Further review of Nate Smith gates at Worlds...

[rico]

So I was watching the webcast of Men slalom and was surprised to see how closed Nate looked from missing his gate at 39 to being comfortably inside on the appeal.

I took a few screenshots and can't help thinking the gate review video shown on the webcast was not 39 but 35.

 

I know the camera angle and height can be confusing but it just doesn't look like the same pass...

 

I am adding a few screenshots. What do you guys think?

 

 

[Kelvin]

Look at the amount of rope and knots extending past the shock tube. Clearly the review was the 35 off pass.

[rico]

Obviously my comments are only based on the webcast rather than the screen judges used to make their call

[Horton]

Here is what I think happened.

 

Nate did make his gate at 39.

 

The red graphics on the bottom of his ski looks like a ball when blurred by the video. So it looks like he missed it in some freeze frames.

 

The webcast crew then goofed and showed replay of Nates 35. This immediately sent off alarms that there was some funny business going on. After review it seems that there was no funny business but only a honest mistake by the webcast crew.

 

There is no scandal but the skiing world is paying attention. That is a good thing.

 

Good catch @rico

 

[BraceMaker]

Graphic thing is pretty interesting - would wonder if there is a color that is "optimal" for video analysis purposes.

 

Like what if all skis had to have a reference color stripe. Kinda fun to think about.

[Texas6]

Can someone help me understand why we don’t use colored ropes anymore?

[lpskier]

The strands being used in the new Masterline rope only come in white, so I’m told.

[liquid d]

Because we had to add another 200hp to the boats, and now have to get stretchy ropes to counteract it so it doesn't break you body....and the stretchy crappy stuff only comes in white.

[Drago]

@liquid d , I'm not clear on your opinion of the optimized ropes....

[BraceMaker]

@Drago not sure he has one. More of a social commentary on the sport.

 

I still think it would be interesting to take accelerometer readings on boats. A 220 hp powerslot 87 with a good skier, a 90s nautique 196 with perfect pass and 300 and a modern boat with ZO and see what the data says

[Golfguy]

I would agree that the Optimized rope takes away spectastor enjoyment of even watching your neoghbor train. Put Masterline to the challange of adding the color back

[6balls]

Put an expensive, computer-deployed, colored flag on all new boats commensurate with rope length and up-charge for it. Who needs colored ropes?

[klindy]

@6balls can’t you tell from the wake on the Nautique? It’s already got a computer-deployed wake enhancement device based on line length. Maybe we just need some color matched LED transom lights and run slalom at night.

[lpskier]

I’m all in for transom lights, @klindy.

[skierjp]

The colored ropes wouldn’t do much good at short line with the shock tube covering the rope coming off the pylon.

[Golfguy]

Maybe the boats could dump colored dye comersitive of the rope length in the wake water.

[Drago]

 

[Brewski]

@EVERYONE Guys and Gals the Masterline Optimizes ropes are color coded. There are strands in the braid that are colored to the line length.

[rico]

 

[rico]

Led Light color stick display line length

[jimbrake]

I think we should discuss use of the word "comersitive". Is it a real word?, you ask. It is now.

[klindy]

@rico do you know how many years it took to get rid of the use of flags from the rule book(s)?!

[rico]

I'm not saying it should be mandatory but I have to admit, it made the whole tournament more interesting with people more engaged.

I didn't expect that.

[klindy]

@rico I think use of all flags went away when we eliminated the reride flags (red for mandatory and green for optional).

[ScottScott]

I think we need a flag when Nate Smith misses his gates....(just trying to stay on topic....)

[Horton]

I think the discussion about clearly being able to see the color of the rope or Flags or LEDs or whatever kind of misses the point.

 

When @rico realized that Nate actually did make his gates and that the webcast error was actually a harmless mistake I encouraged him not to remove his post because I think it makes another point. The point is the world is watching and paying attention. People at home are freeze framing the webcast and double-checking to make sure the event is legit. I actually have two images sent to me by different people that show judging mistakes at Worlds. Neither of them really impacts a podium or a placement so I made the decision not to publish them. There's no point in me creating additional controversy but officials must know that everything is under review by the skiing public. I think that's a very good thing.

[jayski]

@Horton as it was in the golf world when a random tv viewer saw a player not 'drop' a ball properly, made the crazy effort to call them and player was awarded a penalty...NOW they had to put a rule in that no outside spectator can repeat such an incident...We have enough on our hands to deal with as judges we DO NOT need someone at home assisting with judging when replaying the video 100 times which is explicitly not allowed in the rules.

[Horton]

@jayski I see your point and do not disagree. If the judges are competent and doing their best I do not think folks at home should impact an event. Good judges should be allowed to do their job without interference.

 

On the other hand there have been times over the years where the officials ruled in one way but if they knew that the folks at home where double checking they might have ruled in another way. There was an incident a number of years ago at Moomba where Billy Susi was given a score that was clearly wrong - he got 1/2 a ball or a ball more then he was scored. It was the difference between making the finals or not. He appealed and was basically stonewalled. If that had happened today with a webcast that could be replayed and slowed down I do not know how the officials could explain it.

 

On the flip side lets say Billy really did not get around that ball. As it is the judges ruling is a legendary injustice. If we all had been able to double check we would know that the judges got it right.

 

 

[auskier]

@Horton To say that the score was 'clearly wrong' in regards to the situation for Billy at moomba, I would suggest is inaccurate. There was sufficient official evidence for the call to be made the way it was.

[Horton]

@auskier 100% not how the events well were explained to me by a number of skiers who were there. Don't you wish you had a quality replay to prove your point.

 

 

[auskier]

@Horton well, I was in the tower for the entire situation - original score, protest being lodged and the review and final decision.

 

I also DO have the video from the boat footage. I reviewed the entire pass at great length during and after the event.

 

But as per usual with difficult calls and decisions, everyone else on the bank knew more than all the officials involved.

 

Again, to say Billy was given a 'clearly wrong' score is a stretch.

 

 

[Horton]

@auskier see now we like a couple of grade school kids pointing each other and saying you're wrong no you're wrong no you're wrong no you're wrong, well my daddy can beat up your daddy, no my daddy can beat up your daddy, and so on and so on and so on and so on.

 

If we had high-quality replay video we wouldn't be having this argument. That's my point knucklehead.

[auskier]

@Horton You are also using an example that happened 8 years ago I think? If you want to talk about the video quality, in my opinion it has probably only been the past 1-2 seasons where true high quality video with rapid replay capability has become available. At least to a standard that we all deem to be acceptable (judges and webcast viewers alike). The quality of footage and ability to rapidly review with the systems that Tom and Tony each have, are the best the sport has had before. Such a setup would not have been in the budget for the 2011 moomba masters.

[Horton]

@auskier the thing with Billy at Moomba was just an example. I'm just trying to make a point. As you have stated, when that controversy happened there was not the kind of video that we had today. If there had been that level of video back then - there would be no argument between you and I about what really happened.

 

I'm just advocating for transparency. There's a saying in this country that "sunlight is the best disinfectant".

 

Over the years there have been accusations of incompetent or dishonest officiating at some major events. If those accusations are accurate or not is unknown but when we can all review on our desktops it's a huge incentive for the event to get it right the first time.

 

And before I get an angry phone call from Richelle... this is not about good judges making honest mistakes. That happens - we've all seen it and or been the judge who made the wrong call.

[ToddL]

Judges are human. Humans using judgement in real time watching something that happens fast. They are going to make mistakes. The good ones do their best to get it right always and every time and where allowed by the rule, they try to correct any mistakes made.

 

@Horton 's point is that any judge/official with any agenda or bias should be scared. Today, that agenda/bias can no longer easily hide, and people are watching.

 

Separate from intentional bias/agenda concerns, there are also ability concerns. As we all age, our eyesight, reaction time, cognitive agility, etc. all decline. The best of the best in our judging ranks are often the founding patriarchs and matriarchs of our sport. At what point do they retire and put down the virtual clipboard due to the very real impact of aging on the responsibility of judging? It's a very difficult topic as none of us want to admit to our own decline. Also, we owe a ton of respect and gratitude to our mentors.

 

I encourage every one of our senior / pan am officials to strongly consider "adopting" an apprentice to mentor and encourage to pursue that same level of expertise. Thus, I ask ever senior / pan am judge to contemplate these questions: What is YOUR legacy? How many new officials have you raised up to your level of expertise? Have you ensured there will be someone as awesome as you to take your place when the time comes? How have you ensured that the sport you have poured your heart, soul, time and money into will thrive when you retire?

[klindy]

@ToddL @Horton and others, the rule book(s) are filled with pages of rules which outline conflicts of interest, specific guidelines and a variety of definitions which are used to determine the ultimate scores, winners and so forth. As has been pointed out above, humans can and do make mistakes. But the whole concept of multiple judges, defined viewing locations, review rules, etc. is based on minimizing the human error and eliminating the effect of a bias or agenda. @ToddL your comments above suggest there is one judge that makes the decision or somehow there's collusion or conspiracy among the majority of officials actually involved with the event to affect the outcome. I'm not naïve enough to say it's impossible, but I have been involved enough to know the obvious goal is to make the right call and put the right person on the podium.

 

This whole conversation is somewhat intriguing since there seems to be broad consensus that we need checks and balances to prevent the "obvious" but at the same time many of the same people complain that the rule book is too long already. I'm all for transparency but dozens of arm-chair quarterbacks who send in their vote on social media seems counter productive. Those same detailed rules also outline when and how a score can be changed or challenged in the event of a potential error.

[Horton]

@klindy the target for my comments is the events over the years where skiers have claimed outrageous bias or incompetence. There's no lack of claims but in the aftermath of these events (before there was webcast) all there was is accusations. Wouldn't we all be thrilled to find out that all of these accusations were false and or just sour grapes?

 

There is a downside of constant second-guessing of officials and I agree that is not a good thing.