2 buoy overspeed rule proposal

[eleeski]

AWSA Rules Amendment Request Form

In order to request that the rules be amended you must be a U.S. Citizen and a current member of USA Water Ski with AWSA listed as

your primary sports division. This form must be submitted in electronic format to the Chairman of the Rules Committee by August 31st

to be considered for the upcoming year.

Member Name: _Eric Lee_____________________________________

USAWS Member Number___200008363___________________________

Age Division_M5_______(ex. B1)

U.S. Citizen?_Y___ yes _____ no

AWSA primary sports division? _Y___yes ____no

Rule number to change?____10.06 2) D) _____ (ex. 1.08)

Suggested wording:

D. A skier may elect to start at a speed higher than his division maximum speed,

up to his respective Open Division maximum speed, and may not return to his

division maximum speed on subsequent passes. Any passes skied at that

higher speed shall receive credit for buoys as though they were being run at

his division maximum speed plus two buoys.

 

 

 

 

Reason: An overspeed is more difficult. How much is a debatable issue. Two buoys is a reasonable (if underestimated) correction.

 

 

 

Background: Skiers trying to compete in world events or seeking Open qualifications may need to train at the higher speed. They should not be punished by facing a more difficult speed without getting some scoring benefit. While the Worlds now match AWSA age division speeds, the proposed new 65+ division may pose this dilemma anew.

 

[RichardDoane]

now you're getting carried away IMO

[LeonL]

Rule proposal: a maximum number of proposals per person per year.

[Deanoski]

Silly

[MrJones]

Not silly. It is a handicap system for those wanting to ski at higher speeds against their age group. I skied most (non regional/national) tournaments in M3 at 36 until I was 42. One year at our state championships I ran 4@39-36 with Chad (Scott) going out after me at 34. I thought I might have a chance, but he ran 1@41. Now +2 buoys would have still had me in second place, but it would have made it more of a fair fight.

[matthewbrown]

4@39 @36 is much better skiing than 1@41 @34, period.

[Klundell]

I'm not a fan of this idea. Lets make our sport even more difficult for spectators to understand who the winner is.

[MattP]

.

[Drago]

I agree with @matthewbrown. I think it's more like +6

[liquid d]

Someone steal his keyboard...now!

[Klundell]

@mattp how come I got tagged in your blank post?

[ForrestGump]

Why handicap it at the higher speed? Why not just request the rules change to score it at the higher speed?

[RazorRoss3]

When you drop speed from M3 to M4 the total buoys scored at any given rope length decreases by 6 because you no longer get credit for the long line 36mph pass so if you were going to give points to a skier for skiing faster than his speed I think +6 would make sense due to getting credit for 6 additional buoys. That being said, when you ski faster than division speed you are making the choice to disadvantage yourself and I'm not sure you should get a bonus by doing that personally.

[MattP]

I will let y'all know my thoughts on the subject in 13 years.

[ForrestGump]

+6 is essentially scoring it as it's the higher speed. Which I feel is the correct thing to do.

[ntx]

@Razorross3 I think you mean M2 to M3. M3 & M4 both ski 34

[Zman]

What are you guys smoking?

[RazorRoss3]

@ntx, I believe you are correct. Not sure how I got those confused.

[eleeski]

There are valid reasons driving the age division speeds. Occasionally, a few skiers need to ski at speeds different than the age division maximum. Currently the overspeeding competitor gets zero credit for the overspeed. Without giving a strong incentive to overspeed, some credit should go to reflect the difficulty of the overspeed. Two buoys sounds reasonable.

 

Personally, I think Open is cool. Especially if an older skier is challenging the kids. Discouraging the older skiers with zero credit for the Open speed doesn't promote the aspiring Open skiers.

 

Additionally, World tournament participation is fun. And can be good for the USA (my proposal was an AWSA rule). World speed rules have differed from AWSA rules in the past. With the (new?) 65+ senior division in the Senior Worlds that could happen again. Perhaps a reasonable rule in place beforehand could solve those problems.

 

The real buoy handicap for going faster is an interesting question. I'm not trying to answer that. I'm just trying to get a bit closer to a reasonable fix of a problem that occasionally creeps up.

 

Eric

 

[Klundell]

@scotchipman so if the rule was a full six buoys would we get to see you ski 36 again? I like that idea by the way. Full six! Anything else brings way too much confusion.

[Than_Bogan]

At +6, I'd almost definitely return to 36. It is my belief that I'd nearly always get deeper at 36/-35 than at 34/-38, and I think I'd also be slightly less outclassed at 36/-38 than I am at 34/-39.

 

For the next tier above me, I'd think the decision would be trivial. Of course, that may well be a good thing! This would almost act like a giant Open, where a lot of good-but-not-incredible skiers would stay at 36 for a long time. Some may claim that 34 is safer than 36, but I am not convinced. At least at the very short end, I think rope length has more to do with safety than speed, and at 34 I spend a whole lot more time at -38 than I ever did/would at 36.

 

Fwiw, I doubt anyone would ever go to 32. I've never tried it, but "surely" 32/-38 is much harder than 34/-35?

 

I'm not sure I really see the point of a +2 rule, but then again I can't really find a strong objection either, since it's guaranteed to be an underestimate for any top-end skier.

 

A +6 rule would be a giant change, with a lot of skiers returning to 36 as noted above. I wouldn't vote for that, but it sure would be interesting!

[eleeski]

@Than_Bogan Wait a few years, get a couple injuries and that 32mph is looking tempting. Still too far away in AWSA years but I hope to keep skiing long enough to get there. But when I do get there, what speed will Senior Worlds ski at? If it's slower, a couple extra years practice could help. If it's faster, training at the higher speed would be really valuable (at least 2 buoys worth?).

 

Flexibility and choices offered to the skier should keep interest and participation up for the masses. It's a non issue for the top of the elite. A safe experiment.

 

Eric

[klindy]

Unless I'm missing something I can only see three reasons why a skier would elect to ski at a speed which is faster than their max age division speed.

 

1. To obtain an Open rating. Once achieved the skier would ski at the Open division speed (which is equal or faster to their age division) so the only time a skier elects to ski faster it to "gain the six buoys back" which the zero based scoring eliminates with the same base starting speed. In other words, a M3/M4/M5 skier wanting an Open rating believes 2@39 - 36mph is easier to score than 2@41 - 34mph (or wherever the level 9 cutoff score is at the time). This is the scenario that @eleeski infers in the original post and most of his other comment above. I this case a more practical (and infinitely easier to understand) solution would be to propose a 34mph threshold to obtain an Open rating (presumably the same "score" at the slower speed (2@39 - 36 OR 2@39 - 34 would both punch your ticket for Open). This is the same kind of solution which is used for jump where there are different ramp heights and speeds among the divisions. Since skiing in Open (or MM) is optional, the only skier affected is the one wanting to ski faster so no need for a handicap "bonus".

 

2. Skiers wanting to post a IWWF ranking list score in divisions where speeds may vary fro AWSA rules. In this case you should be able to ski at the faster speed in a class L tournament (which is necessary to be posted on the IWWF ranking list anyway). Since class L tournaments are run under IWWF rules you should be able to do this today. This scenario appears to me to be a 'secondary' reason @eleeski infers in his second comment above. Again no rules change required nor handicap necessary. Either ski faster for the ranking list score or ski slower to compete in your age group. Again this only affects the skier wanting to ski faster.

 

3. Skiers who feel they have an advantage skiing at a faster speed. This appears to me to be what @MrJones discusses in his comments above (which do not appear to be @eleeskis reason). In this case the final score/buoy count affects every skier in the age group. That being the case any "bonus buoys" could also be considered a "penalty" for every other skier in the group. I'm not sure it's fair to "penalize" one skier for the decision of another. If the skier that wants to ski faster feels the faster speed is an advantage for him/her then they should be scored as if it was the slower speed. Adding buoys would also complicate overall scores. Currently we don't add distance or penalize jumpers who ski at various ramp heights or speeds. Why would a slalom skier get bonus buoys (effectively leveraging their slalom score) when a jumper does not.

 

I can see the reasons to actually ski at faster than age group speeds but I see no logical reason to pad their score or penalize others for that decision.

[eleeski]

@klindy If your #3 scenario is real, then I absolutely agree with you that no padding of the score is reasonable. But I have never met a skier who honestly skis more buoys at 36 than 34. There have been some awesome performances at 36 by 34 aged skiers but I believe that even those skiers got no buoy advantage by skiing faster. Two buoys is likely a significant under estimation of the difficulty of the added speed.

 

Regarding issues #1 and #2, if a skier's skills have earned the right to challenge for Open or World qualifications, we should be encouraging that! Padding the scores (by a small amount) for Regional and National placement won't do too much to shake up the top but it might help a couple skiers get to the next level (and open up a spot at the top of the age division as some qualify up?). A couple more boats and ski lakes might get sold, a couple more families dragged into the sport and I'm not sure anyone will be chased away.

 

Eric