Trail Differences-Within Ability Level

It seems to me, that especially at Whiteface, many trails within an ability level are not similar in difficulty. For example, Excelsior and Wilmington Trail are both blues, but one is a much darker blue then the other. In your opinion, what do you think some major discrepancies are in terms of trail rankings? Hard/Easy blues? Hard/Easy blacks? Any blacks at WF that should be blues? double blacks? Seems like an interesting topic and a more through guide to trail ratings.

Thanks for your replies in advance!

-skisheep

I've definitely noticed this too.

Some blues are easy for me. I can go fast and turn well. Other blues, I get a bit freaked out, have a hard time committing to the fall line and stem my turns in an effort to force turning them faster.

The blues I do the best on seem to be the ones that aren't as steep, but are narrow. The blues that are wider seem to be steeper. Those are the ones I struggle with the most.

There's no doubt that some of the blues at Whiteface should probably be rated as blacks, or at least as double-blues, which is something I've seen out West. I think that to some extent, the blue ratings for some trails are there to make the mountain appear to be less difficult, and hopefully attract more family skiers.

That said, the following trails that have blue ratings should probably be rated as blacks, in my opinion: John's Bypass, Victoria, Paron's Run, The Wilmington Trail and Draper's Drop.

John's Bypass is a tough trail ... it's somewhat narrow, has a double fall line, usually not much snow, and people fly through there at high speed all the time.

Victoria, in my opinion, is a deceptively difficult trail. For starters, it usually has minimal cover after about 10 am. It's fairly steep with a constant pitch that runs for quite a good distance. You often see people out of control on it from about mid-way down, due to the fact that they underestimate how much speed you can pick up on it.

The top of Paron's Run has that one pitch right before the point where it joins up with The Follies. It's fairly steep there, and often wind-blown.

The Wilmington Trail ... well, I think that one has been well documented over the years.

As for Draper's Drop, that final pitch is definitely very steep ... steeper than a blue rating.

After going down Lookout Below (black diamond bump run off the Wilmington Trail) I thought it was tougher than the average black diamond.  I ski with a lot of intermediate skiers that can ski blacks with no problem, but this one would've made them wet their pants.  I successfully navigated the run, but I think it was more on par with a double black - very steep, big bumps, pretty narrow.  That was the big standout to me from the two times I've skied WF.

I like the fact that Whiteface reserves the double-black rating only for the Slides and the most difficult glades. Once you consider yourself an "expert" skier, capable of skiing black diamond trails, you should be able to ski any black diamond trail within a ski area, or at least be experienced enough that you can recognize the difference between different expert trails, and decide for yourself whether you can ski a trail or not. You shouldn't really need someone to tell you that Empire or Lookout Below is going to be a lot more difficult than Mountain Run.

WF did an ad campaign a couple of years ago--(not verbatim)---Our blues are most resorts blacks, thats ok, their greens are our parking lot.  Something like that.  Resorts dont compare trails to other resorts, they are compared within the resort.  what is black at Ski sundown, is probably a green trail at whiteface. its just a bigger mountain. I think the ratings are fine.  All blues arent meant to be the same, some are meant to challenge.  If Wilmington more challenging than Excelsior? yes.  But it certainly isnt a black.  Any trail with bad conditions could be considered a black really. If you have trouble on some blues and not others, then you probably think you are a better skier than you are.

Pants wrote

WF did an ad campaign a couple of years ago--(not verbatim)---Our blues are most resorts blacks, thats ok, their greens are our parking lot.  Something like that.

I have a copy of that poster on the wall of my office!!!

Pants wrote

All blues arent meant to be the same, some are meant to challenge.  If Wilmington more challenging than Excelsior? yes.  But it certainly isnt a black.  Any trail with bad conditions could be considered a black really. If you have trouble on some blues and not others, then you probably think you are a better skier than you are.

I agree ... that was my point about the black diamond ratings, however, for intermediate skiers, I can see the need for some differentiation, given that a "beginning" intermediate skier may not be able to recognize the difference between two different trails at the same mountain as easily. Once you're able to ski a black diamond trail at a mountain, you should be experienced enough to recognize the difference between black diamonds at the same mountain.

that would stop people anyway.  People always think they are better than they are. Just look at mountain run on any given holiday weekend. People need to take responsibility to not be stupid.

In general it would help if ski areas used a more exact grading system. I think I have seen a green circle superimposed on a blue square to grade a trail between blue and green. Having green, green/blue, blue, blue/black (Wilmington), black, double black would be helpful for most skiers/borders.

Pants wrote

that would stop people anyway.  People always think they are better than they are. Just look at mountain run on any given holiday weekend. People need to take responsibility to not be stupid.

You're absolutely right, however, there are people who are very happy to be intermediate skiers ... they're just out there to have a nice day, and they would be perfectly content to ski Excelsior all day. For those people, a little warning would be useful to keep them from "straying" on to a trail that they're not prepared for, like the Wilmington Trail, for instance. If they were told that it was a double-blue, or blue/black, those people would avoid it. When conditions on the Wilmington Trail get a little questionable, they often put a warning on the blackboard over there. I've seen lots of people read the warning, and then decide to continue down Easy Street instead of going up.

Once you make a decision to knowingly go on to a black trail, however, all bets are off, and I agree with you about taking responsibility for your own actions.

I agree with the above hard blue designations.  They are that way due to marketing considerations.  The two the cause the most issues are Victoria which is easily steeper and more difficult than something like Skylark at Killington and the Wilmington Trail.  Both of them frequently get folks in way over their heads and you see them walking down.  They now have put a "blue easier sign" directing lower skiers away from John's and Connector which lead to Victoria.

I'd rate the following as Double Blacks compared to other mountians and WF's other blacks
Empire
Cloudsplitter Glades
Sugar Valley Glades
Look out below
Upper Mac
Blazers bluff

Upper Skyward is questionable as its probably the steepest trail but is usaully groomed pretty well

Pants wrote

People always think they are better than they are. Just look at mountain run on any given holiday weekend. People need to take responsibility to not be stupid.

True, but self rating can be a difficult thing.  And then again.....some people ase just selfish fools when self rating.  Case in point, this guy and his kids (maybe 11 and 9?) who were at First Tracks over President's weekend.  To give you an idea of the mentaility, I ask the guy while waiting for the gondola...."so where do you usually ski?"  His response...."Whistler, Tremblant, Aspen".  Then he starts talking about Fresh Tracks at Tremblant, Whistler....Uh, dude, I didn't ask where you've been, I asked where you usually ski.  So I ask if he's from out west, given his response.  Nah, guy's from Jersey and usually skis Hunter.  Anywho...on with my story.  Trust me, it relates to self rating, I promise.  So, typical of First Track (or Fresh Tracks, as this guy called it), plan on one run, but if we make it down before official opening they would get us on the gondola in front of the masses.  On the way up, dude's chatting up the host, after the run, where do we go to get more first tracks before everyone else, like he'd have to worry about that......Anyway, we take off for the run, cruise down to the stop at the end of Excelsior.  And we wait....and wait....and wait.  Who were we waiting for?  Mr. Gstad and his daughter.  Needless to say, we didn't get on the gondola again before opening, missed it by less than a minute.

Point of my story?  First Tracks states that you must be advanced intermediate or above.  No way this guys should have considered his kids advanced intermediate or above.  This guys probably didn't care that his kids weren't of an appropriate ability level (and what impact that might have on others), cause they are entitled to "Fresh Tracks" everywhere (he seemed a little arrogant......we were staying in the same hotel, both heading out in the am, seemed headed in the same direction early with our gear, so he chats me up, am I going to Fresh Tracks.  See, I could do something for him then, I had useful info for him.  He couldn't be bothered to recognize me that night in the hotel, as I was no longer useful to him.  I can't stand people like that, but I digress......)

Where was I?  Oh, for people who care, self rating might be a difficult thing, and people do often over assess themselves.  However, people need to realize that just because you have skied certain trails, it doesn't mean your overall ability level matches, know what I mean?  Heck, my 13 yo daughter has skied Cloudspin, Skyward (upper and lower), Mac (upper and lower), Blazer's, Empire, Cloudsplitter....the most difficult stuff on the mountain, but I wouldn't assess her overall ability level as advanced intermediate, much less expert, just because she has skied those tough "expert" trails.  She's good, but still has a lot to learn.  I wouldn't bring her on Fresh, er...ah, First Tracks because she isn't ready for the pace required.  Same with my 10 yo son who bagged Skyward (upper and lower) and Mac (upper and lower) Prez weekend (sorry, proud pappa peeking out).

I can climb off my soap box now.  As for trail ratings at Whiteface, I think they are pretty fair, and don't think I would really change any.  Rating shouldn't be conditions dependant, either.  Wilmington isn't steep or technical enough to be a black.  Empire, while narrow, isn't steep or technical enough to be double black.  Upper Mac?  That gets pretty steep and technical, funky fall lines....way, way steeper than lower Mac.  Could an argument be made for a relative double black?  Maybe, or maybe lower Mac should be blue, it isn't very steep and only rates black when it is bumped.  Victoria.....maybe, maybe I could be convinced of a black rating on that one, it has a decent pitch.  If anything, I'd look at the lower end of Whiteface's trails for changes.  Boreen would maybe be an intermediate at many other mountians, but relative to other trails at Whiteface (which is the intent of the rating system) it is easier than most.