JAS

Ed what binding and speed fin settings are you using? Have my new ski and currently running totally stock. Thanks

Thanks ED

Are you using Schnitz's recommended settings? I use a Slot Fin on my 68.5  9800 and have found more DFT has worked best.  THX

 

Wondering if any of you that have been on the WIDE RIDE have advice or suggestions. I have one on the way and am currently riding a 9800SL. Seasons getting short and hoping to tap a little of your experience. THX

Any paticular group of skiers (size, line length, style) that are liking the mid-ride better than the SL or Wide ride"  Haven't seen a recent ski report lately, and thinking about about giving either a MR or WR a try.

Any opinions on the best skiing 69" high end skis for 55k mid shoreline? 225 lbs

Horton how would you compare the Coefficient X with Strada 55?

I know, just passing the same deal that I received along.  The 67" is sold.

I have 2008 Senate C in both 67' and 69'  250$ plus shipping. Both are in excellent condition, great skis, I'm just between sizes.

 

Are there an extra set start gates?  55 meter buoys?

Is there an online technical source for binding location and fin settings for the Senate C, or for that matter the Radar line of skis?

Thanks 

 

 

Horton, AB, or ????? can you give a little more detail on your experience riding the Senate C. I'm 225 working on 28@34 and currently on 68.5 9800.  Any thoughts on how the skis compare?

Thanks,

Jay 

 

Wade is right and fighting physical laws is a poor choice of words and not what I actually meant to describe. Why, without physical laws we would have no sport of waterskiing.  For a given skier, at a given pass length, there is a minimum amount of work that must be done to negotiate the ski course. The skier's body movements is the variable that creates movement back and forth, otherwise he/she would simply drag behind the boat. The challenge is to maximize use of positve energy and mimimize creation of negative energy. This was the basis of my thoughts at the beginning of this thread of how handle control contributes to an efficient technique.

 JAS

Growing up skiing on a river behind an outboard with a stretchy rope I was a yanker and puller for years.  It seemed ridiculous for the amount of time that I put into the sport that I couldn't get past 22@34. 3 years ago had the chance to ski with Rossi and Williams and realized that I was putting way too much effort into my skiing and that mimimizing load was the ticket. Delaying load, holding low as possible, and turning all the way back to the wake has helped tremendously with cross course speed, but I noticed that I was still narrow. This summer I read Bruce Butterfield's comments on handle control at the edge change and added that to my skiing. Suddenly I started to feel like a weight at the end of a string. With this tension in the line after the edge change I immediately started getting farther up on the boat and wider. Schnitz comments on Karina minimal time off the handle provide another improvement with a quicker turn and back to the  handle with more speed.  

But why have these things worked for me? I think MISKI has provided an amazing explaination of the forces that we all struggle against. In reality we are not fighting the balls, but rather we are fighting physical laws. 
Acceleration of mass, drag, change in direction, it that simple. In waterskiing, more than any other sport than I've been involved, what seems obvious is not. For me understanding why something happens helps me understand why something is not happening. I'm 53 and hopefully skiing better each year. Got to love this sport! Thanks MISKI for your insight.

JAS

Ok guys, after watching some Youtube of Karina's 1@41 and being totally amazedwith her smoothness, I stumbled on a short clip of Wade Cox from Edged in Water.

 I bet I've watched the overhead footage 50 times, focusing on the Wade's angle cross course, rope angulation relative to ski angle, Upper body rotation relative to ski angle. edge change locations. I'm kind of a visual learner and this vantage of a great skier brings many of the concepts together. A few thoughts

Importance of keeping handle tight to hips at edge change may have more to do with changing direction of skier. After all it is the swing of the skier that brings him up on the boat and ultimately maximum width in the course. Reduce swing up on boat, reduce width. The skier as a ball of mass going cross course would continue going cross course without imput from ski and/or rope. Rope tension directed to skier center of mass swings skier into arc matching handle path and allow ski to take independent wider path. Since less load on the ski ( rope is doing some of work to change path of skier mass) less load/drag and more speed at the ball.

Conversely if arms are let out then the force on the rope is at the shoulders, considerably above skier center of mass, edge change is forced, harsher, cutting short its cast, creating more drag. With narrower path the skier slows sooner, doesn't advance as much on the boat, and finishes turn with less velocity.

Also check out (1) Upper Body rotation behind the boat to allowing the ski to cast wide, (2) actual skier cross course angle (3)Upper body counter rotationand forward reach at the ball,  (4) Quickness of turn and hookup (5) Skier path vs Line  angle (can see zone where line tension in critical and where it is not.)

Just good stuff, what do you guys see?

Ok guys need your imput. Have been on 9800 68.5 with front powershell and RTP for about a month. I have got dialed in to what seems like a nice ride 34@28. I am using slot fin to schnitz's specs but when I look at a picture that he has on his web site I see that he has fin way back. I am using a regular dial caliper and somehow my front-back measurement positions fin forward about .750 (similar to Goode fin).  The rest of the story is that my final front binding position is forward .500 of factory recommendation.  I'm obviously out of the normal zone but the ski seems to ski very well. Should I move bindings back to recommended and start over with the fin?

Thanks Jay