Thanks for the replies and advice. I got a counterpoint opinion from a ski shop carrying the Blizzards. The opinion of the rep. there (who had both 165cm and 172cm available) was to go with the 165cm. His logic was that the ski is plenty stable and, as long as the stability is there, going with the shorter length will make bumps, glades and tighter spots more fun. I am sure I could line up 10 ski experts and and get 10 different opinions on anything, but what are your thoughts regarding the rep's logic? Thanks again ...as of now, I can get either length at a really nice deal, so I would like to make a selection and go with it.
Thanks again ... more opinions and information = better decisions = happier skier!!
more opinions and information = information constipation = confused skier!!
Now, if you are looking for more information (hence me clouding the decision) split the difference and go with the 8.7 in a 167cm.
. As far as the reps reasoning (and I hope this isn't my rep because I am sure I will hear it later, sorry
), in a perfect world, yeah but in reality I do not recall too many situations that I was in that I said, if these skis were just 3" shorter...
In reality, I don't either ski is "wrong", myself along with the others here (3 out of 3 so far), think the 172 is the better