SKIING MAGAZINE: Canadian skiing vs. American skiing ?!?!?!
I just read the Novermber issue of Skiing magazine and while it has its flaws (some mentioned in threads over the past few days) I found their "resolution" of the Canadian skiing vs. American skiing debate to be completely ridiculous. They send several skiers from America, who have never skied in Canada, to test out the goods up North. They do the same with Canadian Skiers who have never skied in America. They call this the "Final Conflict" which is completely ridiculous because no matter how many skiers they send this argument will still be going on. They are trying to put an end to an endless argument and are obviously trying to sway the unknowing skier in attempting to do so. One example of the narrowness of this "study" is the conclusion that one Canadian tester makes at the end of their time in America: "backcountry in Canada is far better. Huge, boundless, snowier, steeper-no comparison." Considering that the Canadians' trip was limited to New Mexico and Southwestern Colorado, this is a fairly ludricous assessment. It seems as if they are playing into the way Skiing wants to shape the reader's views because they do acknowledge Utah, California, and Jackson but only in terms of lift served terrain. How could any respectable skier who knows anything about the sport make that kind of assessment without taking into account the above mentioned territories' backcountry as well as the Pacific Northwest and ALASKA!?!? Skiing is clearly shaping the viewers mind since they barely focus on the Americans' time on lift served terrain and the showcase their time in helicopter accessed terrain. Never once in the article did it mention the Canadians going on a helicopter or going farther then a bootpack to hike-to terrain right next to a resort, at least from what I remember. Did anyone else hear read this article? Are you also scratching your head in amazement/astonishment? I think this argument can be settled if certain mountains are compared individually or if the testers accessed a much larger area of both territories. However it is impossible to be settled when the two areas are generalized to the extent that they were in this article and when one of the testing parties had access to such a small area. just my opinion not sure what any your takes will be on this. (skiing magazine, november 2007, pg 103-118).
