What is the purpose of Class L and R events?

[Horton]

This is a semi-rhetorical question but seriously what is the point of record tournaments?

[JeffSurdej]

@Horton world rankings is the most apparent reason, its the only way to qualify for international events

[MattP]

Too many people use the term record to mean both and they are different. Only about 10 skiers in the world need a R to be able to set a world record. L for the rest who want world ranking.

[Horton]

So you guys are saying that the only reason to go to an L over a C is for international ranking?

[Jody_Seal]

@Horton

Yes ! What are you thinking! And soon pay an extra fee to do so..

[MattP]

@Horton and the hope of "a higher standard" driving and judging, but we all know that ratings do not always come with skill. I could care less about being on the world ranking list. The video gates, number of higher rated judges, surveyed course should make those scores worth more than a C. Though I go to plenty of C tournaments that are run to an L standard.

 

@Jody_Seal is right, but at least they pushed that out a year.

[RichardDoane]

Put a Sr. Judge in the boat, and Sr. and a Reg. Judge on each tower and you don’t need gate cameras. Boat path video and you’re good for an L. @MattP is right, L scores should get a % increase. That would be more PC than discounting C scores.

[klindy]

I think it's important for a score to remain 'the score'. In other words, penalty or bonus for tournament class, number of scores, etc. I would prefer to see scores at higher class tournament weighted differently by how long they 'live' on the ranking lists. For example, a class L/R score remains part of your average for 18 months, class E scores remain on the list (AWSA list) for 12 months, class C for 8 months, etc. Adjust the timing as needed but that gives relative weight to the class of tournament and allows the calculation to drop the penalty for fewer than 3 scores. Using the same concept, that would potentially allow scores like class F score and even practice scores to legitimately be used to generate a more realistic ranking average. Let class F/practice scores only live for 3 months and restrict how many can be used to generate the average (lets say no more than 1-3 scores).

 

There are a few challenges to the current ranking list. As more league type events which

may have a handicap included, it's very difficult to get an accurate handicap (or target best score) from the ranking list. Using just the score posted on the list can have a 5 or 10% penalty added to the score. So a skier with a ranking score of 90-95 buoys and only a single score or two has 'real' scores of closer to 100 buoys or a pass or two higher than the ranking score. So you have to look at all the scores posted to get something more accurate.

 

Also, even the skier that posts the most tournament scores rarely has more than 30 scores posted in a years time. And the vast majority of those are typically clustered near the high end of the scores. Increasing the population of scores used to generate their 'average'/likely best score increases the potential accuracy and can help limit the chance of sandbagging.

 

Varying the time different 'classes' of scores stay on the ranking list also add a dynamic to the ranking list that would bring back a little mystery as to who is REALLY the best skier on the starting dock. While seeding values would still have legitimacy you'd have to show up at the dock and ski competitive tournaments like the Regionals or Nationals instead of assuming based on where you are on the ranking list. Back in the EP rating days, you literally had no way to know where everyone was ranked until all the rated skiers showed up at Nationals.

 

Anyway, I think weighting different class scores by how long they are included in your average would be an interesting way to add some life to a pretty static list. And it would generate some 'value' of class E/L/R tournaments that doesn't exist today.

 

[kc]

I do care about the world ranking list, and have skied international events. I also will always ski an L event over a class C, if it’s a viable option. There’s a lot of us, right or wrong, who take greater pride in our L scores because of the more stringent tolerances required for L. That’s my .02 cents.

[Horton]

Is this Class L driving?

[kc]

@Horton Sad and disappointing for sure! I’d like to believe that occurs LESS in L events than C, maybe that’s naïve of me.

[JackQ]

Often in the past I didn’t really concern my self about international rankings, but went to records as the drivers generally were more experienced and more skilled. I said generally, some drivers drove in both records and Cs. And sometimes the driver in a R should not be have been allowed in a C or any other tournament.

 

My personal pet peeve is a driver that the only time they pull a skier in a year is the couple of tournaments they attend! To quote Phil Adams circa 1995,”if I am not driving a skier to 25 and 38 every week, I have no business driving in a tournament!”

[Horton]

I pulled this thread down about 2 weeks ago at the request of a AWSA official. I was told the event where the above boat path video was shot was under investigation. I was also told that this thread and the video was making it harder for the AWSA officials to do their job. I believe all that to be true.

 

Yesterday I got a bit of an ass chewing from a prominent person in the sport. One of the things said was that I was personally inconstant about how I handle controversial subjects in the sport. I gave this a lot of thought, took it very seriously and the accusation has some merit. In my defense inconsistencies are the result of not having a standing policy. After 12 years of running this site I have policies that cover a number of subjects and now I will have to cook one for this sort of issue. The policy going forward is roughly - "If I see Bull$hit that impacts the veracity of the sport the I am going to publish it."

 

The point of this thread and other like it is to expose various actions that are detrimental to the sport. It is not to be decisive or to create controversy or drive web traffic. The goal is always the integrity of the sport.

 

---

So for those of you not following along.... the videos above were shot at a Class R event. Scores from that event are on the World Standings List as well as the AWSA National Standings List.

[Horton]

So back to the original topic - Class L and R events are to be administrated in a manner that is beyond reproach. These events are the highest standard we have in the sport.

 

The driving in the above video looks like an attempt to cheat the standings lists.

[kurt]

@klindy , I like the thought of weighting the L scores to stay on longer than the 12 months .

However if you lower the C scores to a 8 month time frame , for us in the north we will have zero incentive to participate in any tournament.

I host 4-5 tournaments at my lake a year and have ZERO desire to change those to an L just so my score can stay on awsa ranking longer. You will experience a net loss of participation in tournaments.

I host the tournaments as a way to 1: get a score , 2: hang out with my buddies and not necessarily in that order.

You are right in the average not necessarily reflecting the true skiers ability, I ski 10-12 tournaments a year and only the top 10% of those scores are in my average.

 

As far as the F scores go my example is last year I had guy's over to ski the night before a tournament. I skied pretty good, the next day same conditions , same two guy's in the boat ( both seniors) I missed my opener on my own site uugh. (probably mind wander thinking if I had enough gas/food/porta jons/is my wife mad all these people are over /etc. or something else for the event)

 

 

[jcamp]

L/R scores are already given more weight than C class scores. Two L/R scores can be used for your average without a penalty while you need 3 class C scores. This increases scores for those who ski L/Rs because a third, most often times lower score is then not considered.

 

This might not be perfect, but I prefer it over a system that will make things more confusing. And let's face it, not all regions (or skiers' budgets for that matter) have the same access to L/Rs that others do.

 

 

 

[6balls]

I flat out missed a 6 ball in a "R" with video etc and they counted it. They didn't use the standard towers usually used at skiwatch but set up the "R" one's. I've been in the standard towers many times and there's no way a judge up there gives me that 6 ball. I pulled to the side and threw the rope it was so obvious to me.

 

 

[JackQ]

Horton, I just reviewed your attached video's, Yikes. Looks like generally bad driving, wrong siding the skier as much helping the skier, in an poorly executed attempt to help the skier. I think skier would have better performance if the boat just stayed in the middle.

[Horton]

@JackQ watch the first one again. The driver is way right at 1 ball and as soon as the skier hooks up he goes hard left. At two ball the boat is way left and then the skier hooks up the the boat suddenly goes hard right. Same pattern for the rest of the pass. That score was a 5 @ 41 and impacts the world standings list.

[matthewbrown]

@Horton in a class L or R you would run 5@38 behind me, in a class C you would run 5@39 behind me. There should only be one class of tournament where the integrity of the sport is always kept in tact, with the exception of a class F tournament where beer is required and swimsuit tops are not.

[disland]

I have said this and will say it again. One of the biggest factors driving the need for L scores are juniors. Juniors want to qualify for Jr Masters and Can/Am and Jr teams. Today only E/L scores count for these events. So the parents and the kids drive the need. Since its almost the same trouble to do E as to do L no need to mess with E and such no one does.

 

If these events allowed C to count it would make everyones life easier.

[JackQ]

Horton, I agree but on some of the subsequent videos, there appear to be some poor executed timing, on attempts to move to next side. On thing that is not in doubt, it was purposeful.

[markn]

I am assuming there is a Senior Judge in the boat....and in charge. Just as much criticism, if not more, should be directed at the boat judge. When I was a senior judge and senior driver, I had no problem telling a driver to tighten up and/or stop "toning" or accepting advice to correct boat path more to center line. I did not care if it was a "C, E,L or R", I drove like every one was an R/L and every pass was being scrutinized.....as it should. It is called integrity. One of the many reasons I walked from tournaments/officiating 10 years ago and just resumed last year. (albeit as a skier only).

[Chad_Scott]

@matthewbrown I certainly agree with your comments. Turn the camera off and I can certainly get you at least 6 buoys maybe more if I skied with you enough to know your rhythm. @JackQ whether this was done with good timing or not it sure appears to be done with the intent of aiding the skier. I would say that this certainly seems to be the definition of “pattern driving”. We can all get out of sync with a skier and when it happens I will always do my best to not hurt the skier. But it seems that this was a conscious effort to aid the skier. Someone is supposed to be assigned to monitor end course during a record event. Were the judges not watching? Interested to hear from someone in authority what the opinion of the organization is regarding how these scores are effecting the standings list.

[Jody_Seal]

I was asked what I thought about this set of videos and also was asked to identify the driver ( I could not) . My thought was dont spend any time chastising the drivers of this event, just go ahead and downgrade the whole tournament to class F! Notify the chief judge and the tournament director about the situation. This type of pattern driving won't happen again with these chief officials.

[Chad_Scott]

@Jody_Seal perfect solution

[Horton]

@Chad_Scott @Jody_Seal

 

I 100% agree. Downgrading the whole event is the solution. If they cherry pick out the worst passes and allow the rest it will only impact a few skiers and will basically go unnoticed. Scores from this event impact national and international standings lists.

 

The difference between Class C and Class R is effectively the quality of officials and overall process/scrutiny. At an L or R event we should expect drivers with the skill and experience to give a good ride and stay in the middle.

 

At every event the drivers are supposed to TRY to keep the pylon down the center. We all know that sometimes drivers get out of sync or get pulled over - that happens. We should have a ton on understanding for honest mistakes and zero tolerance for cheating. At a Class C there is room for drivers to learn. The videos above especially the first 2 look like blatant cheating to me.

[bigtex2011]

What region ids this from?

[MISkier]

@bigtex2011, the date in the video is 11/10/2019, which would likely place it in the South. A quick check of tournament scores in USA Water Ski for that weekend should narrow it down.

[LLUSA]

This will continue to go on until the AWSA board as a whole stands up to this, I for one was very vocal about this tournament and the driving at the winter meeting. Pulling the scores is fine but until you finally make an example out of someone (pull their drivers rating for a year) it will continue to go on. If we're going to allow this then the season is open

[Jody_Seal]

Pulling drivers rating or putting a driver to task so far has not been a deterrent because this is still hapining.

Ultimately this needs to be addressed by the chief judge of the event. Like I said downgrade a couple of these tournaments where apparent pattern driving is prevalent skiers take notice, officials take notice and drivers are attended too via being pulled out of the drivers seat, and this issue gets nipped in the bud.

[JackQ]

Not at great mystery as there was only one R tournament held on that day. Maybe I should have attended, maybe I could have gotten good score. :wink: )

[Horton]

@LLUSA where was the chief boat driver and the chief judge? Were all the chief officials off drinking mojitos?

 

Seriously, I think the culpability goes beyond just the driver.

[LLUSA]

In R events the CJ is suppose to be in charge of the drivers, there was a CD, why he wasn't watching video or having another judge watch video I don't know, I don't operate that way, ask @Chad_Scott everyone can see our video. The CD should have done something that day unless he was the one driving, then the responsible party is the CJ. Regardless this will not stop until as @Jody_Seal said you downgrade the sanction but I believe the drivers also need to be reprimanded way more than a written letter. Just sayin

[Horton]

when this sort of thing happens, if the entire tournament is downgraded to F, future tournament organizers will pick their officials and drivers more carefully

[The_MS]

Are there enough qualified Sr drivers? And by qualified I mean can they drive a straight 39/41

[Chad_Scott]

I agree with @LLUSA you need to pull the sanction and take the scores. I am not aware of many events where the organization has done anything to the drivers other than talk about it and not follow thru. It has to be a combination of both. People spend good money to ski a record tournament that is downgraded to an F. They will think twice about paying that again if they aren’t sure the drivers will do their best to provide a legitimate pull. What’s the point of end course if upon review the path is determined to be consistently out of tolerance and nothing is done about it. As Lyman mentioned there were several chief officials that didn’t do their jobs. Do they get a pass. There’s a boat judge sitting in the seat was the boat is bobbing and weaving. Are they not just as liable as the driver?? Most of the event I go to are just like @LLUSA boat path video is where everyone can see it. I can assure you after pulling big scores @LLUSA @Jody_Seal and myself usually go immediately look at it to see what we can do better

[ScottScott]

@The_MS There are in Florida

 

Looks like the only info available (at least that I can find) on that tournament is the scores. Is there somewhere that has the judges and drivers listed?

[dbutcher]

There is another point of having record tournaments that I didn't see mentioned above. In my ASWA region, a tournament must be class E or higher to accommodate the setting of or the breaking of a regional slalom record. A U.S. national record requires a record tournament too.

[JackQ]

There may be some repercussions that are in work that we are unaware of. Jeff Surdej monitors comments on this forum and should be able to provide some enlightenment.

[dave2ball]

Wow. I have seen better driving in C events. AWSA should really down grade this event to an F. Not sure if the whole tournament should be down graded but what video has been released that driving was very poor.

 

[bishop8950]

We have some excellent officials and drivers, we have some that try hard but need experience and I hope a rare few that deliberately allow the wrong things to happen.

 

My concern is there are not enough qualified officials as it relates to boat path. Not related to this specific event, but in general. I have the end course video available live for anyone that wants to watch it when I am the Chief driver. Frequently I have a hard time finding some one qualified to monitor boat path, sometimes including the Chief Judge. They just don’t know a little movement from a lot. Certainly there are a lot of boat judges that would struggle to know if the driver is moving too much. It’s easy to say “common, it’s not that hard” as we sit behind key boards, but I know a lot of good people that just don’t know.

 

So maybe the answer is training. Make boat path a bigger part of Judges clinics, not just drivers clinics for a start?

 

Yes, we should have a means to follow up, downgrade, sanction etc. It will help for the larger community to k ow it won’t be tolerated. But that’s not enough. We need more people that know the difference on site that are willing to manage it live.

[Splasheye]

I wholeheartedly agree with @bishop8950 about the need for improved education of all officials regarding boat paths. It should be specifically discussed at clinics and seminars to demonstrate what a small movement is, what a big movement is, what a deliberate movement is.....

It sounds obvious but in reality it takes knowledge, practice and experience.

 

And we already have technology available that can solve this nonsense overnight.

 

For $200 on a video capture device and free software the appointed end-course monitoring official can click a few buttons on SplashEyeDrive and have a complete deviation report 10 seconds after the pass.

 

For $2000 on a GPS system the driver/judge can have tracking live in the boat.

 

These solutions allow us to deal with the problem at the time. Give the skiers the reride they often deserve, give the Chief Judge/Driver the data they need to properly manage the driving and improve the drivers performance through accurate, immediate and objective feedback.

[JeffSurdej]

@JackQ This issue is not being swept under the rug, the proper channels are handling it at the moment such as the drivers committee and the southern region. As evidence unfolds and the proper protocols are handled it will be in the hands of the folks who can start making a decision on what to do with the sanction and the officials.

[Horton]

FYI - The Pan Am Council did downgrade 9 scores from this event. See http://www.iwsf.com/dbheadlines/headlinefiles/Removal%20of%20Scores%20from%20the%20ranking%20list.pdf