# Whiteface = Okemo, but steeper



## St. Jerry (Feb 1, 2008)

Both over groomed and boring.  But Whiteface has more angle.


----------



## Greg (Feb 1, 2008)

*Acck!!*

:-o

Everybody, duck for cover!

:smash: :uzi: :flame:




:lol:


----------



## Warp Daddy (Feb 1, 2008)

Hey Mods --------------------troll Alert !!!


----------



## SnowRider (Feb 1, 2008)

Them 'fightin words to some people on this board...


----------



## campgottagopee (Feb 1, 2008)

cps27 said:


> Both over groomed and boring.  But Whiteface has more angle.



Go back to sleep there lil buckaroo You'll be okay in the morning:dunce:


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 1, 2008)

Never skied it, though it does look like a sick mountain.  That said, this wouldn't be the first time I've heard complaints about too much grooming and not letting enough of their terrain bump up.


Even without skiing there though and just by looking at the mountain during summer......Okemo and Whiteface certainly don't belong in the same sentence.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 1, 2008)

Greg said:


> :-o
> 
> Everybody, duck for cover!
> 
> ...





Warp Daddy said:


> Hey Mods --------------------troll Alert !!!



You got it Daddy. Dudes a hater, he's St. Jerry over at SKIADK. He's trying to get a raise on a Slides thread over there. He loves Gore and hates WF. He's done this here in the past. If memory serves me well I showed him for the ass he is and he went away for awhile. I just don't feel like doing it now. Seems childish and petty and I don’t want to act like what he is.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 1, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> Never skied it, though it does look like a sick mountain.  That said, this wouldn't be the first time I've heard complaints about too much grooming and not letting enough of their terrain bump up.



Deadhead I wish you or any bumper on this board where skiing the Mackenzies with me last weekend. They blew a ton of snow and it bumped up great. Unreal.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 1, 2008)

cps27 said:


> Both over groomed and boring.  But Whiteface has more angle.





I agree..Stowe and Sugarbush blow both mountains away


----------



## lerops (Feb 1, 2008)

I was at Whiteface over the MLK weekend for 4 days,  Friday-Monday.

It was my first time there, it really is a different mountain. Probably Okemo is the one mountain least resembling Whiteface among what I have skied.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 1, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> I agree..Stowe and Sugarbush blow both mountains away



Fine with me if you think that, but didn't I finally get you to admit that you never skied WF? I know I remember a post where you didn't know that the Summit chair go to the actual summit of WF. I don't know how anyone could ski there and not know that.

Stick to what you’re good at, counting stuff. From a post you once made describing yourself maybe it would be a good idea if you start counting calories.


----------



## BushMogulMaster (Feb 1, 2008)

Uh oh.  GSS comparing mountains, when he hasn't skied one of them.  Remind you of a previous thread where you ripped me a new a-hole for suggesting that the Bush was better than Stowe, when I hadn't skied Stowe????

GSS... tisk tisk tisk.  Bad boy.  :wink:


----------



## campgottagopee (Feb 1, 2008)

Just check out cps27/St Jerry on skiadk--the dudes a real poser


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 1, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Fine with me if you think that, but didn't I finally get you to admit that you never skied WF? I know I remember a post where you didn't know that the Summit chair go to the actual summit of WF. I don't know how anyone could ski there and not know that.
> 
> Stick to what you’re good at, counting stuff. From a post you once made describing yourself maybe it would be a good idea if you start counting calories.




No I skied Whiteface in 1994 and 1997....it's fun for alot of vert and cruising but they lack in snowfall and natural snow terrain..


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 1, 2008)

BushMogulMaster said:


> Uh oh.  GSS comparing mountains, when he hasn't skied one of them.  Remind you of a previous thread where you ripped me a new a-hole for suggesting that the Bush was better than Stowe, when I hadn't skied Stowe????
> 
> GSS... tisk tisk tisk.  Bad boy.  :wink:



Screw you I skied both..du


----------



## lerops (Feb 1, 2008)

They said that they increased snowmanking tremendously, and they made tons of snow over the 4 days I was there. Whiteface will definitely be more visible over the next few years.


----------



## BushMogulMaster (Feb 1, 2008)

Alright, alright.  You win.  This time.


----------



## crank (Feb 1, 2008)

I also agree with the OP.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 1, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> No I skied Whiteface in 1994 and 1997....it's fun for alot of vert and cruising but they lack in snowfall and *natural snow terrain*..



The picture below shows 3 things:

1. The lift line to the far left is the Summit Quad, as you can plainly see it does not go to the top. GSS said it did in another thread. It would be like going to Stowe and not knowing their 4runner quad didn't go to it's summit. If you where there you would know.

2. The natural snow terrain in the picture is the Slides, there is nothing lift serviced that can compare to in in the East. Yeah I know it's usually only open in March and April.

3. GSS knows dick about WF

Now if people who've skied there don't like WF, fine, to each their own. It just pisses me off when internet experts start spouting off on something they know nothing about.

I can't believe I'm getting caught up in another one of these threads again. I need help.


----------



## lerops (Feb 1, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> 2. The natural snow terrain in the picture is the Slides, there is nothing lift serviced that can compare to in in the East. Yeah I know it's usually only open in March and April.


Hey hpd,

Why is the Slides open only in March and April?


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 2, 2008)

Primarily because patrol consists of a bunch of wusses and wont open it up until the spring corn cycle. I rode there for 3 years and I dont think it slid once. The slides are called that cause they were formed from natural land slides .. not avalanches. Also, theres a pretty nasty water/icefall on Slide 1 that could kill someone whose in over their head. If Whiteface was out west, theyd be open by January.

I bet GSS could tell you exactly what he ate at the midstation lodge though, just like his exciting reports of the Casper food here in JHole, which sucks by the way. Caspers only good for free beers from your buddies who work there.


----------



## campgottagopee (Feb 2, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> I can't believe I'm getting caught up in another one of these threads again. I need help.



Nah, just passion and I'm with ya. I really, really like WF and it's my fav place to ski in the east. Nuff said.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Feb 2, 2008)

MANY  R with ya HPD !!


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Feb 2, 2008)

HPD....I know it's hard but your just feeding the trolls...people that say things like  "the patrol are nothing but a bunch of wussies" obviously are either 10yo or have no clue whatsoever.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 2, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> The picture below shows 3 things:
> 
> 2. The natural snow terrain in the picture is the Slides, there is nothing lift serviced that can compare to in in the East. Yeah I know it's usually only open in March and April.




Yes and no

It probably is the largest acreage of that sort, but there are things that do compare.

I haven't skied WF nor the slides, so these others might be mute if the slides are truly 'lift serviced' and don't require a little bit of hiking.

The Chin at Stowe certainly compares, though it requires a 45 minute hike.  The Chin terrain looks to offer a bit less fully exposed verticle, but there are a ton of options up there.  North Face, Hour Glass, Profanity, Epiphany Bowl to name a few.  The former two lead into Smuggler's notch, the third does as well, but it's a bit more tricky.  Though the terrain in the Notch is no longer exposed such as the slides, a run of NF or HG to Hell Brook offers roughly 3000 vert with roughly 500 of it above treeline of the sickest 'lift serviced' terrain I've ever skied in the east.  The best part?  It's unpatrolled and if you think the snow is good enough, go for it, you don't have to wait for the Patrol to dorp the rope on it. 

Also at Stowe there is 'Tusk' off the back of Spruce.  It requires considerable snowfall to be skiable, but this is essentially one 'slide' just like those pictured at whiteface and requires zero hiking to get to, fully 'lift serviced'.  It offers I'd guesstimate 1700 vert of skiing that it is just like the slides.  Again, unpatrolled terrain, ski it if you can.

Also to consider are the snowfields at Sugarloaf.  This would probably be the closest comparison as it is a patrolled area and just like the slides, rarely opens outside of March and April.  That said, it is much smaller in terms of acreage and vert to the slides.

So, yes and no, there's nothing that compares.  Yes, if we're talking patrolled terrain.  No, if we're talking 'lift accessed' terrain.  The latter, which essentially is Stowe in the arguement I'm making here, I feel comfortable saying beats what the slides offers by a good margin.  I haven't skied the slides though, so I could be wrong.

To be honest, I think the best thing that could happen to WF is to make the slides out of bounds, ski at your own risk terrain like the Chin is at Stowe.  I'd be pretty pissed to have to wait for the patrol to open that terrain if I was a Whiteface skier knowing that the terrain is probably quite skiable many more days in a season then they allow.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 2, 2008)

Whiteface gets half as much snow as Stowe..which sucks..


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Feb 2, 2008)

To the point of the OP, nothing like it at Okemo


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 2, 2008)

ski_resort_observer said:


> HPD....I know it's hard but your just feeding the trolls...people that say things like  "the patrol are nothing but a bunch of wussies" obviously are either 10yo or have no clue whatsoever.



And how much experience with Whiteface do you have? It was my home mtn for 4 years, and I rode there almost exclusively. I was riding the slides in December 2 years ago. The terrain, when it isnt late season snowpack, is pretty gnarly and would require alot of patrol work to mark obstacles, etc to open up early season. Plus, since its so easy to access, patrol doesnt open it up cause gapers, probably like you would get in over there head. Like I said, there wasnt an avalanche in there the entire time I considered it my home mtn, and I stand by my statement that if the slides were on a mtn out west (like JHole for example) theyd be open by January at the latest. Just the way it is there. Empire never opens that much either for similar reasons, even when its perfectly skiable.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 2, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> To be honest, I think the best thing that could happen to WF is to make the slides out of bounds, ski at your own risk terrain like the Chin is at Stowe.  I'd be pretty pissed to have to wait for the patrol to open that terrain if I was a Whiteface skier knowing that the terrain is probably quite skiable many more days in a season then they allow.




You sir, get it. This is what should have always been the case. But at least with patrol being over protective, I got freshies in there the majority of the winter before they opened it up.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 2, 2008)

AdironRider said:


> cause gapers, probably like you would get in over there head.



this isn't necessary to prove your point


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 2, 2008)

AdironRider said:


> You sir, get it. This is what should have always been the case. But at least with patrol being over protective, I got freshies in there the majority of the winter before they opened it up.



Do they pull skiers passes who poach it?  What do they do to deter it?  If Whiteface was my home mountain, it would take a lot to keep me out of there.


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Feb 2, 2008)

AdironRider said:


> And how much experience with Whiteface do you have? It was my home mtn for 4 years, and I rode there almost exclusively. I was riding the slides in December 2 years ago. The terrain, when it isnt late season snowpack, is pretty gnarly and would require alot of patrol work to mark obstacles, etc to open up early season. Plus, since its so easy to access, patrol doesnt open it up cause gapers, probably like you would get in over there head. Like I said, there wasnt an avalanche in there the entire time I considered it my home mtn, and I stand by my statement that if the slides were on a mtn out west (like JHole for example) theyd be open by January at the latest. Just the way it is there. Empire never opens that much either for similar reasons, even when its perfectly skiable.



I don't care if it was your home mountain for 50 years it doesn't change my comment at all. BTW, I was skiing Whiteface before you were even born.


----------



## lerops (Feb 2, 2008)

How long is the hike from the Summit Quad to top of the Slides?


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 2, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> Do they pull skiers passes who poach it?  What do they do to deter it?  If Whiteface was my home mountain, it would take a lot to keep me out of there.




Im sure theyd pull your pass. Most of the time its just roped off right at the top of summit quad. Very easy  to get around if you have half a brain. Easiest and safest way, in terms of not losing ski privs, is to hike the auto road and drop in from the top.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 2, 2008)

ski_resort_observer said:


> I don't care if it was your home mountain for 50 years it doesn't change my comment at all. BTW, I was skiing Whiteface before you were even born.



Then back your statement up. I already stated my case, but you just called me a 10 year old with no clue. But I guess since youve been skiing the face since before I was born you dont have to do that.....


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 2, 2008)

lerops said:


> How long is the hike from the Summit Quad to top of the Slides?




10 minutes


----------



## crank (Feb 2, 2008)

Putting the Slides aside though, I've skied about 6-8 days at WF and about 12 at Okemo through the years.  In that they groom too much terrain they are similar.  There is not an abundant variety of terrain on either mountain.  Their runs run towards similarity.  Whiteface is much steeper, but that alone doesn't save it from the boring category it shares with not-so-steepkemo. Okemo is more plush and has better snowmaking and grooming skills, also, more bump runs seem to be sprouting this year.  I like both mountains for a day, but find both somewhat boring when the day is done.  

I have never been lucky enough to be at Whiteface when the slides were open.


----------



## St. Jerry (Feb 3, 2008)

crank said:


> Putting the Slides aside though, I've skied about 6-8 days at WF and about 12 at Okemo through the years.  In that they groom too much terrain they are similar.  There is not an abundant variety of terrain on either mountain.  Their runs run towards similarity.  Whiteface is much steeper, but that alone doesn't save it from the boring category it shares with not-so-steepkemo. Okemo is more plush and has better snowmaking and grooming skills, also, more bump runs seem to be sprouting this year.  I like both mountains for a day, but find both somewhat boring when the day is done.
> 
> I have never been lucky enough to be at Whiteface when the slides were open.



Oh, looky.  Someone agrees.


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

*Devil's Advocate*

Let me play devil's advocate here for a minute. Many WF fans themselves agreed that WF is for the most part a consistently steep groomer hill. A few said so right *[thread="17531"]here[/thread]*. So in a sense, the OP, while obviously trolling wasn't _that _far off the mark, was he? Take the Slides and Empire (which aren't open all that often) out of the equation, multipy Okemo's vert by 1.5, and tip the mountain on edge several degrees and do you really have radically different hills?

Just sayin'


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

cps27 said:


> Both over groomed and boring.  But Whiteface has more angle.



Man o man the groomers up at whiteface would love to see this.  Okemo has some of the best grooming in the country to be mentioned in the same sentance is a compliment no matter what the intent was.
Northway to upper mac,  HMMMM steep powder witha 10 foot hit 3/4 of the way down.  A zip down to lower mak covered in symetrical soft bumps to finish the run.  Jump on the double of if you have it in you go down to the ghondi and take a shot through  the half  pipe with it 69 foot walls.  That was my sunday. 

Borrrrrrriiiiiiinnnnnnnng


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

crank said:


> Putting the Slides aside though, I've skied about 6-8 days at WF and about 12 at Okemo through the years.  In that they groom too much terrain they are similar.  There is not an abundant variety of terrain on either mountain.  Their runs run towards similarity.  Whiteface is much steeper, but that alone doesn't save it from the boring category it shares with not-so-steepkemo. Okemo is more plush and has better snowmaking and grooming skills, also, more bump runs seem to be sprouting this year.  I like both mountains for a day, but find both somewhat boring when the day is done.
> 
> I have never been lucky enough to be at Whiteface when the slides were open.



Sorry to dump on you a little crank but okemo 12 times??  Really You arguement lost validity with that little factoid.


----------



## ComeBackMudPuddles (Feb 4, 2008)

Has Okemo ever hosted a World Cup mogul competition?  Has Sugarbush or Stowe?

Trails that aren't groomed too often:

* Empire (never)
* Slides (never)
* Upper Cloudspin (almost never)
* Upper Mackenzie (rarely)
* all the glades (obviously)

A pretty decent selection/amount of terrain.  They could sometimes ease off of the grooming, but to say WF is like Okemo except that it has a lot more vertical and is a lot more steep is really ridiculous.  

It's like saying MRG = Alta, but MRG is much smaller and gets a lot less snow.  Silly.


----------



## crank (Feb 4, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> Sorry to dump on you a little crank but okemo 12 times??  Really You arguement lost validity with that little factoid.



I could go on about the dozens of time to Jay, Stowe, Sugarbush, Killington, Sugarloaf, Cannon, Tucks, JH, Mammoth, Squaw, etc... but why bother.  Fact is Okemo bores me and for many of the same reasons so does Whiteface.


----------



## campgottagopee (Feb 4, 2008)

This thread is really apples-n-oranges. You can't seriously compare the 2 places.............


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

crank said:


> Putting the Slides aside though, I've skied about 6-8 days at WF and about 12 at Okemo through the years.  In that they groom too much terrain they are similar.  There is not an abundant variety of terrain on either mountain.  Their runs run towards similarity.  Whiteface is much steeper, but that alone doesn't save it from the boring category it shares with not-so-steepkemo. Okemo is more plush and has better snowmaking and grooming skills, also, more bump runs seem to be sprouting this year.  I like both mountains for a day, but find both somewhat boring when the day is done.
> 
> I have never been lucky enough to be at Whiteface when the slides were open.



Fair enough, you're entitled to your opinion. I’d just like to pick your brain a little if I may. What ski areas in the East are not boring to you after a day? Where for instance could you happily spend a weeks ski vacation and not be bored and what keeps you interested there?


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Whiteface gets half as much snow as Stowe..which sucks..




Stowe says 250" yearly, WF reports 168" - more for sure, but not half. The last few years we've been well over that 168".

I just don't believe you've ever skied WF. I can't get past the summit chair thing. Let me try to give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe the summit wasn't open the days you where there. Just tell me this, does the gondi go to the summit of Little WF?


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

Greg said:


> Let me play devil's advocate here for a minute. Many WF fans themselves agreed that WF is for the most part a consistently steep groomer hill. A few said so right *[thread="17531"]here[/thread]*. So in a sense, the OP, while obviously trolling wasn't _that _far off the mark, was he? Take the Slides and Empire (which aren't open all that often) out of the equation, multipy Okemo's vert by 1.5, and tip the mountain on edge several degrees and do you really have radically different hills?
> 
> Just sayin'



Yeah, you really do. I can tell by posts you've made in the past that you've made up your mind about WF without ever skiing there.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 4, 2008)

campgottagopee said:


> This thread is really apples-n-oranges. You can't seriously compare the 2 places.............



Without skiing Whiteface, but having skied Okemo several hundred times; I think this is a fair statement looking at things one way.

Just driving by the mountain and seeing how steep sections are, the unrivaled verticle by a long shot on the east coast and the slides, Whiteface has the potential for EPIC days.  I'm certain that this is what drives the passion behind the resort.   If there's a decent base and the mountain gets two feet of fresh, I'm sure it's as good as anywhere you'll find on the East Coast.

Now Okemo under the same large natural event while probably pretty darn good, would never qualify as Epic in my book.  It is completely lacking in steep enough terrain, the glades are nothing to write home about and obviously there's nothing in the same time zone as the Slides at Okemo.

For those reasons, I'd be much more inclined to have WF as my home mountain than Okemo, but that's just me.

I think looking at things another way, Okemo might be a better option.  If you're an intermeddiate skier, Okemo is the better mountain.  They have vastly more low angle intermediate terrain and as good of grooming and snowmaking as anyone in the biz.  It's also a better mountain for families due to the HUGE amount of ski in, ski out lodging.  If I had children, this would be a big priority for me.


The great thing about skiing?  If you don't like a mountain, no one is forcing you to go there.  If you do decide to go anyway, you can always voice your dissatisfaction to mountain operators and maybe things might change if enough riders share your opinion.


This all said, it's clear that the author of this thread is clearly 'trolling'.  He has a gripe with Whiteface and is looking to ruffle the feathers of the WF loyalists.  Looks like he succeeded at that :lol:


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Yeah, you really do. I can tell by posts you've made in the past that you've made up your mind about WF without ever skiing there.



If you read my post here and in the thread I linked to, you might notice I asked questions; I didn't make any blanket statements about a place I've never skied so enlighten me. I like more natural variable terrain even if the cover is thin. I would rather ski 1,000 vertical feet of what I would consider interesting terrain over 3K+ of steep groomers any day. That's just my preference. And I'm not talking just about zipperline moguls either. A good smaller scale analogy would be Jiminy vs. Sundown. The former is much steeper and has more vert, but I would probably take Sundown over Jiminy more often than not for no other reason than those silly little seeded bump runs. That's simply more interesting to me than a groomed Jericho.

We tried to set up a visit this year, HPD. You know that. Scheduling just got a bit difficult. With two little ones at home, I only have limited overnight opportunities each season so I would prefer to have an abundance of the type of terrain that I like. So, maybe you're right and that's why I didn't push to make it happen. I know you think SB is overrated, but for me when coupled with MRG, it has *a lot* of that type of skiing which is consistently open unlike the Slides or Empire, and at a closer drive than Whiteface. Still, I do want to give Whiteface a try. You never know, if we get a repeat of last April and the Slides are open, there's still a chance...


----------



## gladerider (Feb 4, 2008)

i am no WF loyalist, although i do visit 2-4 times a season. in fact, just came back from WF last night. i ski all over NE and Europe. someone who thinks WF=Okemo is smoking something really good. i need some of those.


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Feb 4, 2008)

campgottagopee said:


> This thread is really apples-n-oranges. You can't seriously compare the 2 places.............




I agree 100%

WF - the adult
Okemo - the child


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

Greg said:


> I like more natural variable terrain even if the cover is thin. I would rather ski 1,000 vertical feet of what I would consider interesting terrain over 3K+ of steep groomers any day. That's just my preference. And I'm not talking just about zipperline moguls either. A good smaller scale analogy would be Jiminy vs. Sundown. The former is much steeper and has more vert, but I would probably take Sundown over Jiminy more often than not for no other reason than those silly little seeded bump runs. That's simply more interesting to me than a groomed Jericho.
> 
> We tried to set up a visit this year, HPD. You know that. Scheduling just got a bit difficult. With two little ones at home, I only have limited overnight opportunities each season so I would prefer to have an abundance of the type of terrain that I like. So, maybe you're right and that's why I didn't push to make it happen. I know you think SB is overrated, but for me when coupled with MRG, it has *a lot* of that type of skiing which is consistently open unlike the Slides or Empire, and at a closer drive than Whiteface. Still, I do want to give Whiteface a try. You never know, if we get a repeat of last April and the Slides are open, there's still a chance...




First off I'm not telling you what you like to ski or where you should spend your time.

I do not think SB is over rated, it is a great place. I've said so in many threads, I just don't think it's head and shouders above everything else on the east coast.

You mentioned seeded bumps. We have the World Cup course set up on Wilderness for anyone to use.

This weekend Lower Skyward will be all bumped up. Upper Cloudspin hopefully the same. Upper and Lower Mackenzie are never groomed unless the thew - freeze cycle makes it a must to knock them down and start over. For those of you who never skied WF those trails are long. 

I'm just going to leave it at that for now.


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> First off I'm not telling you what you like to ski or where you should spend your time.
> 
> I do not think SB is over rated, it is a great place. I've said so in many threads, I just don't think it's head and shouders above everything else on the east coast.
> 
> ...



Yeah, right. I'm sure that WC course would kill me. :lol: Fair enough, sounds like Whiteface has several fun trails. Hopefully we can still work out a visit. Again, perhaps April.


----------



## Paul (Feb 4, 2008)

Hang-on a sec, gotta go make some popcorn....


----------



## Marc (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Stowe says 250" yearly, WF reports 168" - more for sure, but not half. The last few years we've been well over that 168".



HPD correction:

*Stowe reports 333 inches annually.*

http://www.stowe.com/mountain/

That would be 3 inches shy of twice Whiteface's reported annual average.


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

Marc said:


> HPD correction:
> 
> *Stowe reports 333 inches annually.*
> 
> ...



You're going to send the codger into a frenzy with that one... :lol:


----------



## Marc (Feb 4, 2008)

Hey, I get paid to review engineering work for accuracy, competency and honesty.

Don't hate me for doing my job.  I'm a slave to the truth.


----------



## crank (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Fair enough, you're entitled to your opinion. I’d just like to pick your brain a little if I may. What ski areas in the East are not boring to you after a day? Where for instance could you happily spend a weeks ski vacation and not be bored and what keeps you interested there?



A very good question.  I admit the answer is no ski area in the east would really hold my attention for an entire week's vacation.  Those that come closest are are Stowe, Sugarbush, Sugarloaf,  Why, because of size, steeps, variety of terrain, and opportunities for OB exploration.   Second to these in my mind are MRG, Jay Peak and Cannon for much the same reasons, trees and exploration opportunites.  Usually when I spend a week skiing in the NE I safari around to different areas.

I think Whiteface has tons of potential that, sadly, is far from being realized.  That's just my opinion and my skiing style.  It's a great place for carving steep groomers.  I guess that's just not my thing.


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

Marc said:


> HPD correction:
> 
> *Stowe reports 333 inches annually.*
> 
> ...



If they are reporting 333 per year then we get 260 per year.  They get more snow but i am trying to draw an accurate corralation for what people should expect when comparing snow fall totals.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

Marc said:


> HPD correction:
> 
> *Stowe reports 333 inches annually.*
> 
> ...



I got my info hear: Weather in Stowe brought to you by Scenes of Vermont - PB Publishing ... Average Annual Snowfall: 250 inches per year Snowmaking: ...
www.birdsnestinn.com/weather.htm - 

Like SB, Stowe is a great eastern ski mountain. I love that place. I don't know, I'm probably wrong, but the Park City resorts in Utah average less then 333", I kinda doubt Stowe gets more then them.

I know, I know LCC gets way more, just sayin about PC area.


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

crank said:


> A very good question.  I admit the answer is no ski area in the east would really hold my attention for an entire week's vacation.  Those that come closest are are Stowe, Sugarbush, Sugarloaf,  Why, because of size, steeps, variety of terrain, and opportunities for OB exploration.   Second to these in my mind are MRG, Jay Peak and Cannon for much the same reasons, trees and exploration opportunites.  Usually when I spend a week skiing in the NE I safari around to different areas.
> 
> I think Whiteface has tons of potential that, sadly, is far from being realized.  That's just my opinion and my skiing style.  It's a great place for carving steep groomers.  I guess that's just not my thing.



If you hire a guide they will take you to places within a 45 minutes of LP that will give more OB exploration than you could cover in a season.


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Like SB, Stowe is a great eastern ski mountain. I love that place. I don't know, I'm probably wrong, but the Park City resorts in Utah average less then 333", I kinda doubt Stowe gets more then them.



The difference probably is the East also gets more rain.


----------



## Marc (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> I got my info hear: Weather in Stowe brought to you by Scenes of Vermont - PB Publishing ... Average Annual Snowfall: 250 inches per year Snowmaking: ...
> www.birdsnestinn.com/weather.htm -
> 
> Like SB, Stowe is a great eastern ski mountain. I love that place. I don't know, I'm probably wrong, but the Park City resorts in Utah average less then 333", I kinda doubt Stowe gets more then them.
> ...



Might want to check your sources, HPD.  It doesn't say anywhere on your website what Stowe gets for average annual snowfall.  Plus, you said "Stowe says" in your post.

Also for the record, PC reports 355 inches annually:

http://www.parkcitymountain.com/winter/conditions/resort_stats


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

crank said:


> A very good question.  I admit the answer is no ski area in the east would really hold my attention for an entire week's vacation.  Those that come closest are are Stowe, Sugarbush, Sugarloaf,  Why, because of size, steeps, variety of terrain, and *opportunities for OB exploration*.   Second to these in my mind are MRG, Jay Peak and Cannon for much the same reasons, trees and exploration opportunites.  Usually when I spend a week skiing in the NE I safari around to different areas.
> 
> I think Whiteface has tons of potential that, sadly, is far from being realized.  That's just my opinion and my skiing style.  It's a great place for carving steep groomers.  I guess that's just not my thing.



www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-n-M6cqrKE
http://www.wildsnow.com/?p=333


----------



## crank (Feb 4, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> If you hire a guide they will take you to places within a 45 minutes of LP that will give more OB exploration than you could cover in a season.



I've been considering doing that.  Or possibly the Mt. Marcy tour detailed in Goodman's book.  I know there is an ADK backcountry event, or used to be,  a couple of my ski buds attended a few season's back and enjoyed some guided trips in the area.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

Marc said:


> Might want to check your sources, HPD.  It doesn't say anywhere on your website what Stowe gets for average annual snowfall.  Plus, you said "Stowe says" in your post.
> 
> Also for the record, PC reports 355 inches annually:
> 
> http://www.parkcitymountain.com/winter/conditions/resort_stats



Yeah, maybe I should. This thread is wearing me out anyways. You baited me cps and it worked, good job.


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> This thread is wearing me out anyways. You baited me cps and it worked, good job.



Don't kid yourself, HPD. You're loving every minute of it!


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 4, 2008)

Bump for stoke..


----------



## dmc (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Yeah, maybe I should. This thread is wearing me out anyways. You baited me cps and it worked, good job.



You done good...  Be true to your school...


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

crank said:


> I've been considering doing that.  Or possibly the Mt. Marcy tour detailed in Goodman's book.  I know there is an ADK backcountry event, or used to be,  a couple of my ski buds attended a few season's back and enjoyed some guided trips in the area.



It still goes on.  It is sometime in March.  It run out keene valley but they spread out all over the dacks.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Fine with me if you think that, but didn't I finally get you to admit that you never skied WF? I know I remember a post where you didn't know that the Summit chair go to the actual summit of WF. I don't know how anyone could ski there and not know that.





highpeaksdrifter said:


> *I just don't believe you've ever skied WF*. I can't get past the summit chair thing. Let me try to give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe the summit wasn't open the days you where there. Just tell me this, does the gondi go to the summit of Little WF?





GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Bump for stoke..



Looks like you want to keep it going, so why won't you answer my question?


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

cps27 said:


> Both over groomed and boring.  But Whiteface has more angle.



TJF, didn't you and Grostrider use to ski with this guy? I don't know his real name, but he's St. Jerry and he skis Gore alot. He was on RSN and I think he lives in Malta, but Ghostrider told me he tells everybody he lives in Saratoga for the cache effect. Same guy?


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> TJF, didn't you and Grostrider use to ski with this guy? I don't know his real name, but he's St. Jerry and he skis Gore alot. He was on RSN and I think he lives in Malta, but Ghostrider told me he tells everybody he lives in Saratoga for the cache effect. Same guy?




No clue.    It is not the person that you are decribing.


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

Greg said:


> If you read my post here and in the thread I linked to, you might notice I asked questions; I didn't make any blanket statements about a place I've never skied so enlighten me. I like more natural variable terrain even if the cover is thin. I would rather ski 1,000 vertical feet of what I would consider interesting terrain over 3K+ of steep groomers any day. That's just my preference. And I'm not talking just about zipperline moguls either. A good smaller scale analogy would be Jiminy vs. Sundown. The former is much steeper and has more vert, but I would probably take Sundown over Jiminy more often than not for no other reason than those silly little seeded bump runs. That's simply more interesting to me than a groomed Jericho.
> 
> We tried to set up a visit this year, HPD. You know that. Scheduling just got a bit difficult. With two little ones at home, I only have limited overnight opportunities each season so I would prefer to have an abundance of the type of terrain that I like. So, maybe you're right and that's why I didn't push to make it happen. I know you think SB is overrated, but for me when coupled with MRG, it has *a lot* of that type of skiing which is consistently open unlike the Slides or Empire, and at a closer drive than Whiteface. Still, I do want to give Whiteface a try. You never know, if we get a repeat of last April and the Slides are open, there's still a chance...



How do you know that you would rather ski 1k instead of 3k.  You have never skied 3k of vert. in one run.   So I appreciate what you think you would want to do until you have done them both can you really compare?


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> How do you know that you would rather ski 1k instead of 3k.  You have never skied 3k of vert. in one run.   So I appreciate what you think you would want to do until you have done them both can you really compare?



Came close.....at Sugarloaf. I'm sure the extra 200 feet of vertical makes a huge difference though... :roll:


----------



## takeahike46er (Feb 4, 2008)

Actually Greg, its more like 700' feet by my calculation.  The 2800' at Sugarloaf is a bit of a stretch.  Its more like 2500' unless you are skiing to the beginner area or your condo.  Whiteface is a legit 3200' without hiking to the slides.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 4, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> How do you know that you would rather ski 1k instead of 3k.  You have never skied 3k of vert. in one run.   So I appreciate what you think you would want to do until you have done them both can you really compare?




I don't think the vert is the key part of his arguement, it's the actual terrain.  ie. 1000 vert of interesting skiing trumps 3000 vert groomers.  I would ski the Palavacini chair anyday at A-Basin, which is maybe 1600 vert, then do top to bottom 4K vert runs at Snowmass.  

I think the same arguement could be made for total acreage as well.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 4, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> I don't think the vert is the key part of his arguement, it's the actual terrain.  ie. 1000 vert of interesting skiing trumps 3000 vert groomers.  I would ski the Palavacini chair *anyday* at A-Basin, which is maybe 1600 vert, then do top to bottom 4K vert runs at Snowmass.
> 
> I think the same arguement could be made for total acreage as well.



Anyday, but could you ski it everyday? :wink: terrain off that chair is killer. I don't know what would beat me up more, that everyday or Maryjane.


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

Greg said:


> Came close.....at Sugarloaf. I'm sure the extra 200 feet of vertical makes a huge difference though... :roll:



Did you enjoy sugarloaf?


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> I don't think the vert is the key part of his arguement, it's the actual terrain.  ie. 1000 vert of interesting skiing trumps 3000 vert groomers.  I would ski the Palavacini chair anyday at A-Basin, which is maybe 1600 vert, then do top to bottom 4K vert runs at Snowmass.
> 
> I think the same arguement could be made for total acreage as well.




Have you ever skied 3k vert and not found interesting terrain?


----------



## ajl50 (Feb 4, 2008)

This is on page 8?
Good god it needs to snow around here.


----------



## dmc (Feb 4, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> I don't think the vert is the key part of his arguement, it's the actual terrain.  ie. 1000 vert of interesting skiing trumps 3000 vert groomers.  I would ski the Palavacini chair anyday at A-Basin, which is maybe 1600 vert, then do top to bottom 4K vert runs at Snowmass.
> 
> I think the same arguement could be made for total acreage as well.



good one... We need to ride..  Deadheads think alike...

I've skied top to bottom at most place I go to out west..  But I only do it at the end of the day..

For me personaly - i find the bottom of most mountains pretty boring..  Like Jackson..  Or Kicking Horse..  Or Big Sky...  Or Blackcomb...  I could go on...  Hell - even Bellayre bores me past the middle station...  

Maybe I just got middle station issues...


----------



## dmc (Feb 4, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> Have you ever skied 3k vert and not found interesting terrain?



Yeah - but sometimes only in the first 1500 feet... And that my contain some of the most kick ass terrain ever...  And it may be serviced by a chair...  So why waste the time and energy to go all the way to the bottom..?


----------



## Greg (Feb 4, 2008)

tjf67 said:


> Did you enjoy sugarloaf?



Yes. Now make your next clever point.


----------



## snoseek (Feb 4, 2008)

dmc said:


> Yeah - but sometimes only in the first 1500 feet... And that my contain some of the most kick ass terrain ever...  And it may be serviced by a chair...  So why waste the time and energy to go all the way to the bottom..?



Agree.

Supreme chair at alta is 900-1000 vert and I used to ski that chair all day.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 4, 2008)

snoseek said:


> Agree.
> 
> Supreme chair at alta is 900-1000 vert and I used to ski that chair all day.




haha,

don't know how dmc is gonna feel about you referencing his post and agreeing with him and offering up a similar example at a place where snowboarders aren't welcome :lol:


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 4, 2008)

dmc said:


> good one... We need to ride..  Deadheads think alike...
> 
> I've skied top to bottom at most place I go to out west..  But I only do it at the end of the day..
> 
> ...



Totally..on the one powder day at Jackson Hole I only skied to the bottom twice the entire day..1k of intense terrain beats 3k of brutally groomed in my book..but 3k of brutally groomed is good for mad steezy speed which is a guilty pleasure of mine..up there with 80s music and fat chicks..lol


----------



## tjf67 (Feb 4, 2008)

dmc said:


> Yeah - but sometimes only in the first 1500 feet... And that my contain some of the most kick ass terrain ever...  And it may be serviced by a chair...  So why waste the time and energy to go all the way to the bottom..?



Now a days you can either go through the terrain park or through the half pipe.  On the smaller hills you have to choose crazy terrain or man made features.  When you have 3k of vert you can do both.  Just saying


----------



## kcyanks1 (Feb 4, 2008)

dmc said:


> good one... We need to ride..  Deadheads think alike...
> 
> I've skied top to bottom at most place I go to out west..  But I only do it at the end of the day..
> 
> ...



I wouldn't quite call the Hobacks boring.  Not my very favorite style of terrain, but boring?


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 5, 2008)

Considering the Hobacks have pretty much every style of terrain other than manmade features, have you ever even been in them? They're a consistent 3k vert of 30-35 degree pitch (with gully walls giving you 4-5 turns at 50 plus), with trees, cliffs, powder fields, moguls, anything you can think of. Theres even natural halfpipes down in the lower third.  

Ski them on a 12" in pow day and youll never be satisfied with another run again anywhere else.


----------



## dmc (Feb 5, 2008)

kcyanks1 said:


> I wouldn't quite call the Hobacks boring.  Not my very favorite style of terrain, but boring?



Hobacks are(can be) good - when the aren't baked..  
But It really wasn't what I was thinking about...


----------



## dmc (Feb 5, 2008)

AdironRider said:


> Considering the Hobacks have pretty much every style of terrain other than manmade features, have you ever even been in them? They're a consistent 3k vert of 30-35 degree pitch (with gully walls giving you 4-5 turns at 50 plus), with trees, cliffs, powder fields, moguls, anything you can think of. Theres even natural halfpipes down in the lower third.
> 
> Ski them on a 12" in pow day and youll never be satisfied with another run again anywhere else.




I've ridden and skied them a bunch..  And they are good they are great...

Take my original statement and take the Hobacks out..


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 5, 2008)

He's probably talking about Sundance and Gros Verte..the steezy speed runs that are brutally groomed..


----------



## kcyanks1 (Feb 5, 2008)

AdironRider said:


> Considering the Hobacks have pretty much every style of terrain other than manmade features, have you ever even been in them? They're a consistent 3k vert of 30-35 degree pitch (with gully walls giving you 4-5 turns at 50 plus), with trees, cliffs, powder fields, moguls, anything you can think of. Theres even natural halfpipes down in the lower third.
> 
> Ski them on a 12" in pow day and youll never be satisfied with another run again anywhere else.



Asssuming you are directing your post at me,  I've  been on other lower faces ~2 times, but I think not the Hobacks.  They have not been open much at all when I've been there.  I guess I have to have more runs there, but from what I saw it was generally very wide open skiing, which I enjoy, but is not my favorite.   I'll hold further comment on it.  But I did not mean to bash them.  I brought them up though as *good* skiing on the lower part of the mountain in response to DMC's post that the lower part of Jackson isn't good (which he later clarified).


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 5, 2008)

Enough about Jackson Hole..

Anybody else want to comment on why Iceface and Blow-kemo are inferior to the best resorts in the east???:dunce:


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 5, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Enough about Jackson Hole..
> 
> Anybody else want to comment on why Iceface and Blow-kemo are inferior to the best resorts in the east???:dunce:



If you had ever skied WF we would have alot more respect for your opinion.


----------



## Greg (Feb 5, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> If you had ever skied WF we would have alot more respect for your opinion.



Stop taking the bait, HPD. The cheesy one is just trying to get a rise out of you.


----------



## ComeBackMudPuddles (Feb 5, 2008)

Greg said:


> Stop taking the bait, HPD. The cheesy one is just trying to get a rise out of you.




HPD's inability to not take the bait is why I voted him the biggest Homer....


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 5, 2008)

Greg said:


> Stop taking the bait, HPD. The cheesy one is just trying to get a rise out of you.



I know, I know, but doesn't it bother anyone that he says he skied there and never did? Why? To impress who?

I guess I should ask myself why do I care? 

BS artists just rub me the wrong way.


----------



## 2knees (Feb 5, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> I know, I know, but doesn't it bother anyone that he says he skied there and never did? Why? To impress who?
> 
> I guess I should ask myself why do I care?
> 
> BS artists just rub me the wrong way.



i think he says alot of things that are factually challenged.


----------



## SIKSKIER (Feb 5, 2008)

dmc said:


> good one... We need to ride..  Deadheads think alike...
> 
> I've skied top to bottom at most place I go to out west..  But I only do it at the end of the day..
> 
> ...



Come to Cannon...ski the tram...not too much boring about the bottom of the tralis that lead back to the tram!Having said that,I hate the tram and never ride it.


----------



## dmc (Feb 5, 2008)

SIKSKIER said:


> Come to Cannon...ski the tram...not too much boring about the bottom of the tralis that lead back to the tram!Having said that,I hate the tram and never ride it.



Cannon's on the list..  
I like the fact that people either love it or hate it...  intrigues me...


----------



## St. Jerry (Feb 5, 2008)

ComeBackMudPuddles said:


> HPD's inability to not take the bait is why I voted him the biggest Homer....



second that


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 5, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> If you had ever skied WF we would have alot more respect for your opinion.



fOR THE 22ND TIME i SKIED THERE IN 1997 AND 1994..BUT I WANT TO GO BACK NEXT YEAR WHEN THEY HAVE THE NEW TRAILS CUT


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 5, 2008)

ComeBackMudPuddles said:


> HPD's inability to not take the bait is why I voted him the biggest Homer....



ahahahahahaha...I still think DMC is the biggest Homer Simpson..


----------



## dmc (Feb 5, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> ahahahahahaha...I still think DMC is the biggest Homer Simpson..



I'm down with that...   I can stand by what I represent...  I love living in a ski town.  You may think it's a blast but i wear it with honor..

Headed out right now to bring some people to the polls...  Gotta push my ski town agenda..

Supporting growth in not just the mountain but also the town.  Making sure that it's not unilateral and that everyone benefits.  

Also want the empty buildings in town to become retail and restaurants - and either eminent domain them OR offer some incentive to sell or lower rent.  Right now people just hold onto real estate for the loss.... Rents are too high - businesses can't afford it... 

Need to make sure we defend ourselves from NYC too.  We made some deals with them when they put sewers in town..  And they sometimes make it difficult to do new construction.  

Another thing is the environement..  We need to protect our natural resources.  makes sure the mountain works with the DEP to come up with good snowmaking pond decisions.  where they don't do too much damage to the creek but can still sustain snowmaking.

I also support a bike path between all our villiages in the town of Hunter and even to Windham.  A friend supported this in the "Community unity" party...  But lost..

vote for me!


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Feb 5, 2008)

The bottom of JH is alot more than just the Hobacks, check a trail map. Beavertooth and Slalom are two fun finishing pitches on the other side when you do go to the bottom. Hobacks are great but from the main entrance off of RT they are nowhere near 3000vert.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 5, 2008)

The Hobacks are about 2500 vert...I like going down Cheyanne gully as well along with the North Woods and Riverton bowl is also a hoot..

Are the hamburgers at Whiteface as good as the hamburgers at Okemo???  I bet Whiteface doesn't have as many people from Connecticut..lol..:dunce:


----------



## dmc (Feb 5, 2008)

ski_resort_observer said:


> The bottom of JH is alot more than just the Hobacks, check a trail map. Beavertooth and Slalom are two fun finishing pitches on the other side when you do go to the bottom. Hobacks are great but from the main entrance off of RT they are nowhere near 3000vert.



Those are great runs... But I (!)personally(!) goto JH for the top half of the mountain..


----------



## ski_resort_observer (Feb 5, 2008)

dmc said:


> Those are great runs... But I (!)personally(!) goto JH for the top half of the mountain..



When the day is done you have to find someway of skiing down.. :wink:  I think this might be one of those threads where hijacking it might just be a good thing.


----------



## kcyanks1 (Feb 5, 2008)

dmc said:


> Those are great runs... But I (!)personally(!) goto JH for the top half of the mountain..



I totally agree.  Of course the Hobacks/Lower Faces have mostly been closed when I've been there.  But I still go for the top.  I just couldn't let your comment slip by


----------



## campgottagopee (Feb 6, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> If you had ever skied WF we would have alot more respect for your opinion.


Doubt it:flame:


----------



## lloyd braun (Feb 7, 2008)

I actually have skied with CPS and would value his opinion on terrain. 

I am quite baffled why he did not respond to anyones comments but maybe he will.


----------

