So_I_Ski

Although I agree with most of the comments about improving your alignment as a prerequisite to continued advancement in the course, the "reason" that you can't make this particular pass is not because you aren't early or wide enough. What I see are poor off side turn mechanics that must be addressed to ever make a 32 off. Unlike some, I do not believe that the ski turns itself. Your onside is decent, your offside is not. It doesn't help that your hips are trailing and the handle has peeled away as you start the pre-turn going into your offside and you could never run a 35 in that position but you should still be able to run this 32. As so many of the ballers have said over the years, be tall at the ball. You start your pre-turn by leaning over too soon and then make matters worse by dropping your handle. If you freeze frame the video you can spot the handle drop very clearly. From that point on you are dropping your shoulders and your head, in effect attempting to make that turn simply by falling over. I would suggest that you can dramatically improve that off side turn by simply standing up (as per Horton's advice by straightening the back leg as you exit the wakes). That in itself will bring your hips closer to the handle. Then focus on reaching up, not down while attempting to level your shoulders and head as much as you are able. Lastly, turn the ski by edging like a snow skier. Think feet, ankles, knees and hips. In effect turn the ski with your lower body, not your upper body. That's my two cents for what it's worth and have fun working on that 32.

Geez, I thought the topic was "butt" plugs, maybe something new to prevent enemas. Still laughing!

I've received coaching that made less sense - worse yet, I've given coaching that made less sense. Way too cute!

Reminds me of the old: This morning's sermon: Jesus walks on water. Tonight's sermon: Searching for Jesus.

I'm 65 and while I have been skiing for years, was only exposed to a course for the first time about 12 years ago so I came late to course skiing. I've loved sports all my life and participated in almost everything at one time or another and being analytical by nature I've always looked first in detail at the form being employed by the best in an attempt to shortcut the process by mimicking their movements. So far in this sport I will admit to limited success with this approach in comparison with other sports I have picked up. Maybe it's just age catching up with me. Anyway when I started course skiing I began watching a lot (and I mean a lot} of video in order to dissect exactly what the pros are doing that makes them so successful. As part of that analysis, I have watched older videos of the pros from as early as the 80's and 90's and compared them with the videos of more current skiers. We often talk about advances in ski technology over the years as it relates to improvements in ball count. But I believe that there have been more dramatic changes in style which have resulted in so many of the pros regularly running 39 and better. For those of you who are older like myself, or anyone who is just familiar with the style of the pros from earlier decades I have two questions: 1. What in your opinion are the most significant changes in style that have contributed to so many skiers consistently running shorter line lengths? 2. What significant changes in style have you made from when you first started skiing the course and how have your scores improved (I hope) as a result?

I second the motion of @skispray. Watch Forks Over Knives, followed by Plant Pure Nation and What the Health or Food Choices. The evidence for a whole food plant based diet is overwhelming and you will find the authors of these documentaries to be highly credible.

@Horton That goes directly to Ed's comment which places the hip and COM on the inside edge of the ski. As we turn the ski with our lower body pivoting, our upper body can remain still and facing down course just like a snow skier which I believe is much more efficient. I would say that when we counter, we force our lower body - hips, knees and ankles to activate to turn the ski and in so doing we are able to keep our upper bodies much higher off the water while rolling the ski more on edge - ideally like a Nate Smith or a Marcus Brown onside. Conversely, old style skiers from the 70's and 80's kept their bodies straight and relied solely on falling to the inside to turn. For one thing they could not transition nearly as quickly or as easily. Honestly, I don't know the bio mechanical reasons but any snow skier will tell you that as you turn the torso one way, the lower body will readily and eagerly twist in the opposite direction.

That boy is in disguise. His real suit is the one with the red cape and big letter "S" under that bag.

@Horton - I agree with Ed's analysis on bringing the COM forward but what neither of you has addressed or acknowledged is that our stance is asymetric which is the reason that the hips are not aligned the same as we cross the wakes and begin the preturn. Approaching our on side the counter will be natural or much easier but for the offside turn, to actually aim your torso slightly towards the shore as opposed to directly down the ball line is not possible without any counter.

@Horton - Good videos and I will look for future installments however, I really don't get the correlation between countering and falling back. I have heard you mention that in other posts but when I just stand with one foot in front of the other and simply twist my hips by a couple of degrees in either direction, my weight distribution remains exactly the same. Now if you throw your arm back, perhaps, but that would not be advisable. Ideally, just leave your arms relaxed and extended by your sides. Then twist a couple of degrees and without moving your upper arm, just bend your arm at the elbow to get the idea of what the end result should be. In other words, when you release the handle to counter DO NOT extend your arm but rather leave it bent so that your forearm remains perpendicular to the water and in close proximity to your body. You will have remained quiet in your upper body and the result will be that your hand is still quite close to your vest and ready to reconnect with the handle as you complete the turn. That is what I see the pros that are moving their upper body the least are doing on the water. Case in point - Chris Parrish

When I look at videos of old pros, pre 2000 for example and new pros, I see a noticeable difference in where their shoulders are facing at the apex of the turn and that difference is what I consider the most visible example of counter rotation. At the apex of the turn almost all old style skiers have their shoulders and therefore their chest facing squarely down the ball line. With virtually every one of today's pros, the back or away shoulder is at least slightly behind the reaching shoulder which results in the chest being pointed away from the ball line. In some cases it is very pronounced as with Freddie Winter but I could only find one modern skier where that is not the case. That skier is a fellow Canadian, Stephen Neveu and I don't believe that he has had the success of many of the other pros. Now you can view all of these guys in one excellent video by youtubing "The Water Ski Broadcasting Company". You can pull up each and every one of them seperately and a number of the women as well with an excellent camera angle shot from the boat. I have also watched Horton's videos on his ski reviews and he has what I would consider an excellent "counter" on both sides particularly his off side and he looks like he should run 39's his form is so good. I think Terry explained it ... "the counter allows the inside hip to shift weight to the inside of the turns" (not back) and that is the reason all of the pros employ this move to one degree or the other. So anyone that suggests that the "counter" position at the apex is not beneficial is contadicting the visual evidence of the top professional skiers today. The skier with the most counter on the offside is hands down Freddie. The one with the most counter on the onside is T Mo.

Something I have found that most skiers are taught which is a mistake is to keep your arms straight. When your arms are straight, the only part of your body that can give to the pull of the boat is your back so you get pulled over onto your face. There is lots of strength in your biceps so bend your arms, tuck your knee into your chest and when the boat starts pulling, you can let some line out with your biceps. Maybe that will help.

@Ralph Lee, I met Terry about 10 years ago. I'm 5'10 and if memory serves me correctly Terry is a good 2" shorter than I. So when you factor in shorter arms he may pick up 8 to 10 inches on some guys. Having said that, I agree that the "skinny kid" still wins.

As per @ozski, I would also bet that the skiers would be all for it. They are competitive guys, they know and respect each other and I'll bet they would find it fun to embrace a new challenge and for the taller guys, prove that their reach is not the defining factor over the shorter skiers. Doubtless, the shorter guys would be all in! Let's ask Terry and Chris.

@Than_Bogan - fair enough and that's one vote against.

@6balls, with regard to off topic, perhaps the title of my discussion did not place the focus where I intended. I did not intend to open a discussion on who is best skier in light of their respective reaches. What I really intended was to suggest that it would be very easy to have one handicapped tournament each year that would remove that advantage or disadvantage from the equation. It would be interesting and fun to watch and it really is simple to accomplish. For my money, I still think Nate comes out on top but Terry or someone smaller like him might be damn close. Perhaps one day one of the major companies will sponsor it.

@Bruce_Butterfield, "compensating" is entirely the wrong definition of eliminating a glaring external advantage of "reach". The entire point would be to remove that advantage so that all that is left are the "myriad of physical attributes or skills" of the different athletes. And I agree that there are many more factors besides reach which is again, why I say let's isolate them. I also agree that "reach" is not the most "important physical attribute" and never implied that it was. But among high level skiers who have spent many years honing their craft, if one has an overall 10" reach advantage over another wouldn't it be interesting once each year to level the playing field to see who comes out on top? Just for interest's sake, and to remove the monotony of Nate dominating the tournament with the usual suspects accompanying him on the podium, if nothing else. I would wager that among the ballers there would be a great deal of interest in watching such a tournament. And no, I am not suggesting any more than one such tournament each year.

@Bruce_Butterfield, a bigger man has all of the added musculature including strength to support his frame relative to a smaller man so respectfully, the 50 lb comment doesn't fly. As a poor example, I weigh 165 and I road bike with a guy my age who is 2 inches taller but 20 lbs heavier and in the same shape as I am. He can hold his own even on the hills because his legs are simply as strong as mine pound for pound. So if we were in gym he could squat more than I. And with respect to agility or coordination and speaking of biking, that in my opinion may be the only sport that requires less agility or coordination than waterskiing in terms of overall movement. The best skiers move very very little from ball to ball. The only noticeable movement to a lay person would be the arm we reach with. The rest are subtleties like timing. Yes, there are slight physical factors but isolating those would be the point of levelling the field by removing the reach advantage which is significant and frankly unfair. That's why jockeys have to ride at the same weight, to remove an obvious unfair advantage. Height and reach in our sport is a glaring advantage. As proof of how unfair it is, consider how many more times that Chris Parrish has run 39 and 41 off compared to Terry Winter and yet, like Horton, many other ballers would agree that Terry is technically as good or better than Chris. If what you propose were true, Terry would be matching Chris on his passes but we all know it's really the reach handicap, don't we?

No doubt I am not the first person to think of this but wouldn't it be interesting to handicap one major tournament each year so that we could see who really was the best pro skier on the circuit? Considering the height and reach advantage that someone like Chris Parrish or Nate Smith has over Terry Winter for example, perhaps inch for inch, Terry or one of the shorter skiers is actually as good or better than Nate. It would be an easy thing to handicap simply by measuring the highest vertical reach of each skier and then have short sections of rope made up that are added to the handle section. So the tallest skier, say it was Chris, would ski on the standard rope and every other skier would have the difference in their reach from his added to their section. I believe that Chris is 6'4, whereas Terry is 5'8. Chris probably also has a 2" reach advantage so Terry would get to add a 10" section of rope ro his passes. Completely fair, easy to do and it would be fun to watch. We would get the answer to who really is the best technician on the water, for that weekend anyway.

My very good ski buddy and I were discussing what factors contribute to a failure by a skier to be in that desired position all the pros achieve at the completion of the turn where the handle is practically pinned to their thigh. He offered that reaching for the handle too soon is one of the most glaring. I believe that there are probably a number of other possible causes that vary from skier to skier. For example, a lot skiers simply have the habit or the muscle memory of trailing the hips or being slightly hitched entering the turn to begin with which prevents them from every getting the hips to the handle. As Horton has said many times, they would not be "tall into the ball". Another one would be habitually turning the head too soon which leads to upper body rotation. In your experience, can you point to other factors that you have either seen or worked on improving yourself that hampers that important position at the completion of the turn?

@rico & @RazorRoss3, I find it odd that discussions about how Nate's superiority never seems to include how he completes his turn. Whether he is actually "light" on the line or not and how he controls his speed or load and when are virtually impossible to determine. One thing that is clearly evident when you watch the completion of his onside turn though is how much he manages to roll the ski on edge relative to how high his shoulders remain off the water at completion. As a result of the roll, he establishes more angle and quicker which results in less slack or a tigher line sooner while having more control because his upper body remains furthest off the water relative to other skiers. More angle, if only a degree or two plus a quicker connection to a tight line equals earlier acceleration which puts him earlier into his offside than everyone else. That's what I see for what it's worth. When Mike Suyderhoud coached us a couple years ago he mentioned something that stuck with me. He said that the skier who accelerates the soonest coming off the ball has the most advantage just like a drag racer. It's not the top end speed at the end of the quarter mile that matters, it's the quickest off the line. I believe that Nate is quickest off the line.

It really is very hard not to laugh. Immediately when you see the jumper hanging up there with all that time you know he's thinkin ..... this ain't gonna end well! I suspect that I may have seen the hardest, most violent slalom fall that did not end in death when I was driving for my ski partner and he was free skiing in the spring about 10 years ago. He was going full tilt boogie after about 5 really hard turns on short line and was just exiting the wake when he hit a dead head about 20 feet long, half submerged laying right across his path. I had not seen it and had driven right along side it about 4 feet from my boat. His ski skipped right over it but when the fin hit the log it drove the tip into the water. He smacked the water so hard that his first bounce was about 6 feet in the air. He told us after that he not only had time while he was airborne to get over the shock and wonder what the hell happened but he could even look around before the second impact which was followed by a third and then a tumble. We still laugh at the first words out of his mouth when he climbed onto the swim grid cause he repeated them at least four times. He said ... jesus guys, that really hurt you know! NO KIDDING!

Lot sof great comments here. @BoneHead on the ski being between you and the boat, I found particularly insightful as I am convinced that is what has been happening on my onside pull. It ties in with something I've been looking at a lot in videos this year I believe applies @H20SkiGirl. What the pros do much more dynamically than intermediate skiers is that they swing the ski onto the new edge as they exit the second wake. As opposed to what I see in your video which is that as you focus too much on holding thru the wakes, you miss utilizing the swing momentum you built up approaching center line. Then you are forced to manufacture your edge change instead of it happening naturally which is what produces that extra time for the pre turn and standing tall but gliding on your new edge. For great examples of landing on that new edge see Seth Stisher's whips and google Ivan Morros, a 34 video that someone posted awhile back when he won. Super smooth and dynamic edge changes both sides.

Some people are not aware that their credit card (depending on the card you used) includes 90 day "purchase protection". In that case anything that happens to your purchase within the first 90 days is fully covered. Lost, stolen, broken, set on fire - absolutely anything that happens even if you did it intentionally yourself are all covered. Check your card coverage and good luck.

@skidawg and @BoneHead, why can't you ask for confidentiality? NDA's (non disclosure agreements) are commonly used in the business world. Then, if you don't like what you hear from her, you simply don't contribute but you keep a zipped lip. No one should have any problem whatsoever with that because she'd not saying she will only tell you after you give her the money, she's just saying that for whatever the reason, she doesn't want her idea to be public knowledge at this stage.