Tough call. Both are impressive, but let me tell you...nothing will pucker your asshole more than being in a no fall zone looking down at 1000' of air below you, rock climbing in ski boots.

Never been a park guy but it's got to take some balls to man up and send those huge kickers.

Actually here's a better question.

Have you ever gone into the park knowing if you make one mistake on a critical section you will die? Now ask the same of climbing an exposed line in the backcountry.

ddukehad a discussion about this during lunch today with the homies, what is gnarlier/more impressive? being able to throw down in the park or skin-ing for a couple hours to ski one insane line? has anyone gone from being a park rat to skiing mostly backcountry?

really have an itch to try alpine touring

Yeah, this is a real tough one, personally I think their both equally impressive I their own right. Each skier has put in tons of dedication to they're specific craft. The only real difference I can see is that with a gnarly line you only get one chance, where as a park rat has practiced each manoeuvre to the point of it being second nature.

I feel like in the park you get hurt more often from crashing but in the BC you just fall off a cliff and die so I would say BC is much more sketchy

Loco-Deer-SlayerActually here's a better question.

Have you ever gone into the park knowing if you make one mistake on a critical section you will die? Now ask the same of climbing an exposed line in the backcountry.

when did you start skiing the backcountry? and why?

dingusI feel like in the park you get hurt more often from crashing but in the BC you just fall off a cliff and die so I would say BC is much more sketchy

no ski patrol out there either making it 10x worst if something did go wrong

ddukewhen did you start skiing the backcountry? and why?

Two years ago. I started because I realized the snow conditions in the backcountry are always better than resorts no matter how shitty the snow is.

I don't hit gnarly jumps very often in the park so that could be a factor but I feel like for the most part, even though the park can be terrifying, there's nothing that really has the potential to kill you or seriously injure you barring freak accidents.

The other day I was skiing a rocky line with a turn out around a big cliff at the bottom in lake chutes. The line ended up feeling pretty mellow but from the top I was thinking that if I took an out of control fall I could potentially die and you definitely don't get that feeling in the park very often.

I want to get a touring set up it will the bindings hold up in the park? I probably wouldnt do rails on them but what about jumps and butters? My friend broke both his bindings trying fronties in his backyard into 2+ feet of powder.

jKutcher

Bwahahahaha...

Really, you'd probably have to ask non skiers to get an idea on what is considered more gnarly/impressive. As one who does both - they can be equally as gnarly and impressive at the pro level. The shark factor that is avalanches might give the backcountry a +1 though. That, and not always having the luxury of scoping your line before you ski it.

Mr.noodleI want to get a touring set up it will the bindings hold up in the park? I probably wouldnt do rails on them but what about jumps and butters? My friend broke both his bindings trying fronties in his backyard into 2+ feet of powder.

Alright I've never had touring specific bindings BUT I have heard that they don't hold up well to torsional forces.

Hoji absolutely slays lines I could only dream of in Dynafits bindings, which gives me confidence, but still I'm not sure if we are that stage of technology where touring bindings hold up 100% to what alpine binders are capable of.

I almost feel like it's carbon fiber on mountain bikes. Once upon a time, carbon fiber was fearing because it would break, but today I feel like it's a superior product to aluminum in most ways (except for price). Time will only tell.

I've never been able to ski backcountry living on the east coast and all but it seems like something that would take some serious huevos. I've seen people ski slides in the Adirondacks and it looks insanely dangerous and much more impressive than a good lap in the park. Backcountry has my vote for sure

The backcountry can be incredibly mellow too. It just totally depends on what you are feeling that day. Not every day is gnar, but the snow on the way down will always be better than a resort.

There is nothing like a pow day in the BC. Waking up pre dawn, earning your turns, and you just end up in a wonderland. Being on top of a peak where you are your buds are the only tracks around for miles is a surreal experience.

Every day I have in the BC is just another day of wondering why I even bother to go to the resorts.

Thom4sI've never been able to ski backcountry living on the east coast and all but it seems like something that would take some serious huevos. I've seen people ski slides in the Adirondacks and it looks insanely dangerous and much more impressive than a good lap in the park. Backcountry has my vote for sure

Loco-Deer-SlayerThe backcountry can be incredibly mellow too. It just totally depends on what you are feeling that day. Not every day is gnar, but the snow on the way down will always be better than a resort.

There is nothing like a pow day in the BC. Waking up pre dawn, earning your turns, and you just end up in a wonderland. Being on top of a peak where you are your buds are the only tracks around for miles is a surreal experience.

Every day I have in the BC is just another day of wondering why I even bother to go to the resorts.

Yeah I guess everything is as mellow or as gnar as you make it but BC just seems so so so fun but scary at the same time

I get way more scared skiing lines / back country then park, so gunna say its gnarlier....

I feel although park is still relatively very dangerous, the fear is kinda irrational as 90% of stacks are pretty much a controlled slide down the landing with no consequences (obviously gnarlier tricks that on the edge of your skill set can go wrong way more often with BIG consequences).

Skiing big lines though, like said before, you can be standing at the top with a very real possibility of "If i miss my turn there, I WILL slide and die...". I find myself using all my strength sometime to control that fear and stop shaking my tits off before I drop.

Standard freeskiing dilemma - why does danger equate to gnarly/cool

Hiking up 45 degree slopes in a foot of powder with 100 foot cliffs on either side of you is pretty intimidating. Some of the scariest part of backcountry is just getting to the line. Honestly some of the mountaineering is the gnarliest to me just the risk to get up to one line is shocking. And I was a park rat but now that I'm older I've spent less time in park and more out and about the mountains.

DubV134Standard freeskiing dilemma - why does danger equate to gnarly/cool

Well the colloquial meaning of the word gnarly is dangerous or scary. A higher level of danger does make it more impressive to watch but I don't think it necessarily makes people want to do it themselves.

the gnarliest features were not created by man. We've got no chance.

I would say backcountry, but most of the risks/gnarliness is not apparent to those looking at it from the outside. The conditions/snowpack/avy danger change a lot in the BC. The park is mostly the same. Even if the park crew changes it up, you still know what you are getting into and you have a reasonable idea what speed you need, how to do everything, etc.

In the BC, you are constantly evaluating the weather, snowpack, terrain, and what risks you are taking. There is a whole lot more thinking that goes into it and much of it is before you leave your house in the morning. You have to have self control(deciding to ski a boring sub ridge instead of the huge chute you just spent 4 hours getting to because you aren't confident in the snowpack). You have to have education, experience, and a whole ton of equipment.

I don't know about the comparison because of the danger of avalanches. It seems backcountry wins this argument every time just because of that. You can have a straightforward 38° slope that would be super gnarly and risky to ski on a high danger day, but it would appear as nothing compared to a 100' kicker. It seems apples and oranges. Better question would be park vs sick inbounds lines that are controlled.

As for BC bindings in the park. Just have different pairs. There is no reason for a one ski quiver here. I've used my gaurdians in the park, but I dont even use them in the BC. Just get some dynafits and find a good pair of used touring skis. Keep your park skis for the park.

What is more gnarlier/more impressive:

Slapping skins in a bc hut/yurt or

Railing some chick in the back seat of your car?

If I bring my portable solar panels and watch porn on my phone does that count?

Loco-Deer-SlayerThe backcountry can be incredibly mellow too. It just totally depends on what you are feeling that day. Not every day is gnar, but the snow on the way down will always be better than a resort.

There is nothing like a pow day in the BC. Waking up pre dawn, earning your turns, and you just end up in a wonderland. Being on top of a peak where you are your buds are the only tracks around for miles is a surreal experience.

Every day I have in the BC is just another day of wondering why I even bother to go to the resorts.

dude if you can't score multiple fresh lines at a resort on a pow day

you suck at resort skiing

I like lapping park and the feeling i get from new landed tricks is pretty awesome, but yesterday i was hiking with my friend and skied the nastiest line of my life. The run wasnt too hard but hike up there was definatly scariest thing i've done in my life, that's why the run down felt so undescribable. Park is great, bc is always better.

I grew up exclusively skiing park in NC. Moved to Jackson 4 seasons ago and haven't really touched a park sense.

Honestly, I think being able to hold you own in both is the future of skiing. Just like there are tons of park rats who have no clue what to do on a big mountain line, there are tons of techies who couldn't do something stylish to save their life.

I personally wish I could still ride park, but my knees are just too beat up. I occasionally try to bring what I learned from riding park into the backcountry.

I feel like most outsiders would have the perspective that:

More gnarly= backcountry

More impressive= park

I've been skiing my whole life but at a tourist level of days/ability. The past few years I've been able to start skiing more so I feel like I kinda have both sides in mind. Before I got on NS and got involved in the community aspect, I definitely though park was more impressive. The "wow" factor definitely contributes to that. Now that I have experience and know more about skiing as a whole, BC takes the cake. It's definitely gnarlier and more impressive. To have the desire to skin for hours for one ridiculous line is really impressive. Both are impressive and gnarly, but I would say BC is my vote.

Loco-Deer-SlayerIf I bring my portable solar panels and watch porn on my phone does that count?

Rogers Pass has great cell service. We were streaming the Olympics hockey on our phones last year while spending a week at the Asulkan Hut. Backcountry hut's with streaming ability is always hilarious.