Should we change the gate rule – another poll

[MattP]

Aw crap did not see the first choice. I vote no change but if there HAS to be a change im for the one I voted for.

[Dusty]

Some kind of standard needs to be maintained. I still say if there HAS to be video gates, it gets looked at ONE time and NORMAL speed. Last I saw in the rules, trick passes are not judged in slow motion, over and over? But then again, I haven't reviewed the rules for trick yet this season... Benefit of doubt per existing rules is supposed to go to the skier.

[MISkier]

The review should be timely, while the skier is in the water and not of a duration that requires the skier to wait excessively to begin the next pass. Make the call and move on.

[Marco]

Repeat post from the Advanced Topics thread...

 

"If it is close, it is good". Thats the key point. There is no way to be accurate judging which side of the centerline of a round object the ski passes over at high speed, and a "miss" by an inch or two has zero effect on the skiers ability to run the pass. If there is any question that the gate was made or not, it should be judged as a good gate. A miss should need to be ovious and without question.

[aswinter05]

I still feel strongly about the "Volleyball" out of bounds rule. If ANY part of that ski touches the right hand gate buoy.... GOOD GATE! Just like in volleyball rules. The ball can be 99% out of bounds, however, as long as the ball is touching ANY part of that line... it's considered in-bounds.

 

I think unless the judges see a clear gap between the ski and the right hand gate buoy.. it's a good gate. (i.e. , a gap created by the ski passing on the southern side of the right hand gate ball)

[jipster43]

Tie goes to the runner and no video. But I still believe there needs to be a rule amendment to accommodate beginning course skiers. I had a friend in high school who went to a tournament for the first time, missed his gate, and was done. I don't think he's paid to do that again!

[skidawg]

The problem with most gate reviews is that you typically can't tell clearly because the gate dissapears from the boat wake. close calls should go to the skier.

[RazorRoss3]

The gates are a challenging aspect of learning the course and learning a new pass. That said I think the rule is fine the way it is now. Giving new and tenured but not pro skiers wiggle room is just holding us back after a small initial gain and the pros have been at it long enough that while missing the gate at 41 off can't be any fun at all I think they should play by the same rules as the rest of us.

[LeonL]

On the other poll I voted "fine the way it is", but after reading a lot of comments I feel we should go back to when the rule stated something to the effect "must be clearly out" and use that for all classes of tournaments. I believe that back then that was only for class "C". On the other poll @skidawg stated the cutting it that fine is not an advantage to the ultra short line skier. I believe that's true even for my level. I've tried "cheating the gate" to get a advantage on my lost difficult pass and have never bettered my score. Just seems to mess me up for two ball. Another comment concerning a young fellow named Nate. I think he has been zeroed twice this year and I was in the tower last fall when he got zeroed. Having said that I heard him counseling a W3 skier TWO years ago, after missing her gates, not to cut it so close and I quote him, "you don't need to do that, if I can run 39 and deep 41 by going in the middle you can run 32. Now has he change his gate somewhat to run 41 consistently. Probably not, but hey who knows.

[Horton]

@Klindly

[klindy]

I can't post in the Advanced Topic section but to @Horton's point about how we score gates there are only two (types) of tournaments that require gate video - Any R tournament and the US Nationals (rule 10.08 C.1.c). At there's no problem ONLY running groups/divisions of skiers that can break a world record at R and everyone else L or below. That's a pretty small subset of skiers since only 55k and 58k recognized and not multitudes of age groups.

 

At every other level of tournament (including L) use of gate video is optional as long as you have judges towers in the proper location and have two judges in each tower. I understand that if you have one skier who can set a record you need to set up all the hardware and you might as well use it for other divisions to reduce the judges needed and, potentially, solve some judge tower location issues. But far too many L and below tournaments have defaulted to using gate video as the first choice. Much of the problem is solved if you put judges in the right place on shore and eliminate using the video all together.

 

As far as review of the gates when available, MUCH of the time taken to review the video is trying to sort out the hardware. Even with "one button rewind" DVR's the learning curve is steep for judges sitting on the tower for 15-20 skiers a weekend (or whatever). So finding the right spot on the video is the biggest time waster. Letting a skier continue at risk wont help since if you review later (before the next skier) and take the gates you still have the same confusion on the shoreline.

 

In terms of problems like Nate's gate at the Masters - Rule 10.13 A is very clear that the decision needs to be made "before the next pass or next skier". IWWF rule 14.11 also says the score will be final before the next skier skis. So reviewing retroactively, in my opinion, is not allowed according to the current rules. Although I fully support "making sure the correct skier wins" theory of getting the call right. There are ways to solve disputes but it involves challenging along with $250 ($100 for E) and a complaint from someone but that's another topic.

 

Rule 10,08 C.2.d says "It is recommended the view be recorded". Which obviously means it's not necessary to facilitate a gate review even if you need a gate camera to solve a judges tower (or quantity of judges) issue. Further rule 10.08 D.2.c says "(If video replay is not available, the boat judge shall call the gate)". So that means, instead of the two tower judges making the gate call you use all three (two tower and one boat judge) to call the gates and NO VIDEO REPLAY IS NECESSARY for anything E or below. World rules (L and R) require the gate video to be recorded for review purposes.

 

I believe there is merit to cleaning up the 'close call'. Perhaps a clear miss is a miss and anything over the buoy (like tennis - any part of the ball on the line is good) would help simplify things. But I've seen some "close calls" that looked like somethng was over the buoy when the skier passed that are CLEARLY out when you see the review. Our human eyes using consumer grade electronics are a lot to be desired when it comes to "close calls". Indecision on the part of the judges - wanting to see the review over and over before they need to make a call is rediculous. You've seen it in slow-mo, now call it good or not and move on already.