The Vertical Drop Thread

MarzNC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
EDIT: since this was broken out from another thread . . .
Topic started after I posted stats that included Greek, Song, Lab, and Toggenburg from Mountain Vertical as part of a discussion about Togg. That website lists ski areas/resorts in order by True-Up Vertical Descent.

Screen Shot 2021-09-09 at 9.54.45 AM.png


Yeah, but they claim that Togg is 700, which it ain't, as mentioned by Adam above. Also, 950 is Greek's brochure quote; however, it's less than that. Do the "true-up" verts represent what's possible on a continuous run or is it simply the total top-to-bottom on inbound terrain?

Vertical isn't everything. Still, it's helpful to compare apples to apples.
Here's the explanation for True-Up Vertical. I use the Mountain Vertical for quick comparisons. Hadn't looked since I had a chance to stop by the bases of Song/Lab and Greek and other ski areas in the Catskills. The numbers seem rounded off for smaller hills with under 1000 ft vert.

For Massanutten, it's possible to get the entire 1070 ft vert from the summit to the base continuously. But there is only about 250 vert for the long green that is the entire length of the long beginner lift form the base. Takes under 3 min to finish for an advanced skier starting at the top who skis Diamond Jim, the straighter black trail. Took less than 5 min when I was just getting back on skis as an adventurous intermediate 15 years ago.

Screen Shot 2021-09-09 at 1.01.21 PM.png
 
Last edited:
I don't total get true-up vert. As I recall, the number for Gore is less than summit minus base but way more than you can EASILY ski.

I mean you can ski from Gore's Summit to base, but it's almost completely a traverse. And the True-up number doesn't match it.
 
I think the true-up guys are obsessed with figuring out the most vertical you can easily ski from one lift ride. It’s really about “lap-able vertical” rather than a mountain’s longest possible run I believe
 
I don't total get true-up vert. As I recall, the number for Gore is less than summit minus base but way more than you can EASILY ski.

I mean you can ski from Gore's Summit to base, but it's almost completely a traverse. And the True-up number doesn't match it.
I think the true-up guys are obsessed with figuring out the most vertical you can easily ski from one lift ride. It’s really about “lap-able vertical” rather than a mountain’s longest possible run I believe
The MountainVertical guys used topo maps and trail maps to come up with TrueVertical. They haven't skied all the ski areas/resorts on the website. No one would bother to do that. So it's pretty easy to see flaws in their thinking for a given mountain if you know it well. I find MountainVertical more useful than the vertical put out by resort marketing. Especially when what I really want to do is compare more than a couple mountains.

See their website for examples like Sunday River where total vertical from the highest point to the lowest point on the resort isn't very useful since SR has multiple peaks. Jay Peak is the example where total vert and TrueVertical is actually the same.
 
I don’t know but they put Killington at 1640
That doesn’t make sense either. Maybe they just suck
1640 vertical is the Killington Peak gondola. The Skyship 2 stage gondola is 2520 vertical. I guess they feel that people mostly use the Skyship for access rather than skiing. The other lifts at Killington are all under 1640 vertical and none of the lifts stack vertical (like riding the North Quad and then riding the High Peaks quad back to back at Gore).
 
You have to tuck Cloud like the good old days. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
I guess that is Summit 3600 to Base 1500?

Semi-legit. Somewhat more legit than pipeline I guess.

In reality it's all good to me, I'm just trying to put myself in the shoes of someone who gives a crap about vert.
 
Back
Top