Efficient skiing (Path and speed)

[Bud Man]

Isn’t it harder to ski what you don’t see? I believe I see the course differently now than I used to, and I feel like it has helped me. I would like to help others if I can.

 

I do not keep up with basketball, but noticed a tournament on TV recently and thought of an analogy to share. Illusions can be created or revealed by camera angle. If you look at someone shooting baskets from directly overhead, it would appear the balls path was straight to the hoop. Imagine how long it would take you to perfect getting the ball in the hoop if that was the only angle you have ever viewed. We start watching basketball from a side view and quickly learn the path we are trying to get the ball to follow.

 

I believe that I, and most others, started watching slalom from the boat and we have a burned in image of a skier swinging side to side like a pendulum. I am inclined to think that this is possibly the biggest hurdle slowing skiers from learning and progressing with slalom. It has only been in recent years that most of us have even been able to see aerial views of slalom and those are from somewhat of an angle. I have yet to see a direct overhead view. It is this view that should help us the most.

 

It could be possible that some of the best skiers see the correct path and take it for granted thinking that everyone sees it that way. I can at least say; until recently, I never did, and now that I do, slalom is easier for me. I do not always think clearly when I ski and my brain jumps back to its old default of swinging like a pendulum and I do not ski as well. As time goes on, my feelings grow stronger that no pendulum physics fit slalom at all and picturing the swing hurts skiers.

 

I believe the boat pulls a skier through the course and if the skier realizes he is being pulled and can see the path he needs to take, the person will ski better. I do not believe the skier nor does the handle at any time follow an arc path like the swinging pendulum.

 

I have a lot to say, and a lot to prove. I would like to discuss all of this progressively, so I will not start with a long and lengthy post. I am working through all the details of doing direct overhead videoing and illustrating my theories of the ability of skiing the ALMOST same path and average speed at lines 14.25m through 11.25m. I will call them the middle four, and it is the middle four that most of my focus is on now.  Once I get into running the test, I will probably throw in 18.25m, 16m and possibly 10.75m and see if they fit into my theories. It is still a little early to speak on those three line lengths now.

 

I believe I will be able to prove that as far as the middle four lines, the line lengths do not force the paths and average skier speed to significantly change.

 

I should be able to measure distant traveled and speed more accurately when I take the aerial view and plot it on a grid. So far, I believe I have skied the exact speed from the gates to the one ball (1.46 seconds) on all the middle four lines. That should prove to be a slower average speed than traveled between any of the turn buoys. To clarify; at this point in my studies, I believe that the changing lengths of lines, of the middle four, are not forcing me to change my average speed from gate to buoy one and I believe that my average speed from the gate to buoy one is a slower average speed the it is between any of the turn buoys. I plan to compile and share all my theories and test to one paper, but until it is complete, if should be fun to discuss these theories.

 

I’m sure we are going to have different opinions on these theories, but do not let that stop us from sharing our points of view. So, what do you think?

 

[Ed_Johnson]

Bud,

I do agree that it is beneficial to be slightly slower Gate to One, in relation to the higher rhythm you will maintain in the course.

I also strongly believe in the importance of mentally visualizing your path throughout the course.... I take it a step further by combining a mental image of every physical move in combination with the path and rhythm.

The next level you may not agree with, since it is not an actual path but a mental path. For me this path is skiing a Figure Eight, with the ski always moving in relation to the handle. I also visualize my COM, Center of Mass movement, combined with Angulation. This is more of a mental image of Giant Slalom in snow ski technique than accepted Waterski Technique. However, it is working for me...... I believe it is of paramount importance that everyone finds what works for THEM, and not just copy someone else's form.

Keep the discussion going,   ED

[Bud Man]

This message was whispered after my first post, so I will leave it anonymous, but I really like what the person said, so I hope it is OK for me to post it. If the person would rather me remove it please let me know and I will. (budlake1 at yahoo dot com) 

"Wow very cool indeed.......  I like this kind of out of spectrum thinking you have here and tend to agree that you will expose the much needed eye for path and skill to accomplish it by. I am really looking forward to this........ " 

There is an old term that goes; “thinking out of the boxâ€. We are all going to have to “think out of the boat.†We have to get out of the boat to ski, so while you ski, visualize the true path, the one as we should see from overhead. Don’t let your mind get back in the boat where you see the illusion of swinging side to side like a pendulum.

[Bud Man]

Here is another illusion or misconception that a lot of skiers will not agree with at first read.

 

In reference to the middle four lines:

I believe that most people perceive that as the rope gets shorter they have to GET UP ON THE BOAT FUTHER at the six turn buoys.

 

I say no to that and believe that by perceiving that will hurt your skiing and your progress. You only have to get your feet out to the buoy and the buoys are the same width out from the boat no matter what line you are skiing. People make a big mental block for themselves by thinking; “Wow, the handle doesn’t reach the buoy at 38 off.†That should not matter to the average skier, so don’t think of that as any sort of issue at all.

 

I want you to do this: Measure five feet out from a wall across a non-slippery floor, then stand at the five feet mark and stretch your arm out to the side and touch the wall. If you are of average height, you will see that it does not require but a slight lean. After doing this, you should realize that the handle reaching within six inches of the buoy is no longer to be considered an issue.

 

And, if you don’t have to GET UP ON THE BOAT FUTHER, then stop pulling so hard and overskiing you shorter passes.

 

At some point we will rule out a number of things that we thought made short line skiing harder, and if we do, then we are going to ski those shorter lines or ski them better.

 

I would sure like to see some opinions and questions.

 

My theory for the single most important thing that is affected by shorting the rope is t-----.

[jayski]

One person's perception of what needs to be done in the course in not necasssarily effective for another. The biggest issue in coaching, teaching or self improvment is understanding that certain aspects/movements of slalom are generally beneficial but the path to those aspects/movements vary greatly to every skier...

Descriptions of what is right in one persons words or the actual action they do to obtain those actions may be right for them but will probably be ineffective to the majority of skiers based solely alone on mental processing converting to action.

For example the statement that skiing with more than just your feet outside at the buoy line at shorter passes is more effective/efficient. True, less effort, and why work harder than you need to...the problem comes in that for a lot of people if they ski "narrow" they are unable to increase their requirments to suceed in the shorter line lenghts. Hence the need for some to skis as wide and early as possible in the early passes to suceed at later passes.

Most skiers have an understanding of what's required to achieve sucess in the course, it's the application that's the problem. The mental/physical disconnect...

 

[ForrestGump]

Rope length WILL determine how far back on the boat you can be at the turn.  The narrower you ski that path, the farther back you will be until the geometry makes it so that you cannot reach the buoy. Conversely, the shorter the rope gets, the farther up on the boat you have to be geometrically. Now that doesn't mean you have to be directly beside the boat, just relative to the pylon, geometry requires you to be in different places in relation to it depending on your total arm length(rope length plus body length to ski surface).

[Bud Man]

Those are very good comments.

One thing Ed mentioned was form. He said; “I believe it is of paramount importance that everyone finds what works for THEM, and not just copy someone else's form.†I believe that he is so right. 

However, even thought there are a lot of different styles or forms, I’m more inclined now than ever before that there might be only one most efficient path, at lease for the middle four lines.

 

jayski mentioned; â€...the problem comes in that for a lot of people if they ski "narrow" they are unable to increase their requirements to succeed in the shorter line lengths.†He is so right. That is why for training purposes, we can ski some passes wider and harder than we need to for strength building, but we should realize that we should also ski that line length in an efficient path on other training exercises. Just like for example; we sometimes spin at the ends and ski repetitive passes without dropping to build up endurance. My point is that there are different training exercises, and skiing wider and harder than necessary, is a training exercise and not the way we need to always ski.

 

ShaneH, everything you said is totally correct, but in reference to the middle four lines (right now), where the boat is in relation to where you are, should not be much of a factor on the path of a skier. It is not the skier who is in a different place, it is the boat that is in a different place. This concept might be the most difficult for me to explain. It is kind of like those 3d pictures. I can see it, but how do I find the words to help others see it.

 

Imagine this:

A skier rides through a slalom course on a jetski. The jetski enters the gates and exits the end gates in 16.95 seconds and has an average speed of 47mph. the jetskier travels the path that I think is the most efficient for a slalom skier. Surely he will add power at some points and bleed off power at other points between the turn buoys, but the average speed is still 47mph. Once you have that picture in your mind, add a ski boat driving through the course at an exact speed of 34.2mph. Now if the distance between the boat and jetski (when they were in line with the course) was to change between 14.25m, 13m, 12m, or 11.25m, would it affect the path of the jetski? My answer is no. There is no doubt that a snapshot picture including the boat and the jetski rounding a turn would give the perception that the jetski had to do something different to gain on the boat, but it would just be a false perception. I believe that it is that false perception that slows us from progressing.

 

We do not have a motor to push us through the course. The boat pulls us, and if we never made our ski deviate from the straight path that the boat travels, then we would never go faster than the boat. The boat going faster does not give us angle. However, as soon as we angle the ski, we increase our speed. Therefore, I believe it is angle that gives us speed. The ski angle also gives us our path. A longer path gives us a faster speed. It requires more strength to hold more angle, which gives us more speed and a longer distance to go through the slalom course, and I do not believe that is efficient.

 

It should take more than this description for everyone to see what I think I see, so please ask questions and add comments. I assure you that there is potential here for a lot of people to be helped or prove to me that I see it completely wrong.

[Ed_Johnson]

Bud,

You bring up a lot of good points and I would just like to add one; "Perception is in the eye of the beholder.".....As an example,  you are correct that you don't need to "TRY" to ski up on the boat at the shorter line lengths. What I find is it is just something that just naturally occurs. Personally, I pay no attention to the boat whatsoever. However, when I play back my video, I am surprised how far up on the boat you can be at 38 and shorter. The first time I ever tried 41, I turned one ball hard, had a ton of slack, and darn near hit the boat. Looking at the video, it was a real eye opener.

The other point is angle vs. speed. I believe Speed gives you Angle. Plus the greater that speed gives you angle the less load you will incur. Many times I have seen skiers purposely turn hard, grab a ton of angle at the ball, come to a near stop, and then dramatically get pulled up before the wakes. Thus no speed from the angle.

I feel it is much more efficient to accelerate off the apex and let the speed build the angle so you can load spray to spray vs ball to spray.

Thanks,   ED

[Bud Man]

Good points also Ed, and I like your input.

                                                                                                   

I think when I get the videoing done; I will be able to show what I now see only in my mind’s eye.

 

This is what I picture: My path through the course during the middle four lines being almost the exact same with one overlaying the other and I believe the skier will be in the same place. The main difference will be where the boat is in the picture, and it is not because the skier had to ski up on the boat. It is only because the rope is shorter which put the boat in a different place.

 

We have been analyzing skiing from the boat way too long. We have to get out of the boat to ski, so we need to get our minds out of the boat as well.

[Bud Man]

OB, I’m hoping for ALMOST exact. My skiing is inconsistent enough to not get the exact path even skiing multiple passes at the same rope length. But I am also excited to see if my theories are correct. I don’t know what to do about ZO thought. I don’t know anyone in the area that owns a ZO boat. I might try your suggestion of contacting a dealer and see if they would like to be involved in the test. It would be interesting to also video someone with a style like Marcus Brown skiing the middle four lines, and shorter.

  

How about you Ed, would you be up for a trip to SC to ski under aerial video?

[Ed_Johnson]

Bud,

I would if I had this new style I'm working on down pat. Right now I am in such an experimental phase and my boat video tells me all I need to know. My two ski partners, who are much younger than me, and ski old school, think I have lost my mind. The only satisfaction is I spanked both of them at 38 yesterday, while working on my Snow Ski technique. I admit what I am working on is "Outside the Box," but I really believe in it's potential. I know I can't go wrong, since I'm drinking Tiger Blood and being coached by Charlie Sheen.

Winning,   ED

[Steven]

Ed,

Could you elaborate on your snow theory or point me toward one of your older posts that explains your theory? I too believe that there are multiple similarities.

Thanks,

Steve

[ToddL]

Overhead Video... I think one of these folks could do it!

http://copterkidsllc.com/2010/12/aerial-demo-reel/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmDADFsjpF4&feature=related

 

 

[Ed_Johnson]

Steven,

There are 4 pages of comments on this site under the heading of "Snow Skiing Vs. Slalom Skiing (same or different).

Hope that helps,  ED

[Steven]

Thanks Ed

[DW]

Good posts.  We have used the overhead view for a long time in analyzing Nascar pit stops and then applying time and motions studies to them to decrease pit stop time.  It has worked wonders as the times have dropped from 18 to 13 seconds over time.  That view certainly reveals a lot.  Are you planning on using a boat attached apparatus to get the video?

Another useful tool is dartfish, used a lot for analyzing drivers lines, speed and position at any given time during a lap.  You can see this in use during some of the Nascar qualifying broadcasts where they will superimpose one driver over another, or during the Red Bull Air races where they do the same for two different pilot's runs.

[disland]

I have dartfish and its awesome. I believe the best way to use video is to compare yourself to yourself

[Dirt]

Bud, when you are talking about overhead video are you talking about an aircraft matching the boat speed and filming straight down or are you talking hovering over the center of the course? I have watched quite a bit of sking from overhead. I am just wondering if it matters where the camera is.

[jimbrake]

Dsmart - how is my path? Pretty f'd up I'd imagine.

[Wish]

What would work perfect would be the cable system cams they use at pro football games that hang from the bowl and move in any directions.  Imagine looking straight down on the skier and following that path moving forward at boat speed and left to right with the skier.  Loooong cables.

[Bud Man]

dsmart,

I had a surveyor last week shoot some reference points around the lake. My plan is to use four measured fishing lines on reels and shoot straight overhead (possibly 300 feet) and move it to three locations. I will mount the camera in a cradle and suspend it from helium balloons.

1^st location is centered between #2 & #3 (#4 & #5) which will give me my off side paths.

2^nd location is centered between #1 & #2 (#5 & #6) for my on side paths.

3^rd location is about 7m past (inside) gates for my approaching path to gates and approach path to #1.

 

I should be able to:

·         Superimpose all the paths on top of one another and on a grid. (Different line lengths and different skiers) (I need volunteers)

·         Measure angle of ski at any point in course.

·         Prove the slide theory wrong. (see paragraph below)

·         Measure length of paths and length of sections of paths.

·         Calculate speed at different segments.

 

I have read that some people think that a slalom ski slides sideways somewhat as you cross the wake and as you travel down the course. I think that the overhead video will prove that mostly wrong. I believe that current slalom skis track more in a path where the ski is pointed with ALMOST no side slide. I expect to see some slide in the turns.

[ForrestGump]

I can tell you that I've seen video from below the surface, where the slide of the ski is quite evident, both at the buoy and coming into the first wake. 

[Dirt]

I look forward to seeing your video. It will be interesting.  I can follow the boat path but not the skier and filming straight down is the most difficult to keep the camera on target with a gimbal system. Jim Brake, you look good from all angles. I have probably watched more aerial footage of you than anyone else. I can even guess what you are yelling when you fall. 

[Dusty]

Something else to consider?

From math, if you add, parametrically and graphically- circular motion, (swinging an arc at a given distance behind the pyon), to straight line motion, from the perspective that shows both components, you get a path that is a derivative of a sine wave.  Skier path is not a pure sine wave because a portion of it is not skidded straight-line down-course out near the buoys, the ski is turning and moving mainly unloaded from line tension. 

Isn't gate to one slower because it is not half the longitudinal distance between buoys?  88 compared to 67 feet.  I suspect skiing the same speed would require the skier to turn back across up course from one ball, at very short lines.

  There was a formula published at one time that computed skier speed with line length/boat speed.  I don't have it any more, but I recall the caveat given that the formula broke down at shorter than 38 off because the handle would never reach any further outside the course width or something.

[Bud Man]

dsmart,

When you said you could follow the boat path; what did you mean? Do you have one of those helicopters? If so, are you near South Carolina.

[scoke]

Bud, you're obviously got a tremendous amount of enthusiasm for this project and process. It will be interesting to see the after video. Unfortunately most of the video will have an asterisk by it since the skiing will all be perfect pass.

If this was 4-6 years ago, it would be cutting edge information. Unfortunately using older technology can sometimes taint results.

Shortline skiers might just raise an eyebrow and reply with "neat, cool videos but it means nothing to me as I ski ZO and thats not how I ski." Hopefully you can line up a ZO boat.

[Bud Man]

Skoke, I wish your comment were not as true as it probably is. But you are right from what I hear people saying on the forums. I will work towards running the test with a ZO boat.

 

Also, if my theories are correct, they should work behind any speed control. And from the complaints I’ve read about the problems with ZO, skiing the way I am proposing should be the best way to ski behind ZO.

 

I am hoping that when I’m through with my test, the results will apply to longer lines as well as the middle four. As much as I want to help short line skiers, I hope to help entry level even more. We need to re-grow this great sport.

 

Think about how many people get discouraged and quit because they feel like they are not progressing. And those are people still on long line. Even people that finally run a 12m line and cut to 11.25m, will pound away for a decade or more before finally running it. I have a feeling that it has mostly to do with perspective. I think that if I can correct the perspective of the skier, I can help them to progress faster and ski better.

 

One of the biggest problems for a skier, might be them thinking about a pendulum and skiing what they think they see from the boat. I hope to change that and help them ski better.

[Horton]

This level of out of the box thinking is what this site is all about. I do not know if Bud lost his mind or is a genius, but I love this level of thinking.

 

The long time ballers know I have hatched plenty of crazy ideas...

[Old MS Accout]

He is on to somthing or on somthing.

[jimbrake]

Dsmart - I think you can probably hear what I say when I fall, even from your vantage point.

[Bud Man]

I said this up earlier in this thread: “My theory for the single most important thing that is affected by shorting the rope is t-----.â€Â Â 

Did everyone know what I think it is?  

What do you think is the biggest effect of shorting the rope? Again, in reference to the middle four lines.

[Klinger]

I think it is timing.  Is that what you are thinking?

[Old MS Accout]

I believe that it is all visual. I think what seperates the really good skiers from the pack is that they see and react to things differently than most people do.  Visual perception and reaction can be learned but having it as a natural ability is what seperates the top skiers.  

[Bud Man]

Yes sir Klinger. I agree with you. Timing. 

As the rope gets shorter, I believe you have to be more patient coming out of the buoy to allow the boat to get down course enough for you to be able to use it to pull you in the correct direction which I believe is about 44°. If a skier learns this from the beginning then they don’t have to relearn it when the rope gets shorter. 

I believe the skier thinking of coming out of the buoy and turning far enough to put the handle on their hip can create too much angle and speed. Not efficient at all.  

I believe a skier is better off:

1.      coming out of the buoy while riding under his own speed back toward the wake

2.      look at the path ahead of him that will take him efficiently to the next buoy

3.      place the handle down on the front of his thigh (off centered)

4.      feel more of a forward pull in the direction of your chosen path

I do not think it is good to feel like you are turning yourself and ski sideways to the boat with a great force like you are going to rip the pylon out of the boat.

A good feeling to me is that the boat is slightly pulling me forward (direction of travel, not direction of lean) adding to my speed out of the turn and along my chosen efficient path.

[Gern Blanston]

Bud -

 it's been a while since I dusted off my "west coast slalom" DVD, but I'm pretty sure they cover the different paths that the skier takes from an overhead perspective at different line lengths.  Namely, since the boat is going a consistent speed for all passes, regardless of the speed control device used, the time that the skier will arrive at each bouoy is the same.  The path is completely different, however.  I think that's the point you're trying to make with this post.  The path at the shorter line lengths is is more rounded.  You're able to develop more angle and therefore more speed  (yes, I said that they way Suyderhoud did in the video) by working harder/more efficiently to get that angle.  You start your transition sooner.  Whereas at the longer line lengths, these efficiencies are not required so you can ski a straighter path to the bouy.  So, even at the shorter line lengths, you're actually travelling a greater distance and with more speed.

I think the pendulum analogy is only appropriate in that the width on either side of the boat is the same.  Otherwise, I agree that it's completely false.

 so, before you go to all the trouble, it might be worth your while to pick up a copy and check it out.  Hope that helps!

[Bud Man]

Gern,

Someone asked me to view that DVD last year and give my opinion. With all due respect to everyone that worked hard on that project, I did not give a supportive opinion off the ideas they were selling in that DVD.

  

Also, I hate to say this, so please do not take offence, but what you said in your first paragraph is not at all what I am saying. I believe people do ski different paths which result in different average speeds from buoy to buoy at different line lengths, but I do NOT believe they are forced to ski a different path and average speed just because the line length changed. I hope to show that I can ski the ALMOST exact path and average speed at different line lengths. I do not want more angle and speed than necessary to ski efficiently.

  

I do not recall a direct overhead shot showing an undistorted path in that video of any other either. I have never seen anyone run the test that I am planning to do.

  

When I am through, I should have accomplished proving myself wrong or right. I can accept either result.

[Gern Blanston]

Bud -

 I'm not in any way offended.  The views in West Coast Slalom are not necessarily my own.  As Marcus said, there's some good stuff in there and there's some stuff that he doesn't necessarily agree with any longer.  The premise I take from it is the idea of counter rotation and skiing efficiently - dropping the hips, getting good knee bend, and being square to the boat as opposed to pulling from the leading shoulder. Those are the things that work for me.  (and darn it if I could work on more than one at a time, life would be much easier)

They didn't show the skier from overhead in the video. Rather it was more of a graphical representation of the path the skiers take at the various line lengths.

 I believe I understand what you're saying, but I don't think the physics makes it possible for your line to stay the same path at 22  and 41 off (at the extreme ends).  I certainly wish you luck in your quest, however. I will also be interested in the results.

Didn't someone display a picture of (and excuse me if I get the words wrong) an accelerometer or a shadowbox a while back?  It was a way to map your travels through the course with gps.  Am I remembering that incorrectly?  That might help Budman in his pursuit of slalom truth.

[Bud Man]

I am hoping to see more than just my path that the shadow box is supposed to show.  I want to see where I am in relation to the buoys and the angle of the ski. The path of the ski whether it is tracking straight or side sliding, etc…

 

 

My main thoughts are on the middle four lines right now. (14.25m, 13m, 12m, & 11.25m) But, once the camera is in the air, I plan on trying other lines as well. I’m turning 54 this year so it has probably been over 15 years since I have skied 36mph, but I am wondering if I should give that speed a try as well. I might want to save that speed test until last in case I break something. Then I can sit around in a cast while I compile all my data.

 

[Bud Man]

More thoughts on the speed during different segments through the course.

 

When the direct overhead video in done and the images are superimposed on a grid, there should be four distinguishable segments that the paths can be measured and the average speed of those segments can be calculated.

1.       Gates to buoy 1

2.       Buoy to wake

3.       Wake to Buoy

4.       Buoy 6 to gates

I think I will find that the slowest segment will be # 4, next slowest # 1, next slowest # 3 and the fastest #2. However though, # 2 and # 4 are hard for me to guess without plotting it from directly above because your acceleration is delayed coming out of the buoy. Even though the distant is the same between (the gates and # 1) and (# 6 and the gates), I think the paths and speeds are greatly different. Longer path and faster average speed verses shorter path and slower average speed. It could be a tossup at this point to which of these two is faster and slower.

 

I also hope to be able to possible see a fifth segment. That would be the acceleration zone. I am hoping that the spray will allow me to mark and measure that segment.

 

Another thing that I hope to gain some understanding is the speed during loading the mass and the speed after loading the mass. To elaborate; as we come out of the buoy and “hookupâ€, the rope becomes very tight as we load our mass. Some people load hard and fast to be able change edges early, then have the mass free ride all the way to, around and then out of the buoy. I believe the mass’s “free ride†is shown by the swag in the rope. Other people load lighter and longer and have a shorter “free rideâ€. I believe at this time that this second method is more efficient and a safer way to ski. I think that Chet’s “Spray to spray†and Bruce’s “Handle control†support this second way of skiing. I am very eager to attempt to calculate the speed during and after the loading.

[Dusty]

I for sure will be interested in your results.  Some thoughts: 

 Visualize a pass at long line and then a pass at 38 off.  Where is the skier at the buoy in relation to the boat?  I know as a boat judge the skier is for sure further up on the boat at the ball at 38 off than 32 off than 15 off.  At 38 you have to even crane around the driver to see the skier at one, three, five.  Can't tell much about their path from the boat as it's sort of two dimensional from there.  From watching a lot of really good skiers at 35, 38, 39 etc- you can see that they have less time to effectively accellerate-  They are closer to the white water  and are very efficient in adding energy to reach next buoy width.  The best are really good at energy (speed)management, and don't need to add as much.

From various coaches, I have also observed that you can use a "pulling" edge relatively long at 15 off and not create too much excess energy.  At 32 and shorter, "pulling" longer- say past the white water, creates energy in a down course direction beyond that necessary to reach the buoy= slack.  I think skis are designed to turn in certain 'window' of speeds.  I know if my weight moves forward and the ski tries to turn at a certain threshhold speed, I usually get the OTF eyeball peeler I deserve. 

[Bud Man]

Dusty,

That was a very useful post that pinpointed some issues that make the shorter lines harder to learn.

 

We do get used to the ability to not be patient and start loading right at the buoy when we learn the longer lines. Then we have to latter stop skiing that way after it is burned into our brains and muscles and change to a more patient style of riding the ski with its leftover speed back to a point closer to the wake as you pointed out. Now there is a choice to load our mass hard and fast to make it around the next buoy or less intense but longer. I believe either work but hearing people talk about ZO, the second way might be more conducive for ZO and your body as well.

 

And what you said about watching short line skiing from the boat is something that I think might be the biggest hurdle for us all. As you said: “Can't tell much about their path from the boat as it's sort of two dimensional from there.† You are so right, but that is where most of us try to learn from.

 

And you said: “…the skier is for sure further up on the boat at the ball at 38 off than 32 off than 15 off.†I would believe that most everyone thinks that. I know I did until recently. I no longer believe that. I think the skier is in the same place and the boat is what is in a different place causing an optical illusion, which in turn hurts our skiing progress.

 

In reference to this picture: It looks like the man is much larger than the woman but it is just an illusion. They are both normal size. When we hit the water with the illusion in mind that we have to get up on the boat, I believe that it is detrimental to our progress. At this point in my thinking, I believe that we simply need to see the path that we need to follow, and I believe that it is ALMOST the exact path for all the middle four lines and it might hold true for others as well.

 

Again, good post Dusty. Let’s hear some more thoughts or questions from everyone.http://ldifrq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pLDhyTc2mCjl6iYLwB2jqlhb20iERSfbGC-U8-53fBacLI3y0-jYNpT48x889nJ4AHian4qOsXPdq9vmI6ObljZdUK_H_4vxH/illusion.jpg?psid=1

http://ldifrq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pLDhyTc2mCjl6iYLwB2jqlhb20iERSfbGC-U8-53fBacLI3y0-jYNpT48x889nJ4AHian4qOsXPdq9vmI6ObljZdUK_H_4vxH/illusion.jpg?psid=1

[Bud Man]

My thoughts are to take the measurements from the buoy cross line not parallel line. I hope to superimpose the video images onto a graph. But I plan to share my raw data. When I’m through, you should be able to break it down to even more segments if you want to. We should be able to get a wealth of knowledge from this, especially is some different style skiers will participate. Any advocates of wide and early Interested? How about any pros? Contact me if you are.

[Dirt]

Bud, do you need video to do what you are proposing? Is a GPS unit not accurate enough to record speed and track through the course? You could hold it over the buoys to map the course and then record data with it attached to the skier.

[Dusty]

• I'm not sure GPS is accurate enough for the task. My Garmin will not update fast enough, except for maybe gross measurements like every 50+ feet or whatever at 55K. Maybe I can borrow a radar gun, tape a square of aluminum foil to a good skier's vest and get multiple readings at points throughout the course. Then e-mail them or post them here. Computer adept people can 'map' them up for us?

 

 

I do see the point that the skier is in the same place more or less at the buoy- i.e.- we dont ski 20 feet wider at long line than 28 off. Maybe the difference is that a skier can add energy closer to buoy width at longer lines- The boat is relatively more in front of the skier than off to the side, as the relative angle(s) subtended by the rope changes as the length changes, buoy width and speed constant. Line tension occurs 'sooner'.

 

 

I've asked good skiers what they do differently at 38 over 35 and received answers like "I have to do less at 38", or like Bud Man says "I have to be more patient- there is no 'pulling' from buoy width at 38 and shorter"

 

 

The West Coast Slalom video showed a series of line tensions, that appeared to grow as line shortened. I don't recall a huge variance through the middle lines though. Anyone watched it lately?

 

[Bud Man]

David Nelson and I have communicated via phone and email discussing slalom theory. Some of our opinions are similar and some differ. I am very impressed by the charts that he has mathematically produced. He also did some very extensive test a number of years back also. I have asked him to include them for all of us to learn from. As I said from the beginning, I am eager to run my own test to prove myself wrong or right. I think that it is good to be open-minded and look at everything. David knows that I have a tremendous respect for him and his work, and it is OK if we don’t see everything exactly the same way. It is a great thing that we can share opinions and stimulate good discussions.

 

[dn]

I'll work on putting together something this evening - what I've sent to Bud piecemeal and with the help of phone conversations needs some work to make sense on the thread.

[Dusty]

A recurring "discussion" around our group has been prompted by my assertion based on math and physics, that unless the rope got longer, the minimum, down course speed of any skier is boat speed? Any thoughts? dn- I used a 5 meter radius turn at 60K (estimated turn speed at 55K) and get no more than about 1.7 g's. 65K (58K boat speed) gives 2 g's, same radius. Do you feel we can turn the ski at a 5 meter radius? Shorter, longer?

[Bud Man]

Dusty,

David Nelson did some great work that should address some of your questions. Here is a link to the thread and his attached file.

 

http://ballofspray.com/forum#/discussion/2771/skiing-strategies-path-speed-force