Dusty

Called it 4... Mostly because, I figured if the ski had been outside the ball, you would not have been able to see it- the spray would have eclipsed. Could have been an inner side strike too, which would also be 4. But without video or better vantage... 4.5 is probably the decent call to make. I value 1/4 buoys, becasue it shows scrappiness (or blatant disregard for personal safety...) but, if the handle is in the hands past the ball at anything shorter than about -22, the ski has already penetrated the course and you get a half or one...

Pretty sure the rule says they have to be set in a Record tournament. That said- I don't give a rip about video, other than end-course to comply with boat path requirements. A whole lot of records were set without video gates etc... We going to toss them all because of that?

I have owned a '93 MC, (Carb.); and a '98 SN. (IIRC same hulls in '92-'94 MC's, and '97-2000 SN's) Both drove great. Better wake if possible behind SN, and way less side spray, not as 'quick' or easily maneuvered as the MC but overall, a better slalom trainer, for what you will face in a tournament now days.

What I know is- I don't see driver's deliberately weaving around here. I have personally assisted in the survey of many of the northwest's private sites- they are very accurate. I am a senior slalom judge, and senior slalom driver- I can see just fine without video, and I believe I can give a skier a pretty decent ride and chance at a PB without weaving. I AM a believer in the relatively uselessness of Class E. Costs the same as class L,R pretty much, benefits the same as a C, pretty much. It IS a volunteer officiated sport. It takes a little dedication and attention to detail so that people can have fun and ski, and so that it is fair to each and every one who enters...

I am missing something I guess. The gates are affected the same whether the rope is at LL or 43 off, I should think. From the skier's perspective, well up on the boat, the right hand gate is always going to be difficult to spot. If it can't be seen at all, I would suspect some work on bungees could be in order- but still wouldn't they be hard to see at any line length?

One skier of my acquaintance believes the multiple settings a placebo/marketing illusion. If we look under the dash close enough we might see just a large bundle of wires with exposed ends... :-) Could be- perception is often reality...

For Alex38. The GPS units available will not be precise enough. The ones used by surveyors and the miltary could do it maybe- but as I recall it takes a long time and lots of satellite 'looks' to resolve the position. No longer in that industry, but one vendor claimed resolution within a sphere 10 cm. virtually anywhere... maybe not so hot in 259m. but pretty tight between L.A. and N.Y.

Most any ski built over last 8-10 years will be pretty suitable. Most of the manufacturors have a ski (or two) built using less graphite etc, in the same molds as their top end slaloms for way less money. Depends too on height and weight, skier speed etc. There are skis to stay away from... A word to look for is "forgiving". Some skis in the mid to late 90's were pretty high performance rides, but 'forgiving' was not in their job description- the 'sweet spots' were measured in like mm.'s not inches. There were some dead-end designs that didn't last long- (fortunately).

Some of the prop guys seem to work miracles, you never know til you ask. Might want to buy another anyhow, just as a back up. Has saved more than one ski day for me.

Good tips from AB and thager. Especially about using at least two people at each end of tape/rope/wire. If you can't stand up easily though... it is nigh impossible to pull the tape tight enough to get a good measurement. You can use a decent compass to find centerline direction, and 90 degreees to that and offset to the shore to measure the 180 ft.(in C/L direction), then back 90 degrees into the water to boat guide line. You can get within about 1 -2 feet pretty easily- good enough for practice generally. FYI a whole lot of courses were surveyed in as lakes were built, before there were 55m. buoys... They got added later after the lakes were filled. Usually... fairly close... When we began surveying the local courses we noticed the alignment being torqued around by the pregate baseline, and discovered how the homologation program made the offset calculations. (Some of those anchors were/are an absolute %#$&* to move.) A really fine project for a crappy non ski day, or when your hands can't take another set! Beer or other analgesic to counteract banging your shins while 'walking' with anchors is recommended :-) YMMV!

If you are pulling past the 'white water' off the second wake you are pulling too long. Excess speed can be mitigated by adding a wing, crisper edge change and better extension, but is best if not initiated at all.

The math looks OK... Might get you close... Likely the anchor would not fall exactly vertical and probably not at the correct width (interior boat guide width.) If your interior boat guides have been placed at or about 1.15m. or at least are all the same width, you can 'eyeball' from water level and get within an inch probably. I would still measure the 180'/55m., or have it surveyed by a TC or someone who can do a single, two or three point survey. For practice it would mostly make little difference. In the event you want to hold a record tournament, and the TC surveys your course, the homologation calculator uses the pregates to compute the course baseline- so it's nice to have them fairly close, and save resurveys and recalculations when the C/L and interior buoy locations look 'warped' until the pregates get set in correct locations. Probably TMI :-) ...

I guess I am missing something. Been a senior driver and judge for a few years now. Haven't been getting a free room. Buy/make my own lunches. Pretty sure I'm not getting paid. No free entries unless a Chief official. Not sure if anyone even knows what my ratings are. Mostly, I find that I get to work more than many others. Only complaint I might have is that "some" skiers (deliberately?)eschew any ratings, and sit on the beach all day unless skiing. Even though at a Class C you don't need a rating to dock start or announce or perform rope monkey duties. Since most officials are voluntary, where are these Senior officals swaggering around? Haven't seen it yet.

I'm sure that all sorts of technology can be applied to the sport. Unfortunately, there is a 'trickle down' effect from "R" to L, E, and even C's. The gimmicks are available- who is going to own, maintain and replace them? Do we want C tournaments eventually required to use video gates etc? The TC for a Class C is the chief judge. If we end up requiring a rated TC for a class C, be prepared to pay for the services and equipment- it's not cheap and it doesn't last forever. Do skiers want to throw down (way) over $100 for a C tourney? THAT is where we're headed unless some common sense prevails. Do we wonder why INT is doing so well? I've said it before. IMHO The judge(s) look(s) at it ONCE, in real time, not magnified, stop framed etc. and NO peanut gallery allowed in the tower or viewing site. Unless clearly a miss, the current rules say it goes to the skier. Let it be. It is unfair to the skier to interrupt their performance rhythm- if it can't be properly reviewed in the time it takes to drop and shorten, then the skier prevails and keeps going. We get over it and move on. Q. Are we are installing and using this technology to make it better or worse- more fair or unfair? Most of us are not going to be collecting a big paycheck at the end of the day, no matter how grand we do. Maybe we are slapping too much lipstick on this pig and taking ourselves a little too seriously? Rant over.

Senior slalom driver, assistant in T/J- pending Reg. status... Senior slalom judge, Regular T/J; Regular S/T/J Scorer. Technical controller; Safety coordinator (whatever that is- need upgraded 1st aid card)

I was coached to try to stay 'on the handle' longer (not pull longer)- it made head and tail winds little different except for the pre-gate set up.

Ah- It is NOT a "slip knot" if tied correctly. The line needs to pass through the rope, around the standing line at least once and back under the turn(s) and fidded into running line. There were some handles being manufactured with a hokey kind of loop and "anchored" in place with super glue or whatever. The knots moved, and had to be properly tied as described. Spectra or other kevlar line does tend to move a bit once in the water and the braids and knots 'set'. If it starts at 4'-10" it may well end up at 4'-11 1/2"... Then it does not change very much. It has virtually no stretch, and may be an issue if you suffer tendonitis in the wrists, elbows or shoulders... It is also about 5 times (at least) stronger, and less prone to break and frays in a way different manner.

Fin measurements seem close enough that it is likely a technique tweak that needs addressing. From my ski partners that run it, 35 off requires a little different approach. They tell me that visually, if you get your eyes outside the buoy line, you have already pulled too long and are going to have slack. They talk of 'lack of commitment'- not releasing the edge and beginning the turn without reaching the buoy with upper body? From the boat or towers, the (successful -35 pass) has an edge change that is more positive- quicker, and closer to C/L than you can get away with at -32...

I am aware of a Regionals that did not have bungies on the gate balls until well after the start of the tournament. The effect was that each time the boat went though the gates disppeared under water in the wakes, at very near the time the skier went through. Numerous skiers had their gates pulled, until the deficiency was identified and corrected. From the towers, the wider hulled boats do appear to be causing a similar visual issue. We could fix it with a rule change involving moving the buoy or making sure the gate did not move laterally somehow. Some courses have quite robust, permanently poured anchors with surveyed locations for gate buoy anchors. They will not be so easy to adjust...

Some kind of standard needs to be maintained. I still say if there HAS to be video gates, it gets looked at ONE time and NORMAL speed. Last I saw in the rules, trick passes are not judged in slow motion, over and over? But then again, I haven't reviewed the rules for trick yet this season... Benefit of doubt per existing rules is supposed to go to the skier.

Like several mentioned- good knee bend starts from bending the ankles forward. On the pull out, i like to stand up and feel a centered, balanced stance with knees slightly bent. Similar to 'settling in' as you set up a golf shot, or before shooting a free throw. Of course, then the line goes tight, my mind goes blank, and the wheels often come off... but once in a while I can keep that centered feeling all the way thru the exit gates! Sometimes even for a whole set!

I know the owners of several lakes. I notice they spend maybe 60? times more time mowing, and maintaining than skiing. I help out when I can but members/guests amount to tourists really- We aren't there to see even a fraction of the work involved- nor experience first hand, the 'charms' of finding, fixing or financing busted stuff virtually every day.- If you know a lake owner, treat them nice, thank them frequently, and buy them beer- they are busting their butts for you.

In the mean time, for practice sets when there[s the most 'exposure' to injury- I suggest keeping well under a half diameter buoy showing and filling them as you prefer- (water, alcohol or both,,, (beer maybe?!).

During a clinic Marcus Brown was the first I'd heard advocate holoding trailing arm (the one coming onto the handle), pressure during the turn finish- That movement by itself seems to slide the hips towards course center and maintain energy through the turn. I wish I could actually do it!...

IIRC- the ludicrous Federal height/weight standards are/were based on the BMI values. I think another thing to consider as well, is that high performance skis are not generally built in sizes appropriate for us heavier skiers- whatever their muscle mass. The course dimensions being a constant- longer skis/bigger turns are probably not be ideal for running the course as efficiently as can an equally lean skier on say a 67" board...?