What's wrong with competitive skiing?

[MikeT]

I am competitive water skier, a competitive golfer and snow ski racer. The latter two sports have it figured out when it comes to providing a format that engages everyone competing against one another. A format that doesn't have one person in a division. A format that is fun and involves "everyone" competing against each other. Golf has it's handicap system and I've been employing that type of system at the New England Slalom Championship for years. We have only 2 divisions. To use a golf term a Gross score division which is a group of the better skiers skiing with no handicap adjustment and a handicap adjusted group or "Net" score group which encompasses the rest of the skiers and they are usually comprise of 2/3rds of the entries. This system works great.

I think most people are competitive and enjoy a chance to win or place and win prizes which we provide in the form of gift certificates. Now couple this with an national handicap system like golf and Nastar and you have a system to now have "ABILITY BASED" tournaments and rankings.

The one big difference with golf is that all your practice rounds are entered into the handicap system and that's how golfers can compile so many scores towards their handicap. With Nastar all the runs go into the system and the races are timed and sanctioned by Nastar officials. You can only get Nastar scores while in competition but at a Nastar race there is usually time to take up to 6 timed runs so you can accumulate quite of few runs in a season. Much like waterskiing, Nastar takes your top three or lowest times to calculate your handicap and the times must be from 3 completely different races.

With waterskiing we only draw from tournaments but maybe some rules could be drawn up to allow for "some" practice runs to be entered for handicapping. Maybe a run or two a week could be scored for handicap. A verification system like the one used in golf where your golf/skiing partners would sign off that the practice run was conducted to a class C standards in order to obtain more scores in the system. Understand the last sentence is very general and don't spend to much time on it.

The point is to develop an ability based system with gross and net scoring.

With a national handicap system you would be able to state your level with your handicap. Nobody outside waterskiing knows our scoring. Nastar rates everyone that way and it is primary expression of stating the measurement of your ability. The top skiers in the country are under a 5 handicap and it goes all the way up to 60 or so. Golf ranges from the 30's to a negative handicap for the pros. They really have to do it that way because snow ski and golf courses are not the same so it's the best way to summarize or express it. Nastar seems to employ some sort of a NOPS type system as well with regard to age. If you are 10 years older than someone and you scored the same race time the older person will get a lower handicap. So keep that in mind.

Golf has a formula. They take the average I believe of the 10 best scores running, average it, multiply it by that golf courses rating which brings it up or down a little then I believe multiplies it by 96% to get your handicap.

At the New England Slalom we take the skiers National rank average and multiply it by 95%, then subtract that score from the Men's open rating score and we call that par and the difference is your handicap. In short order your average is say 95 and the open rating is say 105 then your handicap is 10. I've tested it and it works good throughout all handicap levels. The 95% of the handicap reduction makes it work good and equitable. You have to have 3 tournaments to participate in our handicap system. We have skiers with handicaps up to 50 and sometimes more.

One thing that waterskiing has going for it to make it's scoring system simpler is that all the courses are the same unlike golf and snow skiing. The speeds are set so the only variables are score and age should you decide to overlay it with NOPS.

36 can ski with 34 mph skiers as well. We give a 36mph skier a +6 buoys start with to even the numbers out. We feel that 6@35/36 for our purposes is equal to 6@38/34 mph and it works pretty good with the +6.

Tournaments can have gross and net divisions. Nationals and regionals could be run that way as well but I think you'd have to take a poll on what the majority of skiers would like as far as that goes.

I know this has been talked about allot over recent years and there are many tournaments doing their own creative tournament formats. I would like to see a poll taken and would like to see what an ability based handicap system would do for tournament waterskiing. It's a big problem if you think about when you have skiers going to a "competition tournament" and they don't have anyone to ski against. Really?? The system has not moved forward with the times.

[RichardDoane]

@adamcord - I started skiing INT in the late 1990's, but the emphasis on making money for the owners on the back of the volunteer labor force left a bad taste in my mouth. I voted with my feet and started supporting AWSA ever since. If @shane doesn't like the current situation, then he can vote with his feet as well and focus on his bike riding, everybody has the choice to do what they want. @bry - way to knock down the -35 in all three rounds, that's great consistency and gave you a shot at -38 every round, you should be proud of your accomplishment

[Edbrazil]

Once again in the Back When (although not the far back: late 1970's), and before Rankings, etc., we had fewer divisions, of course. But, competition tended to be individuals against each other.

And, we actually gave away prizes, such as towlines, handles, and useful silverware like candy dishes. But, you can't just turn back the clock. I like some of the ideas above, however, to make events handicapped competitions.

[Than_Bogan]

Great to see detailed comments from @MikeT . Every idea I've ever mentioned on this topic, I stole from him.

[6balls]

When I first began, I sure liked trophies, embroidered towels etc. I remember even looking at the regional guide and couldn't understand why some tourneys were for "rankings". I didn't even know what rankings were...just knew I had an age division and I wanted to show up and win it.

 

Now I don't care so much about the trophies. I am guilty, though, of keeping track of the skiers in my division at a tourney. I cheer them on, but if my score is the best in my division I chalk it up as a "win'.

 

Some interesting thoughts @MikeT

[ForrestGump]

Hah! Richard, that's a brilliantly great idea to go along with your first brilliant idea of traveling. Drive someone out of the sport. No wonder other sports are growing and ours has half the membership it did 20 years ago.

 

I'm not leaving the sport. But there's a LOT of room for improvement in it.

[boarditup]

The INT is essentially a marketing tool for the various sponsors. As a former State Coordinator, I can attest that I never made any money - I broke even once. The INT is well produced and has a different "feel" with the announcing, background music, and banners - so it is more expensive than an AWSA local tournament. It was designed to be more novice-friendly and require far fewer officials. It is not as Type-A competitive satisifying as an ELR tournament. But, because of the marketing structure, it is much more controlled and it requires a more controlled State Coordinator. So, you don't have a bunch of distributed LOCs putting on the tournaments. It is just a different model.

 

That said, it would be nice to have the AWSA more user-friendly for the new skier or the new site. If you are growing an area from scratch, it takes longer to get your Senior Judge in slalom than it does an MBA - and not too much less time and effort. With kids in school, a full time career that involves a lot of travel, and the demands of homeownership it is no suprise that fewer people are involved. You need several people, an expensive boat, expensive personal equipment, lots of time, extreme levels of patience, and confluence of various people's schedules, and a very supportive and flexible family to make it all work. It just doesn't happen like it did in the '70s and '80s anymore.

 

If we restructure to reduce the demands and keep the fun, we can stop the contraction and perhaps grow again. Evolve or go extinct. It is not the strongest that survive, but the most adaptable.

 

[jimbrake]

@MikeT - re: snow ski racing. You may know this, but others likely don't - Nastar is more like INT and Masters racing is more like AWSA. Masters is a more-serious (still fun), clique-ish, smaller, higher-skilled group of competitors. Everyone knows everyone. The group is small and shrinking. The course sets are closer to real FIS racing. Training options are limited and somewhat expensive. Nastar is more visible, the course sets are much easier, it's more inclusive, and more inviting to skiers that may not really be "racers" in terms of skill and courage.

 

Slalom (much less 3-event) is HARD. Hard to do, hard to find a place to train, expensive, clique-ish (I don't care, I love it). Unless slalom is made readily available and easier for people to at least try (picture a concession-type set up with a boat, a course, a driver, and an instructor near every public lake boat ramp - visible, not crazy expensive, and inviting) we won't bridge the gap between recreational skiers and serious tournament skiers. Changing our existing tournament format isn't going to attract a bunch of rec skiers to come try tournaments.

[Than_Bogan]

@jimbrake I can't really disagree, but I think you're missing something significant: There are a lot of capable slalom skiers who don't ski tournaments. Growing the pool would be great, but we aren't even managing to draw as well we "should" from the existing pool.

 

To be clear, the above statement is a generalization based on AWSA-wide stats. In New England, I actually feel things are going very well, and that the recent trend is toward overall growth, especially in the ranks of the kids.

 

When we look at total participation counts, we have to be careful to understand demographics (especially the giant bubble of those born in the 60s) and economics (income, income distribution, and participation costs) as explaining much of it. But that just strengthens the points made above: WE MUST ADAPT.

[bkreis]

i just held 3 rnd slalom, 2 round trick in Miami, wanted to keep it fun, hang out for lunch( we provided home cooked food) for 20ish skiers...ended up with 23..cost was 50usd/per skier and anyone who skied paid..went off brilliantly, had some pb's, great company, great food, fun people and all really appreciative of not only hosting, but keeping the cost down. requests are coming in to do it again..we stopped 45 min. for lunch and all got to catch up or meet new people. simple easy fun

[rodltg2]

The current format sucks. When I first started skiing tournaments I was gung go , But then realized how it all works and lost interest. Only ski the ones at our lake. Only do so because it gets boring sitting on shore all day and it's frowned upon as a member of the lake not to be there. I know that I my level in Men's 3 , I'll never place well. So there's no point. INT , grassroots and other formats are far and few between.

[The_MS]

The people that grew up in the 70s and 80s all kept score at the soccer games. Todays crowd comes out of the era of not keeping score and everyone is a winner.

[jimbrake]

@Than_Bogan - I do get that. We have a pretty good tournament crowd at my club, but we have some that rarely ski tournaments and one of the clubs I used to be in, which was huge, now has 0 competitive skiers. Maybe there is a tournament format that would attract @rodltg2, but then a lot of people won't compete no matter what because serious competition is just not their thing. What was it about "how it all works" that you didn't like, Rod? When I started, I was way down the list, climbed up, now have fallen way back, but I still love it. I'm just wired (weird) that way. Helps that my kids got into it, too.

 

When I started, tournaments were so big that many people showed up, skied, hung for a little while, then took off. Not everyone worked. They didn't need that many workers. I remember back in the '80s sometime the backlash against this started and understandably because the same people were doing the work and the same people weren't. You started seeing "workers tournaments". It became almost heavy handed. I started working tournaments a long, long time ago and I like hanging out all day, but maybe we ought to let some skiers just show up, ski, and leave at their leisure just to get them going. If they like the people and the skiing, they'll start to pitch in.

 

I don't know the format answer. I tend to think it's more of a "who's into it" vs. "who isn't". Just a human nature thing. If it was easy we'd be overrun with skiers. It isn't.

[cp]

I could not agree more with Shane, I used to ski every sanction tournament in my area which was alot, got many judges ratings, went to Regionals put on a Regionals now I am done with all that. I have been pushing for some sort of skill based/handicap system for years. I sent letters to my EVP, Regional counsel person, preached to anybody who would listen. It obviously did no good. I will ski tournaments on my own lake and thats about it.

[klindy]

@BK as has been mentioned on this thread there's nothing that prevents "ability based" groupings or handicaps in a Class C (or E or even L/R that I'm aware of actually) tournament. It's purely a function of how you set the groups up. Likewise, a tournament sponsor can give away awards or whatever else based on the groupings and ignore the age divisions.

 

That said, all the scores (run under Class C and above and scores below level 5 for Class F/X) will be posted on the ranking list by age groups.

 

So to me the question is why dont more tournament sponsors run an ability based or handicap format today? Seems that every one that told a story about how "I've run one on my lake" or "we pull the xxxxx tourament that way" has a blast and it attracts people!? My only guess is that, under the current system, "winning" or preforming well doesn't get you anywhere. In other words, it "counts" at the local tournament but nowhere else. Perhaps there's an opportunity....

 

Many (most?/all?) of these 'systems' - rankings, handicaps, ability based formats - can co-exist. The trick is to add enough value to those which may be the 'most fun' or attact the most skiers or whatever so that the formats are relevant.

[RichardDoane]

@shane - you are correct in that most of my ideas are brilliant, my point was if you feel the need for more competition than you have locally then you're going to need to travel, or you could help sponsor tournaments and try to encourage new skiers to get involved, I guess it doesn't bother me that there are less skiers now than 20 years ago, everything has a life cycle and the waterskiing numbers are down right now, it's not the end of the world, I'm tired of hearing, "it's a dying sport" because it is not

[cp]

We have tried all the different formats at our tournaments and it adds some fun but everyone knows that the real format is how regional and nationals are scored. Its seems odd that skill based format is so hard for AWSA to accept yet thats pretty much what MM is.

[BRY]

@bkreis showed the current format can be fun, not boring. Everyone there wants to do it again. He had an idea for a what he felt was a good tournament and the went out and made it happen.

[6balls]

Is life different today? I need a very compelling reason(s) in a short season to dedicate precious weekends to more than a few tourneys. When I have kids in activities who won't live here forever, a job, elderly parents who won't be here forever, siblings I don't see enough, friends I don't see enough it's hard to justify the time when I can easily ski just as much locally in the wee morning hours over a weekend and do a whole bunch of other stuff with my weekend as well.

 

Surgery last year a wash...but even to do 3 tourneys to get rid of score penalty is a challenge for me given competing priorities. If there were no ranking issues, I would ski two 3 round tourneys per year on a single weekend in Florida. It's a great get away with my brother free from all other responsibility with great folks on-site...a vacation of sorts...a relaxing weekend for sure.

 

Doesn't make sense to do that with frequency, however, at the expense of the outside interests of my wife/kids, at the expense of my bank account, or at the expense of me just being able to kick back at home decompressing from work on a weekend skiing in the a.m. with good buddies and enjoying whatever comes the rest of the day.

 

There are lots of technical issues re: tourneys outlined in this thread. The competition for tourneys for me, though, is the competition with other valid aspects of my life that I also enjoy that don't sacrifice skiing buoys...just tourney buoys.

 

I ski with 3 primary partners. One used to chase the big score hitting lots of tourneys but no longer does, the others get into 35 and 38 but never ski tourneys...too many competing priorities to dedicate full days or weekends for their singular interest.

 

My post solves nothing...just shows what the competitive aspect of the sport is up against. Of our primary group of 4 skiers, we have a guy that is in his 50's and still runs 32, a guy in his 50's that occasionally runs a 35, a guy in his 40's that mid-season runs consistent into 38, and a guy n his 40's (me) that seldom misses 35 and gets out of 38 twenty or so times/season. Among us I'm the only one who skis any tourneys...and it's one to three per season.

 

Given competing priorities in life, format change wouldn't matter for these four skiers. I know one former college ski team mate that has skied a tourney post college.

 

Slim pickins.

 

 

 

[aupatking]

I tell you what. I want to host a tournament on a public river, thus semi-public course. I want it to be fun and open to everyone. That said, we'd likely be running PP boats that are closing in on 20 years old.

I know I need a driver of some rating (what rating?), and a safety officer. If all I'm running is slalom, what else is needed? Does this qualify for any class, or X only, or even that?

If I want to run tricks too, how many judges. Because it's a river, we won't have fixed camera/judging towers, are they needed at all?

What if I format it as: 34mph, 2 passes, next skier? Speeds up the action, no one is sitting around long. Next round is the guys who made both passes first round.

 

Those are examples of questions that I think the guys on this forum are great at handling. I've looked at the rules & regs, with some of these questions in mind and get nowhere but annoyed.

 

To be clear, I'm only being half serious. Some of these are things I'd like to try out, some are just an example of the questions that must be answered to get mass participation. If you're of the "we don't want mass participation", or "it's not a spectator sport, it's a participatory sport", you've missed the point on both. You can't have 1 without the other.

Public tournaments (like biking), and inventive (I'm not sitting around 3 hours) formatting.

This horse ain't dead, I guess.

 

[walleye]

@boarditup said it best about both leagues.

 

The AWSA has too many rules for clubs to host class C tournament. AWSA criteria for judge or driver ratings for an amateur event.......LOL GET REAL AWSA THERE IS YOUR BALL AND CHAIN. Save your rules for big events National, Regionals, State etc.

 

The INT is nothing more than insurance cooler for that guy in Washington, but it does have the right stuff for growth, fun and promotion.

[LeonL]

@aupatking based on what you described, you would sanction a class "F". (If you feel the need to sanction at all) You would need an assistant driver, a safety person with level of "state" or higher, and at least one judge with Assistant rating. I'm pretty sure of these, but I will verify and post again. Just have your tournament and don't worry about sanction.

[Rpc29]

@OB has hit the nail on the head here. We need to keep it simple, affordable, accessible, and fun.

[9400]

The only problem with keeping it simple is that unfortunately there are cheaters out there and cheaters will cheat. Heck, even with all the rules in place, who ever thought we'd have a guy with moveable turn buoys holding age division records and even trying to make a pro event splash.

 

I'm good with making it simple, but we're going to have to accept what comes with that.

[MattP]

@9400 the truth will always come out when those skiers attend States, Regionals or Nationals. There could always be a filter in the ranking list to show skiers who attended those events along with those with E,L,R scores and their average without the C scores. Would be interesting to see.

[9400]

I agree with you @MattP . My point being we didn't have all the rules and requirements years ago. They were put in place for specific acts or specific cases. It's part of the nature of highly competitive people who keep score and play to win. Some people have no problem playing by the rules and accepting what happens, some like to push the grey areas and some can't accept anything other than winning at any cost. That's where most of our rules in anything come from.

[skihard]

Cheating on ones scores in golf or in skiing will eventually come out and the only person one is really cheating is themselves!

It will come out in the end when they have to prove it.

[MISkier]

There is nobody that I have ever skied with that has asked for or provided any weaving, even in practice. In fact, great emphasis is placed on a straight path and as close to perfect as possible. Furthermore, I'd say the available ski partners will diminish as the driving skills do.

 

I wouldn't want anything but a good path and minimal noticeable recovery/adjustment to maintain said path.

[BRY]

I don't find a C complicated or difficult. I do score and judge and have organized them. A C only needs three Regulars and the rest can be Assistants. It is helpful and preferred to have more Regulars but three will do. While it's running two shore judges (towers preferable but not required), a boat judge, a driver and a scorer. No cameras or video recording devices to hold hours of video that someone would need to look at to be useful. Can all be written on a clipboard and entered at night but much easier to put into WSTIM's real time (almost any laptop will do).

 

If you want just a boat judge, cool, run a Class F. Want to run a real wacky, unusual format, cool, run a Class F. Want your scores to count on a national level, to be directly comparable to any other score in the country, then a standardized format with at minimum of controls should be used, aka Class C.

 

Too hard to be a judge some say. Let's see:

Assistant Judge

Once Serve as a dock starter

Once Explain (usually to the Chief Judge) how to verify the course

Twice Sit with scorer and watch them do scoring

Three times Sit with a Regular (or higher) judge and judge 6 or more consecutive skiers

Send in form and your a judge. No one can convince me that is hard or complicated. Just enough to make sure the judge has a clue. Level 8 skier or higher? Just put your info on the form, send it in and your a judge. Becoming a Regular not that hard either.

[boarditup]

The Prato Principle states that 80% of your results come from 20% of your efforts. Applied to cheaters and rules: The vast majority of people will follow simple rules and expectations without any issue. A further minority will require an increasing level of specifics as they will argue the finer points to their own advantage - call them the Sea Lawyers. The rules for the final .3% is what we have now - the overboard rules and officiating for the very few that "ruin it" for everyone else. It is always interesting that everyone in the sport for even a few years has a few common names and events. From an organizational perspective - if you have to write down your ethics rules you already have lost the culture. Our people will police themselves. Those that are "over competitive" or cheating will find themselves isolated from the rest of the sport - people will vote with their feet and move on or away from them. Simply allow the LOCs to say "no" to entrants that create hostile environments and cheaters. That personality type will move on to something else - hopefully MMA fighting. They have a creative and great way of policing the cheats.

[ForrestGump]

Self scoring works very well for Golf. You rarely if ever hear about a cheater at golf. So why can't OB's idea work for waterskiing? Except for the fact that it's not the status quo, which the florida leadership fears losing.

 

@BRY it's not that getting to be a judge is hard. It's that with the diminished numbers of participants, it's harder and harder to find judges to put on even C events in some areas. We're lucky in the SCR that it's not really an issue, but that's an issue in some areas.

[BRY]

@ShaneH "Self scoring works very well for Golf. You rarely if ever hear about a cheater at golf. So why can't OB's idea work for waterskiing?" Excellent question, maybe it can. Maybe I am jaded and disillusioned with people. I think the majority are great but the cheaters are still a significant number and even "good" people can be tempted. Study after study shows people conform to rules at a much higher rate if they think they are being watched than if not. My friends who golf joke about people with "dyslexic" score cards or who "improve their lie". At golf tournaments above the local level they don't have officials watching for that? When I used to play tournament tennis (most lower tournaments self officiated) there were those who were known "hooks" and those that would hook only on close calls on crucial points. But it happened a lot.

 

"Except for the fact that it's not the status quo, which the florida leadership fears losing." I disagree with this statement entirely. All the leadership I have ever had the chance to speak with all are open to change if it is better than what we have now.. Change for change's sake is a road to oblivion.

 

"it's not that getting to be a judge is hard. It's that with the diminished numbers of participants, it's harder and harder to find judges to put on even C events in some areas. We're lucky in the SCR that it's not really an issue, but that's an issue in some areas."

Some on this thread have specifically said becoming a judge is too hard and overboard. I just disagree and showed why for those many lurkers who may not know.

Great point on finding enough judges in some area's is hard. I am not sure watering down standards for C's will help. If we can get 15 60% of OB's 25 competitors to be assistants, and 5 of those to step and be regulars there would be not problem and that's an easy tournament to run (15 gives you 3+ full crews).

It would be interesting to know what percentage of the AWSA members that have skied 4 tournaments (or more) in the last 2 yearsare judges of any level. A program to get those that aren't to become judges, without driving them away, might be a better approach?

[klindy]

@BRY good question about folks who have skied tournaments and are officials. I'll see if I can find out.

[RichardDoane]

I was irritated with @shane yesterday because he thought my comment was "brilliant" but after thinking about it and reading today's comments, I now appreciate the fact that he still cares enough to "stir the pot", I agree with @ob that a C could be judged well enough by the boat crew, and that C's should be easier to host if possible, and I would prefer an easier scoring procedure, @klindy please do run some numbers about judge ratings vs. tournament's skied, the comments about Regionals/Nationals showing the true scores just needs to take the "choke under pressure" variable into account

[ForrestGump]

The thing is @richarddoane I care about this sport a lot. The point of my original post was to get people talking. It wasn't to compare one sport to another. But to say, hey they do things differently in a lot of sports. And it works there. And it's fun. What's the reason we do it the way we do? And is there a better way?

 

The interesting thing is it turned 90 degrees with @OB's post. Which is good!

 

One of the things that I have always hated about the ranking system is that it does force us to have a system like we do for C because if there was bending the rules at a tournament it could effect regional/national qualifications. We didn't have that issue with the old way of Masters getting you to Reginoals and EP getting you to Nationals. Sure if you cheated you might get to go, but it didn't effect those you might bump out. Unintended consequences, I guess.

 

 

[MrJones]

I've post this before but...

 

20+ years ago we had some class C age group tourneys with a "prize". I forget how they got around the AWSA cash prize issue. Seems we won a gift certificate for $50 or something. Ability based in 15/22, 28/32, 35/38, and 39+ groups based on your 2 best scores from the past year. Men/women/kids/34/36 whatever in the group. Lots of fun. Should be easy to do.

[The_MS]

The true cost of a ski set always comes up on BOS but yet when a club charges 20-30 per set/round for a tourney, everyone thinks its expensive. Getting Promo boats is getting harder every year. There are only 4 left in Minn. 1 CP, 1 CC and 2 TXI. Looks like we lost 3 MC members in the past 2 years. Sanction fees, gas and free entry for boat owners eats away at any profit for the host club site.

[elr]

Take away the incentive to cheat in class C - starting with running an open (no qualifying) Regionals/Nationals - that anyone with the entry fee can compete in (bigger Regionals/Nationals are desired by LOCs and sponsors). Run class self scoring class Cs or just have a boat judge as @OB suggests. Enter the Class C score in the Rankings database but Rankings List champion determined by ELR scores. Seeding for States/Regionals/Nationals has three flights - no scores ski first (draw names for order), those with class C only scores skis second (by ranking list scores), those with ELR scores ski last (by ranking list). If numbers need to be limited then prioritize e.g Top X in Regionals then ELR ranking scores then C ranking scores then have a draw.

[MattP]

@webbdawg99 put on 5 Tuesday night 3 round slalom tournaments last season with a 20 entry cap. $40 entry, and usually included dinner. Officials paid their own entry and if I remember correctly they came out very much ahead over the series. Having more than enough officials made it possible to pull off the tournament without feeling over worked.

Hopefully he will chime in and comment, but making money while providing a quality, low stress tournament is possible. I believe almost everyone we had on site skied and was an official, it worked and it was fun. We talked about at one point doing a team/points/championship something another this year. It would be cool to do an ability based on the side over the series as well like @MrJones did.

 

Though I'm all for @OB's class C idea.

[MISkier]

@MattP, we do the same weeknight tournaments here in Michigan with similar entry cap and cost. There are about 10 of them. About half are Wednesday evenings on the East side of the state and the others are Thursday evenings on the West side of the state. I've skied both and really enjoy it. I do all of the West side and can only get into the East side occasionally.

[jedgell]

@OB's idea is great, it's ridiculous the amount of judging that's required for a sport where you're competing with yourself. Class C is for amateurs, it's not like we're winning money or breaking records. I know there will always be people out there that are going to cheat, but do we make the rules for the 1% to the detriment of everyone else?

[BRY]

@OB You say "We all know how to judge. Most of us can drive a semi straight line and we all know first aid" and "wouldn't it be much easier to write in scores on a clipboard from the observer seat??? No times needed" and "much easier to run a ranking qualified event".

 

But your proposals pretty much castrate a C into an F. Wouldn't it just be better then to drop C's all together and just have F with F then going to the ranking list? Plus to it also is organizers can really have latitude to get creative with format's? It's a thought. I'm not for it but it's a thought with potential merit.

 

Well,it's a good thought all but the clipboard with ranking qualified. That means someone has to transcribe every pass afterwards, what a tedious job and who wants to do that? That sure is not easier for the organizer. Perhaps an app for phones where each pass is uploaded into the ranking list real time. Just need skier name, AWSA number, starting speed and total buoy's for each pass. Seems like an very doable app and much easier for the same end result. And anyone/everyone could view results live, like the "Live Tournament Scoring" page now.

[BRY]

@shaneH you put this very well and very succinctly: "about the ranking system is that it does force us to have a system like we do for C because if there was bending the rules at a tournament it could effect regional/national qualifications"

I couldn't agree more. I think that is a very important consideration. Do we want to effect regional/national qualifications, i.e. open them to cheats and gaming the system, and for what gains?

[MillerTime38]

@OB I agree 100% on calling in boat times. Only call in a boat time if it is not actual. I cannot stand saying "6 with a 95" 100 times while boat judging a group.

 

I think the biggest hinderance to growing the sport is economical. I read somewhere that people are working more and making less. That means less time and money to spend extra curricular activities. Hence more people are selling the $50K boats and not paying $2K a year for private water and are picking up the $3000 bike or the $1000 golf clubs.

[ForrestGump]

I can't count the number of times I've been in the boat and the judge says "only tell me a time if the skier falls or if it's off." Otherwise it's a 95. Honestly, how many rerides were given in 2014 due to bad times in slalom vs the number of actual pulled passes. I bet it is statistically non existent as a percentage. Why, then, do we spend so much effort and time to track this in a C tournament. Now, I get it for Jump.

[MISkier]

Calling in the boat time also helps detect the wrong speed. We had a skier pulled at 36 instead of 34. Calling in the boat time caught it. He was a good enough skier that he ran the pass and just thought he wasn't in the game.

[LeonL]

Calling in the time caught it? I would think that calling in would not be required for that to be caught by the boat crew. (.08'vs .95) And calling in doesn't always fix that either. Most judges just call in the last two digits. If a skier was supposed to be pulled at 32 and got 34 instead and the judge called in "93" would the scorer question that? Only a really good one would. Now I agree that an experienced boat judge should catch that too, but the call in isn't a guarantee of a catch.

[MISkier]

The fact that the driver looked to call it in was how he caught it. if it were not part of the regular post-pass reporting, it might have gone unnoticed for another pass or two.

[Chef23]

I agree with @OB for running C class tournaments. We have talked about running a weeknight tournament at our site which is on public water but we have problems finding enough regulars and a safety official. Plus we don't have towers so we would have to anchor boats (which is doable). If we could have it judged from the boat with a clipboard we could get some additional scores and hopefully add some new tournament skiers.

 

I don't see what the problem is with self scoring. Who cares if someone's average is artificially high (we call them vanity handicaps in golf.) When they show up at a bigger event they are only going to hurt themselves and there is no money to be won in skiing. Plus there is still going to be someone in the boat as a judge and other people at the site.

 

The swerving driver thing always mystifies me. I know I can help my son out when he is running 38 off on his trick ski going 17 mph but I am not nearly a good enough driver to help someone when I am going 34 or 36 mph. I am just trying to keep the boat in the middle. I am not sure what to do at full speed to help out and prevent causing extra slack.

[9400]

I would suspect the biggest concern (for C tournaments) would/should be slalom course accuracy especially, if it depends on floating arms (that aren't secured/anchored). If the wind or current is parallel to the course direction or there's sag in the arms, the turn balls can be narrow. If there has been an ELR tournament at the site, then at least the course should have been checked. The course would concern me much more than the driving....Now if you combine "creative" driving with a narrow slalom course, then you can really have some inflated scores.

 

We had a guy from another part of our state that was showing up for tournaments and according to him, he was running 38 all the time but he showed up at our tournaments and would rarely ever run 35, come to find out his course was significantly narrow.

 

I do agree with everyone that the tournaments that are run on the up and up will sort it all out in the end. There are sites that run C tournaments with the highest standards and then there are some that don't. I think most are intentionally run the correct way.