Gear Guides: All Thriller No Filler
The weathers changing, leaves are falling off the trees, and it’s become movie premier season. Yep that means shred season is right around the corner, what that also means is that the buyers/gear guides have hit the news stands and probably your mail box as well. In years past these might have had some relevance in snowboarding but after the crap that landed in front of myself this past week I can’t help but believe that they don’t understand what a gear guide should do.
I fully understand snowboarding participation has declined in the last decade and all, but that doesn’t mean dumbing down what should be enthusiasts number one source for gear reviews, previews, and descriptions. Sure websites like this one and countless others have stepped up and provided product reviews, tech break downs, and countless answered many peoples questions. But when we’re still the minority in the snowboard media why should we be picking up your slack for your inability to give people proper knowledge?
Case in point alternative camber isn’t going anywhere and more people are buying gear because of it. According to Transworld there’s actually only three options flat, center reverse which includes rocker (according to them), and camber hybrid. They even break down the pros and cons of it and judging by how it’s described they just winged that out of their ass. On a plus note they did give an ever so slight mention to different base technologies like TBT and B.S. Technology. But all in all you can find better info on alternate camber explained, how it works, and the various different base technologies. What’s even funnier is they didn’t even bother to mention what’s going on with sidecuts. Once again you can find a break down of that here on the site. Seriously how can you just skim this technology or ignore it in general? People want to know and be informed!
The cool thing about both Transworld and Snowboard Mag is that they did include write ups on a lot of brands, oh but wait those were only brands that advertised with them. Shit guess you only get a mention if you shell out the almighty dollar. That’s the one thing that’s bullshit they could mention a ton of these great up and coming brands, but nope it’s only the ones that are their advertisers. Way to be a slave to them guys. At least in the microcosm that is independent online blogs/sites we’re far more open to talk to brands that wouldn’t get recognition in the big three mags of Transworld, Snowboarder, and Snowboard or even be recognized in the U.S.
Now if you’ve followed Transworlds Good Wood test you probably noticed something missing this year. Yep they killed off the pipe and freeride categories. Evidently everyone only rides at rails and spins around or hits jumps. Yep guess Olympic half pipe didn’t happen and no one is down with pow slashes. But at least Snowboard Mag stepped up and included a few decks in their Platinum Picks, oh but wait most of those are from their advertisers albeit the Jones and Yes boards didn’t seem to have any ads in this issue as did Smokin. Doesn’t mean that next months issue won’t have some form of advertising from them. But lets give them the benefit of the doubt this time around for that. Seriously though how do you just ditch the all mountain category? That’s the direction almost every rider is going these days albeit with a freestyle focus on it.
Another thing that is bullshit about the Good Wood is that they take guys that are riding at a level you and I will never be at and having them launching off 50 plus foot jumps riding park all day. Some are ex-pros while others are up and comers, these are people that in most instances don’t know the difference between any of the tech. Wouldn’t it be far more beneficial to pull shop kids from coast to coast and have them ride the products for a week? Oh but wait shop kids don’t have a coolness factor of 10 for the magazines and what hype is there to put behind someone that’s not going pro any time soon? The best riders don’t always make the best reviewers and that’s a brutally honest fact. As for the Platinum Picks it’s whatever the editors/writers seemed to get a hard on for(i.e. were given for free).
Lets face the fact here a gear guide should guide you towards something and help inform you. These do nothing but show a bunch of gear, don’t break down the tech, and generally leave your questions unanswered. Then again what can you expect from two magazines that collectively have 166 pages of advertising in them. But hey for those of you that want to be informed you know where to hunt around on the Internet and that’s all that matters. So I leave you with this did any of the gear guides you’ve encountered whether it’s the two I mentioned or others actually guide you? And what would you like to see from a gear guide if you could?
For those that want reviews and tech break downs check out these links.
Popularity: 5% [?]
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by angrysnowboard, shredunion.com. shredunion.com said: angry's POV – Gear Guides: All Thriller No Filler http://bit.ly/bmOALO [...]
I love your site and most of your posts on SBForum so I have seen a lot of what you have written. I am often amused by your pervasive use of the word “myself” but I keep it to myself and also hate grammar nazis on the web. BUT… this is just awesomely awkward.
“but after the crap that landed in front of myself this past week I can’t help but believe that they don’t understand what a gear guide should do.”
Are you familiar with the word “ME”?
I’m done, proceed to get angry.
I hate the word me.
haha what a waste of paper both those gear guides were. and the fools that write them want snowboarding to continue for generations to come? im just glad both the scripts i got were free. i didnt get any guidance from either mag on why i should go with regular or reverse camber. all i got was a bunch of flashy pictures and prices. i thought it was funny how many times snowboardmag used the words “core” and “green” to describe the companies. the one brand i was looking forward to reading about wasn’t in that section. and then the sick wallpaper shots were ruined buy the gear and prices. who cares what the setup is and how much it costs head to toe if you shred you shred.
Just even having a cursory look at the first link you posted my eyes rolled in the back of my head. Its just a stack of info. As i said elsewhere, great if you know what youre looking for, but if you dont its just a wall of sound. I mean maybe im being over protective of the new guy, and maybe the new guy/girl has some responsibility to find out this stuff for themselves. Still, its vast, bewildering and a pain in the ass to struggle through it all.
And yes, its all new guy focussed because the truth is, if youve been through this misery already you have a fairly good idea of what youre after the second time around. You know what you liked about your last deck and what you didnt like, so you come at it with a much clearer idea. Really, there are decks out there that are great springboards for people making their first serious purchase, but its drowned out by so much noise.
Heres the thing, its not the stuff of mad science. People on the whole buying their first genuine deck are often looking for a deck that lets them progress in all directions. They aren’t really after a board that locks them into a style of riding, and when we try and help them by asking them what style they like, we often beg the question and force them to give an answer that truth be told theyre more often than not in a position to genuinely make. I know at the end of my first season i HATED park, so on recommendation i bought a freeride stick, and well, the pain of sliding out and being dumped on my ass naturally reinforced my distrust of boxes and park… but it was an aversion i quickly got over when i found myself riding a much more forgiving and appropriate deck for park in the next year.
I think though companies abuse the whole beginner/internediate/advanced thing too. Or rather they fail to see that people are buying boards aspirationaly and expecting them to grow into them. The info in this regard is completely useless and often counterproductive. People will see something like teh carbon credit and its ‘intermediate’ rating and think ‘guess i should buy the pickle then since its obviously “better”‘. A lot of this also has to do with cross purposes in definitions of rider abilities. A person who can link a turn is often declared intermediate by people offering lessons. they then in turn use that description when considering their board purchases and think ‘intermediate is pretty much someone in their first season… this board will be useless next year and i want value from it’.
Then theres the all mountain/park misnomer. Most of the boards you want to stick a new person on are advertised as freestyle or park boards. Decks advertised as all mountain tend to mean it literally. That is; the whole mountain, inbounds and out of bounds – freeride.
Its a mess. Freestyle as well causes so much confusion for people who maybe dont feel comfortable with park riding. Freestyle encompasses a massive array of decks, but in the head of a new person it means one thing: park/tricks.
Theres then a bit of a disconnect between a person thinking all mountain applies to the resort bounds and the company using a definition thats far wider and much more likely to de-emphasize certain parts of the resort (park and most groomers). But this is precisely what your new person is after
It’s genuinely amazing that the industry as a whole have not seen the crap that comes from this and self regulated with very clear terminology. I often wonder if steeze is really at the heart of all this – that certain ineffable nothing that people attach to a brand because youre in on the code of all this cross purpose jargon, whilst the new guy isnt. You cracked the code! youre just the type of person we want riding our decks! welcome to the super secret!
It seems like snowboarding as an industry actually thrives on keeping people in the dark. Its a model thats done very well i guess in making the sport a lifestyle, but its one thats certainly due a change.
So yeah, long post to say this: what id like to see is consistency in the language of snowboarding tech and definitions. Id like things to be much more transparent than they are so that someone with a bit of intelligence thats new to the sport can take away some kind of idea of what the boards purpose is and who its aimed at.
Id also like to see a recognition that boards overlap. Sometimes within the same company in fact. I;d like the language to explicate this much more clearly. I appreciate every company’s mid range jib/street deck is a special unique snowflake, but there is scope for generalising a bit for the sake of clarity.
As it stands its a mess, and i cant help but feel its deliberate to keep it all a bit mysterious and interesting, and that kinda blows for an industry that is maybe going into decline.
[...] awesome sleeping bag. Yobeat shows us how to shred without snow. The Angry Snowboarder gives us the straight dope on product guides. Endeavor go artsy-fartsy. The Afterbang blog finally tells you how to ride switch. The Injured [...]
Peep how methodmag.com does product. http://www.methodmag.com/product_list
As for the testers, Why don’t they have AASI Instructors do the testing. Were the ones who need to know how the boards feel, react, and perform in different situations. And any level 2+ AASI instructor would be able to share all the details of the riding differences, along with more detailed explanations on how the board initiated, and exited turns, Ect.
On a side note, Im glad to see that Transworlds Trick Tips now use AASI’s ATML model.
Instructors don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground.
[...] recently had their mini blurb about companies in the U.S.A featured in this years buyers guide. According to them there’s really only manufacturers and 9 brands produced here. Now as a [...]