All Head 2 Head all the time

[Horton]

This is a less than 1/2 cooked idea but I need to get it out before I lose it

 

What if a whole tournament was h2h. Forget the normal bracket systems. You seed the whole event and everyone skis against the skier who is seeded next to them. Everyone is always skiing against someone who is very close to their level or it starts that way. 2 boats run none stop. Short wait times and go go go.

 

Say you start with 80 skiers. 40 get eliminated and then 20 then 10 and so on. It could take 3 days including consolation rounds but tell me this could not be fun.

 

[ForrestGump]

I'm in!

[Murrski]

Initial thought... I like it! But 3-days? How about no more than 2 and each skier is guaranteed at least 3-rds. Feasible?

[Alberto Soares]

Great idea, I did some testing with 32 skiers, minimum a skier gets is 3 sets, about 13 hours considering 10min each h2h

[6balls]

Logistics aside sounds fun.

[RazorRoss3]

Sounds like it could be really interesting. To avid by-rounds a bracket needs to have 2^n participants where "n" is a whole number which could be a little constructive. 2,4,8,26,32,64...

[LeonL]

Half cooked or raw, that sounds like fun to me! Unfortunately our lake is incompatible with head to head, due a very tight drop area on one end. I really like the concept, though.

[GK]

We already do it. It's a blast! 2 boats is the best way to go, keeps the event moving, saves times, and is a lot of fun. Winner usually gets 6 rounds in one day! Typically the later rounds you're required to start one or two passes below your average.

[GK]

See attached brackets...

 

This one was from 2008, you might see some names on there you know with much lower averages than they would have today!

[Alberto Soares]

@GK - That's fantastic! How many minutes per H2H?

[GK]

I don't know the average time, but we run 2 boats H2H for a number of our tournament formats and it always seems to speed things up. Just the time you save while one skier is finishing up and the 2nd boat is getting the next skier dialed in at the dock adds up over the course of a day and the wait times at the ends are shorter. The 2nd boat can typically take off with their skier soon after Boat #1 has exited the course.

[LeonL]

@GK , Greg, what you describe isn't what I was thinking with regards to true head to head. I was envisioning h2h as skier 1 runs a pass, drops and skier 2 runs a pass and drops. This continues until one skier scores more buoys on a given pass. Just like the Big Dawg. It sounds like you have a skier ski until he/she misses and his/her competitor does likewise, best score wins the round. No real need for two boats except to speed up the process.

In true head to head there would remain a lot of questions as how to manage it. Example: skiers are seeded and the two that match up (say first and second on list) are as follows: skier 1 (M7 has an average of 86 and his competition (M4) has an average of 92. Do they start at the same rope length, but different speeds? What about a skier that can't run his max (34) against a skier that can run max and 28 off, what are their open passes? Lots of questions, but I still like the idea. Skiers would enjoy it.

[Horton]

I originally said three days because imagine if there are 80 or more skiers. Maybe that is wacky impractical. Somehow everybody has to ski 3 times. There has to be some sort of losers bracket.

[bigtex2011]

@BoneHead are you going to make a comeback

[ALPJr]

Sounds good to me. Much like the seeding in volleyball tourneys

[disland]

@horton why so many skiers? cap it at 40

[fizer]

By far the most fun tournament I have been to in some time was the H2H attached to 2015 Southern Regionals at Paducah. I think more H2H is a very, very good thing.

[Horton]

@disland i am just thinking big. Not necessarily practical

[mikegile]

I'm all for it! I do like the idea of a losers bracket so everyone would get their sets in.

[Edbrazil]

Quite a few years ago, Cypress Gardens had a head-on-head jump event. It was double-

elimination, so you got a 2nd chance. Was in the ski stadium area, and so it was a good

site for rough-water and show skiers. Very entertaining event to watch.

Of course, every year, Moomba has their Night Jump, where there are groups of 4, and

successive elimination rounds where jumpers keep getting eliminated, but the number of

jumps you have keeps decreasing. Don't know if they still do it, but probably they do, as

it was very entertaining, even when the top-level elite jumpers weren't involved.

One year, Mike Hazelwood had the longest distance of the whole tournament in the night.

[jcamp]

Managing running orders, and more probably importantly, officials' work schedules would be tricky. Not impossible, but tricky.

[Wish]

Assuming only class C?

[bigtex2011]

Not to be a buzz kill. but lets say you have one out West. the upper crust skier may be bishop, Badal, Brown, schoeder, you.... After round 1.. 1/2 of those are going to the losers bracket. Seems like the BOS format is better.. Trent vs Big Ward seemed like a logical progression. Just my .02

[6balls]

@bigtex2011 if the event is small. If it were bigger those guys are seeded high and move on barring an upset. In head to head double elim's, sometimes coming up through the losers bracket is no easy feat even for a top competitor depending on upsets. Sounds like a lot more fun to show up on the dock and give another guy a hard time before going out to ski against them than just skiing for myself.

 

Footstock aka Figure Eight National Barefoot Competition ran all head to head, double elim. Was pretty cool...tons of skiers and I went head to head with Peter Fleck (I lost, but hey he's a pro with skis for feet and won the whole thing multiple times...the other dude that beat me got 3rd). Sometimes a top skier lost but came back up thru the losers bracket and to win in the end had to beat the winners bracket guy twice in the final.

 

Endurance barefoot runs in crappy water can run quicker, and on any given day in crappy water a competent show skier barefooter might be standing when a pro catches a toe.

 

It's not apples to apples...but conceptually it was really fun on the footing side. I could see it being fun on the slalom skiing side as well. I've never met @horton, and I haven't skied many tourneys the last few years with a couple spine surgeries...but our tourney bests are right on top of each other and it would be a riot to meet him in a head to head on the starting dock (among many other ballers I know "online" only and who's butt I would love the opportunity to kick--or have them kick mine).

[Horton]

@bigtex2011 the core it the idea is to get as far as we can from skiing just for scores and back to skiing as a competition. So yes 1/2 of the best skiers would move the loser bracket.

 

The original idea was for a BIG event. 3 days. Everyone skis each day. On one lake you could take 90 skiers and if there was a second lake there could be practice.

 

This is just the idea of the day .... not saying it is the best idea ever. Just thinking....

[Stevie Boy]

@Horton does it have to be consecutive days or could it be broken down to forty skiers a time and then maybe the event could be over several weekends spread out, bit like a Mini Big Dawg event, I certainly like the idea, maybe a regional head to head around the country with the top guy's progressing to one final event for all, that way travel cost would be kept down.

Head to Head is far more entertaining for the spectator, instead of watching 30- 40 skiers go up and down the lake for their personal best, I also think Head to Head would result in better competitors, it;s not a case of I will wait until the next round, you have to lay it down there and then.

[ALPJr]

So in volleyball there's a seeding tourney for initial rankings. Then each consecutive tourney the teams are put into brackets... then reseeded from tourney to tourney until the championships. Works quite well all teams get to play against like competitors and the cream rises to the top.

[Horton]

@Stevie Boy I don't know the sky is the limit. I'm just throwing out ideas.

 

If you really only have 40 or less competitors I do think I prefer my current BallOfSpray Cash Prize format.

 

Bottom line is I think our current age group format where everybody just skis to get a score must change

[Wish]

So this is very much needed in FL. It's only about scores down here for the most part. But I know the 34mph skiers (no matter what age div) are comparing scores as they know them to see who really came to win. Love this idea. Jacksonville and Lake 38 would be great start ups for this. Seems fun is high on the priority list for those sites.

[Murrski]

@MattP - I think @Horton earns a panda for his "self promotion"... although I'm fully supportive of his H2H idea... any chance you can provide that to him? :wink:

[auskier]

Decades ago, I believe tournaments were run where every skier would start at a full 75 foot line. The whole field would run a single pass. Only then would the line be shortened and the field go through again. So it could take some time for your set to be done - providing you ran a number of passes. Can you confirm @Edbrazil ? Certainly not as exciting as more contemporary head to head formats, but certainly different compared to how we do things these days.

[Horton]

@OB1 the original idea is that skier seated 40 skis against skier number 39. The winner will then meet the winner of 37 vs 38 in the next round. No Administration required. Simple fast uncomplicated.

 

More importantly after every two skiers are done somebody gets bounced and somebody moved on. There's drama. There's a reason for people to watch. There's pressure on every skier every ride.

[GK]

@LeonL, we do run it as you describe where Skier 1 runs Pass 1 and then Skier 2 runs pass 1, HOWEVER you have lots of situations where Skier 1 falls on his 2nd pass and Skier 2 runs 4 passes. So during that down time Skier 1 boat can be getting the next skier ready to go at the dock.

 

@OB1, Horton is exactly right. You sort your skiers based on average buoy count and draw your brackets. It's not complicated but can take a little bit of time to get your winner brackets and losers bracket dialed in based on how many skiers you have and whether you're doing double elimination through the entire bracket. You can run 40 skiers in 1 day or 80 skiers in 2 days guaranteeing everyone gets 2 rounds minimum. You lose twice and you're done (double elimination).

 

In our case, skiers are ultimately skiing against their average. We have required at some events that skiers start at a certain speed/line length below their average so they both reach their average pass at the same time. More recently however, we've just allowed them to start wherever they want and it's really not a big deal if they're ending on the same "Average" pass. The fun part is dropping in the water next to your opponent, knowing they're the person you have to beat, some people like to do a little jawing and joking around such as "look out for those rollers at 2 ball", and ultimately watching that person go run a full pass and know that you've got to push yourself to your best potential because the other skier just upped the bar!

[Bill22]

@auskier check the link below. Ed's answer is 1/2 way down page 1.

 

https://goo.gl/GXlRGW

 

[Horton]

Before this subject falls off the map

 

One of the most respected pro skiers of all time sent me a text message when I started this thread and told me it was a bad idea. So perhaps it is. I do not totally agree that it is a bad idea but I am sticking to the idea that we need to strive to make tournaments more interesting.

 

Some Ballers tells the story about showing up a water ski tournament with kids. The kids keep asking who is winning and none of the adults have a clear answer. This is a bad thing. So other ideas?

[Dirt]

I agree. It's a bad idea. It would get boring really quickly. Two boats running, one after the other in confined areas. There would definitely be more accidents.

[Razorskier1]

@OB1 -- when I've skied those rules the tournament grouping was based on best completed line length prior 12 months. So if you ran 35, you were in the "35 group". That included men, women, and juniors. We skied two rounds normally. After two rounds the top two in each group got to ski head to head in round three. Fun format, puts scores in the books, and gives two skiers per group the H2H opportunity.

[thager]

@OB1 The format @Razorskier1 is talking about is an absolute blast! At least, until the part where I got whipped by a 14 year old girl :( Still lots of fun though!

[Edbrazil]

At one time, some 30 years back, Cypress Gardens had a head-on-head jump event.

It was double-elimination, so if you lost, you got a 2nd chance. It was in the show circle,

so conditions could be challenging. As the rounds went on, I think you got fewer jumps

per session. Maybe 2 or even just 1. Someone like Lynn Novakofski would have a better

memory of the format.

[Edbrazil]

Note to @auskier Yup, that was correct about the Olde Daze. And, you had to start at

the minimum speed. After 4 passes, everyone with no misses would come back to the

dock. Then, they would go out again, maybe for just 2 passes. I need to go look up a

Rulebook from circa 1960. At the Bay State Open in 1960, Warren Witherell ran up a

score of something like 116. A number that I'd thought would stand forever, but it is

now surpassed, thanks to scoring that starts at 25kph, even if you opt up to deep short

line. Now, in Men Open, some skiers have exceeded a score of 120. Meaning that

they ran a full 41 off.

Best as I recall, you got a point for the gates than, so a complete pass scored 8 points,

and not 6.

Warren's passes would have started at 24 mph, and worked up to 34, which was the max.

speed then. Then 12 off, 18 off, 24 off, etc. Also, passes were repeated up & back, so

you'd go up at 12 off, and back at 12 off. Tournaments weren't required to have short

line loops if they weren't expected to be used. I expect that Warren made things really

busy for the sponsoring club that day. Would have been 14 passes complete, and then

some add buoys.

[ALPJr]

@Horton I think your on the right track. Pre-tourney groupings based on some prior scores. 1st round to reset the ranks, second set to set up the head to head final matchings, and awards/prizes for the top 3 in broad groupings - maybe up to 24 MPH, up to 28, up to 30, up to 32, up to 34 and up to 36.

[Edbrazil]

The Worlds went "38" at one time (60 kph). Would have been early 1960s. Before lots

of things like speed control and boat timing. Jimmy Jackson won the 1961 Worlds with

a score of 5 @ 60 kph. At the 12 off loop. Long Beach, CA.

In 1965, at the Worlds in Australia, Roland Hillier won with 4 @ 18 off, 60kph.

At one time, speeds above 60kph may have been used, vs. shortening the towline.

[Horton]

@OB1 for @Edbrazil or @Mark_Matis or both?

[jcamp]

I'd be careful about a third round that didn't count in the books. Lot's of skiers really want those scores to count. Last year I put on a new kind of tournament series where the finals featured some serious cash. Originally, the first two rounds of the finals were going to go in the books, while the third round, head-to-head, was for exhibition and cash. I had multiple skiers, skiers who book 25-plus tournament rounds a year, say they wouldn't ski in the finals if the scores didn't count (instead they'd opt to ski in another portion of the tournament where the third-round scores did count). In the end I worked with tournament officials to make the scores count so everyone skied, but I was surprised that people were willing to pass up on a chance at $$ and what I thought was a different, more fun kind of tournament round in order to put a score in the books.

[Edbrazil]

There sure would be some nasty wrecks if the speed went up. Entertaining for the crowd,

maybe. Back when Men went from 34 to 36, there was an article in the Water Skier by

Larry Brown that criticized it. Partly because a lot of boats of that era couldn't pull a

solid 36 mph.

Could maybe sell some "38" skis, scaled down in size just a bit.

[skier2788]

I want to know who these people are that want to ski 38 mph let alone the 40 mph... I am a 36 mph guy and have played with it. 36.5 mph getting times of 15.81 and that was fast enough. Took one shot at 38 mph and couldn't run my opener. Holy.... that was fast.....

[Horton]

@Mark_Matis & @Edbrazil can you two please try to confine your comments to ideas that are vaguely plausible in the modern era of water skiing?

http://media.tumblr.com/fe497dd337d9af8479bb6398b9565d16/tumblr_inline_mg6n5ltl6X1rxe4lt.gif