What if Pugski ranked resorts?

[markojp]

To that I'd say sure, but so are ski and gear reviews. Resort rankings as well. Who does the writing, the format and editorial content and follow up thread discussions are what makes the difference.

 

[dlague]

It would also be interesting to have a sub poll under each resort to see what the primary reasons are for ranking a resort high. The reason I mention this is based on some bias that one might have like the desire to tree ski all the time. In another forum, there was a member that skied out west who thought it was ok but likes eastern skiing better because it is all below tree line and the woods are tighter. Well IMO, tight trees are not my deal, love skiing woods but do not like fighting branches.

In another pole (USA Today) http://unofficialnetworks.com/2017/08/08/the-10-most-challenging-ski-resorts-according-to-usatoday/ Smugglers Notch was in the top ten and ranked at #6. I used to ski Smuggs and there certainly other places that have more challenging terrain. The Black Hole is a crawl along tree run linking turns is tough but is that really skiing? What is the word "Challenging" really mean? I know of bowls and chutes off Peak 8 and 7 at Breck that are more threatening than anything at Smuggs and Breck is not even on that list (not that i think it should be).

 

[Jim McDonald]

Well, that looks like loads of fun...

 

[Jim McDonald]

Perhaps a Wikipedia-like format would work? Just a thought.

 

[fatbob]

More than a ranking system, it'd be just nice to have an 'in a nutshell' format, a 'who is this area for?', a 'where to' find a few trademark runs, and a 'how' to get there, and maybe a brief mention of 'dirtbag/medium/off the hook' lodging suggestions for each along with the very basic info (vertical, acreage, %groomed vs ungroomed, uphill lift capacity, open and close dates, etc...) A primer resource if you will.

I like the "nutshell" concept for quick and easy comparison. We all know a good skier can find fun on any mountain provided good enough snow, but the who is it for and who is it not for are pretty important judgements.

E.g. I'm fairly eclectic in my tastes - I love Kirkwood but think Flatstar sometimes gets an unjustified rap given that it has great constant pitch tree skiing and is a go-to bet when a storm is closing out the crest. But if someone sold me on Nstar as great for all grades of skier without telling me that meant "no steeps" then I might be dischuffed. Equally I might find my idea of steeps reality checked by some of the lines at Squaw so a "no we really mean it some of this stuff is pro level steep might be appropriate..

The accomodation options is also important and should take into account nearby towns e.g. you need a healthy wallet to stay almost anywhere in Aspen but there is good public transport from Carbondale and even Glenwood if you are on a tighter budget. On the other hand I would think staying in Squamish to ski Whistler would be just too much of a ballache.

I don't think you can capture that richness in a ranking. Does Baker suck because the nearest accomodation is a few limited options in Glacier and you're probably back in Bellingham before you can cash points?

 

[David Chaus]

On the other hand I would think staying in Squamish to ski Whistler would be just too much of a ballache.

Interestingly enough, I have done just that. As it turns out my balls didn't ache.

It was about 45 minutes to an hour to drive to Whistler, and the free parkade (that's "parking garage" for 'Muricans) was more convenient to boot up and walk to the Creekside gondola than most of the accommodations in the village.

Frankly, Squamish has a really nice, non-glitzy locals vibe, the type of place many on here say they prefer as an antidote to mega-resorts.

And again, for us PNW-types, Whistler is the closest and easiest major resort to get to. So rankings on accessibility are don't mean the same thing, depending on where you are starting your journey.

My point is not to be argumentative, but rather illustrate the challenges in making rankings.

 

[TonyC]

Isn't most of the above already available at ski resort websites (for factual statistical stuff) or unofficial resort guides (opinions from locals)?

Yes, and those are probably formats PugSki should not follow if it wants "Resort Guides at a Higher Level."

Some of the "factual statistical stuff" on ski area websites (mindlessly copied by nearly all media sources) is not very factual. "Brochure quote" snowfall claims and marketing director terrain divisions by ability level come to mind.

The unofficial guides are a better concept, but there should be a comprehensive structure to cover as many points as we think might interest prospective visitors. That will also make for easier comparisons and "cage matches." And if the local primary author can't cover all these points, there probably other people on this forum who can fill in the gaps.

 

[fatbob]

Interestingly enough, I have done just that. As it turns out my balls didn't ache.

It was about 45 minutes to an hour to drive to Whistler, and the free parkade (that's "parking garage" for 'Muricans) was more convenient to boot up and walk to the Creekside gondola than most of the accommodations in the village.

Frankly, Squamish has a really nice, non-glitzy locals vibe, the type of place many on here say they prefer as an antidote to mega-resorts.

Fair enough - I haven't been since they upgraded the Sea to Sky for 2010 I think so I stand corrected. Creekside parking definitely beats the village zoo. I guess it makes my point someone here has done it and rates it manageable.

 

[wyowindrunner]

really don't see why we care if it's a resort or not. We're skiers. This effort is supposed to be our take on which areas/resorts are best. Or, more accurately, our FAVORITE. I'm sure if we talked which attributes are most important in determining our favorite places to ski, the WiFi signal and wine list are pretty far down in importance. Those items might be important for the casual, once a year, skier, so they can be commented upon, but is anyone here going to make a decision based on that stuff? No. If our favorite ski AREA is Turner, then so be it. It's not a resort and oh, well, wouldn't win in such a competition. Now granted, I'm sure that Jackson would beat out Turner, but the fact that there's a great town there is not going to be the reason.[/QUOTE.
I think you have come very close to the dividing line of this discussion. Is this potential ranking / rating system for "Vacationers Who Ski" or a ranking for "Skiers Who Are Willing to Travel For (Best Powder, Bumps, Rock Drops, Trees, Glades)" or whatever you are questing for. To some or maybe many skiers that visit this site, an eight hour or more drive in anticipation of an upcoming snow event of significance is not uncommon. Granted, many times we are aware of the area and what they do/do not offer, but adjacent areas we may not be aware of and it would be welcome info. The resort/area distinction may be of consequence to the former group, don't think the latter would give a rip. QUOTE="DanoT, post: 146092, member: 76"]For me, Castle is the "exception that proves the rule" and we are talking about sparsely populated Canada so lift capacity and skier visits don't count for me, just the size of the mountain.

In reference to the resort/ area distinction, Sundance is surely a "resort", but is dwarfed by ski "areas" like Discovery, Lost Trial/Powder Mt.,or Red Lodge, all having some butt kicking terrain if you know where to look, but no on mountain accommodations. Vert ranges from 1800 to 2400 and size from1500 to 2200 acres. (There aren't a lotta folks in Montana either, and these are all kinda off the beaten path. Red Lodge is probably the most accessible about an hour or so from Billings when the roads are good. A lot of upper midwest visitors on holiday weekends, hardy types who think Montana cold is just another day.)

 

[wyowindrunner]

Sibhusky said: ↑

really don't see why we care if it's a resort or not. We're skiers. This effort is supposed to be our take on which areas/resorts are best. Or, more accurately, our FAVORITE. I'm sure if we talked which attributes are most important in determining our favorite places to ski, the WiFi signal and wine list are pretty far down in importance. Those items might be important for the casual, once a year, skier, so they can be commented upon, but is anyone here going to make a decision based on that stuff? No. If our favorite ski AREA is Turner, then so be it. It's not a resort and oh, well, wouldn't win in such a competition. Now granted, I'm sure that Jackson would beat out Turner, but the fact that there's a great town there is not going to be the reason.

I think you have come very close to the dividing line of this discussion. Is this potential ranking / rating system for "Vacationers Who Ski" or a ranking for "Skiers Who Are Willing to Travel For (Best Powder, Bumps, Rock Drops, Trees, Glades)" or whatever you are questing for. To some or maybe many skiers that visit this site, an eight hour or more drive in anticipation of an upcoming snow event of significance is not uncommon. Granted, many times we are aware of the area and what they do/do not offer, but adjacent areas we may not be aware of and it would be welcome info. The resort/area distinction may be of consequence to the former group, don't think the latter would give a rip.

For me, Castle is the "exception that proves the rule" and we are talking about sparsely populated Canada so lift capacity and skier visits don't count for me, just the size of the mountain

In reference to the resort/ area distinction, Sundance is surely a "resort", but is dwarfed by ski "areas" like Discovery, Lost Trial/Powder Mt.,or Red Lodge, all having some butt kicking terrain if you know where to look, but no on mountain accommodations. Vert ranges from 1800 to 2400 and size from1500 to 2200 acres. (There aren't a lotta folks in Montana either, and these are all kinda off the beaten path. Red Lodge is probably the most accessible about an hour or so from Billings when the roads are good. A lot of upper midwest visitors on holiday weekends, hardy types who think Montana cold is just another day.)

 

[fatbob]

I think sample bias will have a lot to do with it. Somewhere like Red Lodge or 49 Nth could have the greatest skiing in the world on certain criteria but how many Pugskiers have sampled them. Folks like TonyC sure but the average even very keen skier who flies west for skiing I suspect hits the more traditional honeypots of Colorado, Utah and maybe Tahoe along with Whistler and Banff. Same in Canada, you need a 2 week road trip minimum to really get to know the BC interior ski areas.

Same with Europe. People tend to go for week long trips and will stay in one place. I've skied extensively in Europe but have never skied the Sella Ronda or Kitzbuhel or Ski Amade or Ischgl or Crans Montana or dozens of great ski areas.

Maybe it doesn't matter but "popularity =/= quality". Personally I'm just as interested in a little drive up place that maybe only a couple of visitors plus one local say is phenomenal ( I'm sceptical of local only opinion due to loyalty and bias though I fully appreciate that only locals can really lift the lid on the full delights).

 

[TonyC]

Somewhere like Red Lodge or 49 North could have the greatest skiing in the world on certain criteria but how many Pugskiers have sampled them. Folks like TonyC...

Sorry I haven't skied those two. I drove by 49 North on the way to Spokane airport in 2005, but that was a miserable snow year. Half the trails were bare so I wasn't tempted. I've been in the town of Red Lodge to ski Beartooth Basin on the way to Yellowstone in June 2013, but I've never seen the winter ski area at Red Lodge.

I'm fairly confident that Pugskiers collectively have skied North American resorts down to a quite obscure level. In fact I would be surprised if there is an area with even moderate reader interest here where I'm the only one who has skied there. I think it's quite possible to create as an informative resort guide for an area only a few of us have skied as for the big places most of us have skied.

OTOH I don't think there's enough collective experience here to produce a high level guide to resorts in the Alps. Maybe a few of them, but not the comprehensive scope we could do in North America.

 

[David Chaus]

I think you have come very close to the dividing line of this discussion. Is this potential ranking / rating system for "Vacationers Who Ski" or a ranking for "Skiers Who Are Willing to Travel For (Best Powder, Bumps, Rock Drops, Trees, Glades)" or whatever you are questing for. To some or maybe many skiers that visit this site, an eight hour or more drive in anticipation of an upcoming snow event of significance is not uncommon. Granted, many times we are aware of the area and what they do/do not offer, but adjacent areas we may not be aware of and it would be welcome info. The resort/area distinction may be of consequence to the former group, don't think the latter would give a rip.

Two thoughts: 1)we could have a set of rankings for each of these two groups, and 2) the “who is this area for” and “who is it not for” as we typically do with ski reviews, addresses this distinction nicely.

 

[marjoram_sage]

I'm curious if anything came of this thread. It would be great to have a thread plus wiki for each ski area/resort. I love zrankings but it doesn't have all the info one needs to plan a trip effectively. I'm always looking for more opinionated subjective information that will not be available on resort websites or professional publications. Sterile & politically correct information is rarely useful to me when planning trips. Perhaps I will start by creating a thread based on my 5 day trip to Keystone over Thanksgiving.

 

[Sibhusky]

There's the Unofficial Guides. Feel free to volunteer for your resort.

 

[Mike Rogers]

Interestingly enough, I have done just that. As it turns out my balls didn't ache.

It was about 45 minutes to an hour to drive to Whistler, and the free parkade (that's "parking garage" for 'Muricans) was more convenient to boot up and walk to the Creekside gondola than most of the accommodations in the village.

Frankly, Squamish has a really nice, non-glitzy locals vibe, the type of place many on here say they prefer as an antidote to mega-resorts.
.

I've done the squamish commute too.

We went to Whistler as a last minute-get out of town thing. Our very modest room in squamish was 10% of the price of the average available Whistler room...and 20% of the cheapest.

20% of, not off.

The drive was worth it!

 

[Wasatchman]

I'd sure hate for Phil and Tricia to spend a lot of time and resources on a ranking system just to find out that the answer for top ski resort in the world keeps coming up as 42

 

[Scruffy]

I'd sure hate for Phil and Tricia to spend a lot of time and resources on a ranking system just to find out that the answer for top ski resort in the world keeps coming up as 42

But, can you hitchhike to it?

 

[Philpug]

I'd sure hate for Phil and Tricia to spend a lot of time and resources on a ranking system just to find out that the answer for top ski resort in the world keeps coming up as 42

But, can you hitchhike to it?