Whoever was voting in New York has never been to Troy, and whoever is voting in Virginia has never been to Martinsville.
Hey man. Worcester was the Paris of the 80s!
Translation: worst city that enough people know about to be able to vote for it. There are some really shit places people just donât know about to be able to vote for them.
I mean its the capital region, Albany-Schenectady-Troy I would think people would know them at least. I mean Iâm from Schenectady and we dunked on Troy constantly.
Cairo, IL is only known at all because it is the southmost town in the state. It has been dying a slow, rural death for decades.
There are worse places in NY than Troy, which has some good stuff going on. Utica, Elmira, Oswego, Newburgh, Plattsburgh⌠all worse than Troy.
I wouldnât say Plattsburgh is that bad aside from being kinda remote and cold as fuck in winter but I havenât been there in 20 years either. Point still stands that Albany is far from the worst city in New York.
The only thing good to ever come out of Worcester is Doug Stanhope.
Spoiler: base jumping and wingsuit flying are not survivable over 1000 hours of active participation.
I think @apreche should take note of the resort skiing and quit giving @rym shit about it. Less than 1/10th of 1% chance of dying over 1000 hours of active participation.
No you canât just use âlow chance of deathâ as a guide to âsafe to participateâ. If 99 out of 100 people are paralysed by breaking their neck doing an activity and only one person dies, that would be classed as âsaferâ than if 98 people survive without a scratch and two people die.
Itâs right there in the paragraph above the chart:
âUnfortunately, all the information in the chart below only refers to the risk of death and does not account for the risk of injuries. The reason is simply the fact that data about injuries are extremely unreliable since the great majority of sport injuries are never reported and/or accounted as such. (The omission of injury information also means that activities that tend to have a relatively high injury to death ratio (e.g. skiing, equestrian eventing, marathon running, riding motorcycles, hang gliding, paragliding, downhill mountain biking) might look relatively safer than they really are, and activities that have a relatively low injury to death ratio (e.g. general aviation, soaring, skydiving) might appear relatively more dangerous than they really are.)â
Letâs get some numbers!
Cycling
2015 in the U.S.:
818 cyclist deaths
467 000 cyclist injuries
So 571 injuries for every death.
Skiing
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-52755-0_3
2008-2010 in Switzerland:
2.8 injuries per thousand skier days
0.7 deaths per million skier days
So around 4000 injuries for every death.
So given the stats Luke linked with skiing being 0.875x as dangerous death-wise per hour as cycling, injury-wise it would be about 6x more dangerous per hour than cycling. More dangerous, sure, but not all that bad either.
This is all very rough, of course, but I think it gives approximately the right idea. Itâs hard to estimate the relative effects that underreporting would have on those cyclist vs skier injury numbers, though.
I found an interesting statistic along those lines yesterday - 19% of all solo cyclist injuries(ie, they hurt themselves, nobody else involved) in Melbourne are due to tram-lines, making them one of if not the the largest contributor to cyclist injuries in Melbourne.
You also have to consider that skiers in Switzerland are going to be above average skill-wise. Thatâs like, the land of ski. The US is land of car and land of low skills. Bike stats from the Netherlands are a better comparison for Swiss skiers.
Youâd think so, but it doesnât appear to be that simple.
From the article I linked:
In the United States in winter 2010, the injury rate for skiers was also lower than in Switzerland (2.5 injuries/1000 visits), but the rate for snowboarders sustaining an injury on slopes in the United States was 6.1 injuries per 1000 visits, much higher than in Switzerland [15]. In comparison, another US study using injury reports from one medium-sized northern ski area found an overall injury rate of only 1.9 injuries per 1000 skier visits (excluding snowboarders) for 2010 [21].
With regards to fatalities
suggests a 10-year fatality rate of 0.67 per million visits in the U.S., but I believe thatâs combined skier/snowboarder data. Still, roughly the same death rates as in Switzerland.
On the whole, the above quote suggests U.S. snowboarders are probably terrible, but it doesnât seem like U.S. skiers are as bad as youâre suggesting. Of course it could also be down to selection effects (which people go skiing vs snowboarding in the first place and where they do it).
I forgot about snowboarding, so that makes sense. An inexperienced person who goes to the mountain is much more likely to snowboard than ski.