lottawatta

It was my understanding that the insurance payouts were mostly the result of incidents during covered practices and not actual sanctioned events. In that case, I would argue that AWSA has the highest exposure. However, I do see Jody's point that going around 6 buoys is probably less risky than a dock start pyramid or 80mph behind a v-drive.

2011 funding: ABC: $4,822 AKA: $429 AWSA: $34,440 NCWSA: $3,840 NSSA: $20,650 NWSRA: $6,074 USHA: $317 USAWB: $5,975 WSDA: $2,592

From the Board mtg. Minutes: ABC: 520 Active Members,25 sanctioned tournaments, 6 GrassRoots tournaments and 2 skier clinics in 2011. AKA: 146 Active Members and conducted 14 sanctioned tournaments in 2011. AWSA: 8200 Active Members, 546 sanctioned tournaments, 128 GrassRoots tournaments and 83 skier clinics in 2011. NCWSA: 887 Active Members, 41 sanctioned tournaments and 2 GrassRoots tournaments in 2011. NSSA: 5397 Active Members, 10 sanctioned tournaments and 73 skier clinics. NWSRA: 432 Active Members, 12 sanctioned tournaments and 2 GrassRoots tournaments in 2011. USA‐WB: 1053 Active Members, 17 sanctioned tournaments, 16 GrassRoots tournaments in 2011. USHA: 108 Active Members, 3 sanctioned tournaments, 3 GrassRoots tournaments and 2 skier clinics in 2011. WSDA: 88 Active Members, 3 sanctioned tournaments, 1 GrassRoots tournament and 16 skier clinics in 2011.

According to the rules (10.06 c) you take off another .25 meter.

I would try your local county extension office ASAP. link here: http://plants.ifas.ufl.edu/

I don't think we are near the peak yet (just my opinion). This was an active week with the major sunspots visable at sunset and three CME's. The solar storm resulting from the CME's hit this afternoon. I wouldn't doubt that those in wisconsin for the bu open could see the auroras tonight if they look north for the next few hours (10-2am local time there). For those so inclined, see www. spaceweather.com (I have no affiliation with the site, I am a just a solar/physics geek) for more info on this week's solar activity. There were reports of minor GPS and communication discrepancies this afternoon particularly with aviation near the poles. I would be interested to know if anyone noticed any ZO or stargazer problems this afternoon evening between 3 and 9 EST.

EZ Slalom. Hands down, the best engineered course and the best customer service.

try: guy@accuski.com In the mean time, I don't know if I have an older version or not, but I do have the accuski2000 manual somewhere at home, I will check tonight.

She is no longer skiing or competing, but as of last summer she was in an assisted living facility near Akron. I know she continued to ski in Florida for some time after, the last tournament I saw her at was in Piqua Ohio at the last Atomic Open about 10 years ago.

Hit the flipper, skipper. Make it happen, Captain. I make the kids say, "In Gear", and "Hit It."

I asked my Dad this question. He has been around tournaments since the late 1950's. He said the dimesions were likely set by Chuck Sleigh and/or Bill Clifford sometime in the early 1950s when they fine tuned the rules for the AWSA rule book. His further comments: "When I came into the sport, the Slalom course was 90 feet longer. The distance from the end "gates" to the boat guide buoys of the first scoring ball was 135 ft., the same as the distance between all other Boat Guides. The end gates scored as an additional point, so a full pass was 8 points. Course was shortened, probably around '62 to '65. Scoring changed, I think, around the early '70s." Side note to John: My dad served on the board with your dad in the early 70's. JL

More members = more headaches. Less members = more fun. I tell all my members up front: I am not in the business of running a ski lake. If they put me in the business of running a ski lake by mediating disputes, or catering to thier needs, they will be asked to leave. I set reasonable rules. I expect help getting ready for and during tournaments / clinics / etc. I only ask people to join if I think they will be a good fit and get along with everyone else. Every ski club needs a couple of people (besides the owner/s) who are are ready to get their hands dirty and take an equal interest in getting work done. If all the work is left to the owner, it makes for a bad situation for all. I tell my club members they are NOT paying to ski at my lake, they are simply sharing in my expenses in exchange for use of the water. There is no way anyone could ever convince me that a ski club with 20 members+ familes can coexist peacefully on a sigle lake site. My max is ten single / family memberships (each membership gets you one spot in the rotation), which works out to about 20 active skiers. I am in the third incarnation of a ski club at my lake (2011 will be my 18th season of lake ownership), and before lake ownership I started a club on public water, so my opinions come from lessons learned. I have offered a club boat in the past, but few members saw an advantage to it as everyone had their own at the time. We have been lucky in the fact that some members like to ski afternoons, some ski only evenings, some ski only weekends when many of us are away at tournaments, so there are very few times when you show up to the lake and don't get to ski all the sets you want. I have a great group of members. Everyone gets along, everyone contributes to the work, and problems are minimal.  Jipster: my advice to private lake operators is to make the club just large enough to get the work done, keep the place up, and keep your direct expenses paid. If you are trying to make money, or make the lake pay for itself, the lake will be your second job. ONE person MUST be in charge. Shared responsibility for rules enforcement is a recipe for really bad feelings between ski buddies, disolution of partnerships, and alienation of friends and members. Simply posting the rules at the starting dock and expecting everyone to follow them doesn't work. Good luck in finding 20 people and their familes that can get along on and off the water and everyone still get their ski time in. offering my 2 cents: lottawatta

Like the title says, is it possible to do a ZO conversion on an 04 Mastercraft (MCX, if that matters). My memory is weak, but I think DBW started in 04 MC promos and was in all 190's/197's in 05. I know the popular answer is no as ZO requires an 07 or later E-controls ECM. Does anyone know if it is possible to put a later ECM on an 04? Surely someone has investigated the possibility before? Thanks in advance for the info.

To better address your question, Cost will depend on how close your lights are to the centerline of the course. You want your lights to shine down instead of out. The closer to the course and the higher the lights are, the fewer lights you will need. If you get the lights high enough, there is no need for lighted buoys. It all depends on how you want to do it. If you want to go the cheap route and do it yourself (like me), start calling your local commercial electricians and ask about field lighting they may have laying around. Most of the older styles can be operated on 200 amps of 240 volt service which is available pretty much anywhere. If money is no object, call Musco, they will design the system with the required lumens in the boat and skier path. They will survey the site, and determine # of fixtures, # of poles, etc. It all comes pre-installed with fixtures on bars and lights pre-aimed. I would guess the cost to have Musco design and install it would cost upwards of $75,000.  If you are looking to hire it done by a licensed electrician based on your design/requirements, just the system and installation of a basic system within 150' of the centerline of the course with all new materials will run a minimum of $50,000 Depending on your electric provider and your lake's proximity to 3 phase service, it may be cost prohibitive to run it on grid power. Monthly minimum bills may be several hundred dollars or more. Find a used generator (mine came out of a hospital they were updating) with low hours capable of 480volt 3 phase operation. You will get much more light at a cheaper operating cost with Metal Halide fixtures operating on 480. Lastly, I can't stress enough the difference between the construction site flood lights and fixtures designed for sports lighting. The four fixture light trucks are fine for a one time portable system, but for continual use you get much more usable light with far fewer fixtures at a cheaper operating cost with specific sports lighting fixtures when the poles are high enough to shine down on the water instead of out from the shoreline.

I began installing stadium lights in 1995, and had my first night slalom tournament in 1997.   My oringinal system was installed for under $10,000 in materials using lights removed from some old baseball fields and milsurp antenna towers. 100% of the labor was my sweat and time away from skiing.  I removed this system this year in hopes to get my new Musco Lighting system up next year. Once I find someone who can set 70' poles at a cost I can afford, the system will go up. I already have the lights and wiring. Anyone want to buy 50' towers and 30 lights with tons of spare parts? All you would need would be the electric source and wiring and I can put you in the night time ski business! If you are in my part of the word, and for the right price, I may be able to deliver and assist in setting it up. disclaimer: I am not an electrician.

All I can say is that it is attitudes like that make it less fun to host tournaments, operate ski lakes and promote the sport.Â

Where do I get my hands on one of these? What sizes do they come in. I don't see any technical info on Connelly's website.

Eric, I agree, the tournament is NOT the problem, the party is. However, no one wants to use my lake for a tournament unless there is camping and a party. When the tournaments only go to those sites willing to put up with it, the same tournaments, same host clubs, same teams make all the money. The midwest has been very good with spreading the wealth around to the teams. Any team wanting to host a tournament is pretty much guaranteed to get to host one every other year, if not every year. When sites start drying up, the same teams and same lakes will get all the tournaments and the money will go to the same teams for boats, equipment, coaching, and recruitment. Not very fair. But I guess nothing about life, or skiing, is. After long consideration I believe I have been looking at this the wrong way. I now change my mind. The problem is not the NCWSA's, nor is it their responsibility to regulate a party. The problem is mine as a lake owner. I had previously thought that the entire reason for this thread and the ongoing discussion on another site was to try to come to some sort of middle ground through discussions, suggestions, and guidelines so that the camping and party could continue, and the concerns of the lake owners addressed. I was wrong. Now that I have been set straight, I agree my comments are way out of line. My personal solution to my problem is to end camping on site. When approached to bid for next year's tournaments, I responded that I would continue to host, but no camping on site. The ski clubs wanting to host tournaments went elsewhere. The collegiate skiers that have responded to my comments either in person or by e-mail, have all said that if camping was eliminated on site and they had to stay in a hotel, they likely would not attend. By their own admission they were paying to enter the tournament primarily to camp and party. If there was no camping or party, they didn't want to pay just to ski. I was even told I am the one who is giving collegiate skiing the bad reputation, discouraging parents from considering ski team schools, and making it hard to get sponsors. So I apologize.  THAT IS NOT MY INTENT. The camping on site and the evening party has been the main stated reason for the growth of the midwest......not the skiing, team development, and recruitment. The mindset continues to be party first, skiing second.....bring the masses for the party, and hopefully they get hooked on skiing. Best of luck, I hope it continues for your sake. JH, feel free to delete all of my comments from this thread. I meant no harm or disrespect to anyone or any team. I was merely responding to the original post and throwing ideas out for consideration. I'm done on this issue.

One more point: If someone feels there is not a problem let me just point out that midwest colliegate skiing lost one of the nicest venues in the midwest......after just one event......and at least partially due to the concerns I am addressing.  My site is a garbage dump compared to his. While I have not been there, I have seen enough of SueDV's pics to know how nice it is!

I am not upset at all with anyone, any team, any leadership, etc. As a matter of fact, I applaud them for taking an interest in what other site owners think. Somewhere around 8 years ago, under Jeff's leadership, the midwest seemed to have kicked the theft and destruction problems all of our sites were experiencing. The explosive growth of the midwest is a curse as well as a blessing. Great for the sport, but hard to control. C.K. has continued in Jeff's shoes and continues to do a very good job of organizing and keeping the reigns in hand......a very difficult job with the ever changing leadership at each school and so many midwest schools to control. If someone took my comments about the power that be as disparaging, I am sorry, the printed word often doesn't convey the inflection or tone intended. I am quite sure the administration doesn't want ANY unfortunate incident to happen. I only wanted to point out that they know what goes on. That is it. The cost of implementing some of the suggestions I made will reduce the numbers. They have a tough decision to make. Jeff, if in fact you did post, I am sorry, I don't mean to say that you or CK or anyone else is condoning the problems, simply that the leadership is aware of the issues. The fact that the USAWS insurance policy has been pared down to nothing, the litigious mindset of society, and my opinion that the skiing seems to be overshadowed by the party, has led me to the decision to have no more camping on site. I didn't come here to complain or slam anyone. I came here to respond to FA's request for opinions. However, I still stand by my statement that the party is primary, skiing secondary. Last year, one team came to the GLCC, just to party. They traveled three hours and brought several car loads of students just to join in the party, but didn't want to pay any fees to ski. For them, the skiing wasn't primary. I fully realize these students are living the life and making the connections and relationships that they will carry on for many years. I have many fond memories and many friends that I still keep in contact with some 16+ years after graduation. Several of the members of my college ski team are members of the ski club at my lake. Anyone who has been to my lake after dark knows after a few frosty malts I enjoy sitting around the fire with stories of my college ski team days. Far be it from me to discourage these kids from enjoying the college ski team experience. However, the liability exposure from the night time activity is too much for me to ignore anymore. It is my opinion that students are coming to college tournaments in more and more numbers, just because they know it is a place they can party with no worries and no supervision. I just can no longer be the place they can party like that.  I have personally spoken with three other site owners who agree with me, however they either don't want to talk about it in the open, or aren't aware of this discussion. One has already disconnected himself from the colliegate skiing scene. One doesn't allow camping on site for all the reasons discussed here. The third just prays nothing happens As far as site owner's responsibility to set and enforce rules: I simply do not have the manpower to control a crowd of 300 partiers all night long after I keep a site running all day.  Three years ago I hired private security to assist.  For the past two years, my family and a few club members (Like the person who started this discussion:FA) handled security.  My site is pretty unusual and there is a lot of ground to cover to keep an eye on everything. I let the host ski teams make arrangements with the adjacent VFW hall to handle the main party. This year was the first year since 1998 (when a good amount of theft and destruction took place) that the VFW was unhappy with the party. They were very disappointed, I will just leave it at that. I simply don't have the manpower to control a party that lasts for over 8 hours each night. When I do have an incident that isn't resolved to my satisfaction, or when the cops show up, I get the leadership out of bed, front and center, to deal with it alongside me. In the past 6-8 years, the conference leadership delt with the problems and I defer to them for any penalties. In recent history, all incidents concerning skiers have been minor. Most of those incidents have delt with friends/roommates/etc. that "didn't know the rules" and were just there to party. One last comment: 2008 was the very first year I made money at ANY of the previous 20+ college event I hosted. I had always charged the host team a nominal donation that covered my portable sanitation facilities and some incidentals. The host team always kept the purse. So anyone who wants to say I don't support the colliegate ranks doesn't know me.

One clarification: When I say this year's party was out of control I don't mean to say that it was a wild free for all that couldn't be controlled. What I mean is that the skiers were individually unable to control themselves and many drank themselves into oblivion. Individually, many were well beyond what anyone would consider responsible partying. When you are too drunk to know where or who you are, when you have to be carried to a tent, when you pass out half in and half out of the water after puking, when you can't remember where your tent is, etc. Collectively, they behaved themselves much better than years past. Thankfully, no arrests this year, no cop visits this year (breaking the long running annual tradition), no theft this year (my slalom ski was safely tucked inside the locked boat house), no destruction this year. Again, U.C. did a great job. It is my own worries over liability and what I percieve as a trend away from skiing, towards partying that are keeping me from allowing any more colliegate events.ÂÂ

Karl, Where was the conference leadership when all of this was going on. I held the GLCC in 2008, and when there was an issue, I got the conference chairman out of bed and he took care of it to my satisfaction immediately. Where was the host team leadership? If they knew your rules ahead of time and didn't enforce them, they are partially to blame. Sounds like you went to bed while the party was still going on, big no-no. Regardless of the host teams' supposed embarassment, they knew exactly what goes on at the midwest collegiate tournaments. It wasn't their first rodeo, sounds like they didn't prepare you for what goes on. Karl, I sympathize with you. To all: I previously had a very long and detailed post on this subject, however my window must have timed out and I lost it. I will try to condense my response a bit. In the midwest, the skiing has become secondary and the party is now primary. The University of Cincinnati hosted a tournament at my site this year. It went very very well. UC scoured the site for every bit of trash, they were helpful and respectful when setting up and tearing down before and after the event. However, I remain very uneasy about the out of control party. It seems that the party goes later and later and each school is trying to out do the previous school in party length and intensity. Unfortunately, I will no longer allow onsite camping at my lake. I simply can not afford to lose it all to some freshman's parents who choked on their own vomit in a tent at 4am with a bottle of maddog duct taped to their hand. This year, I really tried to discourage the partying by turning music off at 1am, lights off at 2am, they were still raging strong at 3am, and even 4am. I finally forced everyone to stop at 4:15. There were still 30+ who continued the party after that. The party was primary for these people, the skiing secondary. For the past couple of years I have asked that only registered skiers camp on site. I even put in the regional guide and all my communications to the host team that only skiers were welcome onsite. I have been hosting colliegate events since 1990. More than half of all incidents are caused by non-skiing team members, friends, housemates, boyfriends, girlfriends, fraternity brothers, roommates, and alumni who only come for the party. This year, again, saturday night, people started rolling in from the local schools and alumni. Just to party saturday night. The party is primary, the skiing secondary. In years past, the host team has spent more time worrying about what they were going to do for the party theme, make sure there is plenty of alcohol arranged, design t-shirts, etc than they have helping set up the site or clean up. The party is primary, the skiing secondary. I watch more and more skiers come every year to fall around one ball (or fail to get up on a ski). They drive a long distance to camp in the cold, brave the frigid waters, pay an entry fee, etc. They come for the party, not for the skiing. Each year there are fewer and fewer serious skiers. Each year the skiers expect more and more. Each year the skiers are less and less appreciative. These skiers get up early, can't find their equipment, end up borrowing equipment, come to the dock, get in the cold water, get up on the third try, fall going through the gates and swim in, while their entire team is still asleep. When I was in school, I partied as hard as anyone. My team partied as hard as anyone. However, I was always up before the tournament began boat judging, dock starting, announcing, scoring, rope handling and our entire team was up and out of their tents when anyone on our team skied. For us, skiing was primary, the party secondary. The powers that be know what goes on. Things will not change until there is an unfortunate accident. The accident will be alcohol related. It won't happen at my place. Not anymore. The powers that be don't want things to change. The sheer numbers of skiers who come just for the party accounts for more than 50% of the skiers. Their entries, team fees, etc support the organization. Keep these people away and you lose half your income and half your numbers. Suggestions: 1.) Find an insurere to write event insurance for all onsite activities for the weekend (Good luck with this) 2.) The party and camping is for registered entrants only. Give each skier a wristband when they register so we know who's who. 3.) Music off at midnight, final curfew at 2am. (not unreasonable) 4.) Each team posts a bond. Any member of that team causes an incident, the bond is forfeited. 5.) Any incident of theft, destruction, or behavior that gives waterskiing a black eye, the tournament is over and scores are null and void. 6.) Any host team that doesn't live up to their end of the bargain with the lake owner is barred from conference, regional, or national cometition. 7.) Limits on the amount of alcohol brought onsite (good luck on this one) 8.)Security of some sort (sober host club members, lake owners, private security, rent as cops) at the rate of 1 per 50. 9.)No driving after dark. No one leaving period. 10.) Make skiing primary, the party secondary.