ToddL

good info, skidawg.

Steven wrote:  "That looks cool! It looks like the rear panel expands to allow for release. Cool idea!" Isn't this the same concept on the Strada bindings...   They have a rubber heal to the shell allowing for expansion to pass the liner/foot heal through the ankle opening during a release.    These look just like the Radar binding but with a strap instead of the elastic draw strings.  Â

Thanks, folks. I assumed that those 3 and four ball times were magnet based for ZO boats.  You know what they say when one assumes... Now, I know.  ZO = no magnets required.

Confused... There have been comments about magnets not needed for ZO.  This may be true for a practice site, but at tournaments, we always need specific times for all buoys.  That means magnets at every set of boat guides and the gates. Right?

lakeo wrote, "Given that the sport is already so affluent..."   I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I teach tons of beginners and some people who are just trying to get past 4 ball in the course.   They ask me if they should replace that 1984 Jobe ski.  I suggest a few intermediate models which now run about $200-400 new.  They are stopped dead in their tracks.  You can see their excitement about our sport pop like a bubble as their smile fades...   They kind of relent to a likelihood that they will just ski on the public lakes with their families and not really compete.  Yep, golf is expensive at the top level. Snow skiing, too.  Little-league baseball is out of hand these days.  Fishing lures are $7 each.  Hmmm... maybe I need to ask for a raise at work... But I digress.  Back to the PV - great discussion!!! Not yet formed an opinion... Never had an opportunity to try it either. I struggle with buying a new $100 normal vest. (currently wearing an Outrageous vest bought at a garage sale for $5...)

For what it's worth... My 9 yo son skied at 17.4, 19.3, and 21.1 MPH behind the 200 in slalom mode.  He came up on the dock and without prompting said. "that wake was the best ever!"    Any boat that can make a 9 yo slalom skier comment so positively and unprovoked about the wakes is something to take note of...

What's the solution to safer magnets? From Jason's twitter post: jasonmcclintock Hit a magnet going through gates, worst fall I've ever taken slaloming. Ski stopped!http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c54102/x2_1c794dd http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c54102/x2_1c794dd

My other question is:  Where's the video footage taken with that setup? Inquiring minds want to know.

nice helmet cam, sans helmet...

I believe Marc told me this...  For RS-1/Strata bindings, use a small tie wrap as a stop point on the laces, preventing the cinch from being set beyond the safe point.    For buckle-style bindings, paint the tooth where you set the buckles.   By using these techniques, you can ensure a consistent setting each time you ski.  Marc said that a skier was complaining about how the first set was always better than the second set.  He discovered that the skier was over tightening the bindings on the second set since they were wet and felt looser.

I tend to over-think things sometimes... I agree with the other comments - keep it simple this time around. Questions:  If a skier skied in a multi-round tournament, do you count each round in your "last three" scores?  Also, if only one score per tournament is allowed in the skier's average, what's the rule in selecting which score from the multi-round tourny? (highest, avg each of last 3 tourny's, etc.)?

Another faulty assumption in these models is that a skier with a lower average score is more likely to improve. Skiers can stagnate at any point in their progress. Some people will just never improve above 32 off.  Some people will never see short line.  Some people will knock at the door of 38 off all their skiing careers.   Thus, pure delta from average for those people is probably fair as is...  However, there are some skiers who have not hit stagnation and continue to improve. They are the winners in this type of handicapping system. The skier who's average is about 22 off and who is progressing each time... He or she will be the one to post big deltas. Hmmm... I wonder if there is something about the number of years a skier has been skiing as a factor of the handicapping...  If the skier is new to competition, one would expect that skier to be improving at a higher rate than a skier who has been at this for many years.   Thus, a 35 off skier who has only been skiing for 2 years is more likely to be able to improve by lots of buoys when compared to another 35 off skier who has been skiing for 15 years.   Maybe that's part of the formula...    Need more coffee...

I burned some BTUs on this last night with excel. I wasn't satisfied with any of the models, so my assumption of how easy a formula would be may be incorrect. Attempt 1 - put zero buoys at the bottom, world record at the top.  Equally disperse those buoys across a 100 point range to create coeficients.  Thus, a single positive buoy delta for the world record holder would yield full value of that boy. However, a skier at the bottom end (say 6 buoy average), would have to ski like 100 buoys better to equate to the 1-buoy increase of the world record.     Issue - a bit to hard on the new skiers... Attempt 2 - start with the linear coefficients from attempt 1, but then apply a second coefficient in the form of a normal curve so as to no so severely limit the beginners.  However, this model resulted in making the mid-level skier's penalized deeply. Attempt 3 - drink more beer, get some sleep, try again later... I'll see what else I can come up with.   If anyone has an opinion about what "fair" weighting should look like, please share your thoughts.   How many buoys should a 22 off skier have to improve by to equate to a 1 buoy improvement from a skier at 39 1/2 off? What about LL skier? etc.

The issue about the upper level skiers have a greater effort to add buoys is an interesting one.  Double buoy deltas is one solution. However, if this is going to be tracked in a spreadsheet, then we could have a more complex formula... Consider a formula where:  Buoy Delta * Coefficient = Ranking Delta The Coefficient would start a 1 or 100%.   The top-level skiers would get this coefficient.  The coefficient value would decrease as the skier's average decreases.   Thus, a beginner skier with a average buoy count of less than 6 buoys may have a coefficient as low as 0.01.   We'd have to figure out a few scenarios for assigning the tiers or the formula for coefficients... We could come up with a formula where the current World Record represents 1.000 and 0 buoys represents 0.01 coefficient and all other buoy counts are equally dispersed between these two.   Then, the skier's average determines the skier's coefficient.  Thus, a beginner skier's ranking delta would be significantly reduced compared to a world record skier's ranking delta.  Thus, a beginner skier would have to improve by 100 buoys to equal a world record increase of 1 buoy. Other thoughts?

I have the new Strada Boots. When the liner is removed and you look intothe shell, there is a weave fabric on the toe foot bed. In one of the boots, the edge of this fabric has come loose from the plastic shell such that inserting the liner folds about 1/2 inch of the fabric back onitself. Has anyone else seen this? If so, what did you do about it? If you fixed it yourself, what type of glue/epoxy did you use? (It appears to be epoxied such that the fabric was saturated through during the original installation.) I bought these gently used. Not sure if Radar will address this as a warranty issue or not. Thoughts? Regards, Todd http://www.thewaterskiforum.com/webbbs/images/main/pic58989.jpg (The pic is the good boot. The boot with the issue currently has tape over the edge of the fabric, so I can't show you the fabric coming up.)ÂÂ

One more... http://i754.photobucket.com/albums/xx185/ToddL_bucket/PA300448.jpg

Removed pic since MAD was having a bad hair day.   Enjoy the pics of Bailey. She's a better skier anyway. ÂÂ

OK... this may be basic stuff for some of you fin setting experts, but I'm just getting started really working with fin settings. Here's the question: If my ski adjustments calls for removing some tip, wouldn't that action alone result in also changing the fin length?   I'm assuming that the screw near the back of the fin stays tight and then the tip of the fin is moved inward. Or, do you add depth to compensate for tip reduction so that over all fin length is maintained? Sorry, I just don't quite get it.

Water is also flowing into Frameswitch Ski Lakes north of Austin.ÂÂ

1) As the water gets colder, what are the basic/typical fin adjustments that are recommended? 2) Also, I'm on a ski that is new to me 67" RCX.  I started with factory fin setting, then took a little more tip out due to stalling deep tip and breaking at waist on the off-side turns.  Now, the ski is on a rail around my off-side turns.  However, once I hook up and head into the wake, I always rock back on my back foot making myself narrow into the on-side buoys. Thus, my on-side turns are rushed due to no cast out in the pre turn. I am thinking that I am probably over compensating at the finish of the turn to avoid getting too deep on the tip. Does that theory make sense? Is there possibly something else at play?   Most importantly, do I need to take more tip out of the fin??? Or something else?  What do the fin-tweak masters out there do?

I agree with ClemsonDave.  It depends.   I coach a lot of novice skiers.  I explain to them that slalom skiing is about balance.  If you explode off the ball and cross the wakes with intense speed, then you have to balance that with a earlier, more abrupt, and further/deeper edge change. I've seen really good skiers who don't understand this balance. When they have an issue at a buoy and have to stay on edge long to the next one, they don't know what to do.  That longer lean has to be balanced with a much more abrupt and fuller edge change to a deeper inside edge.   When I watch West Coast, I am amazed at how much angle they generate and maintain across the first wake. This translates into earlier path and more acceleration.  They've accomplished all the angle and acceleration needed in a shorter amount of time across the wake.  Thus, they can edge change earlier, and more smoothly.   When I watch old school, I see them take a more conservative angle across the boat's path and then hold it longer.  They have to do this to get to the same point prior to the next turn.   Thus, their edge change is later.   The timing/amount of effort is different, thus for each style to achieve balance, the timing and abruptness of the edge change is different for each.   Still, each style is in balance with itself.

I hadn't heard of the Strada line. It appears to have replaced the RS-1 line.  Here's a link to a 2010 flier that I found: http://www.squareoneco.com/dealer/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=445&Itemid=2 Regards, Todd

Does anyone have a name and contact info for a person at ZeroOff?   I'd like to chat with a human over there.  My emails have been unanswered.

There has been some rain in the Austin, TX area.  Please keep your prayers and well wishes or rain dances going!    We need several more days of focused soakings to put water back into our ski lakes.

More pics and a cell phone video.   http://www.waterskiaustin.com/Lakes/drought2009.htm Most of these pics are over 1 month old - so they don't really tell the current story. Austin, TX (Central Texas Area) - Austin Aquaplex - completely dry Frameswitch Ski Lakes - completely dry San Marcos River Ranch - 1 skiable lake out of 4 ÂÂ