Beggars Would Ride
A Grain Of Salt
Not long after sentencing myself to singletrack exile at the poison oak farm deep in Carmel Valley, I took delivery of a new test bike. Right about the time I finished building it up, the power went out, so I decided to take it for a spin into the village to get some coffee and check my email. The bike was a gravel-ish kind of rig and it was a nice spring day, so a mellow 25-mile round trip on lumpy pavement seemed a good way to check that everything was working.
The bakery in the village was owned by an incredibly fit, highly animated, bike-obsessed Argentinian named Martin, and it was always a bit like wandering into a conversational tornado showing up there with a new bike. You never knew how long it would last or how intense it may get, but you would most certainly get shook up. As it was, Martin wasn’t there. My relief at not having to verbalize a bunch of thinking about a bike I had just finished building was short lived, however.
A young, exceptionally clean cut guy looked up from his laptop, clocked the bike, and began peppering me with questions. Coffee not yet in hand, I sighed internally and painted something onto my face that I hoped looked more like a smile than a grimace. Yes, it was carbon fiber. Yes, it cost a lot. Yes, it rode pretty nice but it was too soon to tell how the relationship was going to pan out. No, I didn’t buy it locally. No, I didn’t buy it online. No, it wasn’t really mine. No, I didn’t steal it. It’s a work thing; I ride it for a while and then write a review about it.
He beamed hugely and almost shouted; “Bro! We’re in the same line of work. I write reviews for a living too! Where are you posting? Amazon?”
I stared blankly at him, unsure what he meant. He showed me his laptop, where he was mid-composition of a five star review for an electric kettle. “I get supplied a list of products – SEO determines what products are trending, then I write reviews of those products, make sure to include the required keywords, post them on Amazon, get paid. You don’t do this? Duuuude. It’s super easy, and the pay is killer!” He then mentioned a number that was about triple my annual income.
This was not exactly news, but at the same time, finding out that random dudes in coffee shops were making six-figure incomes jamming out reviews of products they had not actually physically experienced, well, it was a little jarring. As I rode home, I spent a lot more time wondering about what constitutes veracity when it comes to product reviews than I did focusing on the ride characteristics and purported benefits of little elastomeric dampers build into seatstays. What, exactly, qualifies someone to test things and write about it? Why should anyone listen to me?
It's not as if my mind was blown, but this image serves as a solid reminder to not believe everything you read on the internet, be it fake Amazon review, bot-powered political dissemination, or photoshopped images of Einstein riding away from a mushroom cloud...
He beamed hugely and almost shouted; “Bro! We’re in the same line of work. I write reviews for a living too! Where are you posting? Amazon?”
I have been riding bikes since childhood. Most of us have. So, that isn’t exactly a qualification. I have never been a professional racer, and as an enthusiastic amateur really only spent about a dozen years in that particular crucible. Also, not really a qualification. Dwindling power output, risk averse, can’t wheelie, generally asked to step out of frame when the “talent” arrives for the video reels. I was a shop mechanic for about five years in one continuous stretch, then made a few cameos over the following couple decades. Not really a lifer, definitely not the fastest or the smartest wrench on the bench, but I can still twist up a decent pair of wheels. Again, not exactly a ringing endorsement. But then again… spend enough time riding enough bikes over enough years, and some sort of framework emerges. But is it a worthy framework? Is it worth listening to?
Once upon a time, I worked for a bike company that employed some of the fastest downhillers in the world. One of those was very insightful with his feedback when it came to suspension set up and chassis development. Another was the exact opposite, and was widely regarded as superstitious and inconsistent in what felt “right” from one day to the next. So, riding chops, while enviable and always something to aspire toward, are not the whole story when it comes to relaying how a bike works. Consistency of input, context of experience, understanding of variables, this all matters. The coder’s mantra applies everywhere from defining geometry to determining suspension tunes; garbage in, garbage out.
This seems like an appropriate time to include an image of the long suffering Jordi Cortes, who has probably had to Jedi-massage his way through more racer superstition and "it needs to change but I can't articulate why or how" rhetoric than anybody else this side of whoever used to have to set up bikes for Eddy Merckx.
Somewhere before that time, or right around then, there were a couple bike media journalists who were very vocal and deeply invested in the worth of their own opinions regarding mountain bikes and the direction they should be headed. For the sake of discretion, we shall refer to them as “Downtube” and “Halfsag”. Downtube believed that the worth of a bike could be easily determined by the length of the downtube – if it was longer than X, then the bike was pretty good. If it was shorter, then the bike was crap. Not much else really mattered. This was just before reach and stack became functional talking points, so I will concede that Downtube was onto something, but still, his near-binary sense of right and wrong seemed a bit reductive. Halfsag believed that all bikes needed slacker head angles. Again, dude was ahead of the curve on that one. But his habit of running all his test bikes at 50% sag in order to achieve the head angle that he deemed appropriate had so many unpleasant knock-on consequences that his bike reviews were basically unintelligible. In each case, these guys considered themselves the voices of reason. Product managers for the companies whose bikes they were slagging held a somewhat different view of their veracity.
Back to the guy at the bakery. He made a living reviewing products that he had never actually seen or used in person. During my tenure at Rancho Poison Oak, I was 13 miles from the nearest town, and over an hour away from anywhere with a decent saw shop or auto parts store. So, I found myself resorting to the internet whenever I needed to order up a thousand feet of weed whacker string, or replace a dead vacuum cleaner, or buy an on-demand hot water heater. Time and time again, I found myself eddied out in some vortex of dead ends and total bullshit. All I was looking for was some reassuring “I used this, it works. It works better than that other stuff, here’s why” opinion to calm my jitters before sending my credit card into the void. Instead, what I invariably found was a mountain of words that all read basically like the website copy for the things I was looking at buying. “Reviews” written by people who had taken the time to recite all the spec info they could digest, reformat it into some sort of comparative “analysis”, then spit it back onto the internet where it would take up server space but provide no actual useful data points or informative purpose.
Sucks, right? But stand far enough away from the object in question, and how do you parse the worth of someone’s opinion? As in, why should I trust the experienced voice of Downtube or Halfsag over an anonymous someone writing an SEO-optimized comparison of “The Best Mountain Bikes For Under $2,000”? The days where we could argue something like “Well, Halfsag works for an international mountain bike magazine, so he must know what he’s talking about” are gone. Nowadays, size of Youtube audience is a far bigger driver of revenue and readership/viewership, alongside other social media reach indicators, and the old bonafides no longer apply.
Ultimately, for me, I try to determine some sense of experience. As in, a voice at the other end of the wire saying “I used this. Here’s how it worked for me.” Hopefully, from there, I can get an idea of how that person used whatever it is I am reading about, and I will then be able to determine how my own use case may play out. So, I will still have a higher sense of trust regarding something Matt Phillips or James Huang is writing about than I will if the same subject is being discussed by a good looking young person living out of a Sprinter van and sporting a long list of affiliate partners. But that’s just me, and I am admittedly out of step with the times.
So out of step, in fact, that I am still quaintly referencing product reviews as being written by human beings. Hoo boy. Shit’s already starting to get real weird in that regard, and we are just barely pulling the bandaid off that scab.
something something the singularity is gonna be easy, don't worry, mumble mumble...
This is where I am supposed to somehow wrap this up and say You Can Trust Me, Because I Know Things. And then extend that to the whole still fully human-powered endeavor of nsmb.com. We Know Things. We Are Humans. Trust Our Experience.
I think we are all humans here. Not sure about Cooper, but the rest of us, pretty much. But should you prioritize our information as somehow more valid than what the kids at pinkbike have to say, or what Seth is talking about? I can’t answer that. All I can do is continue to view the world from my perspective, and be methodical and consistent with providing a solid frame of reference for that perspective. It beats writing about electric hedge trimmers for Amazon reviews, but still, take it with a grain of salt.
Comments
Lacy Kemp
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I vividly remember having a conversation with a product manager after attending one of their media camps. It was a bike that I enjoyed, that brought the ledgy, rocky singletrack of unfamiliar terrain within reach. Sometimes I do think it's about the bike, and I said as much in the review. This PM told me they didn't think it was fair that I got to share public opinion on their bikes because who the hell was I to judge? I am not technical when it comes to bike reviews, and people might take issue with this. Why should they trust some random girl who doesn't understand unsprung mass and how the atmospheric pressure affects the anodization process that ultimately challenges braking forces when the suspension is set to 28.5% sag? (yes this is a joke) I mean who the hell was I to give my opinion on a bike? Imposter syndrome was real with that one. Ultimately though, I ride my god damn face off and while I may not be halfsag or downtube, I know when a bike feels good and I know there are other short-statured, lighter weight humans who want a real bike with good shit on it who may actually understand what I'm saying when I explain why I like a bike. I guess my point is there is no one-size-fits-all reviewer. But humans > AI on this front and humans with actual > smarmy tech bros sipping lattes without ever using a product. Grumble.
Reply
Dave Smith
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I was just typing a response to this when I saw your answer pop up so I'm going to just attach it here.
A few years ago on a press trip, a bike-journo from another website and I were transferring back to the airport with Mike.
At some point, the other guy had enough of Pops and I jawing about the many flavours of beer we liked to guzzle - Mike, do you ever ask yourself why should anyone listen to what I have to say about bikes? I'm just a regular guy, not an engineer or suspension expert.*
Unfazed by the dark question, Mike simply replied, Well, most people aren't engineers and your experience is probably closer to the everyday rider. You ride a ton of bikes and have enough experience to know what works for you so your reviews absolutely have value.*
Every so often I have flash backs to this conversation when I read bike reviews and will echo what Pete has said in another comment - " The 'know thy reviewer' part is crucial." I always believed that the panel review videos that Bike mag used to do were really valuable and gave people the chance to get to know those that were on each bike. Without that resource, I do a lot of comparative reviews between websites but I do take some journalists comments with a grain of salt because I know for example Cooper and I have pretty close opinions on most things bike related but he weighs 50lbs less than me and is 5X times more fit.
FWIW - I know they are logistically a pain in the arse but I think getting Mike, Cam, Cooper and co together for a camp like experience to run through 2-3 different rigs would make for some great stories and an interesting beer-soaked video.
*For the record, I paraphrased this interaction because of the numerous IPA's consumed the night before this conversation and ever since which have affected my memory.
Reply
Lacy Kemp
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Round tables create good conversation and even better banter. Plus, not everyone has a shared experience and I think THAT is worth discussing.
Reply
Brad Nyenhuis
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I loved and miss the Bikemag BOBT roundtables.
Mike, I rode/loved a Ripmo for three years and am currently on an Evil Offering (the best bike I've ever ridden IMO). Both these bikes went on my radar and short list due to your roundtable reviews there.
I've always appreciated your straightforward and common sense opinions of all things bike-related.
Reply
Kos
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Bikemag.....so damn good for so damn long.
IMO Mountain Flyer somewhat captures the same magic today.
Reply
Todd Hellinga
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Yeah, when I did the occasional review back in the day, I focused less on the nitty gritty tech numbers and more on the qualitative nature of the ride and whom that may or may not suit. Maybe that's too simple but as a consumer of reviews on occasion that's what I always thought was the most important aspect of a review. Anyone can throw too many number at a page and tell you what that's supposed to mean and result in, but can they actually explain what that feels like and who that would suit best? Sometimes I feel like that's glossed or rushed over in favour of *DATA*.
There's a lot of reviews out there that use a lot of words to not actually give you much useful information and seem to just parrot marketing hyperbole. Have always appreciated NSMB's approach which seemed to favour the less formulaic and looser review formats between reviewers that seems to better allow the qualitative to come through more.
Reply
Brad Nyenhuis
3 months, 2 weeks ago
There is a real talent to a quality bike review. You have this middle ground between regurgitating numbers and meaningless word salad that the best reviewers do a great job of finding.
Also, the ability to tie the objective tech to the subjective "feel" is something I look for in a product review. Those reviewers who navigate this well are the ones I tend to trust.
Reply
Cooper Quinn
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I'll go to the camp. It better be in Madiera.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
3 months, 3 weeks ago
We love you Lacy! Even though you only have half a face. Especially because you only have half a face.
Reply
Dude@
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Deciphering the tea leaves of reviews, whether in forums or posts, requires finesse. Within these platforms lies valuable insight, as the truth tends to surface with scrutiny. As a scientist by day, I am privileged to access information via peer-reviewed articles and books. While acknowledging the flaws in the peer-review process, its fundamental principle holds merit. I often yearn for a similar review process in my hobbies. Many of us are intrigued by what constitutes a superior bike, surfboard, or any other item. Some industry folks are extremely charismatic with their insights (see the forest for the trees), yet their spoken wisdom is seldom, maintaining its allure. Reviews serve as the closest approximation to peer review, especially when assessing the credibility of the source and their expertise. Mike, insightful as always, thanks for the read!
Reply
Fat_Tony_NJ
3 months, 3 weeks ago
This! Another scientist here, and I have often lamented the lack of something like peer review in other areas of life. I'm in the process of trying to buy a family-hauler right now, and I'm convinced that you can find a at least one car review to suggesting that any one of the ~10 cars in this class is the absolute best one in the class. Crazy!
Reply
Niels van Kampenhout
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Maybe not the same as peer-reviewed articles but I always like it when a gear review includes two different testers' experiences and findings. I think I remember a plus bike review by Uncle Dave and Seb Kemp where they had pretty much opposing views, it did a nice job of putting things in perspective and showing how gear reviews can be subjective and how tester profile matters. Would like to see more of that.
Reply
UMichael
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I agree in wanting two or more opinions in a review, and it is something I like about BLISTER gear reviews.
When they write their reviews almost as a round-table discussion, it brings out more details as they agree and disagree on things. It really does work
Reply
Mark
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Timely. And good.
I think people need to know themselves, know their limits and have some knowledge/experience on a topic before they can begin to put their trust in someone else's thoughts. There probably also needs to be some commitment on the part of the reader to understand the reviewer - ie looking at their body of work. So developing trust takes a bit of time. For us locals who may know or have met some of the NSMB staff I think that familiarity makes it a lot easier to trust the words they put to screen, but if you follow the reviews here long enough you see that there is an ethos that's been developed when it comes to the reviews/articles - telling it like it is. Whether one agrees with or even likes a certain reviewer, there's a comfort (trust) here that you know you're not going to get a sales job when you're reading something.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Thank you. Well said. The 'know thy reviewer' part is crucial. Hard to adhere to in all things in life, but for bug* purchases at least, it's usually possible at least for those willing to invest a little time.
*big
Reply
DanL
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I guess I have to go somewhere else for my arachnid reviews
Reply
Pete Roggeman
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Edited before I saw this. Gonna un-edit.
Reply
DanL
3 months, 3 weeks ago
haha, at least I wasn't banned from comments
Reply
Curveball
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Mike, while you might not be the fastest and steeziest rider around, the true value in your reviews lies in your exceptional writing skills. Your ability to so clearly communicate things is a strength beyond measure.
Reply
Sandy James Oates
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Another excellent read Mike, keep them coming.
Reply
cxfahrer
3 months, 3 weeks ago
When I read the review about the Ventana MPFS by RC in MBA some day in 1996, I immediately had to buy it. It "motors up hills"! Just a little slack in the bushings, must have been a single incident.
Well, it wasn't. Bushings were slack from day one, and worse. They kept sending me new ones, but I eventually gave up.
That's when I started to read reviews the other way around - looking for hints that this thing might fail.
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
3 months, 2 weeks ago
There's a whole other file of "damn, I wish I knew this before the ink dried" aspect of bike reviews past that haunts me. So many bikes that I absolutely crushed on, that got ridden hard and put away wet and were awesome through their entire test period, and that then disintegrated about a month after the article singing their praises came out.
Reply
Allen Lloyd
3 months, 3 weeks ago
This is hitting a bit close to home as I am in the process of evaluating bikes for my next purchase. I tend to keep bikes for around a decade, so this is not a decision to take lightly. My historic methodology has been to actually ride bikes then read the reviews to see if I agree with what people say. Then I latch on to what they say about other bikes.
Where this somewhat falls on its face is there is a bike I am interested in that a person I trust loves, BUT I have two issues:
1. Every other bike I have ridden from this manufacturer has felt off to me. I have never been able to put my finger on it but I just don't like them.
2. While I trust the person's opinion, I absolutely cannot stand them. Riding the same bike as "that guy" bothers me.
Ugh just re-read the NSMB review of the bike in question and it was liked here :(
Reply
fartymarty
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Allen -
1. It is probably going to feel off if you don't like the company. There are lots of great bikes I would never buy because I don't like the company. I would rather have a flawed bike from a company I truly believed in than a fantastic bike from a company I hated.
2. You're going to be thinking about "that guy" every time you ride the bike.
Out if interest what bike is it? I'm sure we (as a collective audience can suggest something appropriate).
Reply
Pete Roggeman
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Ooohhh Allen, Marty is trying to triangulate this to find out who you hate...don't do it!
Just kidding, you should totally spill the beans. C'mon what's the downside?
Reply
fartymarty
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Nah I'm just trying to see what bike it was and then suggest he get a Starling or Cotic (or other small brand run by awesome people who really care about bikes).
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
3 months, 2 weeks ago
Marty, I admire your consistency...
Reply
taprider
3 months, 3 weeks ago
for example
how long before the stink of Lance Armstrong wears off of Trek?
Reply
evasive
3 months, 3 weeks ago
It’s me, isn’t it?
Reply
Deniz Merdano
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I discovered "Project Farm" on Youtube a couple of years ago and man that is the way to review shit. It is some objective stuff!
also yes, know thy reviewer.. buy them a beer.
Reply
Pete Roggeman
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Tell us you've been renovating your basement without telling us...I've enjoyed that channek as well.
Reply
Cooper Quinn
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Reply
Todd Hellinga
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Reply
Brad Nyenhuis
3 months, 2 weeks ago
BEST
MOVIE
EVER
"You said it man, nobody fucks with the Jesus"
Reply
Curveball
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I read a pretty thorough review about a bike that I was interested in. An Orbea Rallon. The writer clearly expressed the experience of riding the bike in different situations, what it's strengths and weaknesses were, and the value proposition of it. It helped that the reviewer rides in the same area and terrain that I do. I ended up buying the bike after reading a ton of reviews, but I have to say that Dave Golay of Blister Gear reviews really nailed how the bike rides more than any of the other reviews.
I also remember back in the day in a certain magazine (not Bike) where every bike was the most awesome and incredible thing ever and that everyone should get out the credit card right away and buy one. I well understood that all bikes are a series of compromises and strengths which led me to discredit all of their reviews. Well, not just discredit, really laugh at them.
Reply
Kos
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Blister really bottles the occasional magic. In my top 5 fave sites....right behind NSMB, of course!
Reply
Timer
3 months, 3 weeks ago
One of the things that makes a good reviewer has nothing to do with riding skills or even trust. Its the ability to focus on what is going on with the bike while riding. Noticing changes and differences between components. Preferably not placebo.
Thats a skill not everyone has and which needs to be trained and honed. Personally, i would never make a decent bike reviewer. When riding, i just focus on the trail and ignore the gear, more or less. I don't even care if my bike is quiet or loud.
PS: I'm also quite astonished that fake product reviews pay enough to make a good living in a first-world country. I thought that industry was primarily staffed by temp-workers in developing countries. Especially now that automated translation is good enough for review spam. Anyway, that part of the internet has been useless for years. AI will enshittify it further but at this point it doesn't really matter.
Reply
Curveball
3 months, 3 weeks ago
"Enshittify", I love that word! Now I'll have to start using it.
Reply
Distrakted
3 months, 2 weeks ago
Since we are on the subject of discussing product reviewers and other mountain bike media outlets, I have been wondering for quite some time why the level of social/emotional maturity of the commenters on this site is vastly different than on PB? I can read through an entire comment section here and it doesn't turn into a keyboard warrior ego shit show. Thank you everyone for keeping it positive and intelligent.
Reply
rockford
3 months, 2 weeks ago
I recently had similar confounding thoughts about where we're at on the: discovery of wheel ----> self-imposed human annihilation continuum. For a similar reason.
I was assigned a task by our local cycling advocacy group to create some template "letters of support" that people could adopt and use to write a letter of support to send to politicians, etc. for a certain project we were advocating for. I'm pretty good with the pen/keyboard so I was given the task. And then - I had the thought: I can get an AI to do this for me! And after a 'chat' with a popular bot, it took me about 2 minutes of prompts and it had output three pretty darn good sample letters for our specific project. I was genuinely impressed at the semi-decent quality. First drafts were garbage, but after some back and forth - not too shabby. And so I gathered those templates and sent them off to the group, forever proud of my new lifehack to advocacy productivity.
I then quickly realized - these AI-generated letters of support are just that easy to create. I could create thousands, if not millions with a really low amount of effort. And it struck me - these letters are absolutely worthless. In a world of supply and demand, these things are in infinite supply. So, that means their 'worth' will always hover around zero.
These three letters I created might fool their intended government targets this time. And they will be sent by real people as we're just offering templates for people to use to create their own. But politicians will come to learn - future correspondence from "constituents" likely won't be from actual constituents...
Mike's article, and my AI experience drives at the same conclusion: in a land of great abundance, the value of things gets heavily distorted very quickly. Bike reviews in general - in great abundance. A bike review I can trust - super scarce. Those Amazon reviews - I've ignored those for quite some time. Hell - I've quit Amazon for a while now. Nothing good comes from shopping on Amazon.
Latest online scam I've uncovered - if you go on Google Maps, and search for hotels in a given area, many of the listings on there for smaller hotels have been claimed by 3rd party websites that resell reservations to these hotels (think Booking.com, etc). So - you can't actually find the hotel you are trying to book's website. At least not easily or at the top of the listings. You do get offered a room, and you can book it (I think) but you are doing so with a 3rd party that takes a cut and will surely offer no help when you reservation isn't found by the real front desk due to a computer glitch...
The future looks pretty gross on many fronts. But what I do look forward to (if we ever get there): due to the scarcity, we restore our value for quality writing like NSMB and others publications. And we'll restore our valuing of time spent in person, with real humans, doing real things. The online life is awfully cheap and in many ways so very worthless.
Reply
dave_f
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I'd add myself as a third option alongside downtube and halfsag, For FS MTBs I usually start with a chainstay length appropriate for my height and preferences (toss out idler designs where the chainstay length changes a lot). Choose an approximate suspension travel. Exclude headtube cable routing, clevis or trunnion shock mount, motors and batteries and you're left with a short list nowadays. Then go with a frame that's on sale, has the nicest color, and you won't be uneasy being seen in public with. I have several years to adapt to the bike's quirks, people are pretty flexible in that regard.
I read the reviews, especially from people around my size and weight, mostly for entertainment. This site has some of the best. Being honest, I'd say my product choices are pretty much random in spite of the reviews.
Reply
Cee Cee
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Proportions, price, purpose, preferences, and probable pivot maintenance. For 27" add pre-owned to get even a short list.
Likewise, Joy Morton's salt girls should have a say in the lengths of their skirts?
Reply
Alex
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Reminded me of this piece I read about the corruption of review sites -https://housefresh.com/david-vs-digital-goliaths/
Reply
mtbrdan
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I give this article 4 chili peppers
Reply
Pete Roggeman
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Oh c'mon at least four and a half!
Reply
Kos
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I'm commenting too much, here and there, but I am blanking on the name of one well-known reviewer back in the day that made a point of always doing at least the first ride of a test bike without knowing any of the specs (STA, HTA, reach, nose-picking aptitude, etc.). I loved that.
Reply
fartymarty
3 months, 3 weeks ago
IIRC Mike Levy (ex PB) used to do that. Makes sense tho, just ride the bike and then form opinions before being influenced by specs / reviews etc.
Reply
Kos
3 months, 3 weeks ago
You're right about that,
But I was reaching back further, and I'm thinking it might have been Jon Olson (sp?).
Reply
Mike Ferrentino
3 months, 2 weeks ago
John Olsen, man... that dude was a diamond in the rough. I loved reading his articles way way way back when. Wry humor, insightful, weird enough to be genuine and genuinely different.
Reply
Vincent Edwards
3 months, 3 weeks ago
This conversation reminds me of the parable of the blind men and an elephant: a story of a group of blind men who have never come across an elephant before and who learn and imagine what the elephant is like by touching it. Each blind man feels a different part of the animal's body, but only one part, such as the side or the tusk. They then describe the animal based on their limited experience and their descriptions of the elephant are different from each other
…
That kind of sums up how I approach reviews… I try to read 3-4 reviews by authors with different biases, riding styles, perspectives… and then piece together this information into a greater understanding of the whole.
The longer I read a certain (talented) reviewer’s feedback, the more I can glean from reading just one review.
If I’m using this information to inform a buying decision, then I’m also looking at factors like geometry details, price, build details, and brand reputation.
Reply
Butch Boucher
3 months, 2 weeks ago
Coming at this from someone who had several bikes reviewed in previous decades, there are some good reviewers who get "the whole picture" when testing a product. You mentioned James and Matt, I'll add Ben and you Mike. You all share the need to spend time on the bike and in the conditions it is designed for. I can only hope that product managers are smart enough to deliver a product and some tangible elements that steer the reviewer towards the designer's goals.
How the hell can anyone review any product without using it, and get paid.
Reply
Vincent Edwards
3 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment has been removed.
Vincent Edwards
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Expanding on my above ‘comment’ … a good reviewer provides an insight into who they are as a rider, and builds trust and understanding with their readers over years of clear and honest feedback.
I feel like there are two ways to get a lot from a review… either 1) identify with the author as someone with similar preferences and needs, and take direct feedback.
Or 2) learn about the differences between yourself and the reviewer, and filter their feedback through that lens.
If I’m seriously considering a new bike purchase, I’m doing plenty of both… as well as (hopefully) finding an opportunity to demo that bike on terrain similar to what I normally ride.
Reply
jhtopilko
3 months, 3 weeks ago
Yeah, how JKW prefaces his reviews.
Reply
jhtopilko
3 months, 3 weeks ago
I don't trust the great majority of pinkbike reviews.
Reply
Brad Nyenhuis
3 months, 2 weeks ago
"I don't trust anything Outside Magazine touches (including PB)." (Fixed it for you)
Reply
Dave Smith
3 months, 2 weeks ago
I wouldn't trust the governing entity but I know most of the reviewers to be nothing but honest and forthright. Matt, Kazimer and Dario are good eggs.
Reply
Brad Nyenhuis
3 months, 2 weeks ago
Yeah, my problem is definitely in the decision-making ranks.
Gotta love a company that goes on a year long spending spree, only to close down half (or more) of said expenditures.
(but I'm not bitter)
Reply
Please log in to leave a comment.