Jump to content

What would YOU use as a baseline ski?


Recommended Posts

  • Gold Member

@Horton is not going to tell us his, and I respect that.

 

But it seemed like it might be fun to think about what I'd use if I were doing as-scientific-as-possible ski reviews.

 

I guess I think my Goode 9900. Trusty ski, and I don't think has broken down much.

 

But I'm not sure I've ever "gone back" to a ski (since I don't do comparative ski reviews), so it's hard for me to say what would make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
What I have on hand and last skied reasonably well on...something I can get on and ride and have it feel "normal" immediately. Right now that's a Razor as I toy with a different stick. I know I can go back to the Razor and ski well right away on it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
I haven't ridden that many skis but I would go back to the Goode 9960 Mid for me because that is one of the skis I skied best on and I didn't find it finicky. Of course I sold it so that isn't possible.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Let me suggest that trick is something distinctive. It may or may not be your favorite ski but is one where you know exactly what to expect from it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Most of the reviews I've read are not comparative in nature. By design comparing ski A to ski B is not likely to work really well anyway. For example, I've ski'd Goode skis forever and I've never been on a 9900. So I really don't know what it means to "turn like the 9900" etc. Certainly the ski setup can make a huge difference even if I've been on one.

 

I'd think it's better to describe the features of the ski and its performance. You can compare it to a handful of other skis but you run the risk of that info being basically meaningless.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@klindy there's certainly a nugget of truth in what you're saying; but of course @Horton isn't reviewing it with direct comparisons to specific skis. He's using an undisclosed, well-known (to him) ski to reset his perspective so that he has a repeatable, dependable context for evaluating the next review ski.

 

Conversely, if you don't make any comparisons, a ski review can end up sounding like a bad wine review - strings of meaningless, positive adjectives with no context. Which is pretty much what the ski boat reviews in Water Ski Magazine became many years ago (in contrast to the helpful/meaningful boat reviews they did back in the 80s and early 90s, if memory serves).

 

@Horton, I thought the GT review was excellent in terms of explaining the design biases of the ski vs the rest of the marketplace. It felt really clear about strengths, weaknesses and what skiing styles it might fit well with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
@andjules I think a comparison to the "marketplace" is fine. I dont even mind comparisons like "turns like brand X", "accelerates like brand y" and "feels wide and stable in the turn like brand z". What I wouldn't want to hear is every attribute compared to brand X because they probably means nothing to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...