In Principle II

[JAS]

If zero off can consistently pull a slalom run to +\- .02. , should there be any dispute if a tournament decides to pull all skiers at slow threshold of time tolerance?

[MattP]

@JAS yes. how would they consistently get slower times?

[Horton]

@jas the intent of the rule is for the times to be actual. Tolerance is for errors.

[MattP]

Rule 1.12 Tolerances
In any activity involving the performance of an official where a tolerance is involved,
it is the official's responsibility to be as close as possible to the actual
specification. All tolerances are to allow for human error and the use of tolerances
by Officials to improve skier performance will not be tolerated.

- ZO does not show times in practice mode. Using practice mode in a tournament is against the rules. If a driver & judge are running in practice mode they should have their rating suspended.
- If you are running a decreased throttle input and get chirping in tournament mode over a distance you will be given a bad time by ZO and that will be a re-ride.

[JAS]

Really just a what if question. Possible with PP but I have no experience with Zero Off

[Stevie Boy]

I know it is a little off topic but in the same sort of area for discussion , for the slalom course, I have to ask is it acceptable for the slalom course to be set out so that it is minimum measurements throughout the whole course making it narrow and long all the way through, I am sure most people endeavour to get it as it should be.

How much advantage would a narrow long slalom course give a skier, surely not a lot ?

[Horton]

For all parameters the tolerances exist for error not to be used for advantage. You can play all kinds of games with buoy placement but that is not in the spirit of the rules.

[thompjs]

Slalom course width has to average 11.48 vs. Actual 11.50. Overall length is fairly tight as well.

It is hard to have record course that is really off. Easier to cheat with boat path and rope length

[RazorRoss3]

Milking tolerances to boost scores = cheating

 

The things we have control over, we want to be as uniform site-to-site as possible. Ropes, boats, courses, ramps, etc... the tolerance exists because people aren't perfect not so that we can milk them all to the easy side. Doesn't do anything for the things that are harder to control like wind, rollback, sun, rain, the rare turtle-to-ski collision, but that's why those are called things we can't control.

[klindy]

@Stevie Boy This issue was exactly my point in the other "In Principle" thread. ZO uses a mapped location of the entrance gates to trigger the speed control to know where the beginning of the course is. From there ZO doesn't track or sense the locations of any other buoys. So the time you get out of ZO is not the time it took you to go from entrance gates to exit gates, it's the time it took you to go 259m regardless the length of the course - unless the exit gates are exactly 259m from the entrance gates.

 

If I'm wrong on that, I'm sure someone will straighten out my boat path.

 

[Than_Bogan]

Although all information is correct, I feel most responses above are a bit understated, except perhaps @RazorRoss3.

 

Purposely manipulating parameters toward one side of the tolerance is outright cheating.

 

The rules (thanks @MattP) are clear on this point, and indeed the Regular judge test basically asks that question 10 different ways to really drive the point home.

 

Intentionally biasing the boat time, even by a hundredth, should invalidate all scores (and probably have further consequences).

[Horton]

@Than_Bogan hmmmm

[MattP]

@Than_Bogan agreed.

Intentionally biasing the boat time, even by a hundredth, should invalidate all scores (and probably have further consequences).

 

Usually most cheating starts out small and grows into a big problem then that gets out of hand. Stoping it early is what needs to happen.

[thompjs]

@klindy

 

Surveyed course length is +/- about 2ft or 0.7m. That is only a couple of hundredths of a sec to travel. (But you probably knew that)

 

 

[BraceMaker]

@klindy while that is correct in re; timing it is my belief that ZO and PP both utilize the mapping data to adjust speed vs actual at different points such as into the gates and in the course between balls to generate accurate times as well as to generate the appropriate feel for the skier.

 

There was a recent thread in re: remapping ZO and know stargazer we often freeski next to the area where the course is and I think I feel the boat adjust around the entry. Be interesting to really have that data.

 

 

[klindy]

@thompjs @BraceMaker Thanks for both of your posts, I understand what both of you said to be the case. My only point is that ZO is not a timing system, it's a speed control system that happens to overlay a course. It is not actually measuring the time it takes to get from buoy A to buoy B. It's triggering a start in a known location and it's timing how long it takes to get 259m down the line.

 

Therefore, by design, a properly setup ZO system will be within +/-.01 seconds all the time. Any error larger than that tells you that ZO is out of whack and tells you nothing about the accuracy of the course.

[gsm_peter]

What is the tolerance for a boie?

How deep can it float?

Diameter?

 

[BraceMaker]

@klindy aren't they both so related that the issue disappears?

 

Every timing technique we've used as a sport has been the same thing;

259m+/-.7 timed by a hand with a timer dangling over a hull at the gates.

259m+/-.7 timed by magnets triggered at the gates.

259m+/-.7 timed by GPS location mapped off the gates.

 

You could get splits by using a stop watch with it.

You could get splits by having all ball magnets

You could get splits by mapping all the balls.

 

But in all cases you are just measuring a start and how long it takes to go 259m. I guess what i'd say is that ZO isn't a speed control system, its a timing system. We allow our speed to vary so long as our speed over distance is fixed, we do not expect rock steady speeds - particularly in jump.

[Drago]

In Reality you guys need to read the rule book (.)

[aussiemc]

@klindy When mapping ZO from the Entrance gates and traveling towards the exit gates, as you approach, ZO beeps saying that you should be there, but you press the actual exit gate position, therefore mapping the actual course. If it is out of the tolerance length, the course won't map sucessully. Once this is done, ZO has a start point from each end. But it also has the exit gates in mind (not necessarily 259m) each time.

As evidence of this, do a test, drive through the start gates at a slight angle, drive a big arc around 3 ball, and then drive back through the exit gates.

You will notice several things.

The boat will be on a different path, but it will still maintain the set speed. (speed priority, not timing or distance)

It will start and finish timing at either gates. (not 259m)

You have traveled further, but maintained speed, so the time you get at the exit gates will be slower. perhaps even out of tolerance.

To me this proves that ZO is a lot more to it than just giving good times.