elr

I wonder if you can still ski a surf lake . . .

I put my son on a wakeboard [sacrilege I know] before a single ski - he got up and went RFF for a while then went LFF and stayed there.

Yep - 2 drop skis at Nationals

I have seen a drop ski used at Nationals

I like Aliaksei's proposal as a way to implement partial credit. Straight entry of judges pink sheets should not take more scoring time than reconciliation. I can see removing flip limits but ONLY WITH A WHOLESALE RE-EVALUATION OF TRICK VALUES. I think that currently flips are overvalued vis-a-vis other tricks. For instance I think that T5F (350) TWLBB (480)/TWLO (480)/SL5s (550) are substantially more difficult to perform than BFL (500). I think I would work on values and scoring reverses (T[W}B = RT[W]B really?) rather then limits. Set the point values properly and limits can be removed. IMO a high end toe pass is the most crowd engaging part of 3 event - at least it was for me the first time I saw one.

@RazorRoss3 the best slalom and jump skiers would not be disadvantaged with one pass either - they would still win. Trick skiers with similar first and second pass scores are highly disadvantaged in a one pass format - even at the highest levels the placements will change.

@Broussard the perverted logic I am referring to is that a large percentage of collegiate skiers don't run a pass or land a jump - so make them one pass events like trick to save time. Nothing to do with the score book.

Sorry - I have not heard a reasonable argument why a two pass, one fall, no set down trick event as @eleeski suggested cannot be implemented. Why are skiers with enough tricks for two passes disadvantaged because some skiers don't have enough for one? By that logic it should be one pass slalom and jump as well.

One pass, no flip limit, tricks is a very different event and has an impact on podium placements. If time needs to be saved maybe two jumps saves move time than one pass trick.

Wow - sorry to hear that - hope nobody is hurt. Is the boat sideways in the slip?

When I think back on what increased tournament participation the most in the SCR over the last decade or so - it was, believe it or not, Show Skiing. A substantial number of very accomplished SCR junior tournament skiers and their families crossed over from/to the Lake McQueeney Ski Bees. Show skiing seems (I haven't been involved) a bit more recreationally oriented and appears to generate excitement among younger skiers and their families in what appears to be a less expensive manner. Maybe we should start thinking about thinking about tournament sets as separate acts in a ski show if we want to draw crowds.

Biggest $$$$ should be for OA IMO . . .

You probably want to keep your rubber edge and add a hard edge (yes best for flips) for your handle pass- the best trick skiers use a rubber edge ski for their toe pass.

If you haven't worn through the rubber on your Masterline handle they will restring it - $40 including reinstalling the arm guard.

I am very excited that @JeffSurdej brought this topic over from the B3 36MPH thread for focused discussion. I believe that this proposal allows for a number of beneficial things to occur for developing skiers without changing the essence of competition at higher levels: In terms of tournament participation, as I stated in the B3 discussion, we used to have minimum start speeds that were 6mph below shortening speed, that rule kept my older son from skiing in tournaments. When the rule was lifted tournament participation increased. This proposal would have a similar impact for skiers that want to ski/score at other than age group maximum speed. In terms of skier development, my son just skied his last B3 Nationals as a very athletically young 18 year old (17 ski years old). There are B2 kids that are more athletically mature than he is. He COA qualified (1 @ -32 @ 36) in slalom for Nationals his last two years of B3. A big reason he stayed engaged in the sport was because his trick skiing allowed him to OA qualify for Nationals his last two years of B2 - which made the trip worthwhile. Looking back at it I believe he would have progressed faster and more safely in slalom if we had slowed down and shortened to get through -28 at 28, 30, 32, 34, and then 36 then we did chasing maximum age division speed @ -15. The kids that are running -28 seem to have well established technique and have no problem upping speed. In terms for understanding scoring; 3000 trick points are 3000 trick points in every age division; 200 feet equals 200 feet in jump in every age division; but wait 6@-22/34 equals 66 for B3/M1/M2 but 88 for B2/M3-6. Is the B3/M1/M2 skier really 75% as good as the M3-6 skier? Using zero based scoring it becomes easier to compare scores across age groups. In terms of spectators it may be easier to understand a "102 buoy pass" than "38 off" at various speeds. In terms of incentive to ski higher speeds there is a 6 buoy incentive for each speed increment, you choose your speed to maximize your score - not because it is "easiest". If you think that there isn't a 6 buoy difference between -38/36 and -39/34 ski faster. In terms of competition, this will NOT change 1st thru 5th place at placement tournament like Regional/Nationals - not a trophy for everybody - those placement go to elite skiers anyway who will ski at the speed that maximizes their score. In terms of IWWF conformity, World List skiers will easily conform their tournament sets (Class L and R) to World List standards. Class E and L/R groups in tournaments would let skiers choose the rules they want to compete under. The proposal will allow developing/mid-range skiers to ski at the right speed for them. I think we need our rules to be more skier development friendly.

There is a reason why trickers love the higher speed trick wakes on the 197. Its the same reason the lower speed slalom skiers are not so thrilled.

I had micro-discectomies at three lumber levels a few years back. In addition to core, stretching, warm-up, and proper skiing form I've found the following to be helpful: - Move wallet from back pocket to front; - Following the PT's gait training advice [i ended up actively pushing my hips forward as I walked]; - Get to a "good" weight and lose ten more pounds, and; - Powervest

@Than_Bogan @John Brooks Especially for the Juniors but even for adults I believe that the rules should allow for individual developmentally appropriate shortening speeds in AWSA tournaments (Class E and below), just like jump speeds and ramp angles. We used to have minimum start speeds that were 6mph below shortening speed, that rule kept my older son from skiing in tournaments. Along the lines of 36MPH being an incentive I believe the maximum speed for all males should be 36 mph. Scoring is per a buoy count table - 6 buoys per speed increment (starting at 15MPH), 6 buoys per shortening (Starting at LL). e.g. opening pass at 34/-22 scores 84 buoys regardless of division. First shortening after opening pass determines max speed for the round. There is a 6 buoy incentive for skiing @ 36 MPH v 34MPH that you can choose to take in any age group. You can choose to shorten at a speed you are comfortable with. This will NOT change 1st thru 5th place at placement tournament like Regional/Nationals - not a trophy for everybody - those placement go to elite skiers anyway who will ski at the speed that maximizes their score. . World List skiers will easily conform their tournament sets to World List standards. It will allow developing/mid-range skiers to ski at the right speed for them. I think we need our rules to be more skier development friendly.

How about No Earlier Than [NET] times for skier groupings - all events. The NET times would likely slow the rush that @MattP experienced as there would be less of an incentive for getting through skiers quickly. They would also help the wait time that @texas_slalom_trick experienced as there would be an official "safe arrival time." With entry fees and travel costs as high as they are we need to try to be skier friendly.

My son just skied his last B3 Nationals as a very athletically young 18 year old (17 ski years old). There are B2 kids that are more athletically mature than he is. He COA qualified (1 @ -32 @ 36) in slalom for Nationals his last two years of B3. A big reason he stayed engaged in the sport was because his trick skiing allowed him to OA qualify for Nationals his last two years of B2 - which made the trip worthwhile. Looking back at it I believe he would have progressed faster and more safely in slalom if we had slowed down and shortened to get through -28 at 28, 30, 32, 34, and then 36 then we did chasing maximum age division speed @ -15. The kids that are running -28 seem to have no problem upping speed. My suggestion is that: 1) the maximum speed for males B1 to MB be 36 mph, females G1 to WB be 34 mph; 2) scores from the buoy count table (speed/line length) e.g. LL @ 15.5 = 6, -43 @ 36 = 126 3) first complete pass not discounted to LL for being under max speed; 4) no change in speed after shortening from starting line length. This schema allows folks to develop skiing skills at a pace that is appropriate for their level of athleticism and maturity. Both World List and JD skiers can plan their skiing appropriately. Results at placement tournaments will not change although records for B1 and B2 may get higher - could be that Griffin may be able to go more than 2.5 @ -38/36.

A shaped Jr ski like the Obrien Jr Vortex (think it used to be called Amigo) ($150 for a pair) would be best - easy to get up on and kids can run the course into the high 20s on it. A lot of B1/G1 kids in the SCR on these a few years ago. I've donated mine to the next set of little ones . . .

When my son's jumpers were short enough we would pack Slalom/Trick in one Sport Tube and Jump in a second. Never had to pay for luggage (or sign a damage waiver) on Southwest with two of us going - 4 bags free. Only problem was a 1 hour delay in getting the tubes from the holding area out to us - very nerve wracking thinking the skis didn't make it.

The thing I told my son that helped the most was "get out to where the buoys are (e.g. the buoy line) fast as you can." I also had him run the big course on whatever he was riding at the time, be it a ski skimmer, wakeboard, doubles, slalom ski with a huge weave that got smaller and smaller.

I've driven practice for a number of -32 to -38 skiers. From the drivers seat the biggest difference I felt between them and the skier I pulled that regularly gets into -41 is the intensity and placement of the work zone. The -41 skier loaded the boat with more intensity. Loading was later going to ball to 1st wake and lasted longer going from 2nd wake to ball. I think being able to load the boat on the turning edge is the difference. At least that's what I felt by the seat of my pants.

If you, your family, or friends are going to be learning to ski the course (e.g. LL and 15 off @ less than 34 mph) a cross-over boat is not a good choice in my experience. Given that you need an OB I would recommend a slalom specific OB but not the MC 197 (its a great trick boat for a reason) if this is your situation. A 97+ Ski Nautique Open Bow or slalom specific Malibu OB would be on my list of boats to try.