New Slalom Organization

[BRY]

@gregdavis You put forth "Need Three Day Nationals, ( NATIONAL SLALOM ORGANIZATION) Slalom Only, Thur. Fri. and Sat. Qualifying Thur. and Friday. All Divisions, Head to Head Finals Sat. all divisions. Hugh banquet Sat. Night, everyone in attendance, At Banquet, Recognize skiers, Sponsors, etc.etc."

 

So how's that going to work for all divisions. BD super easy event, one division, limit 45 skiers. So B&G 1-3, M&W 1-8 and Open is 24 divisions (25 with MM) (not many in div over 8, can slot in). With 24 to 25 head to head brackets to run in one Sat, how many skiers get into each division. Not many I would presume.

How many rounds per skier in qualifying? 2, one per day? Or just one round qual (1 ride in 2 days). That is how many skiers in the event total? Seems you couldn't pull the approx 600 the current system does. You have thought this through, the numbers would be interesting to see.

 

[disland]

We did a head to head with a handicap format at a members tournament at our lake a season ago. Everyone had a blast. A couple of points need to be considered. A head to head event can accept a much smaller group of skiers. Do the math. A lake can only run a fixed number of pulls a day. Kids B1/G1 take much longer sets, up to 10 minutes sometimes. Carefull planning is needed.

[eleeski]

@Horton Let's see, I am a Senior slalom and trick judge who works a lot. I am a coach and sponsor of several college teams. I am a junior development supporter and coach. I help organize a few tournaments. I'm a part of the "old system". I see the younger divisions getting stronger and don't share the pessimism of AWSA critics.

 

Starting "my own thing" is not something needed. Nor is this divisive exclusive slalom organization needed - or good in the long term.

 

Eric

[Wish]

Not having read deap into each post but rather skimming I think out of the box thinking is great. THE BEST tourney I was at last yr was Andys. Way out of the box and an absolute blast. I think erick and chad both have valid points. You want youth...add wakeboarding or a version of that uses same marketed boards, as an event and toss out an "overall" award for those that choose to do wake and slalom. Runm head to head as well. Bet some adults would play with that overal as well. Think of the new stream of sponsors $$$$. Jump could be added to sites that have them but again, add wakeboarding. They would obviously have to do it behind a slalom tug so no massive wake tricks but it would bring new youth and expose them to slalom and possibly jump. Plus they could literally practice behind their runabouts for the wake practice if the stupid huge wake tugs were not used in tourney. This could be done under the NSO or just rename it. Your going to continue losing youth as long as it's just slalom. I bet my doughter would still be taking more sets down at the lake if she took up wakeboard for competing. You want to grow the sport @Horton and the rest.., start by not excluding but rather adding. All for format change to slalom and having alternative tournaments to go to vs the status quo. But I do not see how just slalom in any format encourages NEW youth to participate. It may keep a few around.

[RichardDoane]

@GregDavis - I'll run Washington for you, just let me know

[aupatking]

I love to trick ski. So, that said, I'm pissing off a lot of people by saying: wakeboard should take the place of trick in 3 event tournaments. It should have happened 15 years ago, maybe even 20. What's the spectator difference from slalom, trick, and jump, even at tournaments like the Masters? People just don't watch trick. Does anyone in the general public have a clue how it is scored? Hell, I don't really know and I've done it for 25 years. To be clear though, I have never competed in trick.

In fairness, i can't really say i know much about the wakeboard score format, but what I do know is, wake is more fun to watch. Jump is actually the most spectator friendly part of all Watersports. It is, however, the most difficult to get into and learn, for a lot of reasons. Money, equipment, coaching, insurance, maintenance, and money again. Even the ramp at the Berkeley ski club lake Berkeley CA is falling apart. Our old ski ramp in Mobile AL is up in the trees in a swamp after letting it get run down and finally washed away by a hurricane.

Slalom, Wake, and Jump. Yes, this would kill trick, but when the ski companies can't afford to make trick skis because they don't sell, and wakeboards are grossing a billion dollars (not an accurate number) a year, we've got to stop trying to make wake a sideshow. Be honest with ourselves, wake is the show.

I am a slalom skier, I don't wakeboard. Thought a disclaimer may be need.

This post probably doesn't belong in this thread.

[boarditup]

We are getting very close to the INT formula. Slalom, wakeboard, perhaps some other popular events if there is demand. Recognition of the individual successes. Get people involved. Large banquet. It does work.

 

Towed watersports are participatory - not spectator. While the big wakeboarding events can draw a large crowd, they are a lot like surfing contests where the festival is the draw - a big party with wakeboarding as the reason for the party. Lots of very fit young people in swimwear, music, food, and refreshments.

 

The AWSA and most event organizers work for PLM - People Like Me. The most successful event organizers work for the targeted crowd - a demographic that works for the business model in the short and long term. In my opinion, we need to really look at recreational boaters, wakeboarders including cable park riders, and casual skiers as our recruiting pool. We need to have events that appeal to them - giving them something that they want - a community of skiers and riders, an identity, a social group. This is hard to do - it takes deliberate action on the part of the event organizer and the established skier group. It is what I belive we have to do for our sport to flourish.

[disland]

Our local Nautique dealer told me this week that almost all his customers are doing surfing now, much less wakeboarding than a few years ago. Wont work for our site, our ski lakes are too shallow

[Wish]

Think outside the box. No need for the silly wakeboard tugs in a tournament. And how many wake folks really own one of those 100K boats. Most wake stuff is done behind a general runabout. My thought isn't about bringing that HUGE style of wakeboarding or even surfing to our tournaments. It's a redefined trick event so to speak. Different name then tricks, different rules and scoring, but use the same slalom boats with no modifications. Daughter thought that was a fun idea. Head to head was not anything she thought would be cool. But she thought going for an "over all" in both would be fun and getting out on the water more then a few time in a looooooong day would be cool as well. Ask your kids what they think.

 

The most disappointing part about moving to FL was the tournament scene. It was, and to some degree still is all about ratings. There were a few tournaments giving out Jr trophies but with 3-4 tourneys happening at the same time in FL, they may only be 3 kids in a given devision. AND WAY WAY to many class RELs down here $$$$. More class Cs this yr..a good sign. More recently I've been to tournaments that are getting back to fun and family. BBQs after, swimming and the like happening all around. Hopefully the pendulum is swinging back to fun and away from ratings. Time will tell, but this thread certainly points it in that directions.

[oldjeep]

Wakeboarding would be an interesting addition from a spectator perspective. I've seen a few people trick ski and watched a couple videos of folks who are supposedly really good. Not particularly interesting to watch for me - looks like someone flopping around behind the boat. (I'm sure it is difficult, just not impressive to watch). Reminds me a lot of another by gone sport - Ballet skiing.

 

And as long as we are talking about making it interesting to watch. Set some of the comps up on public water where people can line the course with boats - it would require that people be able to ski in something other than perfect flat glass water in a pool, but that also adds interest for the spectators and creates more of a party atmosphere. This is the way that some of the surf comps are set up (And watching surfing is about as interesting as watching paint dry). If you want to introduce people to the idea of slalom course skiing then you need to make it convenient for them to watch - not make them run out to some private site in the middle of nowhere.

[DrDave]

Hey OB, are you talking about wake surf? If so wouldn't that be very hard to do on smaller man made lakes for the same reasons wake boarding might be hard? In fact I would think wake boarding would be accepted before wake surfing??

 

I do agree with what a lot are saying though. Reality must be faced. There are sites that have a wakeboard lake beside a slalom lake. Might be one way to solve the problem of lake erosion caused by large wakes. Also wish's point that slalom boats without modification could be used for wake boarding events on the smaller single site lakes might solve the problem.

 

But definitely change needs to occur. The "overall" event is really getting kinda ridiculous when you have like 5-10 skiers in each division (and sometimes less) at regionals and nationals. At some point you have to question why there still is an "event" called overall, unless it includes the currently most popular watersport among young kids. Wakeboarding. I don't wakeboard BTW, but see the reality of things to come in the AWSA.

 

I also like the idea of a NSO. But it sounds like that might need some brainstorming to set up tournament rules , etc. There are a lot of slalom skiers that I know personally (can think of 5 guys without trying hard), that ski all the time. But do not ski tournaments and do NOT belong to USA Waterski. A NSO might attract some of these guys to join. The current system is not attractive to many (including myself) for the exact reason Wish points out. The current AWSA tournaments are ALL about ratings and awards for the "elite" top few guys (unless you do overall, where you get an award cuz only 5 guys are there). Nothing in it for the vast majority of guys who slalom. Some type of scene where fun is more the focus than ratings might attract some back to the organized sport. On another forum last yr or maybe 2 yrs ago someone brought up the idea of an "Outlaw" slalom league. Where the "rules" would be a little more lax and fun would be the focus. Just calling it an Outlaw league makes me want to do it..LOL.

 

Bottom line is we need to increase numbers in whichever organization you support. The current system seems to be failing ..slowly but failing. There seems to be less and less skiers involved and less sites holding events. It is good that these discussions take place. Now we need someone to step up and make it happen. ( not me of course, I'm way to lazy..LOL.)

[dstone124]

All great things. I don't post much but this topic is one very close to my heart. I think the focus on attendance is the key to our sports success. Format, 3-Event, Wakeboarding, Jump, Slalom only... none of this really matters if there's nobody there to watch. Our sport, our sponsors, our enthusiasts GROW when given the opportunity to show off the fun that can be had ON and OFF the water. The festival environment that Dana Reed was creating was a good start.

I think that fewer tournaments which highlight the sports better (not just the best) of our athletes is key. These tournaments can be weighted and head to head. BUT ALL FOR THE FUN. Like the Pro-AM's that exist, but for all events. A cash prize definitely helps, but that only comes with engaged sponsors who are benefiting from their involvement. This is where the reciprocal relationship becomes the reward (for sponsors and organizers). The best thing you can do for these sponsors is show a strong spectator base, even if these spectators don't know what they're watching on the water. Music, Beer, Vendors, Camping, a water skiing squirrel... whatever it takes to get people on the shoreline and beyond.

Keep junior development focused on just that. Host skills clinics in place of these every weekend self promoting tournaments in which participants show up, ski, and leave. These events are LONG and GRUELING for even the most dedicated of volunteers, which, with more and more sanctioning requirements by our governing body makes it harder and harder to staff. The benefit of these tournaments for the participants is what, to increase your rating?!? Why?

Focus on the fun. Focus on fostering talent. Exposing anyone who's interested to WHATEVER they'd like to try and get better at. Make it fun on the shore as well as behind the boat. Give Mom and Dad AND the kids something to look forward too.

 

We are more than a sport, we are a lifestyle.

Just my $.02, Thanks for listening!

[DrDave]

Oldjeep has a good point about needing more "public" venues where public lakes are used to hold events. However, the events would need to somehow guarantee decreased boat traffic etc at the site of the actual event. A lot of skiers are now running deep into 38off and a lot into 39off now a days. An unseen roller at these line lengths can be dangerous and could end up with someone going to the hospital with fractured ankles or worse. Great idea but needs to be handled in a way that guarantees at least safe conditions. Moomba comes to mind. More events like that??

[Jody_Seal]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBIC8JTQMMQ

[ForrestGump]

@Chad_Scott I always loved your idea for Air Dawg. Think about it, @Ham_Wallace could bring his cat on a leash to that one too.

[BRY]

What are you all talking about? @gregdavis proposal is slalom only and dumping AWSA/USAWS. No trick, no jump, no wake board, no surf. He also wants a format that has fewer rides, i.e. fewer skiers. The idea may or not have merit.

 

His Nat's proposal (fewer days, head to head final) can only handle so many rides. Keeping all divisions (as he says he wants to, 25+) means very few skiers. Look how long BD finals take for 16 skier head to head. That's only 16 skiers, 1 division. To do 25+ divisions H2H on say a 3 lake site would require an 8 skier or even 4 skier H2H. If your not competitive with the top 4 or 8 skiers in your division (M3-5 your avg deep 39 or into 41) you ain't skiing.

A site can pull X number of skiers in a day.

1 round = highest number of skiers but fewest rides per skier

2 round = half the number of skiers of 1 round but double the rides per skier

A head to head round takes longer than a traditional round, so H2H rounds fewer skiers yet

 

@gregdavis proposal shrinks, not grows the sport IMHO. But sounds cool for the elite few that will own the H2H rounds.

[DrDave]

Why does an "outlaw" slalom association or a National Slalom Organization HAVE to HAVE a nationals or a regionals?? Why can't members of the NSO still participate and / or belong to AWSA (USA Waterski) if rankings and Natls etc are important to them also? Couldn't it be set up with tournaments at various sites only.

 

Our club in the past had slalom only tournaments and one club I was in a long time back had only slalom tournaments followed by a head to head of the top 8 skiers, scored in the first 2 rounds. One tournament gave a trophy to the skier who bested his 1 yr average by the most. One tournament I was in way back had a ski "shirt" like the pros wear and the leader after each rd got to wear it. The skier with the best score after 3 rds got to keep it. Those tournaments were actually kinda fun.

 

Again, getting away from RANKINGS mentality. If you had to have a "national champion" in each division maybe you could require a certain number of tournament scores, like 20 or more. And take the average in some fair way that eliminates best and worst scores?? Or just take best average of all?? But, why do you have to have a national champion anyway??

 

Why can't it be all about fun and not at all about "rankings" ?? Just a thought.

[BRY]

@DrDave they don't have to have a regionals or Nat's. But Greg's NSO does have one, INT does have one, AWSA does one. Greg's NSO specifically states not part of AWSA/USAWS. A skier certainly could be a member of both.

 

Most tournaments are slalom only tournaments. Most slalom tournaments are multi-round. I have put on (organized, bankrolled) a 2 round C tournament with an 8 skier H2H. I had food, t-shirts and prizes and broke even. Didn't do it for money, did it for the fun. And rankings. We ran a tight, clean tournament with proper judging and driving, but fun philosophy driven by the organizers. Tournaments like you describe and ask for exist now, under the current system. Go look for them, find them, ski and support them and have fun.

 

20 tournament requirement? Holy crap man! It's tough for a lot of people to get their 3. At $60 to a $100 pop that's some cash too! Keeping all scores is not good. Participation will then drop if conditions or site not ideal, don't want to risk a bad score. That would also kill most public sites as they tend to have less than ideal water. I've been to tournaments that were lots of fun on public sites but wouldn't have if that score would count against my avg.

 

It can be about fun. Ski more tournaments yourself, get involved judging (stupid easy), get to know everyone. Your "fun" attitude and desire to help will make the tournament that much better. And you will have more skier friends.

[ALPJr]

For many years I thought that slalom and wakeboard together would work to draw people into tourneys. For about ten years I either went to a slalom event or took my son to a wake event. There was only one tourney in our region SCRRA in MA that combined slalom, trick, and jump with wakeboard, barefoot and mixed doubles. It was a really fun two day event. I drifted away from entering tourneys because I couldn't see making my family hang around all day for me to ski 2 or 3 rounds.

[lpskier]

Here is the problem with public water tournament sites: 1) in reality, skiers hate them and by in large won't support them, regardless of their on-line pontifications about growing the sport by getting into public locations; and 2) Generally speaking communities are at best ambivalent (and at worst hostile), and you'll spend a lot of time arguing with the (by in large ignorant) enviro crowd. At least that's my personal experience.

[DrDave]

BRY I understand what you are saying. My point too I think in some ways. Except I meant 20 scores not just 1 score from each tournament (so more like 7-8 tournaments).

 

I guess the reason his idea seems appealing to me is I understand his concept of all the money and resources going toward slalom and not jump and trick. Our lake when I belonged to a club had anywhere from 8-20 members year to year. We had a jump that was basically used by one guy. To his credit this guy did work the hardest to arrange tournaments etc to bring some Money into the club besides just dues, but I suspect that is not the case everywhere?

 

Also, my suggestion of not having natls and regionals was really for Greg or anyone thinking of a new "league". I have done tournaments before (2004-2010). But at least my experience in general is that they are LONG, BORING , HOT , DRAWN OUT day where you get to ski one time, maybe two if you are lucky. For me to even consider returning to skiing in tournaments I would have to find some way for them to become fun for me. The 2 tournaments I mentioned above were more fun than others because there was a sense of immediate competition, but in fun not so serious as "rankings" etc.

 

For guys like me who can run the course but aren't up there running 38off on a regular basis, there isn't a lot of positive reinforcement for participating in tournaments. And not really a true sense of being competitive. When I started it was about running 35off, but after accomplishing that and realizing 38off on a regular basis wasn't really in the picture, the "drive" to ski tournaments has faded. I guess my point is that the current platform that AWSA tournaments are held etc offers NO real incentive for me to want to participate. I think maybe I am not alone in this feeling from talking to other guys that ski and do not join AWSA etc.

 

I think another fun way to do tournaments is kinda like INT did them with the "never ran" format with a little award or t shirt or something for the "winner". Personally I would like to see a slalom only "league" set up in a "never ran format" where you were skiing against skiers of similar ability not similar age. This makes it competitive for all that are skiing. Maybe a head to head at the end for the best 8? something like that?

 

The bottom line of what AWSA has become is geared toward the elite top 5 % of skiers. Nothing wrong with that, but in addition if we want to grow the participation in slalom waterskiing, I think we have to also cater to the regular joe blow (guys and gals like me).. LOL

 

Note, participation in a NSO should not preclude anyone from skiing AWSA and vice versa. I'd still like to see the really good guys come out and ski for their "rankings". Just not be the focus of the tournament. Don't see why these "never ran" tournaments couldn't still count with AWSA as a class C or something so guys wanting "rankings" could still get them.

[MillerTime38]

@Ob great point. Everyone talks about growing the sport but I just do not see that happening. I think the majority of water skiers are middle class and the middle class is disapearring. So people think that the focus should be to grow the sport even though the pool of potential skiers is shrinking. Sounds like we should just try to maintain what we have.

 

I am all in for the NSL, it is really just the Big Dawg on a larger scale. I think by now we can say the Big Dawg is a succesful model, so just expand. As Horton says, you do not have to do it all at once. Maybe add in a Jr. Big Dawg for the B3-M1-M2 and G3-W1-W2 skiers and then a Puppy division for the junior skiers. We could also throw in the Old Dawgs for the M5 -M6.

[Texas6]

@OB - It's as much about preserving the sport as it is about growing it. So maybe we're saying the same thing. Simply put, everyone knows that if it continues to shrink, there will only be a few of us left to enjoy it, until we can't either. I want this sport to continue to be around for a long time and that means bringing new people into it to replace its aging population (present company included). And in order to do that we should all consider what drives new people to engage in the sport, and ultimately what makes it more fun for people to participate in. I think the dialogue is healthy for that reason. And for a guy who does as as much as you do for the sport, I would think you would want that too right?

[drewski32]

As a junior, the reason i ski local tournaments is almost entirely social. I go hang out with everyone in the community, ride in the boat, and ski a few rounds that mean nothing more than practice. For a junior, tournaments don't mean anything unless you're competing for the regional/national title. For those of us who are below the top 10 there is no competition. Actually having some competition would make things fun for once. It's time for a format change...

[BRY]

@DrDave I think you have some very good points there. Don't agree with all of them, but can understand why you think/feel that. Gotta completely disagree with "AWSA has become is geared toward the elite top 5 % of skiers" however, but think we will just disagree.

 

INT is there for ability based. INT has it's issues with participation too. Changing AWSA into INT format won't solve anything, just shift it.

 

I think you just went to the wrong AWSA tournament for you. Find something like the Wed night Turn&Burn's, typically start like 1 pm with 3 rounds and smaller, like 20 to 30 people. They are around and lots of fun, I've done them in WA and FL. Or find a 1 day, 2 round with a head to head. That's what we threw at the lake I used to be on, lot's of fun too.

 

The thing about Head 2 Head's is they take time. Hence fewer skiers overall and/or a very high bar to qualify into. BD's take a while to run for only 45 or 50 skiers, it's just one division, and just 16 in the head to head. Cool format though. On a larger scale makes for a long tournament (everyone hates) plus significantly fewer skiers. It's a format the really, really rewards the top skiers.

[6balls]

Might ask this: how many would ski an appreciably greater number of tourneys in a NSO situation? I would still have the same time/family/financial constraints. I like the idea, but at this point in my life not sure it would equate to lots more participation on my part.

 

[andjules]

@eleeski has a very thought-provoking point about the head-to-head format. The seeding favours those already at the top. And over time, the best get better from more experience skiing more rounds under pressure. Better for spectators; but dramatically worse for up-and-coming/improving/second-tier skiers.

[ski6jones]

As another data point for NSL I think there is a move toward slalom only already within AWSA membership. I don't have any problem with 3 event tournaments, but they're not a good investment of time for me. I look for and attend the 6 round slalom only weekends (2 tournaments Sat/Sun) almost exclusively. I don't think I'm the only one either. That turns into enough skiing in two days to make it fun for me. More rounds in a weekend than I'd take in practice actually.