JackQ

MS, no each boat if different. In the long ago past everyone had similar 240hp V8, and less divergent hulls. You could put PP or Accuski on the newer boats and they still would feel different. I use B2 on all boats for last 5-7 years and only changed for the 2019 Nautique as it feels like there is nothing at the ball at 38 and beyond. Many other MM skiers feel the same. However the same engine and ZO in other boats feel fine, there is something quite different in the New Nautique.

My experience mirrors Roger’s. He pulled me to 3@39 last week in a tournament, 38,38,35, 32 wakes are fine, 28 harsher than the other boats. Never tried 15/22, but my wife dispises the wake and a fellow mid 35 off women 4 skier compared it to the infamous 95 MC wake. I believe CC has some prop and hull tweaking to do.

MS, I disagree with your ZO vendetta. Unless all boats have the same engine and wetted surface I want multiple settings. Without that ability the new Natique would be unskiable for me at 38 and 39. I am not likely to want the same pull as you or others. Have spent more than a casual role in the development of Accuski, analyzing radar plots and speed control algorithms, I was never impressed by the pull with Perfect Pass =hot gates and chasing the boat in tailwinds. Everyone is different but for 3 years i solely practiced behind PP and skied in tournaments without an issue, other than allways getting a better gate with ZO and easier tailwind passes.

Different era, names withheld to protect the guilty.

Essentially all positive. Meet lifelong (35+ years) friends on the University of Florida ski team, both at UF and teams we competed/partied with. Met my future wife, and leaned how to run the course, jump and trick. Progressed through the 36mph longline barrier and progressed to a few buoys at 35. Took a lot of time and effort to ski and maintain goode grades, but could have easily wasted the time on less positive activities.

I wish I could have his gate. His pull out, glide and gate is a great example to emulate and burn in your mental picture of what to do.

I think you all are over thinking this and have your heads rotated 45 degrees off. Maybe, be more fruitful to think less about real or perceived issues with speed control and more about how to improve your skiing.

Dacon, with advent of all buoy timing that preceded ZeroOff by a decade your concept of making up for a “hard pull” over the entire course would not be legal nor is the way PP or Accuski operated.

MS, don’t really understand the nostalgia for PP. Had to adjust rpm for head/tail and would “run away from you” if you were agressive and early in strong tail winds. Additionally I had to take tides into account for a decent time. For the 1st 3-4 years of ZO, my practice boat was a PP, tournaments were all ZO and did not feel a big difference but did, and still prefer ZO.

Killer, I do not maintain same distance between the binders. Since each binder primarily affect different turns, front=offside, rear=onside, I experiment with front binder first rear second.

You can simulate the longer path, by using a piece of wood with a nail in the top and a string to trace on a piece of paper the path as the string gets shorter but reaching the same path. If I could get the cobwebs out of my head and remember all my Calculus and Trig, I could determine the change in rate of acceleration required as the rope gets shorter. But feel this is like trying to prove the earth is round to the flat earth crowd.

The rear binder primarily effects the on-side turn. So I attempt to dial in my offside turn with my front binder and then slow down (move rear binder forward) or speed-up my on-side. Unfortunately ski/fin adjustment is more of a dark art than science and sometimes the results are not what is expected. If I was better, my on-side turn would not be as mediocre as it typically is.

As the rope shortens you travel on a more curved path and therefore you travel farther at 38 than 15. The distance covered to complete a pass increase more than you may expect and jumps at 35, and spikes at 38/39. As a result you need to accelerate faster and decelerate more and to do so you must put greater loads on boat, ski, and your self.

What I do, is keep moving the front binder forward (during the same set) until I go "%^$" that is too far (you will know!) and then go back one notch. Then repeat with the rear binder. Only then would I consider touching the fin. My motto is you paid for the whole ski, use as much of it you can.

My experience is that 38 take much more energy and beating compared to 35. A larger delta then when I could run 32 regularly and only run 35 occasionally. I believe 38 is when you are truly are up on the boat and energy required goes up exponentially. Additionally at 38 if you ski 1-2 feet wide of the buoy (one of my significant sins) you have to go 4-5 feet farther up on the boat to gain that width. At 32 and 35 not so much. To minimize the beating, I have been going from 35 to 39 and taking 3-4 shots at 39 and then go back and run a 38.

I don't think the difference of a twisted rope will make a difference in my skiing, but it still drives me mad and I will continue to unwind it. My questions, is when I fall and picked up the rope is always (or all most every time) twisted counterclockwise. Seem that it should be random.

That may be, but not my interpretation as it says: * Level 10 creates a level of performance, that when achieved, mandates that a skier compete in their elite division for the remainder of that ski year. *Question: What’s the difference between L9 and L10? Answer: L9 is elite division optional, L10 is mandatory elite

Re reading the New Level 10 and Rule 3.03 FAQ, It appears the inclusion of (M3, M4, and MM for Senior Men skiers (SM). ) is only for the pool of scores for setting the cut off. Therefore it appears all 34mph and 36mph are subject to Level 10?

I do not find the language completely clear: Included "M3, M4, and MM for Senior Men skiers (SM). " So let say I am level9/MM qualified (I am), and then ski in a tournament as Men6 and run 2@41 (I can't), I would not be forced into L10, but if I ski in MM vice Mens6 at a tournament and run the same score I would be pushed into L10? Not sure if that is correct or makes any sense. I also don't believe anyone should be required to be in Open or MM base on a single score in a C tournament. 3 score average or R, maybe, C no. In theory if I could run 2.4@41 in a C it would not count for a Men6 record, but I would be forced to ski in MM?

For the last 5 years or so, I had the assumption that back surgery, shoulder surgery, elbow bone spurs and AGE have conspired to limit my ability to set a new PB. But by working on body position, my weight and form I set a new PB last year by a 1/4 buoy and this weekend at a Record Tournament (by 2 1/4 buoys). If at 64 I could set a PB, most everyone can if your truly work at it.

95% of my skiing is behind my boat, so I would expect my PB to behind it. But other than 4 or 5 times when I skied out of my mind, out of hundreds of sets my best scores behind an assortment of boats are within a buoy of less. 196 Nautique, 200 Nautique, Mastercraft, CarbonPro, new and old Malibu. However, obataining a decent scores behind the 2019 Nautique has been elusive.

The size of ski is on the serial number plate, i think the NanoOnes and XTs were 65.25, 66 and 66.75 no 68. Check what the real size. I skied well on 65.25 at 200lbs at 34mph. But eventually felt more comfortable on 66 on shorter line lengths due to the large “sweet spot”

I am not saying when a few people set PBs or most "ski well" there may be an issue. But when a large number of people set there PB, the best they have done out of dozens and dozens of attempts, statistically and realistically that is not a likely event.

If anywhere near 25-50% had a PB at any single tournament I would be extremely skeptical. I attended a tournament years ago where a high number (not near 50%) skied PBs, my self included, I knew it wasn't right and never went back. I don't consider the score at that site legit or my PB, which would still would be my PB today. I am not saying that the organizers or anyone else purposely did something, but anywhere near 50% would have statistical probability of approaching 0.

I hate to disagree with Horton but a wing can lift the tail of the ski! Just last week I came back from the Nationals with a ski to try and in my rush to set the fin, I somehow in my biggest single boneheaded move, I put the wing in a 9.5 degree up position rather than down! Went out and ran 28 but ski felt like it had lots of tip, squirrelly and very fast. Ran another 28, two ugly 32s, and tired 35, the last thing I clearly recall is ski turned harder at #2 than the shorter passes. When I came to, I was next to number 3, wind knocked out of me, and my left side was numb and I could not more my right arm. After 15 minutes I could feel and move my arm, but still feeling the results. This was the single hardest crash in my life, and self-inflected. I did not realize my mistake until later in the day when I felt good enough to bend down and curse at the ski, and realized it was me.