A Brighter Future for Pro Waterskiing as Waterski Pro Tour partners with IWWF

[ROBOT]

 

International Waterski and Wakeboard Federation (IWWF) and Waterski Pro Tour are pleased to announce their new relationship as they unite to promote professional waterskiing.

 

Earlier this year the IWWF replaced the Elite Point structure that had governed professional waterskiing with an improved competitive framework developed by Waterski Pro Tour. In doing so, a unified, global tour of all IWWF-sanctioned professional waterski events was created. This tour brings together both the historic, tentpole events with the new and emerging under one banner in an effort to further capture the imagination of the growing pro waterskiing audience.

 

IWWF and Waterski Pro Tour have now taken the further step of officially partnering. This reflects their common goal of promoting awareness of, and engagement with, professional waterskiing globally.

 

Under the partnership IWWF will remain the regulators and decision-makers of the technical aspects of pro waterskiing. The Waterski Pro Tour will market pro waterskiing, foster corporate relationships and support existing and emerging pro waterski events.

 

“I remember the excitement of the Café de Colombia Waterski World Cup and Coors Light Waterski Tour and enjoyed watching ski legends battle each other for the gold. Today, we start a new chapter in professional waterskiing that will take our sport back into the public’s view for the new generation to enjoy.” – Jose Antonio Perez Priego, IWWF President

 

"I am very excited to see the IWWF and Waterski Pro Tour work hand in hand to give pro waterskiing the visibility it deserves. We are looking forward to taking the many opportunities to grow the sport we are all so passionate about." - Manon Costard, Waterski Pro Tour co-founder, IWWF Athlete Rep and current women's slalom World Champion

 

International Waterski and Wakeboard Federation (IWWF) is the world governing body of towed water sports. Founded in 1946, it is recognised by the International Olympic Committee as the sole authority governing all towed water sports and has over 90 affiliated member federations worldwide.

 

Waterski Pro Tour was founded in 2020 with the aim of accelerating public engagement with the global sport of professional waterskiing

 

[The_MS]

These events must be held on public waterways in front of the public’s eye. At a minimum you need venues like the Malibu open in Milwaukee

[Wish]

@The_MS The Malibu Open is at a public venue.. Johns Island (Trophy Lakes)... where festivals are held among other things and is well known locally. Best of both world actually.

 

Agree with being at as many public viewed waterways as possible. But, it will only work if it is announce in how many feet of rope the skier is working with vs how many feet is laying on the floor of the boat. Joe Public will NEVER understand what's going on if announced in feet off. Even if "feet off" is explained frequently to them, I can't imagine Joe Public not thinking that it's the dumbest way to call rope length or lack there of.

[slow]

Joe public doesn’t care

[unksskis]

Fostering corporate relationships, like an exclusive towboat agreement.......

[Wish]

@slow, not true. Joe Public will watch as it is a visually amazing sport with amazing boats. But, their attention span will be rather short if they have no clue what is going on as each pass looks the same. Easy to understand numbers that get smaller in rope length vs the number getting bigger.

[igkya]

Agree with @Wish on rope length. Joe public will watch... Boats, beers and bikinis, who wouldn't watch? Or maybe I'm just longing for the good ol days of Hot Summer Nights.

[skimtb]

If I got to vote, I would vote to Also use feet of rope vs meters. Even if it’s weird numbers like 33.6 ft and shortening to 32.0.

[RazorRoss3]

Non skiers are not going to go out of their way to watch competitive skiing unless it’s part of a broader something. How many non-mainstream sports do you go out of your way to watch outside of the Olympics if you aren’t a participant? First thing is first, engage current skiers (members/nonmembers/buoy hunters/free skiers). I think the waterski pro tour is addressing that problem. You need to engage people who already have skis in hand, once you engage that group you can loon at ways to grow beyond

[The_MS]

You need 1000s of spectators in order to gain sponsorship and prize money.

[DW]

For the pro competitor, do you want to ski at a site with compromised conditions in the hope of public & fan attendance -or- do you want to ski / compete in a location that provides world class conditions as those seem to be hidden gems with difficult general access? Can public appealing locations be world class? Best of luck with the initiative, I think it has opportunity in areas where water skiing is more of an emerging sport, difficult challenge in the US where so many other options exist.

 

What are the measurement metrics to determine success?

[Jody_Seal]

Another bonus is the perception that a pro level truly exists. Gives long term goals to young skiers. Most young skiers move on after their junior years as there was really no professional level.

 

Now maybe the awsa can remove the rule "there shall be no distinction between amateur and professional". They don't have to do anything more then remove it.

 

Looking forward to seeing this unfold and bring energy back into the sport.

 

[dvskier]

@The_MS Charleston is the number 1 tourist destination in the USA. I believe the Malibu open should stay there. I’ve been to the past 4 tournaments and the number of “public spectators” is growing each year. Adam Caldwell is doing a fantastic job with food vendors and having TWBC broadcast the event.

[Broussard]

Jeeze - tough crowd...

[The_MS]

Just want it to work so they all get big pay checks

[dvskier]

Absolutely!

[Mastercrafter]

For what its worth, every non-skier friend who lets me show them some TWBC clips showcasing professional waterskiing is usually impressed at a minimum. Some have commented that they can't believe how fast they go, how hard they pull, how big the crashes are, etc. My favorite comment yet was "I can't believe he didn't just 'Mr Potatohead' and rip his arms right out".

 

Getting it into the public eye might help pick up a few more fans along the way. As stated before, figuring out a better way to convey what's happening with rope length and buoy count will definitely help.

 

With that said, Worlds in Malaysia was a mess and situations / sites like that should probably be avoided.

 

 

[Cooper_Trelawney]

I'm not sure what is so hard about saying that:

 

"the standard rope length is 75 ft. Beginners use a 75 ft rope. Our professionals are so good, they start with 32 feet taken off the rope and with each completed pass through the course, more rope is taken off; making it shorter. The guy who completes the most bouys on the shortest rope length wins."

 

Idk, I understood it as a kid. I think we don't give Joe Public enough credit.

[Drago]

Exactly @Cooper_Trelawney Start with 75, then CUT it !

Either way, that is not why the gp doesn't watch waterskiing

[BraceMaker]

The Malibu open in milwaukee was special.

 

With a small small small amount of planning you could line it up with one of the many beer fests and similar. Same park, they fence the beer area off just a bit towards the lake of where the skiing is. You could get the beer organizer to run an enclosed loop up with stadium seat by the jump or heck I strongly doubt most people would comolain about having to buy 4 beer tickets to get to the center stage of the lake.

 

Dont even bother with the lines. Just say each pass gets harder with a shorter rope or a faster speed. Despite the idea that metric is easier the fact that the rope lengths get shorter as the number gets bigger just works. Heres the 39 pass!

 

A visual on site would solve the rope length just have a mainline on a post and set a bouy out. If youve ever tossed a 43off line off your boat to see how long the rope is you get it instantly how short that is.

[Wish]

@Cooper_Trelawney you’re making my point.

 

Your version

"the standard rope length is 75 ft. Beginners use a 75 ft rope. Our professionals are so good, they start with 32 feet taken off the rope and with each completed pass through the course, more rope is taken off; making it shorter. The guy who completes the most bouys on the shortest rope length wins." (less any explanation of buoy distance)

 

Mine version

“ That ropes only X feet long and doesn’t even reach the buoy.”

 

Can you pick out the more simple version to understand?

 

Hot Summer Nights was not announced in rope being used on a whim. ESPN made a deliberate calculation to NOT use line off. It would have been beyond stupid to do so. Add to that the REST of the world does NOT announce in rope coiled on the floor (metric). Why would u take time to tell a first timer we measure in rope note used. If they don’t look at you like u had a third eye, there is something wrong with them.

 

@Drago I’d get pretty frustrated watching Olympic long jump if they made me do math because they told me how far the athlete did not go. Who wants to do math at a sporting event? We live in an instant gratification society. Joe Public is not going to want to figure it all out. They will walk away. Watched it happen in Orlando at many pro stops and was often asked why the rope was getting longer.

 

[Broussard]

I think it's great to have some standardization and a brand to begin to tie together these individual events that are starting to really come into their own.

 

If we ever want to see an actual pro tour again - this is a step in the right direction IMO.

[Drago]

Either way, that is not why the gp doesn't watch waterskiing

[Wish]

@Drago you’re a tag vague. Are we supposed to just guess why? Help out and let us know why u think Joe Public would look away or walk away if a pro stop was at public venue...perhaps with a festival or something going on at the same timing. . Maybe what your thinking has a solution.

[ALPJr]

SF Bay Area (Aquatic Park), Sacramento (Bel Aqua), Orlando, Okeheelee, Milwalkee, Houston, Seattle, New York (Twin Lakes) millions of residents easy airport access and plenty of hotels.

[gsm_peter]

Being an average waterskier I do not forsee a huge difference. However I do hope it will simplify and improve for the athlets.

 

Without public any sport is just a hobby and there are not much money in it.

With public it can make money for the pros.

 

I agree with wish.

Using Imperial units is not beneficial for the sport.

Maybe it is not a big deal?

Waterskiing is the only sport that I know of that provide rounded values annonced to be exact. 'waterski mph' and 'waterski feets'....

 

Fwiw

A rope is not 75 feet. It is about 75 feet.

One does not take off 28 feet. One take off about 28 feet.

The boat speed is not 36 mph. The speedometer is adjusted to show a corupt value.

 

 

[tjs1295]

I hate to say it, but there needs to be more action to get the general public (or probably plenty of water skiers) watching. I understand it's the nature of the sport, but 17 seconds of action followed by 1-2 minutes of nothing, makes for a long day. Two boats, with two skiers at opposite ends, at the same time. Something like the head to head at Hilltop. That was much easier to watch.

[Broussard]

@tjs1295 To get mass appeal the event needs to be edited down to a 1:30-2:00 hr show. The old Hot Summer Nights edited things down and got rid of downtime.

[tjs1295]

@Broussard I agree about that for the TV audience, but I'm thinking mostly about being at the event in person. I think I would be bored out of my mind after a couple hours. Unless there is something else to do right at the grounds like in Milwaukee on the Summerfest grounds. Especially if skiers start running the same pass twice. :D I wonder if more people would attend if the water ski tournament was not the main attraction? I picture a lot of my non-skiing friends stopping to watch some skiing as they walk and drink at Summerfest. Obviously that would be really hard to organize something like that.

[Broussard]

@tjs1295 I think Moomba proves that it works... just hard to put together.

[Freddie Winter]

No doubt it would be great if every event had a Moomba sized crowd and that was definitely the only way to go previously with the hour long Hot Summer Night highlight shows in the 80s/90s. However, the opportunities offered by the webcast in the new digital world are huge.

 

Webcast viewership is only limited by the number of people with an internet connection whereas in-person crowds are limited by space, geography and require a far bigger dedication of time for someone to turn up. Also, event sponsorship can be raised from anywhere in the world on the webcast, not just the local area as for in-person crowds.

 

There is a strong argument that, with the fantastic efforts of TWBC and others, pro water skiing is actually better watched online than in person with dead spots filled up with interviews, replays and analysis. Because of this webcast viewership is on the rise.

For example, Swiss Pro Slalom had 27k views on the day this May and at one point 1500 devices were tuned in to watch. These are not huge huge numbers but the trend is upwards at a steep angle. A couple of years ago those numbers were 15k and 600 peak devices.

 

We are lucky to have 12+ events that occur worldwide year to year. It would be a tremendous shame to disrupt these by pushing events to big lakes in an effort to harness a crowd that may not turn up (as at the last two World Champs) when the webcast can be just as powerful of a tool. The ideal scenario is for a Moomba/ Milwaukee venue with a big on location crowd along with a high quality webcast that can bring in the rest of the world.

[tjs1295]

Agree. The webcasts kick a$$! Been watching a lot this year.

[klindy]

@tjs1295 have you ever watched baseball (long change overs, pitcher changes, etc?), golf ( takes a long time whether you’re camped at a hole or walking with the players), cricket even soccer (typically the ball never leaves the middle half of the field) or football live? “TV timeouts”? All live sports have challenges to live TV. Waterskiing isn’t special in that case.

 

As for how to describe the action, I think consistency is the key as much as anything. I recall the Hot Summer Nights broadcasts and thought the “actual” line length was great. However it was hard for me (an avid skier) to get it and I never heard any of my casual waterski friends complain or complement the decision to call “feet on”. My point is, in the US imperial units may make sense and “feet off” may wrk fine. Everywhere else in the world may get along with metric units just fine. Context seems important.

 

I think it was Ed Brazil who was responsible or claimed some responsibility of color coding the rope lengths to match the spectrum of the rainbow. It wouldn’t be hard to describe the “purple loop” as 2’ short of the buoys and just latch on to the color sequence. The constant action on the water probably means more to an audience than knowing the specific details to the cm (or inch). Things like head to head competition or side by side competition is easy to follow. Perhaps “marking” the water somehow for jump might help. I think it’s intuitive to an extent to watch tricks Ana have a pretty good idea that pass A was better (or not) then pass B.

 

The hot rods who “race” monster trucks don’t spend a lot of time on measuring jumps but they do know how to put on a good show! Again the activity will keep the fans interest.

 

[tjs1295]

@klindy Yes, I have watched a lot of those sporting events live, and on TV. I was going to elaborate in my previous post, but didn't want to be too long winded. I get your comparison, and agree on some level. I have almost quit watching American football entirely because the pace of the game is painfully slow. I disagree about soccer. Started watching about 10 years ago in my mid 30's, and was hooked. I know nothing about the game, but it didn't take long to realize the professionals are incredibly talented, there is almost always something going on (ok, ok, the fake injuries slow things down), and the game will be over in almost exactly two hours every time. Either way, most of those events will be over in 2-4 hours. I just checked the TWBC broadcast of the Swiss Pro Slalom event, and it was almost 12 hours long. Those sports also have the benefit of being held in stadiums, so even between the action there is a lot that can be put on by the host venue during a live event. That's tough to do for water skiing. The webcasts are fantastic, and with sponsorships should be able to fill some of the down time.

 

I'm really not trying to put down anything here. TWBC does an amazing job!!! And I think things are heading in the right direction. I voted in a different poll that I would gladly pay $10-$20 to watch. If there's a way to do that, please send me that direction. I can't offer much to this website, but I can offer the perspective of a complete outsider who slalom skis simply for the fun of it. If I went to one of these events, it would be as a spectator. That's the perspective I'm trying to put out there. I think for a lot of people on this website, seeing the competitors would be like getting together with your friends for the day. Which would be a ton of fun, but that's not what my beer drinking, MMA watching, unathletic, fat, out of shape buddies will experience. They can't drive home from a baseball game after drinking for four hours. They'd never make it until the end of a water ski tournament. They'd all be passed out on the property somewhere.

 

 

[klindy]

@tjs129 I agree with you. Soccer can be fun to watch but can also be painful boring. Of course it lasts almost exactly 2 hours because the clock never stops. But the “add time” is an anomaly only known to the head ref. So all of a sudden the game is done.

 

Point I was making before is constant action. The 12 Swiss pro broadcast was probably only 2hrs of action too.

 

I recall a Collegiate Nationals in Chicago where they even had action between events - Cory Pickos trick demo, 3 guys on inner tubes, bare footing, etc. Non-stop action.

[RazorRoss3]

Largely thanks to the Waterski pro tour and TWBC I’ve actually tuned into and paid attention to pro skiing for the first time in years this year so I think they’ve done a great job and moving in the right direction.

[tjs1295]

@klindy Gotcha. We're definitely on the same page. More action. I don't need constant, just a bit more than now. That's what I was getting at earlier when I mentioned two skiers at the same time like the head to head at Hilltop. My beer swilling, non-skiing friends would be way more into being spectators for something like that.

 

And the extra time in soccer is hilarious. Ok, not really.

[Slalom.Steve]

I love the webcasts by TWBC, and agree they are fantastic for the sport. However, even as a slalom ski addict, I rarely watch them live. I'll start them late so I can skip ahead.

 

It's not even so much the time inbetween passes, especially with replays, commentary, and interviews... but it's the fact that the first 2-3 passes of each skier is a warm-up that they're almost guaranteed to make. With the football analogy, it'd maybe be like: not only having to wait inbetween each play as we do now, but before each play you also watch the team just practice the upcoming play, without defenders, a couple times (and have to wait inbetween the practice plays as well)... then they run a play or two for real against the other team. Then repeat. People want excitement, and that's just not very exciting.

 

It is nice to watch some warmup passes, especially if I'm looking to learn from their technique (since I know it will be ideal at easier passes rather than their hardest ones)... but I can only watch so many before it's boring and I just skip ahead to the shortest lines.

 

I agree that to be a viable broadcast for the public, tournaments would have to be edited down to 1-3 hours.

[IGski]

https://maps.apple.com/?ll=41.921618,-87.630628&q=Marked%20Location&_ext=EiYprTUjQl71REAxnJ86GcfoVcA5KwtJnoT2REBBNCrbSgHoVcBQBA%3D%3D&t=m

 

I often wondered if the lagoon in Chicago @ Lincoln park could be big enough to host a Pro event.

Now that would be cool.... Edit* Nevermind, I see it has concrete walls down one side..... But that location would be killer...

[Drago]

@Wish Sorry, I don't know of a solution. I just don't think feet on or feet off or metric is the problem. All 3 can be easily addressed during a show. ("This is what wish wants to hear ;), this is how it's been done since the beginning of time and what you always heard as a kid, and this is what the euro's say").

Probably the biggest problem is defining the problem: Do we want the old pro tour back in crowded parks and a show on espn, or record tournaments in perfect water with video protests? I skied the Michelin Dry, Bud, Rogaine, and Café de Columbia Tours, some were class F! Most "fans" want the former, but skiers seem to want the latter (Fred Winter, "pro water skiing is actually better watched online than in person with dead spots filled up with interviews, replays and analysis". I skied the Michelin Dry, Bud, Rogaine, and Café de Columbia Tours, some were class F !I think the old tour-style tournament is long gone and we need to let it go. If we want to grow the sport, look at the "grassroots" thread recently started. I love ZO, Surepath is great...lots of great stuff we do for ourselves, but that's not what it's all about (video gates and the center-to-center gate rule is just brain damage). It's about people getting out, challenging themselves, playing some games on shore, hassling each other, talking about it, sharing experiences and going home tired. TWSC is great, but regardless of the quality, a live feed requires viewers to look at their device all day (time, apparently the biggest reason for less and less local tournament skiers). An edited show would be very cool, and I personally would pay to watch that.

https://www.ballofspray.com/forum#/discussion/25958/grassroots

 

[Freddie Winter]

@Drago glad to hear you skied the Michelin Dry, Bud, Rogaine, and Café de Columbia Tours, some were class F! However, please don’t misquote me. I did not say “pro water skiing is actually better watched online than in person with dead spots filled up with interviews, replays and analysis”. This quote was preceded by “there is a strong argument that…” which you omitted, seemingly to imply that skiers want to be on a webcast, not in front of real people. I don’t care either way how water skiing reaches the masses - through in person crowds or through a video stream - so long as it does. My entry earlier in this thread was to show that, with a freely available and limitlessly accessible webcast, we have options to reach a wider audience that we didn’t have during your heyday of countless tours. These options should not be dismissed to recreate the big crowd, crap conditions situation of the 80s which, let’s not forget, absolutely failed to maintain public interest as time wore on. Thank you.

[Drago]

@FWinter , I think we are in agreement. In order to have massive crowds, it needs to be a show, = crap conditions, I unless private neighborhoods allow thousands of their closest friends on their streets and in their back yards.

We had lakes with vertical walls, monstrous Lilly pads, 1,600 ft lengths, huge whitecaps--they generally laughed at guys like me that were barely open rated skiing first while they fixed what they could. It was a show, no protests. I'm not calling you out, my point is the "old dudes" that want these shows that are not the current open skiers. I think what's happening is great, just give me an edited show and I'll pay.

Public interest went to wakeboard. I enjoyed the good old days, but they were my good old days and I look forward to the next good old days,like you running 3@43 (or 32??)

Thank you