Advance Hindsight

Good thread Lowell, and nice story of some of the people I admire. Playing the role of Devils Advocate is an important skill that I need to work on.

When relevant (some risk of an avalanche) I always look at a slope and imagine it sliding. If I choose to ski the slope I factor in the wind effects and other knowns and then will ski the safest line on the slope, one with exits and that minimizes the consequences.

Thank you Lowell for the valued thoughts, insight and Bauer/Trott anecdote. And to Oyvid and Gary for yours. I've been forced to wonder too often when close friends died in avalanche tragedies, just what were they thinking - as most were well educated (in the mountain sense), intelligent and ordinarily thoughtful people. And what I've concluded is that they just weren't able to visualize, to imagine happening, the event which subsequently overwhelmed them and took their lives. They were either distracted, or just couldn't imagine it happening - the occurrence or size & extent. I don't exclude myself, having had close calls that could have gone either way. But increasingly I've adopted Gary's strategy - assume it can slide and do what I can do to minimize my risks. Choosing terrain, or microterrain, more apt to be stable, skiing the edges, having an escape route, skiing from safe spot to safe spot, not getting under others or skiing over others, buddying up and watching each other, communicating among the group - all those travel wisely themes Tremper or AIARE espouse. Then if I do screw up on a judgement call I may minimize the damage to myself, and not inflict it on others.

Good post, Lowell.

I became familiar with this advanced hindsight phenomenon in the early years of my medical career. I'd get a late night call from a patient with a vague complaint. I would entertain the possibility that they had something serious. For whatever reason, I would dismiss my concerns and hang up the phone. I would not go back to sleep. A sick feeling would creep into my gut as I thought about the bad diagnosis that might currently be evolving inside them, the diagnosis that I chose not to investigate. I'd think about how I would feel if I were to find out they had that condition. Five, ten minutes tops, I'd be back on the phone.

It's like other assessments of risk. When you're sure something is OK, or sure it's not, that's easy. It's the ones in between that are dangerous. After many years of repetition, I can recognize this process it as it occurs. I've developed shortcuts to my various levels of certitude. It takes less time to recognize those gray areas of risk where I'm fairly sure a patient is not in danger, but the risk is high enough that I just can't dismiss my concern.

My review of avalanche statistics has convinced me that heuristics are the primary factor that determines who lives and who dies. There are simply too many examples of the "What were they thinking?" phenomenon. The social dynamic on a backcountry outing can be intense. The times I've set off a slide, or found myself on a slope where I shouldn't have been, I was never ignorant of the danger. I proceeded in spite of the danger. Usually because someone else went there first and I followed, being too uncomfortable, or too subordinate, to assert my opposition.

Estimating risk is less than half the battle. You have to understand the dynamics behind the decision process. Backwards and forwards, inside and out.

Marcus, thanks for adding this topic.