boarditup

John: You are correct in this: Money flows to concentrations of potential customers. IF waterskiers can concentrate on one website. IF sufficient numbers of waterskiers are present and will allow themselves to be tracked. IF there is video-rich content that makes sense to non-skiers and occasional skiers. IF some of the other IF's are identified, then we, the waterskiing community, will have some additional attention and money funded into it. Ball of Spray is a great resource and I will support it as a skier. I hope we can get a few good, well produced, videos on the site that are fun to watch and can seed the sport. Look at U-Tube. Some short, 5-minute or so, videos of some of the personalities and action of the sport will go a long way. Of course, the best visited section will be the FAIL section of crashes. Great idea!

The motion of the ski that makes a difference in slalom is not lateral, but vertical. The ski's weight around the turn should have little difference in how the ski responds (the mass of the ski is a fraction of the total mass moving and the movement is against the water). The motion of the ski coming across the wakes, where the ski absorbs and returns energy in a vertical plane (in relation to the ski) makes the most difference. If you have a heavy ski, the ski will both spend more time in the air and more time running deeper in the water. In both cases, the ski loses speed. Often, those struggling in the course lose out in the wake crossing - they lose speed and/or break at the waist. Same thing goes with the hook-up after the turn - except that is typically a technique issue and not a ski weight issue. If you are scrapping though the course, the lighter the ski and the binding, the easier it will be to move around as it has less mass. The prospect of losing sufficient weight to ski better is difficult for us tall and big-framed guys. It is simply just another challenge in the sport. At my height, in my 20's, I was under 210 only after a month-long bout with illness. I think we are at or near the point of diminishing returns in terms of weight. Shape and rebound properties are likely the next chapter in ski evolution as Eddie and the Strada/Vice have demonstrated.

 From the December 19, 2010 NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/business/media/20ratings.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1292936508-Gl1rxBf0T8L/1wuGZAlqfg Football has for decades been declared the ideal sport for television, because of its high quotient of action and natural breaks for commercials. But network sports executives say that the viewing experience continues to get better, with the most obvious visual advance coming with the introduction of high-definition television, which has made the game and its players stand out as never before. “HD has been the dollop of frosting on top of everything else,†Mr. Ebersol said. “If you think about it, the game is rectangular anyway, and now you buy this big rectangular screen.†Eric Shanks, the president of Fox Sports, cited improvements in camera lenses and locations — especially the overhead camera that tracks plays from above and behind — and in audio as well. Fox began the season by using microphones on players in the middle of the action, which undoubtedly influenced the early perception of this season as probably the most physically intense — and violent — in memory. (In later games, many players declined to wear microphones, which Mr. Shanks said prompted Fox to develop even more sensitive microphones on the sidelines.) Mr. Ebersol cited the owner of the New England Patriots, Robert Kraft, who, he said, first compared N.F.L. games to another popular television form. “Bob said, ‘We have the greatest reality show in all of the medium,’ †Mr. Ebersol said. Mr. Shanks leaned toward a different comparison. “It’s kind of like going to an action movie every Sunday,†he said. He emphasized the star power among the league’s leading men. “Quarterbacks drive ratings,†Mr. Shanks said. Fox has an inclination to take the movie comparison to the next level. For the last two weeks, on regional games with smaller audiences, the network has played a musical score in accompaniment with the coverage of the games. The idea, Fox contends, could be the next big innovation in television football coverage because the audience is growing more accustomed to having music with every form of entertainment. **** So - what does this mean for us? Are TV coverage and crowds important? Can we pump up the action quotient? How do we move forward in our sport? Age old questions, but they deserve another go around with some more information.

If you have the option of Grand Rapids, MI, www.placidwaters.com

Maybe even a remote oil filter? Indmar never got user friendly...

I was there when Nate came in second to Asher. The course was real and record-capable. The competition was real and record-capable. The boat and drivers were real and record-capable. I watched him ski several times in competition - he is real and record-capable. Although really young, he is very good, focused, consistent, and a genuine nice guy. He has my respect as a skier and as a man. The IWWSF top 10 have some real competition from Nate. He also has a real shot at the World Record in the near future.  Karl DeLooff

Events must be run by the rules. However, the current rules are archaic and should be changed to match both technology and the culture. For example, how long does it take to become a regular judge? I can get an MBA sooner. The gates - why does the left gate matter at all? Fractional buoys - clarify. Simplicity, please! How many judges and officials are really needed? Why do I have to remeasure my course every 90-days? It has not moved in over 3-years. If you read line-by-line through the rules, like I did, you end up shaking your head in wonder. I am sure that there are historical examples behind each and every rule, but we have to, like golf, depend on the honesty of the skiers and officials.  We are tripping over ourselves in absurdity. It is time to grow up and mature as a sport.

I just finished a project looked out my window (I work from home when not traveling). The buoys are perfectly round.... That means the lake is sheer glass. Not even the tops of the weeds are moving. Sunny, calm - perfect. Now, all I need is a 197 and a skiing partner.

The same group of people are still around. However, the culture has changed. We don't have the huge number of single people or DINKs (Double Income, No Kids) like back then. We now have 30's and 40's with kids and far fewer participants without kids. The increasing cost and the complexity of the sport has significantly changed the demographic - it has moved upscale in terms of income level. The result is a newer community that is more like an extended family reunion than a surf beach party. If we, the site owners, adapt and host more "family reunions" the soul of the sport will remain intact. The goal is the entire family having fun, not just one member drinking a beer alone.

I am still a novice skier. For me, ZO is the better system due to simplicity. From a feel perspective, it feels more consistent than PP ever did. As a skier who skis slow, the pickup from the buoy is sooner, firmer, and predictable. While most skier spend little time at the slower speeds, I have spent a lot of time there and so do some of the skiers I ski with. So, from this novice's point of view, there is a real benefit of ZO to the beginner.

Wow! They have size 14 Strada bindings and a 69.5-inch ski for over 200 lbs. I am running out of excuses not to buy a new ski for 2011.

The front foot heel is in the same spot - in theory - until you try to mount the plates. My back foot heel and ball are much further back than those with normal feet size - by nearly 1.5 inches. This is due the the length of my toes. On typical plates, I have the rear plate in the holes furthest back and then have to put the front plate nearly all the way forward so my back foot toes can lay flat on the pad. Only the Radar plates have enough room for my feet. Most plates and bindings are not sized for my foot - try finding hardshells in a 14... Absolute discrimination against Dutch people! Also, from a balance perspective - the center of mass measurement (huh?)- the distance between the ball of the rear foot and the ball of the front foot - is the real setup measurement. Since we cannot measure or control that very well, the rear of the front binding is the typical reference. Big feet typically means longer toes, so that measurement changes as shoe size goes up. Conversely, those with smaller feet may find out that their bindings may have to be moved back a bit. I am sure plenty of women may be able to confirm or dispute this. I only have family sized sample size, but from what I have seen, moving bindings forward helped me and let me mount my bindings on my non-Radar skis.

With a size 14 I have had to move by bindings forward on virtually all of my skis. This is because the rear heel, and of course the ball, of the foot is so far back from the typical 9.5 that is changes the balance point of the ski. So, about 3/8 of an inch is the average I set my bindings forward from typical specs to get good response from the ski and make it turn rather than stall.

There is not a lot of difference in ski shape. If you compared all of the skis on the market I would guess that they differ by a very small percentage from each other in terms of shape. Sure, there are differences in details, but the basic shape has been the same since the 80's. Now, those minor differences have a profound effect on the way it skis. If only I could get my technique straight.....

What is the depth of the lake under the boat path?

Aerate. Adding O2 to the water will eliminate the algae. An air pump with a bottom diffuser in a few areas will eliminate the problem. Once the equipment is purchased, the only expenses are wear items and electricity.

"None of this is to say we should just be static...and PART of what we should be doing is figuring out how to find that audience." Well said! The key to remember is that our target slalom audience is usually attached to a non-target audience family. MS said it well - "Promote fun tourneys and the people will be there." My perspective is that part of the fun is improvement and involvement that has a reasonable path and outcome. If you don't see a possible positive outcome in a reasonable period of time (individually defined) then you won't even start. For example, would you spend $1,000 for an old HO Mach 1? Not likely. Why? Because the new Strada is a better ski and may actually improve your scores or make skiing more fun or interesting. The Rules Committee and the Judges and Scorers Committee has to remember that involvement beyond skiing at a tournament must also be fun, meaningful, and have a reasonable chance for a positive outcome.  Hazing rituals or "that's that way I did it" does not mean it is right for the times. We have ever improving skis, boats, handles, speed control (flame on), techniques, and lakes. Lets use the same continuous improvement philosophy in our organization so we fit today's culture and keep the organized sport alive. It is up to skiers to push for changes, improvements, and adaptations from the bottom up. If you disagree, that is great - we still need to have a sport-wide discussion so people will come up with solutions better than mine.

"...too hard to learn..." and "...is hard for me to get psyched about even a 2 set tournament where there are travel time considerations..." The entire culture has changed since the heyday of skiing between the 1950's and mid '80's. It is still a viable sport, but we have to change with the times. If the young dad above could have a morning tournament set - between 8:00 am and noon - that would work with his schedule and the tolerance of his wife. Heck, the wife may even get involved. If the young child had a way to compete (say kneeboard or wakeboard) at the same time, the fun factor would skyrocket and more young families would get involved. Now, if we have the new blood coming in, lets have a way for them to become officials in a short period of time (say one season, or two if the pace is slower) by using YouTube, self-study, and mentoring, and you have a way to propogate the sport along. The sport has to become more accessable from a rules and regulations perspective. Why can't we run multiple events on the same day and same weekend? Why can't we mix in board sports with slalom and trick skiing? Why does it take longer to get a Regular Judge than an MBA? Why don't we have on-line training for all of our officials? Skiing has already changed to match the culture. The question is if the organization will adapt, or die out. Time will tell. Ask these questions of your rep on the Rules and Scorers and Judges Committee as often as you can so we can preserve the sport for the next generation.

John - if you have a day free - stop by at Placid Waters. About a 3-hour drive.

Gekko was bought by Centurion - Fineline. I am sure you can still get one, inexpensively. Great boat for the cash. I owned one for a while. Lots of upturned noses from the big 3 fans. However, it drove and skiied great. I would bet that Mark Overbye is behind the new boat and it is a further refinement of the Gekko hull. The press release has some Gekko-ish details (carbon fiber one of them).

Dead on right - more options! Let's have some variety so local organizers can respond to the local culture.

Ted and Jean B: If the tournament was 3-4 hours maximum, had events for the kids (wakeboard, kneeboard, wakesurf, silly games, etc.), and had ability based competition for men, women, and children, would that help with getting the entire family out? I have found that 3-4 hours is the maximum tolerance of a mom with small kids. The problem is this kind of format is non-traditional, takes more people to run (board sport judges), uses different boats (towers, ballast), and does not comply with current rules and structures. Also, traditional 3-event lake owners are hesitant to run a wakeboard boat. What I just described is an INT tournament. I have also tried to do this with a USA WS sanctioned tournament, but am stuck with an F designation. That does not even count for building officials qualifications - a shot in the foot for the organization. The ski clinics are more successful because it is organized, but do not require the officials or level or organization or stress of an actual tournament. Think of a Poker Run. No scores, just skiing, riding, and hanging out with people who want to be there. Lots of families show up.

People know about waterskiing. I have 5 "Learn to Ski Clinics" at my site this summer. We have taught people to ski the course, let people ski the course with ZO for practice and to choose a setting, taught little girls to ski the first time, taught some to get up on a slalom ski the first time, and coached people to new PBs in the course. This is great. It was a life long dream for some to ski the course on a private lake that most only see in magazines (CR is 5@41 off and 236 in night jump). We will do it again next year as well. However, it is a very small result. The culture has changed. There are so many forms of entertainment in the summer that did not exist in the '70s and '80s. People do not want to spend the time necessary to learn to ski. When I was a kid there were few summer options - Little League or summer church camp. Now, soccer, track, dance, LL, Rocket Football, wakeboarding, wakeskating, wakesurfing, horses, video games, paint ball, Facebook, cars, mopeds, etc. Couple that with restrictions on time and locations where you can ski, jump, the cost of boats, the cost of skis, the cost of gas, etc. Waterskiing has passed from a middle-class aspirational activity to an elite sport for a high-middle class few. Wakeboarding has responded with cable parks and 2.0 systems (I have one on my property) where you can ride cheap without a boat. In 3-event, we have such an incredibly high cost (money and time) overhead for organized events that it no longer makes sense for a lot of people. While some blame ZO, the real culprit is we have sucked the fun out of the sport for the elite few. As for officials, I can get an MBA faster than a Regular Judge credential. In today's culture, who has time or even can respect that? Wateskiing is not dying, it is adapting to the culture. We will never recreate the heyday of the Coors Light tour. Eventually, the IWWSF and USA WS will also adapt after the money dries up because the culture will no longer support the old ways and perspectives. It will be difficult to watch, but eventually it will happen. Karl DeLooff

C2 feels the same to me behind any boat. So, I use C2 and have adapted my skiing to it. When I get to a PP boat, it feels weak and it takes a bit to adapt to the slower and weaker hook-up. However, regardless of brand or motor, I am set at a tournament.

We must remember that waterskiing is entertainment! If it drags on and on, is grossly unfair, incomprehensible, or serious it ceases to be fun entertainment for most people. It takes a good plan to make a tournament work. This year, I am going to test a tournament just for kids - and keep it low-key on the stress level and high on the patience and coaching factor. Every organizer must respond to the local culture. If there are a bunch of 40-60 something men with 20-30 years of tournament experience that ski together all the time, that is one thing. Families with kids mixing with the super serious skiers is another thing. We need to respond to the culture and make it work.