Is Hucking the New Expert Benchmark?

[highpeaksdrifter]

If you have skills all over the mountain, but you don’t huck 20-foot cliffs can you consider yourself an expert?

Is hucking a skiing skill or is it a feat of daredevilism that anyone with sack and athleticism can do?

What say you my brothers and sisters of the cold?

 

[kbroderick]

Hucking is an act of daredevelism.

Landing and dodging trees as you do so is an act of skiing.

 

[2knees]

what kbroderick said.

anyone can with the cajones to do it can huck.

 

[rogue rider]

I think hucking for the sake of hucking with no regard for the landing is more about having the cajones than skill BUT...I think the ability and willingness to huck is part of skiing in the same way as the ability and desire to ski powder, or trees, or bumps is. While none of those skills are required to have an enjoyable ski experience, they open up options to explore more lines and experience parts of the mountain that would be otherwise beyond ones ability.

You dont have to huck to be an expert racer or bump skier. You also dont need to be especially competent in bumps to be an expert big mountain skier. Besides what is an expert anyway?

 

[JD]

I love lines with mandatory airs. Nothing over say 10-15 feet unless there is a nice steep open landing. My days of jumping off the waterall under the gondi to a flat landing are over, but a nice drop in the middle of a flowy line is great. Just gimme some transition.

 

[bvibert]

I guess it depends on your definition of 'expert'. If you define an expert as someone that can ski the whole mountain then I guess that being able to huck is a requirement...

 

[Greg]

If so, I'll never be an expert...

 

[bvibert]

If so, I'll never be an expert...

Same here...

 

[ski_resort_observer]

IMHO hucking isn't really skiing/riding it's just gravity.

 

[2knees]

taking it further, can you consider yourself an "expert" if you cant pull 360's, or some kind of a double or clear 50 foot tabletops in the park? It's a discipline for sure, but not one you have to excel at to be a very competent skier. Interesting question though. Personally, i gave up air years ago. I'm brittle enough now, no need to tempt fate again.

 

[trailertrash]

check out the previous discussion of a similiar thread:

http://forums.alpinezone.com/8109-expert-skier-rider.html?

 

[lloyd braun]

If you have skills all over the mountain, but you don’t huck 20-foot cliffs can you consider yourself an expert?

Is hucking a skiing skill or is it a feat of daredevilism that anyone with sack and athleticism can do?

What say you my brothers and sisters of the cold?

I would say NO hucking is not a requirement for being and "expert"

there is a skill to hucking big stuff but I know many people that can jump off a big rock but can't make 3 good turns getting too it. Watching people jump big stuff is fun and exciting, but so is seeing someone stick a great line.

there is a bunch more to hucking stuff than just jumping off. This past summer my wife and I hiked up and cleared some stuff in a couple of landing zones to make sure the line I want to ski will be safe. I have been waiting to ski this certain line which, in the middle, has a 25 ft cliff. The approch is the reason for the line and it closes off to a cliff at the end. The conditions never allowed me do it last year, but I am hoping for one big enough dump to get it done this year. Funny thing about this certain line is that the jump (huck) will be the easy part. Skiing the line prior to the rock will be the hard part. So in my opinion someone who can jump off big stuff but can't ski that well would never be able to get it done and in turn would not be considered an "expert".

does any of my above statement make sense?

 

[ChileMass]

Personally, I am too old to huck anything anymore. I used to go for some air, but I am concerned as skiers/riders attempt bigger and bigger hucks. Have fun, but let's be careful out there. I'm not into outlawing air or OOB stuff in general, but if a lot of people get seriously hurt, thre could be some backlash.

 

[salida]

I would say it is not an expert benchmark, and most East Coast skiers will not venture into Mandatory Air type of lines either...

That being said if you want to ski the entirety of a big mountain out west (or some gnarly chutes in the east) mandatory air becomes part of the equation. Personally, I wouldn't want to go bigger than 15-20 feet. After that it just plain old hurts, my stomach gets all bouncy on impact, whether I land it or not.

I also see a big difference in hucking something where you have to stick the landing, or where if you land there is no consequence. Like Corbet's you can botch it and you are going to slide all the way to the bottom but you aren't likely falling off a cliff. Where some drops must be stuck to ski the line... There is a difference between hucking and skiing a cliff because its in the sweet line you want to ski!

I'm going to put some pictures up for my ego:

ps does this one count:

 

[riverc0il]

how are we defining a huck? how many feet drop would be the difference between taking some air vs. hucking? i think it is a good question because an expert skier should be able to take a minimal amount of air, land it, and keep on skiing. that would involve terrain features whereas the word hucking (to me at least) seems to suggest a cliff or big drop. i think there is a certain height of air and drop that moves away from expert level skiing into extreme skiing. i am no extreme skier, that is for sure. i'll take a ten foot mandatory in stride and have been working hard to improve my ability to hit terrain features. but i think there is a difference between hitting terrain features and hucking your meat. hucking gets into extreme skiing and while it takes a higher level of talent, skill, and sometimes luck than an expert skier, i do not believe the huck defines an expert.

 

[Birdman829]

how are we defining a huck? how many feet drop would be the difference between taking some air vs. hucking? i think it is a good question because an expert skier should be able to take a minimal amount of air, land it, and keep on skiing. that would involve terrain features whereas the word hucking (to me at least) seems to suggest a cliff or big drop. i think there is a certain height of air and drop that moves away from expert level skiing into extreme skiing. i am no extreme skier, that is for sure. i'll take a ten foot mandatory in stride and have been working hard to improve my ability to hit terrain features. but i think there is a difference between hitting terrain features and hucking your meat. hucking gets into extreme skiing and while it takes a higher level of talent, skill, and sometimes luck than an expert skier, i do not believe the huck defines an expert.

Very well put.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

Like Corbet's you can botch it and you are going to slide all the way to the bottom but you aren't likely falling off a cliff.

You might not fall off a cliff but you can seriously injure yourself, as many have, by crashing into one. Like one person who hit the cliff after landing and put his ankle thru his boot...that's right, a compound fracture right thru the boot. You must be confusing Corbet's with some other huck.

 

[EPB]

I dont huck anything bigger than about ten feet because I dont want to deystroy my knees..... I think part of being an expert skier is being comfortable jumping and pulling it off cleanly. I dont nessisarily think that you can put a number on it because the landing can make an 8 footer much more challenging and taxing on your body than a 15+ footer with a perfect landing wit 18 inches of pow.