Why are there no snowboarder only mountains?

[octopus]

there is no mountain, that receives snow, anywhere in the world where snowboards do not work, groomed or ungroomed.

 

[Cannonball]

A serious question... Since MRG is known for not grooming, is snowboarding genuinely not compatible with an operation of this type? In other words, can snowboards and skiers live peacefully if no grooming is present?

Since you say this is a serious question I will believe you (even though it sounds like a joke). Groooming has nothing to do with Snowboarding, the mix of the 2 sports, or MRG's position.

Also, I would suggest that MRG is more known for not allowing snowboarders than they are for not grooming.

 

[Cannonball]

So you are saying skiers are an exciting group to be with.

For sure!

 

[VTKilarney]

The reason I asked the question is that someone earlier posted a comment about not liking moguls as a snowboarder. Since not grooming equals moguls, I was wondering if there was anything to this proposition.

The comment I was referring to was this:
i've always been interested in a snowboard only mountain, partly because i'd like to see what would setup instead of those f'ing moguls.

 

[AdironRider]

The answer is the same as why you have seen basically zero new ski areas developed in the last 20 years.

Try and get it pass the enviros and you'll know the reason.

 

[octopus]

moguls to me are just a pita, not unrideable. i'm sure if i practiced riding them i could make it more enjoyable.

 

[Cannonball]

It's definitely true that some people (boarders and skiers) don't like bumps. Some people don't like groomers, trees, steeps, cold, powder, straight trails, windy trails, narrow trails, wide trails, or just about any other conditions you can think of.

You might not understand MRG. The lack of snowboarders there isn't because snowboarders are choosing not to attend due to lack of grooming.

 

[VTKilarney]

I'm well aware of that. I was just wondering how many snowboarders would actually wind up there if they were allowed to do so given the prior comment re: moguls.

 

[Cannonball]

It's hard to guess. Probably snowboarders who don't like bumps would stay away and instead go would go to the same places that skiers who don't like bumps go.

 

[VTKilarney]

It's hard to guess. Probably snowboarders who don't like bumps would stay away and instead go would go to the same places that skiers who don't like bumps go.

A lot of skiers who don't like bumps still go to mountains with bumps, no? Most resorts tend to have something to please everyone. MRG has never been a "please everyone" type of hill.

 

[Cannonball]

Exactly. Same would be true for snowboarders.

 

[Rowsdower]

For a mountain to be all snowboard you'd need a new resort built with snowboarding in mind as the primary business driver instead of skiing. Every ski area in existence was built with, well, skiing in mind. First and foremost. Snowboarding was added later.

It would be like constructing a six lane highway and then deciding you only wanted bikes on it. Maybe that's not the best analogy but you get the idea. It's not really a preference thing, but the way places were built and what they were built around.

 

[darent]

there is no mountain, that receives snow, anywhere in the world where snowboards do not work, groomed or ungroomed.

yes but some mountains are not boarder friendly, Alta is an example, sure you can board there, but all the really good runs involve short to medium hikes. I would think boarders wouldn't like that

 

[Cannonball]

yes but some mountains are not boarder friendly, Alta is an example, sure you can board there, but all the really good runs involve short to medium hikes. I would think boarders wouldn't like that

Man, if I have to hike I sooooo prefer to do it in snowboard boots.

 

[Cannonball]

For a mountain to be all snowboard you'd need a new resort built with snowboarding in mind as the primary business driver instead of skiing. Every ski area in existence was built with, well, skiing in mind. First and foremost. Snowboarding was added later.

It would be like constructing a six lane highway and then deciding you only wanted bikes on it. Maybe that's not the best analogy but you get the idea. It's not really a preference thing, but the way places were built and what they were built around.

I can't think of a single way in which this is true.

 

[dlague]

It's definitely true that some people (boarders and skiers) don't like bumps. Some people don't like groomers, trees, steeps, cold, powder, straight trails, windy trails, narrow trails, wide trails, or just about any other conditions you can think of.

You might not understand MRG. The lack of snowboarders there isn't because snowboarders are choosing not to attend due to lack of grooming.

Obviously because they are not allowed to go there!


i typed with my i thumbs using AlpineZone

 

[Rowsdower]

I can't think of a single way in which this is true.

I don't see how an existing ski resort could ban skiers.

 

[Cannonball]

I don't see how an existing ski resort could ban skiers.

But what would be different about a new 'snowboarder resort' ?

 

[Savemeasammy]

I would be curious to see what an ungroomed "snowboarder only" trail would look like. My guess would be really widely spaced, irregular bumps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jaytrem]

I would be curious to see what an ungroomed "snowboarder only" trail would look like. My guess would be really widely spaced, irregular bumps.

Mt High in CA had a good 20+ to 1 snowboard to skier ratio when I was there. The bumps on the non-groomed were pretty much what you described. I've seen similar bumps plenty of times in the East. Typically at places where you would expect lower skill levels or with snow that isn't conducive to forming a nice bump line.