Justo8484

nahh it was fun though. my friend (who skis) won a snowboard which pissed off all the boarders though.

staircase with a down rail on the left, wider down rail in the center, and down flat down rail on the right. i dont remember how many stairs, but it was probably a good 20 foot gap to disaster the kink. hitting that switch was one of my scarier moments on skis for sure, but i was happy with myself after landing it. was anyone else there? the skiers were going huge the whole day.

security at lehigh is so hit or miss. i've gone there plenty of times to skate, and sometimes we skate for hours and dont get booted, and other times you're kicked out in under 5 minutes, so its really a tough call. if you're serious about hitting some good rails that no one's ever tried before though, there's plenty at lehigh. i havent actually counted, but i am going to estimate that there is one there thats something like a down flat down-s flat down or something retarded like that thats easily over 100 stairs.

so who all was there and what did everyone think? i had a great time.

to give all you haters and doubters an idea of how big this jump is... http://216.86.152.180/videos/0/316240_26d51_256k.wmv at 1:30 on the progress bar, nick 7's what was then a 58 foot stepdown. it is bigger than that now, just to give you all an idea.

keith, you guys have an awesome park going on up at shawnee right now, its just a shame that we couldnt use the first hit in the comp this morning. i was the skier in the green coat and white pants that was talking to you, by the way. if there wasnt so much fresh snow on the course, everything would have been perfect. well, except for the fact that the judges decided to use the c box as a bench, cause i had planned to use that in my run. oh well, it was a fun time today for sure!

^ that makes way more sense than what bear has been doing, and i hope the judges read this and see it, and take that into consideration.

^ you're silly. its a big big jump my friend, very big. it used to be 58, and the lip is bigger and the deck is longer now, so 65 is not a stretch at all.

now the question is when are they going to close the pipe? maybe it will take someone breaking a leg in one of the sinkholes...

dorsey, i think you are missing the point. the judges arent the problem, they judged their corresponding categories how they were instructed to judge them, and in that respect, they did what they were told and did it well. its the format that sucked. it just makes no sense for amplitute to count on an even scale with the actual trick being done, in a best trick format comp. i'm not pissed because i didnt win, because frankly, there were others out there better than me last night, and i'm fine with that. i'm not fine with three of my good friends getting screwed out of of medals, prizes, points for the showdown series, and pride, because of a flawed judging format. as i said before, the simplest way to put it is that the best trick of the night did not win the best trick comp. thats not hard to understand if you saw what happened last night. p.s. its ORAGE masters, not orange. you eat oranges, you wear orage.

it was best run out of two. essentially, it was split 1/3 on the trick, 1/3 on amplitude, and 1/3 on technical stuff(landing, take off, etc.). that format makes sense in a pipe comp, or even a slopestyle, where you are putting together an entire run and you have to be clean throughout the whole run ti make it look good. it doesnt make sense for a big air comp where you get 2 shots to show the judges what you can do. little things like how you take off and if you drop a hand on the landing should be considered, but only if two people did the same trick and you need to differentiate between the two. consistancy did not matter last night. what mattered, or should have, was that you did the BEST TRICK. if you break it down to that, its really clear who should have won and who should not have. no hard feelings towards the guys who placed top 3, cause they're nice kids and all can spin way better than i can, but there were three better tricks than the ones that placed top three. all three winners did straight 9s, some more hucked looking than others, one was taken to the bottom of the landing, the other two were landed in the middle of the landing relatively cleanly. a 9 is a hard trick, you lose your landing two times through your rotation. a misty 7 you lose your landing twice, and are completely upside down halfway through the trick. harder than a 9? i think so, and it was landed just as cleanly. a 7 with a grab, still lose your landing twice, spun 180 degrees less, but held a grab through half the rotation, making it not only look better, but a harder trick. and finally, a cork 9 safety; just as many rotations as the top 3, but off axis, with a grab. that one's pretty clear.

you must have been hitting a different jump than the rest of us then buddy, cause that jump sucked, and everyone knew it. the in run was bumpy and there was no kick to the lip at all. but whatever, if you like that, i guess you'll just be super impressed once you hit a real jump.

^ it totally depends on what you wanna do with the ski though. if he wants super quick turns, then yeah, go shorter, but if you want something thats going to handle crud, all mountain cruising, or faster, longer radius turns, then going for the longer size would work out better.

25 feet is super weak for a rollercoaster. anyone seen bears? yeah, how often do you see people hitting it? pretty much never, because the transitions are so quick because its about 25 feet long. please give us normal rails that you can actually do things besides hope and pray that they are set up correctly just so you can clean them. a few nice 20-50 foot long flat rails with wide, long mellow lips onto them wouldnt hurt at all. all we've got now besides the boxes are super techy rails like the flat down flat and staircase. i dont know about anyone else, but i feel much more comfortable learning things on simple flat rails than on a rail with two kinks in it or one where you have to ollie on from the side. keep things simple.

if you are 6 feet, i would go for the 172. i demoed a bunch of skis so far this year, and the best all around seemed to be in the mid 170 range for me, and i'm also 6 feet tall, and pretty skinny. the shorter length would be fun for running gates or in the bumps, but you'd probably want something a little more for ripping high speed turns down razors or challenge. the shorter ones will get you more of a workout however.

the real question is, will it be set up correctly? i hope they take it, that thing looks fun.

out of everything you said, the xrc is going to handle the different types of terrain the best, provided you have something a little wider for trips out west or for the slushy spring (january?) days. the xrc is rock solid on icy stuff, so they should work well for the nastar course and for ripping it up on razors, but they arent stiff enough to really punish you in the bumps.

i shall be at the car show tomorrow, with VIP access to the exotic car exhibit no less.

haul ass after coming off the top booter? are you serious? you have to speed check to not overshoot the thing.

they are more newschool, so to say, but thier stuff is really high quality. www.orageski.com. the website is kind of confusing at first...

are you totally set on that coat? orage has a lot of really nice looking women's coats, and the features and technical aspects of orage's stuff is top of the line, and in most cases, not near the pricetag of that spyder coat.

if you are looking for a good all mtn ski, check out the new PEs in a 169, or perhaps a 174 if you think you are going to grow a bit or gain some weight. that way, you have your old PEs (are they last years with the 80mm waist?) for your strictly park and rail ski, and the new, longer pair, for all mountain riding.

how's boulder doing these days since all the rain hit? the announcer was making all sorts of claims when i was there for the z games about how they have the best park and more snow than everyone else, when at that time, both blue and bear had beginner parks that blew boulder's away. silly uninformed people.

yeah nick, the rampages are a sick boot, if they fit you. they fit me, but they wont fit most people just because they are a very narrow boot. i cant really give you a straight answer about what we can do for your boots without actually seeing the boots, what has been done to them, and your foot. it could be a number of things. if you have really flexible arches, then yeah, a footbed really might be the only option. if you are getting pressure on the outside of your little toe and on the inside of your foot by your ankle, then its probably a footbed issue. other than that, i'd have to see your feet. i can say that if you got the boots from us (except during ski mania sale) and we cant find anything to fix them for you, then they fall under the bootfit garantee and we would replace them with a boot that fits you properly. your best bet is to take a trip into the shop when you have a little time to kill and sit down with someone and get everything checked out. if you are coming to whitehall, talk to adam or jon, since they are the ones who generally work with tricker issues, and if you are going to quakertown, nick, wiz, or junior will put you in the right direction. hope you get everything sorted out!