Spectator's viewpoint: Gate rule really needs to change

[Marco]

I have a friend who was scored on the live results page as "6 at -15, 0 at- 15" meaning (I assume, haven't talked to her yet) she ran her 32 mph opener, but got a 0 coming back at 34 mph. I am assuming that meant her entrance gates got pulled at the 34 mph pass.

 

The master scorebook scores her at 60 buoys, and says 6 23 long, with no mention of the zero at her 34 mph pass. Given that scenario, it would be impossible to tell the difference between 6 no continuation, and a 0 on the next pass...

[Marco]

Just talked to my friend. She said she went over the gate ball, stroked the pass, and thought the gates were legit, but they were called a miss. Flying 2000 miles for a zero on the 2nd pass. What a dissapointment!

[Jody_Seal]

I know of two gate calls where it was requested for the gate judge to replay..... this took way to long. unless it is a flagrant miss The skier should be able to continue while the the replay is being performed . Even though the gates were judged good in the end I am sure that the length of time it took for the replay had a impact on their ultimate performance.

[LeonL]

So, as @Klindy suppositioned, you really can't determine by looking at the scorebook if an entrance gate was missed. But, what then are the zeros that are in the book, few as there may be? First pass gate misses? Is this an inconsistency in scoring? Some of you experienced scorers chime in. What do you see as what should be entered in the scoring program?

[Ed_Johnson]

Jody is right, you should be innocent till proven guilty..Unfortunately it's guilty till proven innocent, and that takes way to long.

 

My feeling is if you bump it, run over it, displace it, etc, that should go to the skier. If it is a "Clear," no questions asked miss, your guilty..Instead, a Jury is convened, and a trial performed, while the guilty party sits in the water, while the forensic experts give their testimony, and the court renders a decision.

 

Whether you are innocent or guilty, with the excessive wait time, you will suffer either way.

[MattP]

I count 14 no continuations and 4 missed gates out of 590 pulls at Nationals.

[ForrestGump]

It's an epidemic! We've got to change the rules!!!

[webbdawg99]

@MattP Looking at the nationals website....it may not be telling the entire story on missed gates.

 

A skier in my division ran his 35 but missed his gates at 38. His score shows 6@35 off.....not 0@38.

[A_B]

Nate has missed his gates more than that.... maybe someone needs to work on their gate instead of changing the rule?

[The_MS]

The G1 winner had her gate pulled at -28 but she won by 1 ball anyway.

[Chef23]

I believe there were 3 missed gates in Boys 2. One of them was entry gates on opening pass and it was a clear miss I was on the shore near it and I said to the guy sitting with me oh no he missed his gates. I know there was another missed entry on a second pass and a third skier missed his exit gates which was scored 5.5@22.

 

I don't necessarily believe that there should be a change to the gates but there are a few things that might make things more smooth. First is the tie goes to the skier. Too often it seems like judges look at a tough call as a miss. The gates are moving around as the skier comes through them and if it is a tough call to me it seems like it should count as a make. Second if the skier catches any piece of a gate it should count as a make. Third and this is a little more radical what if we did away with the video replay. It seems like if 2/3 judges call it as good the times a gate is called as a miss it would be a clear miss.

 

I don't know if these thoughts rehash some stuff already above they probably do. But the added benefit of eliminating video is that it would open up a lot more sites to hold regionals and reduce the expenses to do so.

[klindy]

The G1 winner shows 6@22 in the scorebook. That's why I think that some/many of the 6 scores in the scorebook are also 0 scores at the next line length

 

By my count there are 18 skiers with final scores of 6 or 0. I looked each up on the "live scoring" web page and 14 show "0 @ 'whatever speed/line'" and 2 are "6 no continuation. 2 others are from M2 and M6 and those events were never published to the web. Of the 14 with zeros 4 of those skiers missed their opening pass.

 

 

[Kelvin]

In the official scorebook you can't tell the difference between a 6-no continuation and a missed gate, but on the m.okeeski.com website (if you go to the details of a skier's passes) you can tell the difference. Some of the scores end with a 6 on the last pass and others have the next pass with a -0-.

[The_MS]

From the sound of things, it doesn't appear that there were any lengthy delays with skiers sitting in the water waiting on calls.

[ForrestGump]

@OB I completely agree with you on this. Gates are a non issue. What needs to be defined is a review process.

[MattP]

@webbdawg99 ok so lets just add the two together. There were 19 times when a skier did not progress to the next line either from a missed gate or a no continuation which would have "benefited" potentially from the proposed 14m buoy rule change. That's still minimal

[A_B]

A clear miss is a miss. I'm with Ed on this. If you hit it, graze it, sink it, ski to the left of it, it's good! Miss to the right, and you are toast. If there needs to be a non-sinkable gate ball developed, then let's get one so you can see it at 41 off. I thought bungie cords were supposed to let them rise with the wake? Are people cranking them down so tight that there is no stretch left?

[Edbrazil]

I have information from a reliable source who says that the Okee courses do NOT have "elastic device"s. Could explain a few missed gates. See AWSA Rule 8.09D. Can anyone refute or confirm this? Back several years, the buoys were rigged with stainless cable running right up to the buoy. Great for ruggedizing a course with many users and many boat driving skills, but....

[BRY]

I had my -32 gates reviewed. Didn't seem to take that long, though I was surprised they were under review. Didn't feel a thump and I didn't think I was close. Came back with a "good" and off we went. I don't think it affected my skiing at all. At Okee you certainly don't have to worry about getting cold while you wait.

[Jody_Seal]

I personally helped install a replacement Goode style buoy on the turnpike lake. What they use is a length of 14 gauge wire about 3' long attached to the bottom of the Goode buoy structure and then attached by wrapping it around the location on the cross wire! No bungee at all.

 

Oops!!! No bungee's!! pull the sanction! not to code!!

[Skihack]

Back to skiing after about a 10 year hiatus and 70 lbs. Heavier. Can't ski for crap, but I haven't missed my gates. Had an OTF on pull out for gates at 12m. Will new gates fix that? :) Leave gates alone, if I can make them anyone can. I am not even using my corrective lenses and still making them. Maybe not, I can't see. :)

[A_B]

I wonder about the other disappearing gate balls in some of the pics posted out here.

If they truly go under with bungees, then that is where I feel something should be done for a record capable event. Could use a pulley system or something with fast expansion as wake hits it.

[sbink]

@ Marco

Just having one skier who had the experience

your friend did above is too many.

 

Why not support not calling the gates for 1 year trial period for F,C,and E tournaments.

No gate cameras,no gate dvr's and hard to see monitors,happy skiers,happy judges,

happy TC's,fewer delays...

If this change is not well received then it changes back to what we have now.

If this change is well received then L & R tournaments would most likely adopt

this change fairly quickly.

I have never experienced missing the gates or having my gates zeroed

at Nationals but if it did happen to you,your kids,or your friends it

takes the fun out of the sport for a while.

There is no need for this to occur.

 

My gate approach does change to a more conservative one at Regionals and

Nationals to insure they won't be missed.If I could be right up against the righthand gate buoy

without a fear of missing them I would have a better start at my hardest passes.

The above proposed rule change would give all of us that freedom.

 

Also being able to reduce the amount of electronics required on a tournament site

would help to reduce delays.Electronics and the elements don't go together very well.

My ski partner jumped off the dock and was in the water on the Main Lake Friday

and he had to hold up.He had to take his ski off(powershells) and wait 5 plus minutes

before being allowed to compete.He said it didn't bother him but I'm sure it didn't help.

I am not exactly sure what caused the hold-up.

 

It seems like this sport is becoming more and more complex while our skier

numbers are becoming fewer and fewer.It would be nice to simplify it where we can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jody_Seal]

All this for the .065 percent !! ????

[DW]

Should be pretty simple to change the review process. In Formula 1, a transgression gets reviewed by the officials while the race continues unabated. If the decision is against the driver, he/she then serves the penalty (drive through pits or whatever) but the action on the track does not stop. Much more at stake in the F1 scenario so I don't see why a similar process could not be used. Keep skiing until the ruling is determined but don't stop the action.

[sbink]

@Jody_Seal

What were the .065% names?

@OB

Why not make it easier for skiers to progress at the longer line lengths.

Anybody new to the sport has to have pretty thick skin to hang in there when many of the

skiers at any given tournament are level 8 and 9.

[Than_Bogan]

I don't think the small percentages argument is very relevant here, since it's not 0.

 

Even for a minor problem, if there is a good solution, it should be implemented.

 

Maybe it's NOT a good solution, as some have argued eloquently above. But I don't think it's right to dismiss the issue based solely on low probability of occurence.

[Jody_Seal]

@sbink No names, that was the number thrown out their percent wise of the skiers out of the nationals that had their gates judged as a miss! I think that is probably a good number for all the tournaments as A whole. In another words we are considering this for the very few that have either trouble with their gates or have missed at tournaments.

 

Would rather see our organization push to get rid of the six flip rule in tricks. This would truly have an impact on the sport participation wise. More young male skiers would re-consider quitting tricks because of having to learn toe tricks!!

[Than_Bogan]

@Jody_Seal Now there's something we agree on! Flips rule. As a spectator, I'd rather the rule be that you can only do flips than that you're limited to 6!

[sbink]

@ OB

I know the majority on this thread aren't happy with my comments.

I believe what will be proposed as a rules change to not judge the gates is

for the common good of our sport.

Probably doesn't have a snowballs chance of getting anywhere.

I seem to be in the minority(.065%).

I guess I better get to work because I can't ski if I don't work.

Thanks for your response.

Steve

 

[LeonL]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this. I think @MattP came up with the figures that yielded the .065% based on 590 pulls. Again correct me, but isn't that pulls number based on 590 skiers? If so then we have probably somewhere near 1500 passes. Then that becomes the figure we should use for calculations, and the percentage goes down threefold.

[MattP]

@LionL you hit the nail on the head. If I had 6 hours of free time I would figure out all the passes but on average we can say 4 per skier. If we add bigdawg, sr. Tour, the slalom challenges, and centurion challenges I'm sure the pulls exceeds 700 and potentially 2800 passes. We are talking such a minimal of a percent this thread bears closing.

[klindy]

There were 590 slalom pulls and at least 16 "zero/gate" and 2 "6 No continuation" scores. There are 2 others which I can't tell whether they are missed gates or no continuation issues. So assuming it's only 16 scores that's about 2.7% of the skiers. Might be close to .065% of total passes.

[Edbrazil]

.065% is .00065 of the passes? or skiers?, that's about 1part in 1500. Is this the correct # ?

 

My real problem is all the technology and $$$ devoted to the gates, and whether we really

need it. Speaking as someone who does ski course site installations as a parttime job, I'd

rather do without that potential income to simplify the sport.

[DavidP]

My daughter videoed my passes from the end of the turnpike lake. When I watched the videos, on my 22 and 32off passes (34mph) the right hand gate ball went under the water as I went through the gates. I got credit for the gates, but was surprised they went under water. Just assumed that only happened at slower speeds and longer line lengths.

 

I think gates should not be judged for B1/G1 & B2/G2. I don't see the harm in giving the younger skiers a break, they are not skiing max speed for their gender anyway.

[Marco]

My issue with the gate rule is not the fact that you need to go through them, but the way the rule is written. How is it possible to determine, from any angle at any speed, if your ski at the front of the front binding crosses on the inside or the outside of the centerline of an 8" orb that is moving with the wakes? I don't think you can accurately judge very close calls. I think that it should change to be if your ski crosses over any part of the buoy, it is good. It would be much easier to judge accurately that way.

[ToddL]

Below are my draft versions of rule changes that I am planning on formally submitting to AWSA. None of these changes require buoy moves, or skier method changes. It is all about how we handle what we currently have in a better way. I have specified Class C and E due to these classes can have rules which differ from IWWF (to avoid that issue).

 

Suggested Changes for Class C and E only. (Optional - convince IWWF to adopt this for all divisions.)

 

1) There is no need to cut gates for being too late (missing to the left of the left buoy on the way in). Only the skier's path relative to the right-hand entry gate buoy will be judged. A skier may cross the boat's path "late" to the entrance gates. Scoring for 1-ball remains the same.

 

 

2) There is no need to cut gates for being too early (missing to the right of the right buoy on the way out). Only the skier's path relative to the left-hand exit gate buoy will be judged. A skier may cross the boat's path "early" of the exit gates and score all 6-buoys and continue to the next pass.

 

 

3) Close Gates are assumed good unless evidence to the contrary is clearly present. The standard should be: "I couldn't tell that they were missed, thus I vote that they are good gates." This should not be the standard: "I didn't confidently see that the gates were good, thus they must have been bad gates."

If video gates are used, then judges should attempt to witness the gates with their own eyes despite the presence of video and despite their physical location. In the situation where video of the gates is not obtained, the judge's perception of the validity of the gate should be acceptable as a backup. Question for consideration - 7.01 Unfair Conditions - does this apply to video gate issues?

 

 

4) Clarification of judging procedure: No more waiting in the water for gate review regardless of depth of technical difficulty. Continue with "at risk".

 

 

5) Suggest 3 minutes max for gate review issues. (Why 3 minutes? ...because skier gear repair is limited to 3 minutes. Tournament equipment repair delays should be limited to 3 minutes to avoid negative impact to the skier.) If at the time expiration, there is no evidence of a clearly missed gate, the pass is considered valid. (Yes, skier advantage in the absence of clear evidence of a miss - see rule suggestion #3 above) Question for consideration - 7.01 Unfair Conditions - does this apply to video gate issues?

 

 

6) If a skier continues "at risk" due to pending gate review and the next pass is run w/o issue, the prior pass' gate question is nullified and the prior pass is valid due to successful harder pass following it.

 

 

7) If next pass is only partially successful, then the scoring is based upon prior pass' gate resolution. Again, there must be a time limit for review. See rule suggestion #5.

 

 

 

8) If the next pass is only partially successful and if there was no video was captured and no viable judges were able to eye-witness the gate's validity, then see rule #3, or...

 

9) If the next pass is only partially successful and if there was no video was captured and no viable judges were able to eye-witness the gate's validity, then there is no available evidence to suggest that there was any sort of valid gate. Thus, the skier is given an optional re-ride of that pass with the subsequent pass' score as a protected buoy result at the missed gate speed/line length (similar to an opt up situation). In other words, the partial "at risk" pass' buoy count is considered a protected score at the prior rope/speed pass with an option to re-ride the prior rope/speed pass.

 

 

[ToddL]

To clarify my last item:

 

9) If the next pass is only partially successful and if there was no video was captured and no viable judges were able to eye-witness the gate's validity, then there is no available evidence to suggest that there was any sort of valid gate. Thus, the skier is given an optional re-ride of that pass with the subsequent pass' score as a protected buoy result at the missed gate speed/line length (similar to an opt up situation). In other words, the partial "at risk" pass' buoy count is considered a protected score at the prior rope/speed pass with an option to re-ride the prior rope/speed pass.

 

 

 

Example scenario for further understanding...

Skier Ran -15 max speed

Ran -22 max speed, but the entry gates under review, skier continues "at risk"

At risk, skier ran -28 max speed and got 4 buoys

 

Now what...?

 

Three possible outcomes:

1) review completes within time limit and determines valid entry gates; score is 4 @ 28 off

 

2) review completes within time limit and determines zero entry gates; score is 6 @ 15 off

 

3) review time limit expires and there is no decision (lack of video, can't determine); the 4 buoys skied on the 28 off line are scored for the 22 off pass: 4 @ 22 off,

Plus, the skier is given an optional re-ride at 22 off with that 4 buoy score protected.

a) skier does not out ski the 4 buoys; score is 4 @ 22 off

b) skier skis better than the 4 buoys and ends up getting 3 @ 28 off; score is the skier's final performance of the re-ride set; 3 @ 28 off

 

The re-ride and protected score is given due to unfair conditions due to tournament supplied equipment failure (technical or officiating).

 

[tbrenchley]

My opinion...if it's not a record capable tournament no video review is necessary. If it's sooooo close that you want to watch a video review then the skier navigated the gates and we move on. Gates should ONLY be taken from the skier if it was an obvious miss with the naked eye. I've been a judge for most of my skiing years and it's rare when gates are pulled by me. It's never a question if they did make the gates, only a question if they did not make the gates. Pay attention and we judge to pull the gates not judge to give them to the skier.

[liquid d]

my opinion

[sbink]

@liquid d

Did that horse not make his gates?

 

 

[tbrenchley]

@sbink the gates are still under review

[gjohnson]

I guess were going to need another horse. More importantly, who killed Kenny?

[ToddL]

I love the pic @liquid_d. But ASWA's horse isn't dead. It's not even out of the "gates" if nothing is submitted for consideration. My proposals above do not require buoy moves or additional buoys. They are just adjustments to judging methods and processes to avoid delays for the skier. @ShaneH pretty much came to the conclusion that the intent of the rules are OK, but the methods and process needs to be optimized. That's my intent. Threads on BOS are great for working through details of issues, but they are not going to impact our sport unless we submit ideas via the official process to AWSA.

[chris_logan]

apparently collegiate skiers, such as @MattP, also have feelings about how their gates are called... http://whatshouldwecallski.tumblr.com/post/54437430415/when-the-judges-dont-give-me-my-gates