Somewhere on the ski spectrum

[Horton]

This is an unfinished idea…

 

There are skis* that are amazing or perhaps feel amazing right up until the skier makes their first real mistake and then they suck. These skis teach ( force ) skies to refine skills.

 

There are skis* that never feel really good but are so forgiving that they might yield great scores. These skis reward strength and tenacity over technique. These skis perhaps impede technical skill advancement.

 

Most skis* fall somewhere in between.

 

I imagine there should be a graph…

 

What is the point? IDK. Thinking out loud. Thinking there is more to the idea.

 

*(or setups )

 

 

 

[Jody_Seal]

Your talking about trick skis??

[6balls]

Historically...though not as sure about recently...KD allowed me to be all over that thing and get away with it. Maybe wasn't fastest, but was smooth/forgiving. This was back in the 7000, CR7, Nomad days which is an eternity ago in technology...I'm getting old.

 

Seems to me the newer high end skis, to get the best and avoid getting dumped unexpectedly here and there, like to have a less mobile rider on them who stays in the sweet spot. Not that all skis wouldn't be better with said rider, and some of this is set-up dependent.

 

So @horton probably valid concept...you would probably know best really being someone who tries a mighty lot of skis and seem to get same deep scores on all of 'em...question is how much work they took or how "out of the box" or close to it you were ready to rip.

[ski6jones]

There needs to be a component that relates to skier style or preference I think. I've ridden some admittedly great skis that just don't work for me the way I ski. I know they're good skis because others do well on them. I suppose I could work on my technique to improve my scores on a ski that doesn't suit me but why not play to my strengths?

[ForrestGump]

Play to your strengths...... this is why Horton continues to be an asshat!

 

Actually, I think @horton has a valid thought on this. The problem is that everyone is so wacked out different. Especially down in the lower 80%. The top 20% could ski on a 2x6. Oh man, that brings back memories of @The_Krista !!!

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@horton, here is that graph you are looking for. The date on the file I found is 2005, but I maintain it still applies. The theory is that any given skier can hit, or get close to their PB on basically any ski or setup, but the optimum ski will allow the skier to get close to the PB nearly every set.

 

Like many things in the world, it follows gaussian theory where the skiers buoy count will have an average (actually a mean for the geeks) and a spread above and below the average. The "better" the ski setup, the closer that average will be to the PB and the more consistent the skier will be.

 

I'll pick on @adamhcaldwell as an example. I don't know for sure, but I bet he has run 41 on many of his prototype skis, but few and far between. Now on his "ideal" ski, he's crushing it nearly every time, but still hits a wall at 43. Now that he gets more shots at 43, he will gradually learn the technique to get that extra 1/4, 1/2 or full next buoy.

 

This theory applies to all skiers at all levels and helps explain my opinion that no new ski, fin, binding, or magic widget will increase any given skier's PB. What the "best" ski or setup does is allow the skier to get closer to his PB every time out. This is what we all should be trying to achieve in a new ski or setup vs thinking our PB will automatically go up. Yes, I'm guilty of hoping for that magic unicorn too, even though I know better.

 

 

If this makes your head hurt, my mission is accomplished for the day