California spring skiing, was (Re: Jackson (and Utah) mid-trip report)
Yunlong 13 March 2005 05:41:41
lal_truckee wrote:> Well, Jackson is skiing mid-spring, which just ain't right for 10,000
feet of mountain in the beginning of March, but what the hey - it's
snow. .....> Going to spend another day in Jackson, then likely head for Utah. Unless> we don't. No point in overly planning this.
Not sure why you even go that far [if only for the skiing]. Here at Sierra-Nevada mountains, spring skiing is making a full swinging to its best.
Though daytime temperature reaches 70+, the snow remains cool, and the moguls and slush powders are very skiable/turnable after the snow is softened around midday.
Hot, bluebird days with cool breezes and fast snow, California spring skiing is at its finest.
Though daytime temperature reaches 70+, the snow remains cool, and the> moguls and slush powders are very skiable/turnable after the snow is> softened around midday.
Though daytime temperature reaches 70+, the snow remains cool, and the>>moguls and slush powders are very skiable/turnable after the snow is>>softened around midday.>
"Slush powders"? Pray tell, what is that? >
In Vermont, if you can move it it's powder, if you can't it's packed powder.
BTW it's WINTER here in Vermont. Skied the last two days in heavy snow conditions. Freshies on every run, total of probably 18" in last 48 hours. Sunny bright, under 30 degrees here today.
Too much driving for those crappy snows, while your home turf skiing is at excellent condition?
The superpipe at the high roller terrain park, Heavenly is in perfect condition, and you can make a 7min/lap on single line on Canyon lift, even with the weekend crowds.
VtSkier wrote:> Bob Lee wrote:>CLIP>> "Slush powders"? Pray tell, what is that? >> Bob>>
In Vermont, if you can move it it's powder, if you> can't it's packed powder.>
BTW it's WINTER here in Vermont. Skied the last two> days in heavy snow conditions. Freshies on every> run, total of probably 18" in last 48 hours. Sunny> bright, under 30 degrees here today.
Good for you. You must be having a fine last few weeks - the newspeople are all agog at the idea of snow; whole cities are apparently shutting down due to a foot or so. But for a skier it must be heaven.
Here is not heaven. But it ain't hell either. More elsewhere.
"lal_truckee" <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:_h4Zd.9917$C47.8900@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
Dam motels ought to ALL have hi speed wi-fi; Utah better bus bureau > ought to require it, or us high tech dudes will cross Utah off our > tour card - not. I bet in a year they all will.
If you stay here in SL there are a few pubs with wifi. I'm not sure about South if you stay near the mouth of the canyon. Across from Fiddlers Elbow (my fav. local joint) there's a wife coffee shop.
Give me a shout while your here, we'll go have a beer. There is at least one other poster here that just missed our gathering.
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 16:56:35 -0700, "pigo" <pigopowderPANTS@yahoo.com> wrote:
"lal_truckee" <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote in message >news:_h4Zd.9917$C47.8900@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...>
Dam motels ought to ALL have hi speed wi-fi; Utah better bus bureau >> ought to require it, or us high tech dudes will cross Utah off our >> tour card - not. I bet in a year they all will.>
If you stay here in SL there are a few pubs with wifi. I'm not sure >about South if you stay near the mouth of the canyon. Across from >Fiddlers Elbow (my fav. local joint) there's a wife coffee shop.>
Give me a shout while your here, we'll go have a beer. There is at >least one other poster here that just missed our gathering.>
Enjoyed the beers at Fiddlers. Good stuff, nice joint, good stories and fish tales. Sorry I had to run out of there like I did without getting properly torn up, practically a crime. The 3:30 am wakeup the next manana was brutal, but the drive back through Colorado is/was/always will be far, far more scenic than the boring rollercoaster ride across Wyoming so it was well worth it, plus there was that extra day of skiing at the Basin.
In Vermont, if you can move it it's powder, if you>> can't it's packed powder.>>
BTW it's WINTER here in Vermont. Skied the last two>> days in heavy snow conditions. Freshies on every>> run, total of probably 18" in last 48 hours. Sunny>> bright, under 30 degrees here today.>
Good for you. You must be having a fine last few weeks - the newspeople > are all agog at the idea of snow; whole cities are apparently shutting > down due to a foot or so. But for a skier it must be heaven.>
Here is not heaven. But it ain't hell either. More elsewhere.>
Hotel California?
A foot? If New Jack City gets 2 inches everything comes to a screeching halt, except the skiers in SUV's driving north, knowing full well that we can take care of a little snow in Vermont and have fun with it as well.
You should see what an inch of snow does to Atlanta or Roanoke.
Had 2 feet of snow in Boston a few years ago and a couple of friends of mine went out with skis and a video cam and made a documentary of extreme skiing off Bunker Hill (Chelsea). Great shots of hucks off cars, Powder 8's down the middle of a street lined with cars and buildings. Use of cars stranded and abandoned in the middle of the street for a bump run. Hilarious.
"Sven Golly" <sven_golly@myrealbox.com> wrote in message news:Xns9618A5EB2441Asvengolly@66.75.162.201...> lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote in news:_h4Zd.9917$C47.8900
So we're dialup in hotel rooms, not having the energy to go>> internet cafe-ing for wi-fi.
$4 at Radio Schlock for 10' of Cat5. That's less than one cocktail.
Heck, I see em in dollar stores and the gadgets dept in grocery stores.
Though daytime temperature reaches 70+, the snow remains> > > cool, and the moguls and slush powders are very> > > skiable/turnable after the snow is softened around midday.> >
"Slush powders"? Pray tell, what is that?>
The spring powder/snow before it turns into the corn snow?
I see we're a loose constructionist with the concept of "powder."
Though daytime temperature reaches 70+, the snow remains> > > > cool, and the moguls and slush powders are very> > > > skiable/turnable after the snow is softened around midday.> > >
"Slush powders"? Pray tell, what is that?> >
The spring powder/snow before it turns into the corn snow?>
I see we're a loose constructionist with the concept of "powder."
Yup, that's how Kirkwood locals call it, because it is left-over "powder," and it is skied just like "wet powder"/"sierra cements."
Though daytime temperature reaches 70+, the snow remains> > > > cool, and the moguls and slush powders are very> > > > skiable/turnable after the snow is softened around midday.> > >
"Slush powders"? Pray tell, what is that?> >
The spring powder/snow before it turns into the corn snow?>
I see we're a loose constructionist with the concept of "powder.">
Bob
It's all just semantics, Bob. You're really limiting your enjoyment of "powder" skiing by trapping your mind in such narrow constructs.
For example, the "narrowly constructed powder" was fairly... umm... scarce this past weekend. So, after a day of skiing I headed down to the pool for some powder. Sure, it was some of the "powder/snow" BEFORE it had evaporated, frozen and fallen back to earth... but that's just a minor detail. Once I was able to free my mind from these narrow constructs I had a truly great run.
Next week I'm going to try flatboarding... but only in the deep end.
Though daytime temperature reaches 70+, the snow remains> > > > > cool, and the moguls and slush powders are very> > > > > skiable/turnable after the snow is softened around midday.> > > >
"Slush powders"? Pray tell, what is that?> > >
The spring powder/snow before it turns into the corn snow?> >
I see we're a loose constructionist with the concept of "powder.">
Yup, that's how Kirkwood locals call it, because it is left-over> "powder," and it is skied just like "wet powder"/"sierra cements.">
What do you mean by "powder" again?
By "powder" I mean light, dry, fluffy snow, hopefully with a water content of not much more than 10%. We can argue about what the upper level of snow water content qualifies as powder, but let's first agree that all fresh snow is not powder. Powder snow is dry, there is no "wet powder," and "sierra cement" is NOT powder.
And FWIW, the Kirkwood locals I know don't use the word "powder" to describe wet snow or "sierra cement"...ever, no matter how fresh it is. "Slush powder" is a total oxymoron.
How long have you been skiing in the US anyway? I'd expect you to have a better grip on the nomenclature by now.
Bob Lee <rlee@swcp.com> wrote in news:rlee-94602C.22204014032005 @individual.net:
And FWIW, the Kirkwood locals I know don't use the word "powder" to > describe wet snow or "sierra cement"...ever, no matter how fresh it is. > "Slush powder" is a total oxymoron.
I've never heard the term either. Been skiing the Sierras for, oh, maybe 35 years -- probably 20 days at Kirkwood mostly with locals, well OK, one of the bartenders and an instructor friend.
I skied with LAL back at the end of February. On Monday> we had a foot of fresh snow. We called it powder and> LAL later confirmed that the water content was about> 8% which is within Bob's definition of "powder" being> between 2% and 10% water.
Uh, I think the deal was the fresh foot we skied was 12%; the fresh foot a few days earlier in the week, which I probably mentioned, was 8% according to the instruments. I don't know what that does to Bob and his def.
"yunlong" <thedreamofbutterfly@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1110870442.335934.228270@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
and I go by perception; when it looks like powder, feels like > powder> (by the feet), and is skied like powder, yup, I'll call it powder > too,> slush or not.
Slush may be fun but it DOES NOT look, feel, or ski like powder.
Oxymoron or not, the guy plunged down Cornice cheered and shout > "yahoo!> The slush powder really turnable" didn't care a bit, he have > enjoyed> the run.
I yelled "yahoo" on some groomed the other day. Does that make it "flat powder"?
How long have you been skiing in the US anyway? I'd expect>> you to have a better grip on the nomenclature by now.>
So you think that your narrowly fine tuned linguistics makes you a> better skier?
I would say he thinks (with justification) a stupid fucking statement.
I skied with LAL back at the end of February. On Monday> > we had a foot of fresh snow. We called it powder and> > LAL later confirmed that the water content was about> > 8% which is within Bob's definition of "powder" being> > between 2% and 10% water.>
Uh, I think the deal was the fresh foot we skied was 12%; the fresh foot > a few days earlier in the week, which I probably mentioned, was 8% > according to the instruments. I don't know what that does to Bob and his > def.
I'm not a big numbers nut, I was just trying to troll up some response on the water content % of powder. I could go with 12% falling under powder, but somewhere approaching 15%, I suggest that we're going to have to downgrade the status to "freshies."
I skied with LAL back at the end of February. On Monday>> we had a foot of fresh snow. We called it powder and>> LAL later confirmed that the water content was about>> 8% which is within Bob's definition of "powder" being>> between 2% and 10% water.>
Uh, I think the deal was the fresh foot we skied was 12%; the fresh foot > a few days earlier in the week, which I probably mentioned, was 8% > according to the instruments. I don't know what that does to Bob and his > def.>
How's the ribs.>
Oh, sorry about the mis-read. It seemed pretty much powdery, though I have skied fluffier stuff right here in good old Vermont, say two years ago? I do remember being a little tentative but I think I could get used to it without crashing too often.
Ribs are mending. Or should I say the muscle between the ribs are getting back to where it should be. Still a little pain when I change attitude (standing to lying down), no pain sneezing or coughing (that's good)
I still can't get the Raichle boots to be comfortable for more than 2 hours. Tried last Friday. On at 8:30. Couldn't stand them by 12:00. Switched to AT boots.
I can read metaphors like I can read the wind, but you didn't write any > metaphors - you wrote an oxymoron. You *do* know that metaphors are not > oxymorons, that there is a distinct difference? >
We see that you've got a talent for at oxymorons, now try writing a > metaphor (like I did above) and then tell us the difference between a > metaphor and an oxymoron. For extra points, see if you can use the term > "chew-toy" in your metaphor. Example: I play with Ichin Shin like my > dog plays with his favorite chew-toy. >
I'm sorry Bob, what you have written is not a metaphor, it is a simile. These are very close constructs but it is a simile by the fact that you used the word "like" (you might have used "as" instead of "like" but no others).
Example: My playing with Ichin Shen reminds me of my dog playing with his favorite chew-toy.
This is a metaphor. Using "like" or "as" makes it a simile.
I can read metaphors like I can read the wind, but you didn't write any > > metaphors - you wrote an oxymoron. You *do* know that metaphors are not > > oxymorons, that there is a distinct difference? > >
We see that you've got a talent for at oxymorons, now try writing a > > metaphor (like I did above) and then tell us the difference between a > > metaphor and an oxymoron. For extra points, see if you can use the term > > "chew-toy" in your metaphor. Example: I play with Ichin Shin like my > > dog plays with his favorite chew-toy. > >
I'm sorry Bob, what you have written is not a metaphor, it> is a simile. These are very close constructs but it is a> simile by the fact that you used the word "like" (you might> have used "as" instead of "like" but no others).>
Example: My playing with Ichin Shen reminds me of my dog> playing with his favorite chew-toy.>
This is a metaphor. Using "like" or "as" makes it a simile.
Thanks, that's good information. I obviously need to study up on my English grammar - at times it can be more confusing than reading Ichin Shin. (Was that a metaphor or a similie?)
But "a locked-heel telemark binding" and "Lal's fat skis" are still oxymorons, right?
I can read metaphors like I can read the wind, but you didn't write any >>>metaphors - you wrote an oxymoron. You *do* know that metaphors are not >>>oxymorons, that there is a distinct difference? >>>
We see that you've got a talent for at oxymorons, now try writing a >>>metaphor (like I did above) and then tell us the difference between a >>>metaphor and an oxymoron. For extra points, see if you can use the term >>>"chew-toy" in your metaphor. Example: I play with Ichin Shin like my >>>dog plays with his favorite chew-toy. >>>
I'm sorry Bob, what you have written is not a metaphor, it>>is a simile. These are very close constructs but it is a>>simile by the fact that you used the word "like" (you might>>have used "as" instead of "like" but no others).>>
Example: My playing with Ichin Shen reminds me of my dog>>playing with his favorite chew-toy.>>
This is a metaphor. Using "like" or "as" makes it a simile.>
Thanks, that's good information. I obviously need to study up on my > English grammar - at times it can be more confusing than reading Ichin > Shin. (Was that a metaphor or a similie?) >
But "a locked-heel telemark binding" and "Lal's fat skis" are still > oxymorons, right? >
lal_truckee wrote:> yunlong wrote:> > the guy plunged down Cornice cheered and shout "yahoo!> > The slush powder really turnable">
I don't believe it. Someone might yell "Yahoo! the slush is fun!" but
never "yahoo! The slush powder really turnable"
Did you ever consider that Ichin might not be the only one who talks that way? How could there be just one?
FWIW, I was not as offended by his particular oxymoron. To me, "slush powder" brings forth an instant image of the snow conditions. I didn't feel the need to take him literally. In fact, should the occasion arise, I just may use that term in the future. Only when flatboarding, of course...
"yunlong" <thedreamofbutterfly@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1111084997.562177.105690@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
If it is not "accurate" (as I didn't describe to the final end) how> do you know that you have "finally figured out what you were trying> to say"? (what did I say?)>
"Oxymoronic?"
Pseudo-accuracy flies in the face of the light bulb without measuring the efficiency of the product represented in darkness.
Yes, that's because you read with your narrow-minded bias.
Calling Mr. Oswald with the swastika tattoo there is a vacancy waiting in the English voodoo.
Reflection gives you the "depth" of words, in our discussion, the> meaning of my words are all terminated at the physical level; i.e.> they are reflectable through your body sensation and its> surroundings.
Termination of the words only applies in geomorphic progressions from which the physical has been separated from the substrata of meaning -- but only in the metaphorical sense that meaning has when subjugated to an artificial construct of its own making.
Get rid of that pompous self-righteous mentality may help you that,> probably.
Down on the mainspring, listen to the tick tock, clock all the faces that move in on your block.
That only reflects a little knowledge mentality.
Your mirror is clouded with ravages of time and space.
It is world wide usenet, an international setting, and let's not> forget, the subject is SKIING.
The transparent people who live on the other side are living a life that is almost like suicide
That only reflects a little knowledge mentality.
Your mirror is clouded with ravages of time and space.
But lock of perception.
Locked perception is Mr. Oswald's reality of thought.
Meaning? Complete sentence please.
Thinking all about those censored sequences.
So, "Bob's definition" is incorrect?
Soap.
So the second time is no longer fluffy, what do you call that?
Rational planning in the real world.
Maybe we ask too much of you.
Symbolic man suits.
-- Sven Golly Trolling as usual Remove the _ to reply by email
Sven Golly wrote:> "yunlong" <thedreamofbutterfly@hotmail.com> wrote in> news:1111084997.562177.105690@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >
If it is not "accurate" (as I didn't describe to the final end) how>>do you know that you have "finally figured out what you were trying>>to say"? (what did I say?)>>
"Oxymoronic?">
Pseudo-accuracy flies in the face of the light bulb without measuring> the efficiency of the product represented in darkness. >
Yes, that's because you read with your narrow-minded bias.>
Calling Mr. Oswald with the swastika tattoo there is a vacancy waiting> in the English voodoo. >
Reflection gives you the "depth" of words, in our discussion, the>>meaning of my words are all terminated at the physical level; i.e.>>they are reflectable through your body sensation and its>>surroundings. >
Termination of the words only applies in geomorphic progressions from> which the physical has been separated from the substrata of meaning --> but only in the metaphorical sense that meaning has when subjugated to> an artificial construct of its own making. >
Get rid of that pompous self-righteous mentality may help you that,>>probably.>
Down on the mainspring, listen to the tick tock, clock all the faces> that move in on your block. >
That only reflects a little knowledge mentality.>
Your mirror is clouded with ravages of time and space.>
It is world wide usenet, an international setting, and let's not>>forget, the subject is SKIING.>
The transparent people who live on the other side are living a life> that is almost like suicide >
That only reflects a little knowledge mentality.>
Your mirror is clouded with ravages of time and space.>
But lock of perception.>
Locked perception is Mr. Oswald's reality of thought.>
Meaning? Complete sentence please.>
Thinking all about those censored sequences.>
So, "Bob's definition" is incorrect?>
Soap.>
So the second time is no longer fluffy, what do you call that?>
Rational planning in the real world.>
Maybe we ask too much of you.>
Symbolic man suits.>
'mkay, so now we have been subjected to that great construct known as a 'non-sequitur'. How do you like them apples, Mr. Oswald?
VtSkier wrote:> As for the American idiom expressions:> "Jumbo" means large. "Shrimp" while, in this case,> means an aquatic crustacean, it can also mean> something or something which is small. There is> a double entendre here and is kind of a joke.> "jumbo shrimp" then would be "big small" which> are polar opposites and therefore an oxymoron.
Here let me help by demonstrating an oxymoron we can all relate to:
yunlong wrote:> Bob Lee wrote:> > yunlong wrote:> > > Bob Lee wrote:> > > > yunlong wrote:> > [...]> > > > > and I go by perception; when it looks like powder, feels> > > > > like powder (by the feet), and is skied like powder,> > > > > yup,I'll call it powder too, slush or not.> > > >
Here's my perception - if it is slush, then it doesn't> > > > looks like powder, or feel like powder, and you don't ski> > > > it like powder, so you don't call it powder.> > >
In your partitioned mind, maybe, what if it is less than> > > slush? What do you call it?> >
It depends on what the snow is like - there are many accurate> > names for the many distinct types of snow that are found> > between slush and powder.>
"What do you call it?"
Corn, hardpack. chalk, chopped, firm, graupel, cement, sugar, snot, hoar, wet, heavy, light, ice, frozen, refroze, frozen chicken heads, slop, granular, freshies, fetchies, windpack, windblown, windbuff, crust, creamy, crap, crud, death cookies, death cantalopes, glazed, firn, rime, styrofoam, satstrugi, faceted, punchy...but deciding which word would depend on the snow's characteristics and properties. And none of those listed are powder or slush.
[...]> > but you didn't> > write any metaphors - you wrote an oxymoron.>
Metaphor, n. "a figure of speech in witch a term or phrase is applied> to something to which is not literally applicable in order to suggest a> resemblance,"--the random house dictionary-->
Given that "slush powder" is not comprehensible to you, but "slush" and> "powder" are, so when "slush powder" is something new to you, how would> you go about to find out the new thing? Look the resemblance. What> resemblance can you comprehend is depended on whether or not you have> the mental capacity to put "slush" + "powder" together.
"In the realm of arrogance, verbiage reigns." - sting
You *do* know that metaphors are not oxymorons, that there is> > a distinct difference?>
Your "oxymoron" is oxymoronic.>
And that's a good metaphor.
No, actually it's not.
We see that you've got a talent for at oxymorons, now try> > writing a metaphor (like I did above) and then tell us the> > difference between a metaphor and an oxymoron.>
As noted above.>
For extra> > points, see if you can use the term "chew-toy" in your> > metaphor. Example: I play with Ichin Shin like my dog plays> > with his favorite chew-toy.>
Like Bob Lee chewing words; like the dog, like the owner?>
But I'd be happy if, instead of trying to write about> > > > skiing,you'd just put up links to more of those videos of> > > > you trying to ski.> > >
Sven Golly wrote:> "yunlong" <thedreamofbutterfly@hotmail.com> wrote in> news:1111093468.277199.69420@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:>
Huh? You were saying? I must have dozed off, nothing bores me fast
than> > a literary rhetoric. Nevertheless, thanks for the nap>
Your partitioned mind fails to grasp the significance of the
information.
There is nothing significant about in a literary rhetoric, just some noise in an idled mind, even though the writer may think it is shrewd, it serves little meaning/purpose.
IS
-- > Sven Golly> Trolling as usual> Remove the _ to reply by email
"yunlong" <thedreamofbutterfly@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1111162635.714490.199020@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
There is nothing significant about in a literary rhetoric, just some> noise in an idled mind, even though the writer may think it is shrewd,> it serves little meaning/purpose.
Only to a small mind. You have not reflected long enough upon it to grasp the meaning.
-- Sven Golly Trolling as usual Remove the _ to reply by email
Sven Golly wrote:> "yunlong" <thedreamofbutterfly@hotmail.com> wrote in> news:1111162635.714490.199020@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:>
There is nothing significant about in a literary rhetoric, just
some> > noise in an idled mind, even though the writer may think it is shrewd,> > it serves little meaning/purpose.>
Only to a small mind. You have not reflected long enough upon> it to grasp the meaning.
"There is nothing significant about in a literary rhetoric, just some noise in an idled mind, even though the writer may think it is shrewd, it serves little meaning/purpose."
And soon you would copycat my words as though they are signifant.
IS
-- > Sven Golly> Trolling as usual> Remove the _ to reply by email
Bob Lee wrote:> yunlong wrote:> > Bob Lee wrote:> > > yunlong wrote:> > > > Bob Lee wrote:> > > > > yunlong wrote:> > > [...]> > > > > > and I go by perception; when it looks like powder, feels> > > > > > like powder (by the feet), and is skied like powder,> > > > > > yup,I'll call it powder too, slush or not.> > > > >
Here's my perception - if it is slush, then it doesn't> > > > > looks like powder, or feel like powder, and you don't ski> > > > > it like powder, so you don't call it powder.> > > >
In your partitioned mind, maybe, what if it is less than> > > > slush? What do you call it?> > >
It depends on what the snow is like - there are many> > > accurate names for the many distinct types of snow that> > > are found between slush and powder.> >
which> word would depend on the snow's characteristics and properties. And> none of those listed are powder or slush.
Wow, so you think those terms are better than "slush powder" to describe the snow condition? And you say that you understand/know all those terms are for describing a snow condition, but you cannot comprehend "slush powder"? Yup, partitioned mind it is.
[...]> > > but you didn't> > > write any metaphors - you wrote an oxymoron.> >
Metaphor, n. "a figure of speech in witch a term or phrase is
applied> > to something to which is not literally applicable in order to suggest a> > resemblance,"--the random house dictionary--> >
Given that "slush powder" is not comprehensible to you, but "slush"
"powder" are, so when "slush powder" is something new to you, how
would> > you go about to find out the new thing? Look the resemblance. What> > resemblance can you comprehend is depended on whether or not you have> > the mental capacity to put "slush" + "powder" together.>
"In the realm of arrogance, verbiage reigns." - sting
Given that you can come up 38+ terms to describe the snow condition but cannot comprehend "slush powder"? Verbiage it is.
You *do* know that metaphors are not oxymorons, that there is> > > a distinct difference?> >
Your "oxymoron" is oxymoronic.> >
And that's a good metaphor.>
No, actually it's not.
Not sure you know enough to figure that out.
We see that you've got a talent for at oxymorons, now try> > > writing a metaphor (like I did above) and then tell us the> > > difference between a metaphor and an oxymoron.> >
As noted above.> >
For extra> > > points, see if you can use the term "chew-toy" in your> > > metaphor. Example: I play with Ichin Shin like my dog> > > plays with his favorite chew-toy.> >
Like Bob Lee chewing words; like the dog, like the owner?> >
But I'd be happy if, instead of trying to write about> > > > > skiing,you'd just put up links to more of those videos> > > > > of you trying to ski.> > > >
Maybe when the photographer is ready.> > > >
They make me laugh.> > > >
It, the laugh, only reflects your shallowness.> > >
Hahahahaha!> >
Shallow it is.>
Coherent you aren't
Not sure you even know what "coherent" is, given that you can whip up 38+ terms to describe the snow condition but cannot comprehend a descriptive term "slush powder."
Well, there's your problem... you've got antique gear. Try a pair of> Garmont G-Rides ( http://tinyurl.com/43fne ). Warm, light weight and as> comfortable as any tele boot while still letting you ski without> getting down on your knees and begging for your skis to turn.>
There is still time to come back from the DarkSide and see the light.> Come home to us... we'll forgive your past transgressions, brother.>
A.>
Well yeah. I'll, uh, keep it in mind.
I've actually almost always used tele gear in the backcountry and don't plan on changing that. It works very well for me.
Now I may update my Alpine gear when I have the cash for in-area skiing because it's good fun. I doubt it will be with AT boots if/when it happens. This season I've had such a good time being a pin head (cable head really) that I'm not really missing the Alpine gear. I thought I would miss the hucking and sticking those zipper lines but I don't. I would miss them if I had to give them up as I would have as a beginner pinner, but the gap between my skill sets is getting narrower and narrower and now I'm skiing all the same stuff and having fun.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 09:33:30 -0600, "TexasSkiNut" <texasskinut@yahoo.com> wrote:
lal_truckee wrote:>> yunlong wrote:>> > the guy plunged down Cornice cheered and shout "yahoo!>> > The slush powder really turnable">>
I don't believe it. Someone might yell "Yahoo! the slush is fun!" but>
never "yahoo! The slush powder really turnable">
Did you ever consider that Ichin might not be the only one who talks>that way? How could there be just one?>
FWIW, I was not as offended by his particular oxymoron. To me, "slush>powder" brings forth an instant image of the snow conditions. I didn't>feel the need to take him literally. In fact, should the occasion>arise, I just may use that term in the future. Only when flatboarding,>of course...
I am now officially on a mission to make "slush powders" a permanent part of the skiing lexicon. (Note that it must be plural, not the singular "slush powder", in order to be correct.) I'm planning to work this into each and every trip report I post from here on out.
Now I just have to find some snow that could plausibly be called "slush powders". Field research is called for.
Bill Griffiths 19 March 2005 04:46:34 [ permanent link ]
Sources close to the investigation reveal that, on Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:41:40 -0600, VtSkier <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote:
yunlong wrote:
[big snip]
Many descriptive words probably started out metaphorically.>
I'm really not trying to be a jerk here. I might concede>"wet powder" as descriptive. I might even concede that the>12% stuff I skied at Alpine was "wet powder" or even>"wetpow". How's that for a new word? But there just can't>be anything called "slush powder". You see you've used two>nouns with meanings which are polar opposites. when you>use "wet powder", you are using an adjective and a noun>to make a sensible statement. "Slush powder" is just not>a sensible statement.
Agreed, but he may not be getting the metaphor of polar opposites.
He may read that and think it's an example of the partitioned mind dividing the world into North Pole and South Pole and forgetting about everything in between. The rest of us know that it means you can't get close to both poles at the same time, but he seems to think the existence of the equator destroys the distinction between north and south.
Or at least that's my best effort at reading him charitably.
-- Bill Griffiths "The fool hath said in his heart, there is no such thing as justice." Hobbes
yunlong wrote:> Bob Lee wrote:> > yunlong wrote: [...]> > > "What do you call it?"> >
Corn, hardpack. chalk, chopped, firm, graupel, cement, sugar, snot,> > hoar, wet, heavy, light, ice, frozen, refroze, frozen chicken heads,> > slop, granular, freshies, fetchies, windpack, windblown, windbuff,> > crust, creamy, crap, crud, death cookies, death cantalopes, glazed,> > firn, rime, styrofoam, satstrugi, faceted, punchy...but deciding> > which word would depend on the snow's characteristics and properties. > > And none of those listed are powder or slush.>
Wow, so you think those terms are better than "slush powder" to> describe the snow condition?
Yes. At least those terms mean something - and because they aren't meaningless, they are better.
And you say that you understand/know all> those terms are for describing a snow condition, but you cannot> comprehend "slush powder"? Yup, partitioned mind it is.
Here's the problem: Slush is heavy, wet, and mushy - powder is dry, light, and fluffy. You cannot have something that is dry, wet, light, heavy, fluffy. and mushy at the same time.
I tried to be simple and go slowly, tell me where I lost you.
I'd call it a travesty! A crime against god and nature!> >
Bless you Brother, Bless you.>
Hey, thanks!> But... Wasn't I disagreeing with you?
You sometimes have to be extra-clear with the folk still using training bindings. Nice people, and they mean well, but their lips move when they read, if you know what I mean.
Sven Golly wrote:> "yunlong" <thedreamofbutterfly@hotmail.com> wrote in> news:1111164521.583752.131240@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:>
And soon you would copycat my words as though they are signifant.>
There really is a point to what I wrote Ichin. You simply fail> to get it. Wisdom will come to you if you think about it. If> you choose not to you will be closing your mind to increased> awareness.
I know, but I don't care. There's nothing significant in a skiers' newsgroup if the contents/subject is not skiing related.
That is to say, your smart aleck's literary rhetoric wasn't my interest.
snot,> > > hoar, wet, heavy, light, ice, frozen, refroze, frozen chicken heads,> > > slop, granular, freshies, fetchies, windpack, windblown, windbuff,> > > crust, creamy, crap, crud, death cookies, death cantalopes, glazed,> > > firn, rime, styrofoam, satstrugi, faceted, punchy...but deciding> > > which word would depend on the snow's characteristics and properties.> > > And none of those listed are powder or slush.> >
Wow, so you think those terms are better than "slush powder"> > to describe the snow condition?>
Yes. At least those terms mean something - and because they> aren't meaningless, they are better.
Better? It sounds like a confused mind couldn't figure out which term to use.
And you say that you understand/know all> > those terms are for describing a snow condition, but you> > cannot comprehend "slush powder"? Yup, partitioned mind it is.>
Here's the problem: Slush is heavy, wet, and mushy - powder> is dry, light, and fluffy. You cannot have something that is> dry, wet, light, heavy, fluffy. and mushy at the same time.
Yes, those conditions are always existed in a powder field at the end of day.
I tried to be simple and go slowly, tell me where I lost you.
And I tried to tell you that your narrow[-minded] definitions have prevented you to see things broader.
Bill Griffiths 20 March 2005 06:54:06 [ permanent link ]
Sources close to the investigation reveal that, on Sat, 19 Mar 2005 17:10:06 -0600, Sven Golly <sven_golly@myrealbox.com> wrote:
Bill Griffiths <wkgriff@ix_dot_netcom_dot_com.datafoundry.com> wrote in >news:l87n315raid9acgsc8vpvqh5t8i4qmf9sk@4ax.com:>
If that's your charitable interpretation, what's your worst case?>
A flatboarding f***wit?
Hey, no making fun of flatboarding. I treasure my memories of flatboarding on my first pair of skis. Of course, that was TRUE flatboarding, with the skis locked a constant distance apart, rigidly parallel in the same plane -- not the false flatboarding advocated today.
(They were toy skis, all wood, no sidecut, useless for skiing, but excellent runners for a homemade luge. Ah, THAT was flatboarding.)
-- Bill Griffiths "The fool hath said in his heart, there is no such thing as justice." Hobbes
In rec.skiing.alpine lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote:
He talked about the innovative idea of screwing cable hold down hooks to > the side wall near the toe AND A SECOND PAIR near the heel - he just had > to move the cable from the front hold down pair to the back pair to go > from telemark rig to alpine rig. Talk about neat ideas - you guys might > like to reinvent the wheel here and recreate this wonderous > "technological advancement."
Why wouuld you want to lock your heels down?
ObSnow.. 16" new on the deck and counting. Pnuking. No way out.... oh well.
In rec.skiing.alpine AstroPax <astro@astropax.com> wrote:> On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:32:05 -0600, klaus <klaus@xmission.com> wrote:
No way out.... oh well.
Not even by helicopter ? Wow, must really be socked-in.
It's Sunday. 'member. Then again, 26 inches is nothing to sneeze at. I doubt they were flying at all. It was {pn}uking most of the day. (Finally!) But the 4wd on my gas guzzler is out (F*cking auto locking hubs) and I'm not in the mood to chain up. Especially before the rotary comes through. The worst part is that my puppy timeshare couldn't get in this morning and I couldn't get out to get him, and I was sooo looking forward to having the little tyke around in all this snow. That would have been a riot. It's twice as deep as he is tall.
May have to hit the resort tomorrow with the avalanche hazard going up so quickly. I'd bet there'll be lots of action today and tomorrow.
klaus wrote:> In rec.skiing.alpine lal_truckee <lal_truckee@yahoo.com> wrote:>
He talked about the innovative idea of screwing cable hold down hooks to >>the side wall near the toe AND A SECOND PAIR near the heel - he just had >>to move the cable from the front hold down pair to the back pair to go >>from telemark rig to alpine rig. Talk about neat ideas - you guys might >>like to reinvent the wheel here and recreate this wonderous >>"technological advancement.">
Why wouuld you want to lock your heels down?>
ObSnow.. 16" new on the deck and counting. Pnuking. No way out.... oh> well.
See - I told ya'll. Me leaving town allowed you to enjoy some snowfall. It was I preventing weather from blessing your locale.
I gotta have a chat with Ullr about reversing the effect - IMO snow should follow me, not avoid me. Maybe if I brought Skadi a nice parfume?
yunlong wrote:> You must wonder where's my response, eh? Not sure where my> previous two postings of this post have gone; they were> crossposted to rsa.moderated yesterday, but have not shown up> yet. So I cut the "moderated" crap out, see if it works better> this way.
It does work better without "moderated" crap. Now I'm really curious, who is ras.moderated moderator, and what happen to my postings?
yunlong wrote:> Walt wrote:>>yunlong wrote:>>>Walt wrote:>>>>yunlong wrote:>>>>>Walt wrote:>>>>>
There's no communication in this post, only a little>>>>>knowledge's small talk.>>>>
Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we are not>>>>communicating. Which, of course, means that we *are*>>>>communicating, if only barely.>>>
So, "there's no communication in this post, only a little>>>knowledge's small talk.">>
So, "Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we are>>not communicating. Which, of course, means that we *are*>>communicating, if only barely.">
So, what have we communicated?
You have communicated to me the following proposition: we are not communicating. I have received and understood said proposition, and have replied that this proposition negates its own conclusion - by merely expressing it you have communicated something to me, implying that the proposition is false.
-- //-Walt // // Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!
Walt wrote:> yunlong wrote:> > Walt wrote:> >>yunlong wrote:> >>>Walt wrote:> >>>>yunlong wrote:> >>>>>Walt wrote:> >>>>>
There's no communication in this post, only a little> >>>>>knowledge's small talk.> >>>>
Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we are not> >>>>communicating. Which, of course, means that we *are*> >>>>communicating, if only barely.> >>>
So, "there's no communication in this post, only a little> >>>knowledge's small talk."> >>
So, "Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we are> >>not communicating. Which, of course, means that we *are*> >>communicating, if only barely."> >
So, what have we communicated?>
You have communicated to me the following proposition: we are> not communicating. I have received and understood said> proposition, and have replied that this proposition negates> its own conclusion - by merely expressing it you have> communicated something to me, implying that the proposition is false.
Ok, the communication of non-communication, the proposition may be false, but the consequence/result is true. When the consequence/result is true, the true or false of the proposition becomes irrelevant.
--> //-Walt> //> // Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!
You should watch the "blind samurai," on IFC (cable TV), 8:00 am Saturday, ET.
Walt <walt_askier@YerBootsyahoo.com> wrote in news:jVA%d.610$6V3.60 @news.itd.umich.edu:
I have received and understood said proposition, and > have replied that this proposition negates its own conclusion - by > merely expressing it you have communicated something to me, implying > that the proposition is false.
I'm sorry, this is abuse. Arguments are down the hall.
-- Sven Golly Trolling as usual Remove the _ to reply by email
There's no communication in this post, only a little>>>>>>>knowledge's small talk.>>>>>>
Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we are not>>>>>>communicating. Which, of course, means that we *are*>>>>>>communicating, if only barely.>>>>>
So, "there's no communication in this post, only a little>>>>>knowledge's small talk.">>>>
So, "Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we are>>>>not communicating. Which, of course, means that we *are*>>>>communicating, if only barely.">>>
So, what have we communicated?>>
You have communicated to me the following proposition: we are>>not communicating. I have received and understood said>>proposition, and have replied that this proposition negates>>its own conclusion - by merely expressing it you have>>communicated something to me, implying that the proposition is false.>
Ok, the communication of non-communication, the proposition may be> false, but the consequence/result is true. When the consequence/result> is true, the true or false of the proposition becomes irrelevant.
Good. Glad we got that straghtened out. On to the next question:
You know those signs that say "Unmarked hazards may exist"? Well, once you put up the sign, you've marked the hazards, right? So there can't be any unmarked hazards, right? So what's the point of the sign?
Man, it's lonely being a logician.
You should watch the "blind samurai," on IFC (cable TV), 8:00 am> Saturday, ET.
Sorry, dude. Saturday mornings are reserved for skiing, not TV watching.
Sven Golly wrote:> "Armin" <meanon@telus.net> wrote in news:1111176111.832992.267010> @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:>
PS- Some of my best friends are pinheads... but i don't hold it
against> > them. >
How 'bout cable jockies?
There you Pinheads go getting technical again!
Same thing. I use Pindead as a generic term for someone using any type of Tele binding. Pins without cables, cables without pins or cables with pins... they are all Pinheads.
Actually, I haven't seen anyone using tele bindings without cables for quite a while. However, I do still have a pair of Kharu Extremes in my basement, mounted with a pair of Voile 3-pin bindings. It's been a number of years since they've seen daylight. I'd be willing to part with them. Any offers?
You sometimes have to be extra-clear with the folk still using>
training>
bindings. Nice people, and they mean well, but their lips move when>>they read, if you know what I mean.>
"Still using..." ??? more like "Using again..." !!!>
Sorry Pinhead, but been there, done that, got the tele t-shirt and> moved on. It was fun while it lasted but why saddle myself with> inferior technology when a superior solution is available? >
You probably still use a dial-up account to get your 80286 computer on> the net, dontya?>
A.
This one gets a pretty good rise out of Klaus.
When being "picked on" by pinnahs about my "training heels" while riding the lift... "I didn't get to the top of the skiing food chain to ski on equipment I thought was crappy fifty years ago."
BTW, have you seen the AT boots (Garmont, I think) with a bellows toe for easier walking. I think that might be what Kurt K (I think it was Kurt) was yipping about when he said that we (ATers) had stolen their (pinnah's) boots.
Walt wrote:> yunlong wrote:> > Walt wrote:> >>yunlong wrote:> >>>Walt wrote:> >>>>yunlong wrote:> >>>>>Walt wrote:> >>>>>>yunlong wrote:> >>>>>>>Walt wrote:> >>>>>>>
There's no communication in this post, only a little> >>>>>>>knowledge's small talk.> >>>>>>
Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we are> >>>>>>not communicating. Which, of course, means that we> >>>>>>*are*communicating, if only barely.> >>>>>
So, "there's no communication in this post, only a little> >>>>>knowledge's small talk."> >>>>
So, "Yes there is. You have communicated to me that we> >>>>are not communicating. Which, of course, means that we> >>>>*are*communicating, if only barely."> >>>
So, what have we communicated?> >>
You have communicated to me the following proposition: we> >>are not communicating. I have received and understood said> >>proposition, and have replied that this proposition negates> >>its own conclusion - by merely expressing it you have> >>communicated something to me, implying that the proposition is
false.> >
Ok, the communication of non-communication, the proposition> > may be false, but the consequence/result is true. When the> > consequence/result is true, the true or false of the> > proposition becomes irrelevant.>
Good. Glad we got that straghtened out. On to the next question:>
You know those signs that say "Unmarked hazards may exist"?> Well, once you put up the sign, you've marked the hazards,> right? So there can't be any unmarked hazards, right?
Uhh... let the Vtskier decide, he is the picky one, or Bob Lee may insist that every hazard has a marked unmark sign, like his every term for every different snow condition.
I guess it depends.
So what's the point of the sign?
To avoid the liability of lawsuits?
Man, it's lonely being a logician.
Yup, that's why I turn to Tai-Chi-Skiing; it's no-brainer, .
You should watch the "blind samurai," on IFC (cable TV),> > 8:00 am Saturday, ET.>
Sorry, dude. Saturday mornings are reserved for skiing, not TV
watching.
Recording? No problem, not sure you got the stomach for it though; at times, it features the most elegant killing in TV/movies.
IS
-- > //-Walt> //> // There is no Völkl Conspiracy
In rec.skiing.alpine VtSkier <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote:
This one gets a pretty good rise out of Klaus.
When being "picked on" by pinnahs about my "training heels"> while riding the lift...> "I didn't get to the top of the skiing food chain to> ski on equipment I thought was crappy fifty years ago."
Well, maybe it's time to try again. Alpine equipment was crappy 50 years ago... A lot has happened in both worlds since then.
But anyway...The point is that being at the top of the food chain eating raw meat may not be preferable to getting ones fill of caviar and crackers. It's a taste thing. Not to mention that you're never at the top. Someone will always come along and eat your lunch. Don't fool yourself that what you have on your feet is gonna save you that.
BTW, have you seen the AT boots (Garmont, I think) with> a bellows toe for easier walking. I think that might be> what Kurt K (I think it was Kurt) was yipping about when> he said that we (ATers) had stolen their (pinnah's) boots.
In rec.skiing.alpine VtSkier <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote:
Oh, gawd, this wasn't supposed to be a philosophical> thread, humor was intended.
There's a difference?
Thanks for the Scarpa info. There was also some> pictures of the Euros who race AT in a recent Skiing> magazine (or was it Powder, I never look up these> things). These guys could probably eat all of> us for lunch, both with skiing and general all 'round> great shape.
The bellows is pretty standard in racing these days. Those World Cup guys crank. They can beat lift riders to Gunsight Pass.
Oh, and if you are at the top of the food chain AND> a human, you do get to cook your meat.
Ahhh.. but if you are human, you are not at the top of the food chain.
Good. Glad we got that straghtened out. On to the next question:>>
You know those signs that say "Unmarked hazards may exist"?>>Well, once you put up the sign, you've marked the hazards,>>right? So there can't be any unmarked hazards, right?>
Uhh... let the Vtskier decide, he is the picky one, or Bob Lee may> insist that every hazard has a marked unmark sign, like his every term> for every different snow condition.>
I guess it depends.>
Hmmm, depends, yeah that's what I'd say. If the sign is placed at the beginning of the trail where these "unmarked" hazard exist, then I think the hazards have been minimally marked. But if the sign is where you get on the lift, then I probably wouldn't consider the hazards marked and if it's only a notice on the trail map, well nobody reads beyond the map part anyway.>
So what's the point of the sign?>
To avoid the liability of lawsuits?>
Unfortunately true. Sad isn't it?>
Man, it's lonely being a logician.>
For a logician, you throw in a lot of non-sequitors.>
Yup, that's why I turn to Tai-Chi-Skiing; it's no-brainer, .>
Oh, my god, folks, he's admited it!!!>
You should watch the "blind samurai," on IFC (cable TV),>>>8:00 am Saturday, ET.>>
Sorry, dude. Saturday mornings are reserved for skiing, not TV>
watching.>
Recording? No problem, not sure you got the stomach for it though; at> times, it features the most elegant killing in TV/movies.>
If it's really good, is it available on NetFlix? I don't own a TV. But I have a 19 inch monitor on my computer. Along with fixed heel bindings (oh, sorry, that's another thread).
> IS>
-- >>//-Walt>>//>>// There is no Völkl Conspiracy
You should watch the "blind samurai," on IFC (cable TV), 8:00 am>> Saturday, ET.>
Excellent series. Very polite people, the movie Japanese, even when > lopping off body parts. Are the Chinese equally courteous or do they > regard the exchange of insults as normal social discourse?>
klaus wrote:> In rec.skiing.alpine VtSkier <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote:>
Oh, gawd, this wasn't supposed to be a philosophical>>thread, humor was intended.>
There's a difference? >
If you believe there is no difference then I bow to your superior attunement.>
Thanks for the Scarpa info. There was also some>>pictures of the Euros who race AT in a recent Skiing>>magazine (or was it Powder, I never look up these>>things). These guys could probably eat all of>>us for lunch, both with skiing and general all 'round>>great shape.>
The bellows is pretty standard in racing these days. Those World Cup> guys crank. They can beat lift riders to Gunsight Pass.>
I can see the home-made version now. A light weight tele boot (Garmont excursion?) with the sole toe ground down so that it doesn't trip you up when running and use of a Silvretta type AT binding that doesn't care what kind of boot goes in it.>
Oh, and if you are at the top of the food chain AND>>a human, you do get to cook your meat.>
Ahhh.. but if you are human, you are not at the top of the food chain.>
Hmmm, how so? True, a tiger can eat an Indian villager, but great white hunter will come along and kill tiger so village will have tiger meat for a while.>
Yeabut, pinhead/cableheads *like* the telemark binding...why lock it
down? Free> yer heel, free yer wallet and all that jazz.
Hey, don't ever lock'em down.... I'd have nothing to razz you about.
'Had you switched to tele in the olden days, you'd now be getting
bashed by> Armin, BD and other AT ilk.
Nah. In the 'olden days' you might have run into me on my tele skis. The only thing getting bashed back then were my knees... on the fronts of my tele skis.
Mmm, I'm starting to remember why I returned from the DarkSide.
Wonderful skiing yesterday, but it was a little spooky. The only
ATer we saw> was a patroller, oh and one knuckledragger, otherwise the BC was empty. Well,> it was dumping all day though.
Winter has finally returned here as well. 47cm since Saturday and a high of -3C today and still snowing.
I think I feel something coming on... cough... cough.
In article <3a91fiF6bkd9jU1@individual.net>, VtSkier says...
I can see the home-made version now. A light weight>tele boot (Garmont excursion?) with the sole toe ground>down so that it doesn't trip you up when running and>use of a Silvretta type AT binding that doesn't care>what kind of boot goes in it.
No need for the home-made version. Have you seen those Dynafit bindings? Really, no binding at all, just a couple pins (on the sides) for the toe and two for the heel. Pair these w/ the Scarpa F1 and you have tele ski slippers...AT style. I think they have to shim under the Dynafit binding when using the F1 or you'd pop out due to the bellows.
I guess the New Telemark Norm--NTN will be like this too...sorta...if it ever appears on the shelf so's we can all lighten our wallets.
In article <3a91fiF6bkd9jU1@individual.net>, VtSkier says...>
I can see the home-made version now. A light weight> >tele boot (Garmont excursion?) with the sole toe ground> >down so that it doesn't trip you up when running and> >use of a Silvretta type AT binding that doesn't care> >what kind of boot goes in it.>
No need for the home-made version. Have you seen those Dynafit bindings?> Really, no binding at all, just a couple pins (on the sides) for the toe and > two for the heel. Pair these w/ the Scarpa F1 and you have tele ski > slippers...AT style. I think they have to shim under the Dynafit binding > when using the F1 or you'd pop out due to the bellows.
Check out these pictures of World Cup racers' way-modified Scarpa boots and Dynafit bindings at Ootah's Powderkeg Last weekend. You have trouble telling it's AT and not tele...on the uphill anyway...and if you ignore the clothing. Heh heh, say what you want about pinnas, but those fixed-heel folks sure dress funny.
Bob Lee wrote:> > You sometimes have to be extra-clear with the folk still using> training> > bindings. Nice people, and they mean well, but their lips move when> > they read, if you know what I mean.>
"Still using..." ??? more like "Using again..." !!!>
Sorry Pinhead, but been there, done that, got the tele t-shirt and> moved on.
That's okay - lots of people never pick it up. Fortunately for the folks that lack tele skills they still continue to make training bindings.
Wow, these guys are everywhere. I didn't think there were many left? Where did> you ski w/ this 10th guy? We have one here in Kamas too.
Arn't they? Chatted with this guy here at Alpine Meadows, but he wasn't a regular. We do have some regulars from the 10th, also. This guy was in on the tail end; arrived at Hale from basic in Arkansas near the end of the war, so he was about 18 in 1945; never saw action - he was merely taught to ski on the govmint dime and released into the civilian population. Not one of Minnie's boys at all.
Reminds me of sitting one stormy morning in the warming hut after a few blizzard runs and listening to a couple of geezers compare dates and times before deciding that the first guy, who had been a Luftwaff fighter pilot, had tried to shoot down the guy who had been an American bomber pilot, since the dates of engagements matched.
VtSkier <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote in news:3a9jhqF66b9qaU1 @individual.net:
An interesting bit of trivia. You have all heard of Zero Mostel,> the actor, most probably. According to my former father-in-law,> he was a member of the 10th. How he got there, my f-i-l couldn't> explain, but said he was probably one of the laziest men he had> ever met. Would do anything to get out of activity of any sort.
Sven Golly wrote:> VtSkier <VtSkier@nospam.com> wrote in news:3a9jhqF66b9qaU1> @individual.net:>
An interesting bit of trivia. You have all heard of Zero Mostel,>>the actor, most probably. According to my former father-in-law,>>he was a member of the 10th. How he got there, my f-i-l couldn't>>explain, but said he was probably one of the laziest men he had>>ever met. Would do anything to get out of activity of any sort.>
From your reference... In 1943, he briefly served in the Army but was soon discharged. Officially, it was due to an unspecified physical disability, but it's likely he was dismissed because the Army was suspicious of Mostel's left-leaning politics. This was a harbinger for things to come.
My f-i-l only talked about Mostel at Camp Hale. And the part about being lazy.
Bob Lee wrote:> > > You sometimes have to be extra-clear with the folk still using> > training> > > bindings. Nice people, and they mean well, but their lips move
when> > > they read, if you know what I mean.> >
"Still using..." ??? more like "Using again..." !!!> >
Sorry Pinhead, but been there, done that, got the tele t-shirt and> > moved on.>
That's okay - lots of people never pick it up. Fortunately for the> folks that lack tele skills they still continue to make training> bindings.>
Bob
Could be that some are open-minded enough to give something new a try, explore it's potential, discover it's inherent limitations and move on. Fortunately for the folks that lack critical thinking skills, pinnas adoption of plastic boots, alpine skis and releaseable bindings has made their gear virtually identical to AT gear and given it some semblance of usefullness.
Now if they could just quit worrying about looking cool and lock down their heels, they'd be onto something.
The again, they probably sucked at alpine skiing and therefore have nothing to go back to.
You sometimes have to be extra-clear with the folk still using>>>
training>>>
bindings. Nice people, and they mean well, but their lips move>
when>
they read, if you know what I mean.>>>
"Still using..." ??? more like "Using again..." !!!>>>
Sorry Pinhead, but been there, done that, got the tele t-shirt and>>>moved on.>>
That's okay - lots of people never pick it up. Fortunately for the>>folks that lack tele skills they still continue to make training>>bindings.>>
Could be that some are open-minded enough to give something new a try,> explore it's potential, discover it's inherent limitations and move on.> Fortunately for the folks that lack critical thinking skills, pinnas> adoption of plastic boots, alpine skis and releaseable bindings has> made their gear virtually identical to AT gear and given it some> semblance of usefullness.>
Now if they could just quit worrying about looking cool and lock down> their heels, they'd be onto something.>
The again, they probably sucked at alpine skiing and therefore have> nothing to go back to. >
A.>
I'll bite. If you ever want to come meet me at Crested Butte or Monarch I'll wear my painful Alpine boots one more time so you can tell me if I suck or not. If you can hang that is...
Matt (the added challenge of free heels was a nice change)
Did you notice that the page <http://www.telemarktips.com/Moviepage.html> has movies of what they call the "Alpine Meadows Tele Freeskiing Comp" up on the Keyhole slopes? I think we paused and watched a part of it when you were out visiting last month; or maybe all the days just run together when I'm having fun...
Did you notice that the page > <http://www.telemarktips.com/Moviepage.html> has movies of what they > call the "Alpine Meadows Tele Freeskiing Comp" up on the Keyhole slopes? > I think we paused and watched a part of it when you were out visiting > last month; or maybe all the days just run together when I'm having fun...>
You should watch the "blind samurai," on IFC (cable TV), 8:00 am> > > Saturday, ET.> >
Excellent series. Very polite people, the movie Japanese,> > even when lopping off body parts.>
You were reading an "English" translation...
You mean subtitles? Of course, but you get a lot from body language and tone of voice -- once you get over the fact that everything Toshiro Mifune says is NOT a death threat.
Are the Chinese equally courteous or do they> > regard the exchange of insults as normal social discourse?>
Like any society, insults are for jerks, only Chinese have a special> phrase for it, "Yi Qi Ren Zhi Tao, Huan Zhi Qi Ren," "you ways to> yourself," another way of saying, "let you taste your own medicine."
Whatever. The Chinese I know laugh raucously at my attempts to distinguish between the words for boy and girl, and they laugh much louder at my attempts to emulate their pronunciation.
-- Cheers, Bev ============================================= A: Top posters. Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?
The Real Bev wrote:> > Amazing that a broken back could be a lucky accident.>
Lucky breaks can abound. I broke every bone in my right> foot while skiing in 1967. Was in the navy reserve at the> time, senior in college, already had half of OCS done for> them. Went to the navy doc in Burlington. He asked me if> I wanted to be in the navy. I said, "No sir." Abut 6 weeks> later I had an honorable discharge, convenience of the> government.
Cool. Is your foot still shaped like a foot or did you opt for the snowshoe modification?
-- Cheers, Bev ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Why should I be tarred with the epithet "loony" merely because I have a pet halibut? --Monty Python
Amazing that a broken back could be a lucky accident.>>
Lucky breaks can abound. I broke every bone in my right>>foot while skiing in 1967. Was in the navy reserve at the>>time, senior in college, already had half of OCS done for>>them. Went to the navy doc in Burlington. He asked me if>>I wanted to be in the navy. I said, "No sir." Abut 6 weeks>>later I had an honorable discharge, convenience of the>>government.>
Cool. Is your foot still shaped like a foot or did you opt for the> snowshoe modification?
Snowshoe is not a modification. Size 12. Y'know the footprints that show up on birth certificates? In most cases it's a dainty five toes, two balls and a heel (somebody is going to pick up on "balls", I just know it). Mine was a large size blob of ink, no definition.
The Real Bev wrote:> > Cool. Is your foot still shaped like a foot or did you opt for the> > snowshoe modification?>
Snowshoe is not a modification. Size 12. Y'know the> footprints that show up on birth certificates? In> most cases it's a dainty five toes, two balls and> a heel (somebody is going to pick up on "balls", I> just know it). Mine was a large size blob of ink, no> definition.
When last grandspawn was born, the nurse put an ink spawn-footprint on my son's arm. I thought it was cool. It lasted quite a while. Through the wonder of modern technology, it only took me a few minutes to find the picture. Thank god for digital cameras. If I have the patience I can do an hours-long slideshow starting in November 2000.
Still fits a ski boot though.
Good enough.
-- Cheers, Bev ====================================================================== "Steve Balmer, CEO of Microsoft[0], recently referred to LINUX as a cancer. Unsurprisingly, that's incorrect; LINUX was released on August 25th, 1991 and is therefore a virgo." -- Kevin L
Could be that some are open-minded enough to give something new a
try,> > explore it's potential, discover it's inherent limitations and move on.> > Fortunately for the folks that lack critical thinking skills, pinnas> > adoption of plastic boots, alpine skis and releaseable bindings has> > made their gear virtually identical to AT gear and given it some> > semblance of usefullness.> >
Now if they could just quit worrying about looking cool and lock
down> > their heels, they'd be onto something.> >
The again, they probably sucked at alpine skiing and therefore have> > nothing to go back to. > >
A.> >
I'll bite.> If you ever want to come meet me at Crested Butte or Monarch I'll
wear> my painful Alpine boots one more time so you can tell me if I suck or not.> If you can hang that is...>
Matt (the added challenge of free heels was a nice change)
Like I said before, there's your problem... you need some new "painless" alpine boots. I buckle mine up in the morning and don't touch them again until it's time to go home. Both my AT and my regular alpine boots. Actually, both pair are easier on my feet than my tele boots which sometimes give me blisters (unless I duct tape my heels) on longer tours. Then again, new tele boots would probably solve that problem.
BTW, thanks for the invitation. Never been there but if I ever get down that way I'll be sure take you up on the offer... as long as it's followed by copious amounts of beer. And no, Coors is not real beer, and neither is Molsons.
Likewise, if you ever get up to the Kootenays let me know and we'll do a tour followed by some of our local brews.
Oh, and when it comes to the Training-Binding/Pinhead razzing, try to remember the words of the immortal Foghorn Leghorn: "Hey that's a joke son, don't ya get it?"
In rec.skiing.alpine Armin <meanon@telus.net> wrote:> BTW, thanks for the invitation. Never been there but if I ever get down> that way I'll be sure take you up on the offer... as long as it's> followed by copious amounts of beer. And no, Coors is not real beer,> and neither is Molsons.
You do realize that Coors bought Molson?
Oh, and when it comes to the Training-Binding/Pinhead razzing, try to> remember the words of the immortal Foghorn Leghorn: "Hey that's a joke> son, don't ya get it?"
Well, it's not very funny. It's like making fun of someone's handicap.
ObSnow: Wow... nice one coming through right now. Kinda heavy so far, but the next 1.5 to 2 feet should be lighter, so tomorrow will be very nice. I'm coming up on max snowpack for the year again. And it is really coming down fast. But it kinda sounds like a war zone. They're working hard up on The Paper Route. Back in the flow...
That must be the American spin. I think officially they "merged". But we shouldn't feel too bad I suppose, I hear the new company is called Molson-Coors. They gave us top billing:
But so much for the classic "I am Canadian" commercials", eh?
Oh, and when it comes to the Training-Binding/Pinhead razzing, try
remember the words of the immortal Foghorn Leghorn: "Hey that's a
joke> > son, don't ya get it?">
Well, it's not very funny. It's like making fun of someone's
handicap.
Good on ya! Admitting you have a problem is the first step on the road to recovery...
ObSnow: Wow... nice one coming through right now. Kinda heavy so far,> but the next 1.5 to 2 feet should be lighter, so tomorrow will be
very> nice. I'm coming up on max snowpack for the year again. And it is> really coming down fast. But it kinda sounds like a war zone. They're> working hard up on The Paper Route. Back in the flow...
After dumping 50cm on us we are now back to blue sky and sunshine. Things are looking up for the weekend though, more precip predicted. Let's hope they're right for a change.
I get it, but I can't let a dig go un-countered, joke or not. That
would> be an (implied) admission of, well, something that's not true. I hear
your tone and I think we have an understanding.
Hey , I really don't care what the other guy has strapped to his feet. Besides, the razzing goes both ways... else it wouldn't be any fun.
And yes, I realize my painful Alpine boots are a problem (well not so
much if they just stay in the closet). I've been meaning to go back
the fitter and get my Dynafit liners re-cooked. That's probably all
will take, but this has forced me out of my comfort zone and into> freeheeling on everything I ski. It's been a positive growth for me
I'm definitely stronger for it.
I think it definitely takes more muscle-per-vertical-foot to ski tele turns. However, I see a LOT of tele skiers using parallel turn instead, and not just because they can't make tele turns.
Having hauled my share of heavy multi-day packs while on tele gear, I can vouch for the fact that it also forces one to fine-tune their fore/aft balance skills as well.
And yes, Coors is crap and I'd only rate Molson about one (small)
notch> higher. I'll drink Molson in cans on the river if it's really cold
I'm really thirsty. That's about it. I can't even say that for Coors> (maybe if I was thirsty enough and faced with no better options but
would have to be a dire emergency).
I think your being too generous with your assesment of Molson.
John Red-Horse 23 March 2005 22:52:44 [ permanent link ]
In article <1111595543.211498.157400@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, meanon@telus.net wrote:>
Actually, both pair are easier on my feet than my tele>boots which sometimes give me blisters (unless I duct tape my heels) on>longer tours. Then again, new tele boots would probably solve that>problem.>
Ah, Armin, you've finally let the cat out of the bag! Now I know why you get such singular pleasure out of watching us less-than-accomplished flip-floppers in "action".
BTW, thanks for the invitation. Never been there but if I ever get down>that way I'll be sure take you up on the offer... as long as it's>followed by copious amounts of beer. And no, Coors is not real beer,>and neither is Molsons. >
I've got a couple of pieces of advice, fwtw: (1) If you get extended the invitation, go to the trouble of taking him up on it; and, (2) Never using adjectives like "copious" in the same sentence with "beer" with Klaus. It is one of the times that he will take things literally... <g>
Finally, I recommend that we all accept that you are definitely one of the clued-in Northerners when it comes to beer. If you drive when you come down, be sure to bring Klaus some of that NBC IPA; he'll understand what I mean.
In rec.skiing.alpine John Red-Horse <jrredho@swcp.com> wrote:
Finally, I recommend that we all accept that you are definitely one of the> clued-in Northerners when it comes to beer. If you drive when you come> down, be sure to bring Klaus some of that NBC IPA; he'll understand what I> mean.
Mmmmmmmm.. IPA.. Door's open. Will trade bed space for IPA.
Ah, Armin, you've finally let the cat out of the bag! Now I know why
get such singular pleasure out of watching us less-than-accomplished> flip-floppers in "action".
If you tell my AT buddies I'll deny everything!
I've got a couple of pieces of advice, fwtw: (1) If you get extended
invitation, go to the trouble of taking him up on it; and, (2) Never
using> adjectives like "copious" in the same sentence with "beer" with Klaus.> It is one of the times that he will take things literally... <g>
If he tries to drink too copious an amount of my beer I'll have to distract him with ... ugh.. argicultural products. I get the feeling he might have a certain affinity for them.
Finally, I recommend that we all accept that you are definitely one
of the> clued-in Northerners when it comes to beer. If you drive when you come> down, be sure to bring Klaus some of that NBC IPA; he'll understand what I> mean.
... or if you guys should come up here again I believe it's my turn to buy the first pitcher or two.
In rec.skiing.alpine Armin <meanon@telus.net> wrote:
If he tries to drink too copious an amount of my beer I'll have to> distract him with ... ugh.. argicultural products. I get the feeling he> might have a certain affinity for them.
I absolutely lurv broccoli. Just the flowery parts. You can have the stems. You guys grow *good* broccoli. *Good* broccoli. I'd trade Coors for good broccoli. Yup. I would. Straight across. No premium. And I'd feel really good about it. With hollandaise sauce?? Broccoli? I'd go for a merger of equals on that. MMmmmmmm.... Broccoli....
Enlighten me. I'm familiar with 1in10 but not 7of9.
Hey, I think you need to get out more. 7of9 (aka- Seven of Nine) is one of yours. Jeri Ryan. The Borg that left the Collective. You *will* be assimilated. Star Trek. Friggin' GORGEOUS!!
I'm Emericun.. I> know what happens next door, not way the f*ck up there. I know how> often Terri Shaivo menstruates, but I have no idea of the GNP of> Canada. Consider it a cultural deficiency.. kinda like drunken> Irishmen. Everyone loves them.> Really.. you *will* get used to it.
We're working on it. That's why we sent Rick Mercer down there to do some interviews. Ever seen "Talking to America"? It's great. You can find some of the video clips here:
In article <d1s731$hdo$1@news.xmission.com>, klaus <klaus@xmission.com> wrote:
Well, it's not very funny. It's like making fun of someone's handicap.>
ObSnow: Wow... nice one coming through right now. Kinda heavy so far,> but the next 1.5 to 2 feet should be lighter, so tomorrow will be very> nice. I'm coming up on max snowpack for the year again. And it is> really coming down fast. But it kinda sounds like a war zone. They're> working hard up on The Paper Route. Back in the flow..
I went to xxxx today, and it seemed the storm from the previous night never stopped dumping, The snow reminded a tiny bit of Mt Baker in a regular, sane seasons: wet snow and warm temperatures_ However it would had been pouring rain at Baker with the equal air temperatures_ Overall it was a great day for someone, who has been snow starve in the Pacific Northwest_ LCC was a nice drive compare to Washington State Hwy 542_
What is the snow report for tonight/tomorrow? (3-24)
In article <d1s731$hdo$1@news.xmission.com>, klaus <klaus@xmission.com> wrote:
ObSnow: Wow... nice one coming through right now. Kinda heavy so far,> but the next 1.5 to 2 feet should be lighter, so tomorrow will be very> nice. I'm coming up on max snowpack for the year again. And it is> really coming down fast. But it kinda sounds like a war zone. They're> working hard up on The Paper Route. Back in the flow..
I went to xxxx today, and it seemed the storm from the previous night never stopped dumping, The snow reminded a tiny bit of Mt Baker in a regular, sane seasons: wet snow and warm temperatures_ However it would had been pouring rain at Baker with the equal air temperatures_ Overall it was a great day for someone, who has been snow starve in the Pacific Northwest_ LCC was a nice drive compare to Washington State Hwy 542_
From what I read, it looks like it is going to be pretty nice for
klaus <klaus@xmission.com> wrote in news:d1ss49$1dd$3@news.xmission.com:
IPA is great in Utah since they don't refrigerate the (real)> beer. Probably why I like it.
Yeah come to think of it, there aren't any coolers in the state stores are there?? That sux. But then, IPA's are really good sunny day, lunch beers. Mmmm. Stone Brewing makes some of the best. IMHO.
But, you have bed space anytime you show. Beer or not. You're paid> ahead.
Likewise back atcha if you're ever in, uh, sunny uno-where.
-- Sven Golly Yah sure by gosh by yumpin' yiminy Trolling as usual Remove the "_" to reply
