Member of the Month

hi_vis360
November, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Who fell harder?

profile picture
ski_and_distroy
Posts: 328 - Karma: 11
tanner?
Click for larger image
or
dummont?
Click for larger image
Oct 25 2005 10:43PM
0 0
profile picture
levistewart
Posts: 3360 - Karma: 111
tanners jump was a switch nine on chads how evere simion went big if were talkin about respectability i like tanners cause it was something no one sides jon was doin but crashes equal = hardness but tanner got a worse injury hi hell may never hell fully
Oct 27 2005 10:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Coalescent
Posts: 4871 - Karma: 2,063
i dont know i thikn both are pretty bad
Oct 27 2005 11:01PM
0 0
profile picture
skiierman
Posts: 28699 - Karma: -5,563
For the last time, a person's injury does NOT signify the severity of the crash. You can slip down stairs and crack your head open and on the flip side roll a car into a tree but walk away. Anyone would agree the car would be the worse accident because of what happened, not of the injuries sustained.
Oct 27 2005 11:14PM
0 0
profile picture
jns^
Posts: 332 - Karma: 11
simon definatley had the bigger crash, he's lucky he's still alive, he fell from some crazy altitude, although i wouldn't want to be in tanners shoes either, both crashes would hurt like hell !
Oct 28 2005 3:40AM
0 0
profile picture
GGitzen
Posts: 475 - Karma: 17
yah definatly dumont...but the fact that tanner broke both of his ancles in his ski boots makes me cringe a little bit
Oct 28 2005 3:53AM
0 0
profile picture
AKFREERIDE
Posts: 1718 - Karma: 11
it dosnt count........are you insane?
Oct 28 2005 8:01PM
0 0
profile picture
Rez4frederick
Posts: 4740 - Karma: 40
Dumonts wreck is going to give me nightmares for the rest of my life....
Oct 28 2005 8:20PM
0 0
profile picture
rrjames
Posts: 298 - Karma: 15
of i haven't read all the posts but you think bout who broke the most, then tell me who fell harder
Oct 28 2005 8:23PM
0 0
profile picture
XxLibertYxX
Posts: 1452 - Karma: 28
did simon get hurt? like break anything
Oct 28 2005 8:29PM
0 0
profile picture
skiierman
Posts: 28699 - Karma: -5,563
Naw he's right, I mean he did train his body to take hits like that through his pipe runs... Don't deny Ced.
Oct 28 2005 8:48PM
0 0
profile picture
skimasterflex
Posts: 2064 - Karma: 16
i like Hugo Harrisons fall in Yearbook better.
Oct 28 2005 9:14PM
0 0
profile picture
Ahmets_Brother
Posts: 20283 - Karma: 5,931
simon
Oct 28 2005 9:20PM
0 0
profile picture
skisebski
Posts: 5970 - Karma: 21
true. but here id say it was simon
Oct 28 2005 9:21PM
0 0
profile picture
jsg
Posts: 7701 - Karma: 535
u cant say dumont could of just got lucky withno injurys and tanner got unlucky with a bad one.....so its hard to say dumont fell 100 feet to hard ice and tanner cased a big gap....but people have cased chads just as bad or even worsethen tanner who have u seen over shoot a HUGE TABLE and go like 100FEET TO HARD ICE?
Oct 28 2005 9:59PM
0 0
profile picture
skiierman
Posts: 28699 - Karma: -5,563
That's true because one guy did undershoot Chad's breaking his back.
Oct 28 2005 10:19PM
0 0
profile picture
table_top08
Posts: 863 - Karma: 10
def dumont
Oct 28 2005 10:21PM
0 0
profile picture
Bo-
Posts: 553 - Karma: 11
You guys... think about lars.
Oct 28 2005 10:57PM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5985 - Karma: 3,607
tanner cause hes the best at everything
Oct 28 2005 10:59PM
0 0
profile picture
mathers
Posts: 1865 - Karma: 490
simon was a few inches shorter this summer...
Oct 28 2005 11:06PM
0 0
profile picture
NWFlow
Posts: 1557 - Karma: 61
this thread is pretty pointless. at least talk about their recoveries or something.
Oct 29 2005 12:20AM
0 0
profile picture
+[wall.e]+
Posts: 1928 - Karma: 18
I wouldnt go ahead and say Tanner sustained worse injuries. I would say that the kind just takes longer to recover from. Cause Dumont's pelvis was crushed and his spleen ruptured. THat to me seems more serious than an ankle. But IDK im not a doctor...

Dumont's was worse
Oct 29 2005 10:14AM
0 0
profile picture
Tze.C
Posts: 1596 - Karma: 86
dumont cheated death so im going to say him
Oct 29 2005 10:18AM
0 0
profile picture
cousinmark
Posts: 939 - Karma: 29
exactly, this is not even an argument dumonts crash is ten times worse if snowmobile was going 2 or 3 mph faster this would be an r i p dumont thread, you cant tell how sick the shit is on tape
Oct 29 2005 1:02PM
0 0
profile picture
d.spong
Posts: 909 - Karma: 8
that was at like 7 - 8 in the morning and simon got knocked out also, i guess he made a dent in the ice from his head
Oct 29 2005 1:48PM
0 0
profile picture
snoopy
Posts: 5240 - Karma: 30
dumonts for sure.. could have been bbadddd
Oct 29 2005 1:50PM
0 0
profile picture
UrbanRider
Posts: 265 - Karma: 10
haha harsh...but agreed on simon
Oct 29 2005 10:16PM
0 0
profile picture
chugLIFE
Posts: 4714 - Karma: 1,050
dumonts was life threatening, while tanners was more of jsut a shock
Oct 29 2005 11:22PM
0 0
profile picture
bermbuster49
Posts: 7445 - Karma: 90
simon, if you look at the full images/vids, simon's body rag-dolls across the flat where he landed, tanner just kinda cartwheeled in pow, which i do think has to suck when you have two broken ankles, but simon was like rolling on cement, aka park groom.
Oct 29 2005 11:36PM
0 0
profile picture
dylhole
Posts: 2926 - Karma: 983
^ that wasnt a park landing. it was solid ice
Oct 29 2005 11:52PM
0 0
profile picture
levistewart
Posts: 3360 - Karma: 111
eeww god that jump hat some grosom landings
Oct 29 2005 11:59PM
0 0
profile picture
chapz
Posts: 10182 - Karma: 66
simon for sure
Oct 30 2005 1:08AM
0 0
profile picture
Matty.
Posts: 9458 - Karma: 105
I'm going to say Dumont, he went bigger, and he fell the equivalent of like a 40 foot building to flat ice basically.
Oct 30 2005 1:53AM
0 0
profile picture
aussiejibber
Posts: 183 - Karma: 22
spot on
Oct 30 2005 1:56AM
0 0
profile picture
-d-
Posts: 27 - Karma: 13
Both brutal. But no one takes sking more serious than tanner. Hes working his ass off to get better. But he had brutal injuries and still wont be competing this year. Being out due to injuries is the hardest thing to deal with.
Oct 30 2005 2:37PM
0 0
profile picture
Cheeseninja
Posts: 386 - Karma: 12
I think Dumont's definitely had more energy transferred to his body when he hit. With Tanner's he still had the energy to cartwheel like crazy.

Anyone who regularly sees automobile racing knows that a crash when the car tumbles is better than going straight into the wall and not doing anything after that.
Oct 30 2005 3:06PM
0 0
profile picture
Treestman
Posts: 3049 - Karma: 300
Click for larger image
Oct 30 2005 3:28PM
0 0
profile picture
zmanalex
Posts: 452 - Karma: 10
Definatly the Dumonts. He fell from a good 100 feet. Plus anytime you get internal injuries i.e. ruptured spleen or whatever happend to him its so much more bad ass than a broken bone, which he got also.
Oct 30 2005 3:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Girays_Brother
Posts: 13973 - Karma: 1,636
simon
Oct 30 2005 3:49PM
0 0
profile picture
[fisher]
Posts: 1325 - Karma: 11
dumont for sure,, he could have died from that,,
Oct 30 2005 3:56PM
0 0
profile picture
salamander
Posts: 815 - Karma: 16
simon was bein towed in at the right speed but he didnt think so, so he pulled the rope in right before he let go to get more speed, it might not seem like it would make a difference but as we can see, it did
Oct 30 2005 4:39PM
0 0
profile picture
turbo_penguin
Posts: 282 - Karma: 15
the diagram skiholic posted says it all, done. maybe a tie with wilson's.
Oct 30 2005 4:41PM
0 0
profile picture
Tze.C
Posts: 1596 - Karma: 86
^^ if t-hall and dumont went base jumpin and tanner had a parachute and dumont didn't, you'd say t-hall landed harder. sry man but when it comes to t-hall your biased, u might aswell get it over with and suck his dik
Nov 4 2005 12:52AM
0 0
profile picture
ferrinski86
Posts: 774 - Karma: 10
tanners,
he came to a complete stop from 53mph whereas dumont hit and slid.
look at it this way, would you rather jump out of a car at 50mph or hit a brick wall at 50mph?
Nov 4 2005 12:58AM
0 0
profile picture
edmonton_skier
Posts: 3210 - Karma: 110
shit man i have a feeling that im screwed over-shooting a 30 foot tablew. i can imagive having 4 seconds to think (and he could have) that im gonna die

dumonts all the way
Nov 4 2005 1:05AM
0 0
profile picture
Anathema
Posts: 21048 - Karma: 5,061
well, using simple physics, i've determined that mr dumont would have had to fall around 95 feet (or there abouts) to hit the ground at the same speed mr hall did (53mph). so basically, if the height of that fall was more than 100ft, he definately hit the ground at a higher speed

and ,

what makes his crash so much worse was the force at which he hit the ground. in mr halls case, he was travelling forward and had his feet knocked out from under him, so only his feet took the full impact of the blow, whereas mr dumont's entire body smashed into the ground at whatever speed.
Nov 4 2005 1:28AM
0 0
profile picture
Anathema
Posts: 21048 - Karma: 5,061
OH, and i only worked the y axis there, not the diagonal, so i mean, that totally adds to the impact right thurrrr.
Nov 4 2005 1:31AM
0 0
profile picture
Ryno
Posts: 31125 - Karma: 336
what are you saying up retard...brick wall?...maybe if you made it say you jump out of a car at 50mph and clip you feet and ragdolled...he didnt come to a complete stop at all....jeez
Nov 4 2005 1:48AM
0 0
profile picture
$$RivalD$$
Posts: 97 - Karma: 44
Simon for sure... tanner's was bad but not that bad looking on film you see wrecks close to that all the time in movies... (the outcome isn't usually this bad.) but simon's was fucking scary i still don;t think that I have watched it all I look away everytime..
Nov 4 2005 2:47AM
0 0
profile picture
muttski
Posts: 7 - Karma: 10
dumont probably should be dead...

anyone know who the photogs were shooting stills for both crashes?
Nov 4 2005 5:30AM
0 0
profile picture
almostaskier
Posts: 13809 - Karma: 93
after seeing TBC: simon, for sure. i mean, an explosion sounding the fracture of his pelvis anyone?
Nov 4 2005 6:16AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)