Why didn't you attend Nationals (2013 or 2014)?

[TonyaMaurer]

Questions: 1) If you qualified for the AWSA nationals (single event/two events/overall) in either 2013 or 2014 but did not enter and ski at nationals - what was the reason? 2) If you qualify for 2015, what would entice you to enter and ski at the AWSA nationals if you traditionally do not attend?

 

[Horton]

short answer - way too much time and money for one ski ride.

[Razorskier1]

I'm with Horton. That and I only have so much vacation time and money and too many competing priorities for both.

[Wish]

+1 Horton said. Just happy they are in my back yard this year. If it was not...I'd be skiing at home that weekend.

[Marco]

After qualifying for Nats every year since I first started skiing tournaments in '07, I went to my first one this past summer. The reason I went is because I could drive to both Regionals in Colorado and Nationals in Texas. I can't see flying from Colorado to Washington for Regionals and then 3 weeks later from CO to Fl for Nats. Longer version of @Horton 's answer but it still boils down to too much time and money for 2 ski rides, (1 at each tourney).

[Ham_Wallace]

In 2013, I stayed home with my sick dog. In 2014 I stayed home for family reasons. I'll be there in 2015. After 45 straight Nationals, I guess that I can take a few off. I was really going for 50 straight, but I am glad that I stayed home.

[eleeski]

I went. Despite a broken hip in 2013 and a horrible disease (shingles - get vaccinated!) in 2014. Came in DFL both years. Totally worth it!

 

Seeing my skiing friends is priceless. I've made so many good friends all over that Nationals is a great time to get to see them.

 

Eric

[RichardDoane]

I'll ski the Western Regionals this season since they are in WA, but traveling to Florida for a one round tournament doesn't make sense financially

[ToddL]

Travel costs make it a no go. If I was in the top 8, I'd make an effort to attend. If I am barely qualifying, then I would not go. I wonder how many skiers who a highly likely to pace in their division wouldn't go...

[EricKelley]

Took my son to Texas to compete in Boys 3. As a sole practioner in my office, it is very expensive to take an entire week off. If you have kids, they ski at the beginning of the week you ski at the end of the week. School starts here Aug 1so Nats. can't be a vacation because the kids can't miss a whole week of school. Expense and time compounded with essentially a week at Regionals 2 weeks prior. I could have put my son on a plane and stayed, but like the others said not at all worth it for 1 ski ride.

I really like going and seeing all my good friends that I have made over a lifetime of skiing, but time, expense, and 1 ski ride not worth it some years. The Nautique Big Dawg format is much more fun. That's essentially why we are doing the IN HIS WAKES HEAD TO HEAD and expanding it to the 36ers and the JR.'s

[TonyaMaurer]

Appreciate the comments and feedback ...... trend being cost (travel, vacation time, yada) vs 1 ski ride .... although hooking up with old ski pals and going down memory lane is fun but is not a driving factor to attend Nat's ..... if you wanted to know more about why skiers that qualify don't attend Nat's what questions would you ask?

[Boo]

For me, skiing Nationals is a validation of the long hours I've put in--skiing when body parts hurt, time when I'm shivering on the dock waiting for my turn. In my older age group, we have a small group of competitors, and I look forward to renewing friendships (and beating as many as I can--which is not that many). The "1 ski ride" is not a problem for me given I ski all three events. I love to ski Nationals but I also love to watch other competitors and would go even if I couldn't ski.

[The_MS]

I last skied Nats at Oke and was 2nd off the dock on lake 1. There was no one in the stands, the vendors were already taking down booths and there were no deals to be had. The goodie bags for the competitors had some coupons for some stupid local stuff and nothing cool. Pay the entry, fly in, rent a car, go down at -35 at 730am in front of no one. Wow, that was fun.

That after having to go to BFE Illinois for regionals.

[Ham_Wallace]

Why ski Regionals and possibly knock a skier out of going to Nationals that would go? Personally, I have been qualified for Nationals and not skied 3 events at a State in order to get another skier to Regionals and then, not skied all 3 at Regionals in order to get the same skier to Nationals, that was an amazing reward watching that skier compete in Nationals. Well worth it!

[bigtex2011]

Maybe have 20 record tourneys that weekend all over america. compile the data. and crown a champion.

[drewski32]

As a junior, it interfered with school which was too important last year. I would have gone if it was a week earlier or later.

[ToddL]

@TonyaMaurer asked, "if you wanted to know more about why skiers that qualify don't attend Nat's what questions would you ask?".

I'd ask this question, "what would really make you want to attend?"

 

For example, lots have mentioned 1 round as an issue, but how many would truly change their mind simply if a second round was offered? Is that the most significant factor or just one more straw on that camel's back?

 

So, what would it take to make you attend?

 

[JeffSurdej]

Great stuff everyone. Keep it coming. Reason this is being asked is a small task force has been formed to look further into a d2. But we are also wanted to help solve the fact that only 47% of those qualified go to nationals. If we can solve that then we don't beed d2. So help us? Question. Would a prelim/finals format make it worth it for your time and expense? Would more weeks between regionals and Narionals do it. ( Labor Day weekend nationsls). Let's here some ideas?

 

Jeff Surdej.

[JeffSurdej]

When you reply please state if you would what level you are and if you are one of those that attends or does not. Thanks

[drewski32]

I am level 8, currently ranked 18th in B3 slalom. I would enjoy a prelim/finals format, and maybe others would see it as an improvement.

[6balls]

I've qualified numerous times, never went. I'm not a contender...just a qualifier.

 

Nat's competes for me against any other tourney I may travel for at that time of year...and I'm only going to travel beyond local tourneys for one comp...even the local one's I consider and ski are 6 round slalom weekends. Potential distant tourneys require the typical travel expenses and time from family/work.

 

The one I choose to attend I go with my brother and we arrive on Thursday. We ski Thursday and cook ribs for a bunch of good friends/skiers. On Friday we ski again and then help in any way possible to set up the tourney. On Saturday we each ski 3 rounds, mingle with friends and make some new one's, tower judge, boat judge, and work the dock changing ropes/handles. We cheer for anyone hitting a PB, and talk skiing with the sages. There is usually a gathering somewhere onsite Saturday night.

 

Sunday we ski 3 more rounds repeating the Saturday experience among friends/skiers.

 

Monday we run an impromptu 36 mph tourney among remaining 34 mph skiers which is a blast...then pack up our wet stuff and head for the airport.

 

If I have one set of travel dollars for an "away" ski tourney...this is what I'm doing and the same potential bang for the buck simply isn't there at nat's (or regionals...or state for that matter). I'm not much help here...it's such a cool bit of skiing/fun that I'm not sure nat's can compete regardless of format change.

 

The question becomes if a skier doesn't have legit placement chances...can they get some more skiing in there? What if there was another lake on-site available for competitors where they could ski on the cheap per set outside of the competition? Ski the comp but also ski your butt off on a great site while there?

 

 

[ToddL]

@6balls Just FYI, 2014 nats had a practice lake running all week. Pay by the pull with some open skiers behind the wheel.

[Horton]

@ToddL‌ a rushed 4 pass practice set is not quality anything. If that is the good time we have to offer we are doomed.

[lpskier]

I attended in 13 and got sick on the way in 14. I'll go in 15, although I am pissed it is not back in Texas as I was very psyched to ski there and check out the Austin scene. When I missed it this year I consoled myself with going next year.

 

I know it is difficult or maybe even impossible to do, but holding Nats in different, interesting places with opportunities for sight seeing or other non skiing activities, even if before or after the event appeals to me.

 

I was at Okeeheelee today. Same ol' same ol'. Canada, NY and VT were well represented.

 

Volunteer during the event and you have a lot more fun. Watch your kids ski and its totally worth it.

[drewski32]

@lpskier I too was excited about it being at SMRR, but had to miss it. Now that it's at okeeheelee it's just the same ol' tournament to me.

[9400]

Like 6balls said, I'm a long time qualifier but have never attended regionals or nationals. If I were a legitimate contender, I would probably have attended a few (but maybe not). Time and money being the biggest reasons.

[ForrestGump]

$2000 trip for one round if it's flying distance. Not to mention a trip to regionals for one round which is going to run $800-1000. Just doesn't make all that much sense fiscally, even though I can afford it, when I'm one of the first 5 skiers off the dock at Nationals.

[Ed_Johnson]

The requirement to have to go to Regionals...... From Fla to Kentucky, time off work and expense..Would definitely do Nationals if they dropped the Regionals Requirement.

[jimbrake]

Did not go. First week of school for both of my boys. Told them we could go if they wanted to deal with the school issues. Both said neither could afford that much time away from school.

 

We generally go to Regionals only because of the time and expense to go to both Regionals and Nationals. All three of us would love to go to Nationals. It's just very difficult to swing both plus other sport comps they do in addition to skiing.

[ntx]

@waterskispreads I am the dad of a level 9 overall skier. He has been to every Nationals since 2004. PLEASE DO NOT move to the Labor Day weekend. I know that this has been discussed in the past. The holidays give us a break from skiing that otherwise consumes our life. Plus, the cost to travel and lodge get inflated on holidays.

[Than_Bogan]

Hi Tanya!

 

I really enjoy Nationals every time I manage to fit in the trip. But every year it seems harder to justify vs. all of the summer stuff going on with my kids. And I still have all the "old" obstacles like that silly paying job that makes waterskiing possible.

 

I honestly don't think any change to the format would break the tie for me. I want to get there every year, but there are several things it will lose out to every time. So it's basically just the luck of the schedule whether I make it.

 

In principle, I'm not at all sure that I should qualify. I wouldn't throw a fit if the qualifications were increased, even if to the point of locking me out forever. But on the other hand, while I am qualified, I'll keep trying to find ways to fit it in!

[adkh2oskier]

I've qualified for the past couple decades but have never gone. I'm certainly not a contender but might get in the top 15 in my class on a good day. Boils down to the cost, travel, hotel, meals out, entry fee and only one round. Additionally the rule of skiing regionals first makes it that much more expensive. I really would like to enter Nationals once but unless the Regional rule is nixed it will probably never happen.

[kstateskier]

I am in no danger of reaching the podium in Mens 2 slalom or trick. On top of that its a sh*t load of money for a single ski ride. I'd rather spend the whole weekend on my private lake and take 7 sets behind my own boat, then lounge out crank the tunes and drink beers.

[ToddL]

@Horton - Note, I didn't comment on the value of the practice sets, just that they were there.

[Marco]

I went for the first time last year because as stated before, both Regionals and Nats were within driving distance, and skiing Nats at least once was on my bucket list. I wanted to see if the pressure would make me choke...It didn't, and I skied 13 places better than my seed, which was my goal. Ranked 93rd in Level 8, the podium was never in my cross hairs.

 

I don't see myself going to another one unless both Nationals and Regionals are within reasonable driving distance (unlikely in the Western region), or if the Regionals requirement is dropped. If I didn't have to travel to Regionals, I would probably go to more Nationals.

[mike_mapple]

@ms one thing i noticed you said was there were no deals by vendors, its a shame that so many people go to these events and just expect a discount, nationals should be the point where everyone is displaying new product, i can understand on old product but from my stand point, people who came up to me and said i should give them 20% off. it was tough to not laugh out loud at that point. Now i do agree with people who have said its pricy for a ski ride when they are out of state. but it is nationals, not everyone has that opportunity to get there. but from my skiing days i was blessed, but i did love that time of year to see my friends who lived all over the country. but everyone beats his or her drum a to a different tune. (just my 2 cents{ prob not even worth that} )

[ToddL]

@mike_mapple - if only "Nationals" was like NAMM (Music Trade) or CES (electronics) shows, where all manufacturers build hype in preparation for their big launch of new products at the show! Then, people would come to the event to see, touch, discuss, possibly demo/try, new gear. I really don't expect steep discounts on new gear when it is first launched. But new old stock and prior year's gear, yep - make me a deal to take it off your hands.

 

BTW - I do love seeing skiing friends from afar. That is a perk of attending an event that draws people from all over.

[The_MS]

@mike_mapple Fair enough. There were no deals to be had because most of the vendors were done or taking down booths. This is the nationals and you have national competitors that need to be enticed into new or other products that the vendors want sold. If I am selling a product, I want the best of the best using it. That is how you sell more to the rest of the masses. I have purchased 2 Goodes, 2 Monzas, 1 D3 and 1 Mapple after stinking it up on the water and walking into the booth soaking wet.

Badal sold me 2 Monzas for the price of 1 after @Horton beat me in Bakersfield.

[JeffSurdej]

For those that say they are not competitive enough to go would a division 2 solve that? For those that think regionals and nationals is too much, do you think the ramifications of getting rid of regionals could be very bad for our sport, sponsors, lake developments, promo program, etc, etc. I agree it would bring up numbers at Nationals but getting rid of an event that pulls over 2,000 skiers across the nation scares me.

[Horton]

@mike_mapple‌

if you go back in time far enough you would see that ski companies often offered pretty significant discounts at nationals. Times have changed & I completely understand why this practice is no longer common.

 

What's missing today is something about nationals to be excited about besides your ski ride. 20 years ago part of the appeal was the deals and a chance to see all the new stuff. the vendor area was compelling and interesting. the economics have changed so we have to replace it with something else to be interested in

[ToddL]

needs something "to be excited about besides your ski ride". Yep.

[ForrestGump]

@waterskispreads But if we're having this discussion it's because obviously the current format doesn't work for a large percentage of your qualified skiers and the AWSA itself. I realize that the current tournament structure has been the way it is for 40 years+ and there is a large contingent that is ok with the way it is and do not want it changed. The dinasaurs were pretty content with the way they lived and looked what happened to them.

 

I'm curious about a few things, especially in regards to the comment about regionals......

 

1. Why would it be detrimental to our lake developments? Most shy away from hosting Regionals because they don't want the amount of work or hassle. Only a few sites repeatedly host it.

2. Honestly, what do the promo programs get out of Regionals? I've been a promo and pretty much we all despised having to take our boats. What is the detriment to making regionals optional for skiers, cutting down the number of skiers there, and therefore the number of boats needed.

 

Just thinking out loud here, Regionals could morph into D2 nationals. Just at different sites.

[ALPJr]

I've been to Al's (Frosini) Novice Nationals at Berkeley in 93 and 94. Practice Friday evening, two rounds each slalom, trick and jump on Saturday. Good music, announcing, food, raffles, a few ski, rope and wetsuit rep's, promo boats, etc. was about 30 or 40 bucks to enter and included a nice t-shirt. Was a lot of fun. Heard AWSA headquarters was not to happy about the term "Nationals" being used... Was the same weekend of the Nationals.

[lpskier]

@TonyaMauer Hi Tonya, welcome to BallOfSpray.The genesis of following thought is a conversation with Jon Murray of Potsdam, NY. Jon is ranked 16th in Mens 3 and is the third highest ranked Level 8 Mens 3 skier in the country, yet he doesn't ski Nationals. He doesn't go for many of the reasons mentioned by others, primary of which is that he'd rather spend the money to go to a one weekend, one site, two tournament, three round per day ELR. He has more fun, spends less money and skis a lot more, often for a combined entry fee similar to a one round fee at Nationals, with minimal travel expense and missed time from his business. Going to Nationals for him, and many others, just isn't worth the time, money and effort unless he podiums. (The 2012 and 2013 Mens 3 National Champions both live within 30 miles of Potsdam, so I suppose anything is possible!) His idea was to weight the ranking list average more heavily for a score earned at Nationals, in a manner similar to the way scores are penalized if you have fewer than three scores posted for your ranking list average. At first, my reaction was "who cares," and I didn't see what that would really do to encourage people, but then an idea occurred to me.

 

One way of encouraging Nationals participation and also to encourage greater tournament participation throughout the year is to make winning the ranking list substantially more prestigious than it is. Without diluting the Nationals with loads of less qualified skiers, we could expand the "New" ranking list championships to include a champion in each event, each division at each level. So at the end of each "Ski Year," there would be, for example, a Womens 5 Level 5 National Ranking list Champion, and so forth. Skiers would be encouraged to ski Nationals to get the "bonus points" associated with doing so (although in my example a level 5 skier would not ski Nationals because she wouldn't be qualified to do so unless she qualified out of a Regionals, see my discussion below on Regionals). As an example, a Nationals score might be worth 105% of the actual score for ranking list purposes.

 

Also, the ranking list score could be weighted in such a way as to give an advantage to those who ski more than just three tournaments in order to get a non-penalized ranking list average, thus encouraging more tournament participation throughout the season. This could be accomplished, for example, by applying a weighted penalty to those with fewer than, say, six scores instead of three as we do now. Or in addition to the Ranking List, we could have something like a tallied running score throughout the season, and a "National High Score Champion," or whatever it is best called, again for each division, each event, each level. Once it gets rolling, there could be additional awards based on "Most Improved," or whatever. The goal would be to incentivize those skiers who won't be a National Champion to nevertheless compete for an attainable and prestigious goal without diluting what it means to be a "true" National Champion and without making water skiing an "everyone gets a trophy" activity. There will be more trophies, but they will have to be earned. All awards are awarded at Nationals, again providing motivation to attend.

 

Then, to make it really work, there needs to be a big carrot. For example, there could be nice awards for each winner, and the name of all winners each year are placed in a drawing where several nice prizes are given out, with a grand prize of something like a week for four at Godon Rathburn's, all expenses paid. Or you get on the cover of WaterSki Magazine. Or Connelly uses you in an ad. Or you get a all expenses paid trip to Florida and a photo shoot with Bill Doster. Or you get to attend the Ski with the Legends event and be a celebrity. Whatever, as long as it is really cool so that people really want it. And the best part is that the Level 3 Champion is on an equal footing as the true National Champion for winning the grand prize. Open and MM skiers can't compete for the grand prize either as they are already sufficiently motivated. Maybe no Level 9's either.

 

Many people are turned off by the time and expense of competing in both Regionals and Nationals. This is a very legitimate concern. I have messaged you a post I wrote on the original D1/D2 BOS discussion. Since most folks here have probably already read through that conversation, I didn't want to re-post it. To summarize for those that missed it, the idea is to split the regions from five to ten (or more) making them more geographically manageable with a smaller number of skiers per region, thereby cutting down on distances to be traveled, and shortening the regional tournaments from four days to two or three, tops. You might even be able to open up the Regionals to Level four, five and six skiers so long as doing so doesn't defeat the purpose of shortening up the tournament so that attending both Regionals and Nationals doesn't revert to being an expensive pain in the ass for folks. Change the National Qualification rule slightly so that instead of the top five in each division at Regionals qualifying (which means that if the top five in a division are all level 8 or above, no additional skiers qualify), to qualify the top five in each division that aren't already qualified. This adds five skiers per division per event per Region to the pool of qualified skiers.

[skidawg]

The bottom line is-nats is very expensive both monetarily and time wise. Especially if the whole family skis. For me it's not worth it unless there is another event accompanying the tourney (bd finals). Just my 2c

[swaterkd]

Ok, I have an idea. I would like feedback.

The problem: getting more people to go to nationals. But the cost for 1 round is crazy. I’m the same as most of the people posting. I would never podium so I would rather go to a record that has 2 or 3 rounds instead. Everyone is trying to re-invent the wheel, add rounds, make it a C, and run C at the same time, more divisions and so on. There is no incentive other than going or maybe a podium at nationals. So except for the top 10 why go.

What if you didn’t go to nationals there was a penalty on the ranking list. If you are a skier that has only skied in two tournaments then you have a deduction. Why not do the same thing for National?

 

[9400]

I love to ski, probably more now in my mid 50s than ever. I love the challenge of something I'm not very gifted at but enjoy doing. While I listed not being a contender as a factor, it's a minor factor. Creating a Level 2 Nationals would not do it for me. To me, the top is the target not some arbitrary line along the way (I have no problem with any people that think this is the way to go).

If I had more time and money (a considerable amount more time and money), I would probably participate in Regionals and Nationals, but I don't get enough ski time as it is.

[lottawatta]

I will advance the idea of a baby step to eliminating the regional requirement while still retaining a meaningful regional. Why not allow the top 3 in each age division at the state championship skip regionals as long as they are level 8 or above on the ranking list?

[oldjeep]

Question for you folks - what else happens at Nationals? For the snow ski side, (Nastar) Nationals are up to 4 days worth of events, so that there is always something to do. Paid clinics are available for a couple days leading up to the races, meet and greets with food supplied and booze available. Bands in the evenings, lots of product giveaways. Demo skis to try out - usually a deal to be had if you make a deal with the rep to buy the demos at the end of the event. Discounts at all the vendor booths for goggles, sunglasses, shirts, etc. Basically they give you something to do as a group for several days solid, which makes it much more worth it to attend than if you were just doing 2 runs a day for 2 days with a chance for one more if you make the race of champions. Racer attendance is generally around 2000.

[MarkM]

Injured