jdarwin

I second the Sonar - then add fish to maintain. The more you rake and disturb the plant, the more it spreads. Sonar is a great product but is VERY expensive. $3500 to treat my 10 acre lake 3 years ago. But with the fish added afterward, no problems since.

www.lakesatcottonwood.com

Karl - as I understand it, INT has a very different cost structure associated with their tournaments. Afterall, it is a "for-profit" venture as opposed to the USAWS model. Correct?

Brad - I was on the RCX for two years and moved to the Z7 in the fall. I scored my first PB in 5 years at my September tournament (two weeks on the ski). The Z7 may be a bit faster but what it does better is protect width off the 2nd wake and carry more speed into and out of the turn. I found this resulted in better off-side turns. The RCX was my favorite ski - I hated to give it up. But the Z7 is better - its my new "favorite" ski. jhd

If this ski is "better" than the Z7, I'll have to see it to believe it! I PB'd for the first time in 5 years on my Z7 in Sept. I'll certainly have to try one.

http://www.lakesatcottonwood.com/Snow.jpg

Disland and the group at Princeton treat promos guys well. They cover ALL their expenses and allow free entry into the tournament. The days of taking promo guys for granted are over. As for the future, I'm optimistic that AWSA will continue to "modify" the towboat requirement rules in order to maintain tournament count. I have an 07 SN w/ ZO and PP at my site that I anticipate using for the next 3-5 years. As the number of factory promo boats continues to dwindle, it will be up the host sites to provide towboats for their tournaments.

I just mailed off $1000 to sanction my tournaments this summer. By the time I pay the head tax to the region at the end of the summer, I will have spent close to $1400 in "fees" to hold 5 tournaments. And, I still have to do all the work, cover all the expenses and assume all the liability. My interest in hosting tournaments is beginning to wane. jhd

How dominant is the State of Louisiana in "championship games" you ask? Saints are 1-0 in Super Bowl, LSU baseball team 6-0 in CWS championship games and LSU football is 2-0 in BCS title games for a perfect 9-0 mark. Oh, LSU is actually 4-0 all time in BCS games...............laissez les bon temps rouler!!!!!!!!!

Actually, it should be titled "From Belarus with Love" - but that's semantics - great video.

I've got an 07 SN  could be talked out of. And I know an 08 Malibu w/ ZO that is pristine!

lkb - to a certain extent, that has always been the case. Any good agreement has "exit clauses" built in. In insurance contracts, they are called "exceptions". Meaning, if you failed IN ANY MANNER to abide by the rules and regulations, all bets are off as far as their coverage is concerned. As site owners, we have the responsibility (and ultimately the liability) to expend due diligence to make certain our events are run within the scope of the rules. We’re no further out on a limb this year than we’ve been in the past. The difference is that it has been made visible this year thru the execution of these addendums. In the end, USAWS’s insurance provider is simply increasing the amount of their deductible from $500k to $1mil.ÂÂ

As a tournament organizer/site owner, your a$$ has been on the line for years - the USAWS insurance is 3rd party at best. Meaning, the skiers health insurance is primary, the boat owner's insurance is secondary and any other insurance covering the host site then responds. After all other remedies have been exhausted, THEN and only then, does the USAWS insurance respond. You get what you pay for.

No - you must show eligibility from the school you are competing for and have at least a "C" average. Eligibility letters are generated from the school's registrar's office.

I work for beer!

MS - I'll be your Chief Driver again if you promose the weather will be warm!

Karl: I can appreciate your point of view. We ran 4-6 "INT-style" Class "F" tournaments per year from 1994 until 2000. But most of the skiers who currently attend my tournaments are Regional/National level skiers. The availability of tournament approved boats has a direct impact on my ability to host tournaments. Tournament revenue is critical to the operation of my site. Perhaps we'll have to adjust our business model in the future but for now, I have a vested interest in seeing the rules adjusted to allow for more flexibility with the Towboat Rules.

Mark - I thought the day would come when sites would either have to provide their own tournament boats or pay to have them. I guess that day has come. It will be interesting over the next several weeks as Regions host their mid-winter meetings to see the impact that promo boats (lack of) have had on tournaments in 2009 and will have in 2010. I anticipate that the availability of tournament boats will be a prominent subject at all of these meetings.

John: I would not hold my breath regarding ZO's development of a "Perfect Pass" setting. What would be their rational for doing so? It states that "many members have been unable (unwilling) and are not likely to purchase new boats". So, by developing software that is similar to Perfect Pass, they eliminate completely the need to purchase a new (newer) boat. That is a BAD business model. ZO has created demand in the marketplace for their product. This request by AWSA would evaporate demand overnight. I hope the towboat committee is not naive enough to believe that ZO would seriously consider such a move. As for the list of boats being so small, it comes down to money. AWSA charges upwards of $10k for "approval". The ROI is simply not there in the 3-event tournament market.

Richard - the Towboat Comm extended the "current or prior year" rule to 3 years for Class C and under. They put in some language that gives them the option to approve older boats based on condition, cruise system, etc. There is no guarantee that you will be able to use a boat older than 3 years and the granting of an exception will certainly have political implications. Those exceptions will probably differ from region to region and will create even more issues for the Towboat Comm to resolve. Still, a current year or prior year must be used in Record tournaments regardless if there are any available. You can go to France and set a world record behind a 1996 Ski Nautique - why not here? Quick answer: $.

John: I posted this on another forum in October, 2008. I think it is still applies today. CC, MC and Malibu have lobbied hard NOT to adjust the "current year" rule for towboats. The towboat committee has added a year on to Class "C" and below but left the rule for record tournaments in tact. This was probably a compromise w/ the towboat manufacturers. I've inserted some comments regarding what has occured to date: October 30, 2008: If you don’t ski tournaments, don't bother reading further. This won’t affect you. But there is a “perfect storm†brewing that will mute the “Zero Off vs. Perfect Pass†debate: 2009 Promo Boats. For those of you who are members of the Big Three’s Promo Teams, this isn’t news. There have been very few 2008 promo boats sold. Therefore, there will be very few 2009 boats available to pull tournaments. Certainly, the promo member can used his 2008 boat to pull tournaments in 2009. But, will they? The additional credits may help to offset the additional depreciation but only if the boat is sold. The way (most) promo members are compensated is credit on the purchase of their next boat. Therefore, if they don’t sell their current boat and order a new one, all that investment (i.e. out of pocket costs) is gone. They may elect to bite the bullet today (and keep/retire their current boat) rather than chew on a potential bomb next year. (many have elected to do this causing our current situation). The 2008 Malibu guys find themselves in the biggest “pickleâ€Â. If a Malibu promo member elects to pull tournaments, they can either use the current PP system or spend $2k to upgrade to Zero Off (Malibu did assist several promo members w/ the cost to upgrade). Why would they upgrade? They are already taking a hit on the price of the boat – why make that hit worse? If they elect to use PP, they are the odd man out – MC and CC will be exclusive ZO. So, we’re back to the PP vs. ZO argument that we all thought would be a thing of the past in 2009 (2010 may see a return to PPSG as older boats are used). But that’s not the worst part. What if most of the current roster of Big 3 promo members decide to bail on the program and not pull ANY tournaments next year? (This occured throughout the country). I doubt they will receive any type of monetary encouragement from the manufacturers. 3-event skiing is a charity – not a profit center. I’m convinced one or more of the Big 3 may drop the program entirely by the end of next year – one in particular has that on the table as you read this. Therefore, for those of us who host and compete in tournaments, the next two years will define our sport like no other. USAWS will be forced to suspend or modify their current regulations with regard to “current year†towboats (already has occured w/ the latest from the Towboat Committee).  Host sites will have to become self-sufficient relative to tow boats (I upgraded to a 2007 SN w/ ZO due to lack of promo boats in our area). The consistency we debated regarding PP vs. ZO will become an unobtainable goal due to the vast number of tow boats that will inevitably be put (back) into tournament use. I hope I’m wrong but I saw this coming back in 2005 when I chose to leave CC’s promo team after 15 years. As the price of boats continued to escalate, it became more and more difficult to sell a $35-40k “used†boat. A major economic decline would render that next to impossible (this came to pass). If someone is lucky enough to unload their current boat, they have to be asking themselves if it is worth remaining in the program and taking that risk again (most have decided to "retire" once their current boat sold - further reducing the available inventory of promo boats).

Yea, the gloves got smaller! I say the same this about my vest.ÂÂ

There has been no confirmation from ZO to this effect but having heard it from numerous sources, I tend to believe it may happen. I would think that pressure was brought to bear from the boating public as well as the governing bodies (USAWS, IWWF, etc.).ÂÂ

Tom - I've heard KX - / PX 15 or 20 gives a simlar pull to ZO "A". If what I hear is correct, ZO is working on reverse engineering a pull similar to PPSG so all this may be a moot point.

Actually Tom, the response would be slower. The jump setting is designed to react to a higher weight input (pull from the skier) than is slalom. I believe slalom is around 125 lbs before reacting and jump is around 200 lbs.