At what line length does height become a factor?

[Ralph Lee]

38? 39.5? 41? 35?? (If skiing a technically sound pass) when do you guys think height, or wingspan becomes a critical part of rounding buoys?

[Ralph Lee]

It seems crucial to me at 38 off, but that's cause I'm always scrapping!!

[RazorRoss3]

-41 maybe, but certainly comes into play at -43

[Than_Bogan]

I think it can be at play at every line length. Using my above-average wing span advantageously is just about the only advantage I have! I'm pretty darn sure it's useful at -28 and may even be useful at -15. Of course, height is a disadvantage when trying to remain compact against torque, as is typical behind the boat and coming off the wake.

 

If you mean at what point does height become a hard limit to what you can achieve, then it's pretty far along. Even someone who is 4'11" with relatively short arms should have a reach of about 6'2" or about 190cm. So the ski can theoretically go around the ball as long as the rope is at least 11.5 - 1.9 = 9.6m, meaning that even -43 (9.75m) is theoretically still possible for a short skier.

[Ralph Lee]

@RazorRoss3 I would say 39.5. I haven't came close to running 39, but for fun I have tried 41 a bunch, at 41 I could use about two more feet in wingspan

[Ralph Lee]

@Than_Bogan I think what you just explained is one of the biggest reasons why this sport is so appealing, any yahoo with some strength, and athletic ability feels like they have a shot.

[Horton]

I think the dynamics really change around 35 off and that's probably where it starts coming into play. It's not just additional reach it's also additional leverage.

[RazorRoss3]

I think I was more speaking to the hard limit that @Than_Bogan mentioned. I can technically get my ski around a buoy at -43 if we are strictly speaking mathematically. -35 I think there is still plenty of room however the slightly taller skier with more leverage may have an advantage in that respect. At -38, I haven't had a serviceable 1 ball yet however I think that is skill related not height related.

[Jordan]

Whitney recently posted on FB about the heights of many of the top female slalom skiers..some of them are getting into 41...

 

from her post:

 

The pro ladies were talking about it last weekend in California. I have long arms and I'm also one of the tallest women on the tour. Manon & I are around 5'8" ; while Regina, Breanne, Karen, and Kate are all closer to 5'4"; and Clem is around 5'1 I believe.

 

When it comes to "wing span" I think mine may be the longest (just under 6' fingertip to fingertip) and Breanne probably has the shortest reach - tho I didn't get my tape measure out at the tournament last weekend!

[Glock]

It depends on the ratio of height to circumference about the mid section. The higher this ratio, the great the coefficient of drag, and thus the harder it is to get around the bouys. The only way I see you getting around this handicap is to shave your beard and your hair to reduce the wind resistance, along with wearing a speed suit perhaps. Maybe you could put 6" spacers between your bindings and ski. That would get you some extra reach. But then I'm worried that could affect your stack and the outward cast of the ski, especially with your wing upside down.

 

This is what happens when replying to a buddies ski question while laid up with a season ending shoulder injury.

[ToddL]

Standing Vertical Reach (SVR) seems to be the measurement to compare skiers. It combines the elements of height and wingspan. It would be an interesting study to capture skier's Ranking Average Score and their SVR to see if at some line length the average SVR start to rise. If so, that would indicate the line length where it becomes a factor.

[Razorskier1]

I think I'd rather be short with orangutan arms. All the benefits of reach with the compactness of being shorter.

[Waternut]

I think it's much less of an issue than we make it out to be. I've come close a few times but I haven't touched 38off in the course yet so hard for me to speak from experience. I do feel we all want to blame things on aspects of our lives we can't control. Rock climbers always say being tall gives a huge advantage but when I ask a short climber to hang on to lower holds that are awkward for me because I'm taller, they can't do that either. Yet I know a couple skinny 5' tall girls who can climb stuff that I haven't even dreamed of attempting.

[PatM]

@Razorskier1 All I can picture is someone in a stacked position with their hands down by their feet.

[JackQ]

I don't think height matter much from my perspective until at least 38 if not 39.

 

Although I can not run 39 (I have only done twice), rarely it is because I can not get around the ball, but I try to get too wide and then don't set up properly for preturn and turn. Often I am 5 feet wide at 38 and that kills me, at 35 it is "OK" to be wide and back side the buoy but at 38 & 39 that is incorrect. I find it exceedingly difficult to change the desire to be wide and backside.

[Ralph Lee]

I'd be very interested to see the height, weight, and wingspan of the top skiers in the world. Then again, I see anyone who can ski 28 off as a top skier in the world so maybe narrow it down to the official ''pro skiers'' BTW Regina don't count, she is a freak of nature!!

[The_MS]

Check out @skidawgs wing span.

[Ralph Lee]

I'm thinking 6 ft, 185 lbs, with a 7 ft wingspan would be about perfect for slalom

[Bruce_Butterfield]

This gets back to the common misconception that reach is a critical factor in slalom. In reality its the speed you have to generate and height (angle) on the boat that makes shorter lines more difficult.

 

Its only at the point where your physical reach plus the length of the rope won't let you get outside of the buoy. Let's say a typical person 6' tall has an 8' reach. The distance to the buoy is 37.5', so he/she could run a pass with a 30' rope, or 45 off.

 

There is a lot more than height/reach that goes into making a good slalom skier. As a general rule, shorter people have better balance, quickness and agility while taller people are slower and not as agile. Yes, there are exceptions, but as a rule that is true.

 

So for any short skier complaining about height/reach, I have a simple question: "How much agility and balance are you willing to trade for more height?".

 

If I had a choice to simply be a better skier, I would trade reach for more agility/balance in a heartbeat.

[Texas6]

Ask Regina what the height disadvantage does for her into 41:)

[Beastmode]

I agree with @Bruce_Butterfield it's not the reach! I bet Regina runs more 39's then 90% of men 34mph skiers that have run 39' and are 6' or taller!!!

[6balls]

It's gotta matter. How good is Terry Winter technically? Exceptional. WR men...they have some height or some wing span advantages along with amazing technique.

Height and span are not holding me back at 38 (technical difficulties), shorter maybe but still more about technique. At the WR limits, tho, reach/height/body type has to matter.

Phelps is a bad ass swimmer...but he has the combo of all the training/technique but also a unique build well suited to his sport.

[Horton]

@Bruce_Butterfield explain Neveu : )

[Beastmode]

@Horton Neveu has an extra line length!!! lol-- his 38 is like the same reach as most of us at 35 or 32.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@Horton, its been a while since I saw Neveu ski, but from what I remember he was very smooth, patient and stayed balanced on his ski. If you skied like that, you'd run a few more buoys too.

 

 

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@MS compare Skidawg's wingspan to Regina's. Who runs more 39's?

[Ralph Lee]

@DaveLemons That sounds like a fun tournament verses some ski buddies

[bkreis]

it's all regina..game over on height..even dave miller Canada is average height

 

[JJVDMZN]

Slow the boat speed down and shorten?

[LeonL]

This takes a different track. Besides the apparent advantages, there are unique dynamics involved in tall skiers. They seem (to me) to be required to ski a bit differently. Some of the basics we average height people take for granted seem (again that word) to need minor adjustments for the real tall guys. Leverage, etc. Even the choice of skis are influenced by a taller skier that weighs the same as an average height skier. Just my .02.

[Stevie Boy]

Hell I am only 5'6", if I could do something @38 off I would be ecstatic and bouncing off the walls for days.

[ScottScott]

I think it all comes down to room for error. While there may be aspects of technique where a shorter person MAY have an advantage, the longer reach for someone who has good technique will certainly help. I am 5’9” with a total reach of 6’8”. That means that the shortest rope I could possibly get around a buoy is 30’10”, or 44 off (44’ 2” to be exact.) To do this I would have to reach FULL extension at the exact apex of the arc (the rope being a perfect 90 degrees to the boat,) and accomplish that EXACTLY at the buoy, as this isn’t exactly a position that can be held very long. That is a level of perfection that would rarely (if ever) be accomplished by anyone. However, someone that is say 6’3” has 5” more height and a couple more inches in arm length for 7-9” more (?) total reach than I have. That is significant in allowing more room for error, and I would guess that room for error would still be an advantage going on back to 35 off or so.

 

So in theory, a rope length of 45 off could conceivably be done by someone 6’4” but will that level of perfection ever be accomplished? Can a 7 footer ever achieve the kind of technique to be competitive at those line lengths?

[ToddL]

Clearly skill is the primary factor to run extreme short-line, but reach/wingspan must also contribute.

 

I know the body mechanics are quite a good bit different during the reach at the buoy, but what's the shortest line anyone has run using two-handed turns? Seems that's one way to gain some insight into when the skill tops out and the reach/wingspan starts to become critical. It would be interesting to see how far up the rope several pro skiers can go two-handed.

[Ralph Lee]

I was sitting on shore with a unique angle of the gates and one ball, watching people ski. It's a spot I like to sit and watch the pros whenever we can make it to a tournament. At 38 off I was surprised to see how wide guys were at the first buoy. Much wider than the pros, about two feet wider! Seemed like if skiers were controlling their speed better, height would not be a factor at 38.

 

Not that I'm saying anything new, but it was interesting to watch.

[The_MS]

@Bruce_Butterfield Compare it to my span and thats why he runs more buoys then me.

[Razorskier1]

I think it is less about being able to reach, and more about differences in how high you need to be on the boat to achieve the same width. The higher you have to get on the boat, the more your timing and technique has to be perfect. A taller skier won't have to get as high on the boat to achieve similar width to a shorter skier, and there's where the margin for error comes in.

[Horton]

I am just barely not 5'9. Give me 8" more of reach I would pretty clearly pick up some balls.

[The_MS]

@Horton At 5'9 you would look funnier then you look now if you had 8" more reach.

[brettmainer]

More height/reach = more margin for error. I've seen Terry run 41 from the boat. No margin for error. Taller skier doesn't have to be perfect. Same with Regina, whose ability to run what she does at her height is one of the most impressive feats in this sport.

 

Using my 6'-1" self as an example, I have run some ugly 38s that I wouldn't have run if my reach was 6" less. Obviously, if I had more skill and balance, I wouldn't have needed that reach to run 38, but it is nice to have it when needed.

 

I can't run 39. At no time have I thought, "If I had 6" more reach, I could do this." I simply am not good enough / strong enough. So, skill trumps height, but for a given skill level, the extra height can bail you out of a mistake. I think this starts at 38.

[9400]

Yall make sure when you're doing your minimum clearance math that you add in the 4" to go outside the buoy and the 3" to clear the "boot out" height.

[Drago]

It's Reach, not height per say. I'm 6-4 if I can stand up straight, 6-6 with the afro...

But it's all legs. = high cM =less leverage through the wake. I can't remember who exactly, but I compared reach way back when in Miami with many open skiers. Maple had me by a hand, and most out-reached me.

Does it still help me? Heck yeah. But is it The Difference? I don't think so. Would TW be the athlete he is with height?(I watched him ride a wheelie half way down the lake on a bike while carrying his ski) We don't know. Long arms keep the handle low and help reach at the buoy.

I'm gonna bet Parrish,Nate,Rodgers have long arms.

So: @41 off ;)

[6balls]

@drago Andy had long arms, too. He looked like a condor when demonstrating something to me while I was skiing...very fluid condor at that.

There are some physical advantages to compactness in terms of direction change, lower COM etc. What good sports cars have a high COM? None. With that I believe the ideal build would be some height (but not too much) and knuckle dragging arm length.

[Stevie Boy]

I wish, I was a Orangutan, I can think of a few skiers where their hands almost reach their knees when they stand in a normal upright stance, I have tried hanging from overhead rafters, doesn't seem to make any difference in the length of my arms, do you think surgery maybe the answer.

[Ralph Lee]

[ScottScott]

"Right turn Clyde"

[6balls]

@Stevie Boy I've tried holding onto enormous slack hits...my arms are not any longer, either.

[Waternut]

I say put a 6"-8" riser between a shorter persons boot and their ski and let's see how they ski....Other than them not being used to being that high up or having such a high center of gravity, I'd say that's more fair than giving them 6"-8" of extra rope.

[liquid d]

@rico most good jumpers used to be taller.

[Ralph Lee]

So... there is no answer. I still think skiing a solid pass, an above average reach comes into play at 39.5.

 

Or 35 like @Horton mentioned. My wife thinks it comes into play on a 75 foot rope. :#

[Drago]

I still think @ 41. "Shorter" guys can run 39, but get 2 @41 . Super-athletic guys: MB, TW, John Reichard (?) , ...