Analysis of this month's Transworld

[Brian]

I agree with Kent, Kevin Kinnear had a vision and SBL was great, it's how I became involved with carving and riding plates. Met Kurt Hoy and know a little bit of his background, but that attitude seems to be part of the mags current style and format.

Snowboard Journal looks like it will be different from SBL and similar to Surfers Journal. Looking forward to my first issue, talked with two of the editors about carving and "invited" them to attend the SES, we'll see if they show to cover the event.

[lonerider]

Originally posted by Jack Michaud

Well, you can say unequivocally that riding rails and concrete walls and cars and such have absolutely nothing to do with snowboarding because no snowboard is designed to withstand those activities for very long. I'd be very surprised if those things were covered by a snowboard's warranty.

Furthermore, I think that someone who can carve turns and/or freeride the whole mountain, but who never goes near the park/pipe can more legitimately call themselves a "snowboarder" than someone who never leaves the park/pipe. Just my opinion.

-Jack

Hi Jack, I see your general point, but like JohnSch and jlm27, I disagree with your use of the manufacturer's warranty to define what snowboarding. Wasn't the "snufter" two skis bolted together? I'm pretty sure THAT wasn't in the ski warranty. I'm sure you realize this point, but part of creativity is "thinking outside the box" (I can't believe I used that term).

One of my boards is a Neversummer Evo with a super tough base that doesn't has a scratch on it after several rails. They have a three year warranty that might cover rails (I actually just asked based on this post). Definitely this board is designed to withstand rails. Concrete walls and cars are another story, but I'm pretty sure 99.9% of all snowboarders never tried to ride their snowboard on a concrete wall or car (was that just an exaggeration).

Over time I have decided, I don't think I should be judging whether a person is a "true snowboarder" or not just because his or her terrain/riding preferences are not the same as mine because who am I to judge? When I was younger, I used to be like "What?!? you *never* go into the park??!? not even for one small jump!??! secretly wondering what that person sees in snowboarding. I no longer think that now, but it's the extreme I'm coming from.

[Jack M]

Originally posted by jlm27

A snowboard isn't designed to slide rails, so therefore you shouldn't do it?

Correct, if you want your snowboard to last. If you don't, then go nuts.

If I take my golf clubs and whack rocks around my yard, am I golfing?

And when did I ever say I don't enjoy freestyle?

Have you ever even tried to slide a straight, flat rail?

No. I have too much respect for my equipment. I also have no interest in suffering the inevitible groin-shot.

Ever dropped into a pipe and ridden it just for fun?

Sure - whether I'm on my carving board and hardboots or my Burton Custom 164 and two-straps, pipe/park is great fun. That's not my argument though.

I'm just considering two extremes: someone who never goes in the park/pipe, and someone who never leaves them. Which one is more deserving of the title "snowboarder"? I think it's the former. If you had never seen snowboarding before and you picked up a copy of TWS, you'd think that it was the latter. Actually you wouldn't know that the former even existed. Hell, you probably wouldn't even realize that a <i>mountain</i> was required. I think there's something wrong with that.

[ncermak]

How many of you took your try on a snowboard on the local sledding hill or on a slope in your buddy's back yard.

I am hard pressed to say a mountain is required. Surely it makes things better, but hell, my mountain has 700 - 900 ft of vertical. All definitions would call that a hill at best. The legal limits for slope on a half pipe are 16-18 degrees, 16 to 20 for a superpipe. Given 120m at that slope (hardly a mountain), you someplace that Ross Powers would be happy.

my point is that snowboarding is not about doing it right or wrong, but enjoying it and having fun. we all have it in our own way....

[John Gilmour]

I used to search for snowboarding content prior to snowboarding appearing in anything with vague resemblance to a mAg.

I have several copies of "Absolutely Radical" the first dedicated snowboard magazine ISsue #1 and several of later issues when it was remaned International Snowboard Magazine. But who had the best footage? The older Powder Magazines would on occassion have a few good shots.

Skiing hada few shots and did Skier and ISM was the main mag and ironically when TWS came out it was more of a freecarving mag and free riding mag with some carving.

As it stands now- I can't be bothered to read through TWS.

The content is essentially of no value.

Much of the info is incomplete and only good for beginners.

My time would be far better spent reading

POWDER magazine than TWS. At least I would find out about good places to go and deals- along with articles written at above a 4th grade reading level with some semblance of storyline humor, and value to the reader.

Its too bad.

________

Mercedes-benz w116 specifications

[lonerider]

Who are you really mad at? The people who prefer only to do rails, jumps and halfpipe? The magazine that glorifies them? Or the clueless mass populace that reads the magazine and believes it? Or just "The Man" keeping trench digging hardbooters in the minority down and out of sight?

I totally understand you grievances Jack. Remember I was the first to chip in that I found TWSnow worthless as well. And I fully admit that at one time or another, I am guilty of some of the things that you are angry at, and you are rightly so angry at people who abuse their boards. However, I do question the definition of "abusing your equipment" and contend that it is a matter of personal preference, where the extremely are obvious, but everyone truly lies somewhere in between.

In the following post I'm just trying to get people to see the opposing side's argument (sorry, it's something I really like to do on forums) in an effort to gain more perspective.

Originally posted by Jack Michaud

Correct, if you want your snowboard to last. If you don't, then go nuts.

I think this might go back to the topic of personal preference about treatment of equipment (I briefly mentioned this in the other thread) and we probably should deal with that subject first.

CAR ANALOGY

It's like the same thing with cars. For instance here are two extremes (comparable to your examples I think):

There are the sport car enthusiasts have lots of fun making tight and precise runs down windy roads at high speeds. They wax their car once a week, have it maintained regularly, strictly avoid sand/salt, put on the car bra and never take their car offroad for fear of damaging their pristine paint job and engine.

The opposite extreme would be those off-roaders who do crazy stuff like the Rubicon trail that involves things like driving their car over 3 foot boulders, off 5 foot ledges, through 3 feet of water, etc... most often crashing/rolling over their car a few times, breaking a couple of axles and drive shafts along the way.

I *admit* I am a tiny bit more of the latter type in terms of what is considered proper use of my car. No, I never take my puny Honda Civic offroad and I don't intend to, I'm just talking about how I treat my car. However, I drive it everywhere, in mud/snow/salt/rain. I take it in for all its servicings, wash it occasionally and I try to avoid banging it up, but at the same time I don't pamper my car in anyway. It has a few dings and scratches, but I consider that a mark of a car that was really used (this is my personal preference and is no way a judgment on other people with difference preferences).

SORRY FOR THE LONG TANGENT

Back to snowboards. I personally expect a board to last about 120 days before it starts to lose it's camber and springiness. How long to most people expect their board to last before they replace it? I've rode my Salomon 450 for about 100 days on rails, logs, even down snow covered concrete library stairs (you could see sparks).

Aside from a few minor base scratches and some edge dings, the board was fine. Ok, so the shop guys were not amused at my base/edge condition when I brought it in. I mean I wasn't looking to do some GS race where I needed a perfect condition base for those few hundredths of a second. I could still make deep, fast carves. When I first got the board, I tried to keep it in good condition, but after about 30 days and a few accidents, I didn't mind "using" my board. Nevertheless, I don't actively seek to damage my board either. My point is - after a couple of weeks on a snowboard, I'm not going to worry too much about the condition of my gear if it's going to prevent me from having fun.

jlm27 wrote Have you ever even tried to slide a straight, flat rail?

Jack Michaud wrote

No. I have too much respect for my equipment. I also have no interest in suffering the inevitible groin-shot.

How can you comment on something you don't have much experience with? Riding a straight, flat rail does almost nothing to your board. If you tried it a few times, you would realize that. Also, you could get a tougher, not so good "rock board" to do rails on it you like. Yes, it would be limited in it's usability, but I figure most Bomber people are more willing to get boards that they don't use very often.

Also, groin-shots are very rare for snowboarders (common for skiiers) you are much more likely to hit you butt, back, legs, knees, chest and head (both sides) :-O So rails can be dangerous, and you CAN get hurt... just that your crotch is the least likely place to hit :D

Originally posted by Jack Michaud

I'm just considering two extremes: someone who never goes in the park/pipe, and someone who never leaves them. Which one is more deserving of the title "snowboarder"? I think it's the former. If you had never seen snowboarding before and you picked up a copy of TWS, you'd think that it was the latter. Actually you wouldn't know that the former even existed. Hell, you probably wouldn't even realize that a <i>mountain</i> was required. I think there's something wrong with that.

Why is that even a question worth considering ("Which one is more deserving of the title 'snowboarder'?"). I totally understand your complaints about TWSnow and how it presents a skewed perspective on snowboarding. However, I think it is unfair to blame the activities and people that the magazine twists into it's own glorified image.

As I think someone mentioned it... who says that a mountain IS needed. I started snowboarding with a plastic snowboard (no edges, rubber straps) on a hill on a golf course near my house. I'm sure many kids started out that way. Most beginniner start on slopes that you wouldn't even call hills, let alone mountains. Are none of them "true snowboarders"? If you say that they don't count because they eventually "plan" on going up to the real mountain. I can counter that most of those park kids will eventually decide to go up to the rest of the mountain... in ten years, when they are banged up, older, and maybe wiser (maybe).... :-D (Bomber won't let me use another smiley, says I have too many images)

[Jon Dahl]

I still have my premier issue of Snowboard Life, missing the 2 pages on how to learn to ride :>) That mag and espn2 watching freeriders making big pow turns @ midnite for a week is what got me interested in snowboarding in the first place! I respect the good ones in the pipe, but I'm more psyced about a telemarker on skis in the pipe than most of what I see now. I drop small rocks/cliffs and ollie of natural MOUNTAIN terrain when I need to, but have no interest in the pipe. I have to agree with one statement; a complete boarder uses all the mountains natural terrain. The last thing I saw in the mountains that remotely resembled a rail had the word pipeline in it's name! Trees are a different matter entirely.

[Baka Dasai]

I think railslides are totally cool. Stair rails that is.

The idea of taking a piece of ordinary, boring infrastructure, ostensibly put there for the safety of people who are walking, and turning it into a prop for a risky, but stylish stunt has a wonderfully subversive appeal to me.

Ordinary people don't have much influence over the physical design of their everyday surroundings, but sliding a stair rail suggests a mental reconfiguration of that environment - boring safety item becomes fun prop. It suggests a whole range of possibilities for transforming the world and for extracting new meaning from otherwise banal objects.

But a fake stair rail built in the middle of a ski slope suggests something else entirely. It epitomises the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0226260127/qid=1075335451//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i4_xgl14/002-7273889-6100016?v=glance&s=books&n=507846">conquest of cool</a>, the re-packaging of previously subversive activities to make them acceptable for mass consumption. It takes your subversion, packages it up nicely, and sells it back to you for the price of a lift ticket.

Say yes to rail slides.

Say no to phony rails that are built into the ski hill.

<small>Admission: I have never done a rail slide.</small>

[Phil]

50-50'ing a short rail does not really damage your board. I really stay away from boardslides on hardboots. I am just not as comfortable. So I have 50-50'ed a ton of rails on my race boards - no damage. My freestyle boards are a different story, they are all messed up, but I do many different types of slides on them.

Baka - Handrails are the original, and the best - no doubt. But if they are the original, then the rails in the park are just extra crispy. I am glad that we have rails. Rail conditions never change. If we have an ice storm, and the slopes are crap, I can always count on the rails being the same. You should definitely try a rail (again, preferably 50-50 on a short, flat rail to start). You never know, it may change your mind.

[lonerider]

Originally posted by Baka Dasai

I think railslides are totally cool. Stair rails that is.

The idea of taking a piece of ordinary, boring infrastructure, ostensibly put there for the safety of people who are walking, and turning it into a prop for a risky, but stylish stunt has a wonderfully subversive appeal to me.

Ordinary people don't have much influence over the physical design of their everyday surroundings, but sliding a stair rail suggests a mental reconfiguration of that environment - boring safety item becomes fun prop. It suggests a whole range of possibilities for transforming the world and for extracting new meaning from otherwise banal objects.

But a fake stair rail built in the middle of a ski slope suggests something else entirely. It epitomises the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0226260127/qid=1075335451//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i4_xgl14/002-7273889-6100016?v=glance&s=books&n=507846">conquest of cool</a>, the re-packaging of previously subversive activities to make them acceptable for mass consumption. It takes your subversion, packages it up nicely, and sells it back to you for the price of a lift ticket.

Say yes to rail slides.

Say no to phony rails that are built into the ski hill.

<small>Admission: I have never done a rail slide.</small>

I agree that natural rails like logs, benches, snowmaker pipes, actual picnic tables are pretty cool and you get much more props for doing one of those. At the same time, I think the general populace would prefer if jibbers stayed enclosed in a "zoo" away from them so they don't take anyone else out when they "eat it" which happens more often than not. So I think it is a matter of practicality and safety. The park lets people practice their moves, and keeps them away from regular snowboarders. I mean watching a guy try to ride a handrail by the base lodge is cool... until he messes up and takes you out with him.

Here are some other photos (in addition to the library handrail) that I have taken over the years.

Riding through a hockey game at the base of Sunday River:

Barrel riding at Copper Mountain(we have no idea why these were on the mountain).

Oh yea, and who says you need a mountain, or even real snow to snowboard! Taken in May. Ok, so this wasn't exactly "snowboarding" but it was a pretty fun and silly thing to do in the middle of May.

[Guest pike]

One of the great mags, which off course is defunct, was Longboarder. You can find issues still online.

http://shop.vendio.com/Surfclassics/item/588277764/

Originally posted by eddie

I am fed up with tw snow and surf. Maybe it's a sign that I am getting older, I still like to browse through them sometimes but I can't stand to read it for too long. I don't read too many snowboard mags but when it comes to surfing, The Surfers Journal and The Surfers Path are where it's at. Nothing but soul.

[ncermak]

Great points by all.

and here's one or two more.

Regarding natural stair rails vs. park rails: Natural - Much cooler. Look at the Rail Jam in last year's open (BTW They should still race in the open, it's a crying shame that Jake has forgotten the race world). They built a city scape into the hill.

Park rails: Fun accessible, and most importantly they hurt a hell of a lot lerss than falling onto a staircase. Great place to learn to slide, develop trick, and progress the sport before heading out into the urban landscape.

Back to the original topic: TWS!

Now lets talk about reeadability. Personally I find that whenever I look through (is ay look through b/c one cannot read it) the magazine, I find that I often cannot tell the difference between Ads and articles. Multi colored text (sometimes in the same word!) as an attempt to place a bigger picture just doesn't work. I am not sure what their designers and layout guys studied, but my Biology degree taught me enough to not do that (actually, I think it was my High school diploma).

Ride it slide it jib it carve it ski it tele it....it just doesn't matter.

Have fun and see you on the hill

-Noah

[Jack M]

Listen folks, I never said I was angry at anybody. I'm not even angry at TWS, it's a free country and if they can capitalize on an activity and give people jobs, then fabulous. I just think it's a pathetic magazine. I think it's a sad statement that TWS and their advertisers consider rail riding to be 440% more important than actually being able to ride your snowboard down the hill (in this issue anyway). I just do.

I also think that if you are a rippin' all around rider and you can stomp the rails with authority, then that only adds to your coolness in my book. Does it make you a better snowboarder? Sure, it helps your balance and requires skill. But if <i>all</i> you're concerned with is rails and tricks, well, you're not much of a snowboarder in my book. That's exactly what TWS is encouraging.

Sorry if this is against the rules.

-Jack

[Jon Dahl]

about the content change. Looked at my first issue of SBL last night. Had a few air pics, counting ads, but mostly actual snowboarders on, guess what, SNOW. Wow, what a concept!

[John Gilmour]

Considering what the vast majority of snowboarders do ..... just slide/bomb down the hill and carve.

I find it startling that a magazine would chose not to devote any Hardboot carving shots.

Certainly Skiing Magazine covers heli shots,teli, carving, cross country, air, rails etc....

So why should a snowboard mag deliberately decide to exclude its hard booting brethren. And might I remind those who have followed snowboarding for a long time- who was the most extreme snowboarder at one time? Damian Saunders who did multiple backflips off of kickers in.....gosh...hard boots. And shudder......also got huge air at the time in the pipe.

But hard boots are no good for the back country...they say???

Tell that to Tom Burt- winner of King of the Hill in Valdez Alaska.

IMHO one possible reason could be snowboardings major distrust for the ski industry- who at first embraced hard boot carving. They pushed their product on the early adopting ski areas. The snowboarding companies lashed out.

But who now are the players in the snowboard industry other than Burton?

I see K2, Rossignol, Salamon, and a host of other Ski companies hiding their ski persona behind other names. Original Sin, Nale, Hammer (Grand Chavin), Bond, Lizzard- (I started those for Blizzard) (of course some are defunct now)

The Irony- of course -is that Coiler, Prior, Donek, and other board companies that cater to the alpine community who have absolutely no connection to the traditional ski industry now carry this...This....LEGACY, of discrimination.

It's a crime- it shows great stupidity on the Magazines part.

They've forgotten why they disliked alpine in the first place- because of the ski companies that originally bore it. There was a time when "jumping" was discouraged on snowboards at resorts - I can show you the mags. (Wonder who benefited from pushing that through?)

I doubt any of them ever gave it a thought.

Most new snowboarders look to Alpine with curiousity and interest- particularly since the IOC has recognized it. Yet the Magazines still pretend Alpine is not snowboarding.

If Alpine snowboarding is not snowboarding then why ALL people say to me "Why is that Snowboard so thin?" Instead of "Wow, what a neat looking mono ski?" After all we wear hard boots and our bindings more closely look like telebindings than soft boot bindings.

Because- Alpine is still much more snowboarding than Skiing.

________

Help In Love

[Gecko]

Part of the TW problem is that they are based in SoCal...where every brat thinks he can be a Pro Skate/Snow Boarder a'la Shaun White...The odd thing is that RideBMX (I have raced and street-riden a 24"BMX cruiser since I abandoned MTB's to the technology race) hasn't been as effected by the TW effect as other sports. This could be because the "Core" BMX audience is spread out accross the US and SoCal doesn't have as much to exert it influence on...

As for the Future of Alpine and the Olympics...Remember BX is set to hit the next 5 ring circus next time , lets hope the Course design doesn't end up like something out of the Xgames downhill BMX(So dangerous that Pro's were getting very hurt)...I personally would like to see a (Paired maybe) (super) Super G replace Slalom but that's just because I have never really liked Slalom and I have always had dreams of Blazing down a mountain on a BIG BIG (+200CM) raceboard

[Jack M]

Originally posted by John Gilmour

So why should a snowboard mag deliberately decide to exclude its hard booting brethren.

It is obvious to me that TWS is directed at the 12-17 year old crowd (and college students of similar mentality) - people who have enough leisure time after school to read through 220+ pages of rubbish. I got a free subscription to Skiing mag by going to a Warren Miller movie and filling out a card. It's all of about 97 pages, and is a much much better read (although they still don't list ski radii in their reviews). Teens are way more concerned with what is "cool" and "extreme". Rails and pipe are cool and extreme, carving is a discipline, an art.

But is TWS merely reacting to public demand, or are they pushing an agenda - <i>telling</i> teens what is cool and extreme? You could probably write a master's thesis on that

Alpine is still much more snowboarding than Skiing.

Hmm, maybe. I think the new school of carving skis are closer brothers to alpine snowboards than anything else. I've seen several pictures in Skiing of people carving their skis - and if you put your hand over their feet and ignore the poles, they look <i>a lot</i> like us.

As far as the old-guard hip wiggling swishy turn fall-line skiers (the people who <i>really</i> scrape all the snow off the hill!) are concerned, alpine snowboarders are no less despicable than their softbooter cousins, because they don't know how to deal with us on the trail, and we get in their way. So in that sense I agree we are more snowboarders than skiers. But not for long.

-Jack

[philw]

Hmm, I think I have about as much in common with your average side-slipping snowboarder as I do with your average snow-ploughing skier. I choose to ride with whoever is most competent; I don't care what tools they're using.

The clever bit with the magazines is that they circumnavigate the fact that most of their punters can't actually ride. Or talk to girls. I presume that the target demographic doesn't want their lack of skills in these areas highlighting.

I'd think that the skate-oriented magazines are unlikely to be the source of any changes. It's more likely to come from some back-country or other cross-over publication.

[Guest glennmorton]

All in all Transworld is actaully pretty good at what they do. They cover the stuff that the majority of their customers care about, and sell a lot of issues. The dollar amounts rolling into these magazines from advertisers is huge. I work in the windsurfing industry and a full page colour ad does not come cheaper, and more expensive, a color 2 page spread. Personally, I pick it up and flick through it, rarely buy it since I can't really get excited about seeing rail, rail, rail,rail, more rail, more rail, rail, rail......but there are lot of people who do care, so props to TW for cashing in on it.

Glenn

[Neil Gendzwill]

Happened to have the March 1995 issue of TWS sitting here, open the front cover and what do you see - a 2 page spread ad from Burton, featuring Victoria Jealouse ripping a carve and looking fine. My how things have changed! For my money, the only magazines worth buying are Powder and Ski Canada.

[John Gilmour]

What I always found interesting about Alpine shots- other than the snow spray and the slice, was the expressions of the people carving at speed.

You saw intensity in their faces- even Victoria's "Angelic" face is blasting with intensity there.

I carve in soft boots - but I know I never get that intense look on my face unless I'm carving on a good alpine set up at speed.

________

MAGIC FLIGHT LAUNCH BOX

[Jack M]

'95 was also the year Burton had a carver on the cover of its catalog. Actually there were two covers that year, one of a carver, one of your typical air shot. I don't know if it was just a dual cover year, or if they decided in late fall that they had picked the "wrong" picture for the cover.

Alpine is still much more snowboarding than Skiing.

Actually now that I think about this a little more, I'll bet that many softbooters would consider twin-tip skis to be more hip than alpine snowboards.

-Jack

[Neil Gendzwill]

For my money, Victoria Jealouse has had some of the best photos of any rider, regardless of sex. I've had a centrefold from Snowboarder hanging in my office for years of her tearing it up down some 50 degree face in Valdez. She rawks!

[Guest Mark Jeangerard]

Consider Formula One of the 50s - 80s. It has been described as "The worlds quickest drivers, in the worlds quickest cars, on the worlds fastest race tracks." Once upon a time it was. On paved closed circuits nothing in existence could beat an F1 car. Before over-commercialization men like Collin Chapman and Harvey Postlethwaite were designing cars that frightened brave drivers like Graham Hill and Keke Rosberg. Each designer, each driver, each team were in a desperate battle to out-do each other. Every race, someone would pull a miracle out of thin air and championship seasons would be driven by their own frenetic momentum. The sport, technology, and possibilities of what could be accomplished escalated because the stoke was on. Racing was exciting and the spirit of racing was maintained.

...for a limited time. Commercialism and the necessary mass media that follows destroyed F1 by way of forcing the sport to conform to the lowest common denominator. No longer was the conquest of speed the main focus, but rather, using the image of the conquest of speed to sell product was of utmost importance. One of the biggest money making products in the sport was the championship itself, and that activity had to conform to the expected image within the commonly accepted social guidelines of the generation, and at the same time, not displease the organizers or sponsors. The result is a formula that for all purposes is still the highest performing on earth, but far below its potential. And the *spirit* is lost... :-(

It is subtle, and to the uninitiated or even the casual to moderate follower the differences are all but invisible. But in here, in my heart, and the hearts of poor lost souls like Michael Schumacher - who had his natural purpose ripped from his existence by people who denied him the choice to take risks that he knows and they don't - the soul of F1 exists anywhere *but* in F1. What started as a contest to prove superiority in 1894, has become "Probably the worlds quickest drivers, in the worlds quickest cars (but still far, far below their potential), on the worlds most emasculated racing circuits." It is a mere shadow of its former self because it has been re-focused to appeal to a larger audience. It is no longer F1 but some surreal derivative thereof.

I see commercialized snowboarding in much the same way.

When I think of snowboarding I think of Craig Kelly. I think of giant mountains, sick speed, and the determination to conquer one's limitations and flow within the grace and awesome power of nature. I also think of riding at ski resorts and areas. By comparison, riding trees, steeps, powder, rocks, cliffs, groomers, rails, gaps, and trail hits within or close to the relative safety of ski patrol is still snowboarding, if on a somewhat less critical level. For me, snowboarding is not just a pastime though, it is a lifestyle, a spiritual quest... it is my purpose found and my sanctuary.

Where it becomes impure is at the juncture where commercialism excludes a part or parts of snowboarding in favor of that which will create the biggest sales. We are now beyond that point as is witnessed not only by the proliferation of rags like TWS but in the management of ski areas, organization and presentation of competitions, and in the mindset of the core support systems themselves such as manufacturers, shops, and introductory institutions.

For instance, the American Association of Snowboard Instructors not only dismisses the craft of 'carving', they are deliberately striking it from their curriculum. They are still teaching people to carve but the use of hard boots, plate bindings, and directional boards are officially described as archaic and inefficient. In the next manual ‘carving’ as we practice it will be ignored completely. Wha…? How…? Politics? Marketing? These are the guys that are supposed to be offering snowboarding to the masses. Rejecting such an integral part of snowboarding as ‘carving’ would seem to be sheer lunacy, unless snowboarding is not your primary concern. So, snowboarding is no longer snowboarding’s primary concern….

What I want to know is, where's the threat? Why shouldn't there be a world’s quickest auto racing series? Why shouldn’t we rejoice in all styles of snowboarding? Sure, I understand that you can’t put ‘carving’ on ESPN. How would you score it? But does everything we do have to revolve around the highest possible profit?

I believe all of us here have a kinship in the respect that we see snowboarding losing its soul in favor of mass appeal, and that is probably why the TWS syndrome bugs us so much - we will be the first to go.

At this point we are fortunate for people like Fin Doyle and Sean Martin, for they are our last hope, and unfortunately, maybe our last hoorah.

[Lowell Hart]

the American Association of Snowboard Instructors not only dismisses the craft of 'carving', they are deliberately striking it from their curriculum. They are still teaching people to carve but the use of hard boots, plate bindings, and directional boards are officially described as archaic and inefficient.

I've never seen a AASI description of hard boots as 'archaic and inefficient'. Where is that from?