Do most skiers use the wrong skis

[Chuck danache]

Found them. Absurdly expensive. Nothing wrong here... I like the comment on the page that whoever designed these has never skied, but went to Burning Man.
These would go great with my -I don’t know- skis.
View attachment 135258

I’ll take two

 

[Chuck danache]

I would actually dispute the claim Blister doesn’t review mainstream skis. It’s true they also, and more unusually, review “boutique” skis. I personally find a lot of value in that content and probably a majority of the reviews they post are of boutique skis because there are a lot of boutique ski models. That said, they do have reviews of a lot of Nordica, Blizzard, Völkl etc product. Unless someone is saying they want Blister to stop reviewing niche skis because it’s somehow burdensome to see the reviews of those models I don’t quite understand the criticism you are responding to.

I do think it’s fair to observe Blister doesn’t review as many carving skis as they do skis in some other categories.

I also think the bigger issue, as a buyer of boutique skis, is that boutique skis are really hard to demo. I am virtually indifferent to the “standard” ski magazine reviews of any ski, but I can definitely find a Brahma to demo way more easily than a Moment Commander.

Blister also has tendency to review the longest version of a ski which may give a skewed view of a particular model vs what the general ski public may be looking for.

 

[BMC]

The reason they are successful is because they don't review those skis. A reader can find reviews of the main stream "consumer" skis anywhere.

I doubt that’s a “reason” for their success. They review (wider) skis from mainstream manufacturers. Just bugger all below 100mm.

 

[Quandary]

I would actually dispute the claim Blister doesn’t review mainstream skis. It’s true they also, and more unusually, review “boutique” skis. I personally find a lot of value in that content and probably a majority of the reviews they post are of boutique skis because there are a lot of boutique ski models. That said, they do have reviews of a lot of Nordica, Blizzard, Völkl etc product. Unless someone is saying they want Blister to stop reviewing niche skis because it’s somehow burdensome to see the reviews of those models I don’t quite understand the criticism you are responding to.

I do think it’s fair to observe Blister doesn’t review as many carving skis as they do skis in some other categories.

I also think the bigger issue, as a buyer of boutique skis, is that boutique skis are really hard to demo. I am virtually indifferent to the “standard” ski magazine reviews of any ski, but I can definitely find a Brahma to demo way more easily than a Moment Commander.

You are correct. This year in particular Blister has started reviewing more of the skis like the Nordica Gizmos and the Volk Swizzle Stixs and the...... boring. That's why the reviews have become a much less interesting read in my view. I originally found Blister entertaining because f the reviews of skis off the beaten path.

 

[Quandary]

This thread has been an interesting read. What started out as putting beginner Jane on Mikaela's downhill skis is the "wrong" ski to putting any skier (regardless of level) on a pair of skis I wouldn't ski is the "wrong" ski. Skiers at some in their skiing journey have sufficient knowledge to make a conscious decision of what ski that want to ski. They buy that ski and have fun on it. It is the right ski for them. It may not be the "right" ski for you, who cares. This discussion is rather like Northern Ireland, Catholicism is wrong, no Protestantism is wrong! Neither is wrong just a different approach to the same objective.

 

[François Pugh]

This thread has been an interesting read. What started out as putting beginner Jane on Mikaela's downhill skis is the "wrong" ski to putting any skier (regardless of level) on a pair of skis I wouldn't ski is the "wrong" ski. Skiers at some in their skiing journey have sufficient knowledge to make a conscious decision of what ski that want to ski. They buy that ski and have fun on it. It is the right ski for them. It may not be the "right" ski for you, who cares. This discussion is rather like Northern Ireland, Catholicism is wrong, no Protestantism is wrong! Neither is wrong just a different approach to the same objective.

It's complicated.

Sure, for some people the "right" ski involves sacrificing performance in some areas in order to get the performance you want in an area that really matters to you, and what really matters to you might be different than what really matters to someone else. I understand that; I chose a speed ski for decades. It did not excel at moguls or tight turns or tight trees or sideways skiing, but when it came to skiing at mach schnell, it was the bee's knees.

Nevertheless, when it comes to skiing on hard snow (which is what everyone will be skiing at some places 99 ski days out of 100), a 95+ mm, rockered ski is the wrong ski for everyone. Neither is a 13 m SL ski for bottomless glades, but you don't see that many people skiing those there (not none, but not the majority either).

 

[AngryAnalyst]

My memory is a little vague, but I seem to recall noticing their reviews were pretty decent when it came to wider skis, but less so at the narrower more race-like end (for them, from what I've seen) of the spectrum. I would not really be interested in a Blister review of a true carving ski; I think they should just stick to reviewing the skis that are more suited to their conditions and the way they ski. That's just my opinion though. You are welcome to your's.

This one I mostly agree with for what it’s worth. I care more about this site’s view of carvers than Blister’s at the relevant margin (if for no other reason than this site covers the premium segment stuff like Stockli and Augment). I also care about TGR’s view of pow and touring skis about as much as Blister’s in general.

That said, I really enjoy Blister’s content and it’s one of the only “published” review sources I think is worth the time to look at. Even if I don’t always agree with their reviewers about how a ski feels if I try it, I have rarely felt they were way off base. On balance it’s as useful (to me) as any other way of finding interesting new skis, perhaps especially because I’m exclusively on the longest skis in a size run these days.

 

[markojp]

I had 6 'right' skis this season and only one 'wrong'.

Right: Monster 184 88, 177 eRally, 189 Kore 99, 175 iRace Pro, 187 Rossi Sender Ti. 177 Kore 93 (21-22).

Wrong: 184 Rossi Sender.... not really 'wrong' though, just not as 'right' as the Sender Ti. YMMV and most likely will. In general though, I'm easy to please.

 

[Quandary]

Nevertheless, when it comes to skiing on hard snow (which is what everyone will be skiing at some places 99 ski days out of 100), a 95+ mm, rockered ski is the wrong ski for everyone. Neither is a 13 m SL ski for bottomless glades, but you don't see that many people skiing those there (not none, but not the majority either).

As the Dude says "That's just your opinion, man". You presume to make a judgement for other skiers that you shouldn't. Some days I choose to ski my Billy Goats on a groomer day. I do because its fun and different. Is that the wrong ski, absolutely not, for me, on that day. I am skiing the ski I choose to ski. But I guess as thats "the wrong ski for everyone" so I won't be doing that anymore..........

 

[Cheizz]

Wanting 'something different' from time to time is perfectly fine. It is not the best argument in this discussion. For me, it falls in the category 'a good skier can get down on any ski'. I am sure that he will. I am sure that a good skier will get down a slope with 40 cm pow on it on FIS slalom skis. I just think he will enjoy the run more on a different pair of skis. Unless he wants the technical challenge and 'something different' for a change.
I am sure you would agree that a FIS slalom ski is not best suited for those conditions, even though the skier may be good enough to ski them and make it look easy too. In that sense, those would be the 'wrong' skis for that. Be it just in the context that many other skis would suit the conditions better.

 

[François Pugh]

Sure, some skiers want the "wrong" ski for some particular reason, making it the "right" ski, be it challenge, skill improvement, a change of pace, a desire to test drive a new purchase and don't want to wait for ever for the next storm or whatever, but most skiers are not them. Most skiers on the wrong skis are on the wrong skis because they don't know any better.

 

[ScottB]

This one I mostly agree with for what it’s worth. I care more about this site’s view of carvers than Blister’s at the relevant margin (if for no other reason than this site covers the premium segment stuff like Stöckli and Augment). I also care about TGR’s view of pow and touring skis about as much as Blister’s in general.

That said, I really enjoy Blister’s content and it’s one of the only “published” review sources I think is worth the time to look at. Even if I don’t always agree with their reviewers about how a ski feels if I try it, I have rarely felt they were way off base. On balance it’s as useful (to me) as any other way of finding interesting new skis, perhaps especially because I’m exclusively on the longest skis in a size run these days.

I must be a Blister Fan Boy, because I have found most of their reviews of any category of skis spot on. I have skied a lot of the carvers they review (agreed that is fairly low volume for them) and feel they hit the nail on the head. They know how to ski different styles, which is key in my opinion, to evaluating skis. If I try to force a ski to do what I like to do, it may not work well. If I figure out what a given ski likes to do, I get its true flavor. It may not be what I want, but I see it for what it is. I also apply my own filter to their reviews, I discount what their lightweight freeride testers say and give more weight to their heavier reviewers who most closely matches my parameters. If you don't match any of their testers very well, then I can see where their reviews aren't that relevant for you.

 

[ScottB]

Nevertheless, when it comes to skiing on hard snow (which is what everyone will be skiing at some places 99 ski days out of 100), a 95+ mm, rockered ski is the wrong ski for everyone. Neither is a 13 m SL ski for bottomless glades, but you don't see that many people skiing those there (not none, but not the majority either).

I get what you are saying, but wrong ski for everyone is too all encompassing. Never say never. My son skis a 118mm Bibby Pro in New England 100% of the time. Its one wide, rockered ski that can handle hard snow. It is exceptional in how it isolates you from crap snow. It doesn't carve like a race ski, but it sure isolated you better than a race ski. I personally would not choose it for hard snow, but he does, and he has many other options. The other factor is that on hard snow days, he goes in the woods and quite often finds soft snow. In the NE, at least, most ski days are a mix of conditions.

If your day will be 100% boilerplate, the vast majority of 95+ mm, rockered skis will be the wrong ski for most everyone, there still maybe exceptions. I guess my point is always allow for the exceptions.

 

[François Pugh]

Agreed, if your ski day consists of skiing soft snow in the trees, and skiing hard groomers, but your passion is for the soft snow in the trees, the fat rockered ski is the right ski.

There are many people skiing hard groomers, and hard groomers only, on 95+ rockered skis. Those people are on the wrong skis.

 

[HardDaysNight]

But I have a very narrow one-dimensional approach to skiing, so that eliminates a lot of variables for me...

I like you a lot!

For the large majority of casual skiers it makes pretty much no difference what ski they’re on, provided the ski is wide enough to facilitate the heel pushing skid that is the core of their technique. It’s easier to slither around on fatter skis rather than narrow FIS style skis even on firm groomers. The manufacturers know this well which is why they make and promote them.

 

[GregK]

For the large majority of casual skiers it makes pretty much no difference what ski they’re on, provided the ski is wide enough to facilitate the heel pushing skid that is the core of their technique. It’s easier to slither around on fatter skis rather than narrow FIS style skis even on firm groomers. The manufacturers know this well which is why they make and promote them.

This times 1000! The amount of threads on this site about how no one carves and the fact that very few skiers on the slopes have the ability to extract the higher performance envelope from narrow race skis on groomers.

The ability to easily skid turns on all types of conditions including variable afternoon snow and being forgiving of mistakes is far more important for a beginner/intermediate. It gives the terminal intermediate skier more confidence to ski longer through the day so it’s actually the “right ski” for them at that time. There is a reason Enforcers/Santa Ana, Rip Sticks, Kores etc are such a hit. They make skiing all day in all conditions easy!

When they improve and start carving, then they can move to a narrower ski when conditions allow and keep the wider ski for variable conditions.

 

[Quandary]

There are many people skiing hard groomers, and hard groomers only, on 95+ rockered skis. Those people are on the wrong skis.

In your opinion, which is quite frankly meaningless to said skier. Who knows the reason said person is on that ski, maybe they find it easier to ski, maybe they like the graphics, maybe they ski a variety of terrain but can only afford one pair of skis. Who knows. This is skiing, it isn't high level mathematics, there is no universal wrong or right. When it comes to trivial matters, like what ski to buy or rent, an individual can make their own judgement as to what is "right". What you or I think is the right ski for a specific location and condition is likely quite similar, however what you or I think is right or wrong for another skier is completely irrelevant.

I'll finish with this thought. What does it really matter. "Most" skiers on the wrong ski. The reality is the "most" skiers aren't good at skiing. Consequently whether they are on a K2 Wayback 80 or a K2 Press or a K2 Mindbender 116 probably makes no difference and likely never will for that skier. They are still going to have fun, at the end of the day that's what really matters.

 

[slowrider]

In your opinion, which is quite frankly meaningless to said skier. Who knows the reason said person is on that ski, maybe they find it easier to ski, maybe they like the graphics, maybe they ski a variety of terrain but can only afford one pair of skis. Who knows. This is skiing, it isn't high level mathematics, there is no universal wrong or right. When it comes to trivial matters, like what ski to buy or rent, an individual can make their own judgement as to what is "right". What you or I think is the right ski for a specific location and condition is likely quite similar, however what you or I think is right or wrong for another skier is completely irrelevant.

I'll finish with this thought. What does it really matter. "Most" skiers on the wrong ski. The reality is the "most" skiers aren't good at skiing. Consequently whether they are on a K2 Wayback 80 or a K2 Press or a K2 Mindbender 116 probably makes no difference and likely never will for that skier. They are still going to have fun, at the end of the day that's what really matters.

Just as there is no wrong ski for an expert. He just makes them work in whatever conditions exist.

 

[mdf]

Just as there is no wrong ski for an expert. He just makes them work in whatever conditions exist.

Even if you can make it work, it can still be wrong.

 

[KingGrump]

Even if you can make it work, it can still be wrong.

Sure one can make most work. But does it still sucks. If it does then it is wrong.
Check the smile gauge. That is usually a good indictor.