Director Darwin

Roger: We have Star Gazer on site in an 08 Malibu - I was inquiring w/ lkb regarding Zero Off. Determining what version and the procedure to update.

lkb: A member of my club is picking up his Nautique promo on Friday. How do we determine which version his boat has? - CC is notorious for not sending boats out w/ the most up-to-date software. If it is determined that his software is not the most current, how does one access the update? If by USB / laptop, that works for me. Thanks.ÂÂÂ

Roger: Thanks for the feedback. I have a pair coming this week and will provide analysis by the weekend. What binding system are you currently using? I use Fluid Motion boots mounted to a G-10 plate secured by dual loc. Thanks.ÂÂÂ

From those who have seen/skied them, the opinions I've heard is that the bindings look very sturdy and should last many seasons. I'll provide my insight once I've had the opportunity to inspect them. My main interest in the bindings beyond the performance characteristics is the fact that they are made specifically for WATER SKIING. No other hardshell system is designed primarily for water ski applications. All others seem to rust, crack and generally fall apart after a period of time. I have a hybrid set-up using Fluid Motion boots. Although I feel they are the best for my particular needs, they are not water ski boots. They began to show signs of rust within 2 weeks of use. I have resigned myself to the fact that the binding systems currently available are "borrowed" from either snow skiing, ice hockey or rollerblading.  The release mechanisms are borrowed as well and tend to lose functionality if not critically maintained and have a "pass/fail" ratio that does not instill confidence. The RS-1 system was designed from the ground up for water skiing application. THAT is what makes this system unique and IF they live up to the hype, Radar will dominate the binding market for the foreseeable future. ÂÂÂ

Wow - my tournament is going to be fun!! The smack has already begun!!

I have a pair coming to my lake. Should be here sometime next week. Several of us will test them out. We have an assortment of boot combinations on our lake (Powershells, Reflex, HO, D3, Fluid Motion) so the feedback should be interesting.ÂÂÂ

Roger - even if the schedule didn't work for me, I wouldn't complain. The fact that you guys have stepped up to the plate once again is worthy of my gratitude. WPB is a fantastic venue and my family looks forward to coming not only for the skiing but also the other entertainment options. You guys do a great job of hosting the event and making each of us feel welcome. Good luck in your efforts to prepare and we look forward to the invasion!

Roger - both my daughter and I will be there. Arriving Tuesday PM - leaving Friday AM.  I appreciate the LOC putting M4 slalom, W1 slalom and W1 trick on the same day. I must be living right.

John: I sent it to the "White Lane" address. Will you get it? If not correct, will it be forwarded to you?  jhd

My two daughters have been running 88's on their D3's for 4 years and wouldn't hit a course without one. I'm not certain about other skis but for D3's, you can't go wrong - it lights up the turns and the skis track much better off the 2nd wake. In fact, I just put my oldest daughter on a new X5 Rose and the first question she asked before getting in the water was "did you put my carbon fin on this ski?".ÂÂÂ

I would contact PP regarding an update. I believe it will be available within the next two weeks - based on the fact that field testing has been completed and issues resolved.

Skied w/ Chad Scott this weekend. He has been working w/ PP for the past 2 months and has a beta version in his Malibu that allows for changing of the "settings" for each speed. The original problem with early versions was slow 1st segments and actual end times. Corrections were made to the system and now we have fast 1st segments and actual end times. Chad has perfected the settings for 34 that now give perfect times at every segment but those settings do not translate to 32 or 36. Different settings for those two speeds. Expect software updates to be forthcoming for those already in the field.  As far as skiing, I liked the SG better than PP classic. The SG was smoother and provided a better "feel". I felt like the boat responded better to my skier input in SG mode. I got the same impression from the driver's seat. We switched back and forth between passes without telling the skier which mode we were in and received feedback at each end. Without question, the SG was rated a better pull. We have an 08 Malibu on our lake w/ SG (same fast 1st segment issues). A Nautique promo will be delivered to one of our members this weekend. I'm keeping an open mind with regard to Zero Off even though I've heard nothing positive from skiers I've spoken to. ÂÂÂ

To further the discussion of Fisher = Goode 9200, the original Goodes were designed off the Connelly HP. But I would doubt anyone could compare the performance of the 9100 vs the HP. That being said, if you are coming off a Goode, either go with the 9800SL or try the D3 Nomad RCX first. Of all the skis I've been on in the last 3 years, the Nomad fit my style the best. I've been on Goodes for 10 years and haven't found anything that compares to the 9800SL. It is in a class by itself IMHO.

Yes - I'm positive - I sat thru the mid-winter meetings debating the subject. Drivers did not want to give that many options to the skiers (each pass) but were overrulled. It really doesn't make sense but not much of what comes out of rules committee does.

John:  For the 2008 season you will have the option of which system you wish to use. Of course, this depends on the boat being used. If a 2008 Nautique, you have no choice - it's ZO. But a 2007 Nautique could have Star Gazer as well as PP Classic. Malibu will have Star Gazer and PP Classic. MC will have ZO, Star Gazer and PP Classic. Here's the weird part: given you have a choice, you will be able to select which version for EACH PASS if you so desire. This is a nightmare for us drivers and makes little sense as a skier but that is the way the rule is written. The intent is to give everyone ample opportunity to ski behind the new systems as much as possible. In the end, I think the PP Star Gazer and PP Classic will feel so similar that no one will notice and will elect one or the other. As for ZO vs PP Star Gazer, only time will tell.  jhd

With Zero Off and to a lesser extent PP Star Gazer, the public seems to be fascinated by the fact that the end course times are within .02 of actual every time. That is impressive but what remains to be determined is "how" that is accomplished. What are the one ball times? What are the 3 ball times? With ZO it provides a virtual time based on the fact that it is going 34.2mph (supposedly).  The problems with PP Star Gazer have been the mid course times. The end course is always accurate but the 3 ball times have not. Hopefully, PP has resolved this issue.  I can't imagine that ZO has. But without magnet timing, you'll never know. A correct assumption can be made that the timing system must "make up" for the pull of the skier. Where this "make up" occurs will ultimately determine the success or failure of a particular system in the eyes of the skiers using it. We'll have both systems running on our lake sometime around the first of March. We have an 08 Response w/ Star Gazer (and PP classic) and an 08 Nautique w/ ZO. We'll have numerous skiers of different skill levels skiing behind both. It will be interesting to get their (our) impressions of both. jhdÂÂÂ

Bill - I did not mean to imply that all of the 2006/2007 were "high-end" skiers. Not my point. In fact, we had several 28/32/35 off skiers among the group. They were VERY representative of the ski buying public. In fact, most of the testers purchase at least one new ski a year. But ultimately, they were chosen for their expertise in ski set up and design. The team was chosen for their analytical expertise in addition to their on-the-water skills. The combination of these two assets is what made the tests successful and the association of numerical scoring possible. I don't buy the argument that a 39-off skier can not relate critical data to a 22 off skier. The basics are the same. As a consumer, I'm not looking for someone to tell me what to buy. I'm interested in skilled individuals who can articulate the performance characteristics of various skis and allow me to reach my own conclusions. That was what the tests were all about. The main way the tests could have been better is by providing some critical scoring so those of us outside the loop could have some insight into the performance of the skis. Twice as many pages may have accomplished that.

This is not intended to slight the 2008 test team but I believe the group of skiers we assembled for the 2006 and 2007 test were critical to the success of the test. These were individuals who were currently on the latest offerings from the manufacturers, who competed at the highest levels of our sport, were involved either directly or indirectly with manufacturers on ski design and set up and were highly skilled at ski tuning. In addition, these skiers knew the cause and effect of changes in binding / fin adjustment and had the ability to compare each ski against a standard based on their vast experience. THIS is what made the ski tests work and the "numbers" credible.  I would put the knowledge base of the 2006/2007 test teams we assembled up against any group in the world and that includes the manufacturer's reps themselves. As an example, I've heard from several of the test team that the rep that Goode sent knew less about the ski set up than some of the testers. His calipers were "pathetic" and his tool box looked like a carpenters.  Dave Goode sends his prototype skis to one of the 2006 test team members for feedback. Those skis get passed around to several other members of the 2006/2007 test team. These are individuals whom I would rely on for feedback and ski set up.  If you want "numbers", these are the guys to get them from.

John: Do you moonlight as a poll worker in Chicago?ÂÂÂÂ

Actually, a fellow skier at my lake bought a 67" late in the season and I set it up for him. I put the same numbers on a stock aluminum fin after he had skied it stock for a week or so. The ski came alive for him and he was extremely pleased w/ the performance. Next step is to add a CBR fin next spring. As for wing, we both have run 8 deg w/ success. 9 seems a bit much and 7 causes too much lift in the tail at the apex of the turn.

See thread below. The 106 blade is the one to use. http://ballofspray.com/vanillaforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=91&page=1#Item_13

I had the same problem w/ the back of the binding cuff rubbing on my leg. The liner (blue one) did not come up high enough even after multiple re-formings. I cut a piece of thick EVA from an old binding and lined the inside/top of the cuff. Not only is it more comfortable, it took away some of the slop.

John: Andy Mapple leaves Radar to return to O'Brien? That's your BIG story of 07? Again, most skiers (rec and otherwise) won't be impacted by this decision. Great for Andy and O'Brien but really, what's the meaning to most of us? The PP/ZO rise will impact ALL of us no matter the brand of ski we choose to ride. In your little world the AM move may be significant but out here in the yellow sun, it's minor.

Don't let Horton and MS anywhere near your equipment!!

The APPROVAL (not just introduction) of ZO GPS based speed control is #1 in my book. It will have lasting impact far beyond 2007 and will impact every skier in every tournament. JB's world record fiasco while significant, does not impact the local skier and most skiers were unaware it occured. ZO and PP's StarGazer will influence performances of every skier going forward.ÂÂÂÂ