A totally different idea for Regionals & Nationals

[Wolfeie]

First of all I don't compete even at local tournaments, I just love to spend the weekend

on the water skiing as many sets over the 2-3 days that I can. But I have witnessed several

Nationals held at our site, both USA Waterski and INT.

 

This is probably the first subject John & I have ever agreed on. Declining numbers, and picking sites without the best conditions should be some sort of clue. I realize the Nationals is the carrott on the end of the stick for many. The Nationals should not be a goal to just qualify for, it should be a reward for the top skiers in our nation. Under John's format it would also make regionals more important. When Ski West held the nationals several times, the sponsors (booths)

did not make or break our budget, in fact it is a very small dollar amount compared to skier fees and practice rides. By compressing the schedule you will have less cost, need less officials, hotels etc...The ski and boat companies will be there if there are 600 hard core skiers or

250 of the best skiers and spectators.

 

INT seems to have it dialed in with 250-350 skiers and two pulls plus a final round for the best.

 

 

 

To pay in some cases thousands of dollars so your kid can take one ride will make this sport even it more elite than it already is.

[Klundell]

I agree with the idea that a final event with less people could still lead to more participation in the process. Again I look to CrossFit (quite possibly the fastest growing sport right now). Their qualification process is HUGE. Tens of thousands of people pay $20 just to participate and have their name on the leaderboard. They could just as easily not pay and do the workouts and look at the leaderboard to see where they would be but they pay to participate with the community. This year I placed 610 out of 4421 people in my region. Not even close to being in the top 50 required to go to regionals but I loved it and I will probably participate for the rest of my life. I love the idea of going to a local tournament and competing against somebody across the country at their site for a spot to advance to the next level.

[JohnN]

How many other tournaments don't have a bracket besides AWSA? No bracket is a race usually, not a tournament. Qualify by ranking list or a regional tournament. At Nationals run brackets so the winners work to get to the top, either head to head or by score. Maybe even a consolation bracket so everyone gets two rides at a minimum. How to make it happen in a reasonable amount of time? Here's one that I don't think I've seen yet, but it changes Nationals from a family get together - have a Jr. Nationals and a Sr. Nationals, separate events. Hard to staff and all the rest of the issues, but, think about qualifying to the US Nationals and making it through to the finals. That would be exciting, and something skiers would strive for. It solves the fun part, but introduces enough other issues I'm already telling myself it can't work...

[JWebSki]

My personal opinion would be to make it an elimination style tournament for nationals. I think this is much more exciting and the winner really has to prove that he is the best. First round every one that qualified skis. Second round is narrowed down to 12 and the top four from the second round advance to the finals. This would give multiple rounds to the top skiers in each age group. Make the first two rounds in the day and for a select divisions the finals could be at night. This would not only make it more exciting but it would allow the tournament to take up less days. I think the qualifications for nationals should be either level 8/9 or top 3 at regionals. The more exclusive the tournament is, the more those that qualify would want to attend.

 

[ALPJr]

I like the idea of more regional tiered events leading up to a smaller Nat's. I also like what I heard about this year's eastern regionals. If more major tourneys were on public water there would be a whole lot more exposure, fanfare and fun. The '66 Nat's were held at Lake Charmauggaguagchambuag... in Webster, MA. ABC's Wide World of Sports covered the event and thousands of spectators turned out. I think the best way to grow participation is for a a boat manufacture or two to get together with a ski company or two and open a public water ski school or two in central locations in all of the awsa regions, which offer lessons and rides at a reasonable cost, and put just a little local and national marketing plan in place. It doesn't have to be the big three ski boat companies or big ski manufactures either. The Gekko's, Glastron's and Maritime Skiffs of the world could drive this. So could a smart little ski shop or company. Heck maybe even a cool website or a magazine could help.

[jwroblew]

I apologize if this has been said already, 3 pages of posts to read is to much for my short attention span. It seems multi-rounds is a must, but time factor is an issue with 14 or so divisions and 3 events. Why not eliminate practice allowing the event to run longer into the evening or across more lakes. Give 2 rounds were the top 2 or 4 average scores from the first 2 rounds go into a head to head bracket. You may have to increase cost to participate a little, to offset the income lost due to no practice, but heck 2 rounds with a possibility of 3, sign me up! I may be in the minority but I never practice at a tournament site, that's what my first two passes are for and the buoys are in the same relative position as my lake.

[MillerTime38]

@Ntx no I will not be making it up to the tourney. Archery season is just around the corner

[ForrestGump]

I think along the same lines as @Horton here. You look at other sports and a lot of them qualify their nationals competitors at select national qualifier events. Body building is a good example of that. You can do local competitions, but if you want a pro card or Nationals qualification you have to place top 3 at an event designated as a qualifer.

[bogboy]

@MillerTime38‌ I think I assumed that you were someone else. Sorry.

[disland]

Before anything can change AWSA has to agree to change how Nationals is funded. There is a base line concept in the contract that the host club has to pay for judges hotels and rent a bunch of golf carts an so forth. The established fixed costs drive a minimum number of attendees or else the host club could end up seriously underwater financially. This baseline problem is what limits any discussion about how the format or qualification can be changed.

 

Reality is Nationals is really a waterski festival with a tournament going on. That is not bad or good it just is what it is.

 

How about this for an idea. Change Nationals to class C. This eliminates the need for senior judges and a bunch of cameras and DVR's and so forth. Eliminate the system of Regions sending designated judges. Go to all pure volunteer judges and drivers (like pretty much every other tournament today). This reduces huge costs.

 

Change the practice lake to a separate slalom class C, with a lower entry requirement. This way if Dad doesn't qualify for nationals he can still ski in a tournament while Jr gets to ski in the big show.

 

The purists will complain that the skier may not get the best pull or that assistant judges might make a judgement error. I say so what. There are plenty of R tournaments for skiers to go to who are worried about such things.

[LeonL]

Hey @disland, lots of blown calls as it stands. So what would be new? Nobody get defensive, now. Not pointing fingers or calling anyone out or any situation out. It just happens regardless of SR, REG or asst.

[The_Krista]

I know I'm late to the conversation...and to be honest I am tired and am still recovering from three weeks on the road...all work, no ski makes for a grumpy me.

 

But I want to say 3 things:

 

1. I (and USA-WS, AWSA, and our sponsors) are listening and seeing the same things you are. We are taking action. We aren't hitting our heads against the wall, planning to do the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We get it and a lot of the things I read just now, have already been discussed. It's nice to know we are not far off in our HQ staff meetings....when I log onto BOS and see that a lot of you have the same ideas, sentiments and suggestions I feel like we are moving the right direction.

 

2. @sunperch I unfortunately, was not at all involved in the JD banquet. That is an AWSA / JD Committee deal and USA-WS has had 0 influence or participation in it in the past. Again, this is something we are working on changing. I feel like with my experience as a junior development participant, now in my role at USA-WS, with the resources and connections to sponsors, I have a unique opportunity to elevate and influence certain aspects of Nationals and hope that my help is welcomed with JD. But again-- its technically not my/USA-WS territory.

 

3. I guess that's it. Hang in there. Keep the feedback coming. I'll take criticism over apathy any day.

 

[Horton]

Who is this @The_Krista‌ person?

[T_C]

I have been following this thread from the beginning and didn't feel my 2 cents would mean anything but after reading @the_krista post and thinking that AWSA may be listening I needed to jump in. I don't understand the need for a different format for Nationals at all. If you want to ski at tournaments with multiple rounds there are plenty to choose from... pretty much every weekend. If you need three rounds to post a good score no problem they are available. To change the history and tradition of having a prestigious one round one shot National Championship for each age division would be like saying everyone is a winner and there shouldn't be winner and loser everyone is a winner. If you don't want to go to Nationals to see who is the best... stay home and mail in your score. If you want to see how you can do against the best in your age division Nationals is the venue... Always has been. I didn't have a chance in hell of winner my division. I thought I may have a chance at a top 10. Spent the whole week at SMRR had the best time I've ever had at a tournament and tied for 5th. Missed getting a medal but oh well I got beat. I wouldn't change the results for anything. Changing the history and tradition of Nationals would be sad. There are plenty of other formats to include more people if that is the goal. You can ban me now:)

[Horton]

@tc‌ I totally respect your perspective. Clear and concise

[MillerTime38]

@TC disagree as well. I am not suggesting more rounds to post a better score. I am suggesting more rounds to increase participation. Maybe you can add to the discussion and share some of your "other formats" to help instead of criticizing others opinions.

[LeonL]

I didn't get the perception that @tc was criticizing anyone else's opinion. Just voicing his.

[Kelvin]

@disland You are on the right track. I have been to the past 6 Nationals and NEVER skied, but have been one of the "officials" getting a paid hotel twice. Those 2 times, I worked my butt off. Other times I have been just to carry my son's bags. Those times I just went to enjoy the week and didn't really volunteer to help out. Under the current system, I likely won't ever qualify for Nationals. The current system with the officials is broken. The elected/appointed officials are overworked and the volunteer officials don't get anything for their efforts. @The_Krista‌ I would like to see the statistics on how many of the elected/appointed officials actually skied in Nationals. I would also like to see how many regular and senior officials skied Nationals and didn't volunteer to judge. Changing to the all volunteer approach (with appropriate discounts for judging/officials) makes sense.

[ntx]

This has got to be the most frustrating post ever on BOS. So what I see is.

Shorter time in days.

More participation.

More rounds.

Now tell me how to do that.

@Horton‌ sereval pages ago you asked what would be the best tournament with the most fun for nationals. For me it would be open men and open women only. 3 RDS and 3 events all in three days. We can call it the 3 3 in 3 nationals. And....... No MM tricks. That sounds like fun to me, what about you?

 

Actually I really fall more along the lines of @tc with some modifications and some of @kelvin in regards to officials. It is crazy that with a event that big all the officals are overworked. In some cases the egos of the officials get in the way. There were some very experienced, and proven officials that volunteered to work the most difficult event. Calling tricks. Nope we got this was the response. In their defense, I have not heard any complaints about judges cutting correctly executed tricks this year.

[LeonL]

@ntx, I've been in a similar situation, only for a driver aspect. Say you're the chief judge (apologies to @klindy, this is just hypothetical) and someone offers to help call tricks (not a previously listed volunteer) you say ok, as the person is supposedly qualified. They screw up royally and then who looks bad? You, as CJ. So I kinda see their position, but I wouldn't later complain about being overworked either.

[klindy]

@ntx and @LeonL‌ the past few nationals have had a dedicated group of judges (made up of the appointed and assigned judges from each region) who essentially called all the tricks. This was done for both consistency and to expedite things as much as possible. It's worked very well and, assuming we don't change the format of nationals too much, I'd expect it to continue.

 

As chief judge, it's takes a HUGE load off knowing that tricks will "get done". We had very very few issues to deal with this year.

 

True other volunteer trick judges who wanted to call tricks (most quite qualified) were turned away but it's worked well.

[Drago]

I'm with @disland‌. Top 10 seeds could be R? Reduce costs, increase rounds. Score two rounds like big dawgs do, maybe run a head to head but no need, except for the Open men and women (which is the us open) or mm (remove big dawg). I've always thought the top 5(or so) in each age division should get to ski in a Grand Finale against all at their speed

[Horton]

@ntx‌ it is a messy. A lot of folks do not like my solution. I am cool with that. I guess my goal with threads like this is to make skiers question the status quo

[skier2788]

Talking about it in the boat this morning. I think the general consensus is that we would want a state tournament to be a qualifier for nationals. If you ski X number of balls at this state tournament then you go to nationals. If you don't then you have to go to regionals.

From my perspective next year I will be above the level 8 cutoff for nationals. I believe that western regionals is at Warman lake next year. (Could be wrong on that). I don't really feel like taking a week off of work and spending a thousand dollars to go ski a tournament where I just have to score above zero to go to nationals. Seems like a lot to ask a skier to do just to ski nationals. I also feel that the current setup dilutes the competition down to proximity of regionals and nationals.

[LeonL]

As I mentioned earlier, I would prefer to have it that skiing state championships is required for regionals. A proposal was put forth at SR meeting this summer that a skier could skip regionals by paying the entry fee ( or some agreed upon fee) and just not showing up. That takes care of the LOC finances.

I also observed a situation that I'm not sure I'm happy with. I know how the rules are, you win state you go to regionals, you top five at regionals you go to nationals. There was a guy that can't run a pass go through that scenario.. Should there also be a minimum level even if you qualify by placement? Or do most people agree with this type of qualification?

[skier2788]

@LeonL‌ I guess if this person is willing to ski state travel to regionals and then travel to nationals I say why not. I guess my main thing don't make it hard on the top 20% of the age division who qualify by tournament average to go. I bet @horton would consider a nationals trip if he didn't have to ski a regionals. Only a state or qualify by average. I am ok with the paying for regionals if I don't have to attend.

[Horton]

Even this year with my event held on a Saturday that one ride would have cost me at least $2,500. Even without Regionals it just does not appeal to me.

[klindy]

@horton if you flew in your family, stayed at the downtown riverwalk Marriott and ate lobster for a three day weekend I can't see you spending $2500. Count the wages for a day (or two) off work and maybe you get close. But since it would likely be "paid vacation" you really can't count that either.

 

I fully understand and appreciate that the current schedule doesn't appeal to you or to many others. I also think its a great idea to discuss options and hear lots of different ideas. But my wife and I were at WPB last year for a full week flew in, dined out, etc, etc and didn't get close to $2500.

[LeonL]

Since you're getting into dollars, here's what a ski mom at our lake told me. She said prior to going, what with her son skiing 3 events as B3 and daughter skiing 2 events as W1 they would be staying Sat night through Thursday night. Nothing happened Wednesday, just a dead day for them. Extra fees for oversize baggage, tickets, entry fees, rental cars, dining out, practice tickets, she anticipated $4500 or more. I'll speak to her this week and see what the total bill came out to be. They're not poor, but that's a pretty significant chunk of change no matter.

[disland]

Its clear that the state vs regionals problem is different for various parts of the country. Some states have bigger tournaments than others (Florida vs say Montana)

 

Suggestion- State championships tournaments can apply for nationals qualification status. AWSA reviews applications annually and based on previous years attendance can approve a state tournament to be eligible for "Nationals qualification status". Once so designated skiers can ski state and punch their ticket to Nationals, provided they are otherwise qualified. The place top 5 qualification method is not eligible for State tournaments.

[MattP]

@disland‌ I like it if we continue to use the same system we have now. How about making all Jrs top 5 at States a qualification no matter what the status is for the adults. Possibly just qualify for Regionals if they are not already. The more kids we can get involved and stay interested the better.

[Than_Bogan]

@disland I kinda think that would soon eliminate Regionals entirely, but maybe that's OK.

[disland]

@Than_Bogan‌ Maybe it will be smaller but folks will still show up to win medals and get top 5 for Nationals

[ToddL]

So, in the Tricks rankings list, I ended up 24th out of 48 M3 trickers for this ski year. However, at nationals, I placed 12th out of 17 skiers who participated.

 

I just don't feel right saying that "I am 12th in the nation" just because potentially 12 trickers who are better than me decided to not go to Nationals... Ya know?

 

There in lies the issue. Either the "title" is based upon 1 tournament or it is based upon the ranking list. Having both simply creates the opportunity to select which ever one makes you look best.

[schroed]

There seems to be a few problems with nationals that everyone is trying to solve here in different ways. Since I'm just a slalom skier I'm going to comment with only slalom in mind. With that said, here are the two main issues as I see:

 

1. The expense (both time and money) of participating in nationals for only one round of skiing.

2. The prestige and/or excitement of participating in nationals.

 

For the first issue, I would recommend some small changes. I was thinking that instead of the host site running a "practice lake", instead eliminate the traditional practice and change to a "qualifier lake". On that lake, run a qualifying class C tournament for every slalom division. Those qualifying scores would then be used to seed the nationals main event. I would suggest that the qualifier be a voluntary round and cost something similar to the practice ride. I think this would solve a few issues. First, I've never really liked how practices are run at nationals. Although SMRR did a great job, it always seems like a pain to buy a ticket, put your name on the list, and wait around for a couple hours for your turn to practice. So, I assert that this "qualifying" tournament could basically serve as your practice. If it was run this way, you could have your qualifier be the day before the "main event" and you would know roughly were you would ski. If you don't ski the qualifier, you'll be out early in your event. If you want to pay a little extra money, you'll basically get two tournament scores while you're at nationals. Also, the "main event" wouldn't really change much from how it's run today, other than how the order is decided. Additional practice could still be held on the other lakes after the regular "main events" finish.

 

The second issue is a much harder problem to solve. I completely agree that skiing at nationals with nobody on the shore isn't very exciting. I've had it happen to me a number of times for various reasons and it always feel like you're skiing in a regular "any weekend" class C tournament. In order to solve this, I think some larger changes will be needed. First, there probably needs to be some changes to the age group divisions so that divisions that only have a handful of skiers are merged with other divisions. That would result in larger divisions with more competition. Second, I would raise the level 8 requirement so that it's actually harder to qualify through the ranking list. I know this would reduce the number of people that could potentially go to nationals, but I think it might bring some prestige back to qualifying for nationals and thus motivate people to go who qualify. Next, I'd consider eliminating the MM and OM divisions for a national championship. The nationals has always been an amateur event and I believe it should say that way. For Open skiers I think we should bring back the US Open such that the world's best can ski there and for MM, they have the Big Dawg. Perhaps bringing some of the OM and MM back into their age division would bring back some prestige for winning the national title in your age group. Finally, we've got to find a way to make it more fun to hang out onsite. Live bands, bounce houses, more food booths, games to play, holding nats at places with better weather are a few of my ideas. I really enjoyed hanging out on the bridge at SMRR and watching the skiers, but there wasn't a lot to do. Maybe listening to a live band would have kept me there for longer.

[skosney]

I may need to stop reading this topic. I'll just say this ... if we keep looking at ways to make this more appealing to the middle aged elite ... then the nationals will grow old and die with us ... worst part is nobody left alive will care.

 

I like the qualifier/seeding tournament idea, but combining age groups, eliminating Open/Masters divisions and raising entry requirements won't help ... if you think the stands are empty now, it will be a ghost town along the shorelines under that format. There are already plenty of events for the elite skier ... and feel free to create more, just don't make the Nationals one of them.

 

These are my opinions of course.

[Moskier3ev]

As a member of the LOC at this years National and home owner at SMRR thank you for the kind words. " We made it a family vacation". We tried to make it a fun event for all the reasons people had listed. It is a long way and a lot of money for 1 or 3 ski rides.

 

This is my 2cents and my perspective on Nationals and a possible direction.

 

We were in WP for Nats my mother had never understood why we play this game. She came to see my son ski in Nats. She flew in about 10pm and said lets go get a drink. We went to the bar at WP Hilton, someone bought our drinks and after about 10 minutes she looked at me and said," I get it now. This is your Shriner's convention. (My Dad is a Shriner) 1 time a year all the people who love to ski competitively get together eat, drink and ski." She got it in a nut shell for me.

 

My change to Nationals is 2 3 day tournaments.

 

leave qualifying the same state, regionals.

 

The first tournament held in early August for Jrs. Men and women 1.

 

2nd tournament in late Sept early October for all divisions 2 and up.

 

2 three day weekends. Less time off work. Adult ski party in the fall. It would open the event up to more sites, we have so few willing to take on a 5 or 6 day event.

 

I sure missed seeing Ham Wallace at this Nationals.... Chest Bump.

 

Jeff Lindsey

 

 

 

[disland]

@Moskier3ev‌ Great job hosting Nats and even better you figured out a way to ski good too. Crazy far jumping buddy

[disland]

@Moskier3ev‌ I like your idea too. If we had done it your way I would have skied. I just couldn't swing staying around for 3 extra days between Mens 1 and Mens 4 jump

[Moskier3ev]

Thanks and thanks... When the guys in front of you go 53 and 37... I had to take a poke. M4 jump was a great event. Conditions were perfect.

 

Jeff Lindsey

[MattP]

@skosney‌

You hit the nail on the head. If it is not fun/appealing for the M/W1-2 and younger what will keep them coming back when they have to foot the $1000+ bill each year?

If we keep looking at ways to make this more appealing to the middle aged elite ... then the nationals will grow old and die with us ... worst part is nobody left alive will care.

 

@schroed‌ I don't really like the idea of eliminating the OM/OW and MM. I agree the US Open should come back and keeping the BD. I'm not sure most would like seeing the OM & MM skiing their age divisions. They have an Elite ranking they should be skiing with people on their level. The winner of M1 this year had score of 2@41 2nd was 2@39 and 3rd 3.5@38. The top 2 finishers were Open rated and would have finished very respectively in the Open division.

[ToddL]

Let's just ensure each nationals has:

Private airlines which handles skis with care, a hotel on site, a water park on site for kids, air conditioned stands for family, a spa onsite for wives, live music/dancing for the party people, social events each evening for catching up with friends which are conducive to hanging out with adult beverages, 10+ ski lakes so that multiple age divisions can run simultaneously, fit all the skiing and events into a 3- or 4-day weekend, tons of qualified officials who aren't skiing who love to work all day, 360 degree wind protection and tarps over the lakes for shade and rain cover, tons of retailers, ESPN coverage, etc. Did I miss anything?

 

Just kidding...

I wish I had a brilliant idea about qualifications/prestige/time issues. I just don't. With every change something improves, but often at the expense of something else.

 

 

Seriously, when a lot of people from long distances get together for an event like Regionals or Nationals, there should always be sufficiently appropriate after ski social events.

 

Most importantly, recognize that these attendees want to be able to hang out together and catch up with each other. Thus, social events should not involve live bands (unless they know they are background music) or lengthy presentations. After ski events ideally should be near the site, air conditioned, have plenty of seating to gather in small groups, serve adult beverages, and facilitate mingling and conversation, and something for kids of all ages to do while the adults talk. I'm not suggesting that this doesn't already occur, but that this is just as important as ensuring that the ski site has water.

[Edbrazil]

 

This is how it looked at a Nationals, back when I was much younger. 1964 Nationals at

Webster, Massachusetts. Solid mat of spectators there, and not just your friends, family, and

fellow competitors. Also note the TV/film camera at the lower left. The photo is from the

Water Skier. The person in the vignette would be Dicksie Ann Hoyt, who was a very good

overall skier from the East, and the second woman over 100 feet, after Barbara.

 

Looks like it might have been a bit chilly on that late August day. No one apparently in T-shirt

and shorts in the view, but what looks like a whole lot of every-day people. At the time, the

Nationals had much prestige, and the whole sport was pretty much considered an extreme

sport at the time.

 

Best as I know, the picture was taken just as Jimmy Jackson was about to land a winning jump.

At the time, there was no seeding, and Jimmy (RIP) was the first person off the dock. That

changed the next year, and not necessarily for the better, remembering the disaster of Mens

jump at the 1965 Regionals at Reading, PA.

[Edbrazil]

 

Just doing a re-post to keep this thread on the front page, so more people will see it, and

maybe appreciate how "It Used To Be". At the time (1964), the US Nationals had a lot of

prestige. Probably more than the Worlds and even Masters at that time. Network TV

covered this event. And, it sure looks like that lots of spectators turned out.

 

These days, the Nationals is a chore for some people, instead of a great opportunity.

 

I can understand the $$ factor, where even someone like Horton doesn't see the worth of

going there, to possibly win a medal in age-division competition. Incredible now,

when someone who can run 38 still isn't seen as a major contender for MM and Big Dawg.

 

In 1964, there was less traffic on the newly-constructed Interstate highways. Thank you

Mr. Eisenhower. It was as little as a penny per mile to drive, with gas prices then. That's

how I made the roundtrip to the 1966 Nationals for $30. in gas money.

 

Air travel wasn't anywhere near as common. Load up your station wagon, maybe add a

couple of friends, and take off for the adventure to the Nationals.

 

Back even more in the way back, the family next door went all the way cross-country to

the 1957 Nationals in California from NH. Their oldest son was a top performer Boys in 3

events, at least at the Eastern Regional level. They turned it into a sight-seeing trip on the

way and way back. Before most cars up here in the Northeast had air conditioning, and

it was a cumbersome add-on. Even people who would be considered "rich" didn't have it.

Got a good bit sweaty for them in the desert Southwest.

[bogboy]

@Edbrazil‌ when dad bought the '64' caddy, he did not get the A.C. (Option), because you really didn't need ac in the n.w. I got the use of that car when I turned 16. Wow. I remember driving it home on the freeways, which were uncrowded, late Friday and Saturday nights packed with my buddies, racing other cars occasionally. When kicked into passing gear, it seemed like the whole car lifted up an inch or two. Never got caught. In the 60's, mom and dad took us kids to see the waterski follies on green lake. The spectator stands were packed, and it was a really popular, big deal.

[bogboy]

Note to young people: the car thing was a long time ago, was very stupid and dangerous, and can easily get you and others killed.

[Edbrazil]

 

Yup, I was fortunate that I didn't get killed in my hotrod days in my 1970 Camaro Z-28. First

year of the 'fastback' design. Before a lot of the cops had radar. One good friend told me that

the secret to not getting caught was to drive 100+ on the Interstates, since the cops would

typically go 20 over the speed limit hoping to catch up with you going 10-15 over. Yup, off-

topic, but something that needed to be said. One key was that you would slow down to

pass other drivers, to avoid freaking them out.

 

Previously, my 1966 Ford Falcon station wagon had room for ski gear and was a penny/mile,

before I bought the Camaro. Had the Camaro for 34 years before selling it for nearly what I

paid for it. Think that another owner has it now, all restored.

 

Back in the olde days, most people drove to the Nationals, and considered it to be the

premier tournament in the US, if not the World. Back when gas was cheap and planes were

maybe just DC3's or similar. I wonder if the Gnashionals will ever make a comeback.