35 in the bag

MS, I am triing an 67" RS1 tonight because the shop needs the S1 back, as someone else is interested in it. So, can you share your numbers with me....where it is rocking for you? John M

You Asked…Here it is ( Two Reviews Z7 & S1) This year is dedicated to finding a new ski for me. M4, 180-185, LFF, Rubber front , RTP, 35 off every time if I have “a ski working under meâ€Â. Coming off an initial production 68â€ÂMPD which I still have in case I don’t find a “better†ski. I have about 8 sets on a 67†S1 and I’m really liking it……more in a bit. Z7 I had about 12-15 sets on a 67†Z7 (over the last month) and although I really liked many aspect of the ski….I just couldn’t get it “right†under me in all aspects of the course. It gave me very smooth hookups, predictable stable turns, and the most secure, stable, powerful pull position of any ski I have ever ridden. Fast across course (without feeling fast), wide and early into the next ball…….what more do you want you might ask!......Well, a ski that turns quickly enough! The problem I had with the ski is that I was very consistently losing ground down course….in the turn. I am generally a hard turning type skier, so this was a new problem for me. All consensus from my ski buds was that I was skiing well….looked good….just needed to turn earlier. And the problem was on both sides. No matter what I tried, I was not able to quicken up the turn initiation. Starting @ stock, I moved bindings, tried various fin adjustments….all of which for the most part were worse than the stock #’s……with one exception. Taking out a few thousandths of depth helped a bit…….but a few more and it began to feel like I was working too hard in the pull for what I was getting…..a point of diminishing returns.  Recall, in the skis propaganda…D3 tried to engineer out the “all-at-once-turnâ€Â….well, they did! I sent the ski back to D3…….failed experiment for me…..but the ski was “always†stable….. It never did “bite†me. S1 I jumped on the 67†S1, stock numbers, and first set (according to me & my ski buds) skied the best I have skied in two years……right up to last year’s PB 4@38 and “running it – really looking good!â€Â.....not scraping. The only problem is that this set up tends to get me into a “lean-lock/crash†scenario when I really push it in the pull (both sides!). It is progressively grabbing more & more angle as I approach the wakes…which I can’t seem to relieve with body position corrections. When I go easier, it feels like I am working hard to get & keep the ski on edge and get angle. So I am trying adjustments……so far I’ve: 1)     Jumped straight to Greg Badal’s numbers (which he set-up for me while here at the Michigan Big Dawg). Basically less length, less depth and increased DFT. Result was no good for me. The ski was tail sliding way too much for me in the turn. Couldn’t run a 35 – period. 2)     Back to stock…. Result, still good but with the lean lock problem. 3)     Reduced DFT about .005. Result, no lean lock problem…but tamed down the ski a bit too much. 4)     Added back .003. Result no lean lock…. Back to running easy 35s and “skiing well† into mid 38’s multiple times. But I still want more from the ski……If it would only feel like the Z7 did while in the pull! 5)     Moved front binding back 1/8â€Â(thinking maybe I’m not in the sweet spot). Result, No good! The ski when away… couldn’t hardly do a thing. 6)     Next?????????? Front binding forward an 1/8â€Â?, which will probably add too much tip for me on the off side….which I would have to tune out via fin changes (reduce length, DFT change?), Yuck…that’s a merry-go-round…probably It may be that the very near stock setting will be best for me on this ski. By the way, Greg skied well at the Michigan Big Dawg, on a 66†S1. He did recommend to me that I try a 66â€Â…. that the 66â€Âseems to work better for him at deep short line. But the dealers around here don’t seem to have one ….and the factory apparently is not currently producing them and won’t tell us when they will be available. I really want to try one. Tried the RS1 last year and liked it……it’s time to try that again. An Elite is available for me to try….but….What if I really like it?.....the wife wouldn’t then like me as much. John M

"The" new ski will be here tomorrow (67" Z7). Set up suggestions would be greatly appretiated. 185#, 55K, and hoping this stick gets me though 38 more often than the dozen or so times I've run it over the last 3 years........and make 35 easy again like the MPD did when I first got it. Coming off an early (2007 nationals) 68" MPD and a 2005 Monza w/slot fin before that. John M. "Puppy Dawg"

Horton, How in the world does one get the paragraghs to stay where they a drafted?

Electronically Controlled Steering!I have to ask......and have asked,...... is this the solution?  It is a given that opinions and controversy would follow similar to what we have today with the speed controls, but, given the importance to the athlete's performance in our sport, wouldn't definable, controllable deviations be preferred to what we have now? Assuming they are "consistently" equal to or better than what we achieve with human input. I hope the technology is close, and that a company (or companies) are willing to do the R & D and bring to market the first of such a system. I would think it may eliminate a hurtle to having water skiing accredited as an Olympic sport. Food for thought,John M.

I'll take the bet!   But it'll be mid to late May before I "will" do it. Plan A - 22 mph, 75ft line, MPD 68" (subject to revision) Plan B - Increase or decrease speed to find maximum edge holding combination. Plan C - add 15' to rope length (you said "any length"). I have no doubt what so ever. "Double or nothing" - that I do it within the first two passes.......and without any previous slow speed practice. John M.

38's are my stopper. I have a great 1 ball almost all the time......wide & early @ 2 but it's down hill from there. I've run it a dozen or so times over the past two years. Fortunately a couple of times in tourneys. I can't seem to figure out how to keep my speed up through the end of the turn once I get past 1 ball! Therefore I just end up in a battle with the boat and lose! John M

Scot,Thank you for once again weighing in with your expertise. You are one of the best resources we have when it comes to an informed medical perspective. Your contributions allow us to examine our problems more thoroughly and work toward what is hopefully a better answer for us. We are often limited by our ignorance in this area and further stalled by what some "expert"/Dr tells us in the 3 to 9 minutes with us. FYI, my spondylylothesis (sp?) is basically (99.9% of the time) resolved with core training and eliminating low back stretching or beyond moderate twisting. Every now and then the floating pars (I'm guessing this terminology) move into the wrong place.....I feel it happen and experience immediate moderate limitation and pain. I can resolve the acute issue myself by lying on my back and manipulating the L5 process with my fingers until it seems better. Usually I am back to 90% upon completion (which can take some time....it’s all trial & error) of the manipulation and 100% within days. Not really looking for you to comment here, I just thought you might like to know.One year later....I am still reading McGill’s "Ultimate Back".....I can only endure about 1.5 hrs at a time!! Thanks,John Miller

Bill, Live in Farmington Hills........ski @ Lake Jepawhit. BTW, after my set last night, skiing so well, Jeff thinks I'm nuts to get off this ski.......... so....I may just be nuts! JohnÂÂÂ

Great Ski.....of course you already know that.....(several PBs through 38) AUTOGRAPHED bottom (Andy, Will, Marcas, Jamie, Chris, Winters, Moore, Degasperie, Cox, Cale, Rogers, April, Freddie)...... Very Cool! Gold fin (with extra hole for lowered, rear mounted wing) No handle dings...... standard wear as expected for a well cared for ski. Bought new @ 06 Nationals.......Liked it so much that I tried & bought it on Thursday, 1 formal practice set on Friday and skied it on Saturday in the Nationals (matching the high end of my normal bouy count). Pricing.....Hum.... Well.... Probably worth $300-$350 w/o the Autograghs.......and I'm hoping that, to the right person, the Autograghs are worth another $100-$150.  So Asking $450.00 plus shipping (Michigan). Why do I let it go.......moving up to the latest and greatest stick....whatever that turns out to be for me. John Miller

Please don't encourage "Big Brother" too decide how "I" should protect "myself".......it is too much of a slippery slope. My bet it that TW will agree with me "in spades". With that said.... I am planning to get one......just haven't made time to do it yet.  Also, not sure which handle I want it made for. John Miller

NOW FOR TODAY'S ISSUE.......Over the course of several weeks...my skiing became very inconsistent. The ski was very squirrelly at times leaving me virtually unable to ski (not even running 32s when I usually stroke 35s). Began checking things and thinking about it. Fin was good (unchanged) and stable in the block. Bindings were properly attached and un moved. Then I connected the fact that the ski was most unstable if I did not firmly tighten the front laces "before" I put my foot in the binding. Doing so put me back in the game. I concluded that if the front laces were not tight enough, the ski was moving around under my foot.After a few more sets, I was periodically breaking at the waist on the toe side...humm..........typical of a too much tip condition.......again fin was unchanged.....so what could it be?   I have to do something....I won't progress like this! Then I thought.....Maybe my foot is moving forward with in the binding!I layered about 10-12 layers of duct tape around the front of the toe on the outside of the liner then wrapped all that with electrical tape in an effort to hold it all in place……effectively moving my foot and the liner rearward within the shell. It worked great! The ski is back to “normal†for me.  I have concluded that as the liner is used, it compacts at the pressure points. And since there is almost no resistance placed on the lower shin/upper foot the way I am using the binding, a significant portion of the forward force of the front foot is being transmitted to the ski through the front of the foot and toes. This transfer of forward force is significantly different than in other binding system like high wraps which may do a better job of grabbing the whole foot and ankle and are probably more resilient (able to return to their previous shape). I haven’t skied in hard shells so no comment.This is just a heads up for those using RS1 bindings and who have seen their skiing become inconsistent after multiple sets on them.John MillerMichigan

On a different forum I wrote earlier this year........... ........I am hesitant to write this response, especially on this forum, because I don’t want to cast any negative light on the Radar Team Products. These guys are great…..taking on the risk of innovation and product development/delivery to the market……all to our (the skier’s) benefit. The RS1 boot system is a truly innovative concept which has many merits. Bearing in mind that product development is a process as it moves towards perfection for its intended purpose, and, having arrived at a system tweak which has helped the RS1’s usefulness and safety for me, I will share what I have done in the hope it will help others and maybe even aid the Radar Team in the development process. About the RS1/RTP, it has been a process and taken modifications to get the set-up right for me....... Wearing 10.5 shoes, I was directed to try the size 11 RS1 which I heat molded to my foot per the instructions. First set (6 weeks ago) it was just way too loose. My foot was moving all around in the boot and I did not feel I had proper control/contact with the ski. I exchanged the 11 for a 10 which I did not heat mold to my foot. Running both sets of laces quite loose, I found my big toe was being pushed into the front of the boot causing some pain and a bit of bruising under the nail. So I really cinched down the front laces and kept the top laces quit loose. The boot was performing great as far as ski control is concerned.....maybe lacking a little upper ankle lateral support from what I was used to w/ my Connelly Vision high wrap. Over the period of a week I took three normal type falls (32/35 off), all released, but two of them I felt a slight top of foot/ankle tweak. The sort of thing I had only felt a couple of times in three years of skiing the high wraps. Enough to scare me into thinking that this may not be the system for me ......So....... I was about to trash the experiment. But upon studying the binding....and what I felt was happening, I decided to try something. READ THIS........... I took the lower set of laces out of their respective top set of "eyelets", effectively lowering how far up the instep it grabs my foot. This was a great improvement for me. It no longer "hung up" at that partially out release position and I am able to really tighten down the front laces to get good contact with the ski and prevent my foot from moving around under high load. I am running the top bungee laces quite loose. Tightening them only to the point that they do not unduly restrict the release process. In fact at this point I am not even hooking the upper laces around the top lace catches. Several OTF's later, everything is working great. The releases are clean as a whistle. I now have no fear what-so-ever about the safety of the system as it is now set it up for myself. I am just to the point in my season where I am starting to work on my max pass (38off). So I haven't fully concluded whether lateral support is an issue yet. I have several ideas for improvement which I will implement if this becomes an issue for me. I can tell you this………. I have since switched back and forth between the high wrap and the modified RS1 several times, even during the same set. I will not be going back to the high wrap because the RS1, when compared back to back, has noticeably more control, and significant sensed increase of ski responsiveness, and places me in a more balanced, front knee forward skiing position consistent with maintaining more speed at the finish of the turn among lots of other benefits. John Miller – Michigan ÂÂÂ

Randy, Point so well taken cause I hadn't overtly thought about that for a while. Especially the being in the same water again.  Except that I know I’ve always got those numbers.. I ended the year not skiing "well". And I started this year very disciplined,…(read slow---- carefully getting into shape). So it’s only recently that I’ve been skiing hard enough to discern and therefore play with anything. I really hope all is well with you and yours. John

Sorry, I don't know why the spacing is so great.....drafted in WORD, copied here and looked fine before I pressed "Add Your Comments".

Need a little more help,  OK, I’m getting close. But please weight in as to your suggestions.  With the adjustments made this week the ski has settled into Formula One mode. BUT....  I blew the tail when pressing it off side @ 38 2 ball after a weak one.......coming in hot and shallow needing a “good†hard turn.  Obviously the front of the ski over powering the back.......though it didn’t bite on me (no breaking at the waist).  All other characteristics of the ski seem like they’re worth working with for a while... I think... not quite as consistent as I would have liked.... but I’m pretty sure that’s me as I’m really triing to put counter rotation and dropping the hips to the ball into the style right now. Sometimes I remember and things are sweet....sometime my muscles remember (the old way).....any whoooo.  My thought on correction......by reverse elimination is: Length – don’t change it .....the ski is not biting.....after reducing length I needed to move the front binding forward 3/16†to bring it to life.  Depth – (the obvious answer) – don’t change it because deepening will have the side effect of tip rise at the end of the turn....which is what I just tuned out of it.  DFT – I don’t think moving the fin back will hold the tail down except by reducing the rate of turn which I don’t want to change at this point. (why put snow tires on my sports car?) But then again, maybe a small change here is all it will take.  Wing----- ah....that might be it... 8.5 right now (Andy’s setting). 9 just might hold the tail down when pressed...... Side effects expected; more tip....the ski might increase or renew its tendency to bite. ... hopefully not. Maybe less width... generally not a problem for me. If anything I attempt 38 skiing it too wide....subconsciously trying to develop the same visual cues in the pre-turn as at the longer lengths (I’m trying to condition my self away from that...so I don’t make it harder (wider) than it really is).  For what its worth...the ski is still seeking (hunting) a bit when I settle at the end of the lake.......no hint of it in the pre-gate glide though.  Whatchallthink?  p.s. After my fin adjustments, the skis’ turn rate was significantly too slow...I couldn’t comfortably ski with it there. So I move my front binding forward about a ½ hole (3/16†+) and it brought a ripping beast to life (old HO plate with slide slots at the four corners and holes at the center....skiing w/o screws in the center holes for the moment).  John Miller

Roger wrote>>>>>>>> Your turn in is entirely on the tail, the water is breaking behind the front binding. This is costing you angle through the gates and giving you extra speed.<<<<<<<<<< Not withstanding the tail comment which it totally agree with......................... I've seen this type of comment regarding angle and speed many times before and the logic of it continues to elude me.  My understanding of the "physics" dictates that angle (defined for this purpose as; skier path; not necessarily the skis' relative relalationship to the water) is proportional to cross coarse speed. The faster you go cross coarse at the wakes, the more "angle" you have. So I ponder...... how does one have extra speed and less angle.  This is assuming a snap shot at .....say... the gates. We must be talking "too much speed" at "the ball" then. I think what may actually be happening is that the skier is losing pull intensity (and potential speed/angle)as he nears the wakes... therfore not on a path for a wide(er) preturn. So he skis flatter into the preturn just to get width so he can make it around the ball. Of coarse this causes less preturn deceleration just prior to the ball, potentially a later turn initiation and potentially higher speed at the ball, which, if all combined with a large radius turn (more time skiing approximately toward the boat) result in a whole lap full of rope. Now, conversely. Reasonably increase the speed/angle at the shapshot location of the gate balls, set a reasonable preturn edge casting the skier wider relative to the boat and coarse, and allowing the intuitive decelleration in the late preturn, then excecute a more upright, tight radius turn at one ball with little or no slack line. At 35 & 38 off this is all very do-able. The pull part of this equation is the easiest to fix.  The real challenge is the edge change with a meaningful (not flat ski) preturn. It's real hard to break the bad habits until you begin to experience that you will get out to the ball with plenty of width.....Too much if you over do it. Now for the next problem......what do you do when you are wide and early at two ball.....almost never having experienced that before?  Probably over turn it and dump or get pulled forward out of pull possition........this is how you count 2 & 1/2. This combination......without overdoing it.....has helped me develope 1 ball (at virtually every length I ski) as my most consistent/effective bouy on the coarse......ha, ha,.... most of he time.  John

When Eddie and Andy set up the ski for me to demo last year, the first set it was grabbing/stopping on the off side and I bit it hard on four ball @ 38. We went to shore, moved the front boot back a notch and I went out and ran 38 for only the second time in my life. It can only go back one more hole......I'll check my notes....but I seem to remember that sometime after I got home I tried it back all the way.........and it was a failed experiment. Might be worth a try again though. Vitals 190, 6', 68" MPD fin at Andy's settings.....ah, on my calipers...... 6.895 tips, 2.5165, .790, 8.5 deg holes toward the ski, 2004 Connelly Vision Pivot (rear lace, and toe clamp) on a HO plate one hole back of neutral, HO RTP all the way back but with toes touching the front bindings horse shoe. John

Continuing the turn beyond the desired direction for the upcoming pull.... Being in a pre-pull position with too much lean away from the boat and with too little speed (momentum) remaining to carry into the pull AND just enough of a slack line to ensure that the 300+ hp boat will pull me into the worst possible pull position (butt back, shoulders forward, ski flat) just so I can survive (keep skiing). I'm talking 38 and shorter here. That is my dilemma, my nemesis, my incompetence, my frustration, my shoulders and my back.How do I carry the speed........... Somehow I have to abort the turn at precisely the right moment. A lot of ski in the water makes for an efficient and small radius turn, which I believe is needed (as I study the good skiers) and I can achieve this with consistency. Yet with that much ski in the water, the ski want to continue turning.....beyond the point needed and dumping the precious speed which would have softened the hook up.I am dubbing this point in the slalom process the PRE-PULL. Many of the good skiers have it down pat.... and for me I think it is the key too the next level of my skiing competence. So what are some characteristics of it? Commonly the ski tip rises.   But not too much. The ski seems to be advancing forward relative to the hips and or shoulders... but the skier is not "falling" back.....  their momentum continues in the direction of the upcoming pull.... The Skier is not leaning "too" far away from the boat, or conversely stated, is not leaning 'too' low to the water. The strongest possible position is obtained as the rope begins to load. Shoulders open and back, hips and handle very close to each other, knees moderately bent, proper ski edge angle (both transversely and longitudinally) relative to the water.Now we're in the pull which has its own dynamics for another discussion. Except that I believe that in short line slalom it's all about an effective pull.......then the pre turn...then the turn..... ah forget it... slalom need everything.... just most importantly the pull because without that you can't do anything else.  And that’s what the pre-pull must set the skier up for... an effective pull. How to do this? This year I have evolved into a late pre-turn/turn which drops my hips toward the water to execute the turn. The idea being that I achieve a small radius turn without my shoulders/torso being 'too' low to the water for the pull (I used to commonly slam dunk the on side). Learning this I have "high-sided" a few times. These falls are pretty harmless though. Especially when compared to blowing the tail and tweeking a front ankle. The problem is that I'm getting too much tip rise at the end of the turn which is sometimes combined with a simultaneous rotating of the ski down coarse and flattening of the ski..........which all has to be undone to set the ski on edge for the pull. Just way too much going on there! It’s ugly when that happens. It looks uncouth... but most importantly it’s inefficient, wasting momentum and can't be consistently applied. If you can't visualize what I'm trying to describe, then dig up the video of Parrish's 1 ball when he set his record. So how do I end the turn radius exactly where I 'need' to?

The site was great........and despite comments to the contrary above, it was a decent size crowd (150 -200 people on shore between the gates).......at least when compared to the Ohio Big Dawg last year which had exactly one (1) true spectator on shore and a total of three(3) (including my wife & I) on shore between the gates.  The rope thing was a huge bummer for everyone. On a beautiful day in mid-Michigan we hade witnessed the shattering of the National M3/MM record. Television was there and caught it all. The crowd, mostly knowledgably about the sport, and if not , superiorly informed by Jerry (hosenose) Hosner on the PA system, was electric during and immediately after Ben's 41 off pass. We were geeked. We had witnessed history. And those of us associated with the site/tourny were feeling proud that it happened on our watch. I know first hand that the course was dead nuts on, I had looked over shoulders at 39 off boat paths. And I had high hopes that the record would be broken. It was Shattered!!  ...........then.........  well   .....then.  How could this happen?.....and it does happen! I mean any one of a half dozen people could have caught this early. But they didn't. The starting dock crew, the boat rope handler, the boat judge, even the driver ("captain of the ship"), let alone all the skiers who, once its in thier hand are the only ones who could/would see it. Wait.... bright orange switch replacement sections... I digress ;-(  We were crushed, dumbfounded, embarrassed and disappointed. There were tears. Only for an hour or so. Because the show went on, corrected, and it was a good show.  The finals were thrilling. Tynan with 4 1/2 @ 39 leaving the proverbial door open for Larsen who had to hookup off 4 ball and get fully around 5 and back to the wake for the last buoy of the day..........  but didn't.  Wow.....  Congratulations to both Scott & Scott and to our local Dawg, Ted McColley who finished third.  And to Ben, I hope you get the record........ karma.... it would only be right.  John MillerÂÂÂÂ

The site was great........and despite comments to the contrary above, it was a decent size crowd (150 -200 people on shore between the gates).......at least when compared to the Ohio Big Dawg last year which had exactly one (1) true spectator on shore and a total of three(3) (including my wife & I) on shore between the gates.The rope thing was a huge bummer for everyone. On a beautiful day in mid-Michigan we hade witnessed the shattering of the National M3/MM record. Television was there and caught it all. The crowd, mostly knowledgably about the sport, and if not , superiorly informed by Jerry (hosenose) Hosner on the PA system, was electric during and immediately after Ben's 41 off pass. We were geeked. We had witnessed history. And those of us associated with the site/tourny were feeling proud that it happened on our watch. I know first hand that the course was dead nuts on, I had looked over shoulders at 39 off boat paths. And I had high hopes that the record would be broken. It was Shattered!!  ...........then.........  well   .....then.How could this happen?.....and it does happen! I mean any one of a half dozen people could have caught this early. But they didn't. The starting dock crew, the boat rope handler, the boat judge, even the driver ("captain of the ship"), let alone all the skiers who, once its in thier hand are the only ones who could/would see it. Wait.... bright orange switch replacement sections... I digress ;-( We were crushed, dumbfounded, embarrassed and disappointed. There were tears. Only for an hour or so. Because the show went on, corrected, and it was a good show.  The finals were thrilling. Tynan with 4 1/2 @ 39 leaving the proverbial door open for Larsen who had to hookup off 4 ball and get fully around 5 and back to the wake for the last buoy of the day..........  but didn't.  Wow..... Congratulations to both Scott & Scott and to our local Dawg, Ted McColley who finished third.And to Ben, I hope you get the record........ karma.... it would only be right.John MillerÂÂÂÂ

Bouy Idea... Soft floating mass, about 12-14 inches below the surface which binds together "filiments" 12-18 inches long (above the mass). Think of a broom, upside down, with the bristles sticking out of the water. Color and shape the bristles out of a durable material....   bundled at a density to balance visibility with safety........ and ski through them....  Now go build it someone!  John Miller ÂÂÂÂ