Last year for a three week trip that included Park City, Snowbird and Winter Park, I took a two ski quiver of Blizzard Supersonics (72 underfoot) and '11-'12 Gotamas (107 underfoot) trying to cover all possible conditions I might encounter. Conventional wisdom, if I remember correctly, has it that a stiff slalom-type ski is the best for bumps. However, is that for 20-somethings who ski the zipper line rather than a 62 y/o who skis pretty close to the fall line and in a corridor about 3-4 bumps wide on, for example, Winter Park's Outhouse/Drunken Frenchman or Telluride's Mammoth/Joint Point? The reason I ask is that I took a bump clinic at Mary Jane on the Supersonics last March and the instructor commented that the Supersonic's stiff tail was unduly punishing of less-than-perfect turn completions in fairly big bumps. Last week I was in Telluride with Volkl All (or 6) Stars (72 underfoot) and Blizzard Bonafides, both of which are a little closer to rock status than the first pairing mentioned above (bought the Bones' as end of season demos). Either the bump clinic last year helped a whole lot, or the All Stars have a softer tail than the Supersonics, because I didn't find myself rocketed out of a turn quite as badly when I found myself in the back seat. I also took the Bones' into the bumps in 2-4" of fresh snow, and had a blast: due, I suspect, to the relatively soft tail and tail rocker.
So, my question is this: when I repeat my three week Utah/Colorado trip this year, should I sacrifice hard snow performance in favor of my ever growing fondness for the bumps and take a Blizzard Bushwacker (88 underfoot) and Gotama quiver? Is a greying bump lover better served by a soft-tailed ski than a carver? I know that I have probably answered my own question, but I would like to get some feedback.