Why do some of us want to grow the sport?

[The_MS]

Minn has over 10,000 lakes and it is impossible to get a permit for a course on any nice lake. You need to find some holes that do not get used for rec activity and its possible. There are 4 sites that were built up here and the latest 2 lake site is bankrupt. People are not willing to buy lots on the lakes but they all want to ski on them. I dont get it. Its not like they are anymore than buying a lot on a golf course any of the lake shore on the 10,000 lakes.

[Ilivetoski]

@ob One answer may be that if you have someone at your site that dosnt ski tounments (we have a few at my private lake) and on tournment days at other sites the people who dont ski tournments could go to your site and give pulls to the general public.

[Ilivetoski]

@MS part of the reason is the price. I went down to NC for a tournment on Magnolia lake and they have LOTS for sale starting at $200,000. That is with NO house. Also can you imagine the tax because of how much your property is "worth". With public lakes it is because they dont have to buy one. They can come and go as the please especially if they are 10-15 minuites from the lake. Its close enough to justify not spending all the money.

[The_MS]

@Ilivetoski, The per foot cost of lakeshore lots on the lakes in Mn is cheaper than the public water lakes. Taxes are less due to it being a pond in your yard and not actual lake shore. You can get some lots on our lake for 85K right now. We host ski nights, have had Junior D, pro clinics and not one of any of those folks has bought in. Why is it always up to the private lake owners to grow the sport. Ed hits it right, the people that do not have access need to band together and get organized ski clubs together. Use power in numbers to gain access to public sites and get courses installed. If there is a will there is a way. Nobody ever said it is easy.

[6balls]

MS, public puddle 2 miles south of Litchfield has maybe 3 homes on it who don't use it anyway. I know a guy selling a lot on it for $29,900. Put a course in there and would be the only one using it...just like the swamp. Same lake has a 4000 sq ft home for sale for $287K.

Publics are easier to re-sell down the road b/c of their multi-use popularity...fishing, skiing, tubing, view, wally-ing.

FRom a lifestyle standpoint I'd love to buy and live in the demo home on MS' site, but I worry if I ever needed to move for work etc I'd never get out from under it. Too few people interested in a lake only big enough for buoys. The swamp we ski dwarfs a typical man-made, but it's empty b/c the wally's all think it's too small to do their thing.

On a side note, wally's are supporting us. As the people I work with get rid of their student loans they buy lake homes and "big 3" boats (v-drives) to recreate with family. Without that kind of business and the wakeboarders, we would have zippo choice in boats given our small slalom market.

[The_MS]

@6balls, if I was up in the west metro, I would be on Goose lake in a second. No one uses it and it has perfect set up. You have the prime set up. Lake and a swamp with no issues. Razor has a pretty nice gig also.

@OB, I have an hour drive to work but I dont have to drive to the lake, launch, wait out the wallys, ski, load up and drive home. Lots of time saved and if you have kids, that is more time to spend with them.

[Ntq206]

If we want to grow the sport, I believe the answer lies in getting exposure, like advertising, in non-tournament user sites or media.

 

I agree with this. I think it's important to recognize that this sport could attract many additions without even looking at a slalom course. Competitive slalom interest on tucked away private lakes is too much too expect initially.

Its going to come in the form of public lake free-skiing.

The course will be a natural evolution from that point.

I'm on this path right now.

With enough volume of people going through the above, getting courses on public lakes will slowly become easier.

 

I believe this sport needs a big image facelift. Like it or not, it's perceived as a middle-age person sport done at off-times.

I do think with the right focus from the marketing groups of the ski manufacturers, waterski associations and boat manufacturers (yes), that the image can be re-drawn to draw in the attention and interest from the young crowd.

 

The fact of the matter in reality is that this is a REALLY, REALLY COOL sport, and it needs to put it's young guns out in the forefront and market that angle like crazy. That's where it needs to be seeded now.

 

 

 

 

 

[Horton]

@Ilivetoski

Instead of a 2-3 day state tournament you are looking at a 5 day state tournament.

 

Why not simply raise the bar to get in? Not only can you control the number of skiers but you raise the prestige of the event

 

For your local class C tournment you will have skiiers who have dedicated their lives to the sport and compete in all the tournments not being able to compete because someone who is just learning wants to ski a tournament.

More tournaments. How hard is that? Here in the West tournaments all have a entry limit and the number of events every year changes depending on the demand.(roughly)

 

 

 

Also to your number of "100 who dont round balls but love skiing" well, that would be on us to go out to the public lakes and put in a course, and push the sport to the people who are still in grassroots.

First thing you have said that I like.

 

 

[Ilivetoski]

@Horton Ok, but raising the bar to get into local class C tournments (including state) is taking away what this whole thread is about. This thread is about growing the sport and getting more people into tournment skiing, well if we say you have to have a buoy average of 50 buoys (just a number) then we wont have any new skiiers competing. The new skiiers wont be getting to faster speeds and shorter line lengths, thats why they are learning. So doing that would have no effect, it would keep the same people in tournments and instead of giving the new skiiers an option as to compete or not your forcing them not to be able to. Also if we do set a bar, and a new skiier wants to come in, they have no buoy average or any stats so how would you let them in? They arent meeting the requirements

[Horton]

@livetoski I think we are missing each other on this. I am saying that if all tournaments are full there will (in time) be more tournaments. The normal Class C events simply need an entry limit. You still get to ski. It is not like the sport could double over night. Keeping the sport at it's current size or increasing it is an ongoing process. If the number of skiers grows the number of officials and organizers will also grow. If a town doubles in size over a few years does the number of schools and restaurants stay the same? We live in a dynamic world.

 

I love the idea of events like State, Regionals and Nationals being harder to get to. It becomes a skiers goal.

 

To all that are on the fence or disagree with my on this, have you ever been to a Class C without enough officials? It sucks. When you see your whole event is the same Men's 3-4-5 you have known forever you have to wonder who will judge when you are Mens 8.

[Ilivetoski]

I understand what you are saying. I have never been to a tournment with not enough officials. I do agree that getting to State, Regionals, and Nationals should be a bit more challenging. It is now to where if someone asks you about your skiing and you say "i went to nationals last week" most people hear that and think "you must be amazing to compete in nationals" when in reality, you have to be good, but not amazing.

[Horton]

@Ilivetoski be careful about that. There are a lot of Ballers that think nothing of getting to ski Nationals but there are as many or more that think it is a huge deal. Part of what I love about the sport and try to promote is that we all struggle as some level. Some guys dreams of regionals, some dream of nationals, I dream of 55K rating, others dream of winning a Dawg or Pro event. I know this is off the topic but is a hot button for me.

[Ilivetoski]

@Horton Couldnt agree with you more about the struggling. There is no skiier, pro or ameatur, who skis perfect. If they did we would have had 43 run and into the next length whatever that is. This may require another thread

[Ed_Obermeier]

@livetoski. If the bar is too high to get into a C tournament lets not forget about INT league. You compete in INT according to your ability; once your ability gets better you bump up in class so you continue to compete against like level skiers. Get good enough to meet the higher criteria for a Class C etc, go do that if that's what you're interested in. The point is that there are ALREADY plenty of tournament opportunities available if you're seriously interested in skiing tournaments, you just need to look around a bit. Your argument against raising the bar has no merit. You wanna ski tournaments, there are plenty around for you NOW regardless of your ability level.

[Ilivetoski]

@Ed Depends on your state. I live in KY and we just dont do INT tournments. 2 tourments a year per lake plus state at one. We try to get Regionals at paducha as much as we can. Does your INT rank carry over to AWSA? If not then that takes my argument against raising righ tback up because again what im saying is if you are just coming ono the tourment scene, you dont have stats or a buoy average. Thus you dont meet the bar which restricts new people from getting into AWSA tournments.

[Ed_Obermeier]

Bless you OB and best wishes for a successful summer. Definitely abundant good karma.

[Marco]

Wow OB. Beautiful job! I know first hand how much effort it takes to maintain a lake, not to mention capital projects to improve it. Do many of your members pitch in to help? I remember you said you poured your launch ramp with just a few people...

[Chef23]

@OB I think it is great what you have done with your lake it looks awesome. I live on public water in MA with two courses and if there was a private lake 30 min away with a course and a jump for $1900 I would join it also. I don't think $1900 is a lot of money for access to a private lake and a ski boat.

 

I get to Atlanta a few times a year for work I am going to have to bring my ski with me one of these times and stop by. I know you fly if you get to MA I would be happy to host you at our place. We are months away from skiing again though.

[Ilivetoski]

@OB, Is membership still avaliable at your site? We may be moving there and NEED a private lake to ski on.

[Ilivetoski]

@OB exactly how far our from Atlanta are you? We used to live on the outskirts of Atlanta (not sure which side) and we may be moving back, Dad is in metals and has Atlanta is the heart of the metals industry so he has gotten like 3 job offers there so its a good chance that we move there. Your site looks great.

[Ilivetoski]

@OB Marietta sounds familiar. That may have been where we lived. I was young and dont remember. I do remember that We lived directly across the street from a public lake not sure of the name would know it if i heard it

[xrated]

@MS, correct me if I am wrong but from what I have found in the regs for MN, a course on a public lake is no different then a raft. No permits, etc needed. But just like a raft it is open to all. We have put one in on our lake up north but my bud has always pulled it for fear of issues, but nothing that I have found says you have to pull it. Might piss some people off but you can do it.

 

IMO i would rather spend the money on a public lake place over a private site, but that is most likely because I grew up on a lake and can't imagine not being on bigger water.

[The_MS]

In Carver county, we needed a permit from the local Sheriff. I guess it comes down to where you put the course. If you have nothing but issues and dont get any course time due to wallys and the like then its time to move the course to a swamp or unused area to get quality time. Minnesota lake shore taxes are out of control. Up in Nissiwa, the price of a small cabin is nuts and then you do not even get to vote on local issues due to it being a second dwelling.

[6balls]

We get permits from Sheriff in Meeker County as well. Not sure what county Razor1 is in but he also needs a permit.

I have to get one for my swim raft as well.

[xrated]

@Ms, Never heard of needing the sherrif on board but I don't doubt it the way this state works.

 

You don't need to tell me that lake shore taxes are out of control, our family has 86 acres, two sides are lake shore.....

 

I will say that cabin/shore line prices have started to come back down. Meaning people are still asking prices from 5 or 6 years ago but they also aren't getting that price anymore. Back in the prime of the good times I had buds pay 2k a foot for some of the last buildable shoreline on our lake and IMO that is just stupid high. Heck the neighbors up at the lake are trying to sell and have had it on the market for 2 years at 350k and that is to much for one of the better setups on the lake. Last ouse on a dead end road minus ares so no annoying traffic all day, etc. http://www.christianrealtynorth.com/lakelotpix/Holmgren.htm

 

I also tend to agree with you somewhat on the voting issue, as I no longer reside on the lake, but on the other hand I can see lots of people who have lake places constantly voting down levies, etc that benefit the local school and as the product of a public school in lake country I know first hand the benefits that can be brought localy via the lake shore owners. But there are more issues then just school levies that I think the second dwelling crowd take it in the shorts, then again I think at times the weekenders need to leave well enough alone and quit trying to change the way and area is.

[thager]

Wasaca County permit is with sheriff also.

[Gloersen]

Converting the depicted wakeboarders to slalom could incite growth...of some sort.

 

Damn wakeboarders.

This Link is Not Safe For Work / Do not watch with wife or children in the room

 

www.creakyrowboat.com

 

This Link is Not Safe For Work

[Horton]

@Gloersen I had to watch that video a bunch of times to make sure but it is not PG-13. I liked it (a lot) but lets try to not link or post videos like this again.

 

I do not think this is the right direction for the web site or is too far.

[Gloersen]

Actually John it probably is inappropriate, certainly won't lead to a higher buoy count; the primary objective of this site imo.

 

It's January, slalomopaenia is setting in; it was somewhat entertaining though.

 

regarding strategies to yield new PB's; a greater # of physically fit women participating would certainly help, but only if properly clad

[ForrestGump]

JD's idea of receiving an awsas membership is a good one. Approximately 6000 inboard boats on average are sold each year from 2008 on. 1/3 of those are to new inboard boat owners, meaning never having owned a ski/wakeboard boat before. You wouldn't have to give a membership to all 6000, just the ones who did not currently have a membership. While you would give 2000 memberships away for 1 year, If only 33% reupped in year 2, then you've increased your membership 4.3% year on year from boat sales alone. That starts to add up over a five year time period.

[The_MS]

Shane is right again.

[Jody_Seal]

Their really is a lot of water out their in the US to support a bigger clientele of serious skiers. Many states have watersheds and potential public locations for setting up tournament or high performance waterski conditions. Yea might have to put up with a few Fisherman from time to time, or some un sympathetic boarder but none the less their is a lot of uncharted public water for the sport in most every state.

The cost to participate in the REL world of the sport has become stupid costly when it does not have to be that way. Why do we need 60K boats to pull events when a 10 year old 200 hour boat equipped with a legal speed control will work just as well and in a lot of cases better than the new boat.

Rule's and regulation in the sport have gotten way out of hand. We now have to have end course video for jumping, far more cameras and equipment to hold tournaments then really needed, Rules that are not friendly to the development of the sport as a whole.

How would skiers like it if only one boat company were pulling Regionals or our nationals? All three events one Boat company! That's the way the Canadian nationals are!

More Skiers would come back into the sport as whole if the cost was far less and some of the forward thinkers in the sport were not poo-pooed. Ideas like the universal ramp, more competitive division ladders rather then the current age group set up. the turn around slalom idea was almost thrown out because many of the older skiers could not in vision how it would work. Another big todo in the sport is the fact that Our world and National governing bodies are considering utilizing resources (that they don't have) To push Cable wakeboarding into the Olympic's ( they don't have a snowballs chance in hell) but yet they will utilize finances and resources to try and achieve this goal that could be better utilized in generating commercial growth and exposure.

[Chef23]

@OB my only issue with INT events is that it is generally just one pull per day or two if you throw wide ride in. While that allows a larger number of skiers I like getting two or three rounds in.

 

INT is an awesome place to start out though and can be a great bridge to USAWS events that is how we used it. Having a class C or Fun tournament without the huge requirements tied to it would be great.

[Chef23]

@OB the INT events in our region do upwards of 90 pulls in a day across all the divisions with a wide range of ability levels. Some of the skiers you see at traditional events and some of the skiers are only at INT events. I feel a little guilty because if there is a multi-round or three event USAWS event the same day we tend to go to those now and we started out at the INT events.

[Ed_Obermeier]

@Chef and @OB - here in Kansas we run two rounds per tournament plus one round of wide ride. I think they charge an extra $5 to pay for the boat gas for the 2nd round, very few don't do the 2nd round. You wanna run two rounds that's your perogative, nothing to stop you from doing that.

 

I 110% agree, INT needs to mandate two rounds per tournament. That IMO is the one main shortcoming to INT as it currently exists (you out there Jac?). Most state's INT's aren't too big to be able to do that and it would be a big boost to potential participation.

 

Ed

[The_MS]

@OB, I will come down and help out.

[boarditup]

At my site, there are two rounds for the INT - maybe Wide Ride as well. Also, Friday is a fun day for practice, so you can come out and ski really cheap. But then we have a multi-lake setup.

[501Brandon]

I would have trouble with paying 40$ for ONE Round of Slalom with INT (I dont actually pay since I bring a boat but thats the fee for everyone else) when I can pay 40 for 2 rounds at C class. I had been skiing with INT since 99 and like what INT does/did. Edited since my comments were unjust.

[501Brandon]

@OB agree! I was thinking outloud and it would really be the same if we were doing AWSA at our place since we dont have a jump all we could offer would be trick and slalom. Private sites have the right to welcome in who they want when they want and the right to regulate what folks do at their place. And I am guilty of not pushing wakeboarding. I was throwing stones at the glass house!

[brody]

Up where I am we have public water everywhere you look. Only 2 private lakes that I can think of. Both have reasonable prices. In 99 we held the Pan AM games and the waterskiing sold out fast. Was one of the most popular sports, they even had to increase the seating.

 

On the public lake that I have a cabin at, the skiing, (weekend rec skiers) is starting to exceed the wakeboarders. I install and maintain our course every year and pay for it by myself, it is open to public use, and is slowly seeing more traffic but still very minimal.

 

A few years ago some people started up our ski club again which goes through phases, as kids grow up it dies, as they have kids it starts again. When they started it this last time, they had over 200 paying members, on a lake that has approx 100 cabins. There were 2 sides to the club, rec ski/wakeboard, and competitive. ( a great way to pomote the sport)

 

They soon moved the competitive side to one of the tournament lakes that is run by the waterski assoc. At first it was open to all competitve athletes. It slowly moved to only the top rated skiers could use it. (creating an elitist system and reducing the numbers) As some of the parents who run its kids were being surpased, the qualifications to be the "top rated skier" were changed to manipulate the system. (eliminating some good skiers and further ruducing the numbers). This totally killed both the ski club because they abonded the rec skiers who were the root for the competitve club, and the competitive club because there was no one left to support it financially.

 

I have spoken with many rec skiers who have no idea what a course looks like or that you can even compete in skiing. Many have said they would love to learn. There is no advertising or education anywhere aobut how to get involved in this sport. I realized that this is a assoc issue.

 

Whenever anybody I talked to hears that I have a boat, they always ask if I could teach or take them skiing cause they love it.

 

They held a competition her once, a 10 yr ran the qualifiying standard for nationals. It didnt count because the timers werent working. He ran it again and again and again. Finally they got the timing working but he missed it the last time and never made it to nationals because of the rule book. At 10 yrs why not use a friggin stop watch. Who cares if hes slightly out of tolerance anyway it wont change anything at nationals.

 

I competed in another sport when I was younger. They used to have "qualifying" competitions. The last one before nationals the scores were inflated to make sure they got as many kids qualified as possible. This increased the numbers and kept them motivated. They would still have to compete on a level field once they got there anyway.

 

Our problem is accessability, elitists asses, lack of promotion, and a rule book thats way to complicated. If you held a pro tour stop here and promoted it, I fully beleive it would do well and spark interest. It will never compete with hockey, (canadian eh!!) but at least it gives them an alternative fun family summer activity. More people would be attracted to this sport if they new more about it. This sport has everything, beautiful athletes, summer outside fun, beach, big horsepower, beer (after on the shore off couse) and water, the salvation from the heat. To many selfish people trying to kept it for themselves, until that changes, SINKING SHIP!!!

 

Side note, there are alot of NHL`ers that ski and wakeboard as a summer acitvity.

Just my 2 cents.

[The_MS]

@OB, if it works out, I will be there. Its not like we dont have any ATL flights out of MSP.

[swc5150]

I totally agree with Brody's assessment. There is a very small, tight knit, group of guys in my area with a beautiful tournament lake. When I first moved to town a few years back, I showed up with a brand new 196 and no ski partners. It was suggested I contact these guys from a mutual friend, but they wouldn't give me the time of day. I even asked if they had any recommendations where I could pop in my insta-slalom, and I didn't get a response. I'm not badmouthing anyone, as I'm sure these guys are really cool, it's just odd to me that their group is so exclusive. It's not like I arrived with a Bayliner and a pair of Dick Popes. I understand not wanting to share my private lake with too many people, but I'd at least give a fellow baller the scoop on where to find water. If barriers are put up to keep people out, even dudes like me who live and breathe this sport, it is a sinking ship.

[jdarwin]

@swc5150 - I would hope your experience is the exception and not the rule. I welcome new members on the rare occasion anyone inquires. Most of the siteowners I know are the same. More members equals more $ for the club and more help when work is required. And, if you can teach them how to drive, even better! I realize that some people just want their little slice of heaven and don't wish to be disturbed but the social aspect of the sport has always been more appealing that the competitive side as least as far as I'm concerned.

[kdeupser]

I live in Georgia, and I have pursued this crazy sport all my life. I live in Atlanta, and I am in the Atlanta Waterski club. I didn't compete last year due to lack of places to get quality water. The corp of Engineers is busting our ballers more than ever this past year. Our club has been on our site now for 50 years. We have contributed to the community in spades. First they took away our back course, then last year they had us move our one and only course left. This year they want us to stop skiing by noon, and not on certain day's. What's funny is less than a mile away from our course the City of Acworth can't get enough of us. We have weekly slalom league over there, it's a semi-private/public site. Unfortunately we do not have any more promo folks in our area to pull this event. We've tried to get Acworth to let us use the site more and they have obliged for the most part, but we are dealing with a City so it's kinda funny.

 

Yes OB has a nice site, but he's an hour south of our site. I work from 6am to 6pm, 5 day's a week. It's just to far to squeeze in with a family. We have a ton of great sites around the Atlanta area, but before the housing boom most of them that had clubs on them were bought up. For instance, Lake lane in Rome(Pure Awesomeness!), Cole Lake & Weedy Pond in Dallas, Ga, the site in Woodstock, OB's oldsite(which is still empty) and a few others.

 

However we still have some very nice sites as well if you can afford them. Most are either subdivision sites or private owner sites, like Whitestone in Ellijay, No Wake in Ft. Oglethorpe, Da Lake in Toccoa, Ballengers in Rockmart, Secret lake in Dallas, Konigsea in Woodstock, Rutleges lake in Tallapoosa, there's a place in Millegeville, another one in Jessup, another in Macon, and don't forget about Linda Giddens place down by Fitzgerald. And I'm sure I'm still missing one or two.

 

It just blow's my mind to hear people talk about growing the sport. Hell, I'm just trying to stay in it! I hope 2012 is better than 2011 was but it doesn't look very good.

[kdeupser]

I had a former waterski partner who just passed away in August who checked into it for me. He was in the "click" in Cartersville. He told me no way no how and if I even try it they'll shoot. Another friend of mine found a very small place last year just outside of Cartersville, but it's shorter than your place.

 

We've tried to buy two house's out on Ballenger's, but we just could get the numbers to jive. I'm surprised your not out there, that site skies very schweetly indeed.

[MattP]

@OB yeah I heard about a site that was once there, I used to live about two miles away and my dads brother sill lives in that neighborhood.

 

I drive about 45min south (70 miles round trip) to the other side of ATL get to OB's.

 

I will say from experience that some people in this sport are closed minded. I contacted a private site that is no less than 2 miles away from me but was given the usual outsider brush off. "I had nothing of value to offer them" "ZO Boat, Coaching Skills, or proper driving training" "Our lake is funny about outsiders"

- This is one reason our sport will NOT grow with a good reputation. Just my opinion based on one experience. It was a big turn off for skiing for me. I had really never met a skier who did not want to help another skier out (southern hospitality did not exist in this case). All I wanted to do was ski, hang out with skiers, and learn from others in the sport. I can see how this would scare someone off who was new to the sport and just trying to get plugged in someplace. This guy did not give me the time of day. I work at a ski school in the summers, I know a thing or two about this sport.

 

I gave in and got hooked up with some great guys down in ATL. (The drive is killer though)

 

[501Brandon]

I contacted a ski club just in the last couple days to see about getting a pull while in town on business... I simply asked "If you guys have anyone skiing can I buy a pull from you while in town" via their website. The response I recieved was "NOPE. our water temp has plummeted below 80F and we are hunkered down for the winter, Anyway we dont Sell pulls as you may gather from our website." I must say I was shocked. This particular club is set up on a public water way so you would think they would be more prone to welcome people.

I have seen countless offers from many of you telling one another to come by when around which is very encouraging to know that if/when you travel there are friendly clubs in some areas. If anyone is in Little Rock I will be happy to give you a pull...

[T-fromTO]

@Klondike Better to phrase it "willing to chip in for gas" as opposed to "buy a pull". Not that it would have made a difference in this case from the sound of it.

[danbirch]

Chip in for Gas? The gas is one of the smaller expenses of boating. Buying a pull makes more sense, and is a much better phrase (when asking), because it acknowledges that there are more costs associated with skiing than just the gas...

[501Brandon]

@danbirch... exactly my point! I was making sure (I thought) that I wasnt coming around to "bum" some rides and time. I personally pull my boat >70 miles round trip 4 or more days a week. I know how much more it costs than just skiing! Luckily the guys I ski with take good care of me and for that I am ultra grateful...