A quick word on blocking ads
It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
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!
waitigaWho got better spots, skiers, snowparks, infrastructure and anything ski- connected ?
dan4060Europe definitely has better mountains, if you don't count AK and South America,
dan4060Europe definitely has better mountains, if you don't count AK and South America, but I don't know about parks. I have never been to Europe, so take my comments with a grain of salt, but you have to be careful over there. You need to know where you are going or you might end up over a 300 foot cliff. There is less danger of that in North America. I would love to go to Verbier or Engleberg, but I would hire a guide if I did. I have heard conflicting reports about the snow in Europe so I will let someone who knows address that.
ArseneFoxI don't agree that Europe has better mountains, the alps are very serious mountains, but is that a good thing for skiing? I don't think so. There is no real off-piste skiing as you can't go anywhere, unlike when I watch Saga Alosa's Alta skiing and "It's Always Sunny at Alta" video's, that shit is dreamy.
Julius_SteezerYou can literally go anywhere you want in Europe and ski patrol won't throw a hissy fit. If youre sick, Europe's off piste is arguably better as there's so much out there. However if youre not as experienced, america is probably better as the safety setup there is better IMO.
ArseneFoxi wasnt talking about patrolling, true, there are no stuck up patrols in europe, we were talking about the mountains, and what i meant with "you can't go anywhere" is that if you go a little bit to far from the groomed piste, you end up at super high cliffs, dead end nomansland of no return, completely packed up woods etc.. The reason why Mount Niseko in japan is so great, and so highly ranked for backcountry skiing, is that you can go down anywhere from the top of the volcano. ofc i am over exaggerating but most alp skiers just stay where the snowcats go.
ArseneFoxI don't agree that Europe has better mountains, the alps are very serious mountains, but is that a good thing for skiing? I don't think so. There is no real off-piste skiing as you can't go anywhere, unlike when I watch Saga Alosa's Alta skiing and "It's Always Sunny at Alta" video's, that shit is dreamy.
ArseneFoxI don't agree that Europe has better mountains, the alps are very serious mountains, but is that a good thing for skiing? I don't think so. There is no real off-piste skiing as you can't go anywhere, unlike when I watch Saga Alosa's Alta skiing and "It's Always Sunny at Alta" video's, that shit is dreamy.
minihefEurope for terrain, access, infrastructure and food, North America for powder (there's a reason Europeans dream about skiing champagne pow in the Rockies and interior BC). Parks is dependent entirely on resort.
Julius_SteezerDont forget Europe for apres. You guys miss out over in america
californiagrownAs for "Europe has more terrain"... no, it doesn't. It just easier access to more terrain.
That said, the answer is probably Yurp.
dan4060The lines there are insanely steep and they don't have the coverage AK does. I would much rather fall on most TGR AK lines than on the stuff Seth Morrison does in his last movie, forgot what it was called. The guys in Europe are skiing much more carefully and technically (for the most part) than the film stars in AK. The TGR/MSP guys are skiing AK/Coastal BC lines much faster than the European ski mountaineers. I'm not saying the mountaineers are better, it is a different type of skiing, but I would call what they do generally more dangerous than what the guys in AK do. Overall it is much easier to access crazy terrain from the resorts in Europe and I think that is what the people in this thread mean, they are just not explicitly stating it.
ozzywrongSmoke crack much??
Europe shits on America.. Hard.. So many more sick resorts in Europe .. The only ski area in North America that's on a Euro level is Whister., all the rest or the resorts are Tinto
36ChambersOfWuI have never skied outside of New England so I really don't know anything but I am pretty sure that whistler is not the only good skis resort in the Americas. Sure I bet laax and chaminox are nice but Alta, Jackson, big sky, revelstoke, mt baker, alyeska or whatever it's called in Alaska all look pretty damn good to me.
californiagrownYou put baker in there? Da fuq? Lol.
36ChambersOfWuSnow is a beautiful thing
minihefBut you're just comparing the stereotypes of two completely different types of skiing that you happen to think of when you see those places, not necessarily the inherent differences between those places. Comparing ski movie lines with ski mountaineering is like comparing apples with oranges and doesn't have much relevance to the actual differences in location.
minihefThere are lots of people that go and ski incredibly technical descents in North America. Stuff that they have to ski carefully and slowly with multiple rappels etc. Exactly the type of skiing that you think of when you think of Chamonix. The difference is TGR/MSP aren't there filming those lines so you just think of the classic Alaskan charging lines when it comes to the pinnacle of skiing in North America.
minihefSimilarly there are lots of skiers charging big and steep lines at high speed with big drops on European terrain - typical ski movie type lines rather than Cham style exposed billy-goating.
minihefThe access is definitely easier in Europe but the differences in what people ski in each place is not restricted by the terrain.
dan4060I get what you are saying, but there are inherent differences between Cham and AK which lead to different types of skiing. Cham steeps do not get the type of snow pack that AK does, so it is much more difficult to rail big lines in the same way. I know there are guys in Europe charging this type of stuff but the Alps (at least Cham and those places, we are not talking Norway here) don't lend themselves to that type of skiing the way AK does. The point is that there are inherent differences between AK and Cham which lead to the type of descents we see. Coastal AK snow sticks to steep terrain much better than the snow they get in Cham, so for ski movie type lines AK will always be superior. There is an inherent difference between the two.
dan4060There definitely are, but NA does not have the same level of resort access to the mountaineering stuff, so it makes sense for those guys to go to Cham where trams can get them to some amazing stuff.
dan4060Europe definitely has better mountains, if you don't count AK and South America, but I don't know about parks. I have never been to Europe, so take my comments with a grain of salt, but you have to be careful over there. You need to know where you are going or you might end up over a 300 foot cliff. There is less danger of that in North America. I would love to go to Verbier or Engleberg, but I would hire a guide if I did. I have heard conflicting reports about the snow in Europe so I will let someone who knows address that.
tommyf86Im from the Uk, skied America, Canada, Japan. Europe has sick backcountry but if you don't know where your going it can be sketchy. Mountains are steep & cliffs are huge, not a lot of lift accessible "off piste" anything that is good gets tracked fast, so lots of hiking to get to the spots. Home mountains are La Clusaz & Chamonix (mont blanc) (the highest mountain in Europe) If you know Mont Blanc then you have endless off piste all season.
Parks suck... I mean they are proper shit, you Americans don't know how lucky you are. I couldn't believe it when I first rode over there, you actually have guys maintaining jumps all day. At best you might get a lifty check the landings once a day, if your lucky. Rails suck, jumps suck everything about the Europe park scene sucks.
Japan (Niseko / hokkaido) is a hill not a mountain, not steep at all & conditions suck a lot of the time, visibility can get down to 30cm. That being said it has THE BEST powder I have ever ridden. It's the closest to surfing you can get, light dry deep powder (waist deep is a shit day) Oh and they light up half the hill every night till 10, usually it stops snowing & conditions are amazing. For powder the best hill I've skied hands down.
JibberinoHaha, sounds like you haven't been to a European park for about 10 years, or you purposely sought out shitty parks. Just so you know, they have shitty parks in America too, but in general the parks are much better and bigger there. Europe, which is a ridicoulously large area to talk about, has loads of dope and extremely well maintained parks. Seems like you don't really know what you're talking about.
tommyf86Why would anyone purposely sought out shitty parks? Sounds like a shit way to spend a day
tommyf86Why would anyone purposely sought out shitty parks? Sounds like a shit way to spend a day
tommyf86Why would anyone purposely sought out shitty parks? Sounds like a shit way to spend a day
californiagrownSo you don't know anything about the ski area other than its big year snow totals, huh?
36ChambersOfWuIt's a small, steep resort and the backcountry is expansive.
Julius_SteezerHave you been to mayrhofen, laax, val thorens, kaunertal, mottolino, les arcs, tignes, hintertux, stubai or avoriaz recently? Just the first few to come to mind
JibberinoExactly my thought, but it's one of the only possible conclusions if your experience is what you mentioned earlier. Look at the list the dude provided above. I'll throw in some scandinavian parks for good measure, since that's where I roam. Geilo, Hemsedal, Trysil, Hafjell, Kvitfjell, Vierli, Hovden, Tryvann, Folgefonna, Kläppen, Lindvallen, Åre, Ruka are just a few of the ones that would most likely change your view of European/scandinavian parks.
JibberinoExactly my thought, but it's one of the only possible conclusions if your experience is what you mentioned earlier. Look at the list the dude provided above. I'll throw in some scandinavian parks for good measure, since that's where I roam. Geilo, Hemsedal, Trysil, Hafjell, Kvitfjell, Vierli, Hovden, Tryvann, Folgefonna, Kläppen, Lindvallen, Åre, Ruka are just a few of the ones that would most likely change your view of European/scandinavian parks.
tommyf86Avoriaz is the closest park to my hill, the xxl there is sketchy & badly maintained. The only other option is "le stash" which is a bike park with snow on it. It can be ok but needs a lot of snow.
I ride Tignes at least a week per season & tbh it's nothing to shout about park wise.
Laax (I'll give you that) does have a pretty badass park.
Val thorens I haven't ridden in about 3 years but last time it wasn't much cop.
Kaunertal, mottolino, hintertux & stubai I have never rode, but herd good things...
I'm not saying good parks don't exist but I am saying the US had better variety & cleaner (well maintained) jumps & rails.
JibberinoActually, this is what you said:
"Parks suck... I mean they are proper shit, you Americans don't know how lucky you are. I couldn't believe it when I first rode over there, you actually have guys maintaining jumps all day. At best you might get a lifty check the landings once a day, if your lucky. Rails suck, jumps suck everything about the Europe park scene sucks."
So, yeah.
Also, the stash is not a bike park, it's a Burton project that builds features out of wood in the woods, it exists in more resorts than Avoriaz.
tommyf86Le stash is a bike park, I'm riding it once a week atm & it's not a set up for skiers it's built for mountain bikes (if you have ever ridden it you would know) 10 ft lifts to a rail is not set up for anyone on snow... You need a mass base to ride anything there. "Built by burton" oh dear... Are you a 16yr old first time snowboarder? Wrong forum buddy
tommyf86Le stash is a bike park, I'm riding it once a week atm & it's not a set up for skiers it's built for mountain bikes (if you have ever ridden it you would know) 10 ft lifts to a rail is not set up for anyone on snow... You need a mass base to ride anything there. "Built by burton" oh dear... Are you a 16yr old first time snowboarder? Wrong forum buddy
JibbaTheHuttYou obviously suck dick at skiing if you believe it wasnt built for snowsports. I rode it a fair amount the season just gone and i'll admit features are pretty fucking gnarly but thats the whole nature of it, it is meant to have a rugged aesthetic, otherwise there would be no point in the wooden features, they'd just build a standard park through the trees.
JibbaTheHuttYou obviously suck dick at skiing if you believe it wasnt built for snowsports. I rode it a fair amount the season just gone and i'll admit features are pretty fucking gnarly but thats the whole nature of it, it is meant to have a rugged aesthetic, otherwise there would be no point in the wooden features, they'd just build a standard park through the trees.
JibbaTheHuttYou obviously suck dick at skiing if you believe it wasnt built for snowsports. I rode it a fair amount the season just gone and i'll admit features are pretty fucking gnarly but thats the whole nature of it, it is meant to have a rugged aesthetic, otherwise there would be no point in the wooden features, they'd just build a standard park through the trees.
