Nationals (and Regionals) ROI

[brettmainer]

There is a lot of well founded griping about the cost of one nationals (or regionals) ski ride. Take a few days off work, fly thousands of miles, $160 entry, motel, car, etc., and you are spending the cost of a new Goode (maybe even a Warp) for one ski ride. The thing is, nobody who wins ever complains. Only those who ski subpar. And believe me, I have been there. I concluded by 36mph career with a 0.5 @ 32' off at the 2006 Nationals and once lost to Scott McNerney at regionals.

 

Maybe that is the allure of a 1 round tournament. If we had 3 rounds, the standings would closely resemble the rankings list. Not a lot of drama. One round though, and who knows? I am seeded 10th (or thereabouts) this week in M3. I am within a pass of the No. 1 seed. 9 times out of 10, he beats me. But I beat him at Regionals (he fell 2 passes below his average) so it's possible.

 

Two round tournament, no way I'm on the podium. But one round? Maybe I PB (I did at the 1999 nationals, so it's possible), and maybe Menasci, Mongomery et al go down early at -39. There is a chance.

 

Kind of like the lottery, except for in this case, first place pays the same as last place, and a day skiing (and looking at new ski products) beats working.

[lpskier]

Try the joys of three eventing. I suck at tricks and my jumping and other people's swimming have a lot in common, but I pay a couple bucks more and ski three times over two days. It is a lot more fun that just coming to ski slalom.

 

Also, Broadside Harbor is a fantastic site. The tournament seems very well organized and well run. The club did a wonderful job getting the site set up and ready. I'm sitting in my camper parked on the edge of the West Lake, watching the end of practice while eating dinner. You can't do that at Okeeheelee (not complaining, just comparing). The weather is great- high eighties, low nineties, and dry. The place skis really well. The water is mid to high 70's and the lake is about 20 feet deep, so the ski sets in but doesn't feel slow or sticky. There is a practice lake on site and other nearby skiing options, like Gilbert Lake, are available. Anyone who stayed home this year because Idaho was "too far off the grid" really missed a great event. #iskiconnelly

[wtrskior]

Doesn't make much sense at all. I'd do it once just to cross it off the list.

[brettmainer]

One other comment related to my earlier post. I well remember my 1999 nationals ride. I remember @"Mateo Vargas" tossing me a beer as I walked out of the water after a PB. I remember Matt Brown skiing mediocre in the event then crushing everybody in a run off. I remember showing up at 6:30am because I was riding with Schroeder and he was first of the dock out of 80 M2 skiers (that's another story; one that includes McNerney getting banned from the state of Montana).

 

Point is, I don't really remember anything else from 1999. What's that worth?

 

In fairness, memories from the Nationals where I skied crappy have faded. I would have to look up the scores to see what I ran in 2000-2004, with the exception of the hurricane year in Houston, where I was in 2nd place prior to the 4hr lightening delay. I (and 50 others) skied in a driving rain and 20mph wind. After the delay, in perfect conditions, in 15 skiers I went from 2nd to 17th. At the time, lots of folks were pissed. In retrospect, great memories, drinking a case of beer on a dock, trying not to get struck by lightning as the water overtopped the lakes and docks. Those stories are worth the price of admission.

[Drago]

Financial ROI in this whole sport is non-existent, but experiences are huge

[Horton]

When I was a kid and skied three events nationals was awesome. Today as an adult, parent and business person it's just not a good proposition. I want to support usawaterski but I'm not going to pay that much money to go to Idaho for one ride and get 20th place.

 

A lot of what I'm trying to do with the cash prize events is based on what I think is wrong with the big one round events. Everybody needs to ski more and that means there has to be less skiers and the organisers have to be creative and make it fun.

 

On the other hand I support any new innovation that usawaterski can hatch. I'm a fan of whatever crazy stuff Jeff S. comes up with. If team skiing works awesome. If not bring in the next idea but the status quo is dead.

[Horton]

Some of you know that I used to trick and jump. The idea that I would ski those other events just to have something else to do at Nationals is ridiculous. At this point in my life I do one event as do most of the skiers I know. We are slalom skiers. If you love two or three events good for you but I don't think that is most of the skiing population.

[eleeski]

One event skiing rocks - as long as it's trick skiing.

 

@Horton is so wrong to say "we are slalom skiers." Look at the strongest part of skiing, collegiate skiing. Absolute three event focus. I know so many trick specialists. The sport is more than just a right turn followed by a left turn. And Horton was MM rated in tricks not slalom.

 

A slalom single minded focus is harmful to the sport. Coming in 20th might be right to win overall. Worth improving and focusing on the details of the sport. Every aspect and discipline.

 

Eric

[jmvana1]

@brettmainer great post! Although this year I provided opportunity for one of my fellow skiers to take my podium spot, it was still awesome to be a part of it all! Great ski site with great people!

[adkh2oskier]

@lpskier, Good luck in the slalom, I think you are due for a new PB in M5 since it's your last one. Have fun, if you see Nick L say Hi.

[liquid d]

I may be of the minority, but I love the fact that you are standing on the dock with the best in Country/world maybe, and have one shot, and one shot only, to show what you can do. This type of pressure cooker makes skiers a different breed.

[Edbrazil]

Remembering back a few years. When the Nationals had massive amounts of entries in

some events. Looking at this year's lineups, the largest event appears to be M5 Slalom,

which runs today, with 48 entries. Back around year 2000 and earlier, I think that M3

at Okeeheelee ran on 2 lakes at once and had something like 150 competitors. Essentially

taking about all day on 2 lakes. Anyone confirm that? Have we seen the peak amount of

entries in the Nationals some years ago, never to see those numbers again?

And, did sponsoring clubs do better financially with huge amounts of entries, or was it just

more of a big pain trying to put the event together and run the herds of competitors?

[Horton]

@eleeski

My point is if you were going to spend money to travel to ski a big event.... you are most likely going to only really care about the events that you are passionate about

[eleeski]

@Horton That's a much better way to put it. Still, one can have the passion without needing a high placement. Focusing on medals is a bit counterproductive. Not going because 20th place is your expectation is too limiting.

 

It is tough to no longer be in the mix for high placements. The process back in is difficult and a challenge worthy of your efforts - and fun as well.

 

One other factor you are ignoring is the social aspect. Regionals and Nationals is a time to connect with close friends who are geographically distant. Your ticket gets double duty as a tournament and a social visit.

 

We in the sport should be touting the big tournaments, not bashing them.

 

Eric

[klindy]

@Horton another way to look at it as a person who's clearly passionate about slalom, tied to the sport through promoting the sport and this website, knowledgable and, many wound say, noteable in the sport there comes some level of responsibly to attend the big events to help grow the sport. Your input would be helpful and welcome.

[Than_Bogan]

@Edbrazil I didn't get into the Nationals game until 2001, but I still saw the 150-entrant M3 division a few times. I honestly believe that was the anomaly. That group was absolutely gigantic, and quite a lot of them are still there (now as M5 or even M6). The size of other groups seems a little more steady to me, although it's been a while since I took a serious look at the data.

[Horton]

@eleeski i know where i rank in the world of slalom. Competing for 20th place is not the problem. The problem is only having one of event that I am passionate about so I just can't justify the expense for just one round. I support USAWS but if the old mouse trap is broken and we need a new one I'm not going to tell everyone how great the old one is

[eleeski]

@Than_Bogan , @Edbrazil is right about huge Nationals past. It was huge for many years. Every event was big - especially M3 slalom. Before that it was M2. We did see the hint of a problem when there was a gap in B3 which has turned into a gap in M1, now M2. During those up years, waterskiers made the cover of Sports Illustrated and actually made a living off waterskiing. So did volleyball players. And nobody watched poker on ESPN. Times have changed.

 

The old mousetrap might not be broken - there might just be fewer mice. When the driving force of the premier waterski site is not supporting the organization, fewer mice will be caught.

 

Eric

[brettmainer]

@Horton, think of Nationals as a place to rock a red white and blue speedo in front of a larger audience. It has kept your dad coming back for decades.

[ALPJr]

Don't need much data... M5 55 to 64 year olds grew up as skiing was on the rise in the 60's and 70's, came of age and really got into the slalom course during the 80's and 90's when the sport was at it's peak...

[Horton]

@eleeski if you talk to the ski companies they will tell you that ski sales are NOT in the toilet. The number of people skiing tournaments is in the toilet. The number of people skiing today is not like 1970 to 1990 but the decline in tournament skiing is many times the decline in skiing as a whole.

 

The culture has changed so the sport has to evolve to be as attractive as possible. Back on topic.... Nationals needs to be re-envisioned

[ToddL]

I think the rankings list both helps and hurts participation at Nat/Regionals. I think the list helps in that it sets realistic groups of levels of skiers. Qualification to participate in Regionals/Nats is clearly understood and fluid based upon the division's current performances. However, I think rankings themselves serve as a public measure of a skier's "placement" within the division. For example, if a skier knows he or she is #85 out of 200, then possibly there is no expectation of beating the other 84 skiers if they were to all attend the tournament. Plus, why bother if the skier already knows he or she is ranked #85. Measured, publicized, good enough. ?

[ALPJr]

Agreed with @Horton that the number of people enjoying the sport remains decent. The number of skiers at the Nipmuc club (site of '64 or so nationals) in Webster Ma have been steady, at or near full for the past 20 years. There has been a waiting list in recent years. Most are novice to intermediate and ski / board multiple events. Only a few ski in tourneys though.

[Horton]

@ToddL the ranking list is in line with our internet oriented culture but I believe it has done great damage to the competitive nature of our sport.

 

I am in 41st Place nationally and I think 8th Place regionally. So why go to Idaho?

[eleeski]

The ski clubs at my lakes are dead. You can get permits for the San Diego course. Over a recent weekend, the only people skiing in Bakersfield were UCLA and Forrest (because I called him and invited myself to ski with him at his empty lake). The HO Freeride is generating more interest than the new Vapor. It's all old guys skiing the course - with a couple of graduated college kids to spice things up. I'm seeing a fading sport - not the big numbers on every course.

 

Open water skiers are tubing - if you are allowed to launch for fear of some invasive species. At least kids have to walk around to catch Pokemons. All of recreation is different today.

 

I agree that Nationals could use some spicing up. Masters divisions were a good try. Maybe could have been better if there had been some support from the skiers (like a certain MM tricker who wouldn't participate). Rankings lists were another try (while I agree with @ToddL that there are some issues). Huge kudos to Goode for the new entry support!

 

College kids are the driving force now. M1, W1 are good sized events again. Ideas to keep and expand this group are critical.

 

I don't have any magic solutions except to keep skiing, participating and enjoying.

 

Eric

[Edbrazil]

Speaking of the '64 Nationals and the Nipmuc Ski Club (thanks @ALPJr) here is the huge

spectator attendance during the Men Jump on the final day. Solid mat of people.

 

Note they appear a bit over- dressed for August, but the event was late August on an

overcast and cool day.

 

 

 

 

[brettmainer]

@Horton, to tie your 20th place comment together with my comments on one round tournaments, I note that your typical 2@39 would have placed third. If you could have turned and stood up 3 ball, you would have won. You never know...

[Jody_Seal]

2016 US Nationals update:

Broadside Harbor A+ on all accounts. Can't see any reason to have any complaints. Water conditions near perfect, daily weather conditions nearly perfect and the personal very accommodating just don't go throw a line in the water over on the practice Lake , owner does not want their fish trained..

I really hope this organization decides to double down and make it a second year... I do truly understand why not though. Untold man hours to prep a site like this, keep it clean after many skiers can't seem to find the garbage can, a few chronic complainers and just the plain old hard work it takes to upkeep the event.

 

Rumors are that SCPB is interested in doing another nationals, they have some exciting ideas that would make the national tournament more palatable to the skier that wants more then $160 on 1 round. They are wanting to expand the nationals to a more is better and give the skier more available water time that would also include practice, demos, clinics and maybe even a pro style extra event.

 

If we don't make some serious ideology changes a national level will be gone. Far to many rule and policy's are in place to accommodate small percentage of the membership.

Some things have changed and are helping with the overall attendance at tournaments. This year's national entry # are around 30 less then last year at WPB. However total rides are up due to the increase of multi event skier's.

 

Again and again I tell each and every one of you to get involved via attending your state,regional and national meetings. Last night at the host hotel our national meeting was held and only about 25 attended that was not board members. Mostly made up of committee members who were at the BOD meeting on Sunday.

 

Want to make a dynamic change in the sport? Get off your electronic devices! Get off your soap boxes! Attend meetings and give your ideas and support to your state counsel, regional directors and the president of AWSA! otherwise nothing is going to improve!

 

I am heading out to the lake to help Don Parsons pick up trash and run a nationals.

Yall think about it!

[Horton]

@brettmainer it usually takes me a bunch of tournaments to post 2 @ 39 a few times. If that score was good enough for the podium at Nationals that means everybody scores were down. The idea of swooping in and getting a medal is enticing but not very realistic.

[Than_Bogan]

I am still gathering signatures for my plan to use snipers to stop littering.

[Than_Bogan]

@OB1 Totally with you on that one. It's a really silly exercise to imagine how you "could" have done, especially in a 1-round tournament. I've beaten people I had no business beating, and lost to people I had no business losing to.

 

Ranking is an interesting measure, but only barely related to the result of 1-round live contest. Different animals.

[ntx]

@Than_Bogan & @OB1 and then you have the ones who tell you how good they skied in practice. One round, record tournament, tells you who the men are, and who the girls are.

[ntx]

@OB1 Sorry, you and I both know that you really finished 4th with a score of 102. I think you could have won it if you had another practice pass. All you needed was to turn three ball.

 

[Horton]

@ntx

"One round, record tournament, tells you who the men are, and who the girls are."

 

Is that really the sport we are in? Spend all that money for one (6 minute) sudden death round? Part of the problem is sometimes the weather or driver or something else sucks. Maybe your attitude works for the very elite but for the general skiing public it seems pretty uninviting.

[MISkier]

I wonder how many of this year's score "shortfalls" at Regionals or Nationals were due to first, or limited, exposure to single puck ZO (and possibly DI engines).

 

If someone's rankings were based on last year's boats, there may be an adjustment factor as well as the obvious heightened levels of anxiety from an enhanced competitive atmosphere with a large audience.

[eleeski]

@MISkier Realistically, none. Conditions, boats and drivers are the best. Better than in training. No excuses.

 

Perhaps it is an important measure to see how well one responds under pressure. That's a huge part of the value in a high stakes tournament. Why did @Horton 's parents drag him to all those younger days Regionals and Nationals? To train him to meet challenges. It is tough to see him carrying the banner of dodging anything "uninviting".

 

@ntx There are some girls who are rocking it! Some of the women athletes are doing incredible performances and deserve recognition.

 

After calling out everybody, I'd better ski my average...

 

Eric

[ntx]

@eleeski Yes, the female side of the sport is doing great things. Good luck.

 

@Horton Its called life. Look at the events going on in RIO. Some of them get one event that might last less than 60 seconds. Why would anyone want to run the 100M.

 

The nationals is the best way to determine who can perform at a high level under extreme conditions. The best man wins on that day. Step out on the dock, Put your ski on, and beat everyone else. Pretty awesome if you do it. If not, go home, practice hard, and try again.

[Ilivetoski]

"Conditions, boats and drivers are the best. Better than in training. No excuses." @eleeski I can't express how much I disagree with this. Is ZO better than PP? Yes. If you never train behind ZO are you going to ski even halfway decent behind it? Probably not. Just because the equipment is "better" does not translate to better scores. I would say the equipment is more different instead of better. And different, as we all know, normally translates to much lower scores in this sport

[LeonL]

Just a slight correction, @ALPJr . M5 is 53-60.

[Horton]

@ntx Nationals is not the Olympics. Simply qualifying for the Olympic team is a HUGE honor. In water skiing a pretty low percent of the qualified skiers attend. They don't attend because it is not compelling. Jeff S is working on stuff to fix all that and I am cheering for him but as of today a trip to Idaho would have cost me a LOT of $ for 2 1/2 or 3 1/2 passes.

 

Your son is a top 10 Men's 1 overall skier? Right?

 

Sure the event is awesome for your family. Imagine if he only slalomed. Would you still be interested?

 

There are 87 Men's 1 slalom skiers in levels 8 and 9. I would have a hard time telling the 87th ranked guy it is worth the money unless he had never skied a nationals and just wanted the experience.

 

When I was yours sons age it was a great. I skied 3 events and if I had one really good event our of 3 it was still a good Nationals. For most of the skiing public that is not the case. Most of us are one event skiers.

[Horton]

I will be a Regionals next year since it will be in Newberry. That makes Nationals a possibility but I am not committing to anything.

 

NOTE: If you see me Tricking at Regionals it is only to keep @Dirt down a notch.

[A_B]

2014 had 740 skiers at Skiers Edge.

It wasn't all that long ago when people complained that Nationals were too big.

I don't know the biggest year, but I thought it was nearing 1,000 at some point.

[wtrskior]

There is zero issue with nationals or any other big tourney being 1 round winner takes all. That's sport. Most sports have an equivalent to that; The super bowl comes to mind or the wild card game in MLB. Olympic hockey another, etc etc.

 

But @Horton 's point about going to ski for 3.5passes is entirely accurate. Most won't do it, and we need to make the competitive side of the sport more fun and rewarding.

 

A good way around that is have the 1 round medal round but 2 or 3 or however many rounds of pick and choose (for the trickers) are possible of record tourney as well. Maybe throw in a guaranteed 4 pass tourney also.

[RazorRoss3]

I personally have never been to regionals or nationals despite frequently qualifying and I have only been to state twice. So with that as a disclaimer:

 

I think regionals and nationals need a bit of an overhaul in the qualification department. I'm auto-qualified because I'm a level 8 skier and have a tournament average of 3@35, for perspective much of my men's 1 competition can open at -35. I can't even pretend I am competitive in that world. So knowing that if I match my tournament best, 3@35, I won't have a prayer of even a top 10 appearance, it isn't really my bag. This is for a few reasons:

1. I'm 15 months out of college which means I have limited PTO, Nationals would burn a week of that for 1 set.

2. My accounts aren't exactly loaded, that's a big entry fee and a lot of travel related expenses again for 1 set

3. Being a finance major and painfully aware of ROI, I see more value in taking 5+ practice sets, which are much longer than tournament sets, during the same amount of time for a lower cost and wait for a 3 round slalom even that's easier to get to.

 

So summary is limited time, limited funds, and wouldn't feel competitive so I'd rather ski more for cheaper and go to a more relaxed 3 round slalom where I'm really only there to ski my score and have some fun.

 

If someday I become more competitive and have more access to time and money then it might make sense. Also if it was more difficult to qualify and felt more "elite" that might pull me out of my current opinion as well.

[RazorRoss3]

Whoa, @OB1, that came off a little aggressive although I'm sure it wasn't intended to be. I mean "break your neck in a car crash"? Really? I mean I understand what you're saying and I don't want to offend the people who enjoy the sport in a different way than I do but in my situation and how I was brought up in the sport it simply doesn't make sense. Sorry if I offended you, in my defense your first comment preceding mine appeared as I was typing mine and I did not see it until after mine was posted. Apologies again for any offense.

 

-Mitch

[Horton]

@OB1 this year 120 M4 qualified & 30 attended.

[eleeski]

ROI? What do you want in life? When I won my first gold medal, I was offered a million dollars for it by another skier. It cost me way more than that. But if I had that kind of cash, that's exactly what I would spend it on.

 

@Ilivetoski NOBODY qualified behind PP. They found ways to adapt to ZO. If the 16.95 of ZO results in lower scores than the 17.00 of PP, adjust your training. The conditions are right on.

 

The thousands who try unsuccessfully for an Olympic spot are sillier than the waterskiers who balance work, life and skiing. Chase the tournaments without regret.

 

I love @OB1 's attitude!

 

Eric

 

 

[liquid d]

@RazorRoss3 , you're missing out. You're first appearance at a regionals/nationals is not about you having a shot at placing. It's a lot bigger than your local 3 rounder. Pressure of real competition does a person good; pressure to succeed in skiing your best.

You will have fun at both tournaments, see great skiers, get inspired/motivated to be better, and see all the new stuff-it's great! You'll meet like minded fun people from all over the country. You'll talk skiing and get different ideas to take back to your buds....and the women, and free beer! It's awesome!

I've only missed a few over the years due to injuries..and those years suck.

[John Brooks]

A good discussion and I like @OB1 's perspective.

 

The one thing I keep thinking about is the excuse of "I'm not competitive". I do not buy this. I think of all those athletes and teams that can look at their upcoming season, they know how they perform and stack up, but choose to still go out and play the game even if they know their chances are very slim of finishing at the top of their respective league, division, group, whatever. It seems to me that all waterski tournaments, regardless of the level, are about a couple things, challenging myself and personal relationships. What better way to challenge yourself than at a Regional or National event, the best of your competitors, to see how good you are compared to all your past performances and certainly a chance to see all those folks you do not spend time with often and who share the same passion for our sport.

 

I'm a business person and don't think ROI has any point in this discussion. Do you calculate ROI for all your vacations?

[A_B]

From a 57 year old who was qualified and never went. I WISH I DID.

 

I always thought there would be next year, and the year when I really thought I had a good chance to get deep into 38 or run it, so a higher placement, I blew out my ankle and was out from July to the end of the season.

 

Next year has come and gone and I doubt very likely that I will ever get back into the shape and condition to ski at that level again.

 

Just do it. It is the Mecca of skiing and it really isn't all about your 5 minutes on the water. I wish I had that memory.