• Forums
  • Ski Gabber
  • Sorry to curse, but why THE FUCK did us resorts stop building tabletops.

Member of the Month

JalmarKalmar
April, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Sorry to curse, but why THE FUCK did us resorts stop building tabletops.

profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
it happened around the rcr lawsuit so i suspect resorts build standard kicker step down jumps because their afraid of building other than standard textbook jumps.

if you whatch the neophiles familia video youll see how soft and slow the land is but how much air they get at the same time. by the way what resort was that  neophile familia vid filmed at.

what resorts in the us still build big tabletops?

the canyons has for years but recently moved their park. fuck,,,, canyons used to have a 60 foot true table at the bottom of, and then a bueatyful 35 foot true table at the top of their park that they had from 04 to 07.

sorry to rant but if youve ever hit a true table youll understand......soo much better  than stepdowns,
Jan 13 2012 11:53AM
0 0
profile picture
VanMelle
Posts: 1277 - Karma: 1,140
dangerous
Jan 13 2012 11:54AM
0 0
profile picture
UFOsarereal
Posts: 2282 - Karma: 1,109
hang on... how are tabletops more dangerous than step-down? I love tabletops.
Jan 13 2012 11:59AM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
how are they dangerous? you land going much slower on a true table. i would say they are much safer. id rather over rotate a landing going 20 mph on a 40 foot true table than over rotate a landing at 40 mph on a 40 foot kicker step down, so i wonder why you think they are dangerous?
Jan 13 2012 11:59AM
0 0
profile picture
a_pla5tic_bag
Posts: 9210 - Karma: 5,357
i hate stepdowns. tables are always better jumps. mountains just find ny down slope and put a kicker before it and call it a good jump.
Jan 13 2012 12:01PM
0 0
profile picture
Nicko1981
Posts: 527 - Karma: 180
To answer OP question, they were filming in Les Arcs.
Jan 13 2012 12:01PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
i think thats part of it for sure
Jan 13 2012 12:04PM
0 0
profile picture
I_Am_Mod
Posts: 13214 - Karma: 3,753
curious as well ....

Jan 13 2012 12:05PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
holy shit ive skied there, its my fav euro resort better than zermatt imo which ive skied too.
Jan 13 2012 12:07PM
0 0
profile picture
562056961108
Posts: 0 - Karma: 575
Look I think its fair to assume that a jump with marginal horizontal speed combined with a gradually super poppy yet manageable takeoff with a stomp-able landing is the best way to build a jump.

See: Breckenridge, Keystone
Jan 13 2012 12:14PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
if you want maximum airtime with minimum risk, its a true table. if you cant understand that you probly shouldnt hope to pass a physics course within your lifetime
Jan 13 2012 12:34PM
0 0
profile picture
skiilicious
Posts: 7 - Karma: 10
techy lingo being spoken. :D
Jan 13 2012 12:34PM
0 0
profile picture
ski0
Posts: 2321 - Karma: 5,370
table tops need more snow, and generally take more work to build. but actually there are plenty of nice table tops out there. so go explore and find em
Jan 13 2012 12:36PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr.Bishop
Posts: 22671 - Karma: 75,832
See also: Classic aerials.

Kick, steep landing and short distance makes for safer and easier trickability.

Pancaking on the deck is NEVER worse than overshooting. The kickier your jump is, the shorter the landing can be and still feel long too.


Jan 13 2012 12:57PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
well i think its easier to learn tricks when your takeoff speed and landing speed are equal.

gapers overshoot tables. great..... ruins it for everybody.

jon ollson invitational jump is the best jump in the world because you can can the most airtime from a true table unless you want to get as much time on a step down
if you built a step down that gave you as much airtime as joi's table, you would be landing at about 70 miles per hour.


Jan 13 2012 1:06PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
^can get
Jan 13 2012 1:07PM
0 0
profile picture
RoofDaRoofieDogg
Posts: 3090 - Karma: 1,989
Castle has one. ONE.
Jan 13 2012 1:32PM
0 0
profile picture
UFOsarereal
Posts: 2282 - Karma: 1,109
Click for larger image
Jan 13 2012 2:09PM
0 0
profile picture
JakeAssBeatClap
Posts: 6673 - Karma: 2,535
keystone's park earlier this week fatty table

Click for larger image
Jan 13 2012 2:14PM
0 0
profile picture
DURK18
Posts: 213 - Karma: 21
i think canada olympic park's third large jump is a very table style jump. i am personally a fan.
Jan 13 2012 2:18PM
0 0
profile picture
skier_boy26
Posts: 11295 - Karma: 502
Wedges and step-downs are more enjoyable and far, far more aesthetic.
Jan 13 2012 2:22PM
0 0
profile picture
HamFaceGirl
Posts: 5242 - Karma: 2,677
I would think it takes much more snow to make a table vs. a step down also
Jan 13 2012 3:01PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61155 - Karma: 118,841
PC has a nice mix of both, i don't think many people like true step downs except snowboarders. PC has some nice poppy true table style jumps but they usually don't fill in to the back of the jump, so they have wedges and could be mistaken for step downs, when they're actually maybe 2-3ft of step down at the most. breck/keystone does a similar thing too, they look like a step down because of the wedge, but they're actually closer to a true table/step over.
Jan 13 2012 3:05PM
0 0
profile picture
e.will
Posts: 1981 - Karma: 967
Yeah, but that 80 foot stopover you built at hn circa 2007 was the realest. Such an amazing jump. Lot's of hang time, but confidence boosting.
Jan 13 2012 3:10PM
0 0
profile picture
rareison
Posts: 10263 - Karma: 218
This so much
Jan 13 2012 3:14PM
0 0
profile picture
bdowning
Posts: 1630 - Karma: 243

Lol, this is false. The style Key and Breck build their jumps gives you maximum airtime. You just need to hit it with the correct speed. Yes Tables minimize risk but does not at all maximize airtime.

Jan 13 2012 3:16PM
0 0
profile picture
TOAST.
Posts: 7282 - Karma: 33,460
they require more snow.
Jan 13 2012 3:23PM
0 0
profile picture
lands11
Posts: 1818 - Karma: 1,677
This is exactly what I was thinking when I was imagining Brecks jumps.They may seem like a step down but they don't actually step down. They just cut the middle of the jump out.
Jan 13 2012 3:32PM
0 0
profile picture
AGOF
Posts: 2038 - Karma: 3,602
but i fucking love them
Jan 13 2012 3:38PM
0 0
profile picture
skijunkiedtm
Posts: 9229 - Karma: 61
My old hill said it was insurance and a safety issue.
Jan 13 2012 3:43PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
not to argue with the man upstairs but,,,

1 imagine if peple spun off arial jumps, rather than flipped.

 2 imagine the landing on aerials was icy, not the chewed up powdery slush that they have on olympic aerial jumps. ,,

3 imagine someone under rotates or over rotates and catches an edge on this icy areal landing.

his head will slap the ice so hard you will find pieces of his helmet scattered across the entire resort and he will be lucky to be in a coma for the rest of his life.


on a true table you can make the landing insanely long, to rule out the possibility of overshooting.

also  the jump in the neophile video https://www.newschoolers.com/ns/forums/readthread/thread_id/634399/

is almost a true table, and wow what a dangerous jump that looks like.

the truth is its jumps like this that allow people to try flat 9 scremen seamans without having to land at 40 mph. i really cant see any argument that a true table is more dangerous, unless its narrow and ur a gaper out of its element and it falls off the side

Jan 13 2012 3:55PM
0 0
profile picture
james6345789
Posts: 4763 - Karma: 465
Hyland in Minnesota has one next to the rainbow box that's like 25 feet.
Jan 13 2012 3:56PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
well that is what im talking about, id kill to hit that jump. i hope more resorts catch on. fat, long landing,.... whats the danger, unless your afraid of high take off speeds?
Jan 13 2012 3:59PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
yeah . lawyers. we need a loser pays system in america like EVERY other country in the world to prevent stupid lawsuits like someone who jaywalks and gets hit by a car then sues the city saying the dont walk sign wasnt big enough.im glad to see keystone gets it and i hope other resorts follow the trend back to sick tables
Jan 13 2012 4:06PM
0 0
profile picture
Kcin
Posts: 1845 - Karma: 57
I would give my left nut to have that jump at my mountain
Jan 13 2012 4:10PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
and i realize thers kickers in the neophiles vid, but the knuckle is only a few feet lower than the lip of the takeoff, so its essentially a tabletop
Jan 13 2012 4:19PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
Funny that some are suggesting it is a liability issue. I've been around long enough to watch the terrain park evolution. Now I may be wrong here but I always understood that step downs became more popular as aerials got bigger and more technical. A step down gives you that much more hang time to throw in that last 180. To me there's far less risk on a tabletop. In fact I've seen a ton of neck, back, and knee injuries caused by people landing on the knuckle of a step down.
Jan 13 2012 4:19PM
0 0
profile picture
RubberSoul
Posts: 11249 - Karma: 14,642
step downs suck my balls (i used to like them, now id love if i could only hit stepovers for the rest of my life) but i think a major reason theyre so common is they require less snow in a lot of cases
Jan 13 2012 4:32PM
0 0
profile picture
Heart
Posts: 6156 - Karma: 3,462
yessir! fun to try new tricks on
Jan 13 2012 4:38PM
0 0
profile picture
james6345789
Posts: 4763 - Karma: 465
Uh I wouldn't call like 10 feet a few feet
Jan 13 2012 4:42PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
physics lesson no 1.   PE potential energy equals mgh. that means if you land 20 feet below where you took off, you will have the additional kinetic energy of your
 mass x gravity 10 m/s^2 x height difference in meters. so assuming you had a ten meter stepdown, you would be going approx 22.5 mph faster than you were when you took off the lip.if you land 5 meters below the knuckle you will be going 34.75  mph faster than when you took off.

given a 10 meter step down is enormous, on a 5 meter step down, which you will find at resorts, if you take off going 30 mph, if you land mid landing say again 5 meters below the knuckle, you will be going 52.5mph. this is assuming your landing impact is soft and you get the tranny perfect.

have fun over rotating at 50 mph  :)
Jan 13 2012 4:48PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
watch again, the cameraman is standing on the knuckle and hes easily filming from eq height as the lip if not higher. i dont see more thane 3 feet drop between the lip and the rollover knuckle
Jan 13 2012 4:59PM
0 0
profile picture
john.stossel
Posts: 943 - Karma: 5
in fact stop the video at 59 seconds. the camera is a well above the takeoff, so explain to me why the cameraman would be standing on top of a 15 foot ladder on the knuckle...haha
Jan 13 2012 5:08PM
0 0
profile picture
james6345789
Posts: 4763 - Karma: 465
Oh you're right
Jan 13 2012 5:12PM
0 0
profile picture
NTPJ
Posts: 173 - Karma: 8
sorry to be a dick but this is all wrong.

Essentially a skier hitting a jump is the same as firing a cannon (parabolic motion) and the forward (horizontal) and downhill (vertical) momentum are completely separate and don't affect each other.

This means that you do increase vertical speed by falling on a step-down (as you correctly said due to GPE=mgh). However your horizontal speed will slow down, due to air resistance. This means you will have a harder landing (therefore I agree with your point) but you will not be travelling faster, probably about the same speed
Jan 13 2012 5:17PM
0 0
profile picture
.ZT.
Posts: 5679 - Karma: 2,792
i love tables and step ups. step downs are lame.
Jan 13 2012 5:23PM
0 0
profile picture
Emma_Watson
Posts: 4483 - Karma: 6,662
sunday river had a 15 foot table top in jibpark last year. twas prime
Jan 13 2012 5:24PM
0 0
profile picture
Guard_Puma
Posts: 344 - Karma: 82
Thank you. Finally someone who seems to actually kind of have a grasp on physics.
Jan 13 2012 5:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Lord.Quasimoto
Posts: 958 - Karma: 33
huge stepdowns suck. true tables and step over / ups for the win
Jan 13 2012 5:27PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)