Slalom.Steve

3 hours ago, faceplant46 said:

If you haven't already listened to The Water Ski Podcast episode featuring Jacinta's story of breaking the 200 foot barrier and the events that followed, it's worth a listen. She is an absolute legend and it's a loss to not have her on the starting dock.   

Second this^
It'll make you wonder if you wanna buy Nautique.

Obviously, Jack Travers is an absolute legend in the world of water skiing, with an almost incalculable impact on the success of waterskiing... but a live sports announcer, he is not lol. He only ever says something when Tony specifically prompts, "right, Jack?" and then he says a couple words and goes silent again.😄

@chaloux My understanding is that tomorrow morning they're gonna run that same Women's slalom series tomorrow morning. Anyone who did complete their sets can either keep their score from today and not ski again, OR throw out today's score and start over fresh (so no protected scores).

The ski graphics should be two pineapples now.

@Jordan - I think there is definitely something to be said for not constantly changing things. I think this is particularly true in a sport like waterskiing, where our opportunities to practice are so limited. Even if you have a situation where you can ski as much as you want, your body can only take so much. If I play basketball, I can go to the gym and shoot 1,000 free throws in under 3 hrs (I looked it up lol), and I could do that every day, even twice a day! As a skier, we only take 12-20 passes in a practice session (generally speaking), and at least personally I can't keep that up 7 days a week.

At this point, any high-end ski is a good ski, so if you're on a high-end ski, even if new Ski XYZ is a little bit better, you're also going to use valuable practice time adjusting to the ski. And even if your old Ski ABC isn't quite as good, if you know exactly what to do on it, you may ski more buoys than on a "better" ski that you aren't as familiar with.

That said... obviously this doesn't mean you never upgrade a ski! My skis have been the '16 Radar Vapor and the '22 Radar Vapor, and from my first pass the '22 was a noticeable improvement. I think I'm pretty committed to Radar now in part because the skis continually evolve from their previous iterations, so I suspect there would be less adjustment time needed to keep upgrading to new Vapors as opposed to switching between brands every time. I figure, I get the excitement and improvement of new gear (I'm with you there as a gearhead!) but it feels more like just "an improvement" as opposed to "a change and improvement." Not that this is restricted to only Radar, this sort of thinking would suggest finding "your preferred brand" and then upgrading only within their offerings.

That said... the only other ski I've even tried is a C85, and I'm a 34mph, 15-28off skier, so I'm curious if someone who has more experience skiing and more experience trying various brands and models would agree with or refute my theory!

Yeah man, I'm always tryin to find mo' ass.

oh wait... nevermind.

@Horton I should also qualify that my ankle was a little stiff afterwards, so I will admit there was a bit of "injury" due to the T-Factor. 😁

Haha yeah the fact that I slid on my back for awhile meant there wasn't a "hard stop" at any point, so it ended up being not nearly as bad as it could've been. It's rare for me to go OTF like that too, but it was also the 9th pass of my 2nd set at a line length I've run fewer than 10 times.

@JimP By "release" I mean that your foot separates from the ski, whether that's via the binding releasing on a mechanical system or your foot releasing from a boot on a fixed/rubber system. It seems there may be a mixture of use in this term, but in the way I use it, the T-Factor is not a "non-releasable binding," though it will certainly be harder to trigger a release than a mechanical system.

Just for one data point, here is a video of my foot releasing from my T-Factor, and I cinch down both sets of laces basically as tight as I can.
(to repost from earlier my specific setup: I use a Large T-Factor with a 10.5 US shoe size, which is right in D3's recommendation, but I also know a couple guys with 10-ish shoes that size down to a Medium, so their's may be harder to release, though they may also not tighten as hard as I do, I'm not sure).

What is "anti roll" anyways? It "prevents the handle from rolling when you grip it or release it with one hand"... but I don't get what "rolling" means in this context. I've never felt like my handle was rolling anywhere lol. 

5 hours ago, twhisper said:

On another note... skiing is way too fast and complex to "think" your way through any improvements. You must be able to visualize how the new skill is going to look and feel in your mind before ever attempting it on the water. As you go through the movements in the course your job is to be able to visualize yourself doing the new moves as you go through them.

Also, ☝️ this is some f'in knowledge. Such an awesome teaching, for any technique/element of skiing.

@twhisper - The idea of keeping the handle connected through/to the hips makes sense to me, in order to ride the full length/path/swing of the rope. The piece I don't understand is that I've heard to not "pull with your arms" even after the 2nd wake. I know during the cut, the arms should be straight and loose, but it seems like to achieve this elbows-pinned-to-the-vest position in the pre-turn, that would mean pulling the rope in with your arms?

Desperately want this ski. Unfortunately don't have the money for it right now, but someday, a used one will be mine. 😀

1 hour ago, Drago said:

Huh?

@dave2ball seems to still be mad about S-Lines. Right when S-Lines came out (and then the bizarre appearance of ZLine), there was some contentious exchanges in a couple threads.

..still so mad about S-Lines lol. And it seems @Wish's handle in question may actually be a Masterline, by process of elimination.

They're only building two a week, so it's a slow roll out.

@UWSkierI still have my old '16 in the basement (on the '22 now). You wanna buy it? 🙂 

@Horton I can pop my ski off at the end of a set without loosening, though it takes some effort. I will say I have a somewhat narrow heel so maybe that helps? I also use a Large T-Factor, with a 10.5 US shoe size, which is right in D3's recommendation, but I also know a couple guys with 10-ish shoes that size down to a Medium, so theirs may be less easy to release, though they may also not tighten as hard as I do, I'm not sure.

At least we can all agree that Joel Howley is crazy.

@Horton, but @Blofeld is wrong. "Do not release" is a definitive statement. Yet... I've used T-Factors for several years and never had an issue releasing, and I cinch them pretty much as tight as I can, to where my foot hurts by pass 3 or 4 if I don't loosen them and re-tighten in-between passes (which I've taken to doing every couple passes, and whenever I fall until I'm reset for the next pass). While science is not a world of anecdotes, even just one anecdote proves wrong the blanket statement that "T-Factors do not release unless very loose." I also know a number of folks on T-Factors and have yet to hear any "oh s**t" stories of not releasing.

On the other hand, do a search through this forum and you'll find drastically more stories (and videos) of dangerous, painful falls due to mechanical release boots than T-Factors. It's simply in the data. Yes, yes, I know the argument, "If you know what you're doing and check it regularly and don't make any mistakes, you're fine!" Except either that's not true, or it's true theoretically (most likely), but in practical reality, there's evidently a whole lotta people who don't know what they're doing.

Oh also, Corey Vaughn with the absolutely hilarious Reserve card interview of Wade🤣:
https://www.youtube.com/live/BrJhLwlwbKk?si=miSasz4ldNxH0zBB&t=20646

In a sport where moving a fin .005" of an inch is said to have an impact, I have to think that running over clumps of seaweed at least once a pass would be problematic for the skier. Could that help explain why a number of these elite skiers had unexpected bobbles/issues?

Just about every pass, on at least one of the turns, you can see  seaweed fly up out of the water, and sometimes during the cut or pre-turn as well. Just one example that I happened to catch and remember: Paige Rini from Round 1, 38', a pass she is usually good for, right before she has a bad turn at 3 ball, throws up 2 different sprays of seaweed:

Here's the timestamp for the video: https://www.youtube.com/live/M6BHC4d3Kt4?si=7YDr3xzqe8g4iYdS&t=12778

Ah yeah, @ToddL if the need is just to get the boot closer to the front, there's a better solution, as @Stevie Boyhighlighted - cut down the feather frame.

I don't know why Radar has the HRT footbed/frame extend so far forward, it seems to be more than anyone would need. I cut down the rubber and the feather frame on my HRT (and even shaved a bit off the back of my front boot T-Factor plate), so I could get front and back boot closer: 

As compared to stock:

The stock frame has 5 holes, and I shaved mine down to three holes. I have size 10.5US foot and my toe still doesn't go past the end of the rubber footbed. Just use a grinder or a sawzall or maybe even a beefy dremel. As Stevie said, just make sure you have enough length to still reach the back inserts - I'm on the farthest back hole on the feather frame, like in Stevie's image.

Which Radar binding? I did this once with an HRTP, sort of.
I tried a C-85 ski, and the front holes on the ski lined up fine with the feather frame, but the rear holes were too far back. So I did this, feather frame on top and aluminum plate under it:

The first set of screws is a normal mounting screw (though longer since it has to run through both plates), and it screws into the ski "like normal," holding down both the feather frame and the aluminum frame at once. The 2nd set of screws is a countersunk screw pointing up through the aluminum plate and the feather frame, with a nut on the other side holding it tight. This serves to attach the feather frame to the plate. Then the back screws are normal mounting screws that go through only the aluminum plate into the ski, but now far enough back to reach the rear holes on the ski.

Unfortunately I don't seem to have a picture of the bottom before mounting it, but this is how it looked on the ski:

This definitely adds height/thickness, since it has both the aluminum and the feather frame. I'd expect that the change in rear foot height would have an effect of some sort, but I don't know enough to comment how or how much. Also the head of the "upside down" screw seemed flush with the bottom of the plate, but the screw head still ended up marking the ski a little bit, I imagine just since the plate gets held down so tightly. That could possibly be mitigated maybe with some kind of pad on the screw head, or sanding down the screw head or something so it doesn't actually contact the ski even when the plate is tightened down.

I didn't end up keeping the ski, so I didn't trial this set up in the long-term. I don't see any reason it wouldn't have held up though.

Anyone know how far Nate's gotten down -43 in practice?