JPeckham

The 10-18cm rule is specifically for this design. A traditional handle minimum is 24cm.

@Horton If it were made as long as the bridle length on a traditional handle the skier would feel no difference between this and a traditional handle. If it were made more than 1in shorter than the current designs (different lengths for 12” vs. 13” handles) the amount of tip starts to get distracting on the water. Obviously this is different for different people. There is a minimum and maximum length requirement for this yoke coming out in the updated rulebook I believe it to be 10-18cm.

@mattm In this situation the handle will tip, but only to the point where the rope and tip of the central bridle stiffening piece are directly in line with the center of the hand attached to the handle. If you are hanging onto it way out at the end it will tip more than if you are hanging onto it more in the center. This is the same reaction as a traditional handle. If your hand that you’re hanging onto the handle with is centered the handle doesn’t tip at all. If your hand is out against the outer rope it tips to the point that the rope is inline with the attached hand. I personally have never had an issue with the handle tipping and sliding out of my hand or even feeling like it was going to.

@T-fromTO Thanks for the feedback and I’m glad you were able to try it! I definitely agree it feels slightly different. Some people got on it and immediately skied well, while others have taken 2-4 sets before feeling like normal on it. When I started skiing on this handle I had no desire to ever get back on the traditional handle. Because of that I think I just adapted fairly quickly to the differences in this handle. First set felt awkward, second set was better third set felt normal. I do grip towards the center on this handle against the ropes. That puts me in my “home” position. On a traditional handle my “home” was out against the ropes. I have grabbed in different locations on this handle accidentally which feels weird, but it was the same grabbing a traditional handle in different locations. With the traditional handle if I grabbed towards the center, more times than not I would misgrab on the next buoy. So in that way I actually feel this handle is better. The handle you used had a slightly different grip shape than normal. It was conical and oval. This is something I’m testing out. Not sure if it’ll make it to final production. I felt the same things in the grips you were feeling, but I wasn’t sure if it was the grips or me from not skiing in 4 months. This was part of the reason I left it down there for more testing to be completed on it. Also, I am testing multiple grip materials and I appreciate your feedback on this one.

@Mateo_Vargas Yes and no. Some early prototypes when I was reusing brand name handles for testing featured a bent handle. Since I’ve been producing them 100% in-house I haven’t tested a bent handle. However, this can be easily adopted.

@swbca I agree that any handle or other piece of ski equipment has risks, including this handle. In the case of my specific injury with a traditional handle I was using a brand name handle and same brand mesh protector. That did not stop my arm going into the bridle up to my armpit. Then I was thrown from the turn buoy line all the way in to 5’ outside the boat guide line. I feel extreme lucky I wasn’t injured much worse than I was. This handle could hit something as it gets pulled by, but I’d take a hit and release any day over caught and hope to get my arm or worse out. Everyone has their own experiences that drive their decisions. This is my decision based on what I’ve been through.

There is a lot of interest in some kind of nub around the end of the grip. Having skied on this handle all last season I think it’s unnecessary. My assumption is that there is a fear of a hand sliding off the end of the handle and that is where this nub would be helpful. As you can see in the photo the handle is pulling only 15-20deg off perpendicular to the direction of force (line through the rope and the center of the hand). This is no where near enough of an angle to where the hand would slip off the end. All last season I never had a hand slip off the end, nor did it ever feel like it was about to. Having said all that, I have no problem adding this nub feature in as long as it does serve a purpose, and I realize that for some it might. I’m going to get some more skiers testing these prototypes hopefully in the next few weeks. I’m taking in all the information I can to try to make safer option to the traditional handle that will appeal to the majority of skiers.

Pretty simple modification can be made to be able to measure this and traditional handles. Actually the IWWF rules were changed prior to the conception of this product. For 2023 season the rule was a 2cm wide block be used when measuring. This is my solution.

@buechsrI don’t believe anyone will need to give up any buoys with this handle, however, I agree with you! I never want to go through another arm injury or worse. My daughters are #1 in G1 and #2 in G2 nationally. They used a prototype handle starting after nationals last year.

@KRoundyThanks for the support! The idea of a ridge of some sort around the ends has come up. I’m not against it if people feel more comfortable with it. I’d need it designed in a way that doesn’t want to grab anything as it’s being dragged in the water. Probably first iterations won’t have extra features like that, but could be added in future models. I personally always put my hands so they are against the ropes in the center, so I’m never really worried about what’s going on on the end.

That is one of the reasons that the length of the center piece was designed to be smaller than the triangle of a traditional handle...to allow it to tip out of the way when needed.

@Horton apparently word travels fast on the internet. Blown away by the response so far!

Yes, personal preference will definitely play a part in whether skiers like this handle. Much the same as double bindings vs. rear toe, kevlar gloves vs non-kevlar, etc.

I agree 100%. There are inherent risks in waterskiing no matter what equipment you use. This handle is no exception.

Your thoughts are correct. If the center piece is the same length as the opening of a traditional handle, they would feel exactly the same. However, I have intentionally made the center piece shorter in order to maximize safety benefits while also maintaining an adequate about of stability. The more easily the handle pivots, the easier it can move if it becomes caught on something such as a ski or body part. The current design is the result of testing different center piece lengths and choosing the one that was the best balance of performance and safety. Thanks for the encouragement!

As far as the course lines go, the entire handle floats so that should decrease the chance of it getting stuck on cables or bungee cords. I have not experienced it getting caught on anything so far. If a life vests fits correctly, I wouldn't think that would be an issue.

Your assessment is correct. I skied with this handle all of 2023 and I only had 2 misgrabs all year, much less than previous seasons. The center piece is a helpful guide when bringing your hand to the handle to ensure that both hands are always evenly spaced.

Hey Mike, I understand the curiosity about comparing the angles. My wife also suggested that I do a side-by-side video but I have no plans of skiing on a traditional handle ever again now that my handle has been added to the IWWF rulebook. Maybe someone else will do a comparison video at some point but you won't see it directly from me.

The modification to the handle measuring device can be pretty simple. This is one example:

@MISkier, not yet. Going to try to get some video to share in the next few weeks.

@DW Correct, standard handle is 152.5cm max length and the new T-handle max length is 150cm.

@Horton You are correct. However, I don’t believe a slightly more difficult transition is a bad thing. When I switched from semi-hardshell bindings to full hardshells that was a much more difficult transition than the difference in handles. I wouldn’t go away from my hardshells now nor would I go back to a standard handle now.

@DW Thanks! In the new rules around handles there will be a secondary drawing that a T-handle has to comply with. These dimensional differences include an overall 1in (2.5cm) reduction in length. This is because this T-handle can tip more than a standard handle and gain up to 1in in the turn. I know this will turn some off, but the boat path is allowed a 20cm deviation in L tournaments. I’m a 39-41off skier, personally I’m not worried about that 2.5cm. For the ideal dimensions, I tried a few different yoke lengths. I feel the dimensions I landed on are the best balance of limiting the tipping or yaw in the turn while allowing it to tip and move out of the way of something if it’s in the water getting pulled behind the boat. Prior to this year IWWF changed the width of the block to measure a handle. They went from 3.5in width to 2cm (about .75in) width. I left a space in my yoke to allow a 1/4in thick by 2cm wide bracket to fit into. This is a pretty simple modification to any handle measuring device. To meet the newer IWWF rule these measuring devices are going to need to be modified anyway. I’m testing out a few different grip designs, constant radius, and varying elliptical radius from inside to outside, along with rubber compounds.

@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.

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!