Watch Blog Misses the Point, Continues to be Boring and Lazy

https://www.ablogtowatch.com/watch-review-christopher-ward-c63-sealander-gmt-36mm

"For me, given how rarely I actually engage the GMT function on any watch, this is an unimportant distinction, but for some who travel more often, canโ€™t do quick-time math, or are pedantic about such things, itโ€™s important to have flyer functionality."

If you rarely engage the GMT function or think that the difference between a caller and flyer GMT is for those who can't do math in their head or suggest that those that prefer a flyer are merely being pedantic. I completely would understand why the majority of watch enthusiasts who read your article believe you are lazy and that you don't deserve a position writing about horology.

I guess calling this article out is a bit pedantic, but as a watch enthusiast, I tend to want to get into the details and correct those that don't get it. Exercising no expertise I still believe that GMTs are one of the most useful functions of watches that have utility and believe that suggesting to others that there is no major difference just shows how out of touch you are and how much of a disservice someone with a voice such at this reviewer is doing for whoever reads this crap.

The rest of the review is a let down too. Christopher Ward does make amazing watches, and in no way do I think the C63 deserves to be overlooked by those seeking a GMT, but it's also a great opportunity to not be lazy and suggest that the type of GMT is only worth a few sentences about how much it doesn't matter.

This blog is one for sure I will not be watching in the future. It regularly offers nothing of real substance.

This article can be summed up saying the following:

You know the C63, well this one is smaller.

Beyond those points there was nothing else said and definitely nothing exciting about this article. No interesting perspective, no talk about how it's an interesting move from CW to make a watch that appeals to a wider growing market of folks who prefer a smaller size. No facts about the market demographic and how perception of a smaller sized watch is becoming a growing trend.

Again no reason to share this article outside of how much this blog continues to be lazy

Reply
ยท

So, to summarise:

โ€œSomeone on the internet said mean things about a watch I likeโ€

If you disagree with an article, engage with the author via the comments section. Complaining to us on a different platform, while it may be cathartic, wonโ€™t do anything to help improve the quality of A Blog To Watch.

ยท

Anyone can start a vlog/blog/YouTube channel, doesn't mean they are an expert!!

ยท
Inkitatus

Anyone can start a vlog/blog/YouTube channel, doesn't mean they are an expert!!

Sure doesn't, but these articles and he are regularly lazy and I'm my opinion don't reflect the same level of detail that a true watch enthusiast wants when looking for information about a watch. Doesn't rich on any of the facts that would make the article as interesting read it help someone make a decision and this blog is full of this trash.

I could care less about his thoughts. But Google serves these things up right and left

ยท
English_archer

So, to summarise:

โ€œSomeone on the internet said mean things about a watch I likeโ€

If you disagree with an article, engage with the author via the comments section. Complaining to us on a different platform, while it may be cathartic, wonโ€™t do anything to help improve the quality of A Blog To Watch.

Thank you for your input. I want to clarify that my concern isn't solely about someone criticizing a watch I like, as the watch in question, a "caller" GMT, isn't one I personally favor.

My intention in bringing attention to the review was to highlight the importance of accuracy and depth in watch reviews, particularly regarding features like GMT functionalities which I think is misunderstood by some and a costly mistake if they they purchase one to find out they might have been better off with something with a Miyota 9015 for half the price. Even though the reviewed watch may not align with my preferences, I believe it's crucial for enthusiasts to be informed about the nuances of different watch complications.

By discussing these matters within our community, my goal is to promote a culture of critical thinking and accountability among both reviewers and readers. While engaging directly with authors is one avenue for feedback, it's not the one I chose in the end, broader discussions like this can also contribute to raising awareness.

I think you misunderstood me if you thought I was arse hurt over a watch that I would not purchase in the first place, but you may not have know that and that's okay. BTW, I really liked your "Omega Seamaster Diver 300M No Time To Die review". Imagine how much better that article on the Christopher Ward would have been if he would have put even a portion of the detail, depth and passion into his article and not phoned it in with obvious facts, lazy opinons that don't help the broader watch community on a watch that is great but could have been so much more.