CARV data is very one dimensional. The algorithms that interpret the data are biased toward groomed slopes of a typical “blue square” pitch. If you ski terrain or snow conditions, i.e. powder, chowder, trees, bumps, above tree line chutes, bowls with variable snow conditions your IQ will indicate that you are more likely to be less capable than your true ability. I have also been told that world cup racers probably don’t have the highest ski IQs. I have skied with PSIA level 3 instructors at Breckenridge, who whether it is stroking my ego or who I think are being honest say that I am a true level 9 (but of course, according to CARV, let’s just say that I am not that smart - I spend very little time on groomed terrain except to warm up in the morning). I have two other data points that come from a group setting of level 8-9 skiers at Breckenridge on E-chair terrain, the instructor turns to me when we about to enter a “tight” part of the trail that is bumped up, she says to me - “Mark, what is your strategy for skiing this section of the trail”. Her point to the rest of the class is that there is more to skiing than body movement down a slope as there is also intentionality. Second data point, on the lift ride up from that run, the youngest participant in the class (college age) turns to me (the oldest participant) and says - “You are really good, I want to be able to ski just like you”. So, I don’t know if that makes me an expert - but I can ski more than competently on all terrain in all snow conditions (although I am better in trees and bumps than wide open bowls). I have always liked the Breckenridge rating system which defines 9 as uses poles, balance, technique in all snow conditions in all terrain - to me that is an expert skier.
