Bud Man

Contact AWSA. I’m sure they already have a lot of data to share for helping people do exactly what you are doing. I was lucky enough to start leasing a pond back in 1993 and still hold the lease. I haven’t skied there in about five years because I built a lake where I live, but I let others ski there. Good luck with your project. I hope everything works out for everyone.

I wrote this last night and then our internet went down until just now. I did not realize I would miss it as much as I did. Bruce, Just off the top of my head answer. It would appear that for 55kph, David Miller consistently gets more buoys, more angle and more speed than most if not all MM skiers, which supports what you are saying. When I was younger, I had a turn and burn frame of mind and could only ski about six or eight passes every other day. I am turning 54 this year and have more of a target of minimum angle and speed frame of mind and can easily ski close to twenty passes in one set, mostly 12m line, every day if I choose. My typical daily sets this winter in my dry suit were; 1 - 14.25m, 1 - 13m and 10 or 12 - 35s. I’m still in my dry suit but a few days ago have switched to 14.25m, 13m, 12m, 11.25m and then some more 12s. Our weather here is SC is bouncing around a bit. High last Monday about 87° and calling for a high of 61° this coming Monday. Anyway, my point is I don’t think my body can do what David Miller does. He looks like he is built out of steel. If a car hit him when he was crossing the road, he would be fine and the car would be totaled. In all seriousness, if I bend over wrong to tie my shoe, I will hurt my back where I can hardly walk. I love to ski and want to pace myself to ski until I am called Home. By the way, I had miss remembered some things in your handle control article and went back and reread. I think it helps me ski better when I can keep it in mind. Good job on that. Also, your staying open article helps me, when I can keep it in my mind. Another job well done. In addition, the recent reprint of the old article you did about skiing in wind was also a very good job. You really do a lot of good for the sport. Thank you.

This is an example of scoring. There are just three people here but I would post the entire order of everyone. Even if you and your competition buddy across the country are half way down the list there would still be that competition between each other. Even if you are trying different skis or just starting back, it does not matter; just put a note under your score. We have nothing to lose and so much to gain. It is free and should be fun. 1st place went to Jill, 2nd place went to Pat, and 3rd place went to Jack. Jill, Girls 2, Wednesday April 6, 2011, 5 @ 15 off, ZO, 65 buoys Jill, Girls 2, Tuesday April 12, 2011, 2.5 @ 15 off, ZO, 62.5 buoys Jill, Girls 2, Thursday April 21, 2011, 1.25 @ 15 off, ZO, 61.25 buoys Average for Jill is 62.917, ZO Jill, Girls 2, Friday April 29, 2011, 4.25 @ 15 off, ZO, 64.25 buoys Jill’s score is 1.333, ZO Jack, Men 3, Thursday April 7, 2011, 4@ 35 off, PPC, 94 buoys Jack, Men 3, Thursday April 14, 2011, 3.5@ 35 off, PPC, 93.5 buoys Jack, Men 3, Thursday April 21, 2011, 5.5@ 35 off, PPC, 95.5 buoys Average for Jack is 94.333, PPC Jack, Men 3, Saturday April 30, 2011, 5@ 35 off, PPC, 95 buoys Jack’s score is 0.666 PPC Pat, Men 1, Tuesday April 5, 2011, 5@ 32 off, PPSG, 95 buoys Pat, Men 1, Thursday April 14, 2011, 3@ 32 off, PPSG, 93 buoys Pat, Men 1, Wednesday April 20, 2011, 5.5@ 32 off, PPSG, 95.5 buoys Average for Jack is 94.5, PPC Pat, Men 1, Friday April 29, 2011, 5.5@ 32 off, PPSG, 95 buoys Pat’s score is 1 PPSG Let’s have a head count. Who would like to give this a shot? I am one. Now who else?

How is Geoff now?

Now that you say that is Andy, I can see it. And when I read the name Geoff the name rang a bell. Isn’t he the great jumper that was so badly injured in some sort of an exhibition pier jump and Chris did a lot to support him?

I agree DW, I should just put it right out of my head, right after David tells me if is possible or not. [smirk on my face] OB, Good questions, but I don’t have the answers. I tried to ski a bit latter path tonight like the efficient path David plotted for all of us to study and did not do as well. When I cut to 11.25m, I overturned # 5 and sank before reaching the wake, but I ran all my other passes thought. I think there were 10, 12m passes in the set, but I have not reviewed the video yet, so I have not counted. I did not hit the water until 7:37PM, so it was about dark and those red buoys are hard to see that late. I felt very rushed, but that is normal for me when I am pushing darkness. Tonight would not be a fair judgment for me to make for the later path. I will try it again. After studying David’s report, I’m suspicious that I might be skiing more wide and early than I thought, and you might be skiing less wide and early than you thought. ral, those are good points.

This is good input. Honor system – yes What would be the point in cheating? Anyone able to video can add it it they wanted to. We could follow score with PPC, PPSG or ZO. Matt, You are correct, I rarely ski tournaments. I thought this might be a way to put a bit of pressure on us without having to leave home and have fun doing it. If it works we could do it once a month. No one has to do it. It would just be a new thread each month. I can post some examples but I did not want to take the time if John does not want us to have the tournaments.

ShaneH, You described that very well and I understand what you said. I just don’t understand that other person saying that speed gives you angle. Maybe it is as simple as he is trying to say something different than what my brain is interpreting from those four words. When I speak of angle creating speed, I am referring to while being pulled by the boat. I realize that if there is no load, then a change of direction (ski angle) will slow you down. What you said I feel fits into what I am trying to achieve in the slalom course. • Slower average speed throughout the course by crossing wake with less angle and maintaining speed around the buoy. • Longer arching turns at the buoys to maintain speed around the buoys. • Try not to angle the ski anywhere in the course any more than is necessary. I try to see the path I need to take through the course. I try to keep a mental image of the path I posted above. It seems to really help me. I would still like to hear your response as well David. Well said DanE.

John, What I was proposing would be totally different from EZFTC and would not take away from EZFTC. I think my tournament proposal would add excitement to skiing and to your Website. And it is a training exercise for the skiers. It would just be another thread, so no extra work for you. Example: We all pick a weekday ahead of time that will be our tournament days. Ski your first set on that day, cutting the rope until you miss or fall. That is you score. You can continue to ski that set, but it does not change your score. When you get back home, log you score on the BOS thread. Do this once a week for a month. I will average the first three weeks score and then calculate the difference between that average and the fourth score. Whoever has the highest difference wins that month. This handicap would not totally level the playing field, because the people at longer lines and slower speeds often reach PBs more often showing faster improvement. However, when I list the results at the end of the month, you can compare your score with your competitor friend (where ever they live), sort of your own “who won this month”. Speaking for myself; if I know I am going to post my score, I will feel some sort of tournament pressure. So now what do you think John? What would it hurt? What would it help? What do we have to lose? What do we have to gain? If the first format does not work, we can try to adjust with suggestions.

Don’t know nicknames, but respectively are the people Sammy, Bob, Camille, Chris and Carl? Or is that Sammy on the right and then who would it be on the left?

David, I saw in a DVD a while back that said; “speed gives you angle” which is not what I picture in my mind. I realize that things can be interpreted in different ways, but I just can’t seem to grasp that. As a matter of fact, I believe it is the exact opposite of that. I believe as for slalom skiing, the angle of the ski is what gives us speed. That is why I have tried to back off of my angle to slow down my speed and ski a shorter path. I felt like it was easier on my old body and more efficient. Below is an excerpt from a post I put in the thread Efficient skiing (Path and speed). “We do not have a motor to push us through the course. The boat pulls us, and if we never made our ski deviate from the straight path that the boat travels, then we would never go faster than the boat. The boat going faster does not give us angle. However, as soon as we angle the ski, we increase our speed. Therefore, I believe it is angle that gives us speed. The ski angle also gives us our path. A longer path gives us a faster speed. It requires more strength to hold more angle, which gives us more speed and a longer distance to go through the slalom course, and I do not believe that is efficient.” David, Which of these two would be supported by math and physics? (speed gives you angle) or (angle gives you speed)

EZFTC??? I'm not having any luck learning about this tournament.

David, In reference to the speed of the combined style illustrated on page 10: I am trying to balance my speed more than what you are showing on your graph. It shows the shortening of the rope, forces the speed to increase at 20m and decreasing at 31m. According to your calculations, what does a skier need to do differently to get the speeds more balanced in those areas as the line shortens? My thought is to load the line with less intensity but a slightly longer duration as the rope gets shorter. Is that correct? When I watch videos of myself, I think that is what I might be doing (sometimes anyway). Can you do the math that would produce that graph? Thank you David. This is really good stuff.

Smart thinking Ed. I heard of people putting a UV vinyl protectant spray on their seats and the old vinyl car roofs. I wonder if that would help protect the color. You surely would not want anything oily getting on the ski as we all know. This stuff sound pretty good and might help repel some of that bird mess. This probubly could be used on the polyform turns and lanes as well. I think I might order some. http://www.sailrite.com/303-UV-Protectant-16oz

Placebos can be a good thing sometimes. Scams are always a bad thing. Just saying.

Awesome work David. Just to clarify, those path lines are produced through mathematical formulas and you did not draw then. The lines are produced through the formulas of laws of math and laws of physics. Is that correct? The reason I ask, is I actually drew what I thought might be an efficient path, (no math, just imagination) and even though it is not the exact same as your combined style path graph, I feel like it is very close and seeing your combined style path graph makes me think my imagination might be very close to what is actually going on. I will insert it below. It makes me feel good to think your education might actually back up my imagination. I have my path drawn crossing centerline at 14m. Based on your findings, I might should try crossing a tad later. I think you suggest for me to try 17m. I might move my extra gates and give that a try. So far I have crossed center at about 14m on lines 14.25m – 10.75m (28 off - 39.5 off) Think about this: I feel like I am coming out of the buoy too soon as I have said in another thread. If I can come out slower, as I think I need to do, that might set me up to cross where I need to cross. In reading your study, I am even more excited about some theories I was posting on Wet Jacket before a wet blanket put out the thread before it could really get anywhere. I am closer to getting started with my live testing, but still don’t have any volunteers to come ski their “wide and early” style. Again David, very nice work and well presented. /vanilla2/uploads/FileUpload/13/613.jpg/vanilla2/uploads/FileUpload/15/615.JPG /vanilla2/uploads/FileUpload/11/611.JPG

Wish, I just sent you my 20 faded red buoys yesterday from both my lakes. You don’t owe me anything. However, I did send those COD so you will need to have money when they arrive to pay the driver. I’ve been using the water filled system because I feel like it is safer than just air. I tried to get them all in just 2 boxes but they were too big and heavy so the guy at the shipping shop had the great idea to put 2 in each box, so he supplied 10 smaller boxes and added the price to the COD charges. In hindsight, maybe I ought to have let the water out before I shipped them to save on the shipping charges. I’ll try to remember to do that next time. Any way I think the COD charge is $518.54. The guy said you don’t actually have to use cash; they will also take a certified bank check. I’m just kidding you know. I like the idea of recycling. Email me you address so I can send you buoys. budlake1 at yahoo dot com

That does not look safe. If all of a sudden a boat was to cross in front of him, he could be hurt. He should be on one ski instead of two, so that he can make a quick evasive turn. Attention all young boys and girls, let this poster be a reminder of what not to do; never ski on two skies, always slalom.

As for speed; I do not know if this is true, but it seems like I heard in an interview on a ski tour stop with one of the LaPoint brothers say that the speed in the beginning was faster than 36mph. As for dimensions; I would GUESS that it is not an American invention. My opinion is solely based on the dimensions being even verses odd, in metric. Sure 36 mph equals 58 kph and ¾” equals 19 millimetres. And we even changed the spelling of metre to meter. Anyway, it appears that we have converted everything in the course to odd verses even, imperial dimensions. So if we invented it, wouldn’t there be even Imperial numbers. We also rounded 55 kph to 34.2 mph. it is actually 34.18. I hope that slow is given the answer to his interesting question. There is something that I have wondered for a while. This should he easier to answer for it is more current I believe. What came first; the 8 buoy course or the pre-gates. This first came to my mind when I was considering buying a small parcel of land for a ski lake. I found a diagram for an 8 buoy course and noticed that the pre-gates being 55m prior to the gates made it so they were evenly spaced two increments of lane buoys (82m) prior to the #1 lane. This placement allows the pre-gates to double their use in an 8 buoy course. If there were no 8 buoy course at the time, and the pre-gates came first, was this just luck that this placement was chosen or did someone think it through? Or, was there already an 8 buoy course, so they used the 55m distance because it already was there? Seems like Gene Davis might know.

About the center of SC.

I found the picture of the tournament I mentioned above./vanilla2/uploads/FileUpload/8/608.JPG

Where can I read about it?

John, I have really been enjoying the modification to your Website today. Job well done, and thank you for your hard work.

How would it be as a motivator to start a thread where all interested skiers could post a score the four Wednesdays of a month; the first three would be averaged together for the handicap and the last Wednesday would be used for the most improved score. We could take our score from the (first off the dock cutting the rope.) Just like a regular tournament, but once you get your score, you can finish your set without changing your score. It would not matter what your level was, the handicap would level the field. If it works the first month, then we can continue. We can use the rules below, but modify them for what we are doing. Who is interested? And are there any suggestions? I don’t mind doing the math and posting the results. Is this OK with yo John? http://sites.google.com/site/skilittledawg/Home/rules Handicapped Rules (BEFORE WE MODIFY FOR BOS) First two rounds will not count towards the head to head. They will count towards your USAWS ranking as any other tournament. You will know your competitor in the first round of the head to head prior to the tournament starting. When it is your pair’s time to ski, we will flip a coin. The winner will have the choice of picking their boat (2 boats will be in the water), or they can elect to go first or second. If they decide to pick the boat, the loser of the coin toss can elect to go first or second. During the head to head, you will need to start 3 passes back from your average (on USAWS rankings list). For example, if your average is 3 at 35off, you will start each round at 28 off. Another example, if your average is 4 at 15off 34mph (your max speed), then you will start at 15off / 32mph. The first skier will ski his/her opening pass and wait at the opposite end of the lake. The second skier will ski his/her opening pass and join you at the other end of the lake. This will continue until someone misses a pass. The second skier will need to get at least a 1/4 a buoy better than the first skier. If there is a tie, the first skier will win and advance. Most of the handicaps will be taken care of by everyone starting 3 passes back from their average. However, there may be cases where one skier’s average is 5 at their hardest pass, when the competitor’s average is 1 at their hardest pass. In that case, the latter skier will have 4 buoys added to their score. If the difference is 1.5 buoys or less we are not going to worry about the difference. The additional handicap will only apply if the difference exceeds 1.5 buoys at the competitors’ hardest pass. The examples below should help. Example 1: Skier A has a 3.5 @ 38off average. Skier B has a 2 @ 35off average. Buoy difference equal to or less than 1.5. No handicap applied. Skier A will start at 32 off. Skier B will start at 28 off. As the head to head begins, Skier A and Skier B both run their first two passes. Skier A comes back and gets 2 @ 38. Skier B will then have to get at least 2 ¼ at 35 to win and proceed to the next round. Example 2: Skier C has a 5 at 35 off average Skier D has a 1 at 32 off average Buoy difference greater than 1.5. 4 buoys given to skier D. Skier C will start at 28 off. Skier D will start at 22 off. As the head to head begins, Skier C and D run their opening pass. Skier C gets 5 on his/her second pass. Skier D will then need to get 1 ¼ on his/her second pass to win.

Brent, what do you mean “almost”! Please tell me when I don’t think about slalom, then you can add the “almost.” I tease people and say that I am going to build a casket shaped like a ski boat to have it ready for when I’m called Home, but it might not be a joke. And also Brent, are you just going to take away all my excuses? I could use you as a ski buddy to push me harder. Jim, if you line up the skiers, I will open up Bud Lake to the clinic. Having RJM here was a good experience. I had instant feedback at each pass. The main thing he had me doing though was “less.” At each end of the lake he would say; relax and put less effort in the pass. He told me that he wanted me to learn how little effort it really took to ski. He said that once I figured that out, I could then add whatever I felt I need to catch-up if I had to. He also tinkered with my fin after almost every set. He was an intelligent and kind hearted person. We just ran 13m line the whole time he was here. If you are reading this Robert; thank you for your help and people are always asking about you and wishing you well.