The rise and fall of water skiing

[Horton]

I wrote this last year for a sports journalist who I was hoping would do some real research and write a proper story. It never happened so here it is for you guys

 

 

The above video is a snapshot of the sport of water skiing in 1973. At the time Water Skiing was roughly on the same trajectory as surfing. It was a sport that was popular with doctors and lawyers as much as with school teachers and construction workers. Competitive skiing was growing as was the American Water Ski Association (AWSA). Water skiing was a demonstration sport at the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich.

 

Hall of Fame skier Ricky McCormick was on the Ed Sullivan show in 1967 with the Rolling Stones, Flip Wilson, and the Muppets. McCormick went on to win a Gold Medal at the Munich Olympics in 1972.

 

Water Skiing was pop culture at one time and was one of the original extreme sports. The story of the rise and fall of the sport could be framed a number of ways. The dream of becoming a mainstream Olympic sport may or may not have been the defining factor. Within the sport we joke about how badminton and curling have long since passed us in terms of participation and exposure.

 

USOC told us that if we wanted to get back to the Olympics after 1972 we had to restructure our national organization (AWSA) and expand it beyond its original scope. As a result, we formed USA Water Ski with AWSA as a subordinate organization along with other similar disciplines. It is at this point that the once focused sports federation became a bloated bureaucracy and completely lost its way.

 

At the same time, US Water Ski also became subordinate to International Waterski & Wakeboard Federation (IWWF). The IWWF is an even more bloated bureaucracy that rarely appears to be serving the athletes.

 

In the mid 1980s, there were two print magazines as well as one from the AWSA. The best pro skiers had six-figure incomes and literally partied with rock stars. Anheuser Busch and Coors were primary sponsors of pro events seen on ESPN.

 

Fast forward to today, there is no print magazine, high-end ski sales are measured in hundreds of units, not thousands and competitive participation is at an all-time low. Most professional skiers coach to pay their bills. The demographics are increasingly affluent and male.

 

Some of this can be explained by changes in the culture and economics but not all of it. For decades after water skiing was a demonstration sport at the Olympics the goal of getting back to the Olympics was a prime goal of leadership. It can be argued that the fundamental changes made to comply with Olympic criteria drove the sport down a path toward extinction.

 

There is also a theory out there that water skiing was doomed when the sport started to move from public waterways to bespoke man-made lakes. The list of other negative circumstances is long and varied

 

[ral]

What about the ski+wakeboard stats?

[Horton]

@ral IDK and that is a totally different conversation

[GregHind]

@horton I think we are in boom times. Things are different sure but they are good. Innovation + marketing = currently sales in our sport. There is excellent access to a worldwide audience of people willing to buy if they are given a reason

Yes we may be competing with many extreme sports but there are endless new skis, new boats, new wetsuits ropes and other products.

 

Who do we want watching our sport? Keen people or couch potatoes. Sure there are less people but the quality is much higher and that is worth really money for the smart company that realises it.

[Jaypro]

Wow, that was really cool, thanks for posting @Horton and happy holidays! Also thanks for the site to get my stoke going 5 years ago after a 25 year lay off. I really enjoy it!

[sagilbert]

Horton, thanks for the excellent post. I am a life-long Indy Car fan and avid water-skier. Indy Car went through a funk, and is now on a come-back. Credits go to having a spectacle like the Indy 500, having recognizable drivers-who participate in things other than racing (i.e. "Dancing with the Stars"), some of the best racing in the world, and a consistent TV channel (albeit lower/middle tier).

 

As to the general public, what seems largely missing as it relates to water-skiing is a recognizable annual "Indy 500" and a consistent, lower-tier, TV channel. Yes, some water-skiing events moves too slowly, and broadcasters would need to condense those hi-lights, but that's all most people want to see anyway. Side-by-side skiing would add drama. For flare, why not add a big-lake tubing event with a lot of jumps (or something funky like that)? It's all about getting "eyeballs" to the screen---which, in turn, may get the general public more interested in the primary water-skiing disciplines.

 

Yes, promoting all of this will take money, but this is a relatively affluent sport with a lot of brilliant people participating in it. I guess the question is "How hard do most of us want to drive the sport from "affluent" to "mainstream", and how committed are we to supporting the organizations/people that can get us there?

[MuskokaKy]

@Horton one of; if not your best piece i have read to date!

 

@sagilbert you raise / state some great points. I also think it is a fair comparison to Indy giving what we have to compare to. If you ever make it to Toronto Indy; let me know I am less than a mile from the course.

[DW]

@Horton - great post and when you use the term 'bespoke' we know you have been watching way too many F1 races with British talking heads :o

 

My take on the Indy car comparison, racing (in general) offers a great fan experience (speed, noise, visually captivating crashes) where water skiing is much more a participant sport and does not really offer that great a fan experience unless you actually participate yourself. Would I watch, of course. @MuskokaKy - Exhibition place is a very fun track to race on. And if you want to get really close to racing action - go to the Baja 1000.

[swc5150]

I think alpine ski racing is better comparison. Skiing suffered when snowboarding appeared, much like the wake boarding craze. Difference being, FIS kept alpine races in the public arena (obviously out of necessity), where tournament waterskiing moved to private water, and seemed to intentionally keep people/spectators away. 3 event has almost become like fight club, following the first rule.

[Jordan]

@Horton great piece. I am one of the subscribers to (in part) the private lake theory.

I can vividly remember being 5 or 6 years old and watching the cool teenagers on the lake slaloming behind a tri-hull and absolutely aching to try it out.

 

The other piece of the puzzle in my opinion was the clamping down on permits for slalom courses on public waterways.

 

On the public lake where I have a cottage, in the 1970's there were two slalom courses and a jump. Now there is nothing.

 

Ironically, there have never been more inboard DD ski boats. Now, there are also a ton of surf and wake board boats.

 

I find the whole topic fascinating, good job on the write up.

[Spencer_Shultz]

If you guys want money in skiing, start a brand that not only targets skiers but the general public. Hurley is a surfing company. But I’d guess that 80% of their profits come from people that don’t even own a surfboard.

And have you seen the money that those guys dump into surfing?!? A major surf event might have a few hundred spectators, but the payout for the athletes is crazy high!

 

 

[Spencer_Shultz]

@Horton I’m honored ?

[ForrestGump]

Don't be. It's only a single panda. You haven't done anything until you get a triple.

 

[Horton]

@ForrestGump on Christmas Eve I didn't really think I should be giving out triple pandas.

[Wish]

I like the snow ski comparison. The other thing I think snow skiing has done is evolve into events the public finds exciting and easy to fallow. Like side by side slalom events. Waterski slalom makes no sense to Joe public. It all looks the same and no one understands line off. Want to make waterski slalom exciting, fast paced and simple to follow for the public. Run parallel slalom courses. Red lane Blue lane. And STOP announcing how many feet are laying on the floor of the boat.

 

[Jody_Seal]

I think the biggest issue in making this sport more accessible, more economical and add a viable professional level is the fragmentation of direction and ideology within the leadership of our sport.

We have a multifaceted organizing body that continues to facilitate a one size fits all ideology hence the term toad watersports.

Within this organization our sport 3 event waterskiing is controlled by ideology and leadership that is being led around by individuals that believe USOC is needed for access to the Olympics when our sport will never be included. These same sports leaders also continue allowing towboat manufactures to dictate rule and policy.

Until we as skiers and enthusiasts wake up and concentrate on eliminating the fragmentation of direction and personal agendas this sport will continue to be what it is and a true professional level will never be attained.

[ral]

@swc5150, IWWF has tried to go to larger/more public venues. Also with challenges, like the last worlds where many skiers were complaining about less than perfect/unsafe conditions. In alpine ski racing, conditions are not equal for everyone, and whoever goes in 20th position or more is getting much worsened course conditions. Exact same conditions fairness has not been a gravitating issue there.

 

I believe 3 event skiing is becoming very expensive/exclusive because of private water and rising boat/ski costs. 17 brands and 47 ski boats were tested in the 1993 Waterski Magazine. How many now? Oligopolies are bad for consumers. But, at least where I live, the amount of boats in public lakes make skiing almost impossible unless you are in the dawn patrol.

 

How to get more public to private water tournaments is a good question. Most likely, combined events and shows, qualy/finals with head-to-head rather than multi-round events?

 

TV wise, we are in an era of cheap streaming, where Youtube is far more popular than any network channel. How to get the views is the tricky part. But if slime making and slow-motion-below-a-car-wheel food crushing get millions of views, anyone can (I guess/hope)?

 

[JAS]

An interesting poll would be: How much are you willing to spend on waterskiing each year? Splitting this out into Categories of age and family status would tell an interesting story. Young group is dealing with student loans, lifestyle, travel, cars, children, healthcare, sports, future education, retirement. Retired group is dealing with wealth preservation, declining physical activity, and someone to drive the boat.

 

Competitive waterskiing will always exist but certainly has become more of a country club sport. I really don’t think country club sports have much place in the Olympics, but that’s just me. How will our sport look in 10 years? No help coming from boat manufactures, today they are all about business and price point models don’t fit well with plan. Made my first turns 50 years ago and have seen a lot, Just hope to still be making turns in 10 years!!! My favorite sport.

 

 

[Horton]

@JAS

https://www.ballofspray.com/Other/2018_Reader_Survey.pdf

[CTODD3134]

Thanks @Horton for the overview! As someone who is new to the sport and doesn’t quite fit the demographic - I believe there are opportunities to attract other new skiers. For me the ease of booking a set online, showing up at 8.30am skiing with a great coach and being in the office by 9.30 am (without worrying about putting the boat in the water/finding a driver/spotter etc) is of great value. I’m a novice skier but love the exercise and adrenaline that each set gives me. We just need to find a way to communicate all of the positives of the sport to others who don’t even know this opportunity exists!

Merry Christmas to all!

[Spineofgoo]

Food for thought,what if Mike Kjellander had one of today's faster skis,would he be in the 43 off hunt?

[Horton]

@Spineofgoo

 

[Spineofgoo]

The best Christmas present ever!!! Who says there's no santa clause?

[Spineofgoo]

@Horton is that a record for fastest first panda?

[swc5150]

Is this the "ROTFLMAO" panda?

[KRoundy]

I know I’m quite at risk of a panda here, but this is an honest question: How popular is surfing, really? To surf you have to live on a coast, but water-skiing can happen on any river, lake or sea that is long/wide enough. I personally know more people who water ski than know how to surf. Could be where I live skews my view of the reality of things...

Until this post I had never thought of the dream of the Olympics as being this detrimental to our sport. @Horton - what more precisely about the Olympics drove our sport into the ground? Just a focus in the wrong areas?

[NameUnavailable]

I kind of lean to private lakes helping the decline maybe not the total cause...

 

The CL tour was competition sure, but more of a show(to entertain). The best locations were for the crowd not the skier. The value to sponsors is to get 10k people out there watching not a world record. For that crowd, and TV they gave us product to promote with....Mastercraft gave us a boat to give away with a radio/TV promotion....This was when the skiers were in that six-figure range....in the late 70's 100 skiers would show up at a slalom tournament on a public lake....now on our private multi-lake sites we sometimes have less than 25 entries.

[Horton]

@KRoundy

How many surfers in the world?

According to well-established and trusted sources like the ISA, the Surf Industry Manufacturer's Association (SIMA), and Surfing Australia, the worldwide surfing population is estimated at between 17 million and 35 million.

See https://www.surfertoday.com/surfing/how-many-surfers-are-there-in-the-world

 

---

USOC told us that if we wanted to get back to the Olympics after 1972 we had to restructure our national organization (AWSA) and expand it beyond its original scope. As a result, we formed USA Water Ski with AWSA as a subordinate organization along with other similar disciplines. It is at this point that the once focused sports federation became a bloated bureaucracy and completely lost its way.

 

To be fair this is only one of many factors that has diminished the size and prominence of the sport in the last 50 years.

 

 

[Johnseed]

As a long time reader this thread has pushed me to finally join so I could add my $.02. Here goes....

 

I became interested in skiing back in the early 80's partly due to the TV exposure but more because we had a runabout and went to the river most weekends. I learned to ski on the Ohio River and it wasn't long after that I learned to slalom. The freedom and feeling of slalom was awesome compared to just the combos.

 

I always wanted to ski a course but had no idea of where to find one or how to even approach one. One summer camping trip we stumbled upon one at Lake Cumberland and I gave is a shot behind our old tri-hull with a 150hp outboard. I loved the challenge but it seemed impossible to run this thing. Fast forward 20 years.

 

We bought our 1st boat...a bowrider with a I/O and the love was rekindled. The lake near our home has a public course and I have been skiing for nearly 20 years there. My practice PB is a 15off @32 mph behind a Malibu Response but I still love the challenge.

 

Our lake has seen quite an increase in skiers over the past few years. 5 years ago it felt like there were only a handful of us using the course but this summer that number seems to have grown. None of these skiers have ever done a tournament even though several are into 32 off. When asked why most reply...why? I skied my only tournament a few years back and it was a great experience even though my score was a 5.5 @15off, I should have held on. I never have done another tourney, maybe someday.

 

My point is that I believe there are a lot of good skiers out there who aren't interested in tournaments but the sport itself is alive and maybe even growing....it just depends upon how you define growth.

[Horton]

@Johnseed

 

First of all welcome to the forum.

 

There is for sure some truth behind your comments. There are many recreational skiers for every one competitive skier. I am sure it has always been that way. I can not gauge the size of the recreational skiing population but I do know that AWSA membership has declined almost every year for the last 30 years. In the last few years AWSA membership has more or less hit bottom and slightly rebounded. There is reason for a little guarded optimism. I also know that in the last few years ski sales have been pretty good for some of manufacturers ( on the other hand O'Brien totally quit the high end ski business ). :-(

 

The sport at all levels was a lot bigger 20 or 30 years ago. I do understand that a lot of the decline is the result of cultural and socioeconomic changes. People simply spend their time and money on different things than they did 30 years ago. It is my opinion at if AWSA had remained an independent organization it had a greater opportunity to respond to the challenges.

 

If I had a time machine ( it would for sure be a Delorean ) and could make changes AWSA would have been independent and run more like a marketing business and less like a political bureaucracy. Would the results be very different? IDK.

[Horton]

And to all of you that think the problem is the price of boats... There are a crap load of used boats for sale at reasonable prices. The new boats are expensive because it is such a small product niche. In 2019 there were less than 400* tournament boats produced between the 3 manufactures. The tournament boats are the least profitable yet most technically demanding boats they make. We are lucky they make high end ski boats at all. Also there is no market for cheaper boats because of the used boat market.

 

My point is that boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost and boats are expensive because of the small volumes and less skiers can afford them because of the cost...

 

*If someone has better data let me know. This is the number I have heard.

[klindy]

A couple things to think about ...

 

No one took waterskiing away from public lakes. You can certainly grab a rope and a slalom ski and ski to your hearts content on a public waterway. It's true that permitting a slalom course is much more restricted than it was a few decades ago, which helps prevent the transition from a recreational skier to a competitive skier (even if you only compete against your PB). I personally believe that waterway access, permit assistance, public advocacy and an active directory of slalom courses/jumps should be a primary responsibly of USA-WSWS. It's should be a high value benefit of membership. It should NOT be the responsibility of AWSA (the competitive sport division).

 

Competitive traditional 3-event waterskiing has shifted from public venues to private lakes. That shift means the same people who were passionate enough to pursue the permits, maintain the course, build the ramps, negotiate with the fisherman and other property owners, and, occasionally, put on a tournament have moved to private lakes and reduced the exposure to the sport. The 'feedstock' for new blood into the sport are college athletes that discover a water ski team. Unfortunately it's difficult to retain them after college as they start to build a life. The other group is typically the children or grand children of the core of the sport. Neither will "grow" the sport and neither will likely maintain the membership levels we currently have. Some how exposing the general public is necessary.

 

Boats and skis are very expensive and there are few choices than in years past. However, even though exposure to waterskiing is much less than years past, those same public lakes are filled with wake board and surf boats which are even more expensive than a traditional ProStar or Nautique or Response. The money is there just focused on some other activities.

 

The Coors Light tour, Hot Summer Nights and alike were great exposure for the sport. Just like how some of the fundamentals of waterskiing has shifted, so has sport broadcasting. It used to be if you had something cool to put on TV, someone was willing to find a way to film, edit and promote it. Upstart ESPN and other broadcasters begged for content. Today, as we've discussed, with hundreds of channels and lots of options, the opportunity to be "on TV" again has never been greater. However they aren't going to come to us, we need to be able to bring broadcast quality TV shows to them!

 

I agree with @Jody_Seal that the Olympic push was a defining moment for waterskiing. It didn't work and, in some ways we are still hanging on to that dream. We didn't refocus onto a new strategy to promote and grow the sport. That said, the benefits from maintaining waterskiing as a PanAm sport and, therefore, recognized by the USOC are still important. There are actually more benefits than people realize but certainly they have to be 'worth the price' (whatever that really is - including governance issues and being subject to 'outside' influenced rules).

 

Anyway, there are certainly other relevant issues, but I believe we need to rethink a few things to begin the 'renewal' process. It will never look exactly like it did 25-30 years ago but it shouldn't - everything has evolved.

[Horton]

@klindy Tell us more about these IOC / USOC/ PanAm benefits

[klindy]

@Horton you comments about AWSA being a more independent organization more about marketing and less bureaucratic are good but likely worth a separate thread.

[ALPJr]

Good piece. Pro skiing for sure Is much different. DD ski boat builders have thinned out, and probably for the best as some of the boats that got churned out and glued together in the 80’s and 90’s were kinda shaky. The skiing equipment business seems to be doing well, and it looks like there are a good number of people getting pulled around on something on the public lakes. My first thoughts about the pro changes are the loss of big sponsors and an organized pro-tour with stops close to high populations. Sponsors want asses in the seats that are connected to brains that want to buy there stuff. Second thought, comes from the recent @twhisper interview on @MarcusBrown Flow Point TV, what are the stories that draw fans in and capture their interest and imagination? And, I’m not well versed in the debate between rankings/records vs. who’s the best on game day week after week, but has that had some impact on the pro’s? Earlier in the thread someone mentioned shortened versions of the recent webcasts - highlights, stories and the final rounds boiled down to 30 minutes and with 6, 8 or 10 stops with a tour champion crowned the final weekend, might be a good way to attract some sponsors?

[Johnseed]

Personally I think the ambassador program is a start to rebuild things. When we first started trying the course on our lake, with an I/O and an old Connely Mid S ski, I guy in a Nautique stopped by, offered some tips and even offered a few pulls behind a 'real' ski boat. I never forgot that experience. He was super friendly, super positive, and very encouraging.

 

I also agree the cost of boats is more of am excuse than reality. You can get a really decent used DD for about what we paid for our SeaRay I/O 20 years ago.....SIA or even a perfski closeout is a great place to find cheaper gear.

 

TV coverage is a tough nut to re crack but do we even try and publicize a local event to invite spectators or even gear the event for their enjoyment? Every major sport is almost as much as much about the fan experience as it is the sport itself. The tournament I attended had zero spectators and it was even tough to follow for a skier, no announcers, no printed running order, etc....had to use binoculars to see what line length anyone was running, it was totally focused on the competitors behind the boat at that moment with no involvement for anyone else.

[dbressel]

Regarding the Survey:

 

From my perspective there probably needs to be an up-date to how much is spent on skiing per year. I know when I did that survey I clicked $1,000 to $5000, but really never put pen to paper.

 

On average in Central California we have about an 8 Month season.

Lake Membership: Family $2800 – with boat.

Gas: average 8 - 6 pass sets @ 3-4 gallons per set 32ish total gallons per week x $4.26/gal (Avg. Supreme CA) - $136/wk. x 32 weeks = $4,352.00

Ski Equipment: possible new ski, ropes/handles vests, gloves, binding/binding parts, etc. $3,000.

 

Membership $2800

Gas $4352

Equipment $3000

 

Total: $10,152.00 ÷ 8 = $1,269/Month

 

NOTE: does not include tournament fees, gas to and from lake, Governing Body Membership fees, coaching fees, etc. Additionally, I really think the gas estimate is probably low as well as equipment fees; especially with a family.

 

Yes, there are corners that can be cut here and there but on average this is what it looks like in my pocket book every month when skiing. Is it worth it? --- My addiction of skiing says yes, but it is a really expensive sport and it is getting harder and harder to justify it.

 

[Johnseed]

I think the cost can cover a wide range of things such as....

How often to you upgrade your gear?

What is your lake access? Club? Public?

Boat access....own? Club boat? Shared boat?

Most everyone has a limit on how much they can afford unfortunately. Unless I win the Powerball a new boat isn't in my future but hopefully a new to me boat will be.

[swc5150]

Not to beat a dead horse, but @Horton is right on not blaming new boat prices. They're expensive, and always have been relative to the marine market. That and there's now a $250k+ Nautique with enough demand to fill all production slots and then some. I don't think money is the issue here.

[LoopSki]

what got me skiing way back was the waterski show at Marine World. Too bad that is gone now and can't share the fun with my kids. Are those type of shows gone country wide? must have been great exposure for Mastercraft.

[LoopSki]

plus the ski show at silverthorn marina lake shasta was cool as a kid.

[thager]

There is an antennae digital TV channel out there called TBD. Is channel 23-4 here in S. MN. I see all kinds of watersports stuff on there submitted by you tuber types. Anyone tried to get 3 event skiing on there? Could be an easy way to get some exposure. Also short fail clips on Fail Army. Section called People are Awesome showing some short extreme skills stuff.

Marcus?

[Horton]

off topic but ..

@dbressel if you burn 3-4 gallons for 6-8 passes you need a mechanic. 1.25 gallons is a more realistic number per ride.

[dbressel]

@horton thanks, was including wife and myself in one set and occasional other family member. Total individual sets probably much higher.

[skiboyny]

It's too expensive on the whole to ever get very popular. End of story! For you people that think that isn't true you take your income for granted.

[swc5150]

I don't know, auto racing is crazy expensive to get into, but look at NASCAR's popularity...and that's watching cars drive around in circles. Point being, I don't think a majority of the 80's water ski viewership aspired to be the next world champ, but maybe urged them to get pulled around the lake behind grandpa's tri-hull? Or maybe to just own that awesome performing boat one day?

[CBR51]

I agree you don’t have to have a new boat. But it’s too bad that zero off has made a great boat like the bubble butt 97-01 with a fantastic engine like the gt-40 obsolete if you want the same pull as you would get in a tournament. Either the expense of a new engine or a few years newer hull just adds to all the expense, when you already have a perfectly good boat. Also very hard to find a public lake not riddled with wakesurfing/ wakeboard boats that make the water impossible to train 3 event.

So ya, private lake and newer boat put a lot of people out of the sport or stops people from getting into it.

[Horton]

@klindy the real thrust of my original text is that we had momentum and were HUGE and then we became more bureaucratic because of the Olympic dream and that is one ( but NOT the only ) of the factors why the sport is not bigger today.

[Spencer_Shultz]

I’m at risk for another panda, but at this point, I really don’t care ?

Some of you might not know this, but people are actually making money streaming from a website called Twitch. It’s mostly people playing video games, but regardless, cash is changing hands. One thing I’d love to see in 2020 is a Swiss Pro style tournament utilize Twitch and allow people to throw money into the tournament winnings pot.

500 people throw in $20 each and you’ve got 10k. You split that between the top 3 male and female skiers and you just helped somebody pay a mortgage and you got to watch some incredible skiing for your contribution.

 

Another idea is a 50/50 raffle. Now this would be a tough one, because a raffle is technically a form of gambling. But what if some lucky fan walked away with half of the pot and the other half of the pot went towards the prize purse.

 

Just some ideas...

 

 

[Horton]

@Spencer_Shultz7 semi off topic but interesting...