Big dawg sandbaggers

[MrJones]

Rare, but I agree with Horton on this. The exception would be if MM was a 35 or 36mph division which would make it a unique event.

[Klundell]

I decided to ski M2 with an OM rating this year at Western Regionals for a couple of reasons. 1) I had never won a western regionals and wanted that experience. 2) I was skiing in the division where I would have more equal competition. Skiing against MB, TW, and NP. Sort of feels like I'm just out there for fun not really competing. I did ski in a pro event last year to get that experience of skiing against the best in the world but I certainly wasn't really competing.

[liquid d]

It started out with a bang, but very few are ever in it. Is is nice to be able to ski against men3,4,5....but we're doing that on Thursday and Friday. Maybe the answer is keeping the division so special events can put them together and make the 3,4,5 divisions bigger with more medals at regionals/nats. If a division has 30 or more, give out 10...or something to that effect...

Open is a different ballgame- the younger skiers deserve a chance to go for the records that were set before them (kc, zane, etc come to mind), before having to go for open- there's plenty of time for that business.

 

[mshaw200]

@MAD11 your scores only go into the MM ranking list if you ski in a tournament as a MM, not just because you achieve that level

 

@eleeski there is no qualification (as in a certain score) to ski in a Big Dawg, only requirements such as being 35+, and haven't placed in the top 10 in a pro slalom event in the past 3 (or 5 years).

 

@ Mr. Jones wow, you actually wrote that so people could read it? That you agree with horton? :)

 

There was a discussion a couple of years ago when I was on the rules committee to make it mandatory to stay in MM (or Open) thru that years nationals if you decided to compete in either of those divisions during the year. Of all the "mandatory" division discussions I think this was the best ones so far but it didn't get past Rules...

[Horton]

Maybe the question is "what is the propose of nationals"?

 

Elite divisions for people with real jobs is a great idea. I do not see that as being in question. If any elite division belongs at Nationals is my issue. Otherwise we start down the road to ability based championships. In a way we are already there.

 

A very famous old school Sr judge once referred to age division winners at nationals as "best of the rest". Unfortunately this is an accurate description.

 

 

[Horton]

Is it bad that i am posting while i tower judge?

[thager]

No, but not wearing your glasses is bad!!!!

[skitocompete]

We really do need a system to support OM/OW/MM vs age group divisions. First and foremost we have migrated to a ranking system that has levels and you must understnd to make this sport grow you have to recognize performance at the local, state, regional, national, international, world, and open/PRO level. Have you ever asked CP if he cares about the M2 National record? WE have made great strides with the ranking system and it setup to support recognition at various levels so lets just continue to tweak and improve it.

This is potentially going to the rules committee this year and versions have gone before and been turned down. I think this will pass this year if properly proposed.

Using MM as an example and say 2.5@39 is the min qualification to get to level 9. Well you as a skier have the option to ski Men 3 or MM at regionals/nationals rightly so as you are ONLY a MM QUALIFIER. To get to the new level 10 (irony here!) you set the % equal to a significant performance (say top 3% and that equates to 6@39). Well if you achieve level 10 that SKI YEAR then guess what you are now an MM PRO (yes we solve the amateur pro thing and this allows you to be designated accordingly). You MUST for that SKI YEAR ski MM at Reg/Nationals. This would work the same for OM/OW. Do you think CP and RJ want to be designated as pros or age group skiers?

 

Our ranking system could easily be tweaked to support this and remember it is a clear reward to be designated as a PRO vs. just a qualifer (open men qualifier is about 1ish @39). This could also be used to support the elite rankings.

 

Suggested Level 10/Pro ranking for open MEN 6@39 (figure %)

Suggest Level 10/Pro ranking for OW (not sure but maybe 5 @38)

suggested Level 10/Sr Pro for MM (6@39)

 

the only ambiguity here is Some will want to increase the percentage and that equates to lowering the performance to be designated level 10/Pro but remember it is a reward and people want performance and recognition as a PRO. Also logic rues for overall skiers as 1 event OM/OV/MM qualifer counts toward age group overall and Pro is all or nothing (yes just a handfull could get negatively affected in a Ski year).

 

I have asked someone on the rules committe to propose.

 

 

[Than_Bogan]

@skitocompete. You've lost me. I think you need to start by explaining what you are trying to accomplish.

 

We can then debate whether that is worth accomplishing and if this proposal is the best way to accomplish it.

 

I would also suggest a new thread, as this seems fairly unrelated to MM perceived sandbagging.

[ForrestGump]

THAT'S what we need. Another level that no one understands.

[bishop8950]

Hortons question is good wrt ability vs age based competition in the Nationals. If we did remove ability based so everything was clear wrt age divisions, would the M3 guys be happier? I don’t think any of us expect MM or OM/OW to disappear from Nationals so I assume we will continue to have the format of age and ability based.

 

As long as we have elite divisions, I think skiers should have the choice, period. No forcing up. One part of a recent proposal was that if you CHOSE to ski MM (not qualified), you stayed there for the rest of the ski year. Similar how you have to choose your division before Regionals and ski the same at Nationals. Personally I am happy to ski MM and stay there vs M3, but what if I want to ski one round as OM for fun? I don’t want to be forced to stay there.

 

I don’t think there is enough abuse of the current system, or a superior rules proposal that will lead to change (mostly the latter). I think the options for those that don’t like it are A) fly to Okee and heckle and/or B) propose change to the rules committee. I haven’t seen a proposal I would vote for over the current situation, and I have no better ideas. The sport is better off as we passionately challenge it and want it to improve, but part of me is just happy we have a rules committee/Nationals at all.

 

[Klundell]

@skitocompete I like the idea too.

[Horton]

I support level 11

[Horton]

Or i am confused

[ToddL]

Every successful solution starts with a clearly defined problem statement. Before a solution can be discussed, there must be high agreement on the problem statement. Is there a significant number of folks who agree about what the problem is?

 

 

Lack of clear separation between "pros" and amateurs and how/when can a skier cross that line in either direction?

Lack of clear purpose of MM/OM/OW vs. Age Divisions?

Misunderstanding about the intent of Nationals?

Making competition reasonably competitive?

Everyone must get a blue ribbon?

 

Once a problem statement is set, then try to determine potential root causes... Ask the "5" why's? Why is that so? Then ask the same question again of the answer to the prior "why"...

 

Once some potential root causes are identified, then you can start looking at solutions for addressing the root causes and solving the problem.

 

[elr]

Why can't we let skiers that are elite qualified pay two entry fees and ski BOTH age group and elite at US Nationals? Or in the case of some, three entry fees and ski AG/MM/Open. Seems as though it could help with OA and international issues.

[Double7s]

If having a choice is important, than make a choice and stick with it! Flipping from elite to a age division is where it looks like there is a sandbagging issue. Unless you are in a slump or hurt, there is no reason to ski down.

I have read that there is a scheduling issue for some that determines which event they ski for nationals. They all ski on Saturday except M5. How is that a conflict?

Seems ironic that there is not a conflict of schedule with the Big Dawg. Was that planned?

If you deserve the right to choose, would you ski Big Dawg or Nationals?

[bishop8950]

The fresh concepts in this thread are Horton raising USAWS Nationals ability vs age and the "level 10" concept. We need more new idea/challenges.

 

@Double7s: My choice is clear, I don't have single M3 score in the last few years.

 

Forcing the skier to choose wouldn't have what I think is your desired impact. They could work backwards from whatever event they wanted in the Nationals and ski that all season (ex M3), and still ski the BigDawg. Forcing choice or something close was proposed and didn't stick.

 

Forcing skiers up by score ("level 10") would have an impact as long as skiers didn't tank scores to keep from qualifying for level 10, which would be sad.

 

There were scheduling issues in the past, maybe not this year.

[Horton]

if you are in this thread please look at this

 

http://www.ballofspray.com/forum#/discussion/6029/please-add-your-real-name-to-your-account

 

[Drago]

I don't think I'll ever run 39 again, but if I do, I'm looking forward to being a Pro. Who will pay me to slalom ski at that point: USAWaterski, or "skitocompete" personally?

[schroed]

I'm not sure any rule that would force a skier into a certain division is the right way to go. I would think that peer pressure would work well enough. I've seen it work with a few different skiers. Also, I'm not sure adding another level to designate someone as "Pro" would be effective. It's pretty easy to look at the ranking list and see who those people are. I think forcing those people to ski in MM or OM is a mistake. Are you going to force a 17 year old B3 skier to ski against Nate Smith even though he's never won a national title? That doesn't seem right.

[Horton]

So do we want boundaries or not? I just do not like the idea that the nationals MM champ might be M3 age and have a lower score than the M3 Champ. Or that the Last place MM guy could have a score higher than all the M3. And so on. Ski in your group at Nationals. Outside of Nationals and Regionals I think MM is a great idea and am all for it.

[Drago]

National and regionals should be age div. only. Regionals should have an Open with a little prize $. The top 5 in each age at Nats be qualify to ski in the Mm or open cash prize later in the week. What to do with Open men over 35 yrs old?

[Horton]

Cash Prize. That is a whole other thread.

[The_MS]

Not everyone can be the best. There is only 1 first place. This is a dont keep score of the soccer games while growing up problem. Someone has to loose.

[Horton]

@MS that is exactly why i think ability based does not belong at big show

[bmiller3536]

@MS I could not agree more

[Than_Bogan]

I agree with Horton and MS at the same time. I assume the universe will now implode.

[dave2ball]

How about going back to an EP based system. Put the EP between 3-5 @ 38 or higher in men 3,4,5 and delete MM. This may solve some of the problem for nationals regionals . Like years ago you will get the best of the best and anybody on the dock has the chance to bring home some hardware .

USA will not like this idea because this will reduce their cash flow. But it will make the nationals something special again.

[mshaw200]

@dave2ball we can't be so quick to want to just get rid of MM, this isn't just a slalom division anymore. This is the ONLY division for me to ski and train to compete and get ready for events like the Pan Ams and Sr. Worlds.

 

I agree that there are people that are skiing in their age divisions at Nationals that SHOULD be skiing in MM. I can't explain why they do it. Since the inception of MM overall I personally have not skied in my age division. Any time I see one of my scores mistakenly show up in M3 I get it corrected, but thats me

[unksskis]

@mshaw200 Respect!

[Double7s]

I like the level system. It allows us skiers dictate the cut off point, not a committee giving us a score.

[Horton]

@mshaw200 I agree that you are elite. I just do not think it is logical that you should ski out of age division at Nationals. You and the skiers are your level should come and to battle within the age group. I do not understand the downside. I think it is better for the sport as a whole.

[dave2ball]

mshaw200 I know you ski in your respective division and I respect that. Like always it is a hand full of people who screw it up for everybody else.. What do I get out of skiing the nationals? Nothing.The Nationals carry no weight as far as the best skiers being able to ski, you have MM skiers who have won Big Dawgs skiing in their respective age groups which is their choice. USAWS has to make a choice one way or another if they want the sport to grow. Does Europe or Canada have this same problem??????

[Jody_Seal]

So Mark as usual we keep developing rules and divisions for the minority within our organization. MM for instance your the only one in MM overall kudo's to you for skiing in the division but at this time as you say it is the only division for you to ski and train for! Well as stated before that really is not the case as now men 3 can jump at 57k on a 5 and a half ramp, slalom scores carry over as do trick scores. so for you MM it is not an issue as you are a men 3 skier, now if their were men 4 or 5 that wanted to ski on an international basis at the above criteria they would ski in the international men division in a R or L tournament under the conditions needed.

Keep in mind I am only being the devils advocate on this as I had really hoped the MM division would have taken hold and been the great elite senior men division that it was envisioned to be! But this has not transpired and again many skiers that politic for it have returned to age group competition at the regional and national championship level. So why have the division?

[The_MS]

I can ski into 39 on a good day and I have no chance of winning M4 unless everyone else goes down early. Guys like me should not be invited to nats. Bring in the top 15 or 20 and let them compete. Running 120 skiers on 2 lakes is a waste of time, gas and money.

[gjohnson]

@MS Agreed. It waters down the national championships. You should have to qualify for the tournament at Regionals and make it a prestigious tournament. In it's current form, it's just a very expensive ski ride for the masses. As mentioned earlier, some of the best skiers don't even show up. Right now in M4S, the 30th seeded competitor's average is 11 buoys off the number 1 seed and 7 3/4 buoys off #10.

[Klundell]

@MS I can't say that I agree. There are other events where we get to watch just the best of the best battle it out. Having nationals more inclusive gives many skiers who have either just picked up the sport or who are still trying to improve to just get into nationals a goal to shoot for. Especially the kids. I remember as a boys 3 skier trying so hard to improve so I could just make it to nationals and it was a great honor just to get there and beat a few people. Right now my wife is in this boat and is working her guts out in both the on and off-season to get better so she can just make the nationals. I think and inclusive nationals is good for the sport.

[liquid d]

Nationals is big and should be bigger. To say you can run 38 and have no chance to medal is ridiculous....and not true. The Olympics would last about 2 days with your attitude.

To qualify for nationals is a great accomplishment and it should not be any more exclusive than it is.

There has always been the prob with open dropping in and now it's mm and open...only way to fix is just have age divisions at reg/nats ...give away more medals...an 8th or 9th place in men1 or men2 would really mean something...and yeah, I think trophies/medals are a big deal. ..motivates the heck out of kids.

[kfennell]

I would agree that the nationals is too easy to get into. I cant even run a pass at my max speed every set and I could have gone easily and probably will next year. Am I really nationally competitive? Obviously not but Florida sounds cool, and regionals will be at the house so it will be easy to qualify.

[MrJones]

Ah ha! Back to disagreeing with MS. The world is right.

 

Nationals should be a week long water ski event. (It should end with the US open on the weekend, but that is another thread) Let's all be honest. There is no other reason to be in this sport except to have fun. No matter how good you are or aren't there should be something at Nationals for you. If you are there to win, go to win. If it is to check out and buy new gear for next year, great. If is a ski ride for you, but your kids and wife get to compete, then enjoy the family's week together. If it's a chance to catch up with old friends from where you used to live or went to college then great.

 

I agree the logistics of the event are difficult. Everybody knows (pretty much) the skiers who have a chance at winning. Still, we are a small sport and a big get together once a year is a good thing. (IMHO of course)

 

 

 

 

[eleeski]

Stan's MM goal is to never get a score in M5! I'm not good enough in overall to ski MM overall so if I want any overall score I need to ski age division - as the rules dictate.

 

@mshaw200 is overall elite - and rocks! He understands the spirit of MM and international competition. MM has more prestige than age division. I will challenge Marc next year in tricks but this year I am chasing an overall score (fwiw).

 

@MS is off the mark on his Nationals philosophy. I won my first National title from a VERY low seeding. If you qualify, GO! Plus winning a division of many skiers is far more worthy than getting an uncontested title. And the skill required for any qualifier is very high on an absolute scale - and the top seeds are unreal.

 

Eric

[The_MS]

I finely made the cut to ski on lake 1 when I was in M3. I was all fired up that I got to ski in front of all the people in the stands at Oke. Problem was that I was 3rd off the dock on Sunday AM.

The park was empty, the vendors were tearing down already and my wife was the lone spectator in the stands. The first 2 guys go down on their 1st or second pass and now its my turn. Splash at 5 ball@35. What a great way to spend money and have the thrill of a life time.

[mshaw200]

@jody seal actually M3 can jump at 57k but not on 5.5', they can only jump on 5'. I will, as far as I know, be the only MM overall skier this year this year at Nationals and it's disappointing. I am working on some other guys to join me, some have said they might next year, we'll see. I'm pretty sure our M4 skiing conditions matches what the rest of the world considers 45+ (Sr 2). When they upped the M4 jump speed a year or two ago (I think) that brought M4 up to the same playing level. M3 just does not still match. My reason for interjecting in this conversation is that too many times people think of MM as a slalom division. I realize that was the original intention of the division but it is no longer only a slalom division.

 

I still have hopes that MM Jump will grow as more M2 graduate into M3....or maybe I'm just one of the few 35+ guys thats not ready to jump 5'. Michael McCormick only skis in MM, I know Tommy James was jumping MM at one point

 

@MS Are you going to Nationals this year? I also disagree that you shouldn't be "invited". Qualifying for your countries national championship is a great feat and you should be proud.

 

Thanks for the compliments guys.

[Than_Bogan]

@kfennell Can you explain in more detail? What division can get in without a full pass at max speed? Maybe G1 or B1, I guess.

 

Or are you talking about overall qualification? I have no personal interest in overall at all, even as a spectator. But I still think it's totally legit to have the best overall competitors ski in Nationals even if they "suck" in one event.

[eleeski]

Waterskiing is not a spectator sport, it is a participant sport. I've seen Open run at Nationals first thing in the morning with only the judges watching. Be proud of the good performances you make - regardless if anyone is watching. You get bragging rights!

 

Eric

 

re the tag line Horton places on me, I don't care what Horton thinks -but maybe Gallagher matters.

[jimbrake]

@MS. Well that's you and your deal. Sounds like you shouldn't go to Nationals. Ever.

 

I agree with Scot Jones - the sport needs a big get-together which is what nationals is. I rarely go to Nationals because of the expense, but I want to go every year. When I have gone I just want to do as well as I can in my age division and if I ski good I like to see where that places me against the best at the tournament in my age division. For me it's just a personal gauge. You really want a ton of people to watch and be interested in you and for you to be "competitive" with best in your group? I guess we all want that to some degree, but if that is the one thing that really motivates you the most, then you need to get better at this one or work on another sport. I don't know what sport as an adult amateur you're going to get adulation at, though.

 

My first nationals was in '92 in Destin when I had to run an EP of 5 @35 in Mens 2. I was so psyched to just go and be there and see all the different faces, the Open skiers, the vendors (bought my first adjustable fin from Schnitz there), the different site, the different state, etc. I ran my opener and fell on my 28 off. Got out of the lake and went straight out on the gulf to go fishing for king mackerel, which I couldn't do at home. I don't know, the whole thing for me was a blast and an honor to be a part of.

[Kelvin]

@Kevin is in the SCR. At this year's regional tournament there was exactly one M2 competitor in slalom and none in trick or jump. Since the national qualifications include the top 5 at regionals, all Kevin has to do next year is show up and ski all 3 events - assuming 5 other M2 skiers in the region don't do the same thing. It is close to being that way for W1 and W2 as well in the SCR. Hopefully the change in sites for next years regional tournament will bring out more skiers in these divisions. Other regions have this issue with G1 and B1 (that's how a 3 year old qualifies for nationals).

[Jody_Seal]

Dang! Mark I hate it when you are right! but you see where I was going? We made a division for one or two people when They could have lined you up in open and let you ski under the criteria you need for international competition. or let you ski in open in jump and trick and slalom in men 3 as it stands you are competing with in yourself for overall as their is no others in your division except in slalom! Shoot you can do that every weekend in Florida.

 

Shoot I wish they would make a National championship division for skiers of my caliber I think we could bring in far more numbers then The MM division! Think of it Crappy old slalom skiers division that's (COS) Some of us are Crappy at tricks and jump too but I bet we could bring in the entry'$ !!!!!

[kfennell]

Kelvin said it exactly. And even if everyone on my lake showed up for M2 slalom next year I think I would still be the 2nd best, maybe 3rd if drew shows up and I dont pass Ryan. If something happens where all 8 of the guys that could beat me in SCR show up then I just ride down the lake doing a side slide and plop over the jump (maybe going 80-100 ft by then) and voila I am going to nats.

 

Edit: Nope drews only like 22-23 so he wont be in M2, Only me and Ryan that I know of in M2 at SMRR who practice more then once a month.