Check Out Our Shop
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: closer to 50'

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Squambladesh
    Posts
    232

    closer to 50'

    Posted on Powder too. Glen Wade sending it about 50'
    http://www.biglines.com/photos/blpic18153.jpg

  2. #2
    Blurred Elevens Guest
    take off to landing closer to 70 or 80. Caw!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Slut Lake City
    Posts
    7,785

    Thumbs up

    He's looking toit. Toit like a tiger.

    I love the Where's Waldo aspect of that pic too.

    edit for mocking purposes: 70-80... right.
    Last edited by phUnk; 02-03-2004 at 11:06 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Sunriver, Orygun
    Posts
    529

    Sickbird air fer sure!
    But where's the lincoln log?
    Oops, I mean loop.
    Did he stick it or explode?

  5. #5
    Blurred Elevens Guest
    You're right. My bad, closer to 70' I guess. What a pussy..

    http://www.tetongravity.com/usergall...al_newdrop.jpg

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    The Ranch
    Posts
    3,792
    Originally posted by Blurred Elevens
    You're right. My bad, closer to 70' I guess. What a pussy..

    http://www.tetongravity.com/usergall...al_newdrop.jpg
    I think you might want to submit that photo to the Department of Weights and Measures for verification.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Squambladesh
    Posts
    232
    I quit you win!

    Ok new one, how high is this one? Bryce Phillips.

    http://www.biglines.com/photos/blpic18154.jpg

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Nhampshire
    Posts
    7,873
    300' easy.
    (you can't see the LZ so I can say whatever I want)

  9. #9
    Blurred Elevens Guest
    Originally posted by cab9
    I quit you win!

    Ok new one, how high is this one? Bryce Phillips.

    http://www.biglines.com/photos/blpic18154.jpg
    Considering that is the same huck from a different angle, I'll have to put that one right around 70' too.


    JONGS...

    Since when did everyone in the ski world become rock measuring geologists, instead of realistically measuring drops?

    Was your photo the one that was published, or did you take the profile shot?

    And the biggest question that is lonely for an answer is...since you were there...

    DID HE STICK IT??? GOT PICS?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Squambladesh
    Posts
    232
    The shot of Bryce is about 60 feet further up the ridge, and its actually bigger than then one Glen is dropping, about 75' It was that shot of Glen that was published in the Feb issue.
    You know the beauty of stills is that the landings are ALWAYS stuck I will have to look, we hit that ridge for a while and some were stuck and some were serious hottubs. I attached a shot of Scott Rickenberger doubling up the same cliff, to give a better idea of height of the one Bryce is on.
    http://www.biglines.com/photos/blpic18155.jpg

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Slut Lake City
    Posts
    7,785
    That air is 16 skiers tall if he lands at the bottom of the pic. He's super toit in the air, so let's say he's 3.5 feet tall all scrunched up like that. 16 * 3.5 = 56 feet.

    In summary, it looks like the BBF (Brett Bullshit Factor) is about +30%. Good Game.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    7,628
    heh....this thread is funny.

    fukking killer pics and skiing regardless.
    Waste your time, read my crap, at:
    One Gear, Two Planks

  13. #13
    Blurred Elevens Guest
    Originally posted by phUnk
    That air is 16 skiers tall if he lands at the bottom of the pic. He's super toit in the air, so let's say he's 3.5 feet tall all scrunched up like that. 16 * 3.5 = 56 feet.

    In summary, it looks like the BBF (Brett Bullshit Factor) is about +30%. Good Game.
    You should add another on top there Phunky. I doubt he hucked 5 feet below the lip. I bet you did at first, but it ruined your case. so add an extra 3.5...let's call it 60'.
    Also, his heighth is probably closer to 4.0 than 3.5, so add another.5 x 17. that's an extra 8.5 feet. Grand total? 68.5 feet.
    Sorry, I was off by a foot and a half.

    Don't worry, we all know that if it was you, you would have thrown a double-back and stuck it clean.

    BTW-why aren't you competing at Snowbird?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    xanadu
    Posts
    588

    Thumbs up

    Originally posted by Tyrone Shoelaces
    fukking killer pics and skiing regardless.
    something we can all agree on. thanks for the stoke...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Bellingham
    Posts
    1,234
    Originally posted by Blurred Elevens
    You should add another on top there Phunky. I doubt he hucked 5 feet below the lip. I bet you did at first, but it ruined your case. so add an extra 3.5...let's call it 60'.
    Also, his heighth is probably closer to 4.0 than 3.5, so add another.5 x 17. that's an extra 8.5 feet. Grand total? 68.5 feet.
    Sorry, I was off by a foot and a half.

    Don't worry, we all know that if it was you, you would have thrown a double-back and stuck it clean.

    BTW-why aren't you competing at Snowbird?

    How do you guys know that g-wade isn't 7' tall? His brother is pretty damn close! Anyways, sick huck as always.
    smoke crack and worship satan

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    78' N
    Posts
    178
    Originally posted by White Chocolate
    How do you guys know that g-wade isn't 7' tall? His brother is pretty damn close! Anyways, sick huck as always.
    Or for that matter, a midget?
    yay for stoke.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •