Making a Case for Carving Parks
Reliable Racing Supply
Terrain Parks and halfpipes are a lot of fun. So are so-called race arenas, although they often see less activity. To build traffic, I suggest we begin to think in terms of “carving parks,” not racecourses. Yes, NASTAR and similar recreational racing programs fill this need to a small extent. But what I’m talking about is very different, more like a terrain park: A carving park that’s always available, where the skiing and riding public can ski against the clock for free, whenever they want.
Just as terrain parks are not promoted as stunt or extreme venues, we should take a similar approach to carving parks. Let’s not scare modest skiers and riders away. Running gates is not so much about racing or going fast. Rather, it’s an exercise in disciplined skiing and riding—learning how to carve!
With today’s technology, it’s easy to do this for a lot less money than it takes to build and maintain terrain parks and halfpipes. We’re eager to please the younger crowd with expensive terrain parks, but what are we doing for the vast majority of skiers and riders who simply want to improve their skills with some objectivity? Where’s their park, and why should they be charged by the run, while those enjoying the terrain parks aren’t?
Carving parks are simple to organize. They consist of a dedicated hill space that contains an automatic timer (with a visible display, radio linked infrared sensors, all battery operated), 20 or so turn markers and some signage. Brush markers (developed originally for ski race training, now used for kid’s ski schools and marking terrain park features as well) offer the perfect solution for indicating “where to turn.” They are highly visible, can be skied or ridden over, stay in the snow, and don’t hurt when you ski/ride past them. They accomplish the essential goal: teaching “turn-on-demand” skills.
The timer is important because it tells how efficiently you can link a series of turns. It’s addicting, and you’ll find that skiers and riders of all abilities will flock to your carving parks—but only if you provide it on a consistent basis.
Many of our industry’s top teaching professionals are now using carving courses to teach both the accomplished and the rank beginner. The E-PSIA, for example, uses brush markers and soft “stubbie” gates exclusively for their extremely popular instructor race clinics. These clinics are designed to improve the technique of PSIA professionals—through carving skills. If this works for PSIA, it will certainly work for the public.
Some might say, “We already have NASTAR, and besides, racing is old-school and takes up too much hill space.” To those who think this way, I say, “you’re missing the point.” NASTAR and organized racing in any form is like a piano recital. The problem is that the average skier and rider have no piano to practice on! Free skiing alone won’t teach the necessary skills to improve. A carving park that is timed automatically—that is the piano. It provides an essential service, which is very much in demand by the skiing and riding public—especially at the smaller resorts. Don’t believe me? Just set up a carving park with a simple 20-gate brush marker course with an automatic timer on any Saturday and watch what happens.
The resort industry has been impressive in responding to the demands of the younger guests through the building and maintaining of terrain parks and halfpipes. We must not forget that the majority of skiers (and perhaps even riders) rarely enter the terrain parks, and simply want to improve their turning skills and control (carving). This is why your ski schools stay in business.
Most coaches agree that the truly effective way to improve one’s carving skills is by running gates with an objective score. Change your swing in golf, and you might break 90. Start your turn a little sooner and press the downhill ski, and you might improve your time by a few seconds.
I’ve maintained for some 30 years that what the sport of alpine skiing (and now riding) needs is an objective score (like golf, tennis or bowling)—a time you can compare against others or yourself. But even if you don’t agree about the need for scoring, a carving park can be a great addition to your area. Your guests will enjoy themselves that much more, and you will be offering a great service while increasing the fun-factor at your mountain.
Let’s Not Rush Into ALS
by Dick Kun
CEO, Snow Summit Ski Corporation
As head of the company that operates Snow Summit, Bear Mountain and Sierra Summit Resorts, all of which are self-insured for liability through our wholly owned captive subsidiary, I read Bill Koons’ article in the January 2004 issue of SAM, “Every Second Counts,” with a certain amount of trepidation.
For several years now our company has deliberately avoided the establishment at our resorts of Emergency Medical Service (EMS) staffed with Advanced Life Support (ALS) personnel including paramedics, nurses and doctors. We do, of course, provide American Red Cross first-aid (ARC) and transport for injured guests and employees, which we firmly believe is the extent of our patrol’s mission.
Mr. Koons says, “Despite the obstacles, modern ski patrols should strive to bring their medical practices up to the standard of the rest of the EMS world [emphasis mine] and be on-the-hill ALS-capable seven days a week.” His example of the combative trauma incident and general comments are persuasive, but I would urge all resort CEOs, owners, managers or related decision-makers to consider the full implications of establishing such services, as there can be significant financial and liability consequences.
Before I explain, I want to make it clear that we welcome the skilled and dedicated EMT qualified personnel, doctors and other medical practitioners on our paid and volunteer patrols, but we do forbid the use of their advanced skills as agents of our company. Nevertheless, we provide state-of-the-art handling of our injured guests. (We had better, as we are on the cutting edge of terrain park operations.)
A careful reading of Mr. Koons article, especially his listing of the “obstacles,” where he is quite candid and thorough, should alert resort management to the significant increases in the costs of his recommendations.
I am not sure he fully appreciates the liability implications for both the resort and the individual employees or volunteers, although he mentions them. The major problem with setting up emergency medical services beyond first-aid is that the resort may be entering the realm of malpractice liability depending upon its state’s tort atmosphere. If we allow patrollers, even if they are licensed professionals, to provide medical care, emergency or otherwise, our attorneys advise us that we are exposing our company to this sort of liability. Similarly, setting up a base area medical facility and providing such things as drugs for pain or cardiac treatment, suturing cuts, or advanced airway intubating brings exposure to medical malpractice.
In California we have a “Good Samaritan” law that protects people who render first-aid from liability, and it is under this protection for our company and our patrollers that we operate our emergency first-aid services. Even so, we have had brushes with malpractice claims when just providing first-aid and transport.
Costs and liability notwithstanding, we don’t believe we are compromising our emergency care. I am advised by my patrol and medical people that for the vast majority of life-threatening trauma victims, the best practice is to render American Red Cross (ARC) first-aid and Basic Life Support (BLS) and transport as soon as possible, and not take the time to render more advanced medical services at the accident scene or in the first-aid room at the base of the resort. The standard American Red Cross protocol provides “ABC” (clearing the airway, insuring breathing and controlling bleeding) and is the same as that which would be given by any licensed medical professional, including a doctor. We have automated external defibrillators (AED’s), oral and nasal airway adjuncts and suction devices in special trauma packs and sleds, which are consistent with standard first-aid protocol.
Fast transport to a medical facility by ambulance or helicopter remains the goal after first-aid. In the incident sited by Mr. Koons, where the patient is combative, our protocol for handling such a victim may include physical restraint, but not drugging (which I am told may not be advisable on site until a comprehensive exam is performed by a doctor). As stated above, we do not believe we have compromised our emergency treatment by limiting our protocol to standard first-aid care and transport. Fortunately for us, I would add that our Big Bear resorts are one and two miles respectively from the local hospital, which has a med-evac heli pad.
A related concern for our industry (and selfishly, my company) is that many resort companies that do not have the financial resources (we are not one of them) or inclination to establish an EMS center will have liability created for them by the resorts that do. It would be unfortunate for our industry if the “standard” for resorts evolved to the provision of medical facilities, which obviously would create new and unnecessary liability for smaller or financially marginal resorts. In today’s litigious atmosphere, I hope my management colleagues will carefully consider these issues before embarking on the establishment of medical facilities at their resorts, which should include consultation with their attorneys and/or insurance agents. (Are you insured for malpractice; if not, will you need a separate clause for it?)
It has not necessarily been my purpose to argue against advanced medical emergency care on resorts’ sites, although you can see I am against it. Rather, it is to remind all that the basic mission of our patrols is to provide first-aid and transport (with which I trust Mr. Koons would agree), but that going beyond that is debatable as to its necessity. What is not debatable is that our resorts may incur greatly increased costs and liability exposure in implementing medical services beyond first-aid.
World Cups and X Games
A SAM editorial
Two news items in mid January illustrated the diverging trajectories of new school and old school competition. The first item was the announcement that Aspen city leaders had committed $100,000 a year for four years to keep the Winter X Games in town through 2007. The second was that Park City would no longer host the America’s Opening World Cup events at Thanksgiving, because the costs and risks far outweighed the benefits to the resort. It’s hard to escape the message about which events are marketing our sports most effectively.
Aspen, with the enthusiastic support of local businesses, is supporting the X Games because it brings renewed vitality and excitement to the town. The X Games means millions in revenues from the nearly 50,000 spectators. Plus, the Games are broadcast extensively on ESPN, including this year’s first-ever live evening shows in prime time, and provide great exposure with an audience that has largely overlooked Aspen for the past two decades or more.
With that in mind, it would be easy to see Park City’s abandonment of its America’s Opening franchise as a symbol of ski racing’s decline in America. But it’s not that simple. Park City wants to host World Cup races, just not so early in the season, when the promotional value can be diminished by a lack of snow on the surrounding mountains or, worse, by cancellation due to lack of snow in mid November. It would willingly host World Cup events in January or February, when public interest could be higher and the promotional impact greater. Consider: In mid February, Bode Miller was chasing the overall World Cup title. Daron Rahlves had won a downhill at the Hahnenkamm and put together a string of top-three finishes, as had the women’s speed team. Results like these would boost skiing in North America if they came on home turf in the middle of the season rather than in Europe.
Problem is, the mid-season Cup schedule is already full.
And the X Games have become a greater promotional tool in the U.S. than any World Cup event can possibly be, no matter when it is held. Slopestyle, boardercross and skiercross simply have more sex appeal than Alpine racing. Like David Hasselhoff, perhaps Bode Miller is destined to be “really big in Europe,” while Tanner Hall rules at home.
