Brush with a smallish slide.

[summit]

The trees I would have been pushed through are dramatically different. Most of them are small midget trees, with only a couple of "real" trees. Force would likely be a lot greater, as well, due to the significantly higher slope angle. Not saying I know all and that it's impossible for similar massive trauma to occur, but I still question whether it was a probable consequence.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=39.627...num=1&t=h&z=18

There's many names for the same line in EV. What you call Timber Falls, I call King Arthur. When that slides, it often slides a lot farther. It is a much more open path that Racquet. Was it moving 80MPH, no, but you wouldn't call it slow or feckless had it caught you; your rationalization is very much "it is gonna go but I'm a good enough skier not to get caught."

If you are looking for snow science feedback, you figured on the avalanche running short AND not stepping down. It is hard enough with the unpredictability of when a skier may trigger deep instability, but it is dubious to say that you looked around, dug one pit, did a CT, and decided that a "high likelihood" shallow avalanche would not set off something deeper. How in Colorado winter can you be confident in that? Did you have a good sample?

CT has poor sensitivity to deep instability. Also, the load of an avalanche is a larger trigger than a skier by several orders of magnitude.

It didn't step down... this time. Was that judgement, or luck? Suffice to say that you think it was judgement. Being unlucky is a poor outcome despite judged/managed risks; being lucky is a good outcome despite misjudged/unmanaged risk.

I wasn't there. But, I doubt I'd trust a depth hoar snowpack in that way. Is that about my risk acceptance? Or is it about your overconfidence in your ability to prognosticate with your 2 seasons and a maritime Level 1? Maybe there is some of the former, but absolutely there is the latter. You haven't seen a snowpack like this season's before.

So here is my advice: Don't put so much stock in your pit. We don't dig pits for permission to set off avalanche A and not experience avalanche B. Pits do not say "go!" They can say no. We dig pits to make sure we aren't missing something.

I think you'll enjoy this thread about risk... it will appeal to you as an engineer: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...28with-pics%29

I have enough first aid equipment to hopefully be prepared to deal with the sorts of injuries that I've mentioned. I do think about what it might take to get out of there with a broken bone or two. I've thought about this before dropping cliffs in the routes that I frequent.

Maybe you have an extensive history of serious injuries and recovery. You seem extremely nonchalant and confident that you can deal with such injuries. Maybe you don't have any history. Nobody skis far on a broken leg or worse. So I have to ask, what do mean by being prepared to "deal with the sorts of injuries I mentioned"? Does your first aid kit have what you need to let you "deal with" with a pneumothorax, a femur, a broken pelvis? Do you think you can patch up and ski with a tib fib? Do your buddies know how to use your first aid gear? Do you have enough equipment to bivy?

Say you get an open tib-fib one afternoon in Timber Falls. If you haven't had something like that happen, I REALLY want to know what do you think your next 3 hours would look like? Next 12? Day? Week? Month? Year?

[Name Redacted]

(From Tremper's Staying Alive in Avalanche Terrain)

^^^ This is a perfect representation of what is going here. I've seen it happen to myself, and many others. Avalanche education will only get you so far. Having a bad day, will alter your risk tolerance sooner or later. Learning from your mistakes, rather than justifying them, will help you prolong the timeline.

[cmsummit]

There's many names for the same line in EV. What you call Timber Falls, I call King Arthur.

That's what I know it as and what I thought it was when I watched the video. Thanks for the clarification Aaron, you bring valuable perspective to this discussion.

Lindahl, I think you need to weight those probable/possible conditioned scenarios more heavily in your decision to ski a line. IMO, your confidence in predicting what the outcome will be is running at levels far beyond what your experience and perspective can account for. Given the persistent, deep instabilities in our snowpack, skiing something that you believe has a high potential of the upper layers moving, is just asking for it. That's a lot of weight and energy being translated down through a sensitive snowpack. Be safe man. No line is worth getting seriously hurt or worse.

[Lindahl]

Hard to quote everyone, so I'm not going to bother.

smitchell333
----------------
Yes, to me, that run is worth risking a season-ending bone break, as is the large number of other risky scenarios I place myself in. I could choose to live in fear of a season-ending injury and run around making truly safe choices, but I would not be staying true to myself, and would not be as happy in my life.

Risking death? No, at least not that particular scenario. I do risk my life in certain scenarios, but, in this scenario, if I felt death was a probable outcome if I were to be caught, I wouldn't have done it - the probability of being caught was too high for those consequences for me. Based on this discussion, and discussions with more experienced friends/family, I am truthfully re-examining my assessment that serious injury was the worst consequence (I felt that death by major trauma or burial was a freak outcome). I am not completely sold, but it is something I want to spend more time looking at.

bfree
----------------
Thanks for your contribution of the graph. Definitely something to think about. The safe zone is truly safe. I am extremely confident in
that assessment. Though, I should have pulled further into it. Hard to tell in the video, but the landing zone was not in avalanche terrain. It was on a 15-20 degree bench before the rollover. Failing to stomp the landing was not a risk. If it were, I wouldn't have skied that line. I regret skiing a line earlier this year where failing to stomp was a risk (with less slide potential, but still dangerous) - I should have turned back from that one.

jbski
----------------
I had put the chances of it sliding greater than 10%, less than 25%. I felt the odds of me being caught were significantly small(er), based on old slides, the confidence in my ability not to fall, the speed at which I would be entering avalanche terrain, the terrain itself (mainly slope angle), and the state of the snowpack (no hard slabs, friction between the layers). I know you didn't outright say it, but using the 'odds of being caught' as a safety buffer in avalanche decision making is certainly something to think about.

Summit
----------------
The pit was not the deciding factor in my assessment that stepdown was extremely unlikely (it played little role). The old slides, other recent activity in many other EV areas (some representative, some not), and the history of that location (both witnessed by myself, and others who have more experience out there) were major factors in that assessment. The CT test was mainly to look for shearing layers in the upper snowpack as was testing for friction of these shearing layers (though I did want to see what happened in the depth hoar layer as a curiousity). The layer examination of the pit provided reinforcement that stepdown was unlikely - the state of the depth hoar (compacted, somewhat refrozen, shrinking crystals) was similar to other areas I had been in. I was looking for depth hoar that looked more dangerous, ala Mushroom - a reason to say no, and turn away from Timber Falls altogether. Regardless, I certainly was not treating the pit as a true representation of the slope (far from it), but more to get a general idea of the state of things, and to satisfy my curiousity (I want to send the large 40' diving board above the entrance when the conditions allow for it). A hasty pit above the slope, before dropping in, was used to judge the spacial variability and confirm the general layers I had seen in the pit, as well as identify any suncrust that was missing from our pit.

I have enough to create a makeshift emergency sled and deal with major limb breakage. Broken pelvis - not much you can do about that in the field other than try to stabilize the leg as much as possible and get help - FAST. Collapsed lung, no, I don't have a way of releasing trapped air, but it's definitely something that I now want to add to my kit (as well as knowledge to treat). Broken ribs are very much a possibility with the type of skiing I do (avalanche danger aside).

I took a suspended downed tree to the stomach very hard last year (www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ7TD4D_GHw). If it had hit my ribs, rather than my abs, a broken rib would be quite possible. If there was a pointy branch facing the direction I hit (luckily it was pointed towards the sky), there was a chance for disembowlment, or at least severe lacerations to the abdomen.

I've had season ending injuries before. Though not while skiing, my most recent, and most long-term effects, was an ankle dislocation (yes, it's possible), completely blowing the outside ligaments of my ankle. It took two people to pop it back into place (it's amazing how much force it took). Quite painful and risk of losing my foot (if blood supply was cut off - it wasn't). Surgery a week after. I was in bed, couldn't move for a week, watching TV (doped up), and had people making me food/etc. In bed watching TV for another week, but able to get up and take care of myself. In crutches for 2 months. PT for 2 months. Couldn't run for 6 months without significant pain. A year and a half later, it still gives me trouble at the end of a long day. This last summer/fall, when coming back from backpacking and full day+ trips, I often couldn't walk without a significant limp and pain for an entire day. Longer tours, early this winter, give me similar problems. I still don't run very often, as the resulting pain can interfere with activities a day or two after.

These two incidents, and other injuries I've recieved over the years, have made me more aware about what it would be like to be injured in the backcountry and the aftermath. But, as I've mentioned above, I could choose to live in such a way as to avoid such injuries during the sports I enjoy, but to do so would be to go against a lot of what makes me feel happy, alive and, well... me. And, to choose to live in such a way as to avoid such injuries as a result of an avalanche would be hypocritical of sorts.

----------------

I want to say that I don't make a habit of rolling the avalanche dice during every outing (and certainly not with more risk-adverse groups). This is the first time this ski season. I fully intend on waiting until I have nothing more to learn from this incident before I put myself in a similiar position again. There's a few more people I'm waiting to hear from, and discuss the incident with. I really respect all of you that have chimed in with your own personal perspective and put a lot of weight in what each of you have to say, despite if it sounds like I am justifying away your point of view. Thanks. That said, I would still love to hear from some of you that have been involved in slides, both similiar, and dissimiliar, but I understand that it's a tough thing to share.

[BFD]

you are a fool. Have to say good job getting almost 1700 views and 80 responses to your mediocre video.

[counterfeitfake]

I'm no expert myself, but I don't think you're taking that slide seriously enough.

I know a guy who got caught in a "smallish" "fairly slow-moving" slide. He got run into a tree and tore both ACLs. Another party member busted a femur. They were a short hike from a ski area, in sight of the Interstate, and the rescue was started by cell phone around 10 am. The party barely made it out before dark with the help of search and rescue.

I don't think you're taking the situation seriously and I don't think you're following all the possibilities through to their end. Even if all that slide could do was break your leg, what happens after that?

But the way you're talking, I don't think you're going to take it seriously until it happens to you or your friend. You're pretty convinced you did everything right. Good luck out there.

[Name Redacted]

These two incidents, and other injuries I've recieved over the years, have made me more aware about what it would be like to be injured in the backcountry and the aftermath. But, as I've mentioned above, I could choose to live in such a way as to avoid such injuries during the sports I enjoy, but to do so would be to go against a lot of what makes me feel happy, alive and, well... me. And, to choose to live in such a way as to avoid such injuries as a result of an avalanche would be hypocritical of sorts.

This statement is what is wrong with your whole paradigm. It's not about you at all.

Injuries are one thing, having to get you out of the bc is another story.

Are your friends prepared to haul your ass out of the backcountry? Dead or screaming in pain? Are you prepared to risk the lives of the SAR guys who have to come get you? I don't think that you are fully comprehending the consequences of your incredibly high "Risk Tolerance"

And, to choose to live in such a way as to avoid such injuries as a result of an avalanche would be hypocritical of sorts.

I quote this part again because you seem to think that injuries and death are mutually exclusive. In the backcountry, they are not.

[jfost]

it is really hard to discuss this objectively isn't it - good on you for putting it out there and taking all the shit. Your risk tolerance bears out in posting on TGR too!

I think a lot of people's minds are blown by your BC risk tolerance, but the harsh reality is that you might die or you might not. It is that simple. Maybe the slide steps down, maybe it runs light & slow? Who really knows?

[Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer]

First, I must say that I really enjoy Summit's posts in this forum. I don't know you at all, but you always take a good, even-handed, logical framework to these discussions that I like.

I have not gone through all of this thread, but my only questions are:

1. That appears to be an obvious avy path below the cliff band (or at least the run-out zone from one higher up). Notwithstanding the lower angle you reference, didn't that concern you from a terrain perspective?

2. You mentioned you would have wanted to go deeper into your safe zone. What makes that a "safe zone" in your mind. I have no idea of that area or terrain, but it appears quite close to the edge of any avy path (in a year with a horrible snowpack with deep instabilities).

3. You mentioned smallish trees at the end of the path. Notwithstanding their size or the angle of the path, did you not think that in a worst case scenario, being carried into those trees could result in some sort of injury? What sort of medical training do you partners have? What is an evac situation like in that zone? Even a simple ankle sprain can turn into a nightmare depending on the location and circumstances.

Thanks.

[Lindahl]

Are your friends prepared to haul your ass out of the backcountry? Dead or screaming in pain? Are you prepared to risk the lives of the SAR guys who have to come get you?

If I felt like I was truly risking the lives of SAR guys (i.e. due to hangfire, not freak accidents), I would turn away from the scenario. However, I try to be prepared to evacuate myself as much as possible (i.e. makeshift rescue sled, going out with multiple people). The friends I engage with in the riskier scenarios with are aware that rescue might be long and difficult, but I'll make a point to discuss this a bit more with them. Note that I say scenarios, and not lines, since I have to be well aware of this during my non-winter activities as well. Honestly, outside of meadow skipping, I think it's extremely prudent for every BC skier to be comfortable with having to engage in a rescue situation. You never know when you might make a mistake and shit will hit the fan. It happens to people that attempt to take far lesser risk than I. I'd like to put my money where my mouth is, and stage an accident with some of my partners sometime (both skiing and possibly other activities), but this is something I have not yet done.

I quote this part again because you seem to think that injuries and death are mutually exclusive. In the backcountry, they are not.

I'm well aware of this. It's unlikely that injury will lead to death, but not out of the realm of possibility. It's not just in the skiing backcountry, though, but during my canyoneering, climbing and backpacking (usually have technical aspects) trips. Most of the time these are in remote locations where rescue is difficult, often times in much more remote locations than my riskier backcountry skiing scenarios - especially when it comes to canyoneering, or some of the trips I've taken in the San Juans, Winds (WY), or Gores.

I've spent some time discussing this with my uncle over the years, as he's done some pretty remote and amazing things. For example, a plane-drop to climb a 23-pitch first ascent of a peak in a remote part of the Brooks Range in AK (likely the only attempt ever made). It took them 36 hours to climb the route, due to complications in the descent route.

I respect that most of you consider my risk tolerance to be pretty far out there. That is a perfectly valid opinion. However, I don't want to really debate my risk tolerance. I just want to learn from this incidient. Some of you have provided valueable input in this vein. Thanks.

[BFD]

maybe your uncle needs to explain things better to you.
getting hurt in the mountains=FAIL
you seem to think it is a badge of honor.

[Lindahl]

getting hurt in the mountains=FAIL
you seem to think it is a badge of honor.

No. I pretty much agree with you. Getting hurt sometimes means just plain bad luck, but most of the time it means failure. I'm just comfortable with a higher probability of failure.

First, I must say that I really enjoy Summit's posts in this forum. I don't know you at all, but you always take a good, even-handed, logical framework to these discussions that I like.

+1

1. That appears to be an obvious avy path below the cliff band (or at least the run-out zone from one higher up). Notwithstanding the lower angle you reference, didn't that concern you from a terrain perspective?

I assume, by cliff band, you mean the upper large one? Yes. In fact, this was the location of one of the old slides that I reference. The deposition of the old slide was on the flat bench below the second (smaller) cliff band. Skinning across it made me nervous, but the path is short (50'), broken up by a few features, and thus, consequences were low. Closer to the entrance, this bench is less pronounced, and we took a great deal of care getting across this section, but the old slide (different one) in this area, with very little new snow on top, significantly reduced the risk. This old slide (as well as others in previous observations) was the one that gave us the best indication of how big of a slide we might encounter.

2. You mentioned you would have wanted to go deeper into your safe zone. What makes that a "safe zone" in your mind. I have no idea of that area or terrain, but it appears quite close to the edge of any avy path (in a year with a horrible snowpack with deep instabilities).

Heavily treed (unskiable) by old/large trees, all the way to the cliff band (the start zone). No flagging of any lower branches. If I were to do it again, rather than stopping below the old trees, I would pull completely into the forest. When I saw the width of the slide, I didn't bother ducking further into the trees, as I felt like my current position was safe (for this event, only).

3. You mentioned smallish trees at the end of the path. Notwithstanding their size or the angle of the path, did you not think that in a worst case scenario, being carried into those trees could result in some sort of injury? What sort of medical training do you partners have? What is an evac situation like in that zone? Even a simple ankle sprain can turn into a nightmare depending on the location and circumstances.

Yes, I was aware that injury was the worst case scenario. I don't have any formal medical training, aside from boy scout badges (not much). I have some knowledge passed down from friends/family and gained from reading about the treatment of common injuries in the types of activities that I frequent. Access to the zone is relatively quick, easy and very safe. Evacuation is relatively easy until you reach the base of the gully, where navigation gets tricky for a brief length of maybe 100' (forest and a segmented cliff band). My partners and I are familiar with several exits from that location, some extremely difficult, some moderately difficult.

[PowTron]

Ok...so after all this.

Lindahl, EV laps on Monday? I may venture out there, but it depends what the snow and the pack do between now and then...and yes, I would want to do some lower risk stuff.

Just don't want to see you get F'ed up and I do respect your willingness to post up the last few seconds of your video and open the discussion on it (to the douches stating that the majority of his video is not worth watching, you are out of your fucking minds).

[summit]

Lindahl, there are a lot of smart people posting in this thread. Some are very experienced. Some know the area well. Some know you. I don't think you are really listening to them, at least not very much. Every response from you feels like a justification or rationalization. I see very little reflection and consideration. I think you started this thread looking to learn, but your ego was looking for validation and it is getting in the way of your learning. I've seen it plenty of times before post-accident. One avalanche that comes to mind, two people were caught, one buried, and one broke his leg. The guy who was buried only had a few sore spots. He learned nothing and changed nothing. He reasoned around all the glaring signs he missed. The man who broke his leg is finally skiing again. He was humble and learned.

SNOW PITS

Your statements regarding the snowpit and your confidence in what the snow will do, even giving a confidence interval with hard numbers, show a smart mind that is overconfident from perceived understanding without the experience or education to know otherwise. If your mentors are teaching you to think like this, then they are bad mentors. I am not going to pick apart your statements piecemeal. It would take a lot longer post than this already is to cover your misconceptions. Or you could do a lot on your own. I do suggest that you start by rereading dino's post (the best post of this thread) and maybe look here http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...od-for-nothing

INJURY

When it comes to your outlook on injury in technical winter backcountry, you are just as overconfident from lack of understanding. Not to minimize your unfortunate injuries, but you've only had a taste. I will try to share some of my perspective. While I have personal injury experience too, most of my perspective comes from taking care of broken people in the backcountry, in the ambulance, and in the hospital. When I hurt myself in EV, I was lucky it wasn't my neck that broke; it was a sobering experience. I was massively overconfident that day from a large successful front flip the previous day; my partner had tried to reorient me, but I didn't listen and stupidity ensued. It was very unpleasant to ski 2500 vert of trees with that pain with only one tiny mandatory. I don't know if I could have done the small drop if it was my humerus that was broken. Maybe you could?

I'm wondering what your medical training is. I'm not thinking you have experience if you think you can manage some of this stuff, or can just learn how to dart your own chest and then do it.

WINTER RESCUE

If you think your buddies are going to pack you up and get you out, I suggest you try that as an exercise, then imagine doing it while in horrible pain over technical terrain. You are kidding yourself on self-extrication in such a situation. I dare you to prove me wrong. I once saw a guy move his injured partner down about 300 feet of nontechnical low-angle debris in 2 hours, which was impressive, but he had 3000 vert and a dozen miles more to go.

"Say you did an open tib fib one afternoon in Timber Falls. What do you think your next 3 hours would look like? Next 12? 24? Week? Month? Year?"

Briefly, 2-3 hours is a VERY optimistic timeline for the first SAR to even get to you. Lots of pain until then; I think you know pain. Hopefully, the bleeding is controlled and you don't freeze; it's probably dark now. Maybe you are getting circulation below your injury, maybe not. So the rescuers are there and they assess, treat, and pack you up. Maybe you get some painkillers if they have a medic, they can get an IV, and think you can handle the meds. That will help but you'll still hurt, lots. No pain meds and you will be in agony, blinding unbelievable pain. Hopefully you don't get DIC, bleed out, have fatty emboli, or throw a clot that gets in your lungs/brain/heart. Cold+Trauma=Worse. Then they have to drag/ski/lower you slowly through steep terrain. In most of those chutes, that could take a long time... many hours. 8 more hours seems VERY optimistic in cases with a few vertical lowers. Think you are cold and in pain? YEP! Think that is good for your injured limb?

Then you get in an ambulance, more needles, some heat, your ski clothes cut off and you are stripped naked, more assessment, hopefully more drugs, hopefully you aren't too hypothermic. I'll stop there and start again with another story.

ONE MORE STORY

A story of a smallish slide that wouldn't bury someone, caught one person who suffered a broken leg either from a rock or just the forces of the small avalanche. It was clear and sunny, but too windy for a helo. This person's story went a lot like the above hypothetical except the winds lightened and eventually the person was lowered to where a helo could do a pickup (hint, no LZ's in EV Chutes), so their journey from injury to the hospital took an amazingly short five hours, otherwise it would have taken 12-16 hours overnight and this person would have lost their leg at the knee.

Even with the five hours, the decreased circulation and the open fracture allowed a bone infection resulting in not one, but four surgeries over several months, long hospital stays, and unspeakable pain that left the person unable to walk for well over a year and unable to ski for over two years. They could not work. They had no income. They had to move back in with their parents in another state. I skipped over some of the gnarlier details of rehab and recovery.

Adding cold, snow, and technical terrain to an injury in the BC always means worse consequences. I have 100s more stories. At least a dozen involve death. I've responded to about 20 avalanches. Some I cannot even bring myself to post anonymized versions. I have seen the look on the faces of family and friends at the trailhead as they are told of their loved one's death. I'd hate to ever have a story about you. Your daughter would too.

THE END

Lindahl, if I was gong to give you a label, it would NOT be "stupid." You are very smart, too smart for your own good. You remind me of me and we'd probably have a heck of a good time chatting over beers. You are trying to out-think things that cannot be out-thought right now. Your label is more complex: "stubborn overconfidence due to rationalization from lack of understand and inexperience."

[N1CK.]

JONG here to say thanks to Lindhal for starting this discussion and to (mostly) everyone for sharing their two cents. I find the idea of backcountry skiing VERY appealing for, I imagine, the same reasons you all do too. That said, I'm in no way prepared, so I don't do it. Yet.

Some of you may not see it, but this is a good educational and eye opening thread going here for the unexperienced like myself.

[PowTron]

Some of you may not see it, but this is a good educational and eye opening thread going here for the unexperienced like myself.

Very much so, and glad that some people are getting a good thing out of a discussion that has at times turned to the utterly stupid by some trolls.

^^^^^^^^ Summit, very well stated last post, no doubt.

[montanaskier]

another good post by Summit. Who were you out with? Non TGR folk I assume since nobody has chimed in. I'm curious as to how many and if they all thought it was a good decision and what the conversation was after it ripped. My only advice would be that Timber Falls/Abes/Old Mans/Tweeners/etc.. will all be there on another day. If things look bad then just back down, nobody thinks less of you for saying not today. On days when you go to EV, look for reasons not to ski that day vs trying to come up with a plan to ski it...the results can be tragic and you are too good a dude to suffer any of those. Is the risk really worth the reward of a few good turns?

[timeo]

I am just amazed at the total conviction Lindahl has in all his statements: from the amount of risk of getting caught, to his "very safe" safe zone to his assertion that the injuries if caught wouldn't be significant. Blows My Mind.

Lindahl - when you think about how safe your safe zone really was, you might wonder how the guys at Stevens felt about their safe zone and think about how that worked out, just saying. What if you are wrong?

[Rontele]

Did not read this thread.

[Rontele]

Let me add this point. I think the helmet cam has ruined the internet. Although there are ample amounts of well put together videos, by and large, 99% of all helmet cam videos is like watching a captioned version of Ishtar. Another result is that helmet cam/blog fever trumps common sense.

[miahw2828]

JONG and bc newb here

read this thread throughout the day and just want to throw a +1 in there thanking the OP and others that have contributed to the discussion...tons to think about

[Solesides]

Lindahl, if I was gong to give you a label, it would NOT be "stupid." ... "stubborn overconfidence due to rationalization from lack of understanding and inexperience."

Agreed. It's arrogance, not foolishness - fronting like your a chess-master when really you barely know the game. Reading incident reports and the breadth of avy literature is important, but you're nothing without the raw mileage. Two or so years skiing CO backcountry - how many days, how many hours? Let's say you wanted to get yourself in the ski-guide pipeline, and needed to submit a resume. What would that look like? Gives you a chance to be honest about your experience, which is pretty barebones, it would seem. And I don't mean for this to be a personal affront. Hubris like this bothers me no matter its origin. To be fair, I see it all the time. Maybe it's an engineering thing. Too many have a fundamental lack of respect for nature and other critical uncertainties that define complex systems. And too often a high price is paid.. At least for you, Lindhal, you'll never have to ask yourself "how could this have happened". That won't be a mystery. When you roll the dice and lose, there won't really be any questions..because as you profess, you'll accept your loses. To some degree it's admirable..it's also totally insane.

[Joe Dirt]

Reading this thread is my brush with a rationalization expert and control freak

[Lone Star]

Lindahl, if I was gong to give you a label, it would NOT be "stupid." You are very smart, too smart for your own good. You remind me of me and we'd probably have a heck of a good time chatting over beers. You are trying to out-think things that cannot be out-thought right now. Your label is more complex: "stubborn overconfidence due to rationalization from lack of understand and inexperience."

A- great post. We all pass judgment even if we say we don't, and you are providing your point of view without the youthful "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude that we have all fallen victim to at one point or another.

It might be sporting to disagree with some of your WINTER RESCUE line of thought, but I have seen you get made fun of for packing a ridiculous pack......and then bail out the shit-talkers with some random-ass piece of equipment nobody else bothered to bring. You can carry the risk tolerance discussion to a whole 'nother dimension on this issue.... Do you pack in 20 pounds of rescue and med equipment on a 15 mile overnight snowshoeing trip where your risk of injury is low but the remoteness would cause extrication issues just as bad as if you had been hurt skiing?



Blurred knows the area in question where Lindahl skied quite well. Would be interested in hearing his perspective....

[AfroMullet]

not surprised one bit that you had this close call. based on where you've been skiing, i'm surprised you haven't had many more like it this season.

lindahl, backcountry skiing is no place for ego. even if your ego won't allow you to admit to us that mistakes were made, hopefully you can realize your mistakes instead of getting killed by your next brush with disaster.