• 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!

Ski Resort Response to COVID-19

VTKilarney

Active member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
5,410
Points
38
Location
VT NEK
A better example would be american football vs rugby. One being a variation of the other, but both with minimal protection gear. American football evolved into something where one has to wear full combat gear, supposedly for protection purpose, while the style also turned to a full combat sport. All the extra head protection resulted in play techniques that are unsee in rugby, along with the high prevalence of CTE among players.

At least on the college level, rugby players are much more likely to be injured. Rugby players are 2.5 times as likely to suffer a concussion.

As a rugby fan this does not surprise me. The referees are very careful about calling dangerous tackles, but there is still a lot of unintentional harmful contact.

Rugby is a MUCH more entertaining sport to watch than American football, however.
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,773
Points
48
Location
PRNJ
The NFL says that there hasn't been any person to person contact on the field? Do you guys believe it? If it is true, how? Linebackers are in each others face on every play, when someone gets tackled there are several players on top of them. Anyway any thoughts?

I think you meant to say linemen, and I do agree, it seems unsafe due to the fact that barring some rest substitutions, you will likely play the entire game directly across from that same player.
 

abc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,398
Points
63
Location
Lower Hudson Valley
I think you meant to say linemen, and I do agree, it seems unsafe due to the fact that barring some rest substitutions, you will likely play the entire game directly across from that same player.
I'm not a football fan so don't know about football specifically. But all the professional sports are counting on the "health bubble".

So instead of limiting transmission within the players, they test frequently, hoping to identify and remove any source of transmission.

It's the same idea New Zealand and Australia is doing. Full "normal" behavior within the bubble. Only the NFL and MLB are doing it (or trying it) with a "soft border". I don't fault them for trying, but it doesn't seem to work too well.
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,773
Points
48
Location
PRNJ
The NHL had the strictest "bubble", as it really was a no-go zone. Nobody in, nobody out. They were literally captive for several months. Not a single COVID19+ case though.
 

icecoast1

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
499
Points
28
I'm not a football fan so don't know about football specifically. But all the professional sports are counting on the "health bubble".

So instead of limiting transmission within the players, they test frequently, hoping to identify and remove any source of transmission.

It's the same idea New Zealand and Australia is doing. Full "normal" behavior within the bubble. Only the NFL and MLB are doing it (or trying it) with a "soft border". I don't fault them for trying, but it doesn't seem to work too well.
The NFL and MLB arent doing any kind of bubble, they're simply testing players/coaches and when small outbreaks happen they shutdown facilities and reschedule games. The refusal to do a true bubble is why their seasons have been a total shitshow


The NHL did a true bubble where players were quarantined this past summer and they had no problems at all
 

da-bum

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2017
Messages
91
Points
8
At least on the college level, rugby players are much more likely to be injured. Rugby players are 2.5 times as likely to suffer a concussion.

As a rugby fan this does not surprise me. The referees are very careful about calling dangerous tackles, but there is still a lot of unintentional harmful contact.

Rugby is a MUCH more entertaining sport to watch than American football, however.
Concussion in rugby usually occurs on secondary impact. Cases like that are noticeable and players would be pulled. In american football, all the gearing gave a false sense of security, thus head on tackles have been normalized, where even though no concussion occurs, sub-concussive hits occurs regularly, resulting in extensive number of players with degenerative brain disease.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
938
Points
18
Or not wearing helmets...
He's referring to something different. If I understand him correctly, he doesn't believe that people ski more recklessly despite the fact that almost everyone wears helmets which provides significant protection against brain injury vs. not wearing one.

I haven't gone down the rabbit hole on this one, but I had an economics professor who really liked this subject. It's a matter of changing incentives/ risk vs. reward analysis which explains the intrigue from some economists (and why Edd and I seem to view this one differently ;) ). One striking example he would bring up include how much full-speed head-first/head-intensive tackling goes on in football vs. rugby. Apparently, despite the helmets and padding, football is at least as dangerous (if not more, IIRC) regarding head injuries. Apparently, hockey players also got much more reckless once they put extra pads and helmets on. I'm no die hard hockey fan, but apparently collision speeds and the propensity for non-goalies to dive in front of shots has gone up substantially since the advent of modern helmets and padding.
 

dblskifanatic

Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
321
Points
18
It is interesting that the initial mask mandate saw numbers reducing afterwards. Mask use has been broadly accepted by most and today I see more people wearing masks than when the initial mask mandate came out. Yet, the numbers have sky rocketed. I now know of six people who work together in an environment where masks are required and they all have covid. All were wearing masks. I think there has been a lot of pressure on others with quotes like "save a life wear a mask". That has created complacency where people think they are fully protected while wearing a mask and others around you are also wearing a mask which is totally false. It reduces the chances. If people are worried about getting covid then the best solution is isolation.

We moved from Colorado to Boston and drove through 9 states - ate in all of them and slept in four. We mind our own business and do not mingle with crowds we do not know. I feel safe with our approach to travel and living our lives. The problem is not with those that go about their own business - the problem lies within the crowd gather events like universities, or people that have covid fatigue and are gathering in any case.

Politicians are making rules that are not fully vetted and hurting families and individuals that are at wits end. The sheer number of businesses that have gone under or will after this next go around is nuts! Shutting down restaurants like they are in Colorado or New Mexico was not necessary!
 

abc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,398
Points
63
Location
Lower Hudson Valley
It is interesting that the initial mask mandate saw numbers reducing afterwards. Mask use has been broadly accepted by most and today I see more people wearing masks than when the initial mask mandate came out. Yet, the numbers have sky rocketed. I now know of six people who work together in an environment where masks are required and they all have covid. All were wearing masks.
When Covid first hit, it was definitely in clusters. NYC got the headline. But in reality, it was actually specific part of the city, in some neighborhood of Queens, Brooklyn and Bronx. Staten Island and Manhattan had much lower cases. I didn't know of anyone who got infected until late May or June when I heard the first case (sadly, she passed away shortly as a direct result)

But now, it's more wide spread. I've heard several people had it. They live all over the place. Manhattan, even northern Westchester.

There's definitely covid fatique. But some of it are also inevitability. I can't tell you how many times I broke isolation myself out of necessity. When something in my house breaks, I had to have it repaired. Zoos of people in and out of my very sacred space! And when my body part breaks (ok, tooth), I had to have it repaired also. Inches from the dentist! I narrowly avoided having to visit an optometrist. Again another inches from the breath of another stranger!!!

Back in March, we have a small number of infected people, who infected MANY others in an uncontrolled environment.

Now, we have many more number of infected people. So even with mask and social distance, we're still getting some transmission. Can you imagine if we don't do anything (no social distance, no mask, tons of indoor gathering...)? With many more infected virus source going all over the place as they "normally" do as in March, what would the infection number be like?

Can we separate the effect of mask vs social distance vs gathering? I wish some medical research people would do some hard research and give us the answer. But so far, no dice. We're left to "do our best" base on what we know, which is incomplete. That's unfortunately the best we can do, even if it's not quite as good as we want.
 

1dog

Active member
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
297
Points
28
It is interesting that the initial mask mandate saw numbers reducing afterwards. Mask use has been broadly accepted by most and today I see more people wearing masks than when the initial mask mandate came out. Yet, the numbers have sky rocketed. I now know of six people who work together in an environment where masks are required and they all have covid. All were wearing masks. I think there has been a lot of pressure on others with quotes like "save a life wear a mask". That has created complacency where people think they are fully protected while wearing a mask and others around you are also wearing a mask which is totally false. It reduces the chances. If people are worried about getting covid then the best solution is isolation.

We moved from Colorado to Boston and drove through 9 states - ate in all of them and slept in four. We mind our own business and do not mingle with crowds we do not know. I feel safe with our approach to travel and living our lives. The problem is not with those that go about their own business - the problem lies within the crowd gather events like universities, or people that have covid fatigue and are gathering in any case.

Politicians are making rules that are not fully vetted and hurting families and individuals that are at wits end. The sheer number of businesses that have gone under or will after this next go around is nuts! Shutting down restaurants like they are in Colorado or New Mexico was not necessary!
Our own governor in MA has just set us back to Level 3 and 40% capacity - worse yet, he is sending elderly people w Covid to nursing homes ( 2/3 of the 11K MA deaths are elderly, most in nursing homes) We know of a neighboring governor who made this mistake back in Feb. Charlie says its gonna be isolated though, so I'm relieved. But have no fear, Covid will wait until Sunday night at midnight - this weekend you can still eat in a restaurant with no mask - after midnight Sunday - you must wear a mask at the table - unless you are eating.

'hurting families and individuals' is an understatement. Add small businesses - think of the billions that flowed from them to Amazon alone.
 

VTKilarney

Active member
Joined
Feb 5, 2014
Messages
5,410
Points
38
Location
VT NEK
Win Smith is taking questions for a Covid-19 ski area live Q/A on December 9th at 5:30 PM.
Details here:
 

icecoast1

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
499
Points
28
'hurting families and individuals' is an understatement. Add small businesses - think of the billions that flowed from them to Amazon alone.

Bezos probably salivates at the thought of more government imposed restrictions and lockdowns. They might not do much to slow the spread of Covid, but they will do a great job of adding billions more to his pockets as more small businesses are destroyed
 
Last edited:

Puck it

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
9,615
Points
48
Location
Franconia, NH
Our own governor in MA has just set us back to Level 3 and 40% capacity - worse yet, he is sending elderly people w Covid to nursing homes ( 2/3 of the 11K MA deaths are elderly, most in nursing homes) We know of a neighboring governor who made this mistake back in Feb. Charlie says its gonna be isolated though, so I'm relieved. But have no fear, Covid will wait until Sunday night at midnight - this weekend you can still eat in a restaurant with no mask - after midnight Sunday - you must wear a mask at the table - unless you are eating.

'hurting families and individuals' is an understatement. Add small businesses - think of the billions that flowed from them to Amazon alone.
Baker is a criminal and should jailed for the soldiers home debacle in Holyoke. He fired two underlings to save his ass. Why does he wait 6, 8 or 10 days to impose his orders. If it is that important why do it immediately. He is one of the reasons I became a NH resident.
 

ss20

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
2,803
Points
63
Location
CT
Today I got reprimanded at Crystal for the mask. I was alone on a six person chairlift, pulling into the top terminal. Lifty was FURIOUS and told me I needed the mask up at the top of the chairlift....which I'm riding alone....outside....moving....

At the base I get it because there's people all around. Can't say I agree with wearing it up top but apparently that is the rule? I honestly have no idea. Seems excessive to me on a Tuesday in early December when there's 400 people total across 1500+ acres of terrain.
 

drjeff

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
17,345
Points
63
Location
Brooklyn, CT
Today I got reprimanded at Crystal for the mask. I was alone on a six person chairlift, pulling into the top terminal. Lifty was FURIOUS and told me I needed the mask up at the top of the chairlift....which I'm riding alone....outside....moving....

At the base I get it because there's people all around. Can't say I agree with wearing it up top but apparently that is the rule? I honestly have no idea. Seems excessive to me on a Tuesday in early December when there's 400 people total across 1500+ acres of terrain.
Many resorts seem to be going with the concept that its OK to have your mask down a bit while you are "ACTIVELY skiing/riding" down the hill, but otherwise it has to be covering your face/nose completely.

Does it really make that much difference in the big scheme of things what you were doing? Very, very, very likely not.

Is it something that potentially some emboldened, power hungry Dept of Public Health official *might* take notice to *if* they happened to see it? Could be. And if so might that have a negative consequence towards the ski area and ski industry in this crazy time? Unfortunately yes.

Just easier to keep your mask up at the base and summit terminal areas while on a lift right now. The ski industry doesn't need any additional scrutiny from various government officials right now for sure. And regardless of the science or our own personal freedoms, I think we all can agree that we want ski areas to be able to operate!
 

1dog

Active member
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
297
Points
28
Baker is a criminal and should jailed for the soldiers home debacle in Holyoke. He fired two underlings to save his ass. Why does he wait 6, 8 or 10 days to impose his orders. If it is that important why do it immediately. He is one of the reasons I became a NH resident.

A large donation from the nursing home industry group to both he ad his Lt Gov could be the reason for a lack of an uproar. And hey, if it didn't work the 1st time, let's try it all over again.
 
Top