Jump to content

Minutes of IWWF Waterski Council Meeting


Horton
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators
Quote

Open Women Slalom, Regina Jaquess, 5@10.25/55 - All relevant data reviewed including boat path and record approved. There had been some on-line comments about the boat path, based on the boat video showing some boat wash that appeared not to be straight. However, all the boat path data hade been checked and was good. The video showed wash, which did not represent the true path of the boat and position of the pylon.

Emphasis added 

Was there talk about that here? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
10 minutes ago, Horton said:

Does anyone know anything about the T shaped handle mentioned in the minutes?

I saw that and was wondering what was going on there. Did some surface digging and wasn't able to find anything.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Rule 5.09

there shall be no sharp edges or protection, does this affect handles with plastic protection?

also rope should pass through the handle, so handles that the rope is attached to plastic end caps can not be used anymore in tournaments? 
I know at least of one of this type of handle.

@Horton @Broussard?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I remember seeing a T-shaped handle in an old AWSA magazine many many many moons ago. Literally was a T shape. About only thing that appeared safe about it is you wouldn't be able to catch a head in it. Looked like one heck of a projectile though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

T-Shape handle is used by Jason Peckam. I understand he developed it after putting his arm through the handle. He's also the one who is 3D printing flex tails for his Connelly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I agree with @Horton statement................I was well expecting more as in more developed.

On a positive note it seeks to address a real risk. A friend of mine who was a very competent skier had life changing injuries after falling and getting his arm through the handle, without prompt medical attention it could have been fatal.

So a good idea poorly executed would be the negative side of my evaluation. The design introduces a number of other risks which could be designed out.

My take is stick with the handle protectors which @Horton posted recently I don't know how to link them but maybe someone else can. They seem like a better solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

That is, I believe, an older prototype of the “Peckham Handle.” The 3D printed connection between the handle and the rope is the same, but the photo shows someone else’s handle section. Jason now makes his own handle featuring a carbon core. @Rednucleus Don’t worry. The current handle is so light it floats. 

  • Like 1

Lpskier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

I broke my wrist when I hit a buoy and fell forward.  If you wrist or forearm was close to the center connection. the same instantaneous wrist break could happen before the handle moves away.

Edit:   That T-Design might be more dangerous than a convention handle.   I won't want that T being dragged over me in a fall because it might hook a neck or an arm or the back of your head with the end of the handle.  The conventional rope bridle would shield you from getting hooked by the handle in some falls.  The web is filler is the best.

Edited by swbca
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

@Kelvin yeah I now recall the comments. Many of us are guilty of looking at propwash and conflating it with boat path. There was a time when I was totally guilty of doing this myself. If you look at the video of Regina's 41 the propwash looks like it is not right down the center but that is not an indicator of where the pylon is. What matters is where the pylon is and in this case I believe it was good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_
On 1/9/2024 at 1:27 PM, skialex said:

Rule 5.09

there shall be no sharp edges or protection, does this affect handles with plastic protection?

also rope should pass through the handle, so handles that the rope is attached to plastic end caps can not be used anymore in tournaments? 
I know at least of one of this type of handle.

@Horton @Broussard?

It says "There shall be no sharp edges or projections", not protections 🙂

Edited by Slalom.Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
18 minutes ago, Slalom.Steve said:

It says "There shall be no sharp edges or projections", not protections 🙂

Yes you’re right… I mostly wrote this because of the section saying that the rope should go through the handle and there is at least one handle the uses plastic (or carbon lately) attachments to the side of the handle and the rope goes through the attachments and not through the handle. This is a tournament handle, does it mean that you can not use one anymore in tournaments. I don’t use this type, but I know few that are using it and one that stoped using it when it destroyed his ski… 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Call me crazy but I imagined there would not be any rope at all. I imagined it would be a 4'11 carbon pole with a handle at the end.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_
On 1/12/2024 at 1:07 PM, Horton said:

Call me crazy but I imagined there would not be any rope at all. I imagined it would be a 4'11 carbon pole with a handle at the end.  

Wait.. like a pole all the way to the boat? I guess you'd never get any slack! 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

@Slalom.Steve seriously -  imagine if the whole handle assembly was semi-rigid. It would eliminate some potential injuries. I am not saying it is practical but am saying it might be worth evaluation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

okay some good points that my semi rigid comment is not well thought out. What if the handle section was as inflexible as a shock tube? it couldn't be nearly as bulky as a shock dude but what if it resisted coiling?

  • Heterodox 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
20 hours ago, Horton said:

@Slalom.Steve seriously -  imagine if the whole handle assembly was semi-rigid. It would eliminate some potential injuries. I am not saying it is practical but am saying it might be worth evaluation. 

You could take an old handle and using a fid insert something like PVC tubing and see what the effect was.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

For me, improved accuracy in after ball handle grab would need work.  Appears to have minimal tolerance for that.  Would be interesting to try.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Per Jason on Faceplace: "I’m working on the details of producing them now. My focus to this point has been on getting it approved for tournament use."

 

421533038_400901268966812_5614604186326469858_n.jpg

422390472_400580422332230_6626903852987777861_n.jpg

Edited by Broussard
  • Like 1

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

Last pic appears to simulate a mild radius style handle based on what looks like changing diameter on the bar from inner to outer.  For me the radius is key to minimize elbow pain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I think the conical handle taper is a key feature to make hanging on with one hand easier. It doesn't hurt that it also gives that mild radius effect.  Now it needs some kind of cushy end caps for ski protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Logically, to me anyway, it looks like this handle design might keep a skier on the handle longer with  both hands before releasing prior to the buoy. Not necessarily a bad thing .

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I was very excited when I got the news this was fully approved through IWWF. I’ve been working with a few individuals over the past months trying to get this into the rulebook this year. I can’t say thank you enough for the support many people have given me for this T-handle concept.

August ‘22 I fell forward around 5 ball at 39 off in practice and ended up with a partially torn bicep tendon, fractured radius bone and a large hematoma. I know many other skiers with similar stories with varying degrees of injury. This was the driving factor for this change.

I skied in practice on one version or another of this T-handle all of this past season. Ran tens of 39s on it. I would only switch back to a standard handle 1 day prior to a tournament. I wanted to minimize my exposure to potentially putting my arm back in that bridle. I won 35+ PanAms, placed 5th at the 55k West tournament in October and currently ranked 3rd on the 35+ IWWF ranking list. So it definitely didn’t hinder my performances training all year with the T-handle. It feels slightly different skiing with it vs. a standard handle, but I don’t believe that’s a bad thing.

My focus has been getting rulebook approval. So now I can shift gears and work on getting production set up. I’m excited to ski tournaments this year using my T-handle!

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

@JPeckham

what is the official name for the piece in the middle of the handle that extends down the rope?

what would be the downside to it being longer and extending further down the rope?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
50 minutes ago, Horton said:

@JPeckham

what is the official name for the piece in the middle of the handle that extends down the rope?

what would be the downside to it being longer and extending further down the rope?

@Horton

Don’t really have an official name yet. Currently working on a website to be a source of information regarding design and production.

The shorter the central stiffening piece is the more tippy the handle is. The longer, the more stable it is especially in the turn. The current design is a balance between stability and allowing the handle to tip out of the way if it strikes anything in the water.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

@JPeckham - congrats, nice innovation.

As you have navigated the approval process does the yoke dimension have to comply with the 11.5" +/- 1.5" specification?  Have you experimented to find an 'ideal' dimension?  Curious as to how / where the 44 lb. load will be applied?

Once you get closer the questions of diameter, radius, elliptical, replaceable bar etc. will be more pertinent.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...