Pistol Packing Pete





Full moon rising over Sugarbush

New Years Eve snowstorm at Sugarbush

A million years ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I spent a summer working for a very intimidating guy who happened to be the Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. I’ll spare the details of what I was doing there and how that contributed to my career in the ski business, but the judge (known tongue in cheek as “Pistol Packing Pete”) had one particular attitude that I’ve been thinking about lately. Oddly, it’s been on my mind here at Sugarbush as we planned our alpine staff training for the month of January.

As an instructor, one of my goals always is to make sure that my students understand why we move on skis the way we do, why our ideal technique is what it is. Of course, this invites concern that I can overcomplicate things for them, not without justification for those that know me well. Still, I swear, I work hard to keep things simple and understandable for my students, and to keep their skiing in a context that keeps it clear. Thankfully, modern ski technique involves pattern of movements that is pretty natural, universal really, and is easily understood by our guests, whether or not they can do advanced physics and understand complex biomechanics.

As a trainer of instructors (and as their Director), I often explain to staff that my principal goal for the outcome of my training clinics is better thinking instructors. Better skiing instructors and better teaching instructors come with time, experimentation and repetition, all built on a foundation of understanding. I received some interesting comments from one of our staff recently about this concept that is so nice in the abstact, and that drew me back to my history with Pistol Packing Pete. Remember Judge Pete?

Pistol Packing Pete the federal judge presided over the federal courthouse in New Haven, Connecticut, home of Yale University and the Yale Law School. Interestingly, Judge Pete had a strong anti-Yale bias in the hiring of his law clerks. Yale had years earlier dispensed with conventional grades for their students. In their view, apparently, the mere fact of having a Yale law degree was enough for proper evaluation by the marketplace for new attorneys. Pistol Packing Pete took the opposite view, and vocally so. In addition, Judge Pete found that the Yale graduates lacked enough practical knowledge and skills to be useful as clerks to him. Ok, I’m open to the idea that there was something else, some bias involved in his view, but his attitude does work for me here. Nota bene: here comes a sweeping generalization (and a little Latin).

Yale is one of the preeminent law schools in the nation and the world. Its students study with some of the greatest legal minds on the planet, are genuinely in the upper echelons of thinkers and are a remarkably bright and motivated collection of folks. Top tier all the way. For which I congratulate them. I’m sure it’s very useful in deliberating the theoretical underpinnings of our judicial system. Still, if I were hit by some horrible turn of events and needed some sharp, concise, targeted, and effective legal counsel, I’d hire some hungry, boots-on-the-ground practitioner. Someone who could get stuff done in a pinch. No muss, no fuss, no glitz, no glam. I'd need someone from Quinnipiac or Suffolk Law School. Ooh, Brooklyn Law. Seriously, wherever, I’d need results.

Here’s my point, and the lesson my staff has just taught me. All the understanding of skiing in the world does not in-and-of-itself enable people to teach it. At some point, new instructors need to be given some specific tools to do their job. No, I don’t love “bag of tricks” clinics that give instructors exercises and activities to do under certain specified circumstances. Yes, the idea of a “bag of tricks” itself gives me the willies, but the truth is that I have one myself. I have numerous activities that I like to use on occasion to illustrate a point with students and staff, that draw out certain movements or concepts in skiing. They’re not ‘stupid human tricks’, and they work. And some of them, many of them, are actually fun. For adults and kids. Whoa, crazy idea.

If I’ve done my job well and my students and the instructors I train understand the movements of skiing, understand why and how in simple terms, then the right activities work. Use them judiciously, keep them simple, make them fun, and ski plenty before and after to put them in context, and the practical affect of exercises is incredibly useful. And they enable new instructors to have a platform from which they can explore the deeper reaches of their own understanding while still delivering great learning experiences for their guests. I get it. We all need a tool kit and some practical get-stuff-done knowledge. I hope to strike a better balance with our training program between these two complementary goals for a more pragmatic approach. Guest centered teaching, and instructor enabling training – what an idea! Maybe I’ll throw in some Latin expressions just to mix it up. Protinus!