One-event comparison log

Preparation and setting

| Condition or feature | Initial tactic | What to monitor | When to simplify or leave | |---|---|---|---| | Hard patch between softer snow | Regulate pace beforehand; use measured direction and edge inputs | Sudden skid, excessive late braking | Stopping support is uncertain or slide consequence is high | | Soft piles or chopped powder | Use a readable route and available leg range; avoid attacking every pile identically | Deflection and abrupt deceleration | Piles hide hard obstacles or exceed absorption range | | Wet slush or sticky section | Keep stance adjustable and reduce aggressive tilt demand | Pitch-forward sensation, drag or contact | Repeated catches or unpredictable stopping | | Ruts and tracked channels | Inspect alignment and choose a route that does not trap the board | Forced heading change or edge snag | Rut is deep, icy or cannot be crossed within control | | Breakable crust | Prefer a more consistent route; use small, measured inputs if already in a manageable patch | Nose/edge breaking through unevenly | Steering becomes unreliable; do not treat speed or jumping as universal fixes | | Flat light or fog over variable snow | Reduce task demand and stay on a known visible route | Loss of contour information or uncertain stopping distance | Cannot identify a clear path and stop within what is visible | These are starting decisions, not complete lessons for every snow type. In particular, this record does not certify a universal breakable-crust technique. Persistent irregular support warrants route change and local coaching rather than a stronger generic cue.

Exercise task

1. use the fields: location; geometry; surface description; entry; board event; rider sensation; possible causes; one proposed change; actual result; uncertainty. Example: “At the shallow wet patch, glide slowed and torso moved forward; hypothesis: resistance increase; next test: easier entry with more available joint range; result: less pitch disturbance, same exit.”