Jack M

Correct. Great steeps at Sugarloaf: : Sluice Headwall, Narrow Gauge Headwall, Cribworks, Flume, White Nitro below the crosscut. Trails with good steep sections: Spillway, Sluice, Haulback, Hayburner, Upper Gondola Line, Skidder, probably a few others... GeoffV on Skidder... doesn't quite do it justice, but you know what they say about cameras and ski slopes...

hehehe...

The better you get at carving, the more you realize how important it is to be able to carve "from the ground up". This means changing edges starting with your toes, then ankles, then knees, then hips, etc. This is opposed to the practice of making big upper body movements and arm gesticulations. Carving this way allows you to be more dynamic and fluid, and it improves your ability to maintain and recover balance. The higher your binding angles, the less leverage you have across the board with your ankles, therefore you can't use them as well for the advantages stated above. (On a Skwal, you have zero ankle leverage.) I still love my Madd 158 (a hair under 18cm wide) but I'd probably like it better if it was 20cm. I've realized I like riding with binding angles of around 57-60 degrees. I'm absolutely loving my Coiler Schtubby 170, 21cm wide. It feels like a snowboard again. Wide boards actually never went away. Factory Primes and Speeds came in 20, 21cm widths until the end. People just started trying skinny boards and got hooked on the hyper quick edge changes for a while. Also, skinny boards and higher binding angles make it easier to stop the dreaded "toilet sit" technique problem. I think skinny boards helped a lot of people get over a hump in their technique progression, and now they're finding they can return to wider boards without returning to old habits. It's all an evolution. Kind of like how boards went from sym to asym, back to sym.

I didn't say that. Yes. I'm not against that. I'm just against the hate and hysteria.

rhaskins, eaglez, ernie, etc... I'm not trying to excuse Catek from anything, just trying to offer a little perspective. Something a new person to this sport may not have, and something a grumpy person may have lost. Yes, they owe people communication. I agree, what is easier than email these days? We know Scott's deal, we don't know why Jeff is not responsive, but from my perspective there is no reason to not give them the benefit of the doubt. Scamming alpine snowboarders would be a pretty ineffective get-rich-quick scheme. I assume the credit card charges are automated. I don't see Jeff or Scott personally sitting there "taking" people's money. They probably don't even know how many orders have come in lately.

Jeez eaglez. I guess Catek should just close up shop then, according to you. That's the thing with such a niche sport... I'd rather get the goods on the mfr's terms, than not get it at all. What do you think makes it "worth it" for Caron to make bindings? Because it's certainly not the money.

I'd say that's entirely the wrong board for you Dave. Too short and too narrow. After getting back on a wider board that allows me angles under 60 last year, I have a whole new outlook on this. That made it feel like snowboarding again.

I'd say this is a regrettable part of the price we pay for participating in such a fringe sport. And let's face it, this sport would not exist were it not for the internet, so we're lucky to even have it. Some people in the "industry" (and I use that term extremely loosely) go all in and make it their whole life. 24/7/365. Others do not. They have other responsibilities that put food on the table, but they have cool ideas for stuff that can make alpine fun. There is nobody to sell these ideas to, so they make them real themselves. I'm thankful they do this. I have some ideas of my own, but they will never happen because I have a career and family to think of, and I'm probably too lazy on top of that. So my hat is off to the people who do get off their butts and work two jobs to make these things happen.

I wouldn't advise anyone ride like this unless they have some other body alignment issues going on.

If you're talking about Catek, read this: http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=22010

...are the angles which place your toes and heels as close to the edge as possible without hanging over. Try this first then fiddle from there. I actually ride like this regardless of waist width and love it.

Coilers are made this way, I don't know what sort of a pump he uses though.

Pretty sure you want to be over 29" Hg vacuum for this. Vacuum cleaner won't do that.

B.... because I know what it is

sooooo... THAT's why you insisted on bringing your boards into your bedroom at Sugarloaf!!

Rossi Scratch: Burton Love: close? Hey, I'm not protesting Burton, I just think it's low rent.

No he didn't. He is a hack. furthermore if you thought that was sexual.... uhh...

it always amuses me when people without kids tell people with kids how to be parents.

I disagree completely. You're not even close. You cannot say the Venus de Milo and Playboy fall into the same category. There is a difference between artistic study of the human body and intentionally sexually provocative images. (I say intentionally because well, if you get off on the Venus de Milo that's your problem ;) ) Now, I'm just a man, so I've certainly looked at my share of... "stuff", but I am not a hypocrite. There is a line between what is supposed to be public and what should be private. I walk around my house in my boxers scratching myself, but if I saw someone doing that outside on their front lawn next to a main road I'd think they were crude, or even trash, and that wouldn't make me a hypocrite. If you want to look at sexual stuff in private, go nuts. I'd only say that makes you normal.

I've taken back my earlier comments, because the women are not totally naked, but I still think it's dumb - it's pandering to the least common denominator. I agree with Gecko.

see my post above, number 10.

Oh I didn't realize that. Thought they were topless. Nevermind. Sims had topless.

Is some high speed detachable surface lifts. I'm hoping they will see my comments here: http://community.sugarloaf.com/forum/topic/show?id=2245586%3ATopic%3A5029

I could understand that if the ratio were like 3 chairs to 2 gondolas, or even 1 to 1. But 4 chairs to 1 gondola as in this case doesn't make much sense to me.

Edit - oops, thought they were fully exposed, but they're not.