-
Powder Journal
Share Stoke and Obs, Raise Money For Charity. - Write an Article
Everyone has a story, tell it here. - Add a Photo
It doesn't count unless you take a picture - Add a Video
If you get gnar with no video, did you really get gnar? - Add a Route
Help build the only interactive backcountry ski atlas - Add an Event
Let us know about any hoot-nannys and shin digs.
-
Powder Journal
Are First Ski Descents Important? | UNITED STATES, WYOMING | 02/23/2009, by First Trax Max
But are first ski descents all that big of deal compared to the climbing world? With climbing, for the most part, a route is, was and always will be in similar condition to when the first ascensionist climbed it. Meaning the 1 billionth person to climb a route has to face very similar difficulties as the very first. On the other hand, skiing a particular line is much more condition dependent and variable.
A 30 degree couloir with over 3000 vertical rise in powder or corn is much more manageable than on bullet proof ice or breakable crust. So how does one quantify a first ski descent? Some years offer a more filled in, less technical descent, while other years can require linking patches of snow with a series of rappels. And then what about all the early pioneers who skied lines I wouldn't even dream about on skis that are not even wide enough to balance a needle on? To add to the confusion, a couloir, or more appropriately a big face, can vary in difficulty depending where you ski it. Does this ambiguousness lead to a lack of importance of who skied what first?
For a sport that is so condition dependent is it really possible to claim a first descent until you ski it in all conditions, snowpack depths and on all types of equipment? Should whoever skis it in worse, more technical conditions trump the previous successful attempts? Or are ski descents not meant to be claimed?
We want to hear your opinion, let us know in the comments below!
Today's Prize: Heel fit socks for tagging your own first descent!
All you have to do is leave a comment to be eligible!
(You can rest assured that we won't publish or sell your mailing address! If you feel uncomfortable leaving it in the comment field, feel free to email it to [email protected].)
That's Our Opinion. What's Yours?
Telemonster wrote on 02/23/09 at 07:41:32 am pst:
I think it might be more appropriate here to draw the analogy between ice/mixed climbing first ascents and skiing first ascents (rather than between rock climbing and skiing). Ice comes in differently from year to year, obviously changes dramatically throughout the same year, and even changes noticeably throughout the day as temperatures fluctuate. Yet these types of first ascents appear to be just as meaningful as rock routes. Additionally, I think the goal should be to ski the line is as good of conditions (Pow-Pow!) possible, not as difficult of conditions as possible as this article insinuates. In summary, I think first ski descents are just as meaningful as first rock/ice/mixed ascents.
First Trax Max wrote on 02/23/09 at 08:47:41 am pst:
That's a real good point, monster. I think they are meaningful. It's funny how skiers/climbers can glance by something with out giving it any noticed until someone climbs/skis it. I wonder why as a whole, people tend to go with the established flow and do not branch out until someone else does?
Jacob Kalough wrote on 02/23/09 at 2:29:02 pm pst:
Anyone who does something for the first time deserves credit for their exploration. With that said, there's no doubt that variable conditions make skiing a difficult sport to quantify. But why would someone do something just for the recognition? The best skiers out there are people you've never heard of. I think that's part of why the sport is so unique.
Kristin Thomas wrote on 02/23/09 at 8:10:33 pm pst:
That is a beautiful pic!
Dark Star wrote on 02/23/09 at 8:46:02 pm pst:
Great comments by all, and I must agree that it does matter because these descents open eyes to what's possible. However, it's always problematic to quatify something that's inherently qualitative. That being said there's still so much out there that we can explore and while recogntion may come with a first, really it's about absorbing the experience.
Scott Bellows wrote on 02/23/09 at 10:12:55 pm pst:
IMHO, you're overestimating the differences between climbing and skiing. On rock, you're right: the route changes little. Still, holds occasionally break off, and the rating changes. Climbing gear and esthetics have evolved, so everyone understands that the first to aid climb El Cap accomplished a different feat than someone free soloing it. And winter climbs, whether mixed, snow, or water ice, are variable as can be even when the GPS says they're identical. Add weather, gear evolution (can you compare Mallory with Hillary, or Hillary with Lowe? Alpenstaffs with ice tools, or hobnails with crampons?) -- and you have the same kind of variability on the way up as you do the way down.
Which is all to the good, I think. The interaction of humans with wilderness is not quantifiable -- it's always qualitative as well, colored by heroism, cowardice and common sense, and subject to qualification, context, and myth, If it weren't, we'd all just run track in indoor arenas at standardized elevations, and let stopwatches be our judge. Instead, we've chosen lives where our accomplishments can't be related without the use of adjectives, and our heros' relative merits can be debated around campfires - whether those heros earned their places in our hearts by grinding bravely up, or flying bravely down. Thank God!
First Trax Max wrote on 02/23/09 at 10:51:24 pm pst:
Well said scott! Don't forget my arch nemesis, smoothed/buffed out holds! I hate those :)
Editors wrote on 02/24/09 at 08:19:01 am pst:
Thanks to everyone for some very insightful comments. A new pair of Bridgedale socks will go to Scott Bellows. Congratulations!
