News Flash! IWWF approves Nate Smith's World Slalom Record

[Horton]

IWWF Tournament Council approves Nate Smith's World Slalom record of 2.5 @ 9.75m from the Ski Ranch Fall Record 1 tournament on Sept.7

[Andrewski12]

Congrats to Nate!!

[Chuck_Dickey]

Cool! Way to go Nate.

 

Does it always take this long?

[Horton]

yes

[Wish]

Why? Just curious.

[klindy]

Nice job Nate!!

[Edbrazil]

IWWF 16.08 offers a bit of a clue on the time needed, since a record review is done by a committee of people spread all over the world. Although, in today's digital age, 2 1/2 months does seem a bit long.

 

But, I'm still waiting on them to do right by Lisa St. John for a potential WR set at Horton Lake in 1975. Same tournament where Kris LaPoint ran a WR of 4 @ 11.25m. An important event in the history of the sport, as it led to the establishment of the "Record Capability" standards by a special AWSA Committee that met at the 1975 Nationals.

[disland]

It seems somewhat hypocritical that the same people who insist all kinds of technology is used (boat camera, gate camera, end course video, GPS based course survey, GPS timing etc.) are the same ones who use global committee as an excuse for taking 2 months to approve a record. Seems to me that "global" would be an excuse for taking 48 hrs instead of 24 hrs.

 

Could you imagine the outcry if Usain Bolt 100 meters WR took 2 months to be approved

[ozski]

Nate Smith - "Of course I wouldn't be able to do any of this without everyone at Dthree Skis! They are always there for me whenever I need them and have clearly built the best ski in the world!"

[Waternut]

Take my comments with a grain of salt as I'm not familiar with the political aspect of our sport. I'm not trying to be negative but it may come off that way because I simply don't understand.

 

I don't necessarily see 2-3 months being a deal breaker since most people who are really involved in the sport seem to know about potential record breaking runs. However, it does make me question the attitude of the people analyzing this stuff. I don't know if they are paid or not but if someone asked me if I would take a look at a record breaking run and give my opinion without pay, I'm pretty certain I'd be driving home with a huge grin on my face barely able to contain my anticipation.

 

I mean is our sport so backlogged with world records that it really takes that long? What if someone had broken Nate's new pending record a month after he did. Would Nate officially hold the record for a month or would this committee analyze both at the same time and Nate would be the guy who broke the world record but never officially held it because it was stripped at the same time it was proven?

[rockdog]

I cannot imagine a GOOD reason why it takes so long, plenty of ordinary ones.

[SkiJay]

Related news: A couple of weeks ago, Nate ran a full 3@43 off in practice with Drew Ross driving at the Isles of Lake Hancock (an RC rated course). Bring on the World's.

[klindy]

@Waternut and @rockdog as a TC and someone who's been directly involved in several of the latest "top records" there are any number of mitigating circumstances which can cause unforeseen and seeming "impossible" delays. Not to make any excuses but even with backups of backups it becomes difficult to make all the planets align.

 

If it were as simple as just reviewing the boat path it would be pretty easy (relatively speaking). But generally theres more to the picture and especially for world records. Unfortunately essentially everyone has a "day job" too.

 

To the question of what would happen if someone else (or him) breaks it again, both would be reviewed in chronilogical order and assessed separately.

[Waternut]

Thanks for your explanation and your time @klindy

[Edbrazil]

A World Record can be held for a very short time, even in the same tournament, if performed first. A great example is Women Jumping at the 2002 Malibu Open at Bell Acqua. Emma Sheers was 2nd to last seed out in the Finals, and went 55.3m on her last jump, exceeding the then current record of 55.1m held by Elena Milakova. Next out, Elena went 56.6m on her first jump, 2 minutes and 55 seconds later (thanks WSTIMS). Both of these performances are listed at:

http://www.iwsf.com/history/displayrecords.php Scroll down.

 

[klindy]

No problem. It seems that no matter how hard to 'plan for disaster' and install more redundant systems than NASA, there's always SOMETHING that comes up.

 

Interesting story....earlier this year I was the TC at a record slalom tournament where several folks had good potential to set National or World records. n fact, we had I think two national records set - one Canadian and another US - and several 'near misses' on World Records. We had backups of backups. One thing we didnt have a back up for was the actual end course video camera.

 

As luck has it, the camera itself is fairly close physically to where folks walk through from cars to dock, etc. The mount is solid but ultimately can pivot on a single bolt. Once it's set it's generally forgotten except for the image projected on the monitor where it can be reviewed.

 

A skier broke a national record and I immediately went to the DVR to grab a snapshot file of the set. I plugged it into my laptop for a quick look to see that there wasn't some fog. focus or outrageous boat path issues to discuss. For reference the record was set on the skiers 4th pass and the rules state that the "last full pass and the record pass" must be submitted (so passes 3 and 4).

 

Somehow, someway exactly at the time the skier settled into the hole at the near end of the lake (camera end) someone bumped the camera and the image went skiewed like 45 degrees to the course. A few seconds later, the image recenters on the course (ironically better than it was originally!)! Mind you this is without the aid of any kind of monitor or way to actually see what the camera is looking at!! A few seconds later the skier heads down the lake for pass 3 and ultimately pass 4 for a new record!

 

The record has been since approved and alls well that ends well but this is a situation which was totally unforseen. Other, roughly similar, situations seems to creep up when you least expect it. I've seen ants or spiders crawl across the lens, daylight get dim enough that the buoys chance color, sun glare, etc., etc., etc. In each case, the team on site does what they can to provide some verification or alternative to prove the new record. It doesn't always happen that way but if/when it does, and everyone on site knows its a record, we do what we can to make sure it passes.

[Edbrazil]

 

Thanks @klindy for the back story. Lots of that about lots of records, for sure. I have been the TC at Miami, where they got something like 3 endcourse cameras stolen. One of them, while we were watching the video. Steve Cockeram just happened to be visiting the video area, and exclaimed: "Hey, they're stealing the video camera" or similar. And, he was right. Didn't catch them.

 

Eventually, the GMSC was able to borrow the camera apparatus designed by Dick Kreeger, which looked a lot like some sort of electrical box. Plus, it weighed a good amount, was locked up and fastened to the ground.

 

One of many challenges of that site, that has seen World Records, including Andy's first venture into 9.75m.

 

On a bit of an aside, I wonder if there was ever ANY Cl. video captured at the event where Jamie Beauchesne ran 2 @ 9.75 en France. As in ANY video, not just a camera failure. That question has never been answered, and needs to be, before that site ever gets to host another R Slalom.

[E_T]

Who has the boat video for this pass?

[Edbrazil]

Somewhere, sometime, I have seen the boat video from Jamie's 2 @ 9.75. Maybe Brent can locate it. Best as I recall, it is some sort of very extreme/athletic S-turn and recovery out of 2-ball.

[volsandskis]

Why so long? Are they investigating the FSU Winston case?