Authors
The writers behind Poolsidebasics. Each person owns a domain, from the gear they test to the criteria they use. Here is where they come from, why they cover it, and how they work.
Alex Turner
Robotic cleaners
Portland, Oregon · testing since 2015
Alex has pulled more robots out of his above-ground pool by the cord than he cares to admit. He runs each cleaner until the filter basket tells him whether it actually picked up the leaves or just stirred them.
Background
Every Memorial Day, Alex's father opened the kidney-shaped pool behind their Salem, Oregon house with a net and a grudge. Alex spent three summers as a pool attendant at a city aquatic center, skimming lanes at 6 a.m. and learning why sand and fine silt behave nothing alike. He never forgot how much of the job was debris, not chemistry.
A sixteen-foot above-ground pool, a deck he built with his brother, and a shed where dead cleaners wait for parts make up Alex's Portland backyard. A whiteboard by the back door lists each robot's run time and what the basket held. His neighbors have started asking him to test their cleaners, which is how half his notes get written.
Why I got into it
The aquatic center is where he learned that a cleaner is judged by what it leaves behind. Lane skimming was a daily read on wind direction and leaf drop, and a robot faces the same problem with less patience. When cordless cleaners started promising a full season on one battery, he tested the claim in his own pool instead of trusting the box.
He writes for above-ground owners because that is the pool he knows. Most reviews focus on in-ground models with a dedicated power line and ignore the deck height, hose reach, and storage that decide an above-ground setup. He bought his first robot used and rebuilt the drive belt, which is where the repair notes in his guides come from.
How I review
Three full cycles in water he has not shocked, on a mix of leaves, pine needles, and sand, come before a verdict on any cleaner. He times the full run, measures how much the battery drops, and weighs the debris basket dry to see what the machine truly captured. A robot that only works on a spotless floor gets called out.
Storage is the tiebreaker at his house, because the shed is already full. A cleaner that folds into a milk crate beats one that needs a hook and a dry shelf. He tells in-ground owners to skip the cordless premium and buy corded, and he tells above-ground owners to skip wall climbing unless the walls collect algae. The cord tangle test decides a lot.
Above-ground pool owner and former aquatic-center attendant who tests robotic cleaners for debris capture, battery drop, cord management, and off-season storage.
Domain: robotic-cleaners · cordless · above-ground
Focus: leaf and sand pickup · runtime · cordless vs corded · wall climbing · deck storage · above-ground pools
Harper Lin
Vacuums and water care
Boulder, Colorado · testing since 2016
Harper treats pool care as a fifteen-minute weekly job and resents every tool that turns it into an hour. She tests vacuums and test kits by whether they make that short routine repeatable in July and again in September.
Background
Her grandmother kept a small pool in Modesto, California and a strict Tuesday cleaning schedule, which is where Harper first learned that a pool runs on routine. She spent two years as a lab technician at a water treatment plant, running chlorine and pH samples by hand, which taught her that a test result is only as good as the sample you took.
A small in-ground pool, a dog who drinks from the shallow end, and a shelf of test kits in various states of half-use fill Harper's Boulder yard. A clipboard hangs by the back door with the week's chlorine and pH numbers written in pencil. She likes a routine she can finish before the coffee goes cold, which is the whole point of her coverage.
Why I got into it
The water plant job taught her that chemistry punishes shortcuts. A pool that reads fine on a strip can still be cloudy, and a kit with faded reagents will lie to you. When she bought her own house with a pool, she started comparing test kits the way she used to compare lab methods. A vacuum and a kit are tools for the same weekly habit.
She began writing guides because most test-kit reviews stopped at the price. Nobody said how long a color match takes to read, or whether the reagents survive a winter in the garage. She runs the same seven-day cycle on every kit and vacuum, then keeps only the ones she would hand a new owner. The rest go to a neighbor with a bigger pool.
How I review
A week of real cleanups, not a single deep-end pass, is how she judges a vacuum. She times how long it takes to cover a small pool, counts how often the head loses suction on leaves, and checks whether the pole connection drips. Test kits get compared on the same water sample, with time to a color match logged.
The tiebreaker is whether she still reaches for it in week three. A fancy kit that needs a bench and a timer loses to a cheap one she can read at the pool edge. She tells small-pool owners to skip the robotic vacuum and start with a manual head. A cloudy pool needs chemistry, not a cleaner.
Former water-treatment lab technician and pool owner who tests vacuums and test kits on a fixed weekly cleaning and chemistry cycle.
Domain: vacuums · water-care · test-kits
Focus: quick cleanups · test strips · water balance · weekly routines · deep-end reach · simple scheduling
Nate Brooks
Accessories
Salt Lake City, Utah · testing since 2017
Nate leaves his pool tools outside on purpose, because a summer in the Utah sun sorts plastic fast. He buys the cheap parts twice before he trusts an all-in-one kit to last a season.
Background
The Ogden, Utah house where Nate grew up had a pool that doubled as the neighborhood hangout, and he was the second of five kids in it. He spent four summers as a lawn-care helper, dragging hoses and replacing cracked fittings, which taught him which plastics survive a full season of sun. He can still tell cheap polypropylene by the smell.
Two dogs and a shed wall where every net and pole hangs on a labeled hook surround Nate's Salt Lake City backyard pool. A five-gallon bucket holds his test strips and a note on what failed last year. His rule is to buy the part that breaks, not the whole kit, and he keeps a spare skimmer head on the shelf.
Why I got into it
The lawn job is where he learned that outdoor gear fails at the joints first. A hose that splits at the coupling is useless even if the rubber is fine, and the same is true of a telescoping pole that locks once and then slips. He started buying cheap accessories in pairs and reporting which ones survived August.
He got tired of kits that bundled a good net with a brittle pole. Most accessory guides listed what was in the box without saying which piece quit first, so he began testing each part alone. A twelve-dollar net that lasts three seasons beats a forty-dollar kit that loses its handle in July. That habit is the whole method behind the guides he writes now.
How I review
Outside from May through September is the only honest durability test for an accessory. He logs sun fade, brittleness at the connection, and whether a pole still locks after a hundred extensions. Netting gets dragged over concrete a set number of times to see when the mesh tears. A caddy has to survive a full winter on the deck.
Price per season is the tiebreaker, not sticker price. A part that costs eight dollars and lasts two summers beats a twenty-dollar version that cracks once. He tells above-ground owners to skip the wheeled vacuum caddy and carry the head by hand, and he tells everyone to skip any net with a glued ferrule. Replaceable parts win on a deck.
Longtime backyard pool owner and former lawn-care helper who tests skimmers, poles, and deck accessories for sun and chlorine wear across a full season.
Domain: accessories · skimmers · storage
Focus: skimmer nets · telescoping poles · storage caddies · sun fade · chlorine wear · value replacements