So Big Bear sucks...

Went up to Big Bear on Sunday to test out the neck and back after my accident. The drive up there was very nice (the 30/330/18 part) and it was pretty warm and sunny when we got there. It was weird being one of the few skiers there. I would say the snowboarder:skier ratio has to be about 95:1. Lines were long, runs were slush on top of pure ice and the whole mountain is a terrain park. Ended up just skiing around and hitting the kickers and table tops all over the place as my fiancé skied around them. Overall, it's nice to have a place we LaLa Land people can go for one day but I don't think I'll be going there unless i have absolutely no other options. Not to mention the drive back took twice as long because of the congestion on 18. To each his own I guess...

At least the neck/back felt good and Mammoth next weekend is a go!

Q: What has 200 legs, 3 pubic hairs and 12 brain cells?

A: The liftline at a snowboarders-only resort.

I used to rock :yourock: Big Bear with my Rossi 205's, stretch pants, no shirt, and flock of seagulls hair doo. :eek:

Don't hate the Player, hate the game. :the_finge

You chouls have stopped by ski school to say hi!

(Yeah, Bear Mountain has gone a little bit too far towards the snowboard side of things. We're getting lots of complaints from the skiers/boarders that actually spend money at the resort(as opposed to the little punks, that seem to rule the place). People don't really like the new attitude, and feel like the mountain is being overrun by 15 - 25 year-old males with no skills, and no respect. The problem is that when Snow Summit bought Bear Mountain, they decided to make Summit the "premier" resort, and Bear, the boarder resort.This is unfortunate, since Bear actually has some pretty fun terrain (at least it did when you could find some space between the jumps to make turns), while Summit is really flat and boaring, so Summit would have been a much better location for an all-mountain park. Unfortunately Dick Kun (the owner of Summit) didn't want to do that to his precious mountain, so he's left us as a ghetto resort.)

I forgot you worked there, sorry to hear that :D, just kidding.... I'm not sure if there will be another time, but if I make it back I'll stop by so you can show me the killer lines in between the terrain park features ;) So you're saying that Snow Summit is much better then Bear?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bullet

Yep, nothing like skiing on the 405 with a bunch of 16 year olds who just got there license. I also enjoy the short landing hills. 1' too long - flat landing, 1' too short, flat landing. Of course you have to make sure you land between the three boarders sitting on their ass on the landing hill. I live an hour closer than you and it can take 4 hours to get there or get back. Just drive to Mammoth.

Glad the neck feels better. See you in a few weeks.

---

Ya it was weird, kids in line being asses, smoking, just a totally different vibe then Mammoth. I quickly realized after hitting a couple booters that if you didn't have the perfect speed is was going to be flat or flat. I guess a great test for the neck/back. It's not too bad of a drive from the Valley but that 18 congestions sucks ass...

You not going up next weekend, I was going to make my Mammoth return then!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skier0178

I forgot you worked there, sorry to hear that :D, just kidding.... I'm not sure if there will be another time, but if I make it back I'll stop by so you can show me the killer lines in between the terrain park features ;) So you're saying that Snow Summit is much better then Bear?

---

NOOO!!!!!!


What I meant was that Snow Summit would have been a much better resort to turn into a park. If you think the terrain at Bear is boring, Summit is even worse. Their runs are all wide open boring freeways. At least some of the terrain at Bear is interesting (the runs off Silver are fairly narrow and windy). If I was going to turn a resot into a park, I'd pick the one that was naturally less interesting.

If I was in charge (and was capable of ignoring history, and didn't mind forcing the racers to move a mile down the road), I would cover Summit with terrain features, and market it as a "Freestyle" resort. I would then upgrade the base facilites at Bear, create a few park runs, and market Bear as a "Freeride" resort. I'd definitely make a big deal about the tree skiing, and backcountry access (even though those areas are only skiable for a few weeks each season). I would also let some of the runs at Bear develop moguls on half of the run.

edit - watch the snow report for word that "the canyons" are open. Shoot me a PM, and I'll "show you the sick terrain between the features" (there's a lot of fun out in the words, and since snowboarders can't traverse, it takes forever to get tracked out).

Q: How many snowboarders does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Five. One to screw it in and four to tell him how SICK! it was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nest

Q: How many snowboarders does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Five. One to screw it in and four to tell him how SICK! it was.

---

A: Five. One to screw it in, and four to say "Dude, I coulda' done that!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiSoCalSkier

NOOO!!!!!!


What I meant was that Snow Summit would have been a much better resort to turn into a park. If you think the terrain at Bear is boring, Summit is even worse. Their runs are all wide open boring freeways. At least some of the terrain at Bear is interesting (the runs off Silver are fairly narrow and windy). If I was going to turn a resot into a park, I'd pick the one that was naturally less interesting.

If I was in charge (and was capable of ignoring history, and didn't mind forcing the racers to move a mile down the road), I would cover Summit with terrain features, and market it as a "Freestyle" resort. I would then upgrade the base facilites at Bear, create a few park runs, and market Bear as a "Freeride" resort. I'd definitely make a big deal about the tree skiing, and backcountry access (even though those areas are only skiable for a few weeks each season). I would also let some of the runs at Bear develop moguls on half of the run.

edit - watch the snow report for word that "the canyons" are open. Shoot me a PM, and I'll "show you the sick terrain between the features" (there's a lot of fun out in the words, and since snowboarders can't traverse, it takes forever to get tracked out).

---

My fiancé liked the area so we may be back, but it won't be for the "features" on the runs. I'll PM ya if I need the scoop...

***cough****Baldy****cough****

MAN I MISS WATERMAN.............sniff.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arty50

***cough****Baldy****cough****

---

Pardon my ignorance but where's that exactly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skier0178

Pardon my ignorance but where's that exactly?

---

Take the 10 (or 210) to Claremont.
Get off on Mountain
Go North until the road ends

Mt Baldy

(Once it starts snowing, call the snow phone. As soon as you hear that there is skiing to the parking lot, GO! The runs to the bottom are the best, but they melt fast.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Tim

MAN I MISS WATERMAN.............sniff.........

---

No fucking shit. What the hell happened there anyway? Everything was hunky dory and then I heard it sold and now it's been closed the past two seasons. It's a damn shame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arty50

No fucking shit. What the hell happened there anyway? Everything was hunky dory and then I heard it sold and now it's been closed the past two seasons. It's a damn shame.

---

The lodge also burned down under suspicious circumstances a few years back, too.

Mostly, the place wasn't profitable. It had been teetering between red and black for decades. Then Krakta Ridge bought them out, opened up the resorts for one season, opened just Krakta the following season (or two, I can't remember), then stopped opening either one.

Neither place has the ability to do mass snowmaking like the Big Bear resorts or Mtn. High. There's no nearby watershed to draw off of, nor do they have water rights to anything. As such, they rely on mother nature, which usually didn't allow them to open until well into January. They just couldn't compete.

It's too bad. There was some fun stuff at Waterman. Especially skier's left of the lower chair.

Ubersheist: I think you are referring to the Kratka Ridge fire. Waterman was not affected (directly) by this. Some pics of Kratka's burned lodge here.

Last I heard, Waterman was planning to open, snow conditions permitting as usual. The only site that ever has info is the Ski Patrol site, but even that has no current info.

If it snows over a foot, another place to score some decent turns in Snow Valley. The "Canyons" at Bear don't even come close to Valley when there is sufficient natural. There are a million stashes there and no one will even walk ten steps for some fresh, plus they almost always get more snow than the Big Bare resorts. If you go, Rusty in patrol will usually let you hike anything OB if you ask nicely and check in and out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wtp

Ubersheist: I think you are referring to the Kratka Ridge fire. Waterman was not affected (directly) by this. Some pics of Kratka's burned lodge here.

---

Crud. I believe you are correct. I do remember reading about the fire at the Krakta chairlift. I don't think thier lodge was affected, was it?

Something happened to the Mt. Waterman lodge, though too, I believe. Wasn't it broken into and vandalized or something? I can't remember.