aguylikeshark

rossi's rippin' ski looks good. re: reason for wheelies when the line gets shorter - since the skier is further up on the boat, more time and energy is being put down in the turn, to a slower speed. if you are not perfectly balanced over the ski at the end of the turn the tail of the ski stalls out = wheelie. if the boat picks you back up too late, your're done for. this is what makes 41 so difficult - all of the turn is done after the ball. re: driving - weaving the boat is a great way to work down a pass and get into the mindset of running it. to believe you can run the pass = more relaxed skiing, less tension. for the second 41 pass pause action/ look at the boat path/wash and if it is centered or moved over to the skier's advantage.

i just put a video (twitter/youtube/FM Site) on a workout system perfect for skiers. a local doctor/athlete has been using it and i got introduced to it by Angela - a trainer at our gym. i bought two of these right away. people at the gym say "hey that looks like waterskiing". it does - but i would say it's more like tricking which gives you a full rounded workout.

last year i worked on two concept bouys. 1. the bouy is a half moon shaped so there is min water displacement - onl;y the regulation profile/volume is exposed. it's the displaced water that is the biggest component in upsetting the ski. 2. a soft form that fits around existing bouys so there is no need to buy new, and courses can be retro-fit. 3. A new non-inflatable bouy made from the ultralon foam, the same foam used in our (intuition) liners. coated like a crock shoe - very durable, never sink. I got stuck on #2 and the cost/benefit for #3 there was no budget to do this.ÂÂ

Velcro high technology hook and the proper loop does in fact hold as much as dual lock (per sq in). the limit of hold is the adhesive on the back side. hook&loop releases in peel, and does this smoothly because there are 1000's of expandable connections. dual lock is very abrupt - less connections, on or off. hook and loop is very durable and long lasting, with connection force dropping off per 100's of release/closures. it requires that the user twist or wiggle in to allow the loops to hook-up. dual lock is very inconsistent past the first set of release/closures and drops as the mushroom stems fatigue and damage- there are no back-ups. with loop there are 100's of unused loops (like brain cells) and the hook is much more durable as well. dual look is good for attaching with ample margin(e.g. 50% more than min required). we could have used either but hook and loop was much better - more compact, durable, user friendly, available and inexpensive and i really like the way hook and loop skis so we "stuck" with that on the quattro system. the knock on quattros is a bit more time consuming to setup and some extra weight due to the sole plates. all my ski buddies have stayed on their systems for the past 5 years. i went to E's for development sake and we are selling way more of the E's too. I am not surprised at the rate of injury on dual lock. it might take a couple of years, maybe 4 or 5 if you are both good and lucky, but you will get bitten. hook and loop is a great way to augment screws. if you mount to a goode for example, laying down some hook, put loop on the bottom of the boot plates and use 10 screws. we have done this and others too. it works great. i have a small patch under my rear heel of my e's too.

Designed the eboots as infinitely adjustable F&R (and side to side). Plates mount to everything. we sourced cushioned SS washer/fasterners to hold the plates in place. it's working great. http://www.jagersport.com/images/clockwork3.JPG

rewind to what I said - cold temps will turn the plastic (hdpe) of dual lock to rock, increasing release force a lot. same thing if you go to hot - the stuff will let go easier. dual lock is light, simple to make plates and it's convenient to doll it out to everyone for a low cost boot system. almost impossible to self test your boots because it gets damaged with every latch and unlatch. you hit the right roller it will do the same thing as hitting the ball. just like karina's crash the ski can grab in a regular turn.so you are still up sh**'s creek. two skiers showed up at our lake on d/l, went home with broken boots, which was lucky it would have been their ankle.  ÂÂ

best off making the bouys as small and soft as possible. volume or surface area is the factor in displacement. water inside water has no effect as was stated numerous times b4. hitting a roller, a ball or upsetting the ski's attitude, results in a hard grab, and that is where the boots have to release quickly. dual-locked in this won't happen. dual lock is also really inconsistent in terms of attachment. it can vary up to 50% in the force tests we did here. add temperature, wear and water to the mix and I am amazed skiers are getting it to work. no engineer would put their PE stamp on a ski application.

shallow, contaminated or polluted lakes - any lake with a lot of stuff in it that lowers viscosity (not minerals or acidic), and not much new input flow will see less of a fluctuation. A living natural lake, deep will start to bloom in the summer, hold for Sept, but as the leaves & rain falls (more fresh input), start to purify over the fall and winter. So there is a double whammy going on - esp for northern lakes.

good discussion. the basic is that is that anything that impacts or contacts the water will see a greater force applied to it. from there it gets more complex because of the variables we manipulate on a slalom ski to shape turns - from ski sizing, flex, boots, fin shape, fin dft, length, depth, fin surface area and finally wing angle itself. Now 60 deg here and the water is heavy, i changed out all of the above - based on the simple principle, skiing great too for the conditions. wing resting at about 5 deg. any more my arms are falling off.  if you are lucky or unlucky to be skiing in a shallow ditch then the effects of temp and water changes may be no big deal.

there is a lot of ankle freedom in that boot. we used to carbon the lower shell -same thing. fm boots are stout enough they already have the stiffener molded in along the shoe portion of the boot. ben has the orig ski tech boot there - that is a really low cut boot, low cuff with side out for the leg.  what you need to do is measure the buckle height from the floor of the boot to get a proper comparison.. he's added a couple of stiffeners off the back, indicates to me that the ski tail might be dopping away so needs to have something from the boot going back, this happens when you run 39-41 at 34 mph in FL lots of tail stalling in the turns.ÂÂ

karina was skiing there weeks before but don't know if she made changes from FL. look at cp's 2 ball 41, my 41 video on the event for clues. water makes ski act fin back so combination of a little more speed in the turn and more dig = tip/ski grabs, on the softer ski, it folds up and grabs more, you're done. no release from boots so fast rotation into the water. scared the heck out of me, but her instincts prevented handle contact. strained her front ankle/achilles. right square in front of the Goode booth, jill knutson went down to help/see if she was all right.

i captured karina's crash at the tour on video. that was a non-release, she did well to miss the handle. don't have the link handy right now. search sharkgts or karina crash

same basic principles apply to all skis but they def have their own personalities. ski performance links a number of characteristics together so depending on where you're at in terms of line length and ski tuning, adjustments might work out or feel different. anything that impacts the water will see a greater force against it as the water cools: front of ski raised (bow wave/sidewall/bevel pressure) fin blade has more grip in the thicker water (reducing slip on the ski) wing has more force boots forward a bit or drop a size in ski, A reduction in fin area/fin back (harder to do) or move fin forward to restore slip (easier) reduction in wing angle I dropped to the 66.25 ski and made appropriate adjustments, skis great. i think i will stay on the 66.25 too.

slalom has two phases, on the rope and off the rope. photo above is off the rope. off the rope, offside you need most support, more if you are longer lines or don't ski regularly. onside less support - just like fin adjustments. phaseII is on the rope - there you gain support from the line and need to have either an out point at the ankles (low cut, soft cuff etc.), and/or the boot system to flex (as above), or (quattro/e-series) the boot to roll out a bit. slalom we don't go over about 6" of boot depth. ben has his bracket all below the ankle joint - forms a sole pce so his boot doesn't twist right out of the heel pce. The boot is pretty soft and there isn't much platform there also just the hoop so it can deform and pop out under hard pulls. That is why a lot of users have to crank their releases to high tensions (>5) and risk late or delayed or non-releases using the silvretta if the boot is gummy. if your boots are too stiff this creates excessive line load, speed control jacking and skiing will be harsh at short lines.

after riding my usual fin settings and having persistant issues on my offside, i just set the 66.25 up at stock (I went 2.500 6.860 0.765) and it skis really nice. might make a few tweeks after i hit the course tomorrow but overall feels really good. photos at fluidmotionski on twitter.

The optimum setup in my opinion is a supportive boot that can roll. This is the theory behind the quattro setup. The boot itself is allowed to roll a bit on the ski. If that' can't be done then the boot itself needs to give a bit. This allows a lower body position in the pull. Support for the turns - flexing in the pull so the skier can compress. But no matter what the flex you need contact - downward on the ski. Just like rubber boots they do this well. Too loose this way and you lose feedback on the ski. A well tuned setup and top lower leg strength you need less from your boots. that is why pros are using very low-cut setups for slalom. Slalom crosses over to hockey/skating more than any other sport - and I do them all (ski, board, skate). I use very similar properties in my skates as I do in my slalom boots, skating being the more critical setup.  ÂÂ

My trip to the tour stop - all skiers are on 67" 66.25 65's. I am 6-1 and 175 which is the same as JT or Willy riding 66/66.25. CP's on a 67.25 227 amp. Miller rides the 65.5. I spent the summer riding the 67.5" A1 - which is as big as any 68". Getting cold & hyper fast here so ordered up a 66.25" and it in fact skis bouys, and turns esp the onside.

There is a list in the credits... and we are bundling a partial soundtrack CD with the 32 accounts DVD on the FM website. One of the bands (opening, Karina, Aidan Willers/Nicole, Rat Stokes, and closer) is from our town on Vancouver Island.

of that list the only setup (ie off the shelf) you can actually buy is Travers and maybe Rodgers.

put some boots on the postal scale quickly this morning - weights are approx for lbs multiply by 2.2 one of the heaviest setups would be a Silvretta/wiley combo. Rubber boots are heavy in general too. Wiley 1.5 kg RS-1 2.6 (Pr 1.3 each) estimated for the thicker plate which is much heavier. Reflex est 1.5 (silvretta alone is 0.25) FM E Series 1.0 FM Evo Z 0.9 FM Quattro Boot 1.2 (just one boot with sole plate) FM Revo with clamp, silvretta 1.6 Powershells - shells are light, plate is big tho - don't have them here to weigh.

but parrish is not?

deleted http://twitpic.com/g1xgg

the issues we had, that's three skiers who rode it  - i believe are to do with the ski's flat spot location,  not fin or binding placement. I had my boots forward 29 3/4 or more. I could not land the ski (or water) under my front boot pre and in the offside turn, like I wanted too. at the finish of the turn the tip "fell" down and i took off like a rocket. it feels like the pressure point, by moving the f/s rearward, levitates the tip of the ski. now if you are heavvier or softer water this might be masked but quite easy to see on video taken. very different ride from an A1, D3, Sixam goode etc. you can only do so much with a fin, the ski is a big, or bigger part of the overall equation.

if you are on the 2 point that should be enough ski for 175lbs - that is a wide shape. I skied the 1.0 66" and i am 175- skied very nice. Anyway boots need to be placed to put the pressure center of the ski's (bow wave) under your front foot heel area. this is done by feel - numbers are only numbers. softer water, softer skis you may have to run boots more back. stiffer skis, larger skis, firmer water you'll need to be forward to make contact. then there is personal preference. going back is a "faster" ski if you like to jump or can jump on the front. i don't .... i like a balanced setup i like to feel my front boot on the lake and the ski to nose in for me. ÂÂ

A1 is a great ski, i have to say the best i've ever ridden. cold or pure water is much firmer than soft/contaminated/etc. So the ski rides up higher on the bow wave, putting you back on the ski. Also the fin locks in much better. takes more energy/power to ski in pure or cold water. so everything works against you. boots ahead to get some contact, fin ahead to restore slip, reduce depth, increase length to put the ski down on edge and reduce the wing angle so the tail is not lowered and match the ski's flatter planing angle. i run the CR pacific fin on the A1 which we designed specifically for cold/pure conditions. the clarity or purity of the water has much more effect on the ski than temperature. the water in Calgary was cool 68-70F but it was greasy due to the impurities so it still skied decent enough to see some 39's. 3 @41 was an AAA of a score, best ski for the job, helluva skier on it.