How would you describe Son of Beast's roughness?

[bkroz]

My favorite is the people who "O-M-G HATE IT, worst thing of my life! It seriously was a piece of junk, always was! The sixth time I rode it, I thought I was going to die!" To me, that statement is the best friend of "Oh my gosh, the movie sucked so much, I fell asleep five minutes in and woke up during the credits! What an awful movie!" In other words, both statements have you going "... ... huh?"

[Browntggrr]

You seem to misunderstand the point. What I mean is, you cannot look at a collection of reviews on websites and say "See, Son of Beast gets a 3.5 / 10 on average, so ha." That's not how it works. What you COULD say, is that, out of all of those people who rate the ride on roller coaster rating websites, an average of 3.5/10 emerges. It would be ridiculous to say that the community who has enough passion to create an account, log on, and scientifically arrive at a numerical representation of the ride's quality is representative of eveNo ry single person who has opinions on the ride. That would be insane. (And besides that, I imagine that a number of people on these rating sites assign the ride either a ten or a 1, if only to combat others who they think unfairly assigned the ride either a 1 or a 10).

Whatever you draw from amusement park rating sites is precisely that - a number drawn from an amusement park rating site. There are doubtlessly those who consider Son of Beast a 10/10, and those who genuinely consider it a 1/10 (and every decimal place in between), but who never take the time to create an account at these websites you frequent. As such, the only "consensus" you can draw from such a compilation of information is what a very very specific group of folks thinks of the ride. It's neither representative of the general public, nor of a majority of park goers. It doesn't claim to be. Be careful not to confuse that. Some of my friends love the ride, some think it's okay - none went online to express their opinion.

The only review you're getting in the long run is the review of those who are enthusiastic enough to get online and rate it - that represents a very minuscule amount of Son of Beast's total ridership, and shouldn't be thought of as being anything other than that. I'm not saying Son of Beast is the best ride, and I would agree with your conclusion that most people probably don't like it as a whole - I'm simply pointing out the flaws in your method of arriving at that conclusion.

No, I understand the point quite well.

Yet, you have to form a general consensus from the information given, and the information is not just from enthusiast sites:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qi...07210931AAcZxeY

http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM1ZVK_...Kings_Island_OH

http://www.epinions.com/reviews/trvl-Famil...ts_Kings_Island

http://www.faqs.org/qa/qa-14784.html

http://www.oxfordpress.com/news/oxford-new...ers-186193.html

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton...son-243002.html

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/spr...owComments=true

And the list can go on.

Now, just take a look at the comments made. It is quite easy to see who is an enthusiast, and who is not. And even then, the comments made by the non-enthusiast are extremely similar to enthusiast sites. I have a difficult time believing that all the comments are just a coincidence and should be discarded because you believe that it is just an enthusiast's opinion.

And even then, how often do enthusiasts actually agree upon ANYTHING? Yet the majority agrees that SoB is terrible?

You are letting your own opinion cloud your education for sound reasoning.

[bkroz]

I have yet to express a strong opinion one way or another. And no, I don't have to form a general consensus about the information related to Son of Beast, and neither do you. It is not our job, and it is not something we're qualified (or expected!) to do. We cannot accurately represent the overall opinion on Son of Beast. If each and every person walking off the ride for the entire 2009 season was required to take a short survey, then we could safely say that the results of such a survey would indeed represent the total collective opinion about Son of Beast for the 2009 season. However, we do not have such information.

To further narrow your search by accounting only for the opinions of any minority (in this case, those who log onto a site - any site - to rate the ride) would not give a fair representation of the ride's status. Consider, perhaps people only log on and rate the ride if their particular opinion of the ride was so negative that they want to get it out there. Those who had "average" or "good" rides would feel no pressing need to run home, get on the internet and start fuming, right? So right there one could imagine that there will be a significant amount of reviews that are negative for any ride that is known for its roughness.

And let us not forget what I like to call "the Twilight voting system." For every movie that's in the public eye and meant to smash world records you get this syndrome where everyone who thinks its "gay" and "stupid" and "awful" gives it a 1/10, some perhaps without even seeing it. Then to counter that, all of the fans (or even those who thought it "pretty good") give it a 10/10, knowing it isn't deserved, but still trying to equate the entire thing. Now, like it or not, Twilight, nor its predecessor, does not deserve a 1/10, nor a 10/10. To say so would be to say that it has no redeeming feature whatsoever (music, visuals, acting, storyline, effects), or to say it had no flaws. Neither is true of most any situation, but that's how the ratings always breakdown.

Do you think that 13,821 people actually saw "New Moon," went home to contemplate on it and then scientifically arrived at a rating of 1/10? Or that 7,780 truly thought it was a flawless, perfect film? Doubtlessly, no. But for every person who thinks Son of Beast is hands down the worst ride ever to exist, ever, in the entire world, for all time, never been a worse ride, there's got to be someone who thinks its perfect (and vice versa) if only to counter eachother.

Publically displayed, unregulated online polls and ratings will never be a fair way to arrive at a scientific value, because they express only the opinions of a select group, and even then, are absolutely LOADED with bias and counter-voting.

[LongLiveTheSmurfRide]

My thoughts on how SOB feels while riding is that, "My shoulder doesn't hurt very much, but my face does. Right here. Not here or here so much...... Right here."

[SOB_TOM]

You know, I always thought SOB was rough, but not overly so. But of course, when it comes to personal feelings about a ride, no one can be right, no one can be wrong, and someone always has a different opinion.

Tom, who is ignoring bait set up for him to start fighting on this wonderful December 17th day.

[Browntggrr]

edit

[Browntggrr]

I have yet to express a strong opinion one way or another. And no, I don't have to form a general consensus about the information related to Son of Beast, and neither do you. It is not our job, and it is not something we're qualified (or expected!) to do. We cannot accurately represent the overall opinion on Son of Beast. If each and every person walking off the ride for the entire 2009 season was required to take a short survey, then we could safely say that the results of such a survey would indeed represent the total collective opinion about Son of Beast for the 2009 season. However, we do not have such information.

No, we do have the information, but unlike you, I am not willing to throw people's opinions away just becasue they gave it online.

And you can try and throw as much useless data around, but that information is also online, so it can be discarded just like people's opinions.

And yes, having an opinion and backing it up is our job. Welcome to the glorious World of a forum.

[Ki Man]

It's better than sex. No sarcasm at all..it's like the 8th wonder of the world. You don't believe me?

[shark6495]

I have yet to express a strong opinion one way or another. And no, I don't have to form a general consensus about the information related to Son of Beast, and neither do you. It is not our job, and it is not something we're qualified (or expected!) to do. We cannot accurately represent the overall opinion on Son of Beast. If each and every person walking off the ride for the entire 2009 season was required to take a short survey, then we could safely say that the results of such a survey would indeed represent the total collective opinion about Son of Beast for the 2009 season. However, we do not have such information.

No, we do have the information, but unlike you, I am not willing to throw people's opinions away just becasue they gave it online.

And you can try and throw as much useless data around, but that information is also online, so it can be discarded just like people's opinions.

And yes, having an opinion and backing it up is our job. Welcome to the glorious World of a forum.

I dont think hes throwing out the information because its online, but what he is saying or how I interpreted it was that its not a true enough slice of the riding public. To get an accurate portrayal of what people think of the ride would be to follow these steps: First find out how many people ride the ride then determine your sample size (lets say 100,000 people ride it so our sample size is 1000).... out of that 100,000 lets say 60% are white, 25% black, and 15% other races. Then you would have to calculate average age, lets say an average rider age is about 25, so our sample size would have to be of people, in even distribution, from ages 20-30. Then have them take a survey, ranking everything from 1-10. You would have to have more than 1 question. Questions could be Seat Comfort, Ride Smoothness, thrill, etc. Then an average could be taken from all these to give the ride some sort of a scale. however the problem again with this is you have to be able to understand that just because we have a small sample size (1000) it would have a +- of about 4-7 percent, which is huge and makes most surveys useless. (Remember back to civics when we were taught that if a survey can waver 4-6 points either way then its a failed survey)

However this would be a very interesting survey to take, and make...

EDIT- so i tried to add a poll to garner some scientific data and research but I can only put up 3 questions so never mind

[Plankton]

I did not have a chance to ride it, but my sister's friend felt nauseated the rest of the day. Makes me want to try it out even more.

[The Interpreter]

So, if your sister's friend was in a car wreck and afterwards felt sick, would you want to try that out even more, too?

Terpy, just askin' (and not necessarily comparing riding Son of Beast to being in a car wreck...)

[flightoffear1996]

The Rose Bowl was the best part of the ride.

[IslandAddict]

The Rose Bowl was the best part of the ride.

Is that a joke?

Addict, who not too recently, but not too lately, watched a Rose within a Bowl.

[Fear the Four]

The Rose Bowl was the best part of the ride.

Is that a joke?

Addict, who not too recently, but not too lately, watched a Rose within a Bowl.

This is the rose bowl. click click

[CincyMan98]

Lol, ya, the rose bowl is an element in SOB.

[The Interpreter]

In my humble opinion, the best part of the ride was the loop. As for the rose bowl, my mamma always told me if you can't say anything good about somebody (or, in this case, some thing...) ...

[RingMaster]

Really? Can you say Prowler? Renegade?

Just sayin'

Especially considering Prowler received the Golden Ticket for Best New Ride of 2009 by Amusement Today.

Anyway, before the 06 incident with the old trains, the best trick to combat Sonny's roughness was to simply ride in the middle row (the same can be said for both Racer and Beast). Of course, once the old trains were replaced with the new two-row trains, it was now next to near impossible to get a smooth ride, unless you decide to sit in the very front row.

However, I always felt that the roughest part of the ride was the bottom of the Rose Bowl; everything else was fine. I'd much rather them take out the entire Rose Bowl and go for a layout similar to The Voyage up to the MCBR (airtime hills and overbank turns).

Of course, that won't ever happen (especially if the Apollo deal goes through), but it's nice to dream once in a blue moon....

EDIT: The loop was also my absolute FAVORITE part of the ride as well. Just the sheer size of it and had such a smooth transition in and out of it (plus it never lost speed as it neared the top of the inversion) was insane on all fronts.

[marlfox_21]

I think that riding Son of Beast feels something like carrying a large heavy dresser up a flight of stairs with somebody, and you are on the bottom, and the person on top drops their end, followed quickly by the weight of the dresser pulling your body forward before it starts to fall pushing your body down the stairs.

[Coney_man]

From what i heard, the gerstlauer cars on SoB Makes the thing worse, hence the accident last year with the dag near stroke, those cars are not safe, we need Timberliners!!

[coaster_junky]

nobody had a "dag near stroke" after riding Son of Beast last year that caused the ride to close (a woman reported bursting a blood vessel in her skull), and the trains on Son of Beast are safe, if they wern't then it never would have been cleared to run with them when it reopened in '07.

[Outdoor Man]

Here's how I would describe it: SBNO

[shark6495]

nobody had a "dag near stroke" after riding Son of Beast last year that caused the ride to close (a woman reported bursting a blood vessel in her skull), and the trains on Son of Beast are safe, if they wern't then it never would have been cleared to run with them when it reopened in '07.

to be honest unless you are a doctor or have taken a class in Neurology you are in no place to diagnose a possible stroke victim. With that being said because a ride is safe and cleared does not mean it can not cause a future harm. Toyota did not know that their gas pedals would stick leaving the car with an open throttle, but they were ruled safe when they opened. So its possible that the trains could contribute to the overall roughness of the ride. And you said nobody had a "dag near stroke" then go and talk about a ruptured blood vessel she got while riding the ride. Ruptured blood vessel in the skull=stroke. A stroke is an interruption of the blood supply to any part of the brain. A stroke is sometimes called a "brain attack."

[bkroz]

I believe it's safe to say that the Son of Beast trains have been found to be safe.

That being said, it's the same "all clear" that a Top Thrill Dragster train receives moments before a bolt may come lose or a piece of plastic snap off... (not that that's happened, it's only an example). Nothing that has been "found safe" by anyone can be ridden without risk. That's why the state of Ohio has laws in place to prevent and protect certain folks from riding, and still more to protect those who ride and are injured by an event outside their control. Just because Maverick, or Voyage, or Diamondback is cleared each morning doesn't mean it cannot cause future harm.

Do the Son of Beast trains have an impact on the ride's comfort, and guest satisfaction? I'd say so. Perhaps they lead to more injury complaints. Whether they're more safe or not, I don't know. They were replaced to save the ride's structure, and I suppose the fact that it's still standing (to the chagrin of some...) means they've done their job.

[Browntggrr]

From what i heard, the gerstlauer cars on SoB Makes the thing worse, hence the accident last year with the dag near stroke, those cars are not safe, we need Timberliners!!

I gotta ask:

What is a "dag near stroke"?

[The Interpreter]

It is what you have after seeing Dagmar, if you are of a certain age:

[Dalefan]

My back dr. told me not to ride SOB again. Lol.

[shark6495]

sort of agree with you all, its either a stroke or not a stroke. There are no such things as "dag near stokes." And terp was she on the Bob Hope Show?

[coaster_junky]

^what?! you called me out and told me i wasn't a doctor because i said "nobody had a "dag near stroke" on Son of Beast" and then you turn around and say everyone's right "there are no such things as "dag near stokes""?

[shark6495]

right. you said nobody had a dag near stroke so what are you saying? I said you were not doctor so you can not say if someone did or did not have a stroke. If you take a basic neruo class you will learn that there are no such things as dag near strokes. They either are or they are not strokes. If the blood is not reaching a part of the brain = stroke. If you were saying she had a stroke, then I apologize (because you would be correct according to her doctors) but if you were saying she did not, then my "you are not a doctor you can not diagnose anything" comment is still true.

So I guess my answer to your sort of question is yes and no?

[The Interpreter]

sort of agree with you all, its either a stroke or not a stroke. There are no such things as "dag near stokes." And terp was she on the Bob Hope Show?

As in the very first one, no less. Indeed:

http://www.huntingtonquarterly.com/articles/issue35/dagmar.html