Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:06 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Avalanches Death and Exemption
PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 9:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:50 am
Posts: 328
Location: hippy pow turns
a very wise man recently gave me a frame work around decision making. four questions.

1. Are we in avalanche terrain. (yes / no)

2. Can we manage the terrain. (route selection, identify hazards and safe zones)

3. Consequence. (as related to snow pack, terrain hazards, worst case scenario)

4. Is it worth the risk (risk identified both as hazard X exposure and the potential for loss or gain. this is a personal/group decision)

of course it take some knowledge and experience to answer these questions, but it works as a decision making tool if you constantly evaluate where you are and where you want to go using these questions as the frame work.

_________________
fat, old and useless. pick two.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avalanches Death and Exemption
PostPosted: Sun Mar 11, 2012 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:38 pm
Posts: 258
Location: powder central, bc, canuckistan
hey im still procrastinating about my tax return and i found this discussion to be really good also so i just have one last post before i go back to my taxes, promise. (fingers crossed smiley!)

first, on dishwasher daves quote:
'"I do a lot of presentations about mountain sports, and sometimes share a list of dead friends to remind myself and the audience that the hidden price for the stunning photographs is all-too-regularly life itself. There are 27 names on my list. Not one of those friends died while driving to the mountains. Not one died on a commercial airline flight. To equate the risks of mountain sports to everyday activities like driving or even the chance of death from cancer is completely idiotic. Every friend on my list drove to the mountains a lot, and some even wrecked vehicles and spent time in the hospital from those crashes. But they died doing mountain sports."

Good thoughts on this topic from Will Gadd.'

As long as Gadd would consider me an idiot for comparing (not equating actually) risks between activities, i feel compelled to point out Gadd is an athlete, not a math/science/statistician. Clearly people who died pursuing mtn sports cannot die driving, flying or any other way. Statistics is very much a valid means to compare risks of various activities, relating the number of users (exposure) to incidents, accidents or deaths, thereby assessing the 'riskiness' of an activity. While obviously Gadd sees alot of exposure of himself and friends to mtn sport risks, one mite note he also has some vested interest in having those sports appear as dramatically risky; it gets attention. no disrespect intended.

second, splittrippin, 'fat girls need lovin too' can also be expressed (with wider social acceptance and potentially more apropriately for a snow sports forum) as, 'you cant ski powder all the time'. giggity.

finally, with the discussions about group size being mostly negative, that more people means worse decisions or decision making processes, one might look at other vocations where critical decisions are regularly made... medicine, aviation, guiding.... its very much standard in those professions that serious procedures are planned by groups. Individuals make mistakes. Open, honest and clear communication bw experts is the proven method for gettin sh!t done right. It does take time for groups to process ideas, options, conditions but in a 'common adventure' (ie without a designated leader/authoritay) its the responsibizzlety of each individual to participate.

_________________
never summer snowboards
phantom bindings
dynafit touring


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Avalanches Death and Exemption
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 12:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:02 pm
Posts: 256
Location: OR
karkis wrote:
second, splittrippin, 'fat girls need lovin too' can also be expressed (with wider social acceptance and potentially more apropriately for a snow sports forum) as, 'you cant ski powder all the time'. giggity.


I love you both. Fat chicks are hotness!

_________________
"For future reference, the time is now."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  





Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group