Help find an old article!!

[webbdawg99]

I THINK Seth Stisher wrote an article that was published in WaterSki magazine somewhere between 2008-2010. The premise of the article was about "riding the slalom swing". It made direct comparison between running a slalom course and riding a swing at a playground.

 

I've contacted Seth directly but he hasn't located it yet. Any help tracking it down would be greatly appreciated!!!!

[skier2788]

Not the article but have watched this video a lot hope it helps.

 

[webbdawg99]

Excellent video. I've seen it and referred to it a lot......but I still wanna find that article!

[TylerR]

@webbdawg99‌ I'll check my magazines when I get to my place tomorrow and text you if I have it

[Razorskier1]

@webbdawg99 - I don’t have the article, so don’t get all excited. However, I have thought about that exact thing quite a lot when it comes to skiing and compared the loading and riding phases to the best skiers. My observations.

 

First, absolutely, the two are linked. How could they not be??? When you ride a swing you build speed on the downstroke (Jodi Fisher refers to this as “skiing downhill”), then after the apex/bottom, you ride that speed up as high as it will take you. Expending any energy at all on the upswing trying to generate additional speed is of no use.

 

Second, what happens when you reach the top? Well, if you swing so high that you are above the bar on the upswing (past the pylon, in boat lingo), you create slack. Now, there are lots of other ways to create slack in slalom (pulling too long, giving up the handle too soon, not maintaining direction, etc), but the concept is the same.

 

In both cases I want to load/build speed and energy on the downstroke, when it is easy. When we slalom that is because we aren’t going across, but are actually traveling on a pendulum like a swing. If I load from the buoy to the center, I am skiing downhill, creating speed without load (although load builds the closer you get to center, so resistance is key). Once I hit the midline, any energy I put forth is creating load, not speed.

 

This is all consistent with Chet’s “work zone” concept, where he states that you need to work from buoy to first wake, before ZO has you on a tight line straight behind the boat. ZO is a new element that actually enhances the swing concept. If I pull, ZO pulls harder. If I am pulling from buoy to wake, I’m not in a direct line with that 330hp engine and thus, ZO doesn’t fire up as much. The closer I get to the center, the more directly ZO is working against me.

 

Third, there is no question in my mind that the physics of the pendulum matter. Whatever height I get to on one side of the boat, there is going to be a strong tendency (if I do it right) for me to achieve a similar height on the other side. Start narrow, ski narrow. Start wide, ski wide. Here, too, it is contingent on where you “connect” back to the line. Jodi, Chet, and AM all encouraged me to be “quicker at the ball”, meaning that they wanted me to create my angle, get the ski through, and be on the handle again from as wide a point as possible, thus maximizing my work zone from buoy to wake.

 

Sometimes people will say to me that their ski ran so well that they aren't even back on the handle until 5 feet inside the buoy line. That’s all good and fine, except that also means you have started slowing, and now have less time to regenerate speed. Had you been “quicker at the ball”, you could have maintained more speed, and expended less energy in the work zone, creating less ZO spool up.

 

Hope that helps. I think way better than I ski!

 

[Jim Neely]

Not Seth but did you look at this article?

http://www.waterskimag.com/features/2014/04/01/effective-slalom-technique/