Goms
Effectively tied with Cortina dAmpezzo. good terrain match · 67/100 — led by substantial ski-area scale and strong terrain profile; partial evidence, good reliability match · 64/100 — led by strong snow resilience; partial evidence.
Strongest alternativeCortina dAmpezzo
Main uncertaintySome requested evidence is unavailable; the score is rescaled over the evidence that exists.
What could change the resultReduce lift system weight from 14 to 2 and Cortina dAmpezzo becomes the leading option.
Difference between the first and second option.
The ranking changes little under nearby priority weights. Rank range 1–2.
Coverage and coherence of evidence used by this comparison.
Advanced analysisSensitivity, Pareto trade-offs and score contributions
1 option is dominated on commonly available dimensions.
Explore decision boundaries · what preference change flips the winner?
These are the smallest tested single-dimension changes that produce a different leader. Apply one to inspect that scenario; no new database query is required to calculate the boundary.
Reduce lift system weight from 14 to 2 and Cortina dAmpezzo becomes the leading option.
Increase terrain weight from 22 to 53 and Cortina dAmpezzo becomes the leading option.
Increase access weight from 12 to 61 and Cortina dAmpezzo becomes the leading option.
Increase scale weight from 16 to 66 and Cortina dAmpezzo becomes the leading option.
Why Goms leads Cortina dAmpezzo · 4.4 pts
Point contributions reconcile the structural Fit dimensions and confidence-limited current opportunity. Missing evidence is not treated as zero.