Hectares vs. Km of Piste

The US resorts tend to use skiable area as a measure of the size of the
resort, making it difficult to compare with the length of runs used by
almost of all of the European resorts.

Why the difference and is there any way of comparing US and Euro resorts on
size ?

(Of course there are a host of other stats you can use as well but I am
curious)

Oh and a Happy New Year to the group.

All the best,

Edi

PS: We did have a white Xmas in Glasgow but its difficult to ski on 1cm ! Ok
for sledging on the hills with the kids.

Edi wrote:
Why the difference and is there any way of comparing US and Euro
resorts on size ?

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Marinus

--
http://cams.jeuring.com

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:31:12 +0100, "Marinus"
wrote:

Edi wrote:
Why the difference and is there any way of comparing US and Euro
resorts on size ?

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?
--
Champ

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:09:19 +0000, Champ wrote:

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:31:12 +0100, "Marinus"
wrote:

Edi wrote:
Why the difference and is there any way of comparing US and Euro
resorts on size ?

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?

So, the off-piste is counted in a resort's quoted 'km of piste' is it?
FWIW I see some value in both descriptions, but like Edi I'm
frustrated by the lack of comparibility. Just means I have to ski them
all myself :-)


--
Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
Ski Club of Great Britain - http://www.skiclub.co.uk
All opinions expressed are personal and in no way represent those of the Ski Club.

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:12:41 +0100, Ace wrote:

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:09:19 +0000, Champ wrote:

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:31:12 +0100, "Marinus"
wrote:

Edi wrote:
Why the difference and is there any way of comparing US and Euro
resorts on size ?

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?

So, the off-piste is counted in a resort's quoted 'km of piste' is it?

Dunno, but a typical US lift opens up a lot of terrain, which might
only have two marked routes down it.

FWIW I see some value in both descriptions, but like Edi I'm
frustrated by the lack of comparibility. Just means I have to ski them
all myself :-)

Yeah, that works.
--
Champ

Champ wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:12:41 +0100, Ace wrote:


On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:09:19 +0000, Champ wrote:


On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:31:12 +0100, "Marinus"
wrote:


Edi wrote:

Why the difference and is there any way of comparing US and Euro
resorts on size ?

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?

So, the off-piste is counted in a resort's quoted 'km of piste' is it?


Dunno, but a typical US lift opens up a lot of terrain, which might
only have two marked routes down it.

My experience of Canada is that every possible variation from the lift
is marked and signposted as a seperate run. We even found one in
Whistler that was only 2m long (a drop off a cornice that then rejoined
the main route). My experience of skiing in the US is very limited.



FWIW I see some value in both descriptions, but like Edi I'm
frustrated by the lack of comparibility. Just means I have to ski them
all myself :-)


Yeah, that works.

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:12:41 +0100, Ace wrote:

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:09:19 +0000, Champ wrote:

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:31:12 +0100, "Marinus"
wrote:

Edi wrote:
Why the difference and is there any way of comparing US and Euro
resorts on size ?

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?

So, the off-piste is counted in a resort's quoted 'km of piste' is it?

No, but it is included in the US "Acres of skiable territory".



--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Crime wouldn't pay if the government ran it.

To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:53:16 +0000, Alex Heney
wrote:

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:12:41 +0100, Ace wrote:

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:09:19 +0000, Champ wrote:

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 00:31:12 +0100, "Marinus"
wrote:

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?

So, the off-piste is counted in a resort's quoted 'km of piste' is it?

No, but it is included in the US "Acres of skiable territory".

Yes, which is what makes it so difficult to compare. The above formula
is completely useless, of course. Interesting, though, that many runs
that would be, at most, itinèraires in Europe, are actually marked on
the maps of many north american resorts, even though they're not
signed or pisted. So even if they quoted 'km of runs' it would still
be a meaningless comparison.

--
Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
Ski Club of Great Britain - http://www.skiclub.co.uk
All opinions expressed are personal and in no way represent those of the Ski Club.

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?

No.

Marinus

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:22:45 +0100, "Marinus"
wrote:

Divide the area by the average piste width and you're done.

Never go off piste, eh?

No.

Good :-)

--
Champ