What it really comes down to is LL and I agree on the most important thing... nothing trumps experience.
However we disagree on the next thing... quality instruction can help you gain that experience a bit more sanely than “winging it”.
He is convinced professionals post “high danger” because we don’t want to go out on a rescue... not because we understand the local conditions warrant that level of caution.
Nothing trumps experience....and how to gain experiences with a deep understanding is more than a concern for a course. After a snow storm, observing the snow in the windshield of a car to see when the avalanche collapse is more than usefull. You will understand that during the snow fall, except some warm weather exception, the slab is forming and it is just after that the slide appear on the car, the next day. This is a practical experience. Did you teach, in your courses to look at an avalanche on the windshield of a car...I am sure that you will next time.
Before I gave my life o someone who qualify himself as an expert, I will test him to see his knowledge. On the second article, http://www.snowpit.com/articles/training.pdf
, they describe that situation where you follow stupidly a sign telling you what you have to do. It is a very dangerous heuristic advice. In the article, they talk about the mitigation method use by the good climber to diminished the danger in the field...I am not convinced that you teach that for two reason: First, I went to pinnacle in a white out and there is no snow slab during the snow fall, but it is form at the end and the danger increase as the blue bird sky appear...leaving the climber with the decision of climbing: 1- in fantastic condition and 2- an avalanche post with lower risk of avalanche than the day before. As they don't see any avalanche path around (avalanche is going to be higher after the snowstorm as show in a windshield) There decision will be to climb. So experience climber will say that you are stupid to said that avalanche danger is higher during the snowstorm than after (other risk than avalanche can exist in a snowstorm); Second, by your answer. if you had read the article that I cite, you will have see that your answer is a very dangerous heuristic advice. A climber leave there life in the hand of professional who is not there with you in the field at the good place at the good moment. Avalanche danger is always high and you always to care about any danger. It is why it is so pain full to be a good leader. Your decision are slow because you have to deal with discipline and incomplete information and you are always critics when you stop too much excitement or you push them safely in what you, as a professional, call a mistake.
I don't care who did what for which reason. I found the idea of heuristic clue very interesting because it is what we do and what we shouldn't do in climbing. Act in knowledge, not ignorance, on deep understanding not superficial rules (mfoh, the old climber ethic). In fact, if you look at the article that I cite, you will see that the author describe the risk just for the climber who was involved in accident. They never talk about the climber who did, in reality, climb those route safely in a white out. So, the article is just for high risk climber, classify by there risk homeostasis, and stupid guy who follow professional advice just because they told themselves professional. Not for serious climber who want to learn deep understanding