So what happens next? Is 2 at 43 the final limit?

[Horton]

Last year at Soaked, T-Gas and Smith both ran 41 off at 34 MPH 4 or 5 times each (4 ball course). When they got to 43 neither of them could get out of 2 ball. They both got 1 or 1 ½ at 43. The assumption is that the boat needs to go a little faster for them to get any farther at 43.

 

At 36 MPH CP, Asher, JT and Smith have all run 41 at least twice in the last 12 months (I think) but no one can past 1 ½ at 43.

 

Is there a perfect speed between 36 and 34 that is needed to get to 3 ball?

 

[Horton]

It would be interesting to tell the pros they can pick their speed ... any speed

[estrom]

Picking their own speed is an interesting thought. I'm guessing it would eliminate the variable of the size/strength of each skier? Without thinking about it much, that actually sounds like a better suggestion than eliminating gates since gates signify the start of the course, much like a tee box in golf. "Things that make you go hhhmmmmmm......."

[The_MS]

Nobody will touch 3 this year or next.

[Horton]

@scotchipman I just texted CP and told him to stop screwing around

[disland]

Come on they used to say 41 was impossible. Now it gets taken down at every tournament, in florida at least. Once they get more focused on it it will happen.

[ForrestGump]

CP will get to 3 this year.

[Horton]

I was sure Smith would do it last year

[Drago]

I think it will happen eventually. The guys who visit 2 more than once a summer will figure out how to turn it

[MattP]

@Horton Smith is finally on a new ski.

I think CP JT Asher and Smith all have a shot. Only have to up it by a 1/4 to start.

[Skoot1123]

Like 41 being skied this past year, I think 3 or more at 43 will fall this year too. However, it has to be the "right" boat. Once it starts happening more often in tournaments, then we'll see the trend pick up, just like we have with 41.

[Than_Bogan]

I am not buying the magic speed theory. With properly tuned equipment and timing, I'd bet those top pros would go deeper at 34/-43.

 

But also, -43 is a HUGE jump. All of my (flawed in various ways) analyses have suggested the same thing: -43 is "off the trend line" in terms of the jump in things like angle, acceleration, force loads, etc. When you get that short, a half meter is an awful lot to take away!

 

So I think "we" will be stuck working on -43 for quite a while yet, even with all the technological advancement that seems to be happening right now.

 

But certainly it's not impossible, so somebody will run it someday!

[Doug]

The record will fall this year 3 more 41s ran today in Florida at Mccormick's Will,CP and John Travers to many 41s already in the books for 2013

 

I am saying 3 1/4 this year

we shall see

[Horton]

@Doug 3 1/4? I will take that bet. I will believe 2 1/2

[doonez]

I can't remember where I read it but I'm pretty sure Nate or his coach said Nate had got round four ball at 34 In practice sometime. It may have been in the article on Nate in the waterskimag recently

[Texas6]

@Horton, it may be time for a wager on whether or not it goes down this year. I'm in and taking the under, I believe we see 3 ball rounded

[danspence]

If I remember correctly I do believe I read an article on here about AM skis and how CP and Andy both train there. When asked what the course recored was they said it was somewhere past the WR. I think that someone will get 3 this year but obviously everything has to be right.

[The_MS]

@Than is right.

[aswinter05]

Scott Tynan says he's seen Nate run 4 @ 43' off (34 mph). @horton , I'd say that perfect speed for Nate is somewhere close to 34mph.

http://waterskimag.com/features/2013/03/04/nate-smith-the-natural/3/

 

[mwetskier]

way back at the time it was decided to use half meter cuts after 38 off i bet no one ever thought it would go much past 39 1/2 off

[Horton]

@mwetski

36 1/2 off is a hell of a lot easier than 38

 

[DooSPX]

I also believe CP, Nate or T-Gas will make it back to the wake off 3 ball soon. Having it be this year... Maybe....

[Jody_Seal]

How about adding 6 buoy's opposite from the existing 6. Right hand slalom entrance!

That would change things up some.

 

 

[A_B]

Amen Jody. I would have loved to have 5-ball be my onside turn about a zillion times!

[Razorskier1]

@OB -- gonna have to make it to ATL now -- you didn't tell me you have magic water! Now, about that knee . . .

[Edbrazil]

I've heard of someone mistakenly putting in a left-hand SL course, back many years. Maybe they got a mirrored copy of the Rules.

 

HOWEVER, Chet Raley does have a left-hand SL course, along with his 2 right-hand courses. At one time, he was talking about a tournament where one of your rounds had to be run lefty. Maybe some people who've tried it have some comments. From what little I know, it takes a good while to get used to it. Chet's ski school operation is in Florida, near Boca Raton.

 

Of course, I've been curious since 2005 to see what a top pro skier could do with the narrowed course seen for one notorious skier at the Malibu Open that year. Was about 2 1/2 feet narrow on each side, or about 0.75m.

[Drago]

Ed, I'd think, looking at how drM skied, it's good for a full pass at 44 1/2, and a maybe 46 off.

[matthewbrown]

Not sure how many times we need to revisit this discussion but if the boat drives straight as an arrow, no one will get past a full 2 buoys.....if the boat path gets the max out of the tolerance and the rope too, on a perfect site with perfect conditions, then we may see 2 1/4 or possibly a half but no way no how with everything dead nuts on.....Parrish is the best bet for a piece of 3 b/c of his length

[Edbrazil]

Or, another Robert Wadlow comes along and takes a liking to water skiing. He was 2 1/2 feet taller than Chris Parrish is. Even maybe just a Manute Bol or Yao Ming.

[Horton]

@matthewbrown I wondered how long it would take for you to chime in.

[liquid d]

Parrish is the only one with the height to make 3. College teams should start recruiting from their basketball teams...

[BG1]

Asher has the best 2 ball of them all so he may have the best shot at a piece of 3. MS and Matt may be right though. It’s hard to conceive just how hard 9.75M is.

[wilecoyote]

@matthewbrown, I'm curious. You're pretty adamant that no one can turn 3, why? I'm way out of my depth to have any proper appreciation of how hard this is, other than watching these guys go for it, but, I would think that if they can turn 2, then theoretically they should be able to turn all 6 no?

 

[matthewbrown]

@wilecoyote I'm not saying it's impossible, just improbable....too damn short, hence the nodd to Parrish because of his length

[matthewbrown]

Asher and Nate are so athletic, so you never know

 

[Horton]

bump

[Stevie Boy]

There is quite a lot of people out their, who would like to see the speed set at 35mph, will this ever happen ?

[MattP]

@Stevie Boy care to elaborate on those people? I could see 35mph for a division after leaving 36 and not wanting to go to 34. But never for max men's speed.

[Stevie Boy]

Surely if CP can get to turn 2 ball, he must have a good shot at turning 3 ball, seeing that he is left forward forward, also is it possible for him to run all 6, apart from the gate, he has 3 onside turns and two off side, with this in mind and the fact that he towers above everybody else, does this favour his chances.

[drewski32]

I realize the boat path may or may not be legit, but remember that video of Andy running 3.5 in practice? Nate looked this past weekend like he has more than 3 in him right now. However, sandbagging for money means we won't see the scores upped by more than the minimum each time the record is broken. Someone will run it, but it'll be a decade from now at minimum unless politics change.

[Edbrazil]

Yup. Records can go up slowly. The Mens record was stuck at 4 @ 38 for about 5 years

during the 1970s.

[keithh2oskier]

3 @43 off considered sandbagging? What is the world coming to...

[brettmainer]

I think if you can turn 3, you can run the pass. Nate didn't turn 3, but he didn't look that far from being able to do so.

[ToddL]

Records Sandbagging... The theory is that each record comes with some $ incentive. Therefore, skiers can take home more money if they only add to the record by the next increment (likely 1/2 buoy further than before) and typically behind their sponsor's boat on their sponsor's ski. For those who believe this is real, the only way to stop this incremental behavior is to change the incentive. The sponsors could change the payout to be exponential.

 

Let's say a skier gets $2k for a new record (I have no idea what they get; let's just use this amount to make a point).

Under the sandbagging incentive program and with 2.5 as a current record, the skier can get $2k at 3, another $2k later when they get 3.25 (hard to do), another $2k when they run 3.5, and so on...

 

In an exponential incentive plan, the payouts could be something like this:

+0.25 buoy over current record = $2k

+0.50 buoy over current record = $4k

+1.00 buoy over current record = $8k

+1.25 buoy over current record = $16k

+1.50 buoy over current record = $32k

+2.00 or greater buoy over current record = $64k

 

In an exponential incentive model, there is no benefit to the skier nibbling away at records in incremental steps. They get more $ by trying to exceed the record by the biggest jump. (I'd turn the hell out of 3-ball and then 4-ball if there was an extra $8+k for it!)

 

Now, in reality... I think at 41 and shorter, scores reflect real attempts to go further. Do we really think Nate chose to not turn 3 and prevent himself from going for any piece of 4-ball??? He had a damn near perfect 1-ball, 2-ball was a little hot and he had to wait on the boat and take more lean past the center line. So, getting outside of 3 in control was about all that was left, add the extreme effort to get back for the full buoy score. Yep. He gave it his all. I don't see any sandbagging there. Still, the theory of incentivised incremental records will have theoretical merit unless the sponsor deals are exponential.

[Stevie Boy]

Let,s face it, it is likely that when Nate found himself making his way across from 2 ball to 3 ball he new a score of three was going to be a new world record, would any Pro in that situation try and turn three ball, knowing he risked ending up with 2 1/4 equalling the world record.

I may be wrong, but I reckon Nate automatically knew , he was standing up if he got the ski outside of 3 ball, he was never thinking about getting a piece of 4 ball.

[Chad_Scott]

@toddl record sandbagging. I mean first of all why is this even a conversation it's a new pending world record. While there are financial incentives for skiers. I'm pretty sure Nate was just thinking about getting a full 3. A place where no one has been before. With or without the incentive he would have done the same. He has 2. 2.5@43 off. While they are certainly seeking incentives these competitive athletes are seeking to do what hadn't been done before Your incentive idea isn't going to change that. Remember they are World Records for a reason. They don't happen everyday It will be a long wsy to 4 ball.

[Horton]

@Chad_Scott i am tempted to give you a panda for even replying to @ToddL

[ozski]

If it was all about money then my be is that D3 would have been out bid for Nate's services by now. In fact if it was all about money there would be very few if any pro skiers..

[DmaxJC_ski]

These skiers are far too passionate about the sport to just make it about money. I'm sure it adds incentive but not much more then that.

[Keith_Menard]

I have my money on Dr. Michaels.