Bruce_Butterfield

Taelan, Good question. This is something that even very experienced skiers do not fully understand. Here is a little experiment to try: 1. Get a small weight (marble, ball bearing, or fishing “sinker”) and tie to a piece of string 23 inches long. This represents the rope at full length 2. Tie the end of the string to a wall so the weight can swing back and forth like a pendulum. 3. Put 2 pieces of tape or mark the wall with vertical lines 11.5 inches on each side of the string. This represents the width of the buoys on each side of the course. 4. Gently push the weight so that it just reaches the tape on each side. Note how hard you had to push and how fast the weight is swinging back and forth. 5. Now shorten the string to 14 inches (28 off) an repeat. How much harder do you have to push the weight so it reaches the tape on each side? 6. Now shorten the string to 11.25 inches (38 off) and repeat. Again, how hard do you have to push to get the weight to reach the tape? 7. How much faster is the weight swinging with the shorter string than at full length? *The actual length does not matter as long as the proportions remain the same. In this example, inches corresponds to meters.

Here's my wish list: 1. a ski that will perform the same after 5 years as it does on the first set. 2. the offside turn of a 9100 3. the onside turn of a 2005 model Monza 4. the ability to generate angle and space like the Elite 5. the stability of a D3 For the specifics that might make that happen: 1. the next step in manufacturing beyond RTM (not sure what that step is) 2. a really stiff tail (>100lbs) 3. thin tail profile like the Warp 4. the tail “channel” that was on the Monza and Sixam 5. wide forebody – maybe not as wide as a Mid-Ride, but wider than 'normal' Might as well ask for magic

I have finally decided its time to get a Zero Off boat and its time to sell ole faithful. It would be an excellent boat for any baller out there. Email direct at bruce dot kim at texoma dot net 1997 Ski Nautique GT-40 with 1750 hrs Well cared for, regular maintenance with records Perfect Pass version 6.5 Accuski optional Clarion stereo Driver and passenger seat just re-upholstered Back seat like new Bimini top and cover Dorsey trailer Always kept inside or in boathouse Asking $14,500 Great boat for the money! Also posted on Ski it again: http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?topic=Search&category=Comp_Boat&postid=17668

Quote of the day: ”When I am trying to look for technical models, I look at women. They're still stronger than I am, but at least in the ballpark!” That's ripe for too many comments, but I won't touch it! 35- are you watching the same video? Jamie's tip rise is very small compared to the other recent postings. Now consider that he's at 39 and 41 at 36mph compared to the others at 38 and 39 at 34mph and you should see what keeping the tip down does to your performance. He is carrying speed and completing the turn with very near perfect angle – otherwise he wouldn't get through 41. Lt.Dan – for skiers in the 15/22 range, tip rise is usually a result of poor angle across course. OB is right. The main problem is you have to generate speed and angle long before worrying about what happens in the turns. Get WIDE on your gates get some speed, then you can worry about the turns (but you will be a loop or 2 shorter).

35 – Excellent observations. Tip rise means that the ski (and skier) is not finishing the turn in the optimum position to accelerate. Generally tip rise is caused by the skier frantically trying to turn as sharp and hard as he can. This shows up at the shorter lines because there is so much speed and the skier has to sacrifice speed to make the turn and generate as much angle as he can. Think of tip rise being the result of the skier stomping on the brakes with his back foot The other observation about “manipulating the ski” is typically a result of overturning (90 degrees), the tip rising (loss of time and angle) and then having to reset to a more manageable angle. The resulting angle is usually more downcourse than across, and much less than the skier would achieve if he had kept the tip down and maintained speed. Horton was right in an earlier post about watching Terry Winter's 32 off pass. Keeping the tip down is the goal -it just gets much harder as the line gets shorter. One thing that you need to keep in mind is that while tip rise is a bad thing, many of the really good short-line skiers get away with it because they don't panic – they will pause, let the tip come back down, then get after it. Certainly not ideal technique, but one that lets you get away with the mistake of “stomping on the brakes”.

I went through the Rolfing series a number of years ago and it definitely has its benefits. Think of it like a really serious massage that has effects for months rather than days. It will be uncomfortable at times. As with many other physio-therapeutic things its critical to find a Rolfer that will work with you rather than a one size fits all approach. A good Rolfer will spend time to determine what will work best for you. Remember there is no silver bullet. It may help if your issues are with muscle/tendon/fascia imbalances. If your problems lie elsewhere, it may not help at all.

I went through the Rolfing series a number of years ago and it definitely has its benefits. Think of it like a really serious massage that has effects for months rather than days. It will be uncomfortable at times. As with many other physio-therapeutic things its critical to find a Rolfer that will work with you rather than a one size fits all approach. A good Rolfer will spend time to determine what will work best for you. Remember there is no silver bullet. It may help if your issues are with muscle/tendon/fascia imbalances. If your problems lie elsewhere, it may not help at all.

I have like new 68 and 67 Elites looking for a new home if any Elite lovers are interested. http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?topic=Search&category=Slalom&postid=16637 http://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?topic=Search&category=Slalom&postid=16638

Go to Discount Inboard Marine http://www.skidim.com/ They will have plugs and everything else you need for tuneups. If it goes in a ski boat they have it. Very knowledgeable tech support as well.

First practice 38 in 1989 at age 27 on a Kidder Redline, behind a really good driver, which was critical back then. First tournament 38 in 1996 at age 34 on a Connelly Missile, again behind a really good driver. Yikes that was a loooong time ago......when Skidawg was a Skipuppy.

scoke, I have a 68 Elite that I will part with. Let me know if you want it.

horton, the photo upload seems to be broken........

I'm going to offer a different perspective. I think kids will advance more rapidly if they spend more time on 2 skis before attempting to slalom. They can learn the course on 2 and learn the concepts of running buoys and making a LOT of passes with much less frustration than moving to 1 ski too soon. They can start at 10-12 mph and easily run through 16-18 mph. Once they are running 16-18 on 2, the transition to 1 will be a snap. She can even go to tournaments on 2 skis and start below max speed (unscored until 15.5mph) to get a feel for it. You would be surprised how many kids start like that. A pair of wide shaped skis like the Amigos are definitely the way to go. When she is ready to slalom, stick with one of them. I saw a Girls 1 run a pass at 25mph on one of the wide shaped skis at Nationals last year. Next step is a 64-65" regular slalom until she gets to max speed of 30mph, then a 62". I'm a fan of D3s for kids since they are so stable and easy to ride. Also use a light weight 60 strand rope, or get 1/4" nylon rope from Home Depot and cut to 75'. The regular slalom lines will drag in the water at slow speeds. The best time to transistion to 1 ski is when the kid REALLY wants to, not when the parents want to. My $0.02

Joe, My apologies if I came across as lecturing. Some of your comments came across as whining and I strongly disagree with many of them. We have honest disagreements and the tone gets lost on the message board. All better discussed over beer, but in the meantime, we have this forum.

Joe, sorry, but this one gets a burr in my butt: jdarwin August 10 Permalink Flag @jwr - so you're saying that Chad Scott, Chet Raley, etc. are not the best? Really? Yes, Really. Not on that day in those conditions they aren't. That's why we have tournaments. If they really were "the best", they would have been on the podium. I've skied in conditons MUCH worse than what we had this week and Andy still smoked everyone. So, it gets back to the question if the Nationals is to determine who is the best skier in perfect conditions, or who is the best skier under the conditions that Mother Nature has in mind for that particular day? Matt put it very well. 'Bout time you quit lurking!

Wow, Joe, you need to get out on the public lakes sometime! I've been at many Nationals where the conditions were much less than ideal - its part of the sport. You might as well try to stop Global Warming as build a site that can handle anything Mother Nature can dish out and still be perfect. Ok, build an indoor stadium and the entry fee will be $1600 instead of $160....how many will show up? We are already an "elitist" sport. Let's stop the whining. Regardless if the conditions were not what many skiers are use to at their pristine home sites, the conditions were the same for all competitors - that makes it a fair competition. So what if most skiers were down a pass or more? The tournament still determines the best in the nation at the National Championship. Isn't that the idea to begin with? PS, the wait times made no difference. It was a bathtub. We were sitting for 50 sec on one and end and they gave the option of doing a quick turn on the starting end (drop, shorten and go), that almost all of MM used. The wait times would have needed to be 2-3 minutes to let it settle out. It was all rough.

Wow. Listening to the engine rpm increase, it sounds 180 degrees out of phase with the skier's pull. I would hate to see what its like when someone actually puts a load on the boat. Kind of like the very first versions of Perfect pass based on the airguide speedos.

KTM, I have a hunch that with the rear plate, her feet are too far apart. Check that her toes are at least close to the horseshoe on the front binding. Toes riding on top of the horseshoe are ok. Too far apart will cause the big turns. You may have to get the hacksaw out, as well as drill some new holes in the plate to move it forward enough. The 62" RCX is a great kid ski, and pretty forgiving on setup. FWIW, here are some numbers: 6.953 tips 2.450 0.735 needle front binding at 27 1/2

My $0.02....on the 35 with the wing, you are dipping the inside shoulder on both sides causing the ski to bite at the end of the turn. The dipping can be be the result of going slower in the turn and falling over, or the biting can be caused by the balance point of the ski moving back with the wing, which causes the dipping. Chicken and egg, but that's what I see. You seem to be smoother without the wing.

Chef, Thanks. Actually, that picture is kind of a medium flood that we'll get every 1-2 years. The peak of the roof has been completely under water twice in 7 years. The lake can get as high as 15 feet above normal before it hits an emergency spillway. At that level, the peak of the roof would be about 3 feet under. Its only tested that once that any of us know about.

I did mine for right at $10k in materials, plus $4k to bring in a big-ass trackhoe to excavate and help set the pilings. It is "overbuilt" so it can withstand the floods we get, so there is probably about $2k in material that could be cut out if you don't have to deal with floods. It has been completely underwater several times so far with no damage. The dock area is 36 x 20, with about a foot of overhang on each side. I did all the labor myself. I would guess $10-20k on the labor and you will get what you pay for. Aluminum Boat cradles out of Orlando has the best cradle and lift kits I've seen. Shipping cost is surprisingly reasonable. http://www.boatcradles.com/

Back on topic.....you mean an efficient wing like these?

"Everything that happens in slalom depends on what you did the instant before". Circa 1982. I still think about this almost every set.

Razor, Good stuff. Backing up a little, what are you doing different off the ball? Another way to think of this is are you doing something between the ball and the wake that is enabling the result after the second wake? Are you doing anything different with the handle between the second wake and your max width? Did you shorten to 38, and did this technique work there as well? If I understand your comments, it seems like you are trading “max width” for “control”? (a good trade IMO)

I've been reading and thinking about some of the descriptions of the ventral wing and if they all get close to the claims, they may help. The effects and benefits make sense to me. Of course, it will take time and experimentation to determine if the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. (As a point of reference, I spent half a season on a slot fin before deciding the drawbacks outweighed its considerable benefits....for me) So......I took a mini wing, bent it to the *TLAR angle and mounted at the TLAR point on the front of the fin and gave it a try. My normal wing stayed in place. With the disclaimer that I have one set on it an only skied some 35s, I found the descriptions about keeping the tip down and improved tracking to be on the mark. I do happen to have enough extra wings in my shop to add some testosterone to Chet's setup :) I am puzzled why Chet and others have cut down the wing. With a 0 deg angle, I would think need for a “ mini-mini” wing would be minimal. JD's comment about moving the bindings back seems like a logical next step. I have long been a believer in low drag wings, with low profile and tapered edges. The “standard” wing that comes on most skis achieves most of its effect more from turbulent drag than angle. *So far, that is one point where I agree with Eric.