sibhusky

I thought Kulick?

I believe that was Dave K. But remember, that segment was probably filmed months ago.

martial

I used to ski in the rain quite a bit at CB. Unfortunately, although I used "all conditions" Goretex, I found that the main point of system failure was my gloves. I've even tried Playtex dishwashing gloves, but couldn't get them big enough to put Polartec liners under them. The result was either my hands were freezing due to no insulation or my hands were freezing due to wetness. On top of that, I always got water creeping UP my arms from the cuffs of my jacket. If you put the cuff of the glove OUTSIDE the jacket, the water ran into the glove. If you put them INSIDE the jacket, then it would dribble in each time you raised your arm a bit. So, the solution was to pack a lot of normal winter Polartec gloves and keep changing them AND to make sure that the Goretex cuff of the jacket was snugged against my skin, with no underlayers in the cuff area. Then, of course, you are left with it coming down your neck..... Face it, you won't get in a whole day of skiing and still be dry.

I wouldn't trust much I got from a message board.

I sure hope whatever the southern Rockies got this year lands in my northern Rockies next year! It's not fair!

Ha, maybe it's like a stamp...the graphics are wrong, so it's a "collector's item"!!!

Does the ski say "junior"? I am thinking since it's not on their website, it's an older or discontinued ski. What color is the "Fischer"? I noticed that the prior year model had it in white, this year's was in yellow. Then, for some reason, this one for 2003 has black letters:

I can't answer whether it's right or not. What does your SKI say? Also, did anyone actually check your radius in the gate? I bet they didn't. Siblet skied an "illegal" GS ski in the FIS race at Park City. No one stopped her. Maybe if she was in the top 3 they would have, I don't know.

So, it looks like the picture in the auction is the right ski. But what did he GET?

This is from the Fischer site, a picture of last year's competition junior: 2004-2005: And world cup SL junior: 2003-2004: world cup junior:

Are you sure he sent you the right model and year? Here is a site with all the measurements for each length for the most recent season: http://erskia.co.uk/racing/RaceInformation...s%202004_05.htm

I think the bigger issue is whether the ad said "brand new skis" or "2005" skis. Are we sure you got old model skis, of course, is a question. Normally there is some (possibly small) graphics change between years. Do you still have the ad? I'd look at the ski you got vs. the one pictured. Are all the graphics the same? Then compare the picture to the pictures of 2005 skis. I know when I was looking for K2 XP's on the web I had to be REALLY sure what the year of the ski was and queried every seller about this. Many said "brand new skis" or "2004" skis (this was at the beginning of last year). I asked if they were 2003-2004 or 2004-2005 before I bid. Quite a number admitted that they were prior season's skis, but you couldn't tell from the ad text. And the graphics for that ski were extremely similar year to year for about four years. After I owned them and sat on the chair with others I started to be able to see the differences, but they were subtle. The reason I say this is key, is because the guy could know beans about sidecuts and widths and their impact, but he darn well knows the model year of the skis.

You know, I looked up those specs you got and they belong to 2003/2004 Season's Junior Race skis: Is that what you thought you were buying? That is, an OLD model? Or is this a coincidence? Check out (need to page down) http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:awh0L2E...2&hl=en&start=1

He says he will pay shipping costs if he made an error:

Hate to be a post whore, but I have to agree with the above. Either return them, accept his socks, or move on. Anything else is just a shake down of the guy.

I agree with this item. I am wondering if in fact the ski is not actually a Junior ski or different model year ski or something. It sounds like it is a SOFTER ski than the advertised ski. Maybe a woman's version?

It reminds me of when we got our dog yard fence put in. I told them I needed nine gauge fence for structural reasons, i.e strong dogs. Then I said I wanted the green vinyl kind. When it arrived, it was obviously not what I wanted by "nine gauge". It was 11 gauge, dipped in vinyl, suddenly becoming nine gauge. I told them that I don't care what the "industry standard" was, that I had specifically told them I needed it for STRUCTURAL reasons, and that this stuff wouldn't hold my dogs. They agreed there was no way for me to know that once you dip fencing in vinyl it becomes a "different" gauge. They swapped it. Of course, I always say this is a "male thing", advertising one thing and it's actually another thing..... Case in point, two by four wood doesn't measure two inches by four inches..... It goes on to other measurements as well, but we won't go into that here.... ;-) But anyway, the main point is, if you'd have told him at the outset that you needed a turning radius of 11 and he didn't deliver that, it'd be a whole 'nother story. Right now, you're stuck. He's right about the lazy "industry standard". When I bought Siblet's race skis one year I contacted the manufacturer SPECIFICALLY asking the turn radius on the ski I was buying BEFORE I bought it because I knew the FIS regulations were coming.

See, the fact that you are not returning them means that they are acceptable in some way, which is why he is trying to buy you off with socks. IMO, they are NOT acceptable if what you were looking for was a certain side cut, say for quicker slalom turns or whatever. As soon as you take this middle road, you've lost the fight.

Well, definitely put a protest on the charge with your credit card company and at the very least they will withhold payment until it gets resolved. The ONLY acceptable end to this is all of your money back, period. And if you need to invoke all the powers that be at PayPal and Ebay you do it. There is no defense for this guy, it was written ON THE SKI, the heck with the Fischer site.

I think you should just return them and tell him to pay for all your costs. If they are not right, they're not right, why keep them?

I'm suspecting that since you hadn't looked in a long time, there were far more "unread" postings than here, where you're on every day. The CB board goes for DAYS without a single post. In fact, my posting to skierforever on April 18 still doesn't have a response. If people from this board hadn't logged on and posted things, the only posting would have been for the Camelbeach (yecch) section. I bet the Daves have to read this board now since they are getting no info over on their own board.

We saw a lot of stressed out gymnasts when Siblet did that (she had to make a decision between the two around Sophomore year of high school as they were interfering with each other). Those kids have started competing right around the time they started walking. It's not surprising that they are burned out by college -- I would have expected it sooner. Ridge is just starting at ten, which is not that early. As long as you let him ramp up the interest level and don't get ahead of him, I wouldn't worry. That being said, by the time he's in high school, you'll have to start making decisions about the commitment level as you'll either have to dive in full bore (ski academy) or settle for a permanent lower level of involvement. We waited too late for Siblet, not knowing any better. Now she's "out of runway". Which is fine as she wants to get her PhD, she says, before she is 30. The kids who go for a US Ski Team spot are not going to college when they finish high school, you see. They are saving that option for after their race career. The ones who are on the college teams may be good, but they've chosen to allow scholarship to take precedence. Now it's theoretically possible for the NCAA kid to make the US team later, but in reality it's rare.

That's exactly the point I was going to make. After all, we all agreed that Bode is an all around athlete. The MONEY in the US is not in skiing. Sure, he's got some great endorsement contracts, but nothing compared to some football hero.

I'm thinking this is a guy thing.