ESA Snowmass, the saga continues...

[Lisamarie]

This has been an interesting thread to follow and I'll pose a hypothetical question here. Based on your experience, if you had to do it all over again, would you find more value in an all-day private with, say, Weems, or attending the ESA?

I agree with NannyMin on this. Each experience would be valuable in its own right. That said, I do hope that the picnic does not become a permanent substitute for the banquet. Although I come to ESA primarily for the instruction, the banquet is important for promoting support and camaraderie amongst participants.

I also hope that in the future, the goals of the event would be presented more clearly. In the past, it was designed to improve all of aspects of your skiing. If it has become a 4-day mogul clinic, that's fine, but it should be stated in the description so that people could choose a different type of event that represents a more balanced approach.

BTW, this has become a common complaint in the past few years. In the earlier events, groups were composed of two to five participants. Now that the event has almost tripled in price, the groups are averaging four to eight participants. This leads to a lot of compromises of needs. Many people feel that they either have to stay in a group that is too focused on one type of terrain, or move to a group that is below their level.

Still in all, it's a fantastic event. Hopefully, they will clean uo these minor glitches and safety issues and it will be even more fantastic.

 

[Lisamarie]

I will never know, but our group spend all the time working on bumps or at least preparing to ski bumps

This was a huge issue for me, since I have way too much rotary and really need to work more on my carving skills. I totally understand why the ski needs to be flattened in moguls, but working on one movement pattern without balancing it out can eventually cause some serious knee problems.

 

[abc]

There're a couple difference between NM's and my difference.

One being I changed groups, which means the new group may not be exactly the right one in terms of expectation, even though skill-wise it was at the right level. I'm not the one who didn't get my needs addressed. But others in my group was whispering about theirs not been met. Granted, theirs weren't exactly what I had in mind so somethings got to give. While I understand it's not possible to form groups to meet ALL the needs neatly. It's just my group happened to be the more dysfunctional than average.

The other big difference is the coach. Our coach was also a boot fitter based at Snowmass. That was both good and bad. The good being we were being accessed for our boot needs, without having to pay the "boot camp" fee. The bad was also a big one. He was basically too busy fitting boots after skiing. So our group skipped the coaches re-cap on evening of day 1. (A few of our group showed up at the group re-cap only to mill around and then left on their own) AND we were left alone to watch the video with no analysis. (we spend a fair amount of time free skiing to be videoed, so there's expectation for analysis afterwards, which didn't happen) The same goes for the evening of day 3, when some of our group show up at his shop only to find a big "party" instead of a group gathering.

As a result, our group has no focus after skiing. That's when the lack of ESA "organized" socialization would have salvaged the situation. But alas, there were none. So we were left on our own device.

Our group recognize the coach was part of the cause of that. So on last day, when the "envelope" was passed around, there's some resistance to participate (and that's also when the "whispering" finally got loud). Technically, our coach was good (and good at teaching too). But there's clearly a distance between what he did and what was expected, for both the ESA veterant and newbews alike. My understanding is this is his first year coaching ESA so he may have not be acustomed to the "norm" of ESA?

As I said in previous posts. I have no real problem with the teaching part (a few minor details could have been improved but wouldn't make much difference in my learning). It's the Epic part that's lacking. Given the price of the clinic being in the same ball part of other commercial clinics, it simply felt (to me) just like any other clinic!

 

[abc]

Now that the event has almost tripled in price, the groups are averaging four to eight participants.

The number of group size isn't the most important, the need is.

Our group has 6. It's not that large by any "group" standard. But unfortunately, it really had two distintly different sub-groups in terms of need/expectation. One sub-group came from the "old school" and really need to have our bad habits de-constructed and new, good ones put in place on both groomed and un-groomed. The other sub-group really only need to be exposed to more advance terrain and gain experience in applying and adopting their techniques to non-groomer. They were the ones who felt they were short-changed by focus ONLY on bumps. I can see they could use some experience in powder and trees - had we not loudly insist, we may not EVER gone into trees. (in retrospect, I probably should have join the chorus to push for doing some powder-specific techniques, but I kept silent instead and we didn't go there! :( )

The value of group learning is in sharing the LEARNING experience. If the group needs are similar, the "aha" moment can apply to more than one student. But in our group, there's relatively little similarity of needs. So it ended up being a "serial teaching" of one student aftre another. A very in-efficient use of time (and money).

So I'm kind of indirectly answering Toucan's question of group vs. private. A private will ALWAYS be for you, and you alone. There'll never be a quetion there. The plus side of groups is, if you luck out with the right group, you get a lot more out of the 4 days than 1. (e.g. in my ESA, we cover carving, bumps and tree. And with better organization, probably even powder, I doubt even Weems can cover all that in 1 day ) But that's no garantee there.

 

[SnowHot]

My take on private is that social aspect of it as well as the ability to learn from others in the group.
When I was in Robins group at Stowe, Nannymin and I actually bounce a lot of cool stuff off each other.
I can't imagine getting as much out of it had we not hooked up.

 

[ski now work later]

This has been a very interesting and educational thread. I thought I would share my experience at ESA Stowe December '07, my first ESA experience:

I had a great time at Stowe socially. It was very friendly and I felt welcomed as an intermediate skier. In in terms of my group instruction, however, it was not ideal because what I learned was what I was doing wrong and I was not given the coaching to learn how to do it right. In retrospect, I should have asked more questions, but I was so focused on keeping up with the group and on Sunday, with skiing in the deeper snow, that I didn't stop to reflect and just ask. I did, however, get a whole lot of benefit from the coach panel discussion at ESA and from having breakfast with Bob Barnes and chatting with him. The level of the coaches was great and they made me feel very comfortable asking all kinds of questions. The video review by my coach and by the skier who filmed was excellent and very helpful too. I think that I would have clicked well with Bob or with Robin as my coach, but alas, they taught groups that were above my level.

I've since had 2 private sessions with a coach at Okemo (who I researched and found at the end of last season) who is teaching me what I need to ski correctly, and I'm making great progress with him. He's also more of the style skier that I want to become (he's a freestyle skier with solid ski skills in all areas) and so it feels like a better fit for me. I generally like group learning because you can learn from other members of the group, and I was at the middle skill level of my ESA Stowe group, but somehow the experience at ESA Stowe didn't really add up for me. My coach was a great skier and knew her stuff. I just left the clinic with fairly low self esteem about my skiing and few ideas about how to correct my issues.... This didn't strike me as an ESA-related experience, just the way that group worked and the dynamic with this particular coach who I didn't personally click with.

If my Okemo coach is available to teach me next Winter, I have decided for next season to continue working with him in private sessions and not to attend any clinics, ESA or otherwise (I can't afford to do several privates and a clinic). Once I get to a solid level 7-8 in all conditions, I would consider taking another clinic with ESA, Didi, or another group of great coaches.

Sometimes a mixed or negative experience is there to point us in the direction that we need to go. I found another ESA coach who I'm having a 1/2 day with at Big Sky next Sunday, and I'm really looking forward to that. Perhaps this is just a time in my skiing development that I need one-on-one coaching. For now, it's working, and I am working toward to my goal of becoming an accomplished all mountain skier that can ski all terrain and conditions safely with grace and some freestyle moves.

 

[SnowHot]

As a result, our group has no focus after skiing. That's when the lack of ESA "organized" socialization would have salvaged the situation. But alas, there were none. So we were left on our own device.

Our group recognize the coach was part of the cause of that. So on last day, when the "envelope" was passed around, there's some resistance to participate (and that's also when the "whispering" finally got loud). Technically, our coach was good (and good at teaching too). But there's clearly a distance between what he did and what was expected, for both the ESA veterant and newbews alike. My understanding is this is his first year coaching ESA so he may have not be acustomed to the "norm" of ESA?

As I said in previous posts. I have no real problem with the teaching part (a few minor details could have been improved but wouldn't make much difference in my learning). It's the Epic part that's lacking. Given the price of the clinic being in the same ball part of other commercial clinics, it simply felt (to me) just like any other clinic!

The number of group size isn't the most important, the need is.


The value of group learning is in sharing the LEARNING experience. If the group needs are similar, the "aha" moment can apply to more than one student. But in our group, there's relatively little similarity of needs. So it ended up being a "serial teaching" of one student aftre another. A very in-efficient use of time (and money).

So I'm kind of indirectly answering Toucan's question of group vs. private. A private will ALWAYS be for you, and you alone. There'll never be a quetion there. The plus side of groups is, if you luck out with the right group, you get a lot more out of the 4 days than 1. (e.g. in my ESA, we cover carving, bumps and tree. And with better organization, probably even powder, I doubt even Weems can cover all that in 1 day ) But that's no garantee there.

ABC, I am really glad you are being so articulate on this.

It sounds like you had a good ESA experience but not the phenomenal ESA experience you anticipated.
I've been to two ESA's and absolutely loved both of them. I went in with the desire to be pushed beyond my skill and comfort zone. I know I'm a better skier today because of taking that leap.

Sounds like you gleaned a few "ah hah" moments, but, along with the rest of your group, had hoped for a little more focus from your particular instructor.

I sincerely hope you try ESA again, perhaps with me .
Something tells me we'd have some fun, and maybe learn something, too!

Be sure to fill out your ESA report survey when you receive it. They DO try to respond to the needs of the attendees.

 

[NannyMin]

Be sure to fill out your ESA report survey when you receive it. They DO try to respond to the needs of the attendees.

Ditto! I made a couple of suggestions on my ESA Stowe survey that I got to see put into action at ESA Snowmass. All of our suggestions and feedback can only make ESA better!

 

[abc]

Since this is turning into a "what's the best format for instrution" thread...

It sounds like you had a good ESA experience but not the phenomenal ESA experience you anticipated.
I've been to two ESA's and absolutely loved both of them. I went in with the desire to be pushed beyond my skill and comfort zone. I know I'm a better skier today because of taking that leap.

I went in with something in my mind but open to anything. I got almost exactly what I went in for (learning-wise), which I'm happy of, but nothing else really. I wasn't particularly challenged, pushed, nor exposed to anything I hadn't done before. I did manage to come out doing them better, MUCH better, that is.

I defintely had a good learning experience at Aspen. Though it wasn't so much "pushed beyond my skill and comfort zone". More cleaning up of bad habits and replacing with new ones, which I knew I need. That's where I feel the multi-day clinic format works better than a much shorter private: it takes more than a day to solidify the new techniques into (semi-)habits under various different (and sometimes difficult) conditions. TrekChick, that's why I didn't considered Stowe. I felt 2 days wasn't long enough for the sort of "break old habit and form new ones" (or as often say "take you apart and put it back together") process .

And to emphesize the "group learning" benefit, there's at least one other in my group who was in almost exactly the same situation as me. So it's good to see myself even without a VCR! Though sadly, he wasn't as open to changing his way of skiing (he didn't "click" with the instructor at all). It's also interesting to hear what the coach had to say to him (which he rarely did) because it often applies to me too.

Perhaps because I knew quite clearly what I needed and waht I wanted to achieve, I wasn't exactly "blown away" by the result. In short, ESA was definitely a good clinic, though not an eye-opening, outsized success, as sometimes toted on epic.com. Perhaps it's a result of the "over-hyped" expectation (due to the forum "advertizing") that I didn't find it exciting. Still, it's definitely a worthwhile one and I highly recommend it to anyone who's considering a multi-day "camp" type of instructions. On the other hand, I wouldn't consider it above other similar multi-day camps geared towards upper intermediate and beyond.

Sounds like you gleaned a few "ah hah" moments, but, along with the rest of your group, had hoped for a little more focus from your particular instructor..

As far as focus on snow, I think that situation could happen in any "group" clinic (the "group" not be as cohesive as it should be to enhance learning). It's not uniquely ESA or even our coach's fault.

It's the off-snow part that I (or we as a group) felt let down by our particular coach.

Be sure to fill out your ESA report survey when you receive it. They DO try to respond to the needs of the attendees.

I'm sure they would hear quite a bit from at least our group. Quite a few were eager to offer feedback "to the management". But as is, I hadn't received one. And as the experience of the clinic fades into the background (it's now nearly a week and a half since the conclusion of the clinic), people may be less willing to bother with it any more.

 

[SnowHot]

abc, I really enjoyed spending time with you at Stowe, and really appreciate the manner in which you're presenting your experience.

This type of balanced feedback, with both enthusiasm and critique, is important, and helpful.

For me, personally, I prefer the 2 day clinic, and believe that the social environment runs strong, because a Two day does not leave you exhausted, and overwhelmed.

I make my choice to do Stowe(2 day) where someone else may prefer a longer clinic. So much of this is personal preference.

abc, I truly want to meet up with you again. I consider you a delight!

 

[NannyMin]

The ESA AspenSnowmass Evaluations have been sent out. Don't forget to complete it and send it in! If you didn't get one pm me and I will forward it on to you.

Your 2 cents are important!

 

[abc]

abc, I really enjoyed spending time with you at Stowe, and really appreciate the manner in which you're presenting your experience.

This type of balanced feedback, with both enthusiasm and critique, is important, and helpful.

For me, personally, I prefer the 2 day clinic, and believe that the social environment runs strong, because a Two day does not leave you exhausted, and overwhelmed.

I make my choice to do Stowe(2 day) where someone else may prefer a longer clinic. So much of this is personal preference.

abc, I truly want to meet up with you again. I consider you a delight!

I, too, hope to meet you again somewhere snowy!

If it didn't come out by itselff, I'll say it explicitly. It's because of the enthusiasm I experienced at Stowe that really "pushed" into making the Snowmass ESA! And you, TC, is a big part of Stowe's success!

(although I probably would have done Big Sky instead)

 

[SnowHot]

I, too, hope to meet you again somewhere snowy!

If it didn't come out by itselff, I'll say it explicitly. It's because of the enthusiasm I experienced at Stowe that really "pushed" into making the Snowmass ESA! And you, TC, is a big part of Stowe's success!

(although I probably would have done Big Sky instead)

You make me blush

Trust me, I really considered doing Big Sky.
I'd still like to, but I have my winter schedule so packed full, I'm not sure how I could get it squeezed in.