Boys 3 - The progression from 34 to 36 mph

[John Brooks]

Do you believe that increasing the maximum speed from 34 to 36 mph, going from B2 to B3 is good for the sport and the skiers?

 

I have no kids that age any longer but seeing some good B2 skiers making the progression, moving up to B3, I have seen some kids get hurt and wonder if maybe that jump in speed also might be scaring some others that decide to move away from the sport. I would rather see kids excited about the sport. Maybe something like a move/division to 35mph would be a better option or possibly something along the lines of skills based divisions where age does not matter (I realize this is a INT type format, but is that a better option?). Or maybe do we need other choices for divisions, where the skier makes some sort of choice, within certain parameters, on which division they ski in and not have the division strictly tied to age.

[Razorskier1]

I always felt that it was about two years too soon to lift kids to 36mph.

[Chef23]

My son got hurt last year skiing 36 mph he went out the front at 22 off and apparently cartwheeled 4 times (it was at a tournament and I was on a different lake) and wound up with a minor concussion. That was just before regionals last year which he missed and he hasn't competed since. He hasn't skied 36 since either I decided to try to get him consistently through 28 off at 34 mph before moving him back to 36 mph. My son had just started to run 34/22 occasionally when he jumped to Boys 3 and had never run it in a tournament.

 

In fairness his not competing has nothing to do with getting hurt. My son decided he wants to try and play lacrosse in college which led to a lot of lacrosse this summer which conflicted with the ability to ski tournaments and training and he only has about 10 sets in the course this season.

 

When it comes to moving to 36 mph I believe that skiers that can run 28 off and shorter at 34 mph make an easier and safer transition to 36 because they are obviously better skiers with better body position. 36 mph is very unforgiving to errors in body position and the falls can be violent.

 

I could see waiting another year or two until the kids are more consistently matured. There can be a wide range in maturity and strength at that age.

 

[The_MS]

36 should start at B3 and end at M5.

[gregy]

Too soon for most I think. There's that elite group that are ready for it but most I think are not.

[JohnN]

Maybe it shouldn't be mandatory, but it needs to be allowed. One solution could be to allow shortening below max speed with reasonable scoring or allow/encourage skiing up when appropriate? 36 can hurt though, and is the speed where I've seen several concussions. Kids who ski outside of ussa tourneys will likely have to go 36 as well.

 

FWIW, the jump to 36 hasn't seemed to impede the three we've had go this year and last. Each has exceeded their 34mph line lengths within a season or two (15@34 - running 22@36, mid-28@34->mid 32@36, 1@35@34->2@35@36). 30 to 34 was a bigger jump, IMO. Finally, big picture wise, sending boys to 36 when they hit M1 and are at risk of quitting anyway would probably hurt the sport more.

[JohnN]

make that usawaterski tournaments :-). Already switching gears. The same discussion is happening in the snow ski world relative to gear requirements.

[JoeSkier6]

Everyone might as well get a trophy.....!?

 

 

[Bruce_Butterfield]

"Do you believe that increasing the maximum speed from 34 to 36 mph, going from B2 to B3 is good for the sport and the skiers? "

 

Yes absolutely. By age 14 some kids are ready for the increase on speed and some aren't, but those who aren't ready aren't shortening the rope anyway. Also keep in mind the growth spurts and hormone increases hit pretty strong at that age group.

 

If you want kids to improve, you have to raise the bar to appropriate levels.

 

I really don't believe there is any increase in injury rates with this group correlated with the increase in speed.

 

FWIW, when my son was 12 (90 lbs soaking wet) he skied in a tournament where was required to ski 36. He LOVED it. 36 is more fun. Plain and simple.

[gregy]

Its not about everyone getting a trophy. I've seen some slower developing boys that just weren't ready for 36 in my opinion. Maybe a penalty system could be created to allow 34mph max.

[Chef23]

@JoeSkier6 not sure how this discussion relates to everyone getting a trophy I don't think that was advocated anywhere.

 

I don't think my son would have gotten hurt at 34 mph but then again maybe he would have. If he was skiing tournaments this year he would be back at 36 mph. Given that he isn't we decided to take a different path for the season. He is plenty big and strong and was last year as well but I felt he could use some technique improvement and felt he would learn better and safer at 34.

[ntx]

If you have poor technique at 34 ... 36 will eat you alive. Way back they started 36 much earlier. Soooo in a sense we have already lowere it. Bruce is correct that international tournaments require 36 at a earlier age. I sure hope Griffin Stange can get acclimated to 36. (Read sarcastic)

[Edbrazil]

36 was controversial right from the start. In the early 1960's, Mens max. speed was 34. Former

AWSA President Larry Brown railed against the speed change in the WaterSkier. At that time, he

was right about boats having trouble getting to 36. I remember the 1963 Easterns, where the

driver had to have the throttle pegged to pull 36. But, wasn't a very good boat, like a Century or

twin outboard.

At the 1964 Nationals, boys still skied 34 mph, as Billy Spencer did while winning the event and

nearly running 30 off. Those were also the days of the long endgates. Although, the year

before, at the 1963 Worlds, he won SL at age 14. Pretty sure it's 14, since he was still in

Jr. Boys in 1962.

Of course, at the high end, some Boys 3 are running 39.5. Although, at the current Nationals,

no B3 ran beyond 4 @ 38 off. That seems low; nearly 2 passes behind KC Wilson's record.

 

Personally I never liked 36, and picked up 2 passes when I went into Sr. Men and back to 34.

[GregDavis]

Look for upcoming article in Water Ski Mag. regarding boys1/ boys 2 / boys 3 speed. I've been driving tournaments for about 35 years. My guess is we loose 80% of the boys 2 skiers, when they go to 36 mph. Take a 13 or 14 year old, who weighs 110 lbs. the first time he goes 36, his eyes are like a deer in the headlights. He regresses as far as rope length. all the attention he got coming up in Boys 1, ( personal bests every week ) lots of congratulations, encouragement, etc. Then he goes to boys 2, ( 34 mph ) most of the boys make this transition, however they do regress as far as rope length etc. Less, attention, not many PBs etc. However most of them hang in there. NOW, when they go 36, Holly cow!, they really regress as far as rope length, no praise, no PB.s no attention. etc. They get discouraged, they go out the front a few times, and that's it, they want to go to the Mall and hang out with their friends. Again, I have seen this through the years, in Ohio, we loose 80 maybe 90% of the boys, when they go to 36. Someone mentioned above, if a boy does not have good form or technique at 30 or 34, He is toast at 36. OUT OF SPORT> DONE. boys 1, should be 30, boys 2, 32, boys 3, 34. ( Same for everyone) , let them progress safely, Now, if you have the exception, i.e. Chris Parish was running 38 ( 36 mph when he was 15) let that young man opt. up to Mens 1, if he wants, ( can't come back, but let him go. WHY NOT? Keep these young boys in the sport, keep them safe, keep them encouraged.

[MattP]

I don't think boys are leaving just because of a speed change @GregDavis. So much going on in a B3 skier's life. High school sports more than likely play a big part in their absence in the tournament scene along with their studies to get into college. Along with family commitments, friends, etc.

[ntx]

@GregDavis watch a recent episode of real sports about how we are creating a entire generation. Of entitled kids rewarding them with trophies for participation. Kids in college feel that they deserve a B grade just for attending class. Lets all ski 32 mph. That is real easy. Yes 36 is hard. If it was easy everyone would do it. Many small size kids have made the transition. Mine included. You have to have good form.

[gregy]

Maybe the boys aren't leaving just because of speed but with all the competition from other sports for boys that age why not make our sport a little more user friendly. We can keep a few more of them interested in skiing why not make some concessions. Give them the option to pick a slower max speed with a penalty. A lot of talk about envolvement in tournaments, we've got to evolve. Think outside the box.

 

I really don't see this as an entitlement or give everyone a trophy thing. Just a way to increase envolvement and make things a little safer. Just because "I did it this way" or "my kids did it" doesn't necessarily make the best way.

[Chef23]

Having a Boys 3 skier that competed at Nationals his last year in B2 and hasn't competed the last two years I can share some of the reasons for us. Last year I wouldn't have brought my son he would have needed to top 5 at regionals to qualify to get in he wouldn't have beaten the COA. He was also hurt having suffered a concussion last July.

 

This year he has been focused on lacrosse. It is very difficult to focus on a sport a kid wants to play in college and be a serious competitive water skier. I think you lose more kids to other sports as they hit the high school age than leave because of speed. My son continues to ski and we are going to try to work his schedule next summer to get a couple of tournaments in.

 

I know of a couple of other eastern region skiers that are in either B3 or G3 that haven't skied much this summer for reasons similar to my son.

[ToddL]

@MattL - what are your thoughts as a new B3 skier?

[John Brooks]

I would like to find ways to grow (not shrink) our sport and keep folks safe at the same time. Give the kids the option, stay in B3 at 34 or move to another division at 36, not force them to increase speed just to be able to shorten the rope. Their technique may not be great, but if they don't stay on the water they will not improve, they will not have a water ski addiction (I personally think this addiction is good.) and who will come to the lake to pull us old guys/girls?

 

As @gregy mentioned earlier, I believe we need to think outside the old box, find many different ways to allow folks to enjoy the sport, feel the challenges and success and want to bring their friends.

 

And how about Master Men or some other named division, to have a group, by those who would like a change, additional challenge, to ski at 35 mph?

[ToddL]

If only there was a way to set divisions by size/strength. Some young men develop at the age of 13, while others don't really fill out until 16. i.e. Over 140 lbs and 14yo+? Then you ski 36 MPH. Call the 36MPH division Boys 4.

 

Another idea is to specify Boys 4 by age: 16-17 year olds going 36MPH, and set B3 at 14 & 15 year olds going 34MPH. Thus, have the speed change at B4.

 

With either of these proposals for continuity, historic B3 records would be reclassified as B4 records since they were set at 36 MPH and likely be skiers on the top end of the age range anyway. New records would get set for the newly specified B3 division and would stand alone going forward.

[ToddL]

@GregDavis - will the prep for the article include a survey of inactive skiers who left the sport sometime shortly after competing in B2 (i.e. those who competed in B2, B3, or possibly M1, but are no longer active? If not, then I think the article will be missing out on some key info.

[The_MS]

What about the girl that wins G1 in her last year and then has to go compete against G2 girls 4 years older the following year?

[Chef23]

@MS the 4 year age gaps apply in both boys and girls. For boys from B1 to B2 you go from 30 mph to 34 mph. In girls it goes 30, 32, then 34.

 

Most kids are never going to be competitive their first year or two in a new age division. There is no way a kid who is 9 is going to be competitive with a 13 year old or a 14 year old with a 17 year old.

 

My son has never been competitive on a national level but he has qualified for nationals based on both regional placement and beating the cut off average. Generally if he can beat the cut off average I have been willing to bring him to Nationals. In the East we don't have a ton of skiers so if he qualifies just on placement I have been less willing to cover the expense to bring him.

 

I am fine with the age gaps (and the speeds) I don't believe in giving everyone a medal. I don't have a problem with a kid having to work for a couple of years to be competitive in a new age group. It is up to the parents to manage the kids expectations, help them develop and keep them safe as they do.

 

That said if part of the objective is to get more kids to nationals then having more divisions might help.

[The_MS]

I agree.

[LeonL]

I don't have an answer, but I'd hate to see divisions of only 2 years. We've got a lot as is.

[drewski32]

When I went into B3 i only weighed about 100 pounds and I was fine. At 34 I was running -28 about half the time, and yes I lost a full pass going into B3. The key thing for speed change is good form.

Our sport isn't by any means easy. Making a division change as a junior isn't meant to be easy. My last year in B2 i placed 4th at southern regionals and 9th at nat's. The next year I got my ass handed to me but that is just part of the sport. I never saw it as unfair; Instead I took it as a challenge as any competitive person would. I worked hard to get through it and pulled my buoy count back to normal by the end of my first year and kept improving from there.

Yes, I do feel bad for kids who develope a little later (like myself) and have to make the jump, but that doesn't mean they need help. They just have to be smart about it.

[Chef23]

If looking to compress divisions an option might be M1 and M2. There aren't many skiers in those divisions combined and they both ski 36. The younger end of the division shouldn't be at a disadvantage as they skied 36 in B3.

[elr]

My son just skied his last B3 Nationals as a very athletically young 18 year old (17 ski years old). There are B2 kids that are more athletically mature than he is. He COA qualified (1 @ -32 @ 36) in slalom for Nationals his last two years of B3. A big reason he stayed engaged in the sport was because his trick skiing allowed him to OA qualify for Nationals his last two years of B2 - which made the trip worthwhile. Looking back at it I believe he would have progressed faster and more safely in slalom if we had slowed down and shortened to get through -28 at 28, 30, 32, 34, and then 36 then we did chasing maximum age division speed @ -15. The kids that are running -28 seem to have no problem upping speed.

 

My suggestion is that:

1) the maximum speed for males B1 to MB be 36 mph, females G1 to WB be 34 mph;

2) scores from the buoy count table (speed/line length) e.g. LL @ 15.5 = 6, -43 @ 36 = 126

3) first complete pass not discounted to LL for being under max speed;

4) no change in speed after shortening from starting line length.

 

This schema allows folks to develop skiing skills at a pace that is appropriate for their level of athleticism and maturity. Both World List and JD skiers can plan their skiing appropriately. Results at placement tournaments will not change although records for B1 and B2 may get higher - could be that Griffin may be able to go more than 2.5 @ -38/36.

 

[DefectiveDave]

If you want to keep more B3 boys involved, get more G3 girls involved. Then you could bump the speed to 48 mph and replace the buoys with chainsaws for all they would care.

[Chef23]

My son went back to 36 mph this morning for the first time since last July. He ran 36/22 on his second attempt after getting 4 the first time. He never got bast 2 ball before.

 

We have spent the last year with him running slower speeds and shorter line lengths. He skied 30 mph into 35 off, 32 into 32 off and 34 mph at 22 and 28 off. We have generally been skiing a set that was 30/22, 32/22, 32/28, 34/22 and maybe a look at 34/28 or a couple of 34/22 passes. This morning after running 32/22 we went to 34 and after 34 he asked to try 36.

 

I definitely think running slower speeds and shorter line lengths has helped improve his technique. We will keep mixing in some sets like that and I will probably mix some of it into my skiing.

[socalskier]

I have always wanted B 1-4 with speeds 28-36 and redistributing the age divisions. For me it isn't about every body getting a trophy, it is about good competition and retention in the sport. There is always the concept that if it isn't broke don't fix it, but this sport is broken and needs fixing. I love this sport and what is has done for my family and for the friends we have met. I would just like to see more people in it and have alway thought this system would help and not hurt a thing.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@GregDavis interesting input, but I think its very misleading. Can you find stats on how many kids dropout of little league baseball after 8th grade and don't transition to high school ball? How about basketball, soccer, gymnastics or any other sport? If you dig into those, I suspect the dropout rate at the same age will be very similar to the dropout rate of skiing. Its the simple fact that many kids are given the opportunity (sometimes pushed) to participate in a sport and either they simply don't like it, aren't that athletic, or they get other priorities. Once you get to the high school level, the competiveness gets intense in all sports and the less inclined athletes find other things to do. The kids who are good at their sport stay with it, put in the extra work to improve, and the others go do something different. That's life.

 

What is the dropout rate from G1 to G2 to G3? I bet its nearly the same as the boys.

 

I'll bet a case of your favorite adult beverage that the increase in speed has absolutely nothing to do with the dropout rate.

 

By all means we should do all we reasonably can to keep kids interested and excited about the sport, but I don't think dropping the speed will make an iota of difference.

[LeonL]

Concerning the dropout of skiers at high school age. Even though and maybe even due to being a gifted athlete, kids move to school sports in order to be more popular and recognized at school. No one in their school looks at skiing as a competitive sport. You're going to be noticed in high school,much more if you're a football or basketball star than a national champion skier. That's just the way it is. Kids want to be popular, noticed and accepted. Don't we all? It's just more important to kids at that age.

[webbdawg99]

I had never seen a slalom course when I was in high school. I was on the varsity basketball and football teams. If there was a national champion water skier at my high school, I would've thought he or she was way cooler than all the football and basketball players!

[ntx]

I know this is off topic but..... Is the decline in numbers have anything to do with the been there done that attitude? I have seen MANY talented skiers move from the sport for many reasons. Most have private sites to ski on. Have been going to nationals from early in B1/G1 they have achieved success in the sport up to the elite level and just stop. They get to M1 and jobs and other interest start to kick in. Nationals is not a big deal to them. They have skied and placed at many. Take a look @MattP m1 skier that has never qualified before. There is no way he is going to miss it. On the other end many of the usually top end skiers are missing this year. Go down the list. Greenwood?? Selsor?? (might still be hurt from last year) Brooks devito?? How do we keep the top talent coming back?? The scores are pretty low this year on some of the podiums. Less than 2500 in tricks should not place in m1. 2500 is 18th on the ranking list but finishes 5th at our biggest event?? This might not be the case in all events, and all division, but it looks like the 3 thru 5 scores are lower than in years past. I guess with lower numbers of participants, quality goes down too.

[Chef23]

In M1 I can see it being tough to get to Nationals. Some college kids are on the way back to school and for those out of college with jobs they don't get much vacation or make a ton of money. Taking vacation to go to Nationals might not be in the budget.

 

I know when I was M1 age I was hanging out in Newport RI in the summer meeting my wife.

[gregy]

Definitely could see it hard to justify going to nationals with limited budget and vacation. College age or even just getting out into work. Most companies now days give a week or less of vacation for the first year. If you only have a week or two of vacation time your probably not going to want to spend it doing something you have done numerous times before like @ntx is saying. If I ever qualify for nationals I won't miss it.

[ntx]

My kid was three weeks into a real first job. Even with a boss with a tournament skiing background, he was reluctant to ask for time off. I know he wanted to be there but I am proud of his "big boy" decision to pass on nationals this year.

[The_MS]

Practice time is what holds the M1 guys back.

[MattP]

@MS is right on that one. I have 30 practice sets in for the year... Even got a tournament PB a few weeks ago....

[Jdubs]

I would love to see an extra kids division / age group added - ie. B1, B2, B3, and B4. I agree that the 36 is a jump, but the B1 to B2 jump is much worse at 30 MPH to 34 and what makes it worse is they are at a much younger age. I also think it would bring a whole other group of medalists each regional and nationals. Lets face it - There is little opportunity for some kids to ever win much less really compete against kids 4 years older than they are. I know - It could take the tournament longer to run, but I am of the opinion that it would be worth it. Maybe if we get more juniors entered in our sport, AWSA will think about more age groups.

[LeonL]

Those who would advocate additional age groups, down to 2 year breaks, what do you do with the 13 year old that is already 6'2"? As an old friend of mine once described, "a man among boys". Do you then start breaking divisions by height and weight? There is a wide disparity in sizes of boys in the 11-14 year range. Here in KY this year we had a 14 year old who stands 6'2" or maybe 6'3" and another kid who is 12 and is about 4'10". Both in B2. It certainly appears that if you switched their ages there would still,be a big gap. The 6'2" kid was over 6' a year ago. How do you make that fair? You can't, so adding more divisions won't fix size disparity and that's more significant than age if you ask me.

[ToddL]

@LeonL - That's why I suggested that the ages stay at B1,2,3 like current, but by size (weight or height) they could bump up to "B4" division regardless of age. Kind of a hybrid. The big kids in B4 would ski 36, the smaller kids would be: 34 for B3, 32 for B2, and 30 for B1. If we were writing the rules with no regard for the past, that's what I'd suggest. Then, everyone goes to 36 at 18 years of age in M1.

[Than_Bogan]

The first time I ever tried 36mph, I was roughly 22 years old. So maybe I'm completely missing the core point of the argument.

 

But in my experience 34/-38 seems far more dangerous than -15 or -22 at 36 mph. (In fact, I believe it is more dangerous than 36/-35.) But we don't worry about us old guys taking on -38, because you "can't" get there until you run -35 and so hopefully you know what you're doing by then.

 

Shouldn't the same be true of 36? Kids who complete 34 move on to 36. Is it really that much more dangerous? Anybody pushing the edge of their capability will run into risky situations, but I'm not quite getting why 36 vs. 34 is a special case.

 

I am open to being convinced.

[John Brooks]

@Than_Bogan Good points. My question is not really related to 34 vs 36 but that the kids, still on a steep development curve, are moving from B2 to B3 and not necessarily ready for the higher speed. In a tour if they want to shorten the rope, they need to be at 36. I believe for them to have fun and a sense of accomplishment, it might be a better option to have the 36 mph requirement be in a separate, voluntary division until they reach M1.

[elr]

@Than_Bogan @John Brooks

 

Especially for the Juniors but even for adults I believe that the rules should allow for individual developmentally appropriate shortening speeds in AWSA tournaments (Class E and below), just like jump speeds and ramp angles.

 

We used to have minimum start speeds that were 6mph below shortening speed, that rule kept my older son from skiing in tournaments.

 

Along the lines of 36MPH being an incentive I believe the maximum speed for all males should be 36 mph. Scoring is per a buoy count table - 6 buoys per speed increment (starting at 15MPH), 6 buoys per shortening (Starting at LL). e.g. opening pass at 34/-22 scores 84 buoys regardless of division. First shortening after opening pass determines max speed for the round.

 

There is a 6 buoy incentive for skiing @ 36 MPH v 34MPH that you can choose to take in any age group. You can choose to shorten at a speed you are comfortable with.

 

This will NOT change 1st thru 5th place at placement tournament like Regional/Nationals - not a trophy for everybody - those placement go to elite skiers anyway who will ski at the speed that maximizes their score. . World List skiers will easily conform their tournament sets to World List standards. It will allow developing/mid-range skiers to ski at the right speed for them. I think we need our rules to be more skier development friendly.

[DefectiveDave]

@elr,

 

I like your idea and wonder why we don't already have a system like the one you've described.

 

I would only make one tweak, I see no reason to limit 36 mph in such a system to males. I'm sure there are many women who could also ski comfortably at 36 mph and would benefit buoy-wise from such a system. For example, I know that I find 36mph-22off easier than 34.2mph-28off. Also, while I'm not a shortline skier, I strongly suspect that 36mph-39off is much easier than 34.2mph-41off.

[andjules]

No offense, but I think a some of you are over-thinking this. Let's not make the difference between -15/34 and -15/36 sound like the difference between a baby seat in a mini-van vs riding a motorcycle blindfold with no helmet. It's a little faster and the falls are a little tougher, that's all. Kids will adjust. That's what kids do. If you know your kid and think they are more fearful or more easily discouraged, give them some time with an instructor who'll get them through it without too many painful 'yard sale' type falls.

 

Disclaimer: I apologize it this seems like a rigid, traditionalist, 'grumpy old man' comment.

[Than_Bogan]

Fwiw, from my experience and lots of discussions, I believe most people find you can score more buoys at 34 than 36 in the "mortal range." 36 is so fast that -15 and -22 are generally regarded as very hard passes. It's true that 34/-39 is probably a hair harder than 36/-38, so I agree that in the ultra-talented range the incentive would be to go to 36.

 

But I would suspect that, with a choice of speed, most skiers would never go 36. Even if they eventually reached the point where it could help their buoy count, they'd have gone so far at 34 for so long that trying to go to 36 wouldn't seem worth the learning curve.

 

Maybe that's fine. Maybe 36 should really only be for the very top skiers. And heck, maybe they should have the option to go to 38 -- I wouldn't be surprised if 38/-41 is easier than 36/-43.

 

But I think it would be a very big change that would need some thorough vetting before I'd be on board with it.