EP qualifications for Nationals

[sunperch]

Does anybody know the details of the qualifications for Nationals for next year? Heard multiple reports at Nationals that it was going back to the EP standards.

[eleeski]

If I understand what was explained to me at the general meeting, everything is the same (level 7? 6? 8? to qualify - I don't remember which level) except the cutoff date moved to much earlier. I can't remember if it's just after Nationals or the start of the year. Plenty of time to plan. If you're not in, plenty of time to improve to qualify. Like the EP but it keeping the features of the current system. It's not being called an EP - yet. The changes passed so it will happen. I like it!

 

Eric

[PurdueSkier]

So with an earlier cut off are we still using the 12 month ranking? So most of the 2017 scores will already qualify to 2018 nationals?

[eleeski]

Yes, as I heard. So get your tickets to Kansas now.

 

Eric

[Marco]

Sweet. Driving to Laku for regionals and driving to Kansas for Nats!

[sunperch]

@eleesk So does that mean that you still only need one score above the COA after the COD to qualify?

Anyone have the new COD?

[JeffSurdej]

The 2018 cutoff date for nationals is this Thursday August 17th, 2017. At that date any skiers L8 using the 12 month rolling average are qualified for Kansas Nationals. At that time this will then establish a level 8 cutoff average which is basically like the old EP which anyone can achieve in one class C or above event from 8/17/17 up until the start of 2018 Nationals and qualify. We will post those and advertise them so they are clear. We will see if this helps with travel plans.

[LeonL]

So only one score above COA? Old EP system required 2 scores at Class C.

[klindy]

@LeonL you are correct. I brought this up at the board meeting and it was understood but considered less important than the effort to change the query which looks for one (vs two) scores. So the database queries are identical with the date pegged at August 17, 2017 instead of 3 weeks before the start of Nationals.

[GK]

I love that AWSA is continuing to try new things to make it easier on skiers. Great job!

[John Brooks]

I couldn't agree more with @GK , this is a great change as is the ZBS. I feel these type changes make the sport more appealing to a larger audience.

[jcamp]

And some people want to freeze the rulebook ... ahem @Horton.

[klindy]

@Jody_Seal what is it that you "dislike" in my post?

[animal]

So no requirement to ski at Regionals?

[eleeski]

My understanding is that unless you are in Open, you must still ski Regionals.

 

Eric

[klindy]

@animal the Regional requirement has not changed.

[Chad_Scott]

@klindy I don't know how you can force guys into a level 10 open division or masters men and make a distinction between the two. What is the difference between a level 10 skier forced into open and level 10 forced into MM. The new rules describes both divisions with the same language. Elite division. Therefore MM Is equivalent to open men other than the age. As I told @JeffSurdej there's no way they can have it both ways. I think that falls under age discrimination. If we MM AND OPEN are mandated to these "elite" divisions then we must share the same requirements. i.e. Open skiers do not have to ski the regionals.

 

So what differentiates the two under the new rule.

[klindy]

I agree @Chad_Scott I have been part of the discussion therefore relaying information. I think there are good arguments on both sides. That said, there are a LOT of little details that haven't been thought thru nearly well enough even if you fully support it. Sorting this stuff out on the fly will be difficult at best.

[skidawg]

Get your entry in OB, there are 9 spots left that have a free beer voucher.

[JeffSurdej]

@Chad_Scott I think your request to allow MM to skip regionals is legit considering the new L10. It has not been discussed yet but will be at rules this November. Regardless of which side of L10 one is on there is no doubt we need to make moves to make those division elite and create an atmosphere where skiers want to be in MM and Open, currently we are very far from that so if allowing MM to skip regionals is a reward for your talent and will help push MM skiers to ski MM, I'm all for that.

[Than_Bogan]

Is it intentional/desirable that Nationals qualification is becoming much easier? The entire time the EP was in effect while I was in M3, it was 1.5 @ -38, which of course had to be done twice.

 

If I'm reading everything correctly, and the rankings list doesn't appreciably change between today and tomorrow, M3 will require 6 @ -32 to qualify -- i.e. more than a full pass easier than it was 5-10 years ago.

 

Perhaps that's a good thing, but it seems like a really big change?

[MattP]

@Than_Bogan M3 is a much different division now than it was 10 years ago.. who cares what the score is. IF someone wants to spend the time and money why should we stop them. I'm sure the sponsors would rather have it that way. I'm all for letting anyone ski Nats who wants to commit and pay. All we ever here is that Nats is shrinking that entries are down. Simple fix.

[eleeski]

@Chad_Scott The Open exemption comes from the old days when there was a very active pro circuit. Cutting out so many tournament opportunities at prime season for the pros was worth losing them at Regionals. I wasn't an official at the time but that was the reasoning given to me as to why we didn't get to see the big names at Regionals. Doesn't really apply anymore and not for MM.

 

However, I am a firm believer that elite skiers should be given proper respect and perks. If you think skipping Regionals is desirable for you, you have earned it. Still, it's fun to be able to watch the best.

 

@Than_Bogan M3 performances have declined since the heyday. I remember 40+ M3 at our Regionals, this year it was 11 or 12. Sigh...

 

Eric