Board Reviews and Why You Should Be Wary?
I started writing board and equipment reviews in 1979 for windsurfing magazines. This continued up until about 1986 reviewing for UK, Australian and American based publications. From 1990 onwards as publisher and editor our publications reviewed a limited number of paddles, outrigger canoes and kayaks up until around 2005. I got better at it, but after 30 years of writing many hundreds of reviews (tests) though I improved, I ultimately had a philosophical epiphany.
Board reviews are largely so subjective as to be almost an exercise in futility. Beyond some tangible factors such as build quality, weight, colour, deck finish, rail shape, length, width for example, the rider/writers interpretation of their particular experience of the boards 'performance' merits, are more often than not, representative of but a bite sized experience, in limited water types and conditions, extrapolated into words in the form long winded diatribes, constrained by the riders skill levels, preferences, possible bias on account of an extraneous connection with the boards existence, resulting in an authoritative tone, but more often than not lacking substance and balance.
The Designers Intent
Any review must concern itself with the designers intent. Without prior knowledge of this, the rider/writer will very possibly miss the point of the boards fundamental reason for being. As an example, reviewing a downwind high performance ocean racing board on a lake or in sheltered waters, will lead to a gross misrepresentation of the boards relevant idiosyncrasies.
Reviewers Technical Abilities, Physiology and Preferences
Any singular board shared between half a dozen riders, will inevitably result in half a dozen differing reviews on account of variance of technical abilities (board and paddle skills), paddling styles, balance levels, physiology (varying body mass) and general preference for any number of factors. All reviews are ultimately biased towards the riders own limitations and idiosyncracies, let alone the ability to interpret what it is they are experiencing.
Environmental Factors
Boards must be tested first and foremost in the conditions for which the board was designed as a fundamental start point for review. Outside of these environmental (water) conditions, will diminishes the value of the review and therefore the nature of the board. A Porsche driven over a boggy marsh is not an accurate portrayal of the cars comfort zone and any review of this nature would be superfluous, trivial and without any basis in reality. Regrettably many board reviews fall into this category.
Bias
Regardless of whether you are given the board to test via a manufacturer, a retailer, a friend or if indeed you have purchased the board yourself, the chances that a reviewer will ever completely dismiss the board out of hand as a waste of good materials, are slim in the extreme, being that while the board as an inanimate object lacking the capacity for feelings and therefore the ability to 'react', someone will doubtless be offended along the line if you make negative remarks, leading to very possibly a loss of sales as a result of the reviewers 'authoritative' viewpoints. In such a niche market, reviewers need to choose their enemies wisely, if at all.
I have been witness to reviews of boards which have literally manifested as a result of the reviewers experience of the board lasting less than 10 mins. Is this truly a substantive process of testing? While the reviewer may think the value of their 'opinion' is valid, solid and no doubt of benefit to the SUP community, I would argue it is misleading and detrimental, not least of which to the designer, manufacturer, retailer and importer. Reviewers acting as 'judge and jury' who work their words into cognitive constructs to elevate their standing within the niche market they work in, are often self serving. Reviewers can get 'free-stuff' or at least cheap and once you build a reputation, the reviewer becomes revered and reviled but will by and large almost always ensure they keep on the right side of whomever they choose to. That is the human condition.