Metsky said:


> I'm a supporter of the ban



That hurts man. Think about who you're hurting.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> thats different b/c skiers have already had a taste of those mountains.  And both Jay and the bird rock.
> 
> It'd be like if Big Jay opened up as a snowboard only mountain.




I've skied Alta and MRG...  I know what I'm missing...


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Oct 26, 2006)

David Metsky said:


> I don't think you'd get any flack if you did that.  Fine by me, anyone who wants to hike the place is more than welcome  Drive up to the top of Lincoln Gap to gain and take the LT south, that's the quickest way.
> I'm not sure what it would prove, but more power to ya.
> -dave-



Actually, driving up to App Gap which is open and MRG is right there rather than driving up to a closed Lincoln Gap road 8 miles away, would be a better choice. 3/4 of the ways up the gap one of MRG's lifts top out right at the road, you could ride down, no hiking required. You wouldn't be the first nor the last.


----------



## Birdman829 (Oct 26, 2006)

I don't agree with their ban of snowboards but I will defend to my death their right to ban them! Seriously though, I don't think its very reasonable but it doesn't effect me and there's nothing I can really do about it.


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 26, 2006)

ski_resort_observer said:


> Actually, driving up to App Gap which is open and MRG is right there rather than driving up to a closed Lincoln Gap road 8 miles away, would be a better choice. 3/4 of the ways up the gap one of MRG's lifts top out right at the road, you could ride down, no hiking required. You wouldn't be the first nor the last.


My bad, I got them reversed.  I meant App Gap.  That lift by the road is the practice slope, it's not very much vertical and the terrain is nothing special.  To get to the top of the double requires some hiking.  To get to the top of the single or Paradise requires a bit more hiking.  You can also take the snowshoe trail up from the base, but I think the LT is quicker.

 -dave-


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> I've skied Alta and MRG...  I know what I'm missing...



But i would venture to say most boarders don't.


----------



## dmc (Oct 26, 2006)

nhski said:


> But i would venture to say most boarders don't.



I'm not like most people...    I was a pretty decent skier back in the day(80's-90's) - skied Alta and MRG...    kinda pictured myself as a Scott Schmit kinda extreme skier with the K2 TNCs or Extremes.....  And now I'm taking up telemark skiing for the hell of it...

But that makes me more dangerous to the anti-snowboard crew... Because I KNOW what I'm missing and I communicate it to noobs...


----------



## nhski (Oct 26, 2006)

I've never skiied MRG, and love skiing jay

would it suck if all of a sudden MRG became a snowboard only moutiain....yes
would it suck even more if Jay suddenly bacame a snowboard only mountain...i think so

that was my only point.  I won't waste any more thread space trying to make it.


----------



## loafer89 (Oct 26, 2006)

My best friend and skiing buddy tried snowboarding at Solitude two years back. He had fun, but he said he liked skiing better and he was been a skier for almost 15 years. My son has not expressed any interest in snowboarding as of yet, but I have no problem if he decides to snowboard as long as he sticks to some kind of outdoor sport to keep him away from things he should not be doing when he becomes a teenager. So far the people that I have met in person from AZ have been skiers, but this is more from chance than anything else.


----------



## Greg (Oct 26, 2006)

dmc said:


> I'm not like most people...    I was a pretty decent skier back in the day(80's-90's) - skied Alta and MRG...    kinda pictured myself as a Scott Schmit kinda extreme skier with the K2 TNCs or Extremes.....



D - you gotta repost that pic of you from Hunter in the 80's where your leg/knee is doing that funky shit and you have that big smile on your face. That pic is classic! :lol:


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> D - you gotta repost that pic of you from Hunter in the 80's where your leg/knee is doing that funky shit and you have that big smile on your face. That pic is classic! :lol:



We didn't take skiing as seriuosly then as people do now...


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> We didn't take skiing as seriuosly then as people do now...



Come on - you gotta post it. That pic is hilarious!


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 27, 2006)

Tricky topic eh?
It's too bad that you can make all the sense in the world and it still won't matter. It really is too bad. I'm not being sarcastic. You can make the most rational argument there is for why everyone should be able to go down the hill assuming their respectful, regardless of what they have on their feet, but that it won't matter because share holders control the policy. It's too bad that money talks and rational thought can't because some old crusties can't let go of their romanticized view of yesteryear.
If there was something intrinsically inferior about snowboarding, something that made snowboarding completely unsafe for everyone on the mountain, it would be a different story. But as people have mentioned before, it is entirely up to the individual. There are irresponsible skiers and riders. I personally think that anyone should be able to enjoy their ride down the hill assuming they are respecting the fact that they are using a common playground. I ski/tele-ski but have many respectful rider friends. It's doubtful that MRG would get an influx of the kind of riders the old crusties would be scared of. They'd see a handful of powder hounds. But it comes back to the share holder thing....
It was mentioned plenty of times that we are simply grinding our gears at this point. So, what do you do? How do bring it from something that will perpetually generate the same back-and-forth into something where you may actually be able to ride MRG? 
Would leading by example work? For the riders out there...maybe go up to MRG some day with the largest group of respectful boarders as possible, hike up and ride down. Do it often enough, do it respectfully, be diplomatic about it and maybe you'll gain some recognition by some open minded share-holders. (Are there any?)
I don't know how much it costs to be a share holder but maybe if the riders out there rallied enough support from other riders you could at least buy enough shares as a collective organization to have some voting power....
In the mean time, if you're out on the hill, wherever it may be, just remember that there are responsible/respectful people....and there are crazy people with a lotta balls but no skill....both ends of the spectrum appear on all sorts of contraptions.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 27, 2006)

Skibum_dan said:


> I don't know how much it costs to be a share holder but maybe if the riders out there rallied enough support from other riders you could at least buy enough shares as a collective organization to have some voting power....



The price is $1750 per share and each individual is allowed to own a maximum of 4 shares.  Each shareholder is required to spend an "Annual Purchase Requirement" every year, which has been $200 but can go up with inflation.

http://madriverglen.com/coop/?Page=./3faq.htm&dir=.


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

Skibum_dan said:


> It's too bad that money talks and rational thought can't because some old crusties can't let go of their romanticized view of yesteryear.


I do not believe the snowboard ban is at all monetarily influenced. Quite the opposite, I think. Many would argue that disallowing a large percentage of available snow-sliders (snowboards) is not a good financial move. With that said, I do respect the decision of the shareholders to maintain whatever it is they like about MRG. And as shareholders it's their right to do so.

I thought I wasn't going to add anything else here... :blink:, but here goes:

Probably the most common argument against snowboards is snow preservation. A lot of opponents of the ban say that a beginner or intermediate skier scrapes just as much snow off the trail as a beginner or intermediate skier. I just don't buy that. I've often times seen a beginner on a board kick it sideway and just scrape down a steep trail. You simply can't do that on skis, and I don't believe holding a wedge on skis would cause as much damage to the snow surface. That's just my opinion based on observation though.

But let me play devil's advocate. Say that only advanced or expert riders ended up at MRG. Would the surface on the open trails be any different? Would the bumps lines be shaped differently? I would think that lines through the trees wouldn't change much, but I would have to imagine the bumps would suffer. No? I'm not trying to debate whether the ban is moral or not, whether it could be classified as discrimination or not, or any of that. What I'm trying to do is see if there might be some validity to the argument that the ban is at least partially based on snow surface preservation.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> Probably the most common argument against snowboards is snow preservation. A lot of opponents of the ban say that a beginner or intermediate skier scrapes just as much snow off the trail as a beginner or intermediate skier. I just don't buy that. I've often times seen a beginner on a board kick it sideway and just scrape down a steep trail. You simply can't do that on skis, and I don't believe holding a wedge on skis would cause as much damage to the snow surface. That's just my opinion based on observation though.
> 
> But let me play devil's advocate. Say that only advanced or expert riders ended up at MRG. Would the surface on the open trails be any different? Would the bumps lines be shaped differently? I would think that lines through the trees wouldn't change much, but I would have to imagine the bumps would suffer. No? I'm not trying to debate whether the ban is moral or not, whether it could be classified as discrimination or not, or any of that. What I'm trying to do is see if there might be some validity to the argument that the ban is at least partially based on snow surface preservation.



Paragraph 1: Just not true. I've seen plenty of sideways action on skis as well as snowboards, and anyway that power wedge you describe is akin to driving a snowplow down the hill with the plow down.

Paragraph 2: Good skiers make good bump lines; same for snowboards.

                    Bad skiers make bad bump lines; same for snowboards.

This snow preservation argument does not hold water.


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> But let me play devil's advocate. Say that only advanced or expert riders ended up at MRG. Would the surface on the open trails be any different? Would the bumps lines be shaped differently? I would think that lines through the trees wouldn't change much, but I would have to imagine the bumps would suffer. No? I'm not trying to debate whether the ban is moral or not, whether it could be classified as discrimination or not, or any of that. What I'm trying to do is see if there might be some validity to the argument that the ban is at least partially based on snow surface preservation.




From what i've seen at MRG... Remember I tele there every year...

I've been on scraped off trails and no snowboarders in sight... 
I've also gotten hit by skiers there too...  

This "expert" rider will not involve himself with bumps at MRG...  MRG is not a place I'd go to for bumps...   I'd be in the woods the entire time...


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Paragraph 1: Just not true. I've seen plenty of sideways action on skis as well as snowboards, and anyway that power wedge you describe is akin to driving a snowplow down the hill with the plow down.


So your feeling is a wedge on skis (maybe 45 degree to the fall line) is as distruptive to the surface as a constant scrape completely perpendicular to the fall line? I'm not a physics guy, but that doesn't seem to make sense to me. And again, based on my observations, a snowboarder scraping down a run pushes a lot more snow down the slope than does a skier in a wedge where the snow seems more evenly distributed as they descend.



JimG. said:


> Paragraph 2: Good skiers make good bump lines; same for snowboards.
> 
> Bad skiers make bad bump lines; same for snowboards.


That wasn't my question. If snowboards were allowed at MRG, would the lines change at all?



JimG. said:


> This snow preservation argument does not hold water.


I still think there is at least some validity to it.


----------



## MarkC (Oct 27, 2006)

How many beginner and intermediate skiers frequent MRG?  From my recollection of when I was a skier there are not many.  If the ban were to be lifted you could expect the same from snowboarders.  Granted you are going to get a few "Hey Vinny I'm doin it" a@s holes but for the most part you would get advanced riders looking to enjoy the trees and fresh natural.  My vision of MRG is a mecca for advanced snow sliders who prefer the old school.  It shouldn't matter what your feet are strapped to as long as you feel your mind and worship the snow gods.


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> I've been on scraped off trails and no snowboarders in sight...


Fair enough.



dmc said:


> I've also gotten hit by skiers there too...


I'm not making any point to the contrary.



dmc said:


> This "expert" rider will not involve himself with bumps at MRG...  MRG is not a place I'd go to for bumps...   I'd be in the woods the entire time...


I see your point, but there would inherently be a lot of boarders on the open runs if allowed.


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> So your feeling is a wedge on skis (maybe 45 degree to the fall line) is as distruptive to the surface as a constant scrape completely perpendicular to the fall line? I'm not a physics guy, but that doesn't seem to make sense to me. And again, based on my observations, a snowboarder scraping down a run pushes a lot more snow down the slope than does a skier in a wedge where the snow seems more evenly distributed as they descend.



Bad skiers also scrape snow with skis parallel but across the falline - especially on harder terrain......  Skis are longer then snowboards and also have two edges involved in the scraping process...  First edge scrapes the surface second edge digs deeper...  And skis edge MUCH better the snowboard...  So more power is sent to the "scrape"....

As shonw at MRG where I've encounter scraped off snow...


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

MarkC said:


> How many beginner and intermediate skiers frequent MRG?  From my recollection of when I was a skier there are not many.  If the ban were to be lifted you could expect the same from snowboarders.


I will give you that. You're probably right.

Welcome to AZ!


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> I see your point, but there would inherently be a lot of boarders on the open runs if allowed.



but they won't bug you... Cause you'll be in the trees...  Let the beginners scrape their way down the trails..  MRG is for woods and rocks and cliffs and waterfalls...

i think if MRG did open to riders there would be an initial rush to go and then riders would realize that it takes certain skillz to enjoy MRG and they just don't have them.. 
And then it would mellow out...


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 27, 2006)

Ha. "Hey Vinny!"......I love it.

I hear ya Mark.


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> Bad skiers also scrape snow with skis parallel but across the falline - especially on harder terrain......  Skis are longer then snowboards and also have two edges involved in the scraping process...  First edge scrapes the surface second edge digs deeper...  And skis edge MUCH better the snowboard...  So more power is sent to the "scrape"....
> 
> As shonw at MRG where I've encounter scraped off snow...



Good points. I think those cases of skiers going perpendicular to the fall line probably happens most often with lower intermediates. Those that are beyond a wedge, but haven't gotten consistent turning on steeper stuff down yet.

Again, good arguments and a good discussion.
:beer:


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> I'm not making any point to the contrary.



Just pointing out that the very things that snowboarders constantly get accused of doing actually happens at MRG...

i tend to think that intermediates like to blame SOMETHING for their lack of skillz and having a crappy day..   So they take the easiest and most popular attack to save face....
it's the machismo of the sport...


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> Good points. I think those cases of skiers going perpendicular to the fall line probably happens most often with lower intermediates. Those that are beyond a wedge, but haven't gotten consistent turning on steeper stuff down yet.
> 
> Again, good arguments and a good discussion.
> :beer:



It's called sideslipping...  And intermediates(riders and skiers) will fall back on it when in a jam.  It really pisses us off at Tuckermans...  Cause all kinda problems on steep terrain...


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> but they won't bug you... Cause you'll be in the trees...  Let the beginners scrape their way down the trails..  MRG is for woods and rocks and cliffs and waterfalls...


I'm actually not  big tree skier yet. I dabble, but I really want to hone my bumping skills first. I expect more tree runs this season though.


----------



## tree_skier (Oct 27, 2006)

go away for aday and i miss 16 pages of ---- where did I put that dead horse.

Anyways what I want to know is why I can't ride my goped on the streets of vermont?  I pay my taxes (far too many taxes) it's discrimination I say.


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

MarkC said:


> My vision of MRG is a mecca for advanced snow sliders who prefer the old school.  It shouldn't matter what your feet are strapped to as long as you feel your mind and worship the snow gods.



The terrain there will weed out the gapers...


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

tree_skier said:


> go away for aday and i miss 16 pages of ---- where did I put that dead horse.



So just ignore it...    wtf?

why do people get so "Beat a dead horse" about this issue...??

I think this has been a great thread...


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 27, 2006)

I don't think the "boarders will scrape off all the snow" argument holds any water, but I also don't think it's a factor in the ban.  It's cited by some, but not most of the shareholders who like things the way they are.  That may have been involved in starting the ban but it is not what is perpetuating it.

IMO, there isn't a rational snow quality basis for the ban, it's all gut feel, the desire to be different, and hold onto a feeling.    Part of what makes MRG possible in the current economic world is the fierce loyalty to the place by people willing to put their money in play, year after year.  Any change that would cause people to lose that loyalty would kill the place.  For better or worse, many shareholders hold on to that feeling.

If MRG was like every other ski area in VT it would go out of business.  In order to differentiate it from the others they do things differently.  That includes slow lifts, no snowmaking, minimal grooming, and, yes, no snowboards.  You could make good logical arguments to change any of those but I don't think logical arguments matter.  It's emotional, the fierce MRG loyalty, and that's what you have to address.

And frankly, I don't know how you'd change that attitidue in short order.  It's a long term process that may succeed eventually.  Or may never succeed.

 -dave-


----------



## JimG. (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> So your feeling is a wedge on skis (maybe 45 degree to the fall line) is as distruptive to the surface as a constant scrape completely perpendicular to the fall line? I'm not a physics guy, but that doesn't seem to make sense to me. And again, based on my observations, a snowboarder scraping down a run pushes a lot more snow down the slope than does a skier in a wedge where the snow seems more evenly distributed as they descend.



Doug has explained this to you well in his reply...skis are longer than snowboards, 2 edges instead of 1, and plenty of poor skiers do sideslip in a jam...the same reason poor snowboarders sideslip. No difference between the two regarding damage to the snow surface.




			
				Greg said:
			
		

> That wasn't my question. If snowboards were allowed at MRG, would the lines change at all?



Yes it was...MRG's terrain demands good skills. As Doug also mentioned, there would be an initial rush of snowboarders and the good ones who have the skills required to enjoy MRG would be rapidly weeded out. Back to my original answer...good skiers or snowboarders make good bump lines. MRG demands good skills. Therefore, good bump lines. Nothing changes.



			
				Greg said:
			
		

> I still think there is at least some validity to it.



Here we continue to disagree.


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Here we continue to disagree.


Not totally. I'm not too proud to alter my opinion based on some solidly presented points. With that said, I am going to be more aware of watching beginner/intermediate skiers/boarders this season to see what effect they have on the snow surface. It could very well be that boards side-slipping produce a much *louder *scrape, and more attention is given to that as a result...


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> It could very well be that boards side-slipping produce a much *louder *scrape, and more attention is given to that as a result...




DING DING DING... Give that man a cigar...


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> DING DING DING... Give that man a cigar...



See? It's realizations like this that can result when a discussion remains civil and when people on both sides of the debate keep an open mind...


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> See? It's realizations like this that can result when a discussion remains civil and when people on both sides of the debate keep an open mind...



Not a problem here...  

I only push as hard as I get pushed and enjoy a rational discussion...  Otherwise I'm pretty mellow...


----------



## JimG. (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> It could very well be that boards side-slipping produce a much *louder *scrape, and more attention is given to that as a result...



Oh yeah, this is defintely true. The width of a snowboard seems to intensify the scraping noise alot.


----------



## tree_skier (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> So just ignore it...    wtf?
> 
> why do people get so "Beat a dead horse" about this issue...??
> 
> I think this has been a great thread...



Because it is a dead horse and I also find it humorous that pretty much the same people that get all over ASC for the McMountain approach get all over MRG for their niche market appoarch.

For all the griping I hear about this policy there is a way to change it, put you money up for a share and vote for change untill then ...    wtf?


----------



## JimG. (Oct 27, 2006)

tree_skier said:


> Because it is a dead horse and I also find it humorous that pretty much the same people that get all over ASC for the McMountain approach get all over MRG for their niche market appoarch.



I haven't noticed this; I'll keep a closer eye out for it now.  

One thing this skier does notice is that skiers who are loyal to MRG are really defensive about the place. And that's a great thing for MRG. I love the place myself! But we aren't "getting on" MRG for their approach. We're discussing the ban on snowboards. 

I think it worries people that when you really get into this topic, it becomes clear that the very market approach you claim we are getting on really wouldn't change all that much.


----------



## tree_skier (Oct 27, 2006)

JimG. said:


> I think it worries people that when you really get into this topic, it becomes clear that the very market approach you claim we are getting on really wouldn't change all that much.




The market approach of skiers only wouldn't change by allowing snowboarders????

It would take them out of that niche and make them just one of the masses


----------



## Kerovick (Oct 27, 2006)

First off....

I'm a horrible snowboarder (greens, with linked turns.  Blues are instant death to me)
I'm a good Skier and a good skiboarder (never seen a slope I couldn't ski with some sense of style, but of course I've never been out west or to any "real" mountain


I hate the fact that some resorts ban snowboards, I also hate the fact that a couple places have banned Skiboards from there parks. I hate watching bad boarders/skiers scrap the snow off the slopes (especially when it's me that's doing it :cringe.  In a perfect world all mountains would be open to all winter sport sliding type things.  To bad we don't live in a perfect world, huh?  Did this post have a point.  No, and that's ok with me cause it's friday.

Kero


----------



## JimG. (Oct 27, 2006)

tree_skier said:


> The market approach of skiers only wouldn't change by allowing snowboarders????
> 
> It would take them out of that niche and make them just one of the masses



I was referring to the "old school" niche. I know you're going to get on me for that too, that snowboards aren't old school. I'm talking about the vibe. There are snowboarders who are mellow, some of whom started out as skiers years ago.

I believe it is impossible to argue rationally about this with the group who just says "either no snowboards or MRG will suck". 

You need to be more open minded than that.


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

JimG. said:


> I was referring to the "old school" niche. I know you're going to get on me for that too, that snowboards aren't old school. I'm talking about the vibe. There are snowboarders who are mellow, some of whom started out as skiers years ago.
> 
> I believe it is impossible to argue rationally about this with the group who just says "either no snowboards or MRG will suck".
> 
> You need to be more open minded than that.



I think tree_skier meant "niche" in terms of marketing. After all, just look how much staying power this debate has. It is inherently good marketing for MRG - any publicity is good publicity.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 27, 2006)

Greg said:


> I think tree_skier meant "niche" in terms of marketing. After all, just look how much staying power this debate has. It is inherently good marketing for MRG - any publicity is good publicity.



I know that...but MRG has more of a niche than just "no snowboards". How about no snowmaking, no grooming, and no rules about where you can ski (other than that you can't be in the woods after 3pm)? How about no high speed lifts? No triples or quads? 

I'm not debating the staying power of the no snowboard rule, or the benefit of the PR pro or con. But I think if you're going to tell me that the only niche MRG fills is the no snowboard niche then you are really devalueing the other unique features of the place.

What we really have here is a hard core group of skiers who don't want anything to do with snowboards. It's OK, and it is their right as a coop to be that way if they choose, no arguments. But don't dress it up with concerns about niches, PR, and marketing concerns.

They don't want snowboards there and specifically exclude them.


----------



## Greg (Oct 27, 2006)

So essentially the co-op is still thinking the way they did *back in 1985*? That video is a classic! "They're just like a missile!" :lol:


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

tree_skier said:


> For all the griping I hear about this policy there is a way to change it, put you money up for a share and vote for change untill then ...    wtf?



The debate will continue until the day I get banned from this board...

Until then I keep the debate alive..  And when a new voice is added then I advance the debate...   Who knows what will happen... I know that I alone can't change this exclusion but if there's many of us on board and they become part of this debate..  Then MAYBE they can continue it somewhere else in front of a whole new set of people...

Cause for me... The horse is still kickin...

To you - maybe not so alive...  But you got what you want...   I do not...  And I want it..


----------



## wintersyndrome (Oct 27, 2006)

MRG is not going to change, Im fine with that, I can still ride slide-brook.
and its fine that the shareholders want to keep it the way it is, there are many other mountains in VT and my happiness does not hinge on MRG allowing me to snowboard there, I would ski there if I still found skiing as enjoyable as snowboarding, but I do not, (personal taste) so I will snowboard elsewhere.

though here it is from their website The Co-ops Mission



> The Mad River Glen Cooperative was founded to fulfill a simple mission.
> That is…to preserve and protect the forest and mountain ecosystem of Stark Mountain in order to provide skiing and other recreational access and to maintain the unique character of the area for present and future generations.



are snowboards not recreational? 

my horse is dead...does anybody have a pony?


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

tree_skier said:


> The market approach of skiers only wouldn't change by allowing snowboarders????
> 
> It would take them out of that niche and make them just one of the masses




Why do you accuse us of beating a dead horse and then join the debate???

Is there still some life left or do you just like talk out of both sides of your mouth?


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

wintersyndrome said:


> are snowboards not recreational?



Hell yeah!!!  In fact snowboards were created soley for fun... 
Skis were created for tasks like delivering mail and attacking villages in the next valley...



wintersyndrome said:


> my horse is dead...does anybody have a pony?



I have a stable of clydesdales ready for action... :razz:


----------



## Beartrap (Oct 27, 2006)

Waaaaaaaa

At this point who cares? Sounds like a bunch of babies back and forth. I love this board but has any one of the mods heard of the lock thread option.........


----------



## tree_skier (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> Why do you accuse us of beating a dead horse and then join the debate???
> 
> Is there still some life left or do you just like talk out of both sides of your mouth?



Sometimes it's fun to get people going and I have been know to stir the pot at times.

For example  There is no way the lines and snow surface would be the same with boarders and skiers together as they are now.  Just look at your average trail after a foot of new snow and send 10 boarders or 10 skiers down, which trail would you like to be # 11 down?


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Beartrap said:


> Waaaaaaaa
> 
> At this point who cares? Sounds like a bunch of babies back and forth. I love this board but has any one of the mods heard of the lock thread option.........



What the F are you talking about... We're having a good discussion...

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! They're talking about MRG again....
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!   These boarders need to have their thread locked... WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!...


What a joke...


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

tree_skier said:


> Sometimes it's fun to get people going and I have been know to stir the pot at times.
> 
> For example  There is no way the lines and snow surface would be the same with boarders and skiers together as they are now.  Just look at your average trail after a foot of new snow and send 10 boarders or 10 skiers down, which trail would you like to be # 11 down?



If I was on a board I'd pick the skiers trail... Because skiers tend to take different lines..
If i was on skis I'd pick the boarder trail... because boarders tend to take different lines..



I totally take different lines when I ski then when I board or even tele for that matter....


----------



## bvibert (Oct 27, 2006)

Beartrap said:


> Waaaaaaaa
> 
> At this point who cares? Sounds like a bunch of babies back and forth. I love this board but has any one of the mods heard of the lock thread option.........



Uh yes, we've heard of the lock function.  As I stated earlier in this thread I was inclined to lock it when it first appeared because in the past they get really ugly.  I did not in the hopes that the discussion would remain civil, which it has for the most part.  Obviously folks still care otherwise there wouldn't be so many responses to the thread...


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 27, 2006)

Rather than the back-and-forth that is based on preference, (Board vs. Skis) I was kinda hoping for some more feedback on steps a rider might do, other than purchasing shares, to get some voting power/influence those with voting power. This goes back to my pg. 15 post…..
Otherwise we are pretty much arguing over which is better, apples or oranges. 

Apples are a far superior to oranges…don’t you even bring that orange in here!!!
NOOO oranges are my favorite fruit so therefore they are better… ewww ewww..

 I like cars better than trucks.
 Hell no, tucks are sooo much better..


----------



## andyzee (Oct 27, 2006)

If I was a boarder, I would boycott MRG!


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

andyzee said:


> If I was a boarder, I would boycott MRG!



thanks bud! :roll:


----------



## andyzee (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> thanks bud! :roll:


 
Just busting, sorry couldn't help myself. I know your passionate about it and I agree with you.


----------



## Kerovick (Oct 27, 2006)

I'll boycott MRG with ya.  Of course I never had any intention of going there and have no idea where it is.

kero


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc, maybe do something like getting the word out to as many riders you know or even skiers who share your perspective, to chip in and buy as many shares as you can as a big group of riders.....designate a few members as the share holders who will vote(# of peeps depending on how much interest and $$ you are able to raise) I don't know....just trying to innovative. Seems like if you want to see changeyou have to make it happen because the current share holders aren't going to have it.


----------



## dmc (Oct 27, 2006)

Skibum_dan said:


> dmc, maybe do something like getting the word out to as many riders you know or even skiers who share your perspective, to chip in and buy as many shares as you can as a big group of riders.....designate a few members as the share holders who will vote(# of peeps depending on how much interest and $$ you are able to raise) I don't know....just trying to innovative. Seems like if you want to see changeyou have to make it happen because the current share holders aren't going to have it.



I think just contiuing the debate is good for now..  And anytime someone joins it's a win...
Cause you never know what the future holds and it's good for us to have as many people hip to the debate as possible..

I personally don't have the cash to spend on a share..  I only tele there maybe once a year..   If I could snowboard there - I'd get a share....


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 27, 2006)

I haven't been there for a few years but do remember it having pretty sweet natural trails/good woods and can understand why anyone would want to ride there, regardless of their preferred contraption.
Ha....can't you just try to fool the lifties with a split board??


----------



## andyzee (Oct 27, 2006)

dmc said:


> I think just contiuing the debate is good for now.. And anytime someone joins it's a win...
> Cause you never know what the future holds and it's good for us to have as many people hip to the debate as possible..
> 
> I personally don't have the cash to spend on a share.. I only tele there maybe once a year.. If I could snowboard there - I'd get a share....


 

Perhaps start a drive to raise the cash for shares, there's enough boarders out there that would like to see this ban dropped.


----------



## Grassi21 (Oct 27, 2006)

I love how this normally heated topic has taken a turn (ha ha ha) for the better.  Skiers and riders living together... (I love Ghostbusters and Bill Murray).  I think the idea of not allowing snow boarders at MRG isn't cool at all.  I'll sign the petition and donate some funds.


----------



## andyzee (Oct 27, 2006)

Grassi21 said:


> I love how this normally heated topic has taken a turn (ha ha ha) for the better. Skiers and riders living together... (I love Ghostbusters and Bill Murray). I think the idea of not allowing snow boarders at MRG isn't cool at all. I'll sign the petition and donate some funds.


 

Same here.


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 27, 2006)

That would be pretty sweet. 
Tip of the hat to anyone living it up on the hill.....heck even the monoskiers and snow bladers. ha. hmmm yeah sure...why not! 
The whole skiers vs. snowboarding thing is sooo 1990s...
Actually, as a skier I tip my hat to what snowboarding has done for skiing over the past 10 years or so. The mountain culture tends to be a little less stuffy and race-atron-esque as it were, per say, if you will....
Any how, I'm out! It's Friday!


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 27, 2006)

Skibum_dan said:


> Rather than the back-and-forth that is based on preference, (Board vs. Skis) I was kinda hoping for some more feedback on steps a rider might do, other than purchasing shares, to get some voting power/influence those with voting power.


Honestly, I can't think of anything you can do other than to ski at MRG and get to know the shareholders on the slopes.  But the fact is, there's not much to convince them of, they know the facts.  This isn't about facts; it's about intangibles.

Buying shares would be a great start, but there are already shareholders at MRG who already snowboard.  They just don't snowboard at MRG.  If you buy enough shares to influence the votes then great, the market has spoken.  I doubt there are enough boarders willing to pony up that kind of money and make a long term commitment, but I'd be happy to be wrong.

 -dave-


----------



## bvibert (Oct 27, 2006)

David Metsky said:


> Honestly, I can't think of anything you can do other than to ski at MRG and get to know the shareholders on the slopes.  But the fact is, there's not much to convince them of, they know the facts.  This isn't about facts; it's about intangibles.
> 
> Buying shares would be a great start, but there are already shareholders at MRG who already snowboard.  They just don't snowboard at MRG.  If you buy enough shares to influence the votes then great, the market has spoken.  I doubt there are enough boarders willing to pony up that kind of money and make a long term commitment, but I'd be happy to be wrong.
> 
> -dave-


Buying up enough shares to influence anything might not even be possible, according to their bylaws they already have way more than half as many shareholders as are allowed:


			
				madriverglen.com said:
			
		

> How many shares are available?
> 
> As of October 1, 2006, a total of 2042 shares have been sold. Our goal to operate the mountain on a long-term basis is to sell 2500 shares, but the Cooperative is allowed to sell up to 3,000 shares.
> 
> ...


----------



## awf170 (Oct 27, 2006)

Beartrap said:


> Waaaaaaaa
> 
> At this point who cares? Sounds like a bunch of babies back and forth. I love this board but has any one of the mods heard of the lock thread option.........




It is so difficult to avoid clicking on this thread, isn't it?  :roll:


----------



## Kerovick (Oct 27, 2006)

.....heck even the monoskiers and snow bladers. 

Skiboarders please...Skiboarders

kero


----------



## scharny (Oct 28, 2006)

:-? :roll:


----------



## Big Game (Oct 28, 2006)

The first time I actually saw MRG in person was pedaling up the App Gap this September for the prologue in the Green Mountain Stage Race. Yeah, great prologue. Every skinny bastard Cat. 3 in North America was gunning for the top. Myself, as more "well-rounded" crit racer kind of racer, at 190 lbs, kind of reserved myself to not getting passed by the P/1/2 who started 15 minutes behind us.

So you know, by the time MRG is on my left, I'm already dropped and feel the humiliation of being hefty. But I look up, and I think to myself, now that's a damn attractive hill. Wow. I really would sure like to be there come winter. She's purty. But, knowing full well that "my kind" aren't welcome, it was just further humiliation. It was like this hot, rich girl --- who would never give me a chance because the social strata involved would make sure we could ever fall in love --- was embarrassed for me. But she didn't know me. And she didn't know that I could treat her better than 95% of the creeps who she has been bored with for the last 40 years could. But still, as I rounded the hill to continue my effort with MRG now over my left shoulder, I resigned myself to my burden: 

What's wrong don't matter; what's right don't matter. For, as it now stands in the the US of A, it's only money that matters. And right now, the shareholder's money at MRG tells me not to be there. 

And there ain't nothing I could do about that. 

And what happened at the top of the App Gap? Well, I just got nipped at the line by the first pro finisher (from Team Targetraining I believe). And you know, I just got to think the emotional distance that was so palpaple at the base of MRG had to do something to slow me down. If she was my girl, I know I could have done better. 

But daddy ain't going to let that happen. Is he?


----------



## BeanoNYC (Oct 28, 2006)

I know that I've said this before in similar threads but I'm saying it again.  This skiier would love to see a rider get on a lift with a splitboard and stick it to the man.


----------



## dmc (Oct 29, 2006)

Greg said:


> D - you gotta repost that pic of you from Hunter in the 80's where your leg/knee is doing that funky shit and you have that big smile on your face. That pic is classic! :lol:



All I could find was this one...


----------



## Greg (Oct 29, 2006)

dmc said:


> All I could find was this one...



That's wicked too , but not the one I was thinking of...


----------



## 2knees (Oct 29, 2006)

Greg said:


> That's wicked too , but not the one I was thinking of...



it has to be this

http://www.killingtonzone.com/albums/CAPBOY/Retro_Doug1989.jpg


----------



## Greg (Oct 30, 2006)

2knees said:


> it has to be this
> 
> http://www.killingtonzone.com/albums/CAPBOY/Retro_Doug1989.jpg


That's it:







Classic!!! Now I know why you took up snowboarding..... :lol:  Kidding...


----------



## dmc (Oct 30, 2006)

Greg said:


> That's it:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In the late 80's.... thats the way we rolled...

One more - this one from late May on Superstar ...  in the 90's we amped it up a bit... Still backseat slammiing in the big bumps...  We hadnt quite figured out how to drive the tips over the bump yet


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 30, 2006)

Radical!


----------



## 2knees (Oct 30, 2006)

dmc said:


> In the late 80's.... thats the way we rolled...
> 
> Still backseat slammiing in the big bumps...  We hadnt quite figured out how to drive the tips over the bump yet



lol, i still havent figured it out.  but i have fun so thats all that counts.


----------



## Plowboy (Oct 30, 2006)




----------



## Nosedive (Oct 30, 2006)

I have read a few forums on this website before but this was the first one I felt like I had an opinion on. 
Even though I have never skied MRG, I support the ban because I respect the rights of the shareholders. Personally I don't care whether boarders are allowed or not. I have nothing agaisnt boarders, but I am completly against stupid people and jerks.

When reading the forum I was reminded of an article I read I a magazine a couple years ago so I looked it up online. I assume that a good portion of the people on this forum read the article when it was first published but I will leave the link so people can read it. True Believers

"It was that deep-rooted love for the single chair that brought about the resort's infamous snowboard ban. Most skiers forget that in 1986 Mad River was actually one of the first ski areas in the nation explicitly to allow snowboarding. But the way boarders, without ski poles, had to push off when unloading made the single chairs swing and frequently derailed the cable. So Betsy Pratt banned boarders from the single. Since that also eliminated their access to Mad River's best terrain, two high-school boarders cussed her out at the local supermarket. In 1991, she banned snowboards from the mountain altogether.

With support for the ban running strong and deep, shareholders voted overwhelmingly to maintain it during their first meeting as a co-op in 1998-and haven't officially voted on the issue since. "No one is calling for the end of it," says Eric Friedman, Mad River's marketing director. "I don't think anything will change for at least a generation.""
This is probably the most important part of the article. Yes, if they wanted to allow snowboarders then the problem with the chair could be fixed, but really the shareholders dont want boarders.

The ideal mountain is a mountain that allows all kinds of sliders under 3 conditions
1. They have skills (this would limit the skiers and boarders scraping the snow off)
2. They have knowledge about what they are doing
3. They have manners to prevent the ignorant assholes that hit other people and then slide away
It may require and application and an interview to get a ticket, but it would be a truly unique experience


----------



## ctenidae (Oct 31, 2006)

_"It was that deep-rooted love for the single chair that brought about the resort's infamous snowboard ban. Most skiers forget that in 1986 Mad River was actually one of the first ski areas in the nation explicitly to allow snowboarding. But the way boarders, without ski poles, had to push off when unloading made the single chairs swing and frequently derailed the cable. So Betsy Pratt banned boarders from the single. Since that also eliminated their access to Mad River's best terrain, two high-school boarders cussed her out at the local supermarket. In 1991, she banned snowboards from the mountain altogether._

Your three poitns are good, if impossible (how do you get skills if you can't ski?). But this story has been told, retold, recanted, and told again many times, with no direct word from Betsy on its veracity. It's a nice story, though, that firmly casts snowboarders as unruly, foulmouthed, snot-nosed brats that aren't fit to associate with decent two-plank folks.

Kind of an unfair characterization, don't you think?


----------



## Big Game (Oct 31, 2006)

Nosedive said:


> "No one is calling for the end of it," says Eric Friedman, Mad River's marketing director.



I guess I'm a nobody then. Again, why the hurt?

Nosedive, the single-chair derailment conspiracy theory has been discredited a long time ago. The better argument (if you're pro-ban) is simply, that money talks. The shareholders vote, and if you don't have the money to buy a voice, then STFU.  

But again, the STFU policy hurts (me). It's poison I tell you. Poison.


----------



## madskier6 (Oct 31, 2006)

Big Game said:


> I guess I'm a nobody then. Again, why the hurt?



I think Eric means that no Co-Op shareholder is calling for an end to the ban.  He knows there are many boarders out there who would love to have the ban ended so they'd be able to ride MRG.  There are just no shareholders that want to end the ban (or not enough of them to make a difference).


----------



## AdironRider (Oct 31, 2006)

I still think a group of us boarders should hike up right under the single one day this winter and show em what a bunch of good riders can do. Whos with me?


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 31, 2006)

Hey Adrion Rider, good idea. Get as many people as you can and be as diplomatic about it as possible to A) Show that there is enough interest out there and B) show that riders are respectful and wouldn't be the a pesky bother to all the old crotchety's. It prob won't make a difference right away but if you do it enough, like make an annual or monthly tradition out of it and make it as public as possible you might change some shareholders minds. Again, i think the key would be to do it as diplomatically as possible otherwise the old crusties are gonna keep talking trash about riders...


----------



## Nosedive (Oct 31, 2006)

Big Game said:


> I guess I'm a nobody then. Again, why the hurt?
> 
> Nosedive, the single-chair derailment conspiracy theory has been discredited a long time ago. The better argument (if you're pro-ban) is simply, that money talks. The shareholders vote, and if you don't have the money to buy a voice, then STFU.
> 
> But again, the STFU policy hurts (me). It's poison I tell you. Poison.



The single chair derailment is not the problem, which is why I said in my first post that if they wanted to remove the ban, then the derailment issue could be fixed. My argument is not the single chair derailment theory. I support the ban because I like the idea of a skiers only mountain. MRG is unique to New England because of the ban. I'm not saying all mountains should be skiers only, just MRG. 

Something I have noticed on this forum is the number of people trying to disprove the stereo-types about snowboarders. IMO, some snowboarders are assholes, and some skiers are assholes. However I believe that stereo-types are not just made up, there is usually some truth behind stereo-types. In my experience I have scene a lot of assholes out on the hill, and most of them were teenagers on snowboards. Things have changed in the past few years, but it will take a long time before snowboarders can remove the nasty stain on their image. The general public still views snowboarders the same way they view skateboarding, as a bunch of puck ass teenagers. So far I haven't noticed the snowboarding community trying to change peoples minds about this.


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 31, 2006)

wow.


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 31, 2006)

hmmmmmm stero types are stereo types for a reason. good logic......
Lets see how popular of an idea it would be to have the south re-introduce segregation.....you know....not everywhere...just in the south. It would be ok it was just in the south.....


----------



## JimG. (Oct 31, 2006)

Nosedive said:


> In my experience I have scene a lot of assholes out on the hill, and most of them were teenagers on snowboards.



Hmmm...I started skiing long before there were snowboards. There seemed to be just as many assholes then as there are now. Guess what? Most of them were teenagers on skis.
And I'm sure there were times when I was one of them.

So instead of adding the word "snowboard" or "skis", let's just stop at teenagers. Because that's what you're really saying.

And before I get a flood of hate mail, I'm not saying that all teenagers are assholes either.


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

Nosedive said:


> Something I have noticed on this forum is the number of people trying to disprove the stereo-types about snowboarders. IMO, some snowboarders are assholes, and some skiers are assholes. However I believe that stereo-types are not just made up, there is usually some truth behind stereo-types. In my experience I have scene a lot of assholes out on the hill, and most of them were teenagers on snowboards. Things have changed in the past few years, but it will take a long time before snowboarders can remove the nasty stain on their image. The general public still views snowboarders the same way they view skateboarding, as a bunch of puck ass teenagers. So far I haven't noticed the snowboarding community trying to change peoples minds about this.



You haven't experienced much have you...  Of maybe your ignorance blinds you to the fact that snowboarding is maturing and many of us are not punk ass teens..

Remember the old saying - there are none so blind as those who refuse to see..

But - maybe your acerbic comments are just lame rantings...


----------



## Nosedive (Oct 31, 2006)

Skibum_dan said:


> hmmmmmm stero types are stereo types for a reason. good logic......
> Lets see how popular of an idea it would be to have the south re-introduce segregation.....you know....not everywhere...just in the south. It would be ok it was just in the south.....



This is what happens when people take a simple statement and blow it out of proportion. Snowboarders have a bad stereo-type, and my point is that the snowboarding community needs to unite in way so that they can disprove what people think about them. In no way do I support the stereo-type about snowboarders, I was just pointing out that there is a reason snowboarders are stereotyped.
Anyways, segregation was the result of something far worse than stero-types. Segregation was the result of the belief that white people were physically superior. A stereotype is just a generalized image of a group of people. Stereotypes are bad, but racism is far worse.


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

Skibum_dan said:


> hmmmmmm stero types are stereo types for a reason. good logic......
> Lets see how popular of an idea it would be to have the south re-introduce segregation.....you know....not everywhere...just in the south. It would be ok it was just in the south.....


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

Nosedive said:


> Snowboarders have a bad stereo-type, and my point is that the snowboarding community needs to unite in way so that they can disprove what people think about them.



Or maybe you just need to open your eyes and see the good in it...  
Stereotypes are not a real thing.. They are what you percieve..  And you perception is skewed...

I'll continue to be cool and treat others with respct.. But I'm not going to bow down to asswipes that continue some stupid sterotype


----------



## Nosedive (Oct 31, 2006)

JimG. said:


> Hmmm...I started skiing long before there were snowboards. There seemed to be just as many assholes then as there are now. Guess what? Most of them were teenagers on skis.
> And I'm sure there were times when I was one of them.
> 
> So instead of adding the word "snowboard" or "skis", let's just stop at teenagers. Because that's what you're really saying.
> ...



You are absolutly right, it is teenagers in general. Since I have only been a skier for about 9 years(and the majority of those years are as a teenager), most of the teenagers I see on the hill are on snowboards. Not all teenagers are assholes, but from personal experience I think that most of the assholes out on the hill are teenagers. Yes, assholes come in all shapes, sizes, and ages, but most of them are probably teenagers. Everyone knows that for the past 25 years or so the common trend for teenagers was to snowboard. Believe me when I say that I have a better understanding of teenagers than most of you reading this forum, since I myself am only a freshman  in college. 
I get the feeling that some of you reading this forum would think that I am an asshole too, but I guarantee you that I am not. Remember that when you read my post if it angers you, or makes you think that I am an asshole, then you definatly misunderstood what I wrote.


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

Nosedive said:


> You are absolutly right, it is teenagers in general. Since I have only been a skier for about 9 years(and the majority of those years are as a teenager), most of the teenagers I see on the hill are on snowboards. Not all teenagers are assholes, but from personal experience I think that most of the assholes out on the hill are teenagers. Yes, assholes come in all shapes, sizes, and ages, but most of them are probably teenagers. Everyone knows that for the past 25 years or so the common trend for teenagers was to snowboard. Believe me when I say that I have a better understanding of teenagers than most of you reading this forum, since I myself am only a freshman  in college.
> I get the feeling that some of you reading this forum would think that I am an asshole too, but I guarantee you that I am not. Remember that when you read my post if it angers you, or makes you think that I am an asshole, then you definatly misunderstood what I wrote.



Asshole... No...
Ignorant kid... Probably...

Second chance from the grey haired snowboarder... sure - why not.....


----------



## Nosedive (Oct 31, 2006)

dmc said:


> You haven't experienced much have you...  Of maybe your ignorance blinds you to the fact that snowboarding is maturing and many of us are not punk ass teens..
> 
> Remember the old saying - there are none so blind as those who refuse to see..
> 
> But - maybe your acerbic comments are just lame rantings...



I have my fair share of experiences, one of the most notable was when an skier cut me off, caused me to lose balance and the proceeded to yell at me like I did something wrong. I'm not trying to say that skiers are not assholes. When I think someone is an asshole, it is because of their actions, not because what is under their feet. So, in my experience most of the assholes I encountered were teenagers my own age that just happened to be on snowboards. I still have best friends that snowboard, and they know that I dont care about their decision to snowboard instead of ski. Unfortunatly I get the feeling though that this thread is dwelling on the few bad apples that we have experienced. In general we all know that no matter what is under out feet, we are out there because it is fun, and we dont have to deal with a lot of assholes.

I agree with you that snowboarding is maturing, and there are not as many punk ass teens, but you misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying that the general public stereotypes snowboarders as a bunch of punk ass teens, just like they do with skateboarding. I think what snowboarding needs is people like you, who are not immature teenagers, to change the image of the sport.


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

Nosedive said:


> I agree with you that snowboarding is maturing, and there are not as many punk ass teens, but you misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying that the general public stereotypes snowboarders as a bunch of punk ass teens, just like they do with skateboarding. I think what snowboarding needs is people like you, who are not immature teenagers, to change the image of the sport.




There's lots of of us mellow snowboarders out there - I personally know a ton..  
You just seem notice the ones that are jerks...  Take the time to look and see you'll see tons of mellow riders out there just enjoying the day..

http://graysontrays.com/


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 31, 2006)

I'm not a teenager, but it doesn't seem that long ago. (25 years old) I would tend to disagree with the statement that most teenagers ride, or that most of the riders you see on the mountain are teenagers. Many of the ski-patrollers now-a-days are grey bearded guys with beer bellies. Go to a terrain park some time with a clip board and tally up how many teenage skiers you see. Go to the race slope and see how many teenage racatron 5000's you see out there making mommy and daddy proud....well unless they lose of course.
The important thing to remember is that there are A-holes and there are respectful people on the slopes and they come with a variety of toys. Last season I saw a rider get taken out by a racer who was bombing through a trail intersection. Does that mean every racer is a wreckless speed demon who simply can't fight the urge to keep the race on the race hill.....no.


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 31, 2006)

I gotta proof read more. The gray bearded guys on the ski-patrol I was talking about are riders.....oops.


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

Skibum_dan said:


> I gotta proof read more. The gray bearded guys on the ski-patrol I was talking about are riders.....oops.



I know a bunch of riders that ski patrol..  It has it's benefits and drawbacks..

You left out the gut part


----------



## ctenidae (Oct 31, 2006)

Not all teenagers are assholes.
Not all boarders are assholes.
Not all skiers are assholes.

That said, anyone in front of me in a lift line, or on the slope, or near the line I want to take, or skiing faster (or slower) than me, or hitting powder before I get to it, or parking closer to the lodge, or taking up locker/rack/table space, or anything else, is, by definition, an asshole.


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

ctenidae said:


> anyone in front of me in a lift line, or on the slope, or near the line I want to take, or skiing faster  than me, or hitting powder before I get to it,  is, by definition, an asshole.



hmmm... that sounds like me!


----------



## dmc (Oct 31, 2006)

http://www.bendbulletin.com/apps/pb...1203/SPORTS/412030703&SearchID=73237519224037


"One-third of snowboarders are between the ages of 18 to 24, but now more than one-third are age 25 to 44, according to BBC research and consulting, a Denver-based firm. Five percent are older than 45, according to the Denver Business Journal."


----------



## Skibum_dan (Oct 31, 2006)

Ha. true true. I've got many rider friends, but on a powder day, they're just one more A-hole trying to get the freshies first.


----------



## David Metsky (Oct 31, 2006)

dmc said:


> You just seem notice the ones that are jerks...  Take the time to look and see you'll see tons of mellow riders out there just enjoying the day..


Please read what he's saying.  You two are in violent agreement right now.  You both know (and all of us know) that the majority of snowboarders are well behaved.  But _public perception_ of snowboarders is mired back in the 80's when the majority of boarders were teenagers.  As teenagers, they behaved like teenagers, and were often obnoxious.  I think we all agree that would be the case no matter what was on their feet.

So, like with mountain bikers, skateboarders, surfers, video gamers, and motorcyclists before them, the public perception of boarders lags behind the change in demographics.  It may take time for the general public to think other than "punk kids" when they think of snowboarders.  Public education and organized groups or mature riders will speed that along.

Having said all that, I don't think it will change the ban at MRG.  The shareholders aren't interested in changing the status quo.  All the logic in the world won't change that.



			
				AdironRider said:
			
		

> I still think a group of us boarders should hike up right under the single one day this winter and show em what a bunch of good riders can do. Whos with me?


Actually, they request that you take the snowshoe trail up the mountain if you are on foot.  A large group hiking up the ski trails wouldn't be appreciated and would be a safety hazard.  But if you did it I'm pretty confident that no one would bother you and the skiers would probably salute your efforts.  But it's not going to change any minds that matter.


----------



## Nosedive (Oct 31, 2006)

dmc said:


> There's lots of of us mellow snowboarders out there - I personally know a ton..
> You just seem notice the ones that are jerks...  Take the time to look and see you'll see tons of mellow riders out there just enjoying the day..
> 
> http://graysontrays.com/



Obviously jerks can be more noticble by their actions, but I agree that their are plenty of older and mellow boarders out there. After all skiers and snowboarders are out on the hill for the same reason-to have fun. I even remember the "Gray on Tray" that helped my friend when he got hurt boarding on the first run of the day. I guess the point I am trying to prove is that people outside of snowsports dont really understand snowboarding. I bet a lot of people that do not ski or board have a misunderstanding of the sport. When they think of snowboarding the probably think of Shaun White form the olympics (no, I am not saying shaun white is a jerk b/c I have never met him so that would be unfair). When they see a teenager like Shaun White with his long hair and baggy pants in the Olympics, it unfortunately stereo-types the sport. The times have changed, boarders and skiers can get along now but there will always be those skiers who resist change. Its those skiers who also happen to own shares at MRG. 

I would like to buy a share at MRG someday, and if I ever do I would vote agaisnt the ban. I know in earlier post I said that I support the ban, but really I just support the co-op and the rights of the shareholders. I would rather have a co-op that bans boarders than another privately owned ski resort being turned into a big mega-resort.


----------



## Big Game (Oct 31, 2006)

David Metsky said:


> .
> 
> The shareholders aren't interested in changing the status quo.  All the logic in the world won't change that.



Now, I will violently agree with you. 

Maybe that's our problem. We try to apply logic in an illogical world, which ends in frustration and name-calling. Percpetions aren't based on truth, but rather, what is seen (and what the beholder wants to see). And what is seen is hardly the truth.  

Now, how do I preceive MRG to be without a ban? Kind of like Castlerock, but with fewer curiosity seekers. Only the real hard-core boarders would be interested. And just like a handful of snowboarders can't diminish the beauty of C-rock, their mere presence would not vandalize the MRG experience either.

Oops. I think I tried to argue with logic again. Damn me. Let me try again:

The ban has to be lifted so that Pol Pot is not honored for being a world-reknown pianist. It is wrong to render such human suffering to the Hugenots, Marxist apologetics, and Desi Arnez, Jr. We have to free the snow so it can find its way to the off-ramp. And the sticks are heavy with and iron-type ore that the natives call "rusty resin."  Same as it ever was.


----------



## Skibum_dan (Nov 1, 2006)

Big Game said:


> The ban has to be lifted so that Pol Pot is not honored for being a world-reknown pianist. It is wrong to render such human suffering to the Hugenots, Marxist apologetics, and Desi Arnez, Jr. We have to free the snow so it can find its way to the off-ramp. And the sticks are heavy with and iron-type ore that the natives call "rusty resin."  Same as it ever was.




Nice!


----------



## ctenidae (Nov 1, 2006)

Big Game said:


> The ban has to be lifted so that Pol Pot is not honored for being a world-reknown pianist. It is wrong to render such human suffering to the Hugenots, Marxist apologetics, and Desi Arnez, Jr. We have to free the snow so it can find its way to the off-ramp. And the sticks are heavy with and iron-type ore that the natives call "rusty resin."  Same as it ever was.




I don't know, I think the Huegonots got waht they deserved, what with their silly round churches and their ridiculous accents.
Desi Arnez, too.


----------

