• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

Does anybody still not wear a helmet???

Greg

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
31,154
Points
0
99% of the time I do. I didn't for the first time in a while last weekend skiing slush bumps when it was 55 degrees.
 

mondeo

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
4,431
Points
0
Location
E. Hartford, CT
I'll take it off when it's warm. Slush is cushy enough to take the place of the helmet.

If I just skied groomers I wouldn't wear one. I can't remember the last time I fell when carving.
 

cbcbd

New member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
1,720
Points
0
Location
Seattle,WA
I think I see more out here that don't than I did back East... maybe it's the icy conditions? One of the hardest local BC hardman almost never wears one and he's on some gnarly peaks... I don't get it, but whatever - skisickness.com
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
17,569
Points
0
When it's warm I keep my vents open and if it's really warm I remove the padding on the ears..anyway I'm guessing 95% of the people I ski with wear a helmet..I've only been wearing one for 4 years..
 

dmc

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
14,275
Points
0
I rode a couple days in Kashmir without one... We were climbing(13,000+ feet) and riding open terrain..

I know lots of people the are BC types that don't wear them...
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
27,921
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
If I just skied groomers I wouldn't wear one. I can't remember the last time I fell when carving.

I find this statement totally bizarre.

If there is one place I'd be most inclined to to wear a helmet, it would be on groomers for numerous reasons. My rate of speed is significantly higher on groomers, snow can be much harder than bumps, risk of collision always seems higher to me as there tends to be more traffic and less skilled skiers, potential for shooting off the trail into the woods and hitting a tree seems much higher as you don't have bumps in the way to slow you down.

I'm with you in that I can't remember the last time I fell while carving, but I think the risk of sustaining a serious head injury while skiing fast on groomers is far greater than when I'm skiing bumps or trees. Skiing bumps these days is about the only place I don't wear one and that's only if it's all I plan on doing for the day and they're soft.
 

mondeo

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
4,431
Points
0
Location
E. Hartford, CT
I'm with you in that I can't remember the last time I fell while carving, but I think the risk of sustaining a serious head injury while skiing fast on groomers is far greater than when I'm skiing bumps or trees.
Risk = Probability x Consequence. I agree the consequences are greater, but the probability is so much lower that it outweighs the consequences. The point is moot, though.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
27,921
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
Risk = Probability x Consequence. I agree the consequences are greater, but the probability is so much lower that it outweighs the consequences. The point is moot, though.

I guess I just come at my stance from A. Personal experience in that the only time I've hurt my head badly was while skiing groomers and B. Most ski related deaths you read about in the east involve head trauma from a crash while someone was skiing at a high rate of speed on groomed terrain .

I put the consequences of badly injuring your head skiing bumps (unless it''s a freak thing like Jay) at near zero. If you hit your head in a crash going 40+ on a groomer the consequences are so much greater.

To each their own, but I find your logic flawed.

In math terms like you're using my feeling is this

Groomers
Risk (100) = Probability (4) x Consequences (25)

Bumps
Risk (50) = Probability (25) x Consequences (2)

I'm protecting my dome where the risk is double.
 

2knees

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
8,330
Points
0
Location
Safe
Risk = Probability x Consequence. I agree the consequences are greater, but the probability is so much lower that it outweighs the consequences. The point is moot, though.

ITo each their own, but I find your logic flawed.

In math terms like you're using my feeling is this

Groomers
Risk (100) = Probability (4) x Consequences (25)

Bumps
Risk (50) = Probability (25) x Consequences (2)

I'm protecting my dome where the risk is double.

frink.JPG
 

hammer

Active member
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
5,493
Points
38
Location
flatlands of Mass.
If you hit your head in a crash going 40+ on a groomer the consequences are so much greater.
I thought that even having a helmet wouldn't help at this speed...:stirpot:

I don't ski fast, but fast enough...and I've seen my kids get into crashes where, if they didn't have their helmet on, they would have ended up in the hospital with a serious head injury.

That said, it's a personal choice. I feel safer with a helmet on so I always wear one when skiing, but I'm not critical of those that choose not to.
 

mondeo

New member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
4,431
Points
0
Location
E. Hartford, CT
I guess I just come at my stance from A. Personal experience in that the only time I've hurt my head badly was while skiing groomers and B. Most ski related deaths you read about in the east involve head trauma from a crash while someone was skiing at a high rate of speed on groomed terrain .

I put the consequences of badly injuring your head skiing bumps (unless it''s a freak thing like Jay) at near zero. If you hit your head in a crash going 40+ on a groomer the consequences are so much greater.

To each their own, but I find your logic flawed.

In math terms like you're using my feeling is this

Groomers
Risk (100) = Probability (4) x Consequences (25)

Bumps
Risk (50) = Probability (25) x Consequences (2)

I'm protecting my dome where the risk is double.

We're both just guessing at the numbers anyways. :p

But it's actually not the bumps that are the reason I wear a helmet. It's skiing lines next to the woods, exposed rocks, terrain park, and flats drills. Get kicked out of a line and end up in the woods, I want a helmet. Skiing a natural snow bump run and fall on a rock, helmet. Launch a 20 ft booter backseat, want a helmet. Drilling flats, let my speed up too much, then catch an edge trying to do the same quick turns, I want a helmet. Middle of a well covered bump run or groomer while carving are both low risk to me.

Freaky. I just referenced that joke at lunch.
 

jack97

New member
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
2,513
Points
0
Feb vacation, just lapping bumps with my daughter, I got hit twice from behind. First was going to the lift line, kid must have wanted to speed ahead of me and thought he had the clearance. Second was going down a green trail on our last run for the day. The last one spun me around big time and I fell on the back of my head. I got up, wasn't mad but was annoyed and had some choice words for the kid.

I've seen it dozens of times at wawa where out control skiers hit unsuspecting skiers/rider, never thought it would happen to me tho. I think i would be hurting big time if I wasn't wearing my helmet that day.
 
Last edited:

Greg

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
31,154
Points
0
Geez. :roll: I need a helmet just to protect myself when I throw my head through the freakin' computer monitor...
 
Top