Maverick: Family Ride?

I've spent some time researching the "Cedar Point said Maverick was a family ride" subject. I've seen it in a number of places (spend some time on Google to see for yourself), and watched it come back in favor now that Shoot the Rapids has been announced. It usually ends up something like, "Cedar Point says Shoot the Rapids is a family ride?!?! That's what they said about Maverick, too!!!"

So, being an investigative type of guy, I looked for the source of that thought.

And the more I look, the more I'm convinced that it never came from Cedar Point.

The only thing I could find supporting the argument was the Plain Dealer's assertion that Dick Kinzel had once said it was "a coaster for the whole family."

That was a quote from one interview. I don't doubt the accuracy, but I question the significance. The quote alone does not qualify as Cedar Point saying it's a family ride.

On announcement day, Robin Innes told the Toledo Blade, "This will be a thrilling ride that will appeal to a bigger audience, and I think a lot of people will enjoy it."

Again, not the same as calling it a "family ride."

One thread, started a couple of weeks after Maverick's announcement, eventually leads to a discussion of whether Maverick is a "family ride." Some think it is, others think it isn't. For the most part, the idea that it's a "family coaster" is quickly shot down. It's an internal debate, though, not one brought on by what Cedar Point said.

Three pages into the original ride announcement thread, cyberdman says, "Well, just as I suspected. Removed one family ride for another one."

A few pages later, SFGA=toliet counters, "Earlier in this thread someone said that by giving the ride a 48" height restriction, made it a family ride compairable [sic] to WWL. MF has a 48" ride requirement but that doesn't make IT a family ride."
Other posters give their opinion: Tom, TTDragster105, among others.

Gomez mentions in yet another thread that the idea of a family coaster might have come from our own discussion: "Maverick is by no means a no thrill coaster, nor is it the more family oriented ride that might have been speculated in 2006."

My conclusion? I wonder if the belief didn't actually originate from multiple discussions here at PointBuzz, rather than from Cedar Point itself.

If anyone has evidence to the contrary, I welcome it. But for now, I declare the "Cedar Point said Maverick was a family ride" idea from Cedar Point as bogus.

Why did I spend so much time researching this? Honestly, it was an interesting look at how ideas spread and change over time on the Internet. One thought can be changed only a little to end up being completely different, or even go from true to false. We've seen this before with the "Kinzel said he was going out with a bang" topic.

Nice job, Walt! Unless someone brings something up to show different, that shuts it down as far as I am concerned. Great investigating skills;)

Walt, I was trying to do the same investigating and I was sure I saw a video interview of Kinzel stating what you quoted from the Plain Dealer on Maverick's site, but I couldn't find such a thing. As one who had accused CP of announcing Maverick as a family ride, my apologies.

While you're at it could you see if Cedar Point has a space problem? ;)

~Rob

Really good job walt! :) :)

I want to ask OnPointony somthing. How is this a family ride? I ride bigger than Snaked River Falls is not a family ride. A family ride is somthing that a 4 year old and a 94 year old can enjiy. Is Shoot the rapids a family ride?

Walt, you make this point: "The only thing I could find supporting the argument was the Plain Dealer's assertion that Dick Kinzel had once said it was "a coaster for the whole family."

That was a quote from one interview. I don't doubt the accuracy, but I question the significance. The quote alone does not qualify as Cedar Point saying it's a family ride."

I disagree. When the Big Kahuna says it is "a coaster for the whole family," that is, by definition, Cedar Point saying it's "a coaster for the whole family."

In addition in this article DK is quoted as saying Maverick will treat riders to eight “airtime-filled hills,” three inversions and a second launch through a dark tunnel as the coaster reaches speeds of up to 70 mph. “After we built Top Thrill Dragster in 2003, I have been asked where do you go from here?” said Kinzel. “Now we have the answer in Maverick. With low to the ground, multiple terrain-hugging elements and plenty of airtime, it’s a ride that everyone will enjoy.”

Now we can argue the definition of "everyone" and I will admit that is not the same as "family," but "everyone," to me, does not seem to say "only teens and young adults."

This may the video (near the bottom):

http://www.cleveland.com/ontherecord/

I watched it earlier, but don't remember hearing anything. Though, admittedly, I had some family distractions. :)

No need to apologize. This is lighthearted stuff at best. :)

I'm not going to argue about the definition of "everyone" (or "is" for that matter :) ), but that isn't convincing to me. Just like the Innes quote, they definitely recognized a bigger audience. But that doesn't mean ages 8 - 88.

What Dick Kinzel says is important, but one quote does not make a marketing message. If it was the Cedar Point stance, it would have been shouted by everyone. And it's not unreasonable to believe that he may occasionally say things that fall outside of the unified public relations message. CEOs do that. :)

coolkid2345 said:
Really good job walt! :) :)

I want to ask OnPointony somthing. How is this a family ride? I ride bigger than Snaked River Falls is not a family ride. A family ride is somthing that a 4 year old and a 94 year old can enjiy. Is Shoot the rapids a family ride?

Well, my mom who will be 90 in a couple of weeks, loved riding Mill Race, Shoot The Rapids and White Water Landing. She saw the sign on the Frontier Trail for the new Shoot The Rapids and said she wants to ride it next summer. So, I guess if it looks appealing to a 90 year old, a 94 year old will probably like it also. :)

It's not going to be the layout that keeps people from riding. It will be the soak factor. I will ride one time so that I can say that I at least tried it. But, I do not like soaker rides. I have NOT ridden TC or SRF, nor will I. I do not want to walk around the park soaking wet. I do not want to carry a bag of clothes and shoes around the park either (what a drag). So, if this one is a soader, my grandkids will just have to go on it without me. To me, if this ride is a soaker, it is NOT a family ride!

I assume with the 48" height requirement most people thought Maverick would be less intense than a ride with a 52" height requirement. Most of the discussion around here and on CB was that the taller height limit meant Intamin conceded the ride was more intense and less "family friendly" than originally intended. I myself thought even with the change in height minimum the ride would be less intense than I eventually found it to be. I did enjoy it, but Maverick is indeed an appropriate name.

And cpcoasterhaven, it's not about how wet you get, it's about the actual intensity of the ride that's going to determine whether STC is family friendly or not. People of all ages like to get soaked, but the scariness of the drop will determine the family friendliness of the ride. An 85 foot drop seems borderline high-thrill to me.

The relatively low height of Maverick would allow its inclusion of a broader audience I suspect, knowing how many wouldn't touch Dragster or Millennium Force because of the height. This was one of the things that Hildebrandt emphasized in the original promo video clip on the original Maverick Web site. I think his words were that it would appeal to a "somewhat broader audience." He certainly didn't call it a family ride though.

Walt said:

No need to apologize. This is lighthearted stuff at best. :)

But isn't it refreshing to know that some of us can still admit when we are wrong? ;)

By the way, have you found out if Cedar Point has a space problem? If so, what would you call Kennywood and Indiana Beach's situations?

~Rob

Cedar Point has been out of space for at least 15 years. This rec.roller-coaster poster thought Cedar Point needed to start expanding into the parking lot in 1994.

I remember having the discussion of "family" or not with regards to Maverick but I don't recall the genesis. I wonder if you have to go back further to the discussion that started to occur after WWL was announced as an endangered species but before we knew what the replacement will be.

I guess it is irrelevant. The question is really whether or not STR will be a "family" attraction. The height limit will have a significant impact on that.

Good digging Walt. Its like the telephone game for the 21st century.

This was actualy kinda fun to read. Good job Walt.

Very cool Walt. I spent some time on the subject myself. I eventually gave up, as I couldn't find anything.

Boy, this is really weird. I could have sworn the whole "family ride" thing was established canon. Nice detective work, Walt.

To determine if something is a family ride, you first need to define family ride. Thats not an easy definition. Some people apparently view family rides as those that the entire family can ride and which folks from 3 years old through 94 years old can ride. If you visit CP this weekend, you will see famlies riding on each and every ride in the park (other than the kiddie rides which don't allow adults to ride). And you will see folks of all ages (assuming they meet the height requirement) on each and every non-kiddie ride in the park. Does that make them all family rides? Or does the fact that for every ride in the park you can find famlies who won't ride them because at least one family member won't ride it make them all non-family rides?

And no matter what CP said or didn't say about it, Maverick was never going to be a family ride in terms of how I have seen many people define the term on this site. One, there is no way the height requirement would be less than 48" which keeps a lot of younger folks from riding it. Two, with the loops, twists and turns and general speed of the ride, you were always going to have a significant number of folks (in famlies) who would never ride Maverick.

As has been noted, Maverick is a less intense coaster and a good change of pace from the "built it faster, higher" mold. I would think there are a lot of folks who would never ride Millenium or Dragster or even Magnum who will ride Maverick. My brother in law is such an individual (I rode Maverick with him last month and you couldn't pay him enough money to ride the other 3 coasters). But that doesn't make Maverick a family ride (at least not how I see many folks defining the term here).

And any definition is problematic. Creating a ride that folks at the younger and older end of the age scale will all ride isn't as tough as also having it appeal to those folks in the middle of the age scale. And no matter what you do, there are a lot of folks who do not want to get wet, are affraid of heights or the dark or don't want intense rides, etc. that will keep large numbers of folks off any given ride.

To me, forget the labels. Just build the rides and let whoever wants to ride, ride and be done with it. And look at what you have in terms of existing rides and what you think you would like to have and fill needs/holes as you think appropriate. And know that no matter what you do, some people will complain.