Do you prefer the new optimized slalom rope?

[skihart]

I got a chance to ski this rope in a few tournaments this summer and it was terrible. Felt like I was skiing on bungee cord. I don’t get it. Everybody was complaining.

[lpskier]

My personal Optimized rope is fine. My gripe is that they seem to vary, one rope to the next. Some are spongy, some aren’t. At a tournament, you don’t know what you are getting.

[ScottScott]

I have it on good authority that there was a bad batch of rope that led to the extra stretchy ropes. I skied on one at a tournament earlier in the year that I did feel I noticed some stretch. I recently purchased one and don't really notice any difference between my optimized and my old regular rope. I'm told a long liner such as myself probably wouldn't really notice much, if any, difference while skiing. But, as mentioned before, I do notice a little less soreness in elbows and shoulders. It took a second or 2 longer to change lengths.....the 1st time or 2, but now that I've done it a couple times, there's no issue.

[teammalibu]

As a skinny little guy and light on the line “NOT” I like my Optimized rope but supplying two different ropes at a tourney and having backups for each is a PIA!

[JackQ]

When you are in a tournament, with a camera on the pylon, changing the loop every two minutes for 2+ hours you quickly discover what a pain in the butt this is. I know, yes it is a pain, but it is more expensive.

[aupatking]

Skied in a tournament with it last weekend. I didn’t notice the stretch feeling. I didn’t ski any better or worse. It did feel like I skied pretty smoothly, but it’s possible that I did that, not the rope. My scores were my average that I do with a non”optimized” rope.

I’m all for the innovation and if Masterline is sponsoring tournaments and supporting and partnering with AWSA, then let’s use their rope. If the other brands do not support us, let’s not use their rope. BUT, if these brands support us and our organization why would we grant a monopoly to one? So much so that we have to make a rule and, now, a rule exception?

I actually want to buy an “optimized” line so I can ski a couple sets, back to back behind the same boat and, MAYBE, actually notice a difference. Hopefully, a positive difference

[bishop8950]

The only thing I notice is better about the new rope is when I take a hit. At that point I appreciate the the new softer rope. Of course we should try to avoid taking hits!

 

I found the new ropes more difficult to prepare for a tournament. The 8 ropes we got this year are all quite short out of the box, but fell into place almost perfectly after stretching. We tried to ski them in but after 10-20 sets they were still short and very soft. After a few days under a few hundred pounds of pressure they measured great and skied fine.

 

The color is not only hard to see from shore, but also from the boat. I was double shortened several times this year and once in a tournament because the colors are hard to see. As a skier I have ALWAYS looked in the boat to see the line but now I can’t tell.

 

I have gotten used to shortening the ropes as a boat judge. What helped me was to always put the rope on the same way so I am pulling the loop from the same side every time. Now it’s fine.

[ScottScott]

We shouldn't have to tailor a rope to someone in the boat shortening the rope and not paying attention. Its plenty easy enough to see from the observer seat if they're paying atttention. I can't see other ropes from shore, so thats not an issue for me. I can understand having something thats at least distinctive enough for the skier to confirm from the water....that is a little more difficult with this rope, would be nice to see that better as a skier.

[skierjp]

Clint at Swiss has the best system. He uses a carabiner that clips to the rope with a short shock tube. Kind of like the old switch rope system.

It would be impossible to see rope colors anyway from shore if you're using shock tubes which is required.

[klindy]

@dave2ball @mshaw200 I realize both of you know what jumpers do. My point was more general in that both trick and jump allow skier supplied ropes for PREFERENCE to the dynamics of weight, stretch, etc. Except for the obvious difficultly to measure the ropes, logically it makes sense that there is a preference.

[scuppers]

In Tow!

[MarkM]

I like it. Less abuse on the body.

[lpskier]

@skierjp Jim: I haven’t skied at Swiss, and perhaps I’m not getting the correct visualization from your description but wouldn’t a carabiner make for a slightly longer rope? As I recall, the ski ropes used with a switch were shorter. The switch rope attached to the pylon, the switch was on the switch rope, and the switch rope ended with a carabiner. This was maybe an 18-24” contraption. The ski line, that attached to the carabiner, was correspondingly shorter. No?

[BrennanKMN]

@lpskier I believe the switch was the same length as the 41 or 43 off section and you just removed that section from your rope. This was before slide loop ropes when you could easily remove a section.

 

As far as going out and buying/making a switch rope with a carabiener to fix an issue with a rope is laughable. Why not just solve the rope problem instead of adding more crap into the mix?

[BraceMaker]

G. A Slalom Switch or other appliance may be used to attach the slalom towline to

the pylon. When so used, that appliance shall be considered a part of the

boat/pylon, may be from 0.47 to 0.51m in length, and with a recommended

length of 0.50m. The measurements of ropes used with such appliances shall

be 0.50m shorter than the values shown in this table

[skierjp]

Swiss has their ropes custom made.

[skierjp]

If you go to You Tube and watch the Swiss Pro money tournament you will see their set up.

[skiinxs]

After skiing close to a full season with the new rope I still really like it. By this time every other year my elbows are really killing me. This year, no pain at all. I do believe that the new ropes are much easier on the body. I can't really say I am skiing better with it, but certainly not any worse, hard to say, but I can say for certain that when I try to go back to an older rope I ski worse.

[ToddL]

Captain Obvious: Ropes that have more elasticity to them will be shorter while not under load and longer at higher loads.

 

It seems easy to regulate this by adding specifications of total length variance between a minimal and higher tension loads.

 

8.04 says,

"All measurements of tow lines shall be made under 20 kg (44 lbs.) tension for at least 30 seconds and shall be made between the following points, as applicable:

1. The inside of that portion of the handle closest to the inside of the

attaching loop;

2. The inside surface of any attaching loops (loops going to handle/loop

going to pylon);

Tow line measurements shall comply with the Tow Lines Dimension Chart in

the Appendix."

 

Change to:

"All measurements of tow lines shall be made as follows:

Three length tests will be performed:

a) Standard Tension Test: under 20 kg (44 lbs.) tension

b) Minimal Tension Test: under 10 kg (22 lbs.) tension

c) High Tension Test: under 30 kg (66 lbs.) tension

The Minimal and High Tension Tests will be performed only on the red 18.25 M line. The variance between the High and Minimal measurement shall not be more than 0.30 M (30 cm).

Tests shall be made between the following points, as applicable:

1. The inside of that portion of the handle closest to the inside of the

attaching loop;

2. The inside surface of any attaching loops (loops going to handle/loop

going to pylon);

Tow line measurements shall comply with the Tow Lines Dimension Chart in

the Appendix."

 

Note: I have no idea if 30 cm (roughly 1 ft) variance is the right threshold. So, some empirical tests of standard and new ropes should be done to establish a proper specification.

 

 

Interestingly, the Tow Lines Dimension Chart in the Appendix allows for total length variance of +/- 30 cm (roughly +/- 1 ft). That +/- equates to a total variance of 2 ft in length is the acceptable range of a proper length rope. For for 14.25M (@ -28 off / yellow ), the variance is +/- 15cm (total variance of 1 ft)! This is NOT however a stretch variance. It just means currently one "14.25M" rope could be 14.10 M at one tournament and at another tournament one could be 14.40 M and both are within the rules as acceptable.

 

 

[dave2ball]

I have skied with many optimized ropes. And I do prefer them to the standard ropes as I stated before. With that being said The boat driver And boat path can have a lot to do on how the rope feels. They may be narrow on your turn side in the course and causing the rope to feel what maybe considered spongy. My point is that everyone one is focusing on the rope and you are not looking at the whole picture.

The rope Is designed to load more progressive and has a different shock load. How may of the skiers who have committed on this have a rope 1 year or older? How many standard ropes have over 100 rides on them? My point is that some of the complaints may be from skiers with older ropes that are what is called dead. They are wore out. So going from a wore out rope to a new rope such as the optimized rope it will feel what some people call spongy and takes a couple of passes to get used to. Heck on my first pass with the optimized rope I went inside one ball. But it was one of the first prototype ropes. A couple of passes later it felt better and kept getting better.

[ToddL]

@dave2ball said, "Heck on my first pass with the optimized rope I went inside one ball."

 

And this ^^^ is why skiers are very concerned about having to ski for the first time with new tech showing at a tournament.

[dave2ball]

@ToddL shit happens. And to be fair it was a prototype and not what is in production now. Today’s rope is better. The prototype soft by design. With the current rope I can confidently change ropes with no issues. Because I have had to do so in tournaments.

When the new Optimized rope was available I did a blind test. I made up an all white standard rope and took the optimized rope and took 2 full rides Back to back going down the rope into 38 off. What I noticed was the optimized rope loaded smoother and felt better as I loaded the boat. When I’m at a tournament the last thing I’m worried about is the rope because everyone has the same pull. It is all in how you adapt.

You can make the same argument about a boat that you very little to no practice time behind and it is pulling your event. Everyone has a choice to use any rope they want. Me personally I like to train with the same rope that is used in my local events.

[Drago]

@dave2ball Do you work for Master line?

[ToddL]

@dave2ball interesting information. I am glad those steps were taken during development and testing. My point is that competitors prefer to have the opportunity to train with what they will get in a tournament. Your comment about boats is valid. However, as soon as the national boat draw is published, competitors seek out rides behind their division's boat.

 

With the ropes, there is some uncertainty as to what will be utilized at the tournament. That is the reason for all this conversation about the rope. There is no "rope draw", lol. Competitors are in an uncertain time in that they have to choose to invest in the new rope and be familiar with it. Even then run the risk of showing up at a tournament where the "normal" ropes are provided after they have trained and adapted to the "optimized" rope.

 

IWWF's proposal would allow the skiers to choose between two "certified" rope types. This is like letting skiers choose ZO settings. It means that there is some skier preference variability within a division. (BTW, can you imagine if everyone had to ski the same ZO setting per division??? LOL! but I digress...) Still, the IWWF solution results costs for LOCs choosing that option; and since it doesn't require both rope types, it doesn't solve the concerns about skiers knowing what will be at the local tournaments when they arrive to compete.

 

With regards to my post above about a load variance "rule", my intent was to protect competition from what could be an uncertain future with "optimized" ropes. By establishing a standard for how much a rope can elongate at varying loads, it will limit the range of "optimization" and prevent excessive "bungie" effect. (This has been missing with regards to "standard" ropes, IMHO. I've skied a tournament where the supplied ropes were a bit too "fresh and new" and still had too much flex in it.) I think the technical committee should consider doing load variance tests to determine the right high-load tension weight and determine the max variance which should be allowed. I suspect that the ML optimized rope will contribute significantly to those determinations as should "fresh and new" standard ropes from various manufacturers. By establishing a variance standard, all competitors will have some confidence that any certified, tournament-supplied ropes will have some level of consistency and meet skier expectations.

[teammalibu]

Great idea make your TC measure every rope 3 different times with 3 different loads! I don’t think a 10 kg load to 30 kg load would change the measurements much!

[JackQ]

We keep making things more complicated and costly. There should only be one specification for ropes, and the mfgs either comply or don't. I really don't care what rope I ski behind, but as a boat judge I do not like the lack of color and the loop design.

[ToddL]

@teammalibu @JackQ - I totally get what you are saying. Assuming that the amount of rope stretch becomes a true concern, how would you establish a standard? Or have you already concluded that it is not a true concern.

[lpskier]

The issue isn’t that the rope is stretchy. If it was a stretchy rope, you could buy one, practice with it and be totally comfortable when you got it at a tournament. The issue is that the rope you use at home may not feel like the rope you get a tournament. I use an Optimized rope that I bought in May. My rope starts at -28. I skied with two different Optimized ropes at tournaments this summer starting at -28 that felt nothing like my rope. Both were broken in. I also skied with two new ropes out of the box (well, they really weren’t in a box, but you catch my meaning) getting them broken in for a tournament and out of the box the two ropes were noticeably different. To me, this is a problem.

 

[Drago]

Elongation spec's should be a certification, not an loc thing. My guess is only two or three brands would go through the process .

[Roger]

Interesting comments on the elbows. At least two skiers here have stopped using the rope due to elbow issues...

 

[Jordan]

Aggregate poll data....

Out of 121 votes, 94 (77.6%) either "prefer a standard rope" or "don't care"

[Horton]

I do not pull this card very often but I ski more and run more balls than 99% of you guys.....

 

I ski behind a pretty wide range of boats, with a range of drivers (styles and skill levels) and I can not feel the difference in the ropes. It was just last year that I leaned to feel the difference between driving styles.

 

Unless you have gone out with both ropes and skied them back to back with the same boat and the same driver I don't think you know what you are feeling.

[Horton]

FYI - I am motivated be the idea that the new rope is way better on my body in the case of a slack hit.

[bsmith]

@Horton If it took many years to learn how to feel differences in driving styles while skiing, it sounds like there must be very subtle things involved when comparing competent drivers. Just out of curiosity, what is it that you can feel different when being pulled by drivers who are both tournament rated?

[BraceMaker]

I feel as if essentially people have been sold something that isn't being verified in any real meaningful way.

 

Both in-tow and masterline advertise their proprietary yard/weave used. But if you took two ropes, strung them parallel to a spreader bar and then started to stretch them you would have real evidence of the comparative properties of the rope, wouldn't have units but watching the bar swing angle will tell you the comparison.

 

 

[dvskiing]

I have no manufacture preference. I was using the optimized rope early to mid season and for the first time my elbows and shoulders were on fire. I thought I was skiing too much. Heard some comments went back to my old rope and pain was gone in a few days.

[Horton]

@bsmith please start another thread with your question

[The_MS]

I can tell when the rope sucks. I can also tell when a ZO setting sucks. I can also tell when the driver sucks.

If I have any hesitation on rope or driver I will not ski. ZO is just a wasted pass or 2 to get it dialed

[Horton]

@The_MS you are like "the princess and the pea"

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Princess_and_the_Pea

[Ed_Johnson]

When the optimized rope came out, there was so much hype about it, I went down to Performance and bought one. I had just bought a new Regular ML the month before. I skied on the Optimized for 2 weeks and could not tell any difference. Since the other rope was new, I went back to it till it wears out, then I will go back to the Optimized one till it wears out.

 

Some years ago I only skied on In-Tow ropes. But every Tournament was using ML, so I switched to them. The In-Tow definitely felt more stretchy, and the ML felt like a steel cable in comparison. There was such a big difference that I stayed with ML, since that is what the Tournaments used, even though I skied better behind the In-Tow.

 

 

[markn]

Have the opportunity to ski at Swiss a bunch and love it. With respect to the rope/carbiner set up, the reason for that is for the tension/pull load contest on the pro tour. For the other tournaments, they use HO ropes. I skied the Latin Senior Tour tournament earlier in the year and it was simply an HO rope ...felt good to me.

FWIW, I did a comparison set after set, same boat, same driver with Master Line Optimized vs. Master Line black. I do think the Optimized rope absorbs slack line differently than the conventional rope. Less abrupt would be my description.

Did 3 tournaments this year after 9 years off. 2 used HO ropes (Jack's and Swiss) and one used Optimized (Ski Fluid) and scores were within 2 buoys all three tournaments.

[dbutcher]

@Drago has hit the nail on the head. Rule 8.04 does give an "elongation" standard, a weight per foot standard, and a minimum breaking load standard. However, we skiers have to rely on the rope manufacturers to verify that their ropes meet those standards. Technical Controllers and LOC's have NO WAY to check ropes against those standards that I know of. The TC's Handbook states as much on Page 11. I hope that some of the TC's on this forum will chime in (I am not one). I am reasonably confident that major manufacturers do comply, but I really don't know.

 

We can eliminate the issue of not being used to a rope you may get at a tournament by using an "optimized" rope one practice set and a standard rope the next.

[Horton]

Having beers with my chief judge from my tournament last weekend. He tells me that the optimized ropes are the most accurate ropes he has ever measured.

[Jody_Seal]

We skied on the older black rope this weekend as our tech could not get the excessive stretch out of the newer optimized and they were 7 cm to long across the board.

 

I have two of the early optimized ropes they came out very accurate and seem to feel normal to all that have skied on them.

I also have a rope that I ordered with extra training loops, it came out very accurate and feels normal no stretch.

 

So it seems consistency may be an issue here. You can believe masterline is listening and are working hard to continue to be the standard all others strive to equal.

[ToddL]

I have to say, that I am NOT in favor of any changes which would make the LOC TCs' job harder or more complex. That said, I agree with the comments above about "certification" as the gate for compliance. My point is that we accept one fixed value load test for length, but I don't see any elongation tests with varied loads. Maybe I am missing something. Maybe it is assumed to be covered by way of meeting the rest of the specs.

 

If I were running a rope company, I would want to find the optimal point. I would want a rope that could take the bite out of the slack hits, but not stretch during the lean and then not recoil some after the edge change. ML's rope is an example of trying to find exactly that. I hope they continue their efforts. If other rope manufacturers pursue their own solutions, we could begin to have too much variation in elongation rates, etc. Then, the "certification" may need to specify limits.

[klindy]

@Horton accurate ropes are one thing. The elongation characteristics are another. Perhaps the optimized ropes are tied up more 'carefully' and therefore are more accurate.

 

@dbutcher you're basically correct that without the proper tools there's no way for a local TC to test whether a rope is within elongation tolerances or not.

 

@ToddL there's prescribed test procedures for boat tests, there certainly can be similar procedures for ropes. Frankly it would be best if any testing like this was done by the manufacturer and "verified" if needed.

[Drago]

@ToddL the elongation test is @ 250#. Does anyone perform this test (@ the manufacturer or @ awsa)?

Again, ropes should be certified before we get them at a tournament.

[ToddL]

@Drago (How did I miss that!) You are correct: 8.04 A. 3rd line:

"Elongation at 115 kg (250 lbs.) tensile load, 2.6% +/- 0.4%"

 

8.04 also says: "All measurements of tow lines shall be made under 20 kg (44 lbs.) tension for at least 30 seconds"

 

So, if I interpret those combined correctly: a rope that is within the length spec at 20 kg (44 lbs.), then checked at 115 (250 lbs) must elongate no less than 2.2% and no more than 3.0%.

 

Here's a table of the ideals and the range of elongation allowed:

 

Interesting that there is a +/-. This means that a rope which does NOT elongate is out of spec. Right? I bet some clubs/skiers are using ropes which are too old and may no longer meet this.

 

 

[skialex]

This is interesting, I have a 300kg hanging scale, some old ML ropes, 2 new optimized and a colored 9.25 rope fairly new. Could run a test to check elongation on each rope.

I have to run this in daylight and I come home late on weekdays and ski on weekends. If no one beats me to it, I will run the test in a few weeks time and report back.

 

[skierjp]

Maybe that’s the problem, too many skiers skiing on old dead ropes and have forgotten the feel of a proper rope? Someone mentioned, I think it was Macchi, that the rope does have a life span and we would be surprised how short it is!