How about a "Least Favorites" List?
Rus O
wood and steel coaster lists, I'd love to see someone come out with a
list of coasters that people DON'T like. It would then be
interesting to compare the "Most" with the "Least" favorites listings,
and see how many matches there are.
For the sake of argument, here's some of my "least favorite" in the
wood category (in no particular order):
Coney Island Cyclone
Rolling Thunder - SF Gr Adv
Cyclone - SF New England
Mean Streak - Cedar Point
Racer - King's Island
Gwazi - Busch/Florida
American Eagle - SF Gr Am
In the steel category, just list about any Vekoma or Togo coaster!
Anyone else care to share their least faves?
Seven
Ann and I have done 42 coasters together, and so far I have only one
coaster I truly dislike. The others are all tolerable or better, but
this one coaster absolutely stank. It also holds the record as the
only coaster I've been on to give me a headache. I even did it a
second time much later in the day, to see if it was a fluke. No such
luck. That said, I'm awarding my "TAER IT DOWN!" nomination to...
Geauga Lake - Villain
-Steven
Josh Wozny
That ride just has something wrong with it that I can't put my finger
on. I think it's those damn trains..
-Josh
>
> Geauga Lake - Villain
>
> -Ste
Bubba Z
T2 - SFKK
Flashback- SFNE
Shock Wave -KD
Looping Star -Beech Bend
Pirates Hideaway -Casino Pier
Super Flight - Rye
Viper -R.I.P thankfully Sfgadv
I hate to rate wooden coasters because I like to get beat up a little.
But if I had the choice to never ride it again, Which I won't ! The
winner would have to be Predator at Darien Lake. This has been the
only ride I was dying to get off.
Mean Streak gets a nod as well I guess.
Keith Hopkins
news:1189178616....@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> Or, as I've so appropriately dubbed it: "The Cleveland Steamer".
At least you didn't call it The Dirty Sanchez.
--
Keith Hopkins
suss...@sssssssssgmail.ssssssssscom
[clear up the hissing to email]
"Furthermore, America doesn't have a monopoly on stupidity.
I don't know where the idea that "foreign = smart" came from,
but I've seen an episode of Benny Hill, and I can assure you
that people are stupid the world over."
Tshirthell.com
mamoosh
<sussk...@sssssssssgmail.ssssssssscom> wrote:
> At least you didn't call it The Dirty Sanchez.
Or The Hot Carl ;-)
Canob...@gmail.com
Great American Scream Machine - SFOG
Racer - Kings Island
Raging Wolf Bobs
Zeus
Predator
Wildcat - Compounce
Georgia Cyclone
Raven
Coney Island Cyclone
Boss
Beast
Son Of Beast
Wolf
"Rus O" <Ruso...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189171825....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> With all the hype about the Golden Ticket awards, and the "top 50"
> wood and steel coaster lists, I'd love to see someone come out with a
> list of coasters that people DON'T like. It would then be
> interesting to compare the "Most" with the "Least" favorites listings,
> and see how many matches there are.
>
> For the sake of argument, here's some of my "least favorite" in the
> wood category (in no particular order):
>
> Coney Island Cyclone
> Rolling Thunder - SF Gr Adv
> Cyclone - SF New England
> Mean Streak - Cedar Point
> Racer - King's Island
> Gwazi - Busch/Florida
> American Eagle - SF Gr Am
I can see the others, but the Cyclone?
It's reasonably exciting, has a nice setting, has decent throughput, and has
ridiculously padded trains. I can see it not being highly rated, but I don't
get the hate.
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
tom
Wolf, have you riden Cyclone? You are right, it is exciting going up
the lift, the setting is perfect, the ride is nostalgic, and the
trains are ridiculously padded ! And that's the point - why all the
padding - because it beats the s@it out of you. Glad I went on it,
hope it never gets torn down, but god I could not wait to get off of
it.
I would love to see the ALL polls have a Taer it Down catagory, only
posting the top 3. For me it's the Cyclone at SFNE, all vekoma and
arrow loopers.
Tom
scubadiver
ant wood at SFOG and Flashback at SFMM.
Wolf
> the lift, the setting is perfect, the ride is nostalgic, and the
> trains are ridiculously padded ! And that's the point - why all the
> padding - because it beats the s@it out of you. Glad I went on it,
> hope it never gets torn down, but god I could not wait to get off of
> it.
I rode it two weeks ago, 3 laps in the back seat.
It's violent, but no worse than Geauga's Big Dipper or anything running a
Gerstlauer train or a PTC with those contemptable hard foam "pads".
Mark Rosenzweig
Yeah really, everyone's entitled to opinions and all, but to place the
Coney Cyclone in any "worst" category doesn't make much sense unless
you have a small wood coaster track record (of which Cyclone may be
roughest or most violent), or you simply haven't had the "pleasure" of
riding such masterpieces such as:
Predator, Raging Wolf Bobs, Wolverine Wildcat, Hercules, Rattler, Mean
Streak, Son of Beast, Psyclone, GA Grizzly, Cheetah, and Twister II to
name a few.
Despite growing up on the Coney Cyclone, I can easily see why many
either don't like it, or go into riding it expecting something it
isn't. Still, I find it quite a marvel that a 1927 design can still
hold its own (let alone inspiring over a dozen similar rides around
the world) and still run its original *heavy* wooden rolling stock in
today's day and age.
-Mark
Ricky Summersett
> Anyone else care to share their least faves?
Despite not having done a lot of "serious" coastering in recent years
I'll throw in mine, though they won't differ much from the norm.
- Cheetah, Wild Adventures. Possibly the worst woodie I've ever
ridden.
- Villian, Geauga Lake. A close second.
- Mean Streak, Cedar Point
- Rattler, FT. What a crying shame, this used to be a top-5 coaster.
- Twisted Twins, SFKK
- Ninja (name correct?) SFOG This thing seriously needs to go to
Arrow's graveyard.
- Vortex, King's Island (same as above)
- All Vekoma SLCs except maybe Hangman @ Wild Adv. (which I actually
enjoyed, it's smooth!)
- Anaconda, King's Dominion
- Ninja (?) SF St. Louis
The day is coming, but not soon enough, when the world will be void of
all leftover Arrow scraps of metal. Interesting exception seems to be
Loch Ness Monster, which has been relatively smooth & enjoyable over
it's history.
Ricky
Funtype
>
> The day is coming, but not soon enough, when the world will be void of
> all leftover Arrow scraps of metal. Interesting exception seems to be
> Loch Ness Monster, which has been relatively smooth & enjoyable over
> it's history.
>
LNM also has no corkscrew, I still say the old arrows have a great "drop
in" moment, even the demon's into the vertical loops are a classic that
still give me that woah factor.
I didn't mind KI vortex this season, ran great. Viper at SFMM is still
holds up well, the brake just before the cork kills it, but a train
fresh out of rehab negotiates it just fine.
So I hope at least the cream of the crop still remain.
I can see dumping the screw only variety, but gimme an arrow straight
drop into the vert for classic nostalgia sake (of the modern era coaster)
Seems odd to think that the lives of the arrows are coming due already.
--CM
Tim Melago
"Funtype" <funt...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wUOEi.1713$4J3...@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
> LNM also has no corkscrew, I still say the old arrows have a great "drop
> in" moment, even the demon's into the vertical loops are a classic that
> still give me that woah factor.
Was the Loch Ness Monster ever reprofiled on a few turns? The turn after the
big drop is fairly smooth and it doesn't look like an old Arrow paperclip
design.
--Tim Melago
Tim Melago
news:1189305944.4...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Yeah really, everyone's entitled to opinions and all, but to place the
> Coney Cyclone in any "worst" category doesn't make much sense unless
> you have a small wood coaster track record (of which Cyclone may be
> roughest or most violent), or you simply haven't had the "pleasure" of
> riding such masterpieces such as:
>
> Predator, Raging Wolf Bobs, Wolverine Wildcat, Hercules, Rattler, Mean
> Streak, Son of Beast, Psyclone, GA Grizzly, Cheetah, and Twister II to
> name a few.
>
> Despite growing up on the Coney Cyclone, I can easily see why many
> either don't like it, or go into riding it expecting something it
> isn't. Still, I find it quite a marvel that a 1927 design can still
> hold its own (let alone inspiring over a dozen similar rides around
> the world) and still run its original *heavy* wooden rolling stock in
> today's day and age.
I can see why somebody may not like the Cyclone because they don't like a
violent ride whether it's a "good violent" or "bad violent." But it's
probably not exactly fair to put the Cyclone in a worst category because it
does what it is supposed to do very well while other coasters have a lousy
design or do not currently operate the way they were intended to (see Mark's
list above).
In the newer category, The Voyage seems to have it's group of detractors
because it's not mild and smooth enough. Well, it wasn't designed to be one
of the Lightning Racers of the world but it does what it was designed to do
and it does it exceptionally well.
--Tim Melago
Mark Rosenzweig
> "Funtype" <funty...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
It went from paperclip to wirehanger sometime after Toomer took over.
Not sure which is better, though.
-Mark
Sherrie
> "Mark Rosenzweig" <stoneo...@aol.com> wrote in message
> I can see why somebody may not like the Cyclone because they don't like a
> violent ride whether it's a "good violent" or "bad violent."
OK so maybe I'm new at this but what's the difference between a "good
violent" and a "bad violent"? I mean, I've tried to like some of
those old wooden coasters but to me violent is violent and I can't
seem to get my head around a time when it could be considered good.
Yeah, I like my coasters smooth, but that's because I don't like the
distraction of pain when I'm riding. I've read before that some rides
are made to feel rough. OK, but violent? Hey, if I wanna get bitch
slapped I'll just walk to my local crack house and ask for it. I don't
need to pay for admission and parking :) So help me out here.
Sherrie
djg...@gmail.com
used to be by any means ... but I've ridden it a number of times this
year and still found it moderately fun. I think a lot of these
ratings are not "how the ride is" so much as they are "comparing the
ride to when it was new".
Keeping this in mind, Predator at Darien is up on my list. Yes, I do
remember it being fun at one point but based on just the current ride
it gives ... ewww. I've ridden more exciting Alpacas.
Oh, and any Chance Tobaggan. Ouch.
DJ
BaSSiStiSt
"Ricky Summersett" <jesusi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1189309943.5...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> The day is coming, but not soon enough, when the world will be void of
> all leftover Arrow scraps of metal. Interesting exception seems to be
> Loch Ness Monster, which has been relatively smooth & enjoyable over
> it's history.
Not just Loch Ness...when it comes to loopers, Tennessee Tornado and Canyon
Blaster are still both really smooth (for Arrows) and fun. And I hope the
world is never void of Magnum, Desperado, Big Bad Wolf, and Ninja!
Joe Schwartz
I think of "good violent" as sharp, sudden vertical or lateral forces
that were intended by the coaster designer. For instance, the first and
third drops on the Riverside Cyclone, or the fourth drop on the Georgia
Cyclone. Pretty much any coaster that yanks the seat out from under me
or slams me to the side falls into my "good violent" bucket.
"Bad violent" rides have sharp, sudden forces that were *not* intended
by the coaster designer. For instance, "potholes" in the track, poor
tracking around turns, backsmacking (back-to-front vibration), or
getting socked in the ear or jaw by a shoulder restraint.
Note that a ride can have both "good violent" and "bad violent" forces.
The Georgia Cyclone is a good example of such a coaster.
Seven
> "Ricky Summersett" <jesusisbet...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Personally, I've never ridden an Arrow I didn't like.
...
That doesn't sound right.
I've never been on an Arrow coaster I didn't like. There, much better.
Anyway, I think that's a fairly impressive stat, given that they
account for 12 of the 42 coasters Ann and I have done together. Maybe
my taste in coasters is unrefined, but I really dig the Arrows.
Couldn't imagine taking a park trip without them.
-Steven
-Steven
Wolf
>> violent ride whether it's a "good violent" or "bad violent."
>
> OK so maybe I'm new at this but what's the difference between a "good
> violent" and a "bad violent"? I mean, I've tried to like some of
> those old wooden coasters but to me violent is violent and I can't
> seem to get my head around a time when it could be considered good.
> Yeah, I like my coasters smooth, but that's because I don't like the
> distraction of pain when I'm riding. I've read before that some rides
> are made to feel rough.
No ride should be made to feel rough.
Good violent is intensity of forces. Bad violent is chatter and potholes.
Basically, bad violent is roughness or harshness, and it usually a product
of poor maintenance, trackwork, or design (of either the ride or its
trains).
Mark Rosenzweig
>
> OK so maybe I'm new at this but what's the difference between a "good
> violent" and a "bad violent"? I mean, I've tried to like some of
> those old wooden coasters but to me violent is violent and I can't
> seem to get my head around a time when it could be considered good.
To me, "good violent" more relates to high intensity moments that were
designed into a ride. They add character, or act as defining moments
of said ride. Coney Cyclone's drops were designed with sudden changes
in steepness into them- that results in what some would call violence,
but in reality they are really just signature moments. Cyclone's
heavy wooden trains also bottom out hard, making wheel seats
considerably rougher than non-wheel seats. Most people who take their
first Cyclone ride in the very back are probably either not prepared
for what they are about to experience, and will then write the ride
off. If they move up just one row, they'll experience all of the
Cyclone's signature thrills with far less harshness.
Now, take a ride like Anaconda at Kings Dominion. Following the
ride's first two inversions, trains are slowed by a mid course trim
(block) brake. What follows is a twisted section of track that trains
traverse at no more than 25-30 MPH. Half way through, there is a
sudden change in direction that will give you a nice solid jab to the
jaw if you are either not ready for it, or not bracing for it. That's
bad violence- or poor design.
> Hey, if I wanna get bitch
> slapped I'll just walk to my local crack house and ask for it. I don't
> need to pay for admission and parking :)
>
You must be Rob Viand's PR rep. Either way, I'll at least nominate
this for quote 'o the week.
-Mark
Rus O
You rode the Coney Cyclone 3 weeks ago, and didn't experience what you
call "bad violent....chatter and potholes" ???
You've got quite the tolerance level, Wolf!
With a coaster count in the low 500's, I think I can recognize
'chatter and potholes' on any coaster.
Another poster talked about Cyclone's age and history and setting and
such, all of which is taken into consideration. I had last ridden
Cyclone in 1997, and rode 14 times in a row (a 'perk' of having worn
my ACE tee shirt that day). But when I walk off a coaster not ever
wanting to ride it again, (August 5, 2007) it goes on the 'least
favorites' list.
Wolf
>>
>> Good violent is intensity of forces. Bad violent is chatter and potholes.
>> Basically, bad violent is roughness or harshness, and it usually a
>> product
>> of poor maintenance, trackwork, or design (of either the ride or its
>> trains).
> call "bad violent....chatter and potholes" ???
No chatter, really. There are some sideways pops, but they seem a function
of the track profile and aren't so bad, given the 12" of lateral padding.
There are a couple of world-class potholes, but it's also a ride running
4-bench trains. It's a trade-off of the trains, and the trains are designed
for that sort of thing.
> You've got quite the tolerance level, Wolf!
I'm fine with violence. I can't stand head-banging and unpadded trains.
> Another poster talked about Cyclone's age and history and setting and
> such, all of which is taken into consideration. I had last ridden
> Cyclone in 1997, and rode 14 times in a row (a 'perk' of having worn
> my ACE tee shirt that day). But when I walk off a coaster not ever
> wanting to ride it again, (August 5, 2007) it goes on the 'least
> favorites' list.
Getting old sucks, huh?
nashv...@aol.com
On the wooden side:
(some are horrendously rough, some are just horrendously dull)
Son of Beast
Mean Streak
Fizzly
American Beagle
PKI Racer
Lightning Racer
Renegade
Knobels Twister
Twister II
That thing in Oklahoma City if it's still running. (totally blanking
on the name)
Either Roar
On the steel side:
Most any and every Arrow steel except Tennessee Tornado and Loch Ness
Monster
Every Vekoma SLC
Every Premier launch ride from that era they did the Flight of Fear
series.
Ted Ansley
Rus, I'm scratching my head? I rode CI cylcone every year from '94 to '01, it
was very rough, mostly from violent airtime slams and a few potholes. By 2001
it was much better, they smoothed out most of the rough stuff, still an extreme
ride though. Come to think of it I visited once between '01 and this summer,
once again not too bad. I attended the ACE Pres. Con this year and I thought the
Cyclone was as smooth as I had ever ridden it. I took most of rides in the 2nd
to back and 3rd to back seat. Plus, I can't tolerate rough coasters anymore due
to new back problems over the last year, I had to bow out after about 7-8 rides
on both night ERT session on Voyage at the Con. Howver, Cyclone was very
ridable I thought this year. It had some slams for sure, but no washboarding
and maybe only 1 or 2 potholes that were easily tolerable. Back in 90's that
thing use to slam the heck out of me on the first two drops, I was shocked at
how rough those drops were...no more though. I can't think of one coaster that
had the violence of th R. Cyclone, CI Cyclone, Wild One, or the GA Cyclone in
the mid 90's, althought the GA Cyclone still runs pretty much the same.(rode it
last year). However, the violence of each of these coasters was due to extreme
airtime moments...extremely steep drops...not bad track.
--------------------------
Ted Ansley
ans...@usa.com
RollerCoaster Fan<atic>
Ted Ansley
wrote:
>On Sep 7, 8:30 am, Rus O <Rusoz...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Anyone else care to share their least faves?
>
>Despite not having done a lot of "serious" coastering in recent years
>I'll throw in mine, though they won't differ much from the norm.
>
>- Cheetah, Wild Adventures. Possibly the worst woodie I've ever
>ridden.
>- Villian, Geauga Lake. A close second.
Wow, I'm shocked to see these rides on a worst list? Villain and Cheetah are
very solid rides, Villain is just out of my top ten, and Cheetah is just out of
top 20 and they are only held back by roughness. They both FLY and have tons of
airtime and are great designs IMHO. I can see people thinking they are too
mucch for them, and maybe rating them mid pack, but WORST? That totally
surprises me.
Wolf
>>ridden.
>>- Villian, Geauga Lake. A close second.
>
> Wow, I'm shocked to see these rides on a worst list? Villain and Cheetah
> are
> very solid rides, Villain is just out of my top ten, and Cheetah is just
> out of
> top 20 and they are only held back by roughness. They both FLY and have
> tons of
> airtime and are great designs IMHO. I can see people thinking they are
> too
> mucch for them, and maybe rating them mid pack, but WORST?
G-trains.
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
>Off the top of my head...
>
>On the wooden side:
>(some are horrendously rough, some are just horrendously dull)
>
>Son of Beast
>Mean Streak
>Fizzly
>American Beagle
>PKI Racer
>Lightning Racer
>Renegade
>Knobels Twister
>Twister II
>That thing in Oklahoma City if it's still running. (totally blanking
>on the name)
>Either Roar
I'd agree with most of this list, with a few exceptions.
The Roars CAN give a decent ride.
I've had some great rides on PKI's Racer, though I seem to be one of the
only ones. IT certainly wasn't running well at all during the ACE Con,
though!
But I have to very much disagree with Knoebels' Twister. It's definitely
one of those rides that runs hot and cold. But when it's running well, I
really think it's a GREAT ride, especially in row two. I rank it at #23
out of around 140 woodies. Not cream of the crop, but still a great ride.
>On the steel side:
>Most any and every Arrow steel except Tennessee Tornado and Loch Ness
>Monster
I also enjoy a handful of the Suspendeds. And I admit to being a huge fan
of X, though I haven't ridden it lately and hear that it's a lot rougher
now. (I'll find out in 2.5 weeks.)
>Every Vekoma SLC
Honestly, I thin it's a great design. Too bad they are built like crap and
deteriorate after less than a season.
>Every Premier launch ride from that era they did the Flight of Fear
>series.
I usually enjoy these, especially now that the OTSH's are gone.
David H, davi...@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.
"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by
the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree
in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support
him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not
to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he
fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is
unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or
anyone else."
-- Theodore Roosevelt
Keith Hopkins
news:NM6dnVpxT8u283nb...@giganews.com...
> Getting old sucks, huh?
Yes. Get ready; it's coming for you too.
--
Keith Hopkins
suss...@sssssssssgmail.ssssssssscom
[clear up the hissing to email]
"Furthermore, America doesn't have a monopoly on stupidity.
I don't know where the idea that "foreign = smart" came from,
but I've seen an episode of Benny Hill, and I can assure you
that people are stupid the world over."
Tshirthell.com
Ricky Summersett
> OK so maybe I'm new at this but what's the difference between a "good
> violent" and a "bad violent"?
> Sherrie
The cited examples are excellent but I could add a couple of examples;
hope this helps....
"Good violent" Coney Cyclone (sudden, violent slams & airtime
purposefully built into ride)
"Bad violent" Cheetah, Wild Adventures (constant shaking, terrible
tracking, un-natural potholes & slams, horrible trains)
"Good violent" The old Tx. Cyclone (tracked well & somewhat smoothly
BUT had extreme intensity of changes of direction & negative Gs)
"Bad violent" Villian (see Cheetah above)
"Good violent" Rampage, Villian, Santa Cruz Giant Dipper, Vancouver
Coaster, Phoenix, Boulderdash.
"Bad violent" Boss, Shivering Timbers (a mix), Twisted Twins, Son Of
Beast, Tx. Giant (a mix leaning toward mostly "bad")
Yes, Phoenix. The Gs could be considered "violent" to some, but It's
ALL GOOD!
Ricky
Bill Buckley
Hurricane Category 5 - MBP
Cyclone - SFNE
Predator - DL
Mean Streak - CP
Hercules - DP
Cheetah - WA
Psyclone - SFMM
Thunder Run - KK
Rattler - (under SF only)
Basically, any Dinn/Summers nightmare, or those at a SF park...
Wolf
> only ones. IT certainly wasn't running well at all during the ACE Con,
> though!
The layout of Racer is fine, but for whatever reason, all of the
quasi-clones seem terribly maintained.
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
<jesusi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Yes, Phoenix. The Gs could be considered "violent" to some, but It's
>ALL GOOD!
The only part of Phoenix I'd really possibly call violent would be the part
near the end that some of us call the "tushy tenderizer!"
Victor Canfield
> On Sep 9, 11:41 am, Sherrie <Keyo...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>OK so maybe I'm new at this but what's the difference between a "good
>>violent" and a "bad violent"?
>
>
>>Sherrie
>
>
> The cited examples are excellent but I could add a couple of examples;
> hope this helps....
>
> "Good violent" Coney Cyclone (sudden, violent slams & airtime
> purposefully built into ride)
I guess this guy didn't consider it to be good violence:
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/09/10/neck_injury_on_roller_coaster_proves_fatal/9490/
Paren...@aol.com
> Off the top of my head...
>
> On the wooden side:
> (some are horrendously rough, some are just horrendously dull)
> Knobels Twister
...
While people inside the industry often ridicule and malign
"enthusiasts", the fact is that there are many, many enthusiasts who
have more knowledge of The Roller Coaster than do many parks' General
Managers. At the very least, it's a matter of time, of which a GM has
very little, and focus, which enthusiasts, by defintion, have in
abundance.
Mike Saunders has spent a portion of the past eight years writing
unfavorably about KT. He is entitled to his opinion. His
observations on roller coasters in general are amongst the keenest and
most perceptive of all enthusiasts posting notes on Internet sites.
But for some reason, Mike has never been able to square the circle
of facts and emotions he confronts with Twister. Its success as a
popular ride with the public and its meeting the needs of the park it
was built in seems to offend him to the point of him compromising his
rationality. Over the years I have attempted to engage him in
discussions about the ride; he has spent considerable time and thought
in composing negative evaluations of the ride and posting them.
Mike has gone to extensive pains in the past to explain in detail
the faults of Twister. I have attempted at times over the years to
defend the ride by pointing out inconsistencies or illogic in his
expositions. With enough pressure applied, Mike runs for the tall
grass and proclaims that his writings are, after all, just opinions he
is sharing with his friends. Which is fine, if he wants to walk that
pig; I do not understand why he has gone to such trouble to so
carefully apply so much makeup to the pig. So talented a makeup
artist does deserve to have a better venue to demonstrate his talents;
otherwise, walk the pig and don't waste the makeup.
Admittedly, the severity and shrillness of his Twister condemnations
have subsided somewhat over the years, and this particular poke at
Twister is unembellished with any pig makeup. But the odor of past
condemnations accompanies.
This industry makes often sub-optimal choices when choosing,
designing, and building new attractions, especially the coasters, the
800 pound gorillas of the attractions lineup. People who make
carefully-crafted arguments in favor of known park-killing ride types
and against the sort of rides which improve the relationship between
park and patrons are doing this industry no favors. Remember, for all
the internal braggadocio about the superior knowledge park men have
about coasters, for all the smug superiority asserted toward
enthusiasts... they listen. Directly or indirectly, they hear what
enthusists say. Be careful what we wish for.
John
nashv...@aol.com
going to waste the time replying, because quite frankly, I've cut
communications with you long ago for various reasons, but you chose to
air this out in public, and thus so shall I one more time.
First - I'm glad Knoebels Twister makes money for the park. That's
actually the ultimate goal. Of course, I wonder how much *more* would
have been made if the design was better. Guess we'll never know that
one. You see - Knoebels lives in isolation - and (thankfully) this
gives the park the ability to be a wonderful ungated playground of
sorts with far less of the hassles that a typical Six Flags in a
larger city faces. You can go off and design historical rides (such as
the Flying Turns) and do pretty much whatever you want to do, on
"Knoebels Pace", if you will, and your business likely isn't going to
change much either way. That's a nice rarity - a lot of parks can't do
that. And in the broader senses, we (and I expand the description of
"we" to be anyone who enjoys a park, not just enthusiasts) benefit,
because there really is no place like Knoebels and in the land of
every growing corporate presence in all things from pharmacies to
theme parks, it's a nice change of pace. Knoebels obviously has earned
it's "street cred" of being quite possibly one of the best amusement
parks in the world. However, I call things as I see them. That's a
life choice I made. There are other options in terms of how vocal or
accurate one wishes to be with their subjective opinions, and that's
everyones personal right. I made my choice, and it may not be
compatible with someone elses choice.
Now the gloves come off.
I don't know where in the hell you come off with your continued drivel
such as the following:
"But for some reason, Mike has never been able to square the circle
of facts and emotions he confronts with Twister. Its success as a
popular ride with the public and its meeting the needs of the park it
was built in seems to offend him to the point of him compromising his
rationality. "
No - I have no problems with my opinion of Twister at Knoebels. The
only fact in all of this is that Twister is a wooden coaster. My
opinions are not facts. From what ride tastes I like, and in terms of
faithfulness to the original (which I rode and you have not), it's a
failure. I always expected it was popular with the public although I
don't know the exact numbers per year versus, say, the Phoenix, and
frankly, don't really care. I would never want a ride to NOT be
popular with the public, because that negates sound business sense. If
anything, your continued inability to take criticism for the ride has
caused me to reply more, and of a stronger nature, than I usually
might. But at the end of the day - it's simple, so I'll repeat. "From
what ride tastes *I* like...", meaning, it's my SUBJECTIVE opinion.
That's it. Opinion. We're not discussing whether a material has a
specific density on some hardness scale. We'll get back to that in a
second. Another quote:
"Over the years I have attempted to engage him in
discussions about the ride; he has spent considerable time and
thought
in composing negative evaluations of the ride and posting them.
Mike has gone to extensive pains in the past to explain in detail
the faults of Twister. I have attempted at times over the years to
defend the ride by pointing out inconsistencies or illogic in his
expositions."
I haven't spent any more time on the negative aspects of Twister than
I have any other ride I don't enjoy. I'll admit in the past I probably
went on about it longer than I needed to, but that represented my vast
dissapointment with the ride compared to what I remember the original
was. It's harder when you're hopes are built up and then dashed, and
that aspect of my commentary is something I need to seriously
mitigage, particularly after my supreme dissapointment with Renegade
in Minnesota and my ensuing highly negative review. That is also why
you haven't seen me harping on the negatives of the ride in detail
lately. Sorry - but it does merit in the inclusion of my least
favorites list. Hell, the fricking Coney Cyclone was on one dudes list
- a supremely important coaster from histories sake if there ever was
one. I guess Vernon Keenan is calling that dude from the grave and
complaining about the post.
The part of your reply that really hacks me off is your last sentence
("I Have attempted at times over the years to defend the ride by
pointing out inconsistencies or illogic in his expositions") of that
quote. How in the hell are you going to point out inconsistencies or
illogic in what is a bloody opinion. An opinion that basically comes
down to either "I like it" or "I hate it". I may not like Brussel
Sprouts - and there's NO LOGIC, NO FACT, NO ARGUING, NO DEFENSE that
has any relevance to that opinion. Telling me that Brussel Sprouts are
more acid than base and have a lot of Vitamin C won't change the
opinion that I think they suck. Now if I start spouting off the fact
that the sky is actually black and yellow, there are then facts,
logic, and proofs that can be used to counteract that opinion. But a
subjective opinion about a roller coaster is just that - an opinion,
and nothing else. My opinion has always been the same - within my ride
tastes, I view the ride as dull, and I've ridden it enough at various
hours and across multiple visits to feel pretty comfortable that this
is my "final answer". SO WHAT. The standard deviation of thoughts
about Knoebels Twister is rather high - I know a lot of folks who
really hate it, and likely there are a lot of folks who really like
it. Just the fact that the standard deviation of opinion is so high
generally tends to indicate that it's not a slam dunk success, by the
way. But it DOESN'T MATTER. A guy like Bob Hooley loves the ride. I
hate it. So WHAT? You can defend your approach to building it all day
long and for each and every year until the bloody sun burns out and
the universe collapses upon itself, but that's not going to change my
opinion one wit. My opinion is no better or worse than, say, Bobs or
anyone elses whose opinions run the gamut from good to bad about the
ride.
Let's move on:
"With enough pressure applied, Mike runs for the tall
grass and proclaims that his writings are, after all, just opinions
he
is sharing with his friends. "
I run for the tall grass? What the hell does that mean?
No - my opinions are exactly what they are, as described in my
paragraph above. My writings are for my friends and also for those
folks who might have tastes aligned with my own. Fact is, as I've
explained ad naseum, not everyone can Robb&Elissa the world and
achieve a 4 digit coaster count. So decisions have to be made as to
where to travel, and just as I've used other folks opinions about the
viability of travelling to a future coaster (like I most certainly
will with the Flying Turns), some folks have used mine. You see - my
street cred is that I pull no punches and explain well so someone can
rather quickly ascertain the compatibility level between our tastes.
That doesn't make me BETTER than anyone else, or my opinion WORTH any
more than someone elses, but it DOES mean that someone who has similar
tastes may decide to use my review in their planning, should they
choose to.
So you claim I'm running, eh? I'll take that to mean that I usually
(at least until this reply) have not engaged in any conversations with
you regarding this subject in a few years. It's actually quite simple.
You and I will never get along, never see the same light, and don't
operate in the same world of thought. This doesn't mean you're a bad
guy or a bad father or anything - you're probably an awesome guy to a
lot of folks, but frankly, life is short and your continued emails
from earlier years led me to disconnect from any and all conversations
with you. And lest you think I decided that out of anger or spite, I
will tell you that after our last email exchange from several years
ago I was increasingly tired of what I would say is YOUR INABILITY TO
HANDLE CRITICISM ABOUT TWISTER, pure and simple. So I forwarded your
set of emails to three people who I shall not name, (some post here,
some don't), and all are far more level headed and less hot tempered
than I am. I asked them for an opinion which was simply "what in the
world to do with this guy - I can't win" and the answer came back the
same - to ignore you, to disconnect, and to realize that there is no
hope for the two of us to have any sort of meaningful conversation.
And trust me, those people include some VERY respected members of the
enthusiast community.
So bottom line John, have a nice life. I don't mean that in a bitter
way, however I do mean that in a very final way. I tire of your
continued unfocused missives over a simple opinion of mine. People I
respect can handle criticism; you apparently can't, and it's really
that simple.
Good luck with the Flying Turns. When/If I get out there in the next
few years, I will give it an honest appraisal within the context of
the modern day it is being built in, irregardless of how I feel about
our personality clashes or your work with Twister.
-m
KeRu60
> With all the hype about the Golden Ticket awards, and the "top 50"
> wood and steel coaster lists, I'd love to see someone come out with a
> list of coasters that people DON'T like. It would then be
> interesting to compare the "Most" with the "Least" favorites listings,
> and see how many matches there are.
>
> For the sake of argument, here's some of my "least favorite" in the
> wood category (in no particular order):
>
> Anyone else care to share their least faves?
My biggest disappointments translate into my least favorite.
1) Raging Wolf Bobs - (only been to this park once and it was in 1991.
A laughable, poorly designed waste of wood.)
2) Wolverine Wildcat - (only visited this park once, in 1996. Maybe it
had it's better days in 1988, NOT!).
3) Roar, SFA - (rode it 4 times in 2001, only visit since then,
extremely disappointing ride, but pretty to watch, LOL!)
4) American Eagle, SFGAm - only been to this park once and that was
1992. The Eagle had so many trims that it rivals the Beast. I had more
fun on Whizzer frankly. I've heard the AE was pretty decent when it
opened in 1981.
Note: I rode Hercules, Thunder Run, Rattler, Hurricane Cat 5, and a
few more I can't think of now, in their first or second years of
operation. They were all smooth, fast & offered a nice thrill. I
experienced the decline in MB Cat 5, Hercules and Thunder Run, but
luckily, my memories of the Rattler were from my one and only visit
the year it opened. Damn You Six Flags!!!
So, my least favorites are basically from my one & only visit to that
park when the coaster were already running like shit! But I still had
fun regardless!! :):)
KenR
Mark Rosenzweig
>
> Note: I rode Hercules, Thunder Run, Rattler, Hurricane Cat 5, and a
> few more I can't think of now, in their first or second years of
> operation. They were all smooth, fast & offered a nice thrill. I
> experienced the decline in MB Cat 5, Hercules and Thunder Run, but
> luckily, my memories of the Rattler were from my one and only visit
> the year it opened. Damn You Six Flags!!!
>
Weren't the major first drop modifications on Rattler done during the
Gaylord days? Can't really even blame the designers of the ride
either as Gaylord, wanting the world's tallest woodie at the time, had
them raise the lift height after Mean Streak's statistics had been
released.
-Mark
-
Bill Buckley
> Weren't the major first drop modifications on Rattler done during the
> Gaylord days? Can't really even blame the designers of the ride
> either as Gaylord, wanting the world's tallest woodie at the time, had
> them raise the lift height after Mean Streak's statistics had been
> released.
No, they messed with drop #2 in the Gaylord days to prevent roll backs from
entering the helix, but the first drop crap was all Six Flags.
CoasterFanatic
in their unique way), but here are some that I just don't have any
desire to ride again:
Top Gun - Canada's Wonderland
Typically I don't mind SLC coasters much at all. Actually there are a
few that I really like, but this is not one of them. Craptacular from
start to finish. There is just something wrong with this ride.
Tomb Raider - Canada's Wonderland
Sorry Mark, but I just don't get it. Maybe it is my height, but I
couldn't find one redeeming quality in this ride.
Psyclone - SFMM
Thankfully, I don't even have to think about riding this one again as
it is no more. My first ride was my last as debris flew in my eyes
down the first drop and blinded me for the duration of the ride.
Iron Wolf - SFGA
Ouch ... my head.
Son of Beast - KI
I swore this one off for good after a particularly bad ride a couple
years ago but I might have to give those new trains a courtesy ride.
Hurricane Cat 5 - Pavillion
Another one of those "No need to worry since it is gone anyway" rides.
I guess it caught me off guard, but I was not ready for the violent
jackhammering on the first drop. Most people complain about the
helixes, but to tell the truth, they really didn't bother me that much.
Mark Rosenzweig
> Tomb Raider - Canada's Wonderland
> Sorry Mark, but I just don't get it. Maybe it is my height, but I
> couldn't find one redeeming quality in this ride.
>
No apology needed. Haven't been employed by Zampereli since January.
All that Volare hate mail sent me over the edge.
Joe Schwartz
Rattler was built in 1992, the first drop was modified in 1993-94, and
Six Flags took over in 1996.
Mark Rosenzweig
Thanks, Joe. That's the vague timeline I had in my head. I was
pretty sure Rattler's first drop was raised up the ~40 ft or so prior
to 1996, when SF took over. Joker's Jinx was new that year, but was a
purchase made by Gaylord, themed last second to a Time Warner
property.
If anyone's interested, here's some interesting reading on the
troubled early years of Rattler from design modifications/issues to
rider injuries:
http://www.rideaccidents.com/rattler.html
-Mark
Paren...@aol.com
bandwidth on RRC. General warning: below will follow another
"unfocused missive" in reply to the points Saunders attempts to make.
It is not for the weak-kneed, so do not read it if such pointed
disagreement is found to be upsetting. Also, before cutting loose for
the direct replies, I would like to categorically refute Saunders'
mean-spirited refrain that I am unable "to handle criticism about
Twister". I am one of the easiest of people to accept criticism and
make changes in my projects, from before the work in bringing Phoenix
to life, through the Twister project, and now with the Flying Turns
project; when the criticism is brought in a level-headed manner by a
respected peer, on or off the project. But like anyone who cares
deeply about the success of a project, I do not care for: ignorant,
nasty, careless, spurious comments, which I at first refute; then an
offer is made to explain my position, and I exert no small energy in
an attempt to understand and accommodate the contrary assertions; in
time, should the differing opinion be a continuing issue which is
driven by wanton ignorance, I turn a deaf ear. But eventually, when I
have had enough, I provide a stinging verbal response, in the hopes
that eventually my tormentor will quit his pig-ignorant goading.
Hence the upbraiding of Saunders and his untouchable "opinions".
Saunders starts in his recent reply with a statesman-like plaint
that he thought "we were long through with this". Yes, I guess there
was supposed to be something satisfying for me to sit by passively and
watch as every few weeks or months, he tossed out yet another verbal
turd cluster about how we "ruined" the Twister project, or he off-
handedly assigns the coaster to a list of the worst ten coasters.
Now, if he had something constructive to offer in his criticism,
something we could do to make Twister "better" for him, and it
actually made sense, there might be some advantage in him bringing the
subject up, again and again and again. He claims to write his ride
thoughts for his friends; perhaps they dismiss the direct implication
of their stupidity by his endless repetition of a known notion. But
his suggestions, to the extent there are any, are oft based in
ignorance; and when I attempt to engage or educate him, he sticks his
fingers in his ears, figuratively yelling "LALALALALALA" and defaming
my character by claiming that I cannot take criticism.
Let's find one positive thing that came out of his characterization
of the Twister project as our "having screwed it up". Let's find one
positive thing that came out of his gratuitous placement of Twister on
a Ten-Worst list. Does he think these brain farts extrude into a
vacuum?
In one early private exchange with Saunders, he patronizingly
explained to me the need to be able to accept criticism, commenting
upon how he had improved in his own life when he drank from the bitter
cup of the criticism of others. What he says is true as far as it
goes (and there is Mike at a glance), but one reasonably might expect
the criticism offered to have a basis in truth or experience. His
criticism has neither. Ironically, when I have offered to likewise
help him - to criticize his critique - suddenly it is Saunders who
becomes the recalcitrant lump of unyielding will. In a textbook case
of Transference, his inability to accept and grow from criticism
becomes, in his eyes, the fault of his bogeyman.
Saunders has repeatedly expressed admiration for extreme roller
coasters, such as the original versions of the Texas Cyclone and the
Riverside Cyclone. I am left to conclude that he feels, e.g., that
"how much 'more' [money] would have been made [with Twister] if the
design was better" means: more like these examples. I have offered to
him both proof and more proof that rides like these are not optimal,
that they have limited appeal, and, in the case of the Riverside ride,
substantial cause for the original owner-family to have abandoned the
business and sentenced the park to become just another link in a
corporate chain of parks. Somebody had an opinion, years ago, that
the proposed Riverside Cyclone should be: a ride like they got.
Opinions, like words, have meanings.
So I offer to provide Saunders with industry background and factual
assistance which many such recipients might think at least somewhat
valuable. But at this point, he runs for the tall grass - and yes,
Mike, you spent plenty of time right there during your disingenuous
reply - and claims immunity from scrutiny because he's just providing
"opinion". He ignored or completely misunderstood my metaphor of the
pig with makeup. He is entitled to his opinion. The "makeup"
consists of the long, detailed explanations he attaches to his ride
observations. What are these pockets of mental fat if not screeds in
effort of proselytizing? He wants it both ways. He wants, now, to be
able to rattle off crafted, dense, extensive observations about
coasters in an effort to dazzle the less-informed, and then, repeated,
clever little tidbits reinforcing his antagonistic views well-
described previously; but when his observations, or the logical
outcome of them are shown to be damaging, harmful, nasty, or just
inept, he cries out, again and again, that they are "just opinions".
He is a roller coaster bully, used to extruding his observations with
the force of his considerable intelligence into the craw of lesser
beings to become a local King Of The Hill, for whom he writes and
dispenses intelligence.
Saunders claims this week that Twister is a failure in terms of
faithfulness to the original (which he rode and I did not, he
triumphantly points out). Never mind the sloppy construction of his
thought here (he actually means that we did not modify enough away
from the original design; the two first drops he finds most
disappointing are the most faithful part of the ride to the original
Allen design figures. Their smoothness versus the original ride is
due to the better job of track laying that Leonard Adams did than the
original ride's tracking crew).
But in 1999 he publicly stated that Twister is "far more of a speed
ride than the original, with a far stronger helix, but the original
had more 'character', for want of a better word". That hardly seems
like an assessment of "failure". But there I go again, quibbling over
an "opinion", which apparently can be whatever Saunders elects to
squeeze out during this or that season, consistency be damned.
In another past e-mail, he sang to me the praises of the modern
"speed rides" and compared them favorably with the pacing of a
"classic" ride. So if Twister is more of a speed ride than Mister
Twister, and Speed Rides are better than classics like Mister Twister,
does it somehow follow that we really screwed up "in terms of
faithfulness to the original"? Or are "opinions" really to be immune
from any laws of logic?
He also at the time placed it as an "edge top-fifteen ride", which
does not quite square up with it being one of the ten worst now,
unless something has happened to it over the past eight years.
Wait! - I know what the problem is! He suggests it himself, that he
has gone harsh on the ride: because somebody defends it! So that's
the problem? Somebody cares? If I did not give a crap about the ride
and allowed it to fall apart, if I had designed it in a paycheck-
supplying relationship, if I had walled-up and not offered to share my
knowledge of the industry with Mike to help him mitigate the formation
of opinions based upon ignorance and their equally ignorant
dissemination, he would appreciate the ride far better than he does
now! Yes! - an ignored ride is an excellent ride; works every time
it's tried!
Saunders patronizingly suggests that Knoebels "lives in isolation"
and hence we can get away with sloppy work, such as Twister. If
only. Geography and Sociology lesson here for Mike: the area
surrounding Knoebels, from which the majority of patrons have
traditionally arrived, has been in economic depression since 1917, the
year of peak anthracite coal production. Population growth has been
negative for well over a generation. The nearest big town, Shamokin,
saw a population of 50,000+ souls at the time of Knoebels Groves
founding shrink to about 16,000 today. So the park has grown while
swimming against the tide, grown very carefully with not a lot of
local capital available to finance the growth. We reach out to other
areas with their own local parks and depend upon patronage from
outside our area. People drive past Hersheypark and Dorney to get to
Knoebels. They make a longer trip from the Philly or New York metro
area to get to Knoebels than they would to get to Great Adventure, the
flagship park of the Six Flags organization. A large number of people
coming here are choosing us above a more-local Six Flags New England,
Lake Compounce, Rye Playland, Coney Island, Great Adventure, numerous
Jersey Shore points, Clementon Lake, Dorney Park, Sesame Place,
Hershey Park, Dutch Wonderland, Six Flags America, Delaware shore
points, Maryland shore points, Kings Dominion, Busch Gardens Europe,
Bland's Park, Lakemont Park, Kennywood, Idlewild, Geauga Lake, Cedar
Point, Waldameer, Marineland, Martin's Family Island, Darien Lake,
Seabreeze Park, and many other smaller (or temporarily forgotten)
facilities. At one time there were over three dozen amusement parks
in and around Northeast and North-Central Pennsylvania. Now there is
one. This isn't some heaven on earth that we dumbly have set up camp
in. We could lose our step very easily - your blessed "opinion" may
differ, but it's a hard economic fact. Don't patronize our location
as a ticket for sloppiness. We have a competition base that most
parks cannot survive in. Or were there no parks which went out of
business this past year? Let's see...
Saunders wants it both ways. He is supremely disingenuous when he
implies that his posts are without guile, pure of effort to
proselytize. He wants people to listen and respond favorably - to do
what makes him happy. Conversely, he verbally punishes those who
displease him. This is not remarkable; it's only human. What is
distasteful is his insistent assertion that his opinions, qua
opinions, are unassailable. He rejects the notion that an opinion
might be formed on the basis of incomplete or incorrect data. Some of
his opinions about Twister are based on the fact that he believes the
sky above Twister IS "yellow or black"; but since they are only
opinions, I dare not cross swords with him. While he wants people to
comply with his opinions - and that, obviously, is the ultimate
motivation for his endless repetitions of the established - he
attempts to deny those who displease him the ability to defend
themselves because, after all, Tall Grass here - they are only
opinions!
"The standard deviation of thoughts about Knoebels Twister is rather
high". No: the standard deviation amongst enthusiasts is arguably
higher than, say the Phoenix or some choice other coasters. But among
the public, the people who actually pay for the ride, the standard
deviation is very, very tight. It is a fun ride. But you acknowledge
that. And you are allowed to be inconsistent. Because it's only an
opinion. As pure as the wind-driven snow.
"An opinion... basically comes down to either "I like it" or "I hate
it". Exactly. If only Saunders understood and acted upon that fact!
Instead, he piles on paragraphs and paragraphs - lipstick on his pig -
and then tries to pretend that all he was saying was either "I like
it" or "I hate it".
And he misses entirely the gist of my recent post, that somebody
like him who posts such apparently well-considered, well-constructed,
well-spoken posts should be careful about what he wishes for. His
supposed massless, dimensionless opinions, and others similar, can and
have had effect upon choices made by people within the industry:
people who probably should know better, but, well, we are amassing
quite a list of messes! Unlike Roller Coaster Tycoon, we cannot just
press the Reset and do away with our mistakes.
Mike, you have been advised to steer clear of me, by some conveniently
unnamed people who marvel at the meeting of The Rock and The Hard
Place. Trust me, I have gotten the same advice about you. But I
never gave up because I believed, and still believe, that you are
smart, ingenious, observant, and a potentially substantial positive
for this industry, albeit one not too eager to be corralled by facts
(on which one then bases his - opinions!). Perhaps I have been in
profound error. The old dog wants no new tricks. It's just that my
hopes have been built up and dashed... what a waste.
Just one more thing. Flying Turns: "I like it" or "I don't like
it". Remember, the people who have participated in the production of
this ride might actually care for it. They might even want to defend
it against people who wantonly maintain a Roller Coaster Tycoon-
mentality approach to this industry and resist attempts to improve
themselves. Now, as always, viable suggestions are to be welcomed.
Your "Opinions" over four words length might tend toward the
disingenuous.
So let's stipulate that, for the hoard of people who look to your
reviews to decide whether or not to expend money to pay a given spot a
visit, the non-"Robb&Elissas" of the world - let's stipulate that
your four word review of the Turns will be sufficient. Don't bother
coming. Anybody who bases his itinerary on Mike's reviews: we
already know what the review will be. So save your money and follow
his earnest advice elsewhere.
And Mike, while it's a free country and you may go where you wish,
perhaps you might want to save your money as well and just write the
review of the Flying Turns you have already mostly composed. After
all, you certainly have opinions about it right now, and it should be
no more necessary for you to actually visit the park and ride the ride
to hone your opinions about it, than it is for you to listen to the
voice of reason about Twister about how to get over the abusive
feelings you have about that ride.
So: Saunders does not like Twister. Nobody denies him that right.
He goes to great length at times to explain why; at other times, he
just visits and revisits the fact. It would seem that he cannot let
go of the fact that his opinion of the ride is not universal, so he
tries application of layer after layer of his pallet of justification
and assertion.
He bullies. He preaches, but pretends he does not. At the
slightest show of disagreement from another, he pronounces his whole
package of statements an "opinion". The reasonable protection from
scrutiny allowed a simple "I like it" or "I don't like it" is
protection he feels entitled to apply to whatever sort of personal
thoughts he has posted to the ether.
As it is, the broad sense of the word "opinion" the Mike uses is
indeed subject to evaluation and criticism by others. Such an opinion
can be outright wrong - like his comment about the "isolation"
Knoebels lives in, while we are in fact smack dab in the middle of one
of most competitive markets for amusement parks in the world. An
opinion like that is unassailable? Sometimes an opinion can be self-
contradictory: Mike's opinion in 1999 that Twister's recreation was
not a failure versus his current opinion that it is a failure.
Sometimes an opinion can be served sloppily: see his otherwise weird
opening statement about the same discussion as above. Opinions like
these are unassailable? Sometimes opinions are flavored by irrelevant
irritants: Saunders' own admission that he fights back against Twister
because somebody is defending it. Opinions like these are
unassailable? Opinions have consequences. Somebody thought it would
be good to make the projected Riverside Cyclone a strenuous ride.
Somebody else thought the planning which went into J2 at Clementon was
a good idea. Those rides have worked out really well for their parks,
right? Opinions like those are above reproach?
In fact, Saunders regularly posits thoughts which are ill-informed
and often self-contradictory; which have, if and when realized, ill
effects for those who abide by them. He broadens the concept of the
word "opinion" to justify not having to defend any aspect of his
pallet of thoughts - not just the core. There is no doubt that he is
proselytizing when he speaks, his disingenuous disclaimers to the
contrary.
I have offered to help him avoid his mental clunkers. A little bit
of knowledge about how the real industry operates would help him
strengthen his arguments, without the need for him to change any of
his real "opinions" - narrow sense of the word here. He can dislike
Twister from now to eternity, but if he insists upon disrespecting the
ride with sloppy, ill-conceived, ill-advised, contradictory,
arbitrary, or ultimately dangerous "opinions" - broad sense here -
then he will have to live with somebody in his audience pointing out
the mental drool staining his posited artifact.
John
Marshall
it....
What was I talking about?
Ricky Summersett
Is this John Moyers?
Ricky
Ricky Summersett
>I would like to categorically refute Saunders'
> mean-spirited refrain that I am unable "to handle criticism about
> Twister".
It appears (and I may be wrong) that criticism regarding Twister is
difficult for you.
>But like anyone who cares
> deeply about the success of a project, I do not care for: ignorant,
> nasty, careless, spurious comments,
I have not read "ignorant, nasty, careless or spurious" comments from
Mike about Twister.
>But eventually, when I
> have had enough, I provide a stinging verbal response, in the hopes
> that eventually my tormentor will quit his pig-ignorant goading.
I have found (especially in Usenet) that the "stinging verbal
response" normally begins a "cat fight" (or flame war) which you have
already apologized for.
> Hence the upbraiding of Saunders and his untouchable "opinions".
I don't know Mike (nor you) but I do not get the impression that his
opinions are "untouchable."
> him both proof and more proof that rides like these are not optimal,
(In the case of the original Tx. & Riverside Cyclones) I will not
disagree with one involved in the industry but the Tx. Cyclone since I
remember it in the late 70s and forward always had the longest lines
in the park. Riverside was the same.
>He is entitled to his opinion. The "makeup"
> consists of the long, detailed explanations he attaches to his ride
> observations.
I have always enjoyed Mike's opinions, perhaps because his tastes
closely mirror my own in wooden coasters. I hope that he never stops
the "long, detailed explanations."
> He wants it both ways. He wants, now, to be
> able to rattle off crafted, dense, extensive observations about
> coasters in an effort to dazzle the less-informed, and then, repeated,
> clever little tidbits reinforcing his antagonistic views well-
> described previously; but when his observations, or the logical
> outcome of them are shown to be damaging, harmful, nasty, or just
> inept, he cries out, again and again, that they are "just opinions".
If an opinion is indeed "damaging, harmful, nasty, or just inept (I've
not read an inept opinion of Mike's) do they cease to be "just
opinions?" I think they are still "just opinions." If someone was
harmed by them, well, perhaps that person is the one with the
inadequacy.
> Saunders claims this week that Twister is a failure in terms of
> faithfulness to the original (which he rode and I did not, he
> triumphantly points out).
I do not know the depth of effort put into Twister in the effort to
remain faithful to the original. However, if that was the goal I would
say the ride is a failure. I, too, rode Mr. Twister, many many times
(perhaps a hundred or more times in 4 visits). Knoebel's Twister
doesn't even come close. It feels nothing like the original. The only
part of Twister that "feels" like the original is the 2 post-lift
turns. However, I think (unlike Mike) that Knoebel's Twister is a
really fun coaster. Certainly not near top 10, but definately not 10
worst. I like the ride, a lot.
>the two first drops he finds most
> disappointing are the most faithful part of the ride to the original
> Allen design figures. Their smoothness versus the original ride is
> due to the better job of track laying that Leonard Adams did than the
> original ride's tracking crew).
The first 2 drops of the original were abrupt airtime hills. Knoebel's
drops are really not even comparable to the original.
> But in 1999 he publicly stated that Twister is "far more of a speed
> ride than the original, with a far stronger helix, but the original
> had more 'character', for want of a better word".
I agree wholeheartedly with that assessment. Knoebels does have a
stronger helix, more consistent speed BUT the original had more
"character, for want of a better word." Elitch Twister today may not
come into many enthusiast's favorites list, but the coaster had un-
matchable character, in it's unusual design, stop n go elements,
severity and beauty. I think the one-position bars added to the ride
as well.
>So if Twister is more of a speed ride than Mister
> Twister, and Speed Rides are better than classics like Mister Twister,
> does it somehow follow that we really screwed up "in terms of
> faithfulness to the original"?
The comparison of Twister and Mr. Twister as well as the preference of
one style over another has little to do with the success of being
"faithful to the original." Again, I don't think Twister is very
faithful to the original, and that's O.K. It's still a great ride.
>Or are "opinions" really to be immune
> from any laws of logic?
Does an opinion have anything to do with the "laws of logic?"
It's an opinion. A preference. A like, or a dislike. Does logic need a
place among an opinion?
> He also at the time placed it as an "edge top-fifteen ride", which
> does not quite square up with it being one of the ten worst now,
> unless something has happened to it over the past eight years.
Perhaps (in his opinion) better rides have been built, maybe former
favorites have degenerated.
Among my former favorites several have nosedived (Ghostrider,
Shivering Timbers, neither of which have had substantial neutering).
> Saunders wants it both ways. He is supremely disingenuous when he
> implies that his posts are without guile, pure of effort to
> proselytize.
Personally, I WANT to "proselytize" with my opinion. I want people to
try the things I like, ultimately seeing people finding enjoyment in
the things which bring me enjoyment.
> "An opinion... basically comes down to either "I like it" or "I hate
> it". Exactly. If only Saunders understood and acted upon that fact!
> Instead, he piles on paragraphs and paragraphs - lipstick on his pig -
> and then tries to pretend that all he was saying was either "I like
> it" or "I hate it".
That's what I read from him. What is wrong with garnishing and
detailing one's opinion?
> Just one more thing. Flying Turns: "I like it" or "I don't like it".
I sure hope I hear a lot more about the Turns than that! Good, bad and
everywhere in between.
>Remember, the people who have participated in the production of
> this ride might actually care for it.
Ya know, I make a pretty good blackberry cobbler. Most love it, some
don't (like my daughter). Some don't care for the inescappable hard
seeds in the wild, hand-picked (by me) blackberries I use. I put a lot
of effort into making my cobbler good, really good, and pretty, too
with the hand-made crust carefully weaving in & out of the other
strands. Does it hurt when someone says "I don't like it?" Sure, I put
a lot of effort into it. BUT, I want to know what they don't like
about it, even if they'll never take another bite. I deal with my
emotions and don't blame others for them. My emotions are not their
fault, they are just my feelings.
>And Mike, while it's a free country and you may go where you wish,
> perhaps you might want to save your money as well and just write the
> review of the Flying Turns you have already mostly composed.
Wow. That's putting words in one's mouth...
> As it is, the broad sense of the word "opinion" the Mike uses is
> indeed subject to evaluation and criticism by others.
Obviously. You have used a lot of bandwidth to scrutinize and evaluate
Mike and "opinion."
>Such an opinion can be outright wrong
HOW can an opinion be "wrong?"
>like his comment about the "isolation"
> Knoebels lives in, while we are in fact smack dab in the middle of one
> of most competitive markets for amusement parks in the world.
Knoebels seems isolated to me. I completely understand what Mike said,
yet I also agree with your point about being "smack dab...etc"
>He broadens the concept of the
>word "opinion" to justify not having to defend any aspect of his
> pallet of thoughts -
Should I have to "defend any aspect of my pallet of thoughts" when
casting my opinion?
I have a lot of respect for many opinions on rrc because they parallel
my own. Mike's is one of them. But, if I found myself near Valleyfair,
or even in the region, I would visit mainly to ride Renegade. I do not
believe a GCI woodie can be as dull as Mike says. Perhaps I'm wrong,
both Roars certainly seem a waste to me.
I have similar taste for the oldies that Mike has, the original Tx.
Cyclone remains my favorite of all time, Riverside a close second. But
ya know what? I absolutely fell in love with, gasp(!), Lightning
Racer! The ride is almost forceless yet has a flow, smoothness and
consistency of speed that really got to me at the ACE Con years ago.
The dueling racer aspect and the trians are reall, really cool, too.
Mike does NOT like Lightning Racer. I still can't fully understand
what struck me about that ride but I love it!
Knoebel's Twister is a failure if it's intention was to imitate the
original, but I like it. It;s a really fun ride. Mr. Twister remains
on my all-time top 5, not even comparable to Knoebel's, but Knoebel's
Twister is a darn fun coaster.
And that's my opinion.
Ricky
kip...@comcast.net
Brooke Valentine... "there's about to be a GIRLFIGHT!"
-kip
BaSSiStiSt
<Paren...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189790552.2...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> My apologies that this cat fight with Mike Saunders is taking up
> bandwidth on RRC. General warning: below will follow another
> "unfocused missive" in reply to the points Saunders attempts to make.
Twister sucks.
NEXT!
BSzaks
number of words requirement?
kip...@comcast.net
wrote:
>Why do I feel like someone had an assignment where they had a minimum
>number of words requirement?
I know, right?
Their posts are not ADD-compliant. I need the Cliff's Notes.
-kip
mamoosh
wrote:
> Their posts are not ADD-compliant. I need the Cliff's Notes.
So....how many people dressed as "dueling Fetterman & Saunders" will
we see at PPP this year? If I didn't already have my costume idea I'd
find someone to do it, lol.
Buttercup
AGAIN!"
Hercules
Fujin Rajin 2
Both of which will never again subject anyone to their pain.
Rastus O'Ginga
> In the newer category, The Voyage seems to have it's group of detractors
> because it's not mild and smooth enough. Well, it wasn't designed to be one
> of the Lightning Racers of the world but it does what it was designed to do
> and it does it exceptionally well.
What, self-destruct?
-r
Buttercup
"Rastus O'Ginga" <ras...@kingwoodcable.net> wrote in message
news:1190219931.8...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
I'm gonna pay for this, but Rastus, I gotta give you a +1
BaSSiStiSt
"Buttercup" <addict...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:FpcIi.594$6p6...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
> I'm gonna pay for this, but Rastus, I gotta give you a +1
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!
That's it, I'm movin to Santa Claus!