Competition Task Force

[JeffSurdej]

So another item out of the meetings was the return of the competition task force from 15 years ago who came up with the rankings system we have today. I know BOS has had multiple topics on figuring out more/better/different ways to compete in our sport. Aaron weeks has agreed to chair this so its time to fill the committee, and I'd like to fill it with some of you for sure, so if interested contact me please.

[oneski]

Jeff, an idea that I’d like to float regarding scoring for slalom is instead of number of buoys + line length (i.e. 3@12M or 3@35’ off) going to a standard “Course Width” +/-. Course Width from centerline of the course (at the boat pylon) to the skier buoy is around 37’6” (If my memory is correct). This number becomes Course Width which also = 0. Course Width is approximately 11 Meters (38’off). So, a competitor that skis the course at 14.25 M (28’ off) would be running at CW (Course Width) +3.25 (14.25-11) If the skiers round 3 bouys, the score would be 3@+3.25CW. If it’s a skier that skies 3@391/2, that would be scored as 3@-1.5CW.

 

The plus sign and minus sign denote if the skier is using line longer or shorter than the distance to the buoy from the center lone. (Think about like golf. Everyone knows what par means. If you shot 1 under par you know it’s a birdie and a good score. If you shoot 2 over par it’s a double bogey. A “scratch golfer” with a handicap of 0 is thought of as a really good golfer. A golfer with a 20 handicap is not nearly as good. We have a frame of reference that is much easier to understand that just saying 9.75M rope, or 41’ off. To novice skiers these numbers are confusing at best. It would be relatively easy to explain what -1CW means. (1 meter shorter than the distance from the center line to the buoy)

[Horton]

@oneski

 

[RazorRoss3]

Let’s make simple changes like ability based divisions first. If we’re desperate we could still have 3 broader age divisions of junior, adult, and senior. If our sport ever becomes marketable to the broader public again, then ESPN will surely take the time to explain the scoring to everyone, until that fantasy comes true let’s just make competition more competitive at the local class C

[UCFskier]

@RazorRoss3 I believe skiers can opt up into more competitive age brackets if they choose to do so. You just cannot opt down into less competitive brackets. Im not sure if grouping based on boat speed (adults at 36, seniors at 34) will make it more fun for ppl as they will be getting whooped by top guys.... or maybe Im reading it wrong

[RazorRoss3]

@UCFskier i think you are misreading. I want to see ability based divisions. If a skiers average is 90 buoys, they should ski against other people who’s averages are 90 buoys. The only reason I mentioned “junior/adult/senior” is maybe the 50yr old skiing 90 buoys doesn’t want to be directly competing with the 90yr old skiing 90 buoys (props if this is you) who doesn’t want to ski against the 8yr old doing the same. So 3 very wide age tranches with ability based divisions within them. And I would be happy to say screw it to age all together. I would also be willing to end gender based divisions. If it’s ability based and zero base scoring then 90 buoys is 90 buoys. Age and gender are irrelevant.

[unksskis]

@RazorRoss3 are there any sports where this can be used as an example?

[MattP]

Some discussion on the topic here: https://www.ballofspray.com/forum#/discussion/comment/385166

[RazorRoss3]

@unksskis i am not aware of specific sports where ability based divisions are used. I am aware of 0 sports where gender based divisions are not used. I’m just pointing out that under ZBS scoring rules they may not be needed for our sport. Worth thinking about. Since 90 buoys is 90 buoys, does it matter who skied them?

[Kelvin]

From some quick research, Tennis (UTSA) and BMX have national championship events using an ability based format. I'm sure there are others.

[UCFskier]

I get it! I dont think we should or will get rid of the traditional events, however we have considered doing bracket events, like we did when we were kids (like dollars on the dock).

you ski against yourself, closest to your PB wins. this allows everyone an equal footing and the ability to ski against newbees to pros

[ForrestGump]

@unksskis Amateur road cycling, BMX racing, and Mountain Bike racing in the US are all ability based for day in and day out racing. In road racing, it's organized into categories. Category 5 is a novice. On up to Category 1 which is considered a pro. Organizers can run races split by Category. They can also combine categories. Common things they do is have a Cat 5 race. A cat 4/5 race. And a cat 1/2/3 race. And they can choose to run a race split by ages. But regardless, standings are accrued based on the riders Category they are currently in. And upgrade points to be used to go to the next Category are awarded based on # of participants in the race and the riders finishing place.

[unksskis]

@Kelvin and @ForrestGump in looking at USABMX, they seem to have multiple "National" competitions, and then a larger Nationals. The divisions seem to be Cruiser(Beginner) and 20" by age divisions, and then Pro/Open. Am I looking in the wrong area?

[ForrestGump]

No, you're misinterpreting how BMX is run a bit. Easy to do because it's complicated. I'm a track operator so I'm intimately familiar with how we do it. As complicated as the structure is, it's probably not germane to this discussion. I think road cycling and mountain bike racing's structure is better suited for waterskiiing.

 

So BMX. First. Cruiser is NOT novice. But that is a second topic. Let's take it off the table for now and talk about the 20" class. The 20" class is divided up into amateur ages and proficiences. Proficienies are Novice, Intermediate, and Expert. The idea is for Novices to race novices if they are available. Or if not enough are available in their age and proficiency they will move up and race Intermediates. Intermediates can move up or down and race either way. But the higher proficiency locks in the point structure. So if a novice races against an Intermediate, they got Int points. And similarly, if a Intermediate races an expert, they get Expert points. We have age classes that start at 5 and under, and are single age brackets up til 16. Then ages start being grouped together. There is a pretty sophisticated software app that will automatically assign race groupings based on who enters. Let's leave it at that.

 

And BMX does do 30 or so National Events, which are triple point events. Then Grand Nationals, which is akin to the waterski national championships, and is a 4x point event. A national champion in each age grouping(don't even think proficiency here) based on the amalgamation of 6 national even scores + the grand national score). Actually we award NAG 1-20 numbers (National Age Group #s) for each age grouping at Grands.

 

With Mountain biking they only do 4 categories, which could be equated to Novice, Intermediate, Expert, and Pro. Reminiscent of how we used to break out proficiencies until 15 years ago, as Jeff mentioned. EP(which I equate to an expert proficiency in BMX, Cat 3 in MTB, or Cat 3 in Road Cycling) meant something to people back then.

 

And I've received enough Pandas over the years that I am Panda-immune.

 

 

 

[Than_Bogan]

@oneski I don't necessarily disagree, but what you're suggesting is purely cosmetic, right? It changes nothing at about the sport except how the results are reported?

[unksskis]

Thank you @ForrestGump ! Would you mind detailing road/mtb categories as well? I appreciate your insight in these sports.

[ALPJr]

Many youth/adult amateur sports leagues use ability based divisions or brackets -baseball/softball, volleyball, basketball, golf, swimming, cycling, etc.

[unksskis]

@ALPJr definitely something to learn and take from all of those sports and their competitive structure. What are some things make those sports successful with their ability based structure? I know in many soccer leagues, the top placing teams must move up an ability level.

[unksskis]

What are some other examples of sports and their competitive structure that could benefit review? Cycling, motocross, swimming, snowskiing, etc?

[sunperch]

@ALPJr Can you please explain to me how swimming has ability-based divisions?

[ALPJr]

Here’s an example from Swimming NSW Swim League...

Swimmers are first categorised by age e.g. Junior (9-12 yrs) or Seniors (13yrs+) and then allocated a division based on swimming ability. For example, an 18-yr-old boy who can swim 50 m Freestyle in 24 secs will be placed in Senior Division 1, while a 14-yr-old girl who can swim 50 m Freestyle in 33 secs will be placed in Senior Division 2. A 10-yr-old girl that can swim 50 m Freestyle in 31 secs will be placed in Junior Division 1 and a 11-yr-old boy who can swim 50 m Freestyle in 38 secs will be placed in Junior Division 3.

 

[lpskier]

@RazorRoss3 In horse showing, men and women riders (and horses for that matter) compete against one another. There are no men’s or women’s events, except NCAA collegiate equestrian competition is a women’s only sport (there is no NCAA men’s equestrian completion). The IHSA (Intercollegiate Horse Slow Association), by far the larger of the two college level riding programs, is co-ed.

 

And of course women’s track and field in Connecticut is also sort of co-ed...

 

[sunperch]

@ALPJr That is not how swimmers are categorized in USA Swimming or most other national governing bodies for competitive swimming. USA Swimming has age based divisions. NSW swim league is a stand alone league kinda like the INT in skiing.

[disland]

Its important to rememeber, we can overlay ability based right on top of what we do today with ZERO rule chnages. Only cost is more medlas. I know the purest will cry "everyone gets a medal" and all that but what have we got to lose.

 

I did tennis for many years, only the elite (like less than 1%) compete in age divisions. Everyone else competes in ability based divisions. Now dont get me wrong there are problems with sand bagging by the few folks who want to cheat. But the majority of players want to play people who are at their level.

[MISkier]

We did ability-based for years in Michigan. I didn’t see any sandbagging or cheating, just skiers trying to better their own scores and strive for the highest ranking score in the tournament at the same time.

 

We only stopped because of the manual overhead to calculate ability-based placements and manage that data. If it were integrated into WSTIMS, that hurdle would be eliminated.

[RazorRoss3]

I think most people aren’t going to sandbag to be the best of a lower division vs the worst in a higher one and the few that do aren’t in themselves enough reason to kill the idea... maybe winning regionals/nationals is an automatic rank up for the following season so if you sandbag for a major event and then win you won’t be able to do it year over year.

[skierjp]

So if you won or placed in a ability based event like States, Regionals or Nationals wouldn’t you be required to move up?

And yes I witnessed sandbagging years ago from skiers not wanting to move out of the novice division.

Isn’t this kind of the same as Master Men, or Master Women?

[klindy]

@skierjp yes, MM, MW and Open are all examples of ability based divisions. So think about that ... at the highest level of the sport, we put skiers in ability based divisions with (little) regard for their age. But for everyone else we put them in arbitrary age groups and then LIMIT where they can compete. Of course you can ski at lots of different events, virtually none of which have any real competition. And where there is competition (states, regionals and nationals) the age groups still remove any sense of competition for 90+% of the skiers who show up —the rest in that age group stay home.

 

The above may be a bit over sold but it’s illustrative of the situation and really doesn’t support “competitive waterskiing”. To @disland point, we CAN do ability based tournaments today within the current rules. The problem (in my opinion) is that those tournaments are not “easy” to setup and run. They require a lot of manual set up and work by the organizers. A goal this year by AWSA is to provide this type of setup inside the scoring system.

[dbutcher]

There is nothing wrong with our current system. Competition already exists to the extent possible. Local tournaments usually are small enough that it is difficult to increase competition with any system. The changes discussed above just seem (to me) to complicate things unnecessarily. Change sometimes is necessary and sometimes good; but change just for the sake of change is usually not good, especially if it complicates things. Most skiers are in this sport for enjoyment, fun, and the joy of improvement without having to spend hours reading the rule book. He/she who gets around the most buoys at the shortest line length within the current system compared to his/her last performance or compared to another in his/her division has the most fun. The National tournament is the best example (one of few) of true and fair competition. Absent a dramatic weather change during an event, conditions in the National tournament are as close to the same for everyone as is possible, and the winner can justifiably claim that he/she was the best skier in the nation that day in his/her division.

[teammalibu]

Compare sand bagging in Novice to MM or MW??

[skierjp]

I know that when it counted ( States, Regionals, Nationals) more qualified Master Men skied their age division then MM. Excuse I hear, I’ve never won my age division and I don’t have a chance in MM.

[lpskier]

How about this:

 

Jr. Boys/girls 0-13

Boys/girls 14-17

Men/women 18-34

Sr. Men/women 35 & up

 

Seems like this is how it was when I started out.

[dchristman]

@lpskier YES! Wait, wasn't there veterans too? I want to be a vet. Why do I have to slog through 6, 7, 8, 9, A, B, ... I'm a vet, dammit!