I've skiied at Louise on and off for four seasons, and every year I have the same complaint. They big up the conditions online, then too often you get there and find poor snow, ice, rocks, or fewer full runs open than expected. Christmas 2010 was the final straw as far as I am concerned. The web site was reporting 'good conditions overall', and we saw no 'marginal conditions' signs on the runs we tried that day. We drove out to LL, caught the gondola and headed down Pika to Larch. Pika was a sheet of ice notable for the number of beginners slipping over on it. From the Larch chair we skiied one of the blacks, which is usually a fun bumpy run, but this time, there were rocks and gravel exposed in many places. We picked our way down behind a family including some weak skiers (without helmets on) who were taking frequent tumbles on the rock sections. At one point I was marooned in a sea of rock, and had to step a couple of metres upslope to get out of the cul-de-sac. Next we tried a black run from the gondola station area back to base (Wildflower?). After 300 m I had to stop and take off my skis, then walk 30 m to avoid a sea of grass, soil and gravel. So much for the base measurement cited on the web - this would have been considered 'poor conditons' in June, and the run should not have been open. We quit trying to ski, and headed to our local shop for a re-wax. Without doubt a total waste of a tank of gas and a day's holiday, all caused by somebody's inability or unwillingness to be truthful about the true mountain conditions. I accept that nobody can change the snowfall or the temperature, but I do feel conned when it's not reported properly.