Hallpass

Tons of experts here who probably know how every adjustment of 100th of an inch makes a difference. I'm not that guy. But, I did read an article about rear boot placement. The article said that for an average sized man, the rear heal should be about 12 inches behind the forward heal. Shorter folks a little less; taller folks a little more. I checked two of my skis and found the rear binding was closer, rear toe shoved up against the front binding. I made the adjustment and found the stance to be more comfortable, easier to bend my knees, and easier to get into a leveraged position across the wake. You are probably a more advanced skier, but thought I'd throw it out there anyway. BKH

The problem is not unique to waterskiing. There is a swimming pool in every neighborhood, and it's not a particularly expensive sport, yet the number of competitive swimmers is down. Participation in Little League, baseball and softball, is down over 20% since the 90s. Tennis is another sport where numbers are way down. There are hundreds of explanations, and lots of research papers have been written. Three of the issues that I see as pertains to waterskiing are: 1) The trend toward specialization in sports amongst kids. By the time kids are 5 or 6 years old they are being told to pick one sport. Unless your family sport is waterskiing, there's a good chance you will have little to no exposure to waterskiing before you get out of College. I worked for a wealthy CEO who had all the access in the world to boats and lakes. His kids had never skied, or done any water sport for that matter, because he didn't want them to get hurt and miss their "chosen" sports of Baseball and Softball. 2) There are dozens of sports, and pseudo sports, that just didn't exist, were not competitive activities, or were not popular 20 or 30 years ago. Think about it: triathlons, ultra marathons, lacrosse, tough mudders, wind surfing, kite surfing, kayaking, paddle boarding, rhythmic gymnastics (who came up with that), competitive chearleading (are you kidding me), bikini fitness contests (sometimes nice to watch, but a sport?), hundreds of varieties of martial arts competitions, adult kick ball leagues, wally ball (seriously, wally ball), team handball (an Olympic Sport), curling (any game you play with a beer in your hand is not a sport), on and on. Heck, competitive eating is now called a sport and pays better than competitive water skiing. Competitive poker gets more air time than any of the sports in which I participate. All of these sports or competitive activities draw from the potential pool of water skiers. 3) Be honest, water skiing was always a fringe sport. Growing up in the 70s, I looked forward to the two or three times a year that skiing would appear on Wide-World of sports. Here in Northern California, where I grew up, we had the LaPoints, Suyderhoud, and many others, not to mention Golden Gate and Berkeley Ski clubs. Still, few of my friends knew much about water skiing. Today, the sport has been further diluted with competitive wakeboarding (boat and cable), wake surfing, wake skating, knee-boarding (though I think that has died somewhat), not to mention other water related sports that don't require a boat such as surfing, kite surfing, paddle boarding, etc. My $.02. BKH

No, was usually in the Oakland estuary off the dock of one of the restaurants. Corny now, but it was big happening in the Waterski community back then. I guess similar to the Frozen Bun Run we now have in the Delta.

Skiing in the San Francisco Bay on New Year's day. Just found my certificate from 1972. Any of you out there remember or participate?

My 8 year old daughter recently took a run on the ski I used when I was 8 years old (circa 1970). "These binding cut into my feet." "My front foot is going to fall out." "I can't turn." "When can I have my ski?" Needless to say she has new found appreciation for her modern gear. It was fun.

Some of the old 60s inboards are that light, and that's actually the only time I've seen those Shorelander's under an inboard. Relatively speaking, the Shorelander's are cheap. My guess is that either the owner never had a trailer and bought something cheap to get it sold, or the trailer was destroyed, and they bought something cheap to get sold. I would guess that the axle, wheels and tires are undersized for a 2800 pound boat. Possibly the coupler. Hard to say on the structure. The wishbone trailers aren't terribly beefy, and they've worked fine for years. My $.02 BKH

I'm a true size 11. Tried these on three weeks ago. I was definitely a size 7-11. The 10-14s would have been huge. Even put the 11 on with a sock on my foot which is actually easier when you can't get the binding wet. FWIW. BKH

I know you can do it as I was at Wiley's a few weeks back and that was one of the options presented of my new Senate. I do not know if a special plate is required. BKH

P.S. also, Jeff who runs planetnautique.com recently bought a salvage later model Ski Nautique. Had too much damage to fix, so he decided to part it out. Not sure if the platform is available. BKH

Correctcraftfan.com had a source to make platforms for most of the CCs. Have not checked in a while to see if available. They were not inexpensive, but they were well done. Also, a bunch of folks on that site have rebuilt, or built new platforms from scratch. As mentioned, Jatoba and other alternative woods have been used. I'm told Jatoba is harder than teak. BKH

Albuquerque is not particularly hot. Mid 80s to low 90s, tow or three months per year. Sante Fe is a few degrees cooler in temperature, and way cooler on the social scale. Not familiar with the water ski seen there, but some great snow skiing. BKH

I'm a bit late on this thread. @eleeski, Bob Maher and Maharajah are still making skis. Now in their 60th year. www.mahaskis.com. I called a couple of years ago to buy a set of bindings for my Dad's Maha, which he purchased in 1960. Bob answered the phone.+ BKH

When I was at Wiley's two weeks ago, they had some stock on last year's vector boots, which will save you a few bucks over this years model. Personally, I tried on a number of boots, and ended up going with Wiley's boots. Good, old-fashion, rubber, double wraps. BKH

Another bad back guy who has found pulls out to be easier with both palms down. BKH

I think there are so many variables as to if or how long it will take to recover. I had a T3 Laminectomy 10 years ago. Suffered a severe infection and it never did heal correctly. Bothers me to this day. Particularly the muscles between the shoulder blades. On the other hand, had a C4-5 Fusion. Missed two days of work. Surgery in August, and I was snow skiing by Superbowl Sunday. Can't look up as far as I could pre surgery, but really almost never notice. With three levels in the neck so far, sounds like you are an old hand at this, and know your body, what it can take, and when the time is right to push. Glad you are back to doing what you love to do with no symptoms and no issues.

Thanks for all your input. I purchased a 71 Senate Graphite at Wiley's last week and skied it today for the fist time. First - Wiley's. What great people. Spent well over an hour with Darren looking at skis, and mostly shooting the sh-- about skiing. Everyone in the shop great to talk with. Best selection I've ever seen in ski gear in one place here in the West. And, you all probably know this, but the place is like a museum. Hundreds of antique and classic skis, bindings, vests, wakeboards, etc. To me, this is a mandatory tourist stop for any skier visiting Seattle. As to to the ski -after flexing, eyeballing every square inch, staring at the skis, and staring again, I just decided the Senate felt like the best choice over the TX. Yep, gut choice. I'm sure either would be great. I also went with Wiley's bindings, which was unexpected. Walking in the shop, never thought I'd go for traditional rubber boots. Tried on several, and Wiley's just felt best. My first Impression -my skills are less than desirable these days, and it will take some runs to get comfortable with the ski, but on the initial run, it felt great. I agree with some of the posters that I could have gotten by with the 69. But, today was one of many days that I woke up with an aching back, and the arthritis in my left hand was screaming. That pull up was right on the edge of uncomfortable on the 71 and I can only think it would be worse on the 69. I don't have a lot of pain free days, and so, if the 71 makes it even slightly easier to get up and go have some fun, I'll take it. If I should ever feel like 71 is "too much ski" that will be a great thing, and I will gladly go purchase another ski. Again, thanks for your thoughts and input and for taking it easy on a newby to your site. BKH

Looks like the CA Delta Peter. Where did you launch?

Teak all the way. One of the things I do not like about modern boats are the fiberglass platforms.

Thanks for all the feedback. Good to get perspectives from the neophyte to the professional. I appreciate all the comments and particularly enjoyed the good natured jousting between Sam and Eddie. I get the message about the pro's running deep on the "every man's" model of ski - it's not the ski, it's the skier. Your talents will not exceed the ability of the ski, etc. Still I laugh to myself a bit, as those guys could probably do more on a 2X4 then I'll do with "just the right ski." For what it's worth - just signing up for this site, researching skis, checking in here each day for feedback - it's great. Has me more interested in water skiing than I have been in years. Maybe I'll drive over the Lake and watch Greg Badal run some passes. Thanks.

Thanks for the feedback Gents. I did get into a ski shop last week that had the CX, TX, Senate Alloy and Senate Graphite. Unfortunately, did not have Senate or CX in 71s. Also had a poor selection of boots. I plan to be in Seattle next week, so I'm going to try to figure out how to go by Wiley's, or maybe even Radar and HO.

Thanks Gents. Commuterfisher I did read that thread. I believe I read three or four. If I recall there was discussion of graphite vs. alloy on the Senate, and perhaps a little discussion of the Triumph. A couple of folks voted for a Theory or P6. If I recall one guy was about 6'5" and the consensus pushed him toward a 69" ski. Another Gent was under 6" and the consensus pushed him to a 67. Here, already a couple of folks chimed in encouraging me to look at the longer ski, so I've ultimately gotten some value out of posting. I will look at the Carbon V. In the end, these are just skis. Not a life and death decision. I'd prefer not to make a mistake on something that will cost around $1000. But, if I do, I can alway sell, take a loss and try again. I've certainly made bigger mistakes with cars and a starter wife :). Again, thanks of the input. Any other insight welcome.

Discovery Bay, Ca

Ha Ha. 250 views and only two comments. I guess I should have realized that there probably aren't a lot of folks on here with extremely broken bodies, still willing to do this at over 30 mph :) Thanks for your thoughts LeonL and Bogboy. I was kind of thinking bigger would be better for me as well. At least for now. I'll just make it easy. I'll worry about the broken body and just ask if anyone here has any strong thoughts on the skis 6'2, 240 lbs, 51 years old - Senate, CS, TX - your opinions? Best Regards, and thank you.

Hello All. I hate to write a novel, but I know if I don't throw out a lot of facts and information, you will ask the questions anyway, so here goes: I'm 51 yrs old. 6'2" and currently 240 lbs. I don't expect I'll ever go below 225 again. Have been as high as 255. Been skiing since I was 5. Ran the slalom course a bit in my teens, and again in my late 20s. Haven't tried for at least 15 years. Mostly wake boarded from 2000 to 2005. In 2006 I underwent my first back surgery. Doctors said no more wake boarding. Wasn't sure I'd ever get up on a ski either. With the help of a set of Clenchers, and 71 inch HO Magnum, I could get up - barely - and couldn't do a whole lot when I did. From 06 to 2013, I only skied a couple of times per year. In 2013 I underwent a fusion in the cervical spine. Since then, I don't remember trying to ski until just two weeks ago. My 7 year old daughter picked it up last year, and now at 8 she wants to go out all the time. So, two weeks ago, I pulled out the Clenchers and the Magnum. To my surprise, I got up pretty easily, took some aggressive turns at 32 mph, and even snapped the handle back into the boat. The next day I skied with regular gloves and again had little trouble. I wanted to see if I could get up on a "regular ski" so last weekend I pulled out a 68" Connelly Concept that I bought back in 97. Again, to my surprise, got up with out too much problem, and of course skied much better than I could on that Magnum. I was fine at 32 and 34 though calling me rusty would be kind. So, fresh off a confidence run ,and tired of spending all my time driving the boat, I started to research skis. I know HO the best. Thought the CX or CX Superlite looked the best, but learned it does not come in a 71. Not sure the 69 is enough Ski. Then looked at the TX or TX Superlite. Seems like a 69 would be ok and they have a 71 if necessary, but that ski is almost an inch wider than the CX and just not sure about that. I decided to research some other skis and the Radar Senate or Graphite Senate seemed like potential choices. Not sure if I would need a 69 or a 71, however. I saw something on this site about a Senate Lithium, but did not find that on Radar's site. So those are the three skis I had in mind. Would appreciate any thoughts on length and materials. Of course I am open to other ideas, but was not real keen on a ski limited to 30 mph or less. Oddly enough, I live in a waterfront community, but there are not a lot of skiers here. Wakeboarding and surfing dominate, and I haven't found a good shop within a reasonable distance to demo skis. I figure do some good research and take a chance. I'm sure any of the choices above would be far superior to what I have. Thank you, BKH