Mens World Record 3@43 possible?

[Drago]

Would need to be based on reach, but c'mon, this ain't club golf.

[Steven_Haines]

PlusI'm only talking about doing that for the pros. I don't think any Schmoe like myself would gain much if anything from it!

[Horton]

@"Steven Haines"‌ I am schmoe

[Steven_Haines]

I'm The King of Schmoe-ville!

[Gloersen]

not to be humerus, might as well consider limb lengthening, might be covered under the PPACA.

 

[Drago]

@Gloersen‌ you crack me up

[Horton]

So @twhisper‌ would only gain 3" against Nate? Is that worth a ball?

[Chef23]

A higher speed is an interesting thought. 36 mph is scary enough I can only imagine what 38 mph would be like. It would be interesting to see the pros try 38 and see what the results would be.

[klindy]

There's an interview somewhere I saw with Andy talking about buoy size and height. He explains that the current rules (compared to something before) make the course 4" narrower. Meaning it allows you to ski 4" narrower and still get around the buoy without it hitting your ski or ankles hard enough to cause a fall. If that's the case, and I believe it is, then adding 4" to the rope would also improve scores.

[TallSkinnyGuy]

I know it is a lot different in snow skiing because each slalom course is set up uniquely and based on the hill's terrain, but I remember reading that they had to start making the slalom courses significantly more difficult in terms of flag placement after the "shaped" skis started being used. When the improved equipment makes higher achievement easier in a sport it may make sense to increase the challenge with another variable.

[6balls]

My brother is 7 inches taller than me, if we put one arm straight up as high as possible his reach is easily a foot more than mine.

[klindy]

@6balls and who's got the better slalom ranking?

[6balls]

@klindy it's a push right now having been "disabled" for the last season :) He has never skied a tourney and only started skiing buoys again this year after a long hiatus(he's 52 y.o.) and even then his prior experience is minimal other than as a free skier.

 

If you could magically give Big Joe @razorskier1's technical skills/strength/experience...or the reverse give @razorskier1 Joe's height and reach...I bet he runs 39 60-70 times per season like he did with 38 this year. Height and reach are not everything...but technique being equal in our sport height and reach may matter. The x-factor may be that more body is more to control and the boats leverage on an out of position taller skier may be magnified in the event of technical error.

 

I believe this latter point is real or we would have more tall, successful skiers both amateur and pro. There is perhaps a happy medium, and it may matter more at the limits of line length.

 

One thing for sure...I have many more pressing technical problems than my reach/height!!

[Horton]

We have always assumed that super tail guys rule the sport. I guess reach far more important. Personally I have a height and reach closer to Billy Braty than CP. I have heard that Asher has the longest (or nearly) wingspan among the pros.

 

Parsons, CP, Freddie Winter and many of the other top skiers are simply BIG men. They are powerful. That has to be a factor. One the other hand Nate and Joel are tall but not muscle bound.

 

Regina is 5'6 and skis circles around 99% of the men in the sport. I really do not know HOW important it is. I am sure it is better to be taller but how many balls do you get for 3"

[Wish]

Those last seven words just sound soooo wrong.

[Horton]

@wish I've been waiting for you to make me laugh since January 2011. Mission accomplished

[Wish]

you laughed a little when you saw my ski boots....

[klindy]

I laughed too! I'm tall as well 6'-6" and as much as the reach helps it takes more strength to maintain body position from the turn thru the centerline. That strength means extra weight. Personally I think that they tend to equal each other. If not then Parrish would be a half of a pass or more ahead of the field. He's got the skills and the height.

[DmaxJC_ski]

I'm not sure if it was one of the pros or the parents there of, but Im sure I overheard someone say at the Mastercraft shootout that both Nate and CP have successfully turned 3 at their respective practice sites. No question in my mind that in this next 12 months it will go down, what's your thoughts on the ladies? Will a full 41 go down? I don't think we are far from that either.

[Chad_Scott]

Both Nate and CP have been to 3 numerous times in practice Just a matter of time for either one of them

[Than_Bogan]

No rope-length compensation! I had to try a zillion sports before I found one where having orangutan arms was enough of an advantage to give me a chance!!

 

And to the subject of the OP, the fact that someone got to the 3rd ball is proof that the entire pass is possible. I'm not saying soon, but the bar for "impossible" is pretty damn high.

[Horton]

@Than_Bogan‌ at that point what happens? Is one 44 1/2 physically possible?

[gt2003]

If only Andre the Giant had taken up slalom...

[Horton]

Looks like it is POSSIBLE for me to run 43

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjP0dYzQ9HLndEd2bkFIcTJSQzhPcXlvNFV6T1JqY1E&usp=sharing

[Than_Bogan]

We're actually quite far from the point where a person of "ordinary" height physically cannot do it. 11.5m to the buoy line, but call it 11.75m because the ski has to go outside. So even 9.5m (aka 44 off) leaves 2.25m of reach required. That's about 7'5" worth of required reach. Impossible for some, but probably most people over 5'9" can reach that far. My own reach is 9" further than that, so "impossible" doesn't come into play for me for a few more line lengths.

 

All that said, I personally think we should be getting serious about increased speed (or something like that) for pros. With these ultra-short lines, perfect driving is too important, making it unintentionally a team sport.

[andjules]

A page earlier, I suggested:

I still think the sport would benefit immensely from a -42 loop (10.00M)

and @Horton asked—quite rightly—how that would change anything.

In a philosophical sense it won't change anything, but practically, I'd argue it would give us another 5-10 years to figure out what the big, future change needs to be (higher speeds, different course, who knows). The closer we get to the 'limit', the more results and competition compresses. Sometimes that makes a sport less exciting. It's possible in 5 years that the top 5 at most OM events are compressed between 1 and 3 balls @ -43 (in Calgary this year, as in the world rankings, there was a big clump of guys with 3@-41; I think it's unlikely that Nate will add buoys as fast as those guys 'catch up').

 

The rules (written quite a while ago) state that you take 0.5m off of every successive rope length starting at -38/11.25m. In hindsight, that was kind of a dumb idea - a linear approach to something that gets exponentially tougher. Adding a -42/10m loop would inject a lot of excitement back into elite competition for the next 10ish years while we all debate the big question of what's next.

[Than_Bogan]

Really well said, andjules. I think you just convinced me.

[Horton]

Well darn it I want a 36.5 loop too

[The_MS]

Check the reach on @Skidawg, I know he has at least 3 feet on me.

[skidawg]

At least 3 feet & a few inches

[Razorskier1]

I think the balance of factors is key. Body position for a super tall guy has to be a big deal. If you don't get stacked, you are screwed. At 6ft if I don't get stacked I can muscle my way to the next ball. Nevertheless, I'd love a little more arm length, and being 6ft 3in always sounded cool. Maybe I should have @Wish make me some bindings -- then I'd be 6ft 1in anyway!

[Wish]

I stand at 5'10".. I ski at 6' feet. ;-)

[Horton]

@Wish‌

I stand at almost 5'9. I ski at Billy Barty

[mrpreuss]

bump Probably never happen... :/

[Horton]

@mrpreuss I am 99% sure CP, Asher or Smith can and one of them will.

[Nando]

I've been "disliked" for suggesting this before, but one way to negate any advantage tall skiers might have would be to reduce the distance between balls from 41M to 40M, or even slightly shorter. I know, there are a LOT of courses out there and it's easy to shorten cable courses, but a royal PIA for individually anchored courses. Nevertheless, it would be a game changer...

[ForrestGump]

Yeah, that's just stupid.

[Onside135]

Well said, Shane...

[Ralph Lee]

Asked Jeff Rodgers in 2003, how many buoys he's got at 43, 36mph in practice. He said "I've got deep several times..." I wonder how many guys have been around 3 ball in practice?

[Horton]

@Nando I would not be as rude as @ShaneH but I do not get your point. Any sport is a set of arbitrary rules & ours in no different.

[Horton]

@Ralph Lee less than 5

[Nando]

Not to get defensive about a point I wasn't too serious about, and this was way before my time, but before the slalom course was revised to be "metric" in the early 19702 (?) the old dimensions were, from what I've been told, based on the "full" line length of 75'- the width was (and is) half of that from the centerline and the distance between successive balls was 150'. My not very serious thought of shortening the distance would be a way to make it more difficult to run very short line lengths and would make reach less helpful. I don't want to resurvey my course, though :D

[Horton]

@Nando semi logical - I do not want any apart of it but not ridiculous

[aupatking]

The sport is reaching it's performance limitation. I think that is freaking awesome! There is a limit, like @Than_Bogan says, we aren't at it quite yet, but we're closing. I agree that it's most likely Nate, CP, or Asher, because the guys consistently get more looks at it. It's going to end up taking perfection, or just enough of it. No one has it, and definitely not consistently, so even when it falls, no one is likely to be knocking it right back down. The margin is going down by .25 and .5, not 1 or 2 balls. I like the -42 thought but it does nothing for the group at 3 @ -41. We'd be better off with a -40 loop to stretch that group out. When we get a pile-up at -43 in a tournament, I really just hope I'm there.

[bishop8950]

IF the question is will the record ever be 3@43 I say absolutely. You think after a guy like Nate sneaks his ski around 3 for the current 2.5 its impossible that he can get a full 3? HA! He will. Others may as well. If the V Type R is as good as the HO boys hope Asher could be making a run. CP certainly could. Freddie will continue to improve. Others will continue to work their butts off to be on the short list of guys taking cracks at 43. 3@43 is a just matter of when.

[ozski]

At WR line lengths does the lefty have any advantage? When we are talking 3 balls its twice as many on side turns after all....

[Stevie Boy]

Not just about the Skiers, the opportunity is going to have to present it's self with correct Boat/Skier combination, that reduce,s the odds, unless the Boat manufacturers are going to give their sponsored Skiers a green light behind any boat.

Has anybody worked out how many competitions the opportunity would be there for each boat manufacturer per year ?

[PhilSymo]

It will be a British Guy, Freddie has my money, But with Will back on a Ski he can use who knows.... Seen Freddie run 41... the guy is a beast. a Very nice Chap to boot. with only 1 season on the MC ski, and going right in to a Tournament and going deep 41 at the start of the year.. impressive....

 

IT WILL BE BRITISH!!!!! (but skied in US waters)

[Edbrazil]

Old Time Course Dimensions for @nando: The SL course was 75 feet wide, buoy to buoy line.

Longitudinal: 45 yards or 135 feet, buoy to buoy line, including endgate to # 1. Gates were

4 yards (12') wide. Only 1 or 2 interior boatgates vs. 6 now. These dimensions, or close

to them, were reportedly set for the 1947 Nationals at Holland, Michigan by Chuck Sligh.

Changed in mid/late 1960's to 30 yards (90') endgate spacing. At some time, gate width

went down to 3 yards (9'). Buoys could be about anything from Clorox bottles to double-

folded inner tubes to boat mooring buoys.

 

In early 1974, when doing ski tests at the site, I did the survey work to change Jack Horton's

course from these dimensions to metric. Course ends up being slightly wider, by nearly 3"

centerline to skier buoys, plus shorter by a bit over 5 feet. So, in 1974, the World/metric SL

course dimensions would have been allowed, but probably not mandatory. In 1975, a

US/World Mens record was set there by Kris LaPoint (4 @ 11.25/38 off).

 

According to the World Records List: http://www.iwsf.com/history/displayrecords.php

First complete 38/11.25: Bob LaPoint 1980 Cal Cup.

First complete 39/10.75: Mike Kjellander & Andy Mapple 1988 Thrilla at Hydrilla

First complete 41/10.25: Jeff Rodgers 1997 Trophy Lakes SC

 

Time spacing 8 years and then 9 years. It is now 18 years later and the WR is 2.5 @ 43/9.75.

Not quite halfway. So, could be a while until we see 6. Someone mathematically inclined

could try to fit a curve to the data and extrapolate, to estimate when.

[GregDavis]

Bob LaPoint set World record in 1982 I think. 3 at 39. I remember thinking, no one will ever run all 6 at 39.