The Unbiased Biased Review

[Philpug]

Can any review be completely unbiased? We honestly don't think so, and we think it is unrealistic to expect it. We all have biases; as much as we try to be impartial, biases build up over the years. Now, before getting out of whack, let's embrace our humanness. We all have preconceived opinions, whether conscious or subconscious. These biases allow us to create baselines and references, which then serve as the starting point of every review; by doing this we can actually create a review that is very balanced. You have biases in how you want the ski to react. You want a powerful ski or a ski that rewards a lighter technical skier. We can help you with that.

I have said more than once, there are very few bad skis anymore, but there are a lot of wrong skis. As reviewers, our team's task is to help you avoid the wrong skis and find the right ski. We are not here to validate our own likes and dislikes; instead, we are here to help you decide what's best for you. Many times we see consistencies in series of skis within a brand, but that does not mean because you like one ski from a brand it means you will like another one. And just because you liked a ski from a certain brand 10 years ago, or have always skied [insert brand here] that you will like their new offerings; this statement is even more accurate when it comes to boots.

We are here to answer your questions and help you decipher what will work best ... for you. Here at Pugski.com, our reviews have biases, and that is to your benefit. We want to help you find the ideal skis for you. We will help you select the skis for the region and terrain you ski, and for the way you ski, whether with finesse or power. We will base these suggestions on your needs as much as (if not more than) your wants. We all want to ski fresh powder or meticulously groomed trails every day, but we know that doesn't happen all the time. So we will help you choose the right ski for the variable conditions you do ski every day. Of course we can talk about the scalpel of a carving ski and the 123mm reverse cambered powder ski -- because you should have these in your quiver, too.

 

[Tom K.]

No wrong skis, just wrong skiers!

 

[Josh Matta]

I think alot of people who buy their own gear justify what they bought.

I also think a lot of people who get free stuff would feel bad about a negative review.

the most recent ski in recent memory that I hated were a pair of Blizzard Mag 8.5ti I also really did not like the DPS F95 either.

 

[Philpug]

I think alot of people who buy their own gear justify what they bought.

How many husbands buy an Aura for their wife because they were happy with a Mantra? Or Bonafide/Samba or whatever male/female combo there is out there? But yes, the person validating their own decision is the scariest of the "influencers".

I also think a lot of people who get free stuff would feel bad about a negative review.

The negative review is a conundrum, I talked to a product manager about some of their offerings that I personally did not like, he said that he was not a fan of it either but we both agreed that it fit a need and there are a ton of people who did like the ski and it worked well for them. (No, I will not say who it was and wha the ski was) Negative reviews of skis will tend to show prejudices more than biases, so while we might not like it, we just need to decipher who is it for? Did it hit that mark in design? Is is going what the manufacture expected it to do? In some cases, a product misses and in other cases it exceeds the expectations.

I have been asked who can you stay unbiased when someone is paying the site to advertise. For the reason I stated, and for the answers I am giving to Josh. I have told Y manufacture that I might suggest X ski to someone in their thread and in converse, I might suggest Y ski on a thread discussing Z ski. It all comes out in the wash but we need to be consistent in our recommendations to retain credibility and that quite frankly is why they are having us review their product.

 

[tromano]

I will say that I have great respect because it's obvious the motivation of this reviews forum is to educate and help make people happy by getting them on the right pair of skis. Biases are something to be aware of and recognize we don't all share the same priorities.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

How many husbands buy an Aura for their wife because they were happy with a Mantra? Or Bonafide/Samba or whatever male/female combo there is out there? But yes, the person validating their own decision is the scariest of the "influencers".

Betcha she didn't end up on the "wrong" ski.

 

[kickerfrank]

When you think about it your skill level, height, weight and experience are all biases when reviewing a product. There is nothing wrong with bias as long as you make it known. That way a reader can account for that when analyzing the review.

 

[MattD]

When you think about it your skill level, height, weight and experience are all biases when reviewing a product. There is nothing wrong with bias as long as you make it known. That way a reader can account for that when analyzing the review.

Agreed. Knowing this information can actually help narrow down which reviewers might have more in common with your style and, therefore, whose reviews might better align with what your impressions could be on the same skis.

 

[bbinder]

The tricky part for the consumer is sifting though the positive and negative comments to find a ski that will suit his/her needs

 

[SShore]

An interesting example is the Motive 95. @dawgcatching has sung its praises both here and on Epic, while @Philpug has seemed a little lukewarm on it. Both great skiers and ski reviewers but with very different views on the same ski.

 

[Ron]

I think what this site is bringing is exactly what the former site was offering but stopped short. Pugski is taking the reviews of multiple skiers (of varying types) and packaging them up so that different skiers (styles, sizes, abilities and where people ski) can identify with who is reviewing the ski to make better choices. I think this is refreshing and honest.

 

[oldschoolskier]

The trick of a good reviewer is to define their style, likes and dislikes among the usual wt., skill level and current skis. This gives an educated reader a good feel of what to expect.

While the reviewer may not like a ski for certain characteristics, it is what makes it appeal to the reader. Same goes for a ski that is liked by the reviewer would be disregarded by the reader. While biased it is Unbiased by the information provided.

As such good reviewers are hard to find for that very reason as a lot don't share enough about themselves (unfortunately it must be done in every review).

 

[Ron]

You can find the profile of all reviewers by clicking on their avatar, then clicking on the "profile" tab.

 

[Philpug]

The tricky part for the consumer is sifting though the positive and negative comments to find a ski that will suit his/her needs

Well, that is another area where we separated ourselves. Our reviews are interactive and not static. Most every other review site posts the review and there it is and you have to decipher the information yourself and its a pretty good sized crapshoot. Our reviews, be it from any of our testers, you can ask questions of the reviewer which IMHO is huge. Here, you can talk to the people who actually skied the skis and ask them questions directly. You don't even have that ability in most shops, is the shops you might have one person, the buyer, who gets to the demos, maybe one or two key salespeople. At that point you either get second hand information from the buyer, regurgitated rhetoric from the magazines or stuff that is just made up on the spot. Again, this is most shops, there are many good shops that you will get accurate and helpful information.

We have many seasoned skiers here who get on dozens of skis every year and can discern the differences and understand who that ski is for, who will get the most out of it and maybe who it is not for. Are we always right? Hell no. But I think we do a pretty good job. So keep asking the questions about skis and what we think of them.

 

[Tom K.]

An interesting example is the Motive 95. @dawgcatching as well as @tetonpowdrjunkie, @epic, @Whiteroom and @Holiday have sung its praises both here and on Epic, while @Philpug has seemed a little lukewarm on it. All great skiers and ski reviewers but with very different views on the same ski.

Finished that thought for you!

 

[fatbob]

No bias? - even the photo is psycho-programming us to desire Technica group products

 

[bbinder]

Well, that is another area where we separated ourselves. Our reviews are interactive and not static. Most every other review site posts the review and there it is and you have to decipher the information yourself and its a pretty good sized crapshoot. Our reviews, be it from any of our testers, you can ask questions of the reviewer which IMHO is huge. Here, you can talk to the people who actually skied the skis and ask them questions directly. You don't even have that ability in most shops, is the shops you might have one person, the buyer, who gets to the demos, maybe one or two key salespeople. At that point you either get second hand information from the buyer, regurgitated rhetoric from the magazines or stuff that is just made up on the spot. Again, this is most shops, there are many good shops that you will get accurate and helpful information.

We have many seasoned skiers here who get on dozens of skis every year and can discern the differences and understand who that ski is for, who will get the most out of it and maybe who it is not for. Are we always right? Hell no. But I think we do a pretty good job. So keep asking the questions about skis and what we think of them.

I agree 100%.

People who frequent these sites also have the opportunity to compare their own impressions of various skis with the reviews of an individual person. This has been a fantastic tool for me: knowing how you and dawgcatching (and some others) ski and review skis has enabled me to predict how I will feel when I get on a particular ski. Most of the time, my 'preconceptions' are dead-on. This is something that I discovered over time, and you have no idea how valuable this is and how much time and money it saves me when I demo -- you guys have steered me to look at skis that were not on my radar screen, and steered me away from skis that were not what I was looking for (of course, one could say that these allows for another layer of biases, but that is another thread perhaps). Sometimes I will get on a ski that, from your reviews, I am pretty sure I wouldn't like, just to see if the mojo is still there (it is). This has become almost like "virtual demoing" for me -- now there's an idea...

I was pointing out that the less-than-educated consumer may not know how to take full advantage of this. Perhaps a sticky on how to shop for and demo skis for the more casual consumer, including advice on how to use reviews and how to interact more effectively. Maybe you already have something like this, and it has escaped my attention.

 

[oldschoolskier]

You can find the profile of all reviewers by clicking on their avatar, then clicking on the "profile" tab.

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.

 

[quant]

1) If I don't like the tops, the skis must suck.
2) Most people buy skis for what they hope to someday ski, not what they do ski.
3) Often times the "better" rated ski is simply better rated because it performs well in a variety of conditions. Who cares about that if you own more than one ski? So long as your skis perform well in the conditions you are in, that is good enough. Some guy on a 600' hill in MN doesn't need a ski that performs OK in 2' of powder.
4) People who can't use their tips to initiate a carved turn won't like the same skis that have cult followings. There is obviously a corollary to this.
5) An ex-Olympian with thighs like tree trunks may consider a ski as having a top limit for speed...and that is probably a better ski for me.
6) All this technology stuff is crap. Some of the best skis are still made the old-fashioned way, stacked with wood cores layered with aluminum (titinal), something to dampen, sintered bases, etc. Yeah, the devil is always in the details. Still, the basic setup works. I'm not saying there can't be a great foam core ski or one made with carbon fiber (I own some), just that there are a lot of things that work and you don't need microchips or space-age products in skis to make them great.
7) If the ski is free, I'll probably find reasons to like it. If it skis well, I'll let others know about it.
8) Any skis without a decent tune will suck, except in powder.
9) Phil's reviews are very useful because he lets people know who may like the ski and for what reasons. The comparisons with other skis are something most of us can relate to.

 

[Monique]

I definitely am swayed by a nice graphic - but my definition of nice is idiosyncratic. Phil and I disagreed about the graphics on the first run of Sick Days, with me loving them and him ... not so much.