Malibu Open Webcast

[ToddL]

I think the gap at the end of the Women's event might be due to the way the day is broken into a series of web casts. The transition from Sat #1 to Sat #2 caught me off guard because I had backed up and was not all the way up on live. I had to refresh the browser and it jumped me up to live and I noticed I was now on Sat #2 feed. I bet/hope when @Kelvin gets Sat #1 posted we can jump to the end and see Regina's runs. Also, it will contain the juniors' too.

[Razorskier1]

Webcast is black screen audio only

[The_MS]

Can you believe there are 3 broadcasters and @Horton looks like the most clean cut of them all?

[mlange]

Keeps going in and out. I really appreciate all the work that goes into this, but is it really THAT hard to follow the skier a little better with the camera???

[ToddL]

Breakfast w Malibu Open.

Bacon tastes bether at 41 off.

 

[Chef23]

@toddl nice. Everything is better with Bacon.

[The_MS]

Need some Old Milwaukee and brats.

[Edbrazil]

Notes for @wtrskr from the TC who supervised putting in the courses:

 

"Yes the anchors are permanent, as are the riser lines and sub-bouys – about 30 inches deep.

 

But the lake is on a long-term lease to the “Peddle-Boat” concession owner there, and powered boats are not allowed on the lagoon at any time.

 

The Malibu Open organizers have to pay a “loss of income” fee to the peddle-boat owner, for each day the tournament runs.

 

So likelihood of other events or even skiing are not in the cards. The local 3 event ski folks talked to the parks folks about running say the Wisconsin State tournament there, but no go."

[Bill22]

Men's Open RUN OFF!

[Bill22]

Men's Open Double RUN OFF!!!

[Chef23]

Ouch pulled gate for KC in second run off.

[Bill22]

In the 2nd run off did KC and Freddie have an option to go off at -39 or -41?

And if so, could Freddie have changed from -41 to -39 after he found out KC's did not get his gate?

[wtrskr]

"So likelihood of other events or even skiing are not in the cards. The local 3 event ski folks talked to the parks folks about running say the Wisconsin State tournament there, but no go"

 

Well that's lame.

 

I wonder if the paddle boat equipment has to be moved to make room for skiers to make their runs?

 

The two should be able to co-exist. Per the website, the paddle boat business doesn't operate in May on Weekdays. In prime season, they don't rent until 10 am on Weekdays and 9 am on Weekends. You'd have a stretch of available water for skiing everyday from sunrise until the herds of paddle boaters arrive.

 

IMO municipalities should encourage the use of resources such as this for recreation. I can't think of many negatives that would come from keeping the course up the full season and allowing skiers access.

 

 

[ForrestGump]

@wtrskr They drop the lake level 2 feet for the Malibu Open also. Otherwise, there is a LOT of water movement out there on the lagoon. After the weekend, they fill it back up. So you're not going to be able to coexist with skiers and the business there.

[Chef23]

@Bill22 in the run offs usually they shorten the line if there is a tie. Freddy had to go out at 41.

[seks69]

T

[Wish]

 

[Wish]

Is Brian on an S2 or a form of?? Mostly intersted to know if it at least has the spead steps.

 

unfortunate ending.

 

Still one of the best web casts by far.

[rockdog]

Great event, really disappointed we didn't get a good final to watch though.

[UWSkier]

WTH happened? Will blow his opening pass against Nate? Tried following on my phone but missed Will's pass.

[igkya]

Will had gates pulled @35

[UWSkier]

Told my buds the semis this morning were going to be the real final with the runoff drama. Bummed to be right. I like Will.

[brody]

Anyone know where I can see the results

[ral]

Congrats to Rodrigo "Toti" Miranda for his first place in Jump!

[ALPJr]

Really cool for skiers to be able watch throughout the day. For the TV masses a condensed version - 30 minutes with a couple sponsors breaks - of the semis and finals would be fun. Oh that was called Hot Summer Nights in the 80's and 90's. I was pulling for Will and he was looking so good... I think the stock value of the D3 Quest 45 is going up a bit... All in all a great tourney and hats off to the sponsors !!!

[ballsohard]

What was nate score?

[MrJones]

So my son and I go play golf late this afternoon. Get home and pull up the archive. Great! Slalom finals are already up. Not sure if it's my internet or the feed, but quality is terrible. Sit through it all and what??? Gates pulled at 35??? Really???

[Deep11]

It's like the final was cancelled - very disappointing.

I have never really bought into the "gates" arguments before but as a spectacle for the public to view a finish like that is really poor.

Interestingly I looked around the webcast platform and they had a disc golf webcast with "thousands" of viewers !

[klindy]

One of the issues I've been increasingly advocating to change in the rules is to recognize a distinction between a pro and an armateur.

 

AWSA rule 3.01 states "there shall be no distinction between armature and professionals".

 

This simple rule has an impact on a lot of things. One is that the rules are the rules. Doesn't matter what kind of tournament you're producing. If we allowed a distinction, on this case with the tournament declared a "pro tour", certain rules may be able to be applied (or not) depending on the circumstances.

 

The Malibu Open was sanction as a 1 round class L (preliminary round) and one round cash prize. Since the "pro semis and finals" are as much a show as they are a tournament, perhaps we allow things like relaxed gate calls, etc. since these are self declared "pros" they can collectively decide what's acceptable.

 

I'd envision something like this - tournament sponsor/director provides a list of rule "proposals" to the skiers for approval. Everyone knows the changes and can vote up/down. This would greatly help the ability to allow the show to go on for the public.

 

Thought out carefully I think there's some potential to improve the spectator appeal of our most visible events.

[rockdog]

And still no results on the website.

[Edbrazil]

And, no results from the London Night Jump. Maybe they are somewhere. Maybe the event had

an Internet feed, but I can't find either. Malibu Open does have results...from 2014. It bugs

me that events put up nice-looking websites, and yet don't keep up with them. A common flaw.

By the way, it's "amateur". You'll find an armature inside an electric motor.

[MAD11]

Seems to be something our sport is missing when the final can get cut short due to a gate call. I'm not sure what the best option is, but positive most casual spectators just walk away even colder than we all did after something like that. The two best guys on the weekend didn't get to battle it out. After waiting for that specifically for two days it kinda sucks. I know there are those that will say the others didn't miss it and I agree when your setting a record, but the show must go on and be exciting or eventually people stop watching. Maybe there is some compromise in the final four of a head to head or something.

 

Great job on the webcast @Kelvin As usual it keeps getting better every time you do it. Even when there were issues, I was impressed how quickly your team sorted them out. Hope to see you at the Pro Am. Not sure @horton has your entry yet, but figuring that just the mail service being slow. :) Thanks Again

[Ed_Johnson]

Agree it would have been great to see a battle into 43, it's what we all wanted.

 

Easiest Gate cure would be to give a Mulligan on your gate, as long as you make the next pass. Especially your opening pass.

[Texas6]

Couldn't agree more. Tough to see two of the best skiers in the world not even competing for the win. I know the rules are the rules; just so anti climatic when that happens. Eds idea or something along those lines would add to the suspense and pressure, rather than just ending a weekend long tourney at 35 off

[Edbrazil]

Sure took about "forever" to come up with Scot Ellis' distance on his 3rd jump. And, was it

actually a tie with Zack? Since 209' can be either 63.6, 63.7, 63.8, or 63.9 meters.

[Drago]

"They"can apply for rules exceptions, but it needs to be well prior to the tourney.imho: If they want a show, they should go class C and get rid of all the judging cameras. Isn't this the 3rd time this summer they have changed the results after the skiers are done skiing?

[ALPJr]

Was a little disappointing. I watched most of the day and delayed starting dinner on the grill so I could see the finals. However rules are rules. Changes would need to be finalized before the season/event though or it could really be a cluster.

[John Brooks]

@Drago I agree, actually I think for the head to head portion just make it Class F. Usually no one will attempt setting a record in that portion, they just want to win. I believe that would help with The Show as well.

[slow]

The gate rule needs to be fixed. Rules change in Alpine racing each year to make the sport better and safer. Adapt the sport to make it grow. The sport is not ready for TV broadcasting in its current form when your not sure who really won until after the fact.

[klindy]

@Texas6 that's true that may have helped "keep alive" a couple skiers who were judged to have missed the entrance gate. I'm sure there are other circumstances which can be "show stoppers too". If nothing else there are legitimate pros in all three events.

 

@Drago again I was proposing a broader solution that wouldn't need a "rules exception" every time.

 

Allowing a distinction between Pro and

Amateur (thanks EB) opens an avenue to help produce fan friendly, public enticing, enjoyable for the skier Pro Events.

 

As I mentioned the prelim round (in which everyone skis) at the Malibu Open was a Class L. All according to the rules and all scores eligible for the IWWF ranking list. Subsequent rounds are run fundamentally differently. My point is to make is easier for the Pros to stage the events that work!

 

Here's an idea to solve this single "issue" of unfortunate "missed gates" in the semis/finals. A missed gate call means a video review (or two) -delay. It's absolutely the skiers responsibility to go thru the gates, but any review or "sorry no gates" ride back to the dock is completely confusing to the uneducated. So you lose the crowd quickly. In a head to head situation is compounded because you have two skiers involved. Hardly "a show".

 

Well all know there are cameras on the gates. How about allowing Pros to simply turn off the view to the shore judges. Let the judges call gates as the see them. Leave the cameras run and be visible to others (like the skiers) if they which. Let it police itself basically. Take that video review judge and have that person watch all the gates and determine if they are good/bad and note it for every pass in the semis/finals. Circulate the report to all the skiers in the list and the tournament sponsor after the event.

 

Immediate ramifications? None on a close call. Longer term peer pressure will help. Real abuse and the sponsors can not invite the skiers.

 

Point again here is change one simple rule. Probably write some framework rules because of the change and then let some out of the box thinking happen.

 

I'd suggest things like course dimensions, ramp dimensions, how we score the events, and probably some other core rules must not be changed without special approval from the top weeks in advance of the event (if ever).

 

I just know that if a dozen or two of us get on here and say "so and so missed their gates and that made for a crappy finish" or "man that was anticlimatic" due to x or y means there are probably lots and lots more who were onsite that are much more disappointed or turned off by the sport.

[RazorRoss3]

I could see a mulligan if you run the next pass with gates. That takes the gate-make-rate from needing to be 100% right now to 50%. I think it's safe to say that the majority of skiers after year 1 or 2 in the course can make 50% of their gates. Unless you only mulligan the opener which wouldn't do anything really since usually the gate gets pulled at a later pass anyways. I am strongly against saying you don't need to go through the gates and I don't believe in widening them because at the end of the day skiers would still aim for the right hand gate ball and still get gates pulled for missing them.

[LeonL]

Changing the current course of this thread (only temporarily) .....just who is "Dano the Mano". How is he connected to Malibu? Why is he the mouth of waterski webcasts? I ask because (trying to be tactful here) his lack of a deep knowledge of the sport is evident. He makes glaringly inaccurate comments. Much better announcers can be found. I assume that his audio is heard as an onsite announcer, not just for the webcast.

[foxriverat]

@LeonL Hes mostly a wakeboarding guy http://wakeboardinghalloffame.com/2015/03/19/more-than-just-the-noise-the-dano-the-mano-interview/ I imagine there are not too many water sports announcers around. He`s entertaining and usually has help in the booth from a slalom expert. @Horton did a great job helping. Educational and entertaining. And it was nice meeting him.

[Than_Bogan]

@LeonL I agree. He certainly tries hard and probably does a better job than I could. But there are many awesome slalom announcers. Marcus Brown, @Horton, Tadd, and newly discovered announcing savants Freddie Winter @FWinter and Matteo @Luzz come to mind . Actually Nate Smith was super insightful one time when he was hurt.

 

I'm sure there are many more who really know the details AND how to make it exciting yet accessible. Maybe Dano part of the time, but he really wears me out.

[UWSkier]

He's not a bad dude, but sometimes when there's nothing to say, I wish he'd say nothing rather than trying to fill. That and slalom needs more radio voices. Matteo was a welcome change-up in the booth yesterday. He did a great job and has a good voice for the PA system.

[Ralph Lee]

Dano has the voice of an Angel, but Marcus Brown is the most enjoyable announcer ive heard in awhile. How about Dave Benzel, and Rhoni Barton? They were great on the outdoor life channel years ago.

[LeonL]

@UWSkier, oh I'm not trying to say he is a "bad dude". Nothing personal, but such comments as calling competitors "riders" shows his wakeboard influence. Once he remarked about skiers getting father "down the buoy line", huh? When he must have meant shorter line lengths. Just to name a couple. He even seemed unsure as to the format (maybe that wasn't his fault apparently no one else knew fully.)

[crashman]

I agree the rules should be different for this type of event. Every other sport makes yearly rules changes based on what people want to see- and what do people want to see from these skiers? We want to see them ski into 43 off. In the finals Instead of a sudden death situation why not let both skiers ski every pass from 35 to 43 off but have buoys at successive pass count for more and more points- 1 point for each ball at -35, 2 points for-38, 3 for -39, 5 for 41, 10 for -43 or something of the sort.

[ToddL]

Back to gates... Pros should be able to run valid gates. I understand that at the limits of our sport's record levels, every fraction of an inch matters. So, here we are.

 

There was a rule change for Class C where if a skier missed their opening gates on the opening pass, but completes it with no further issues and make exit gates; then the skier can continue "at risk". If that skier runs a clean next pass, all is forgiven and the set continues.

 

It seems that this same concept should be applied at the pro level. Miss a gate, but run the pass; then ski next pass at risks. Therefore, the skiers will want to have clean gates for the top 2-3 passes anyway. They don't want to risk it.

 

But, it might still be confusing for spectators... Here's a scenario: Head to head.

Skier A runs 39. Skier B runs 39 but with bad entry gate. Skier A gets 3 at 41. Skier B gets 4 at 41, but since he is at risk, his score doesn't count. Skier A wins. Might be confusing for spectators, or it might up the drama of skiing at risk...

 

Here's another scenario where this rule change would help... Head to head.

Skier A runs 38. Skier B runs 38 but with bad entry gate. Skier A runs 39. Skier B also runs a clean 39 (so all is good now). Skier A gets 3 and 41. Skier B gets 4 at 41. Skier B wins. Spectators, see great skiing and the skier who skied the farthest won, so it makes sense to them.

[ToddL]

One more thought on gates... I recall that when the position of the current gates were set, they were based upon the ideal path into 1 ball for top level skiers. Skis, Boats, Speed Controls have all advanced in our sport. It is possible that with all this new technology and some more intense technique by top-level athletes, maybe the location of the gates is no longer ideal? Do they need to be a meter sooner? The original logic was that too early to 1 ball would cause the skier issues. Is that really true? If so, then an "ideal" gate location must really exists. Too late is just as bad as too soon for top-level performance.

 

Maybe the gates are no longer in the ideal location? Just something to ponder. Maybe we should use video to capture the point of wake crossing from 2 to 3 ball for top pros at 38/39 passes to see if "ideal" wake crossing location has changed.