KillingtonZone.com

PicoDreams wrote: the end result/goal is to maintain the Pico v. K experience...while adding something new ?

this seems like fun to me... but is there a quantifiable ROI ?

There is absolutely no difference in experience between K and Pico on a Saturday!
(and Yes, I have been to both places on a Saturday)

Weekdays it's great at both places...

deadheadskier wrote:

Ragged#1 wrote: it's not a great family place with all the clubs and crap.

All the clubs and "crap" is part of what's made Killington what it is for decades. Plenty of people go just for the partying with the skiing being a secondary reason for being there. Nothing wrong with that IMO.
You want the PG puppy dogs and ice cream family experience, head 30 minutes south to Ludlow.

Back in the 80's we had a stat cut out of Ski Magazine posted on the frig that Killington had one liquor license per every 16 residents. Highest bar to resident ratio in the country. Not much has changed except maybe a few more residents.

If you want the ice cream experience the Green Mountain Sugar House on 100 South has the Maple Creemee solution.

iRock wrote:

Ragged#1 wrote:
1.) Southridge CHAIRLIFT replacement and Snowdon express
2.) Village: All you people complain but look at the town! It's falling apart and it's not a great family place with all the clubs and crap.
3.) Interconnect: Pico never gets good buisness anyway. You won't be complaining when your not climbing up the abandon mountainresort named Pico

Exactly. I don't see how Pico gets half the business it does get. The mountain tries to have a family atmosphere, but with one terrain park and almost no off-mountain activities that's impossible. You can say Pico has classic trails, but go an hour north and you've got MRG and Sugarbush, 2 of the most old school resorts in town. Pico has an identity crisis. Like Smuggler's Notch. Family village at the base, but terrain that would make any expert think twice about what they're about to embark on. When I first skied Smuggs I started at Morse, and while traversing to Madonna I saw a giant wall of a mountain rising through the fog. My mouth dropped and so did my poles.

Must be imaginary business. Perfectly suited for the imaginary interconnect.

iRock wrote:

Ragged#1 wrote: 1.) Southridge CHAIRLIFT replacement and Snowdon express
2.) Village: All you people complain but look at the town! It's falling apart and it's not a great family place with all the clubs and crap.
3.) Interconnect: Pico never gets good buisness anyway. You won't be complaining when your not climbing up the abandon mountainresort named Pico

Exactly. I don't see how Pico gets half the business it does get. The mountain tries to have a family atmosphere, but with one terrain park and almost no off-mountain activities that's impossible. You can say Pico has classic trails, but go an hour north and you've got MRG and Sugarbush, 2 of the most old school resorts in town. Pico has an identity crisis. Like Smuggler's Notch. Family village at the base, but terrain that would make any expert think twice about what they're about to embark on. When I first skied Smuggs I started at Morse, and while traversing to Madonna I saw a giant wall of a mountain rising through the fog. My mouth dropped and so did my poles.

A year or two ago Nyberg said that Pico was profitable and from what I saw this winter I doubt that has changed. (Of course none of us see the books). Doubtful IMO that it would close.

Not saying that Pico cannot be marketed better... but I think you are comparing it to the wrong resorts that they would be competing against. Don't think MRG / Sugarbush... try Bromley / Cranmore type of places.

They have an advantage in the off mountain activities in that Pico has all of the same off mountain stuff that Killington has.

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote: Agreed.
I certainly don’t want the Julio woods sacrificed to produce another Big Dipper. Don’t want to hate on that type of trail but Killington certainly has enough of that stuff. But I do agree that Kton doesn’t have an old school steep and winding trail like it did. The original Superstar was wonderful. Could you put a trail like that (not like the new Superstar) into the Julio woods? Not sure but…

The wonderful Superstar is still there in modern form. Need to limit uphill skier numbers like MRG or Castlerock does to produce that old school feel. Fear of the steep trees limits traffic in most areas.

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:I LOVE the trees. Even the thick stuff. My face gets scratched up every year crashing down the thickest woods I can. I adore the top of Falls Brook off Juggernaut, I love the actual backcountry drops. But if you ask me are there some woods that are too thick to ski with any pace… yeah. I am always watching for folks dropping woods lines and always searching for tracks going new places.

Many times this year I have ducked into some of favorite stashes with a friend only to hear "Wow, never been in here before". Killington always seems to hold new surprises or old lines rediscovered.

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:There is plenty of woods at Killington that NOBODY seems to ski… because it is too thick. Any woods to the side of Catwalk cannot be skied... you can’t even walk through it. The woods between Ovation and Superstar almost never get skied because they are too thick. I have never found a decent line in there and I have never seen anyone else get through there except really slowly. Would the skiing be better there if the woods were thinned a bit? Hell yes.

Favorite run of the year for me was those trees that cannot be skied. One of the few places in the East were you can ski trees over 4,000 Ft. Trees top of Pico skiers left of the Poma Line are too tight IMHO.

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:The majority of the woods between the Light and Ovation almost never gets any tracks because it is a bit too thick. I head out into that mess, off the actual tracked Julio & Anarchy paths, a lot but I rarely find any lines that wouldn’t be improved with a little pruning. I am not asking for clear cuts like skiers right on Big Dipper. I don’t mind working to find some tight chutes in the thicker woods but… I really think the Julio woods, a half mile wide swath of trees from top to bottom, could definitely be improved with at least more pruning.

There are hundreds of lines in there but you must like tight to find the virgin. As a practice I prune on every run I make in there. If you join me those lines will improve over time.

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote: I don’t want you to lose the wilderness feeling you get in there but after hunting through those woods almost every weekend for the last five years I think that area has big patches that never get skied. Maybe the answer is not to drop a narrow trail through it but to have a huge section of steeps that almost never gets skied and never get skied out seems a bit wasteful. If I am wrong about this why is it so easy to find fresh lines (in the tight spots) in there weeks after the last snowfall?

Huge section of steeps that never gets skied out is a Godsend.

Dr. NO wrote: Went to Steamboat in the 70's and over by Priest Creek chair (it may be THE chair) the lifty would hold the chair and as soon as you sat down you were off the ground. If you screwed up he would grab the chair, tell you to duck and let it go, hopefully missing you. He then told you to go to the back of the line. Very effective way to keep the chair loading and rid the mountain of dummies. Probably would get him fired these days.

At some point in their lives, most people are "dummies" like that. Unless you've discovered a genetic secret unknown to the rest of us, we don't come out of the womb knowing how to board a chairlift. We have to be taught, which probably means doing it wrong once or twice. If the sport is going to survive, it needs more of those "dummies", who with practice eventually become good at it.

There are hundreds of lines in there but you must like tight to find the virgin. As a practice I prune on every run I make in there. If you join me those lines will improve over time.

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote: I don’t want you to lose the wilderness feeling you get in there but after hunting through those woods almost every weekend for the last five years I think that area has big patches that never get skied. Maybe the answer is not to drop a narrow trail through it but to have a huge section of steeps that almost never gets skied and never get skied out seems a bit wasteful. If I am wrong about this why is it so easy to find fresh lines (in the tight spots) in there weeks after the last snowfall?

Huge section of steeps that never gets skied out is a Godsend.[/quote]

OK all good points in rebuttal but.... sometimes it seems like the stuff we like the most... fresh tracks, are only there because the rest of the mountain gets really crowded. If I was looking at it as a marketing issue I think Julio woods is truly underutilized. It is an amazing chunk of woods in the middle of the most popular mountain in the east and it barely gets used.

I think of Valkyries at Taos. All much more open (and steeper) and so much of it that it never seems to track out. Could Julio be an east coast version of that? It would take an amazing increase in skier traffic to ski out a half mile wide swath of steep trees.

Did you really get clean fast lines between Ovation and Superstar?... that is very cool. And how do you trim while you ski?.. I would do that if it isn't ridiculous or liable to get me caught and kicked out.

deadheadskier wrote:

Ragged#1 wrote: it's not a great family place with all the clubs and crap.

All the clubs and "crap" is part of what's made Killington what it is for decades. Plenty of people go just for the partying with the skiing being a secondary reason for being there. Nothing wrong with that IMO.

You want the PG puppy dogs and ice cream family experience, head 30 minutes south to Ludlow.

Agree..i have friends who are yelling pickle barrel before thier feet hit the ground getting out of the car

deadheadskier wrote:

Ragged#1 wrote: it's not a great family place with all the clubs and crap.

All the clubs and "crap" is part of what's made Killington what it is for decades. Plenty of people go just for the partying with the skiing being a secondary reason for being there. Nothing wrong with that IMO.

You want the PG puppy dogs and ice cream family experience, head 30 minutes south to Ludlow.

Not even necessary. Just drive 5 minutes west to Pico and don't take your kids to a nightclub on the access road at 10PM.

Plenty of family friendly restaurants etc on the access road.

boston_e wrote:

deadheadskier wrote:

Ragged#1 wrote: it's not a great family place with all the clubs and crap.

All the clubs and "crap" is part of what's made Killington what it is for decades. Plenty of people go just for the partying with the skiing being a secondary reason for being there. Nothing wrong with that IMO.

You want the PG puppy dogs and ice cream family experience, head 30 minutes south to Ludlow.

Not even necessary. Just drive 5 minutes west to Pico and don't take your kids to a nightclub on the access road at 10PM.

Plenty of family friendly restaurants etc on the access road.

No way, you mean stingy parents actually do this, take their kids to bars and night clubs so they can enjoy their personal time? Never would have thought that possible.

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:OK all good points in rebuttal but.... sometimes it seems like the stuff we like the most... fresh tracks, are only there because the rest of the mountain gets really crowded. If I was looking at it as a marketing issue I think Julio woods is truly underutilized. It is an amazing chunk of woods in the middle of the most popular mountain in the east and it barely gets used.

I think of Valkyries at Taos. All much more open (and steeper) and so much of it that it never seems to track out. Could Julio be an east coast version of that? It would take an amazing increase in skier traffic to ski out a half mile wide swath of steep trees.

Did you really get clean fast lines between Ovation and Superstar?... that is very cool. And how do you trim while you ski?.. I would do that if it isn't ridiculous or liable to get me caught and kicked out.

My only comment is that the exits to Julio and Anarchy get beat fast. Those rock gardens would need 10' of snow to handle increased traffic. That ridge is underutilized, but the conditions are often what dictates it's skiability. It's not like it sits completely pristine. It's the thick parts that harbor snow, and even if trimmed, all funnel to a very rocky final pitch.

I would think one of the main reasons that ridge is underutilized is the need to use K1 to lap it.

deadheadskier wrote:I would think one of the main reasons that ridge is underutilized is the need to use K1 to lap it.

Or a combination of 2 lifts (SQ/ST + CQ/NRT), giving you a total of 5 different paths to lap the entire Anarchy ridge.

Some of the ridge can be lapped by riding just the Superstar Quad. Some of the ridge can be lapped by riding just the Canyon Quad.

Yeah there are other lift routes to take to lap it or parts of it. Guess I'm just saying the only way to access all of it via 1 lift (without heading uphill from SSQ) is to utilize the K1. That's not something many will want to do during busy days. Last day I skied K was Saturday of snoedown and lapped the ridge all day finding fresh every run. One of my best days of the season and I couldn't believe how few people I saw in there.

I'm not saying that they should totally remove all the clubs.
The village will be a great place where families can go and enjoy some nice time, good food and hopefully some awesome stores. After, they can just walk back to the hotel or drive down the street to their condo's. It's better than dealing with drunken idiots.