MY ZO observations from tournament yesterday

[ForrestGump]

Yesterday was my first tournament of the year and the first time to ski behind the latest version of zero off. I decided to try all at B2 just to see how they compared to Stargazer.  Here is what I thought.

 Malibu- B2 was sooooooooft. This boat, which was not my favorite last year was my favorite of the day. My next time behind this boat I'm going to try B3.
Mastercraft- B2 felt like a runaway freight train- holy cow this boat was strong! I decided to tough it out and see if I could adjust to B2 and that was a mistake. I should have dropped to B1. If there was a B0, I think it would have still felt like it was yanking the handle out of my hand.
CC 196- B2 was ok.

Out of the 38 off guys I talked to, they had the same comparison, although most used C behind all the boats. Most who used C2 behind the malibu thought they needed to go to C3 and most who tried C2 behind the MC thought it felt like it was pulling them up and they should have gone C1. And the consensus seemed to be C2 behind the Nautique. 

Overall, I liked the changes ZO made to their system over the fall/winter.  All the boats came through the gates at 34.7 this time and there were no missed gates like last year. 

[ForrestGump]

34mph

[h2oski]

Were all of the boats powered by 5.7L engines?

[ForrestGump]

The malibu and nautique were for sure. I'll check on the MC.  I think it was.

[alex38]

2 questions:

1. Do all the letter, number, and boat combinations make a difference?

2. If all I have to practice with is PP classic, what do I choose at a tournament?

[Horton]

1) Yes

2) good luck

[ForrestGump]

Alex, It seems to depend on your level as a skier. For me, B2 behind the nautique felt the most like PP. From what I saw, the 15-32 off skiers liked B and the 32-39 off skiers liked C. And within those two letters, everyone liked the MC at 1, the CC at 2, and the Bu at 3.

[MrJones]

I appreciate the information and I don't want to change the thread, but my first thought this morning is "what a load of crap." I ski behind and older boat with SG and don't have the time to travel and train behind ZO with any regularity. My first tournament of the year is next weekend and I am sitting hear thinking "well, I guess I need to memorize SCOKE's charts sometime this week. Oh, and it will change behind every boat BTW.

 

I am still trying to get a ski set up much less thinking about any of this. Oh yeah, I will have to figure it out for my wife too. She is an excellent skier, (regional champ/national medalist) but as far as knowing what to ask for she will be at the mercy of me and/or the boat crew. 

 

Thank you for the insight and I will try to put your impressions in my memory bank. (Somewhere beside Scoke's charts) Sorry for bringing this up, but I'm frustrated. 

sj

[Roger]

I wonder if it varies from boat to boat within the same brand, because at our tournement the Mastercraft was considered the better pull over the Nautique. We had no Malibu, but I can tell you from last year that the Malibu (2008 model) felt softer then the other two with BOTH SG and ZO to me.

I use B1 on both the Nautique and the Mastercraft and I preferred the Mastercraft slightly in that I thought it hooked up out of the turns slightly softer.

I agree about the gate speed. We had 14 missed gates last year (all time record for a tournament at Okeeheelee) and none this year.

 

[eleeski]

Shane, Fantastic feedback! Thanks, this is exactly what I need as a starting point for my adaptation to ZO.

Scot, shame on you. Quit training on a system that is in a world of its own with no options to conform to current conditions. At least PP classic has options that can simulate ZO better. And bagging on ZO for improving the product is counterproductive. You are a skilled and respected member of the skiing community - use your talents to help us adapt to the current conditions (perhaps different ski setups for ZO or your take on the closest match in the ZO menu to SG).

Is anyone connected with Stargazer? Why haven't they added a switch and some options to get a closer simulation of ZO? PP classic with GPS derived baselines would be sweet!

Eric

[alex38]

What adjustments can be made to PP that simulate ZO?

[Roger]

Emulation of ZO with PP Classic. I use ZO B1 in tournaments. The closest match I've found with PP Classic is KX Normal, PX15. I think anything in the ZO A group would require KX- and anything in the C group would require KX+ or KX++. In all cases, a PX of at least 15 is required IMO as you have a lot more time at the ball with any of the ZO settings compared to PP without any PX.

 

[SM]

I'm getting a headache.... My boat (87 MC) has PP classic, the other boat I train behind (06 CC) does also, I have no problem switching between the two. The first time I skied ZO was in a tournament, total disaster. I skied PP stargazer for the first time 2 weeks ago and it was better but less than satisfactory. In a pretty strong headwind, the boat raced through the second segment. You could hear the boat accelerate to make up time. I haven't even begun to learn my ABC's and 123's and now I'm hearing that I have to add Mastercraft, Malibu, and Nautique as independant variables???? I'm not particularly fond of wasting our short season to do what was easy and straight-forward before.

[scoke]

 

I love this thread! haha

[lkb]

I have been working hard on staying countered and moving through the pickup point. When I do this right ZO is not an issue. C3 feels pretty good.

If you are behind it's gonna feel unfriendly. I think carrying speed through the hookup is key

.

[SM]

Somebody needs to change Scoke's picture to Yoda.

[eleeski]

I use PP classic on KX- PX10 to simulate last year's ZO C. I run my baseline down and add 100 pounds to my weight. I also shoot for 16.90 times. This feels a lot like ZO C for me.

Stargazer and KX normal PX0 tend to keep power on as I approach the ball. This is a very different feel than ZO C. I didn't like ZO A or B much so I didn't spend much time there. I also haven't used KX+ or ++ much (with a working switch - I did use that when my switch was broken but I didn't like the feel).

My big problem is slack at the ball. When the boat shuts down at the ball I don't have as much slack. I'm OK with getting hammered in the hookup and a big speed variation to get this feel. My PP classic settings may give me a different ZO emulation feel from Roger and others but the transition is easy for me. I seem to ski a bit better in ZO tournaments and Stan's ZO MC than my practice.

ZO tricks is better than every DBW PP or Stargazer I have skied behind. My PP classic throttle cable feels similar for the tricks I do to ZO B or C. I will use C2 next weekend for tricks.

Thanks to Shane, I will slalom at C1 MC, C2 CC or C3 Malibu next weekend. But if I ski badly it's probably the funky new ski I'm playing with - not the boat. Or my skills!

Eric

[RichardDoane]

Put it on whatever setting you choose, but remember to ski in proper position, use good handle control, and get a good gate.  I think too much time is wasted on worrying about SpeedControl settings, and forgetting about the basics of good slalom course skiing.

[scoke]

 

In an ideal world, Engineering design is based on logic and innovation.

In the real world, Engineering design is based on a suits business model and strategic plans.

 Either way, with all the questions in this thread, the answers are very straight forward and obvious. The truth is out there!

 

[eleeski]

I got to judge the best skier division yesterday (including John Horton - he is a damn good skier!). Conditions were perfect and they skied quite well. Several of the skiers started at C2 for their first two passes then switched to A2 for 35 and deeper. Maybe they were changing for the fun of it. But they were happy with the pulls and the setting change.

I did a similar thing changing from C2 to C1 at 32 off but I didn't get past 1 ball. That had nothing to do with the ZO - I'll blame the experimental ski (or the lack of skills). And that wasn't planned. I just forgot Shane's recommendation of C1 for the MC until then.

No magic either way (good or bad) for the feel of the ZO pull from my PP classic KX- PX10 with the weight run high.

Kirk drew Stargazer. On his opening pass he claims he got massively gassed from 5 to 6 and didn't make the pass. Huge bummer for his overall score. My dislike of Stargazer grows.

Eric

[Horton]

Never seen SG do anything strange besides give goofy mid times. Ski with it all the time and never been gassed. That Boo he skied behind is just very strong.

[MrJones]

Well, we skied our first ZO tournament on Saturday. Luckily Scoke was there and gave me some pointers. Started B2 but wound up on C2 as I (and Scoke) felt the boat was on me long off the second wake on the B setting (36). The Nautique felt ok. The MC felt very strong, but the same MC felt super strong to me last summer on SG. Overall my scores were about what they should have been for how practice has been. In short, it felt a bit more firm/hard in the pull, but SG practice to ZO tourney was not terrible.  

 Eric.

John is being tight lipped on the Elite, but if you judged him this weekend how about a little "observer review"??? Of course, don't get yourself in trouble with the Galactic Leader.

sj

[eleeski]

Remember the picture of John a while ago? He looked nothing like that! The ski was remarkably smooth and stable - after cranking a radically tight turn. Lots of ski was in the water without chatter or bounce. And he was nice and early. Now I don't remember John as being that smooth when I've seen him before. The printed average I had on my judging sheet was pretty close to what he ran there - despite a horrible gate at 38 he got around 2 ball.

Actually the smoothness of the ski was remarkable enough that it really highlited equipment differences. A couple of (higher seeded) skiers didn't ski as well and it appeared as if the skis were chattering and/or searching for an edge. Of course, some of the skiers had skis that seemed to handle on the water nicely as well. But John was within 1/2 buoy of the round's top score. Imagine him without that stilted one handed gate...

Eric

 

[MrJones]

Interesting. I only saw CP ski the Master's finals in the rain. (Missed Saturday's skiing) Even in the rain and on Robin lake I thought the ski looked very "smooth."

Now we just need to know if it was the ski or Seth's coaching responsible for John's form.

sj

[Boody]

We occassionally have SG surges.  This weekend, I was driving when the boat surged towards the end of the pass.  Had a 7.24 3 ball but finished with a 95.  Did this a few times during the weekend, but most passes were perfect.  I don't believe the surges were driver error.

[ForrestGump]

And now I don't know what to think. We skied behind Marcus Brown's 08 40th MC197 yesterday.  With the old sw with only A, B, C. It felt good at both B and C.  WTF??? Thank goodness I'm just a hack! lol

[Thomas Wayne]

I know absolutely nothing about GPS, other than how the only unit I ever ownedsaved a group of us from certain peril in a whiteout blizzard while snowmachining several years ago.  So if my question/proposal is silly, justchalk that up to general GPS ignorance.

Is it possible that over the course of 16 - 17 seconds of continuous accessa GPS signal may occasional "flutter" or "scramble" in someway?  I mean, cell phone calls break up all the time and radar signals canwaver a bit... so could it be that some anomaly in the GPS signals (caused by sunspots,greenhouse gasses, or interference from UFOs) be responsible for theseoccasional glitches?  Perhaps this is something that PP and ZO would beloath to admit (if true), but what do the more learned members here think ofthis possibility?

TW

[Horton]

Shane,

Where are you? Were you behind the boat in Arvin?

[ForrestGump]

John, MB was out here in Texas this week.

[skispray]

I usually ski behind zero off in practice so maybe I've just gotten used to it, but I wanted to share this: For the last month or so I have been skiing in practice behind perfect pass classic instead of with my typical practice boat.  I've also gone to a few tournaments where they've had the latest version of zero off in all the boats (which have all been nautiques) and I've skied a couple times behind a friends mastercraft with zero off.  Additionally, I skied one weekend behind a malibu with stargazer.  To be honest, changing from boat to boat and system to system has had no effect on my skiing.  When I'm on the handle end of the rope, I honestly can't even tell which system is being used.  I usually ski on "B" behind the zero off system available to me in practice and "B2" in tournaments - I've never even tried anything else.

 My point is that if you don't have the chance to practice behind all the systems, then maybe it is noticeable, and the psychological effects could certainly throw you off.  However, as the systems become more available (in time) there is hope for all you guy struggling or mad about zero off!  

[ScarletArrow]

TW -

Interesting question...yesterday I was an observer while pulling someone 32off.  After 2 ball the boat backed off and slowed way down as if the driver cut the throttle only to resume normal speed an instant later.  The driver and I looked at each other in that moment each wondering, "what the heck just happened!"  It was only a split second, but it was unlike anything I had seen or experienced with ZO.  Could we have lost a GPS signal for only a moment?  We did notice that the segment time from 1 - 2 seemed fast and theorized that perhaps the computer overcompensated.  Not sure.  Didn't happen again with dozens more passes.

[Roger]

Skispray, how much do you weigh?

 

[skispray]

Roger, I weigh between 170 and 175, although I believe I am a fairly light skier compared to my weight.  Very good point, I have heard the transition is much different for heavier guys.  However, I was only trying to convey that there is hope! (in the long run).

[Roger]

That has been my observation. Skiers of around 170lbs and under are not impacted by the new system nearly as much as those over that weight. Looking at our tournament from this weekend, virtually all the lighter skiers (that don't own ZO boats) skied much closer to their practice averages than those of us who wiegh more. It seems that at 185lbs, I either need to drop 15lbs or drop 40k on a new boat or ski perfectly without ANY MISTAKES.

The frustration of all this has already caused me to withdraw from Regionals and Nationals this year and I'm seriously considering dropping tournament skiing all together.

[skidawg]

I have noticed that on cloudy days our boat runs diff, than typical days (mc w/ gazer).  Coincidence, who knows,  but it does feel diff.

[jwr]

I was really scared about ZO from everything I had heard.  Then I pulled my sister trick skiing behind her boat with ZO and it made me hate it even more.  The boat was constantly speeding up and slowing down, but she swore she couldn't feel it.  I switched it off and pulled her using the old fashion art of driving the boat, and she couldn't tell the difference. 

 I finally skied my first tournament behind a ZO boat, and I loved it.  I practice behind a 07 MC with PP.  I'm about 205 skiing on a 67 SS at 34.  I skied one set behind a MC and two behind a CC and all felt very good.  I did fall early on my first set,  behind the MC, but it wasn't ZO's fault, I got on the  front of the ski and it died.  The second two sets felt great.  

 For me ZO on B2 skied close enough to perfect pass that ZO is no longer even a consideration of mine, and I will just keep practicing with PP, no need to upgrade. 

[Roger]

jwr, what is your practice average and what did you run in the tournament?

Also, division/speed?

 

[jwr]

I'm one of those 98 to 100 bouy guys.  I ran 2 at 38 off in the 2nd and 3rd round of the tournament, and I was early and wide.  I panick at 38 and try to force the pass instead of let it come to me.  I'm M3, 34 mph.

[Roger]

Well, you're an anomaly based on the data I've been collecting, but I'm happy for you.

[jwr]

I've been told I was strange my entire life.  I really was dreading skiing behind ZO and I was pleasantly surprised.  I was actually complaining about ZO on the dock, before my first round, not even haven skied behind it before.  I have only taken 3 rounds, maybe I'll learn to hate it.

 I'm sorry you are having trouble with it.  What problems are you having with ZO?

[Roger]

Specifically, ZO compared to PP Classic:

1) Gate timing is different (though not nearly as bad as last year when ZO came through the gate at 34.2 while PP Classic came through at 34.7).
2) Too much time at the buoy. I've been experimenting with the switch to emulate, but can't seem to get it perfect.
3) ZO is brutal if you get late and try to catch up by pulling hard. Instead of slowing the boat (so maybe a 95 becomes a 97 or 17:00), the boat adds throttle and where with PP you arrived at the next buoy after pulling hard at about the same width as a normal pull, with ZO you arrive late and fast.

Tonight, I tried to make PP as brutal as possible. I went out an ran a couple of 28s at KX Normal (my usual). Then I ran one at KX+, then one at KX++, then two 32s at KX++, then 3.5@35 at KX++. Even with this setting, I skied more consistently than I do when I ski behind ZO (I had never tried KX+ or KX++ before tonight). The only skiers I know skiing consistently with ZO and weigh over 170lbs either own a ZO boat or have access to ski several sets with ZO before each tournament (present company excepted of course).

I plan to continue using KX++ and running hot times going forward to see if I can get some edge on ZO when I ski tournaments. If not, I will simply not ski them anymore...

I have another 3rnd tournament at Miami this weekend two more practice sets Thursday night, so we'll see how KX++ does for preparation.

BTW, I really mean I'm happy for you, not that you're strange /vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-smile.gif

[jwr]

Yeah I know, I was just kidding, but thank you.  I am a little strange and that may be helping me.  My normal practice site is usually very windy and rough.  Most people wont ski there unless it is dead calm, and there are no other boats around.  I practice anyway, I just bend my knees and go.  When I get to a tournament and get to ski good water, it just seems that much easier.  I really believe that making some practices more difficult is helpfull.  I also take opportunities to ski good sites to practice on new things or shorter line passes.  It is hard to get a good one ball with a knuckle head on a tube screaming by.  Not that there is anything wrong with that.

[eleeski]

Roger, while you are in experiment mode try KX-. I emulate ZO with KX- PX10 and I run the baseline RPM lower and my skier weight higher. This gives a very late hard hit. The hit seems very short so I have a lot of time at the ball. I'm not sure if the effect is a good simulation or just a mental coping technique but I transition easily to ZO. I use C (now C2). At 165 I'm one of the lighter skiers so my pull might be different.

I'm also one of the least stylish skiers. My pulls are all over the place. I cannot agree with you more that the problem with GPS speeds is as you stated "3) ZO is brutal if you get late and try to catch up by pulling hard. Instead of slowing the boat (so maybe a 95 becomes a 97 or 17:00), the boat adds throttle and where with PP you arrived at the next buoy after pulling hard at about the same width as a normal pull, with ZO you arrive late and fast." Stargazer makes it up at 6 ball and I find that tougher. PP Classic with a skilled driver does give the best pull but we will never get that (or Phil Adams' soft hand drive) in a tournament again.

Messing around with PP settings might make the feel of the pull less critical. Running more hot times might get us used to the make up hammering. Maybe some crappy driving is all we need to adapt. I'm not quite ready to ski with tubers in the course ahead of me but I  try to spin and ski through the backwash a bit more. Maybe I can get up to Stan's and figure out the new ZO letters and numbers. But time is softening the impact. As long as it doesn't take so long that my age related deterioration of skills keeps me from ever skiing well (or maybe it is that funky ski).

Eric

 

[Roger]

"Roger, while you are in experiment mode try KX-. I emulate ZO with KX- PX10 and I run the baseline RPM lower and my skier weight higher."

I have tried KX-. However, your description of how KX works is not correct. Minus causes a softer pull overall with a longer throttle duration (similar to A on ZO). If you doubt that, try your "make it everytime pass" with your usual KX- setting, then come back on the same loop with KX++. I think you'll have a different view of what "hard hit" means in relation to PP classic. Going up the KX ladder last night from normal to ++, it was not night and day between each setting, but I arrived cross course earlier with more time on each setting up. It will take a few sets to get used to ++, but I believe I will better be able to handle ZOs brutal reactions once I do. Time will tell.

 

 

[eleeski]

Perhaps the key to my easy transition to ZO is in the extra weight I add to the skier. When the switch engages it adds lots of extra RPM.

PP Normal 0 should be the softest pull. The switch is ignored and the RPMs are kept constant at all times. Throttle is added only to maintain RPMs.

My understanding of the KX settings is in the timing of the extra switch generated RPM increase. - has little delay and + has a bit of a delay. But I could be wrong on that. I do know that when my switch was broken the feel was very different (and I didn't like it). I will definitely try the KX++ right after the KX- (I wish I had a "make it everytime pass"). Thanks for the input!

Eric

[Horton]

Maybe it is the home made ski

[Roger]

I agree with your first statement, the extra weight will have an effect on both the KX factor and the PX factor.

KX settings however, have nothing to do with the switch and are available and have the same effect even if the switch is removed. KX is how aggresive and how long the throttle is applied and works as a factor in rpms of your weight (which is why the extra weight you've added is having an effect). Minus has RPM added slower and hence has to stay on longer to get the same time through the course. ++ brings the RPM in faster and hence has to cut off earlier to get the same time in the course. Think of KX- being more like ZO A and KX++ being more like ZO C. PX is an additional RPM factor (again based on your weight) that is added when the switch engages and removed when the switch disengages. For me, the net effect of the switch is either more or less time at the buoy since a higher number means more RPM is either removed or added.

Here are the two settings from the manual:

7. PX (Rope Switch Setting)

Factory setting is 0, which is the off position (typical values range from 5 – 10). If the optional Slalom Switch is used, this is the percentage of skier weight which is applied during each pull (i.e. A value of 10 would apply 20 rpm to a 200 pound skier). A value of 0 means no pull from the switch.

8. KX (Throttle Response)

The KX value represents the throttle control response of the system. Under the current rules, a skier is encouraged to use the factory settings or normal (represented by an "n" on the screen), but has the option for a higher more immediate throttle response setting (+ or ++). As well they have the option for a lower KX (-).

 

I think I'm going to try your additional skier weight theory; you might be on to something there!

[D Wolters]

I am one of the lucky one's who gets to train behind ZO.

 In fact if truth be told I ski a set behind a 00 malibu  w/PP6.5 and then 1 or 2 sets behind 09 malibu w/ZO

The setting I have chosen with ZO is C2. What I have found out or feel is that w/C2 as soon as you put the handle away ZO brings on the gas...BUT...as soon as you come off the second wake ZO removes it.

 What I feel with this setting is:

After the second wake I am free of the boat and the ski will cast out. At the completion of the turn I never beat the boat to the turn and all is good as long as I can stay in a strong stance

With all of the other setting I tried the things I would feel was,

After the second wake you could feel the boat running w/the handle (chasing the boat)

At the completion of the turn the boat wasn't there (beat the boat to the turn)

C2 feels more like PP 6.5 at normal and none to me. 

[Roger]

Thanks for the input. I have not tried any of the C settings yet, but plan to. I'm hoping for one ZO set tonight before the tournament this weekend, but I don't know if that will happen or not. Don't know why I never tried it, but hey, I never tried KX+ or KX++ until Tuesday night and had no real difficulty with them...

[D Wolters]

Roger,

The way I see it is everyone's afraid of C except the big guns. Truth be told, to me it feels more like PP. I will say it is a little stronger and the MC is skied behind was a lot stronger. Don't know what to tell you about that one.