or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Skiing Mag Top Resorts

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
Since the thread on Ski Magazine's top resorts inspired so much comment, I thought its sister mag's ratings might be an interesting topic. Pretty different, anyway.

1. Whistler/Blackcomb, BC
2. Snowbird, UT
3. Vail, CO
4. Squaw Valley USA, CA
5. Jackson Hole, WY
6. Mammoth, CA
7. Crystal Mountain, WA
8. Big Sky, MT
9. Aspen Highlands, CO
10. Fernie Alpine, BC
11. Crested Butte, CO
12. Kirkwood, CA
13. Red Mountain, BC
14. Steamboat, CO
15. Alpine Meadows, CA
16. Heavenly, CA
17. Mt Baker, WA
18. Lake Louise, AB
19. Arapahoe Basin, CO
20. Sunshine Village, AB
21. Sun Valley, ID
22. Kicking Horse, BC
23. Alyeska Resort, AK
24. Breckenridge, CO
25. Telluride, CO
post #2 of 27
This list is biased against the core skiers who spend alot of money to keep the industry rolling along. Deer Valley, Tremblant, and Beaver Creek didn't even make the list. Unbelieveable.
post #3 of 27
I don't believe any opinions they print anyway. For example, if you have ever been to A-Basin, you would know it is not a "resort". So why would I believe their opinion of other "resorts" that I haven't rode. It's a marketing ploy to draw developement and the less informed skier or rider that have thousands of dollars to spend. It really has nothing to do with the quality of the resort. I personally look for areas that will challenge my skiing abilities and make me feel welcome. Not just my money. I realize that that might sound a little hipocritical since I live in Jackson but, I moved here for the snow. Not to be pampered.

Peace
post #4 of 27
Hey MilesB:

Did you ever think that maybe the list is for people who actually ski; not sit around in the lodge or bar trying to look like skiers. No self respecting real skier would even consider putting the places you mentioned anywhere near the top 25. I've heard posers really like those places though.
post #5 of 27
The core skier or the mediocre skier?
It's just glossy rag crap. Does it really matter?
Hell yeah! it matters..It matters to the administration operating a resort...It matters to the hords of sheep that have to read the gloss to find the best ski area.
DV, BeavCreek, Tremblant...they're the boring 5 star clubs that no skiier enjoys.
We want Snowbird's and Squaw's..We want Highland's and Big Sky's
post #6 of 27
I can speak for Mt. Baker, #17. It's definitely not a resort. Two day lodges is all there is. No overnight accomodations. They even have to generate their own power. The closest town is 30 minutes away and it's SMALL.

Baker can challenge any ability level even though it only has 1500 ft. of vertical. It gets more new snow than any other ski area in the world so even if some of it is Cascade Concrete, a great deal of it is very nice to ski (though I'm a local, so light powder to me is anything lighter than mashed potatoes). The back country is it's biggest claim to fame, and there is a lot of it.

I was surprised to see Baker on the list because it is not a destination area and doesn't try to be.
post #7 of 27
I don't know what the results are based on, but I have to agree with it more than I agree with Ski Mag's list. Well, for me anyway. I think this is much more of a skier's list. Just look at the top 5. I'm not a huge fan of Vail, but the rest are great skier's mountains, as are places like A-Basin, Crystal and Red.

This doesn't seem to be a reader's pole of places with best access, best food, most lux lodging, best grooming, fanciest bars, etc.
post #8 of 27
I find this list impressive and far more on the mark than Ski's list. This list has Red and Fernie, I doubt ski has ever heard of those two mountains. All of those mountains in the top 10 are the real deal. Can you honestly tell me you would not want to ski any one of them in good snow

Alfonse
post #9 of 27

Take your clue from the title

I've noticed over the last few years that I, (like some of you), am much more in agreement with the Skiing resort ratings than the Ski resort ratings. I know for the most part they are very similar, but I like to think of it as related to the name of the magazine - "Skiing" is a verb, implying the action. I do like to read the rankings - it lets me feel a little superior ("Alta wasn't in the top 30 from Ski"); I get to play the "I've been to 5 of the top ten resorts as rated by Skiing" game; and also provides info on any changes/updates to those resorts.

Just my take.
post #10 of 27
I've been to 17 of the 25 and would be most happy to return to any of them (except maybe Vail - it would take a "reason" for me to go there). So I can't say that I have too many complaints about the list.
post #11 of 27
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si
I've been to 17 of the 25 ...
! I'm impressed.

Out of curiousity, which have you missed (so far)?
post #12 of 27
blame the magazine for their list? NAH. they are catering to their audience.

SKI and Skiing magazines cater to a different segment of skiers. period. hence different lists.

it cracks me up how avid SKI mag types write letters to the Skiing Mag Editors bitching about the "adult" references and how it's no longer welcome in their "family" homes. I have a few choice words... but they are not fit to print here, either! LOL

kiersten
post #13 of 27

i could be wrong but...

...i don't recall seeing mammoth so high in these rankings. (SKI readers seem to have barely heard of it.) wonder how much of the climb in rank has to do with intrawest's pouring money into the new condos and whistler-like, copper-like, beaver creek-like, etc.-like village.


The Vision:

http://www.homesofmammoth.com/Vision/index.cfm
post #14 of 27
Oh I just love these threads! The outrage,the indignation, the horrorof it all. How dare they list Mont Camel Dung over, over my favorite place ski, Cow Pile Valley! I can tell that they have never skied there, if they had they would know that it's home of the most core skiers in the world. And whats with calling it a resort? Real men don't ski at places called resorts! The nerve of those people! Do those Editors even ski? It's all a vast conspiracy by the libral media! As soom as Bill O'rielly gets off the phone he is going to look into this. Don't worry Fox News is on this cheap election year Democrate trick! O'Reilly is going to put together the real list. the list of real mountains!
post #15 of 27
Like just about everyone else who participates in this forum, I think that SKIING Magazine's top 25 is much more realistic than SKI Magazine's. Not everyone agrees which mountain is the best (we can all argue for our home bergs), but at least they don't insult us with the trash that SKI tries to sell. Isn't is funny that Deer Valley rated in the top 3 destinations overall, and the top "chick trip" resort. Give me Snowbird/Alta or Jackson anyday. I just wish that The Canyons made it into the top 25!
post #16 of 27
Have always disliked these "best resort" polls each season in ski mags. Pretty much just skip those pages each season. Must be easy for the mags though to fill an issue with the same brief descriptions each year and sell lots of resort advertising space. Of course each year the current editorial staff creates their own criteria weighing the many different facets. Some mags rate in several different categories of course. A better read would be to simply describe and compare resorts with the best terrain without resorting to some subjective rating. Or maybe an article for the lodge set likewise describing and comparing best lodging and non skiing diversions. Just another reason I used to subscribe to 4 mags for more than a decade but now just two.
post #17 of 27
Vail above Jackson Hole?
post #18 of 27

skimming, but this stood out

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfonse
Can you honestly tell me you would not want to ski any one of them in good snow

Alfonse

GOOD SNOW!!!!! What place is not fun with a soft base and 24" of superlight fluff on top???????????

Shannon
post #19 of 27
In defense of the SKI mag:
1. It says top RESORTS not top MOUNTAINS.
Want skies carried to the bus? Want the in-unit hot tub cleaned out and sanitized on a daily basis? Want to rent in a shop called Beppi's? That's a top RESORT. Seriously: A lot of good people make a living from people who are getting hyped up by the mags every fall to spend a lot of dough carved out in the big city streets... And it's not the good who get the good's, so tip well
2. The subscription runs $10 or so a year... so big deal... how can SKI be anything but industry advertisement? (hmm, is this "in defense"?)

And yeah, off topic, may I bash VAIL? LOL, I ripped out the poster... it's 50% sky and the rest looks like Killington with fewer trees. On top the bowls' names are printed in super small font to make the hills look bigger.
post #20 of 27
I also get confused by the reaction these ratings inspire. Do we get points based on the ratings of where we ski? I find that the more crowded resorts are rated highest and then higher ratings lead to even more crowds. And those top rated resorts are often among the most expensive. Who needs that combination? The best thing about the lists for me is that they provide another reason to read about skiing before the snow starts to fall.
post #21 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB
This list is biased against the core skiers who spend alot of money to keep the industry rolling along. Deer Valley, Tremblant, and Beaver Creek didn't even make the list. Unbelieveable.
What?

Meh.....
post #22 of 27
The listing above is only for West Coast mountains, there is a whole other listing for East Coast mountains. I must agree though money talks, especially when it comes to skiing and publicity.
post #23 of 27
Sure, money talks, but I can assure you 100% that Mt. Baker didn't pay a single cent to be placed where they were in the list. As was mentioned before, they aren't a destination resort, and don't pretend to be. No landline phones, everything is powered by diesel generators, and one of the worst access roads around.
post #24 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi00
The listing above is only for West Coast mountains, there is a whole other listing for East Coast mountains. I must agree though money talks, especially when it comes to skiing and publicity.
I disagree. I am from the east, and have been skiing for 30+ years. Although, I learned how to ski on eastern mountains, I had to buy a home in Utah, because I was fed up with the crowds, the ice, the lack of altitude, the attitude, the questionable snow, the lack of quality terrain and the weather in the east. Sure, while Whiteface, MRG, Stowe, Jay and Stratton all have their attributes, none of them rank in the top 50 of mountains in this country, not to mention Canada! I am not writing this post to come down on eastern mountains, but, in reality, they are only mere hills when compared to the rugged west.
post #25 of 27
Thread Starter 
A side note: Colorado is on the "West Coast" in the same sense that Illinois is on the "East Coast."
post #26 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canyons
I am not writing this post to come down on eastern mountains, but, in reality, they are only mere hills when compared to the rugged west.
Sure.

You just come back here on a reeeallly bony day, fall on your ass a lot at MRG, and then call it a "hill".

When I lived in Utah for a season, I only found two days where my slalom skis were actually fun to ski on. The other days were all too soft, and the water injected race hill was off limits. Soft snow is great, but not for 155cm slalom skis and a 200lb fat kid.
post #27 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman
Sure.

You just come back here on a reeeallly bony day, fall on your ass a lot at MRG, and then call it a "hill".

When I lived in Utah for a season, I only found two days where my slalom skis were actually fun to ski on. The other days were all too soft, and the water injected race hill was off limits. Soft snow is great, but not for 155cm slalom skis and a 200lb fat kid.
You're right. I don't even have my slalom skis or GS skis in my western quiver. No need to bring anything with a width under 68-70 to Utah...hopefully the snow will always be too soft. I never said, nor do I think, that eastern skiing is for the faint hearted, or unenjoyable. But top 25 overall in the nation, COME ON!!! Of course, eastern hills breach top 25 status, if you limit the criteria to moguls, hardest to ski, and ice.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion