drew

drago, I see your brother's point, but don't bikers suffer from a similar sense of entitlement that certain constituents do?

My wife Leigh went out to Denver last weekend to visit with Heather and is amazed at how strong she is, but it will be a long, tough road. Mike is a rock and will continue to do everything possible that he can for Heather and their two super girls. Heather needs everybody's thoughts and prayers during her recovery.

I have been using the PTM mirror for a couple of months now--and I have to say I love it. It took me about a week to get used to the appearance of the rate of the skier's travel from one side to the other (due to the convex shape). There is no way I would do without it now.

Neilly uses Wiley's that I have customized. For kids they come out easily and offer great support.

Dan, Sounds like you have a giant on your hands...I am not sure what the factory dft setting is for S1, but I would be careful about going too far forward given that your son is in a "normal" mass range. I think the reason that I have arrived at the numbers I have with Neilly's ski is largely due to her light mass and low mass/ski size ratio. I plan to move the fin back in small increments as she grows.

As the skier grows, the fin can move back...

Mark, 27 1/8 is good on this ski. 2.475 is a good fin depth, and not too long (6.720 jaws). The anamoly is dft--when she moved from the 59 to the 62, the fin needed to go a fair ways forward (.110" from her 59 location). 1" from tail

Mark, check the length of the ski as well as the binding placement numbers and let me know. Neilly was skiing the junior allegiance before the junior elite.

Neilly is riding a 62" Jr Elite, which is actually a little smaller than 62". I really like the Jr Elites for the smaller kids, as they are steady and forgiving, unlike many of the other high-end junior skis, which have livelier bevels and PVC cores. Neilly weighs just over 70 lbs, so she could still be on the 59, but she found she liked the feel of the bigger ski. Set-up is fairly crucial, as it is dependent upon weight and performance level of the skier.

X files guy is Bill Davis, a cool Cdn dude I used to see at tournaments up in Muskoka (Bala Ontario, Bush's place). Ted Ligety always likes a slalom shot. So does Eric Lindros. Erin Mielzynski will be a well-known celebrity soon--she has more World Cup wins in her. She was (is) a super talented slalom skier who I am sure will resurface sooner or later.

I am fortunate enough to hear a variety of instructions to start. The best is "ready when you are". It let's the driver know that he is dealing with an expert, capable of achieving the start without notice, at the will of the driver. Immediately the driver should feel slightly in awe to be at the helm for talent at the end of the rope...

For sure, significant disparity exists between access to skiing and access to training to excel at the competitive level.  Access to training for the sport at the competitive level can best be enhanced by enabling site creation. I am convinced that the greatest barrier to improvement in this respect is the fact that each time an individual endeavors to create a site, he more or less needs to reinvent the wheel from a permitting/approval standpoint.  USGA has streamlined the permitting process for golf course creation. Materials are available for this that demonstrate the benefits of open space, net environmental gain, and other benefits (economic, health, etc) that come with golf course creation.  Perhaps a focus of USAWaterSki needs to be to streamline/facilitate the educational/permitting/approval process of site creation. I believe that if individuals are confident that such an endeavor can be accomplished, the investment and effort will be made. This will certainly result in more facilities that will ultimately become ski clubs or ski neighborhoods. Though skiing will always remain expensive, improving access via improving the site creation process will increase accessibility.