The Unbiased Biased Review

[Daves not here]

On Pugski if you hang around long enough, you get to know who gives the best review for you. So at least on this site I don't see it as biased as all reviews seem fair.

Agree! Another thing in regards to reviews is knowing what you are looking for and understanding the language of the reviewer. I experienced this first hand - coming from my Prophet 98 - looking for a new ski. After reading many reviews on many skis in that class - I realized I was not 100% sure what I was looking for in my next ski as the reviewers presented many different things that got me thinking much deeper on the topic and how all of that fit in with my other skis as well as my local terrain and conditions. In the end I got the new Bonafide (not what I started out thinking I would get) and I could not be happier! Taking the time to understand my quiver, my local conditions and terrain, the reviewer (and their bias and such) - really paid off in the end. This started for me over on Epic with the same cool cats that are now prominent over here on Pugski. Such a great experience with so many great people willing to share their knowledge and views, take time to understand my thinking and answer endless amounts of questions!!

 

[Jake M]

All too often, reviewers/sites say a particular ski is great. I don't want to know if it's great!! Most, if not all of the testers, are experts and have the skills to make just about any ski work. Saying a ski is great, for example, says nothing.

The trick, as Phil implies I think, is to find what it's great for, but most importantly, WHO it's great for. With people having different abilities, sizes, preferences, and in varying conditions, the trick is finding a ski (or several options) for what could work for THAT particular person. Tell me a ski is suited for a lightweight finesse skier who prefers the groomers. Tell me a ski is suited for an athletic charger who wants to lay down trenches at mach schnell. Tell me a ski is suited to the intermediate looking to experience the glades and improve their technique while having fun.

Case in point: I demo'd a boatload of skis last year at Steamboat. Now, I'm sure there are many people who will sing the praises of the Mantra, Q98, Soul Rider, and NRGY for example, and I'm sure they're great skis, but they most definitely weren't great FOR ME. Then @Ron suggested the Head Collective 105.....smooth, damp, strong and not too stiff. Seemed to suit my preferences. It wasn't even on my radar until he suggested it. Sure enough, on the first run......huge smile on my face. Found my new love, and bought them on the spot.

Having people like Phil, Ron, Dawg, etc who can ascertain what might work for a certain person, then go demo. Now THAT is the way to do reviews!

So please don't say a ski is great, it doesn't do justice to your experience and knowledge. Sounds like that's what will set Pugski apart from the rest!

 

[Brian Finch]

Here's one of my current fav skis- the exact ski depending on the year (same ski) is either a beginner model or suitable for up to an expert. One year it carves short arcs, next medium-long. Btw- despite the graphic, there is no tail rocker....

 

[oldschoolskier]

If I have a question about a race ski there is only one....ScotsSkier.....truely unbiased and always on the nose.

 

[ScotsSkier]

If I have a question about a race ski there is only one....ScotsSkier.....truely unbiased and always on the nose.

Thanks OSS! Yes, I try to be pretty objective and, since I am not tied to any manufacturer deal, and in most cases actually own the skis, (even if only briefly! I like to think there is less tendency to bias since I am always looking for performance advantage.

One very important point for reviews is that to be valid the skis really have to be tested in the environment they are designed for. For race skis that means running gates. I have been on a number of race skis that felt great free skiing groomers but which did not translate through to perform in the course.

BTW. Look for the upcoming review on the blossom over limit and over limit + WC GS skis. Just need to do some back to back timing tests against my reference ski.......

 

[Tricia]

All too often, reviewers/sites say a particular ski is great. I don't want to know if it's great!! Most, if not all of the testers, are experts and have the skills to make just about any ski work. Saying a ski is great, for example, says nothing.

The trick, as Phil implies I think, is to find what it's great for, but most importantly, WHO it's great for. With people having different abilities, sizes, preferences, and in varying conditions, the trick is finding a ski (or several options) for what could work for THAT particular person. Tell me a ski is suited for a lightweight finesse skier who prefers the groomers. Tell me a ski is suited for an athletic charger who wants to lay down trenches at mach schnell. Tell me a ski is suited to the intermediate looking to experience the glades and improve their technique while having fun.

Case in point: I demo'd a boatload of skis last year at Steamboat. Now, I'm sure there are many people who will sing the praises of the Mantra, Q98, Soul Rider, and NRGY for example, and I'm sure they're great skis, but they most definitely weren't great FOR ME. Then @Ron suggested the Head Collective 105.....smooth, damp, strong and not too stiff. Seemed to suit my preferences. It wasn't even on my radar until he suggested it. Sure enough, on the first run......huge smile on my face. Found my new love, and bought them on the spot.

Having people like Phil, Ron, Dawg, etc who can ascertain what might work for a certain person, then go demo. Now THAT is the way to do reviews!

So please don't say a ski is great, it doesn't do justice to your experience and knowledge. Sounds like that's what will set Pugski apart from the rest!

You (and many others) have reinforced my thinking.
There are some incredible skiers testing skis for publications, who ..

• Can ski anything and make it rip
• Struggle with words to describe what they are skiing

 

[Ron]

Dont get me wrong but a lot of the folks out there testing skis at SIA are there because they are shop owners or reps for the most part. Many only test what they carry due to the time restraints and availability of skis for testing. One thing that sets Pugski apart is that many of us here who test have no affiliations, no financial ties whatsoever. For me, my ski "whoredom" has allowed me to become quite familiar with certain ski lines since I ski them for the season or at least over 10-20 days. I have certainly gravitated to certain traits in skis that work best for me but I also get exposure to other skis that may work better for others whom I have skied with like @Jake M. That Head is a great ski, just not perfect for me.

 

[AmyPJ]

You (and many others) have reinforced my thinking.
There are some incredible skiers testing skis for publications, who ..

• Can ski anything and make it rip
• Struggle with words to describe what they are skiing

I'll add to this "can't relate to an intermediate skier at all." For me, I want to know how a ski performs at 25mph, and also if it can tolerate someone who still skids on steeper stuff.

 

[Ron]

I'll add to this "can't relate to an intermediate skier at all." For me, I want to know how a ski performs at 25mph, and also if it can tolerate someone who still skids on steeper stuff.

This has always been a sore point for me too. I remember once a person said, "this is the ski Hoji Ski's" I said, I cant ski like Hoji, so i guess I don't want that ski! Or you will see reviews touting a certain ski that is highly rated. The Enforcer is a great ski but I wouldn't just put any skier on it, and as much as I love my Kastle FX94, I wouldn't recommend that to a skier who can't finish a turn yet.

I think of ski's in a little different way, I like to try the ski slowly at first, see how it responds edge to edge, does it accept drifting, does it just want to engage, and so on. Does it flex evenly, does it ski stiff or soft. does the tail lock or does it release. Then take it up to speed. These traits indicate to me how easy a ski can be piloted. A good ski doesn't have to be demanding, stiff or exacting. A good ski is one that responsive and will accept the pilots commands for the given skier (terrain and level). So a skier could really like a softish, easy going ski that readily releases but responds to the skiers input accordingly.

 

[AmyPJ]

This has always been a sore point for me too. I remember once a person said, "this is the ski Hoji Ski's" I said, I cant ski like Hoji, so i guess I don't want that ski! Or you will see reviews touting a certain ski that is highly rated. The Enforcer is a great ski but I wouldn't just put any skier on it, and as much as I love my Kastle FX94, I wouldn't recommend that to a skier who can't finish a turn yet.

I think of ski's in a little different way, I like to try the ski slowly at first, see how it responds edge to edge, does it accept drifting, does it just want to engage, and so on. Does it flex evenly, does it ski stiff or soft. does the tail lock or does it release. Then take it up to speed. These traits indicate to me how easy a ski can be piloted. A good ski doesn't have to be demanding, stiff or exacting. A good ski is one that responsive and will accept the pilots commands for the given skier (terrain and level). So a skier could really like a softish, easy going ski that readily releases but responds to the skiers input accordingly.

This is a good tactic. I wonder if most reviewers do the same? Sometimes I get the impression they take them out for a few runs and go as screamin' fast on them as possible. I don't think you can get a TRULY good assessment of a ski in a few runs at all. You can get a decent overall impression, and some will make you smile right out the gate, but I think it can take several days in different conditions.

 

[Tricia]

Dont get me wrong but a lot of the folks out there testing skis at SIA are there because they are shop owners or reps for the most part. Many only test what they carry due to the time restraints and availability of skis for testing. One thing that sets Pugski apart is that many of us here who test have no affiliations, no financial ties whatsoever. For me, my ski "whoredom" has allowed me to become quite familiar with certain ski lines since I ski them for the season or at least over 10-20 days. I have certainly gravitated to certain traits in skis that work best for me but I also get exposure to other skis that may work better for others whom I have skied with like @Jake M. That Head is a great ski, just not perfect for me.

@Gerry Rhoades a nod his wife are great examples of the balancing act. Affiliated with a shop. Good examples of male advanced skier and female intermediate. Discerning ideas about how the skis perform. I know Gerry has sold women's skis that his shop doesn't carry, based on his wife's "review"
He does a good job of balance that isn't easy to come by

 

[Ron]

well... I will say I am about to write a review on the Stockli SR 107. I just finished 3 days on them. I wanted to play around a bit with the mount points (there are 3 suggested) and see how it skied in a variety of powder and broken conditions. I will say its the best resort powder ski I have skied. May not be for everyone though.

 

[Superbman]

I tend to let price determine the austerity of my reviews..for any product. Skis that are well priced always get the caveat-'at these prices these are great skis-(and that is most of the ski products I buy.. bikes, too) and are held to less stringent standards. High end stuff gets the high end requirements. Interestingly, I think most people are willing to beat up on moderately priced gear in public forums but go out of there way to wax rhapsodically about the over-priced marquis skis they just bought. I get DPS, KASTLE and Stockli's are well made skis and all....but the effusive praise wears thin.

 

[Ron]

Interesting, why would anyone evaluate a ski by cost? For instance, I think the Sali Q105 is a great ski. I wouldn't have a higher or lower opinion based on the cost. I would say its a tremendous value based on the price.

 

[Monique]

Yeah, I would think all skis should be evaluated similarly, but then there can be a note about price.

 

[ScotsSkier]

Interesting, why would anyone evaluate a ski by cost? For instance, I think the Sali Q105 is a great ski. I wouldn't have a higher or lower opinion based on the cost. I would say its a tremendous value based on the price.

Yeah, I would think all skis should be evaluated similarly, but then there can be a note about price.

Agreed. A review should evaluate the performance of the ski so a comparison can be made to others. The price aspect gives an indication of relative value or performance/$ rather than simply performance.

 

[Alexzn]

A reviewer's bias is a function of size, weight and technique (Dawgcatching and Phil may be exhibit A is how size shapes your preferences). Its important to be transparent about those things, just as it is important for a consumer to be attuned to those factors. It is also important to have clear points of reference. If you talk about edge hold and carving, you probably should spend some time on a race ski. You cannot objectively evaluate float without ever trying a dedicated 110+ powder boards, etc. BTW, it is something I discovered fairly late in the reviewing game . The more skis you try the more objectively you can evaluate skis, so retailers who get the testing opportunities more regularly and have access to large demo fleets would probably be more objective than a casual demo skier. Instructors and former athletes clearly benefit from better technique but bring their bias for technical skis to the table. So, it looks like the most impotent thing in reading a ski review is to understand the reviewer.

 

[Alexzn]

I tend to let price determine the austerity of my reviews..for any product. Skis that are well priced always get the caveat-'at these prices these are great skis-(and that is most of the ski products I buy.. bikes, too) and are held to less stringent standards. High end stuff gets the high end requirements. Interestingly, I think most people are willing to beat up on moderately priced gear in public forums but go out of there way to wax rhapsodically about the over-priced marquis skis they just bought. I get DPS, KASTLE and Stockli's are well made skis and all....but the effusive praise wears thin.

If they ski better than a competing model they get the praise they deserve. Whether the additional expense is justified is a separate question and likely a matter of personal choice.

 

[Gerry Rhoades]

Many only test what they carry due to the time restraints and availability of skis for testing. One thing that sets Pugski apart is that many of us here who test have no affiliations, no financial ties whatsoever.

The first sentence might well be true, but when I test skis I try to test stuff that isn't what we sell. Last year I skied several Blizzards at Bg Sky. We are not a Blizzard dealer but if someone comes in and says they want a ski like the Blizzard Dill Pickle, it makes a huge difference if I've been on that ski. Same with women's skis. How can I try to sell a ski if I haven't skied it? I'll demo a women's ski as readily as a men's/unisex ski.

And I agree completely with the second sentence. This really is a unique place.

 

[Philpug]

A shop is doing themselves and their customers a great disservice if they don't ski what they don't buy. Like Gerry said, you still need to know and explain why it is not on your ski wall.