JackQ

It did have names, each one could have a different rate of pull up, as well as starting speed.

I an many other are on D3 T-factor bindings, Nate Smith appears to do fine with them. I think it is more important to get whatever binder that you feel safe and comfortable in. All this systems have good and bad points.

What the tolerance limit should be may be debatable, but the concept of a mandatory reride when the boat/driver is giving the skier an advantage should not be. If you run a pass that is slower than tolerance you must reside, though essentially unheard of today, I had many in my past.

@usawaterskiHQ Nate, 100K for the website!, not to drag up that topic again.... But we should ask for the 100K back from whomever executed it, as unfortunately it is the least user friendly/unintuitive website I have experienced in years. But, this should be a separate tread.

I will take the training and going to tournaments, holding my nose in disgust of the forced mandate.

It would be interesting to see how much of the IWSF revenue is generated is the USA. Some how (without data) I feel that we are not get the voice in IWSF that is appropriate to the importance of the USA market. Maybe the North American market but not sure how the Canadian’s feel about this. I would gander that AWSA would fare much better without the IWSF then the IWSF would without AWSA.

I only see negatives in any association with USOC, are there any non theoretical advantages? Isn't that why we have the crappy website? or the excuse anyway. There is no realistic chance of skiing being added to the Olympics anyway, they dropped wrestling, one of the original sports, not that being a Olympic sport would have benefited 99.98% of the members.

@skierjp I correct. I am not a AWSA rated boat drive, but I often drive the boat to the starting dock, at some site I have been a pick up boat driver, and often assist promo owner pulling their boat out. I should have to have driving training a lot more than SafeSport as I essentially have zero contact with youth skiers. Having everyone take the training is pure BS, what is next awareness of gender fluidness.

It appears that many see this is another case where the organization is not in sync with the members. Unfortunately the list is long, ill fated fascination with the Olympics, HQ location/building, Driver certification, SafeSport for all and many others.

I dont think Seat Belts are a good corollary, there are demonstrated tangible results for seatbelts in testing and real life, for Aircraft, race cars and passenger autos. Demonstrated impact for telling people what not to do, or not tolerate what they already know not to do, not so much. What would have a much better results, is swift significant punishment and public exposure of anyone that violates the law.

I just had my annual physical yesterday, and as is typical you have endure the inevitable prostate exam. But a new law requires you to sign a special permission form to have the exam performed. More and more layers of well intentioned stupid requirements. What’s next a witness to have a colonoscopy performed.

Since 99.8% do not need the training as they would never conceive of such behavior, do we really think the .02% that are or are considering such behavior are going to take the training, and have an revelation and think, “ now that have this 1hr of training I realize I should not be a child predator” really. For Coaches, Camp Councilors I can buy it, but for the rank an file skier and judges/driver...BS.

Only rule that I am aware of is movable part while skiing. IE a fin that moves.

When HO offshored production on the Animal binders about 7 years ago, I found them uncomfortable. I tried T factors and never looked back. More comfortable (significantly), more support, and you can easily buy any replacement part from D3's web page, do more of what year is your binder, oh don't have that part.

I believe the tolerance's need to be reviewed and possible modified as we gain more real world experience. I doubt there was any science in the 20cm max or cumulative deviation, it was originally developed for video review. One could argue that when a strong skier (Freddy, JT , CP, etc) gets in trouble a driver may struggle to keep within 20cm, but Ok on the other buoys and with the cumulative, and the skier did not gain advantage. I also believe only one mandator re-ride, is an unfair penalty to a skier for sub optimal driving. Experience should dictate if they are too restrictive or too loose. After a season experience we may find 20cm is easily obtained and it should be 17cm or 19 or ??

1. I am sure another thousand pounds will do wonders for the wakes 2. Not sure that many have power to boat to charge as many have to use solar for their boat lifts. 3. I am sure that the low volume of ski boats the cost delta for electric will be significant , I guess we can all look forward to the future of 200K+ boats. 4. As far of the load, I am fairly sure the hull drag at 36 greatly exceeds the combined rolling drag and wind resistance of an auto at 70 mph, which is in the neighborhood of 25-30hp.

I have always thought that timing was a very underrated aspect of the sport. For one, it isn’t something you can readily see, like hard turns, pulls, body position. I believe it is one of Nate’s comparative advantages in comparison to some of his peers. One observable attribute of excellent timing, is the lack or minimal adjustments a skier makes in a pass. I certainly feel it when I get it wrong and as the rope gets shorter it is exponentially more critical.

@Broussard you nailed it. The old site was like working with rocks and sticks, not great but once you learn the in and out, you can move forward. The new site make me nostalgic for the old rocks and sticks that at least was functional.

The current website is unworkable, sanctioning in particular. We should immediately redirect traffic to the old site( it still works as I can access it) , while the debate, planning and execution of a suitable replacement is worked. Frustrating those who plan, set up tournaments and those who participate in them is not a particularly effect way to grow the sport.

I think many skiers look at this the wrong way, it is not so much peak load. It is the "area under the curve" the pull from the ball to CL, not just one point (peak). No one is going to run 39 off by just standing up after the buoy. The goal in my experience is to get as much angle and load at the buoy you can "comfortably" maintain to the centerline, better to have a little less than more. Typically though many skiers bite off more than they can maintain, spike line tension, ZO reacts and they get pulled up or out of position.

@HSL, I doubt those numbers if so I am one of the 9. Before graduating to Mens7, I consistently ran 38 in tournaments, more frequently in Rs than Cs. And have run 39 at 34 and 32mph with the wrong grip, I think there are more wrong gripers than you think.

I think this is not always the case. I switched to the "correct" grip for an entire season, 7 years ago in practice and tournaments, didn't help nor hurt. During the late fall of that year , I tired on pass back to the wrong way, and I just felt more natural for me. I don't think my incorrect grip is hindering me , many other shortcomings are, but I think too much is made of this. The theory is that the correct grip gives you more power on your odd side, with a slight loss on your stronger on-side. As my offside is much better than my onside, I am likely an anomaly.

Many have different Philosophies, I have allways adjusted my ski for the shortest pass I can run. Don’t really care about my opener where i am less aggressive, way early and don’t have to scramble. Can I tell .005 change, hell yes if length or depth. But for some reason I am tone deaf on forward/back, i can change .005 or.030 and cant tell a difference, I am sure i don’t have the optimal set up because of this.

I have always treated colder water, similar to skiing in salt water, in that it is more buoyant and if you feel the need to adjust take a little tip out (or in this discussion binder back). Unfortunately or possibly fortunately I am relatively “tone deaf” to most changes other than adding or removing tip, so take with a grain of salt.

I skied on a course off the Potomac river in Maryland until a few years ago, one end of the course opened in to a well traveled channel, and a 55 was not acceptable. I ended up with a 55 on one end and not the other, was good enough for practice and preparing for tournaments.