U21 and Pro skiers

[LeonL]

Before anyone jumps on me too hard let me state two things: I know what the rule book says and....I'm not sure where I stand. Do any of you think that once you ski Pro events, and not just ski them but win or podium with some regularity, you might just take a pass on skiing in U21 Worlds?

[Broussard]

Are they under 21?

How do we define a "Pro Skier?"

Is it possible to make a sustainable living solely on payouts from pro tournaments?

[A_B]

Hell no. Maybe if we were talking Coors Light Pro Tour back in the day when pros made real money. Right now is a totally different story.

 

I ski with a U17 girl when she is up at home who has been invited to a couple pro events and that is great experience for her. Even if she won, the money would barely cover expenses of travel and lodging etc.

 

I think the “amateur” rules should be rewritten to reflect the times.

 

Any support we can give the young skiers trying to keep “professional” skiing alive should be a top priority.

 

We write the rules so if we don’t like them we can change them!

[lpskier]

Absolutely not. It’s the same argument that the Level 10 rule addressed, but even less compelling. You want to cull the herd before determining who is the best U21 skier in the world? Doesn’t make sense to me.

[Broussard]

@lpskier "best of the rest"

[LeonL]

@Broussard I guess they're under 21, since they skied in the U21 Worlds. "Pro Skier", also a guess that if you regularly ski in "Pro" tournaments you're kinda considered a "Pro". It's not about the money.

[Broussard]

@LeonL 1) define "regularly"

 

2) What is "kinda... a 'Pro?"

 

3) I would say that a majority of people categorize "pro skier" and I will use that term loosely as someone who earns a living (or attempts to) by skiing in Pro Tournaments and sponsorship deals - so I would argue that yes, it is about the money.

 

What else is it about? Getting your face on a cereal box?

[LeonL]

As I stated up front, I'm not sure where I stand on this. But somehow if you step up to ski with the "Pros" it's a little weird to back and ski with those who don't ski with the "Pros". As to item (1), Off the top of my head, Masters, Swiss Pro, Lake 38, U.S. Open, Hilltop. Item (2) Ski in Pro tournaments. Item(3) "attempts to" is pretty ambiguous. Whether one makes money or not, I would say that the majority of people would see a pro as one who enters such tournaments where a purse is involved. But I suppose my original question has been answered. As long as a skier is young enough to fit the age division, they should ski there regardless of other levels of endeavor. I would be willing to speculate that a "face on a cereal box" is money, unless of course the caption is "Have you seen this person"?

[ral]

@LeonL , just curious, what does the rulebook says, and which rulebook are you reading?

[Kelvin]

Since the Olympics allows NBA players and Pro Golfers (that certainly do make a living at it) compete, I see no issues with anyone competing in the World Championship based on age.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@LeonL before you posted this, did you give any thought at all to what problem you are attempting to solve? Is a "pro" skier too good to compete and/or win a world championship?

 

Regardless of whether a skier has skied and won "professional" events, I and many others would consider the world championships to be the ultimate tournament, well above the prestige, pressure and competition of any professional event.

 

I'm sorry, but it seems like anytime this topic gets brought up, its by someone who doesn't have a clue why the suggested change is needed and the myriad of unintended consequences that result. The level 10 fiasco worked out just the same as mandatory open division did in the 70's.

 

I skied a handful of professional events in the '80s and '90's and even won some money. Was I a "professional" skier? Not by a long shot. Do you want to prevent young up and coming skiers from even entering a pro event? That's the first of many negative consequences - and I don't see a single positive thing about your suggestion.

 

@ral the AWSA rulebook, rule 3.01 Amature and Professional Status

There shall be no distinction between amateurs and professionals.

That has been in place for more than 30 years, probably alot longer.

[NikolG]

The U21 Worlds are every other year so passing it up would be a missed opportunity. Lots of pro events, few Worlds. Yes several pro women are U21 and podium at pro events but dang they earned it and should have a crack at it before they age out.

[jjackkrash]

Rule 3.01 is a good rule for our sport. There is no good reason to get mired down in pro / am distinctions.

[ral]

@Bruce_Butterfield Got it. Thanks.

 

U21 Worlds are ruled by IWWF and not AWSA, and there is not a mention of anything that would classify (or not…) a skier in a “Professional” category.

[klindy]

First as @lpskier said, if you qualify to compete, you can. (E.g.-“U21” is for anyone under the age of 21. It doesn’t matter if your 4’ tall or have 2 other jobs or if you’re family is Uber wealthy or you’re a 10 year old phenom - if you’re under 21 you are eligible based on the selection criteria for team skiers and/or independents.

 

As for defining who is a “pro” … the Pro Tour points system is probably the best thing we’ve had ever to help define a pro. Points are based on tournament finish, strength of course the field and the number of tournaments you attend. Seems it would be fairly easy to say if you finish in the “top 50%” at the end Of the year you’re a “pro” (pick whatever percentage you want). Or if you’re on the “top 80% of the current list, you’re a pro (again pick whatever percentage you want, point is now it’s a dynamic model).

 

So assuming we want to define a pro,

The next question as @Bruce_Butterfield asked us “why”?

 

I personally believe we SHOULD distinguish between an amateur and a pro. And rules for each group should be catered to allow each group to achieve their goals. For example, pros probably need more flexibility to better deal with alternative formats like night skiing and head to head where things are more of a “show” but you want to maintain a competitive atmosphere . Where as amateurs might be more concerned with fair age groups and even ranking lists etc.

 

My point is some blue sky thinking could help develop traction on the pro side and simplify the amateur side while still providing an incubator for the pros.

 

If the goal is to keep the best of the best out of some level of competition, I think that’s a bad idea.

[ScottScott]

Maybe the question should be whether the Jr worlds should have an open division....? Not saying I think there should be....but....

[lpskier]

I think the term “World Champion” is all that needs to be said. Best in the world. Period.

[klindy]

I’m not sure who disagreed with my comment above (you certainly can). But like to know why and what part you disagree with?

[LeonL]

@Bruce_Butterfield I didn't say I was trying to solve a problem, nor did I even say that there was one. As noted I didn't know where I stood on this. That being the reason for the post. Now I have a better idea of how almost everyone feels about it and I see the reason that they feel that way.

[klindy]

@ScottScott the OPEN Worlds has an Open division. Nothing says you can’t ski both. Likewise, several skiers skied both the U17 AND the U21Worlds

[jercrane]

There is no such thing as a professional water skier. If you can't earn a living doing it you are not a professional. Just levels of ability and achievement. The people we call "pros" are just the best of the best. The definition os U17 and U21 is right there in the name and it has nothing to do with whether they crossed some threshold of "goodness".