Jump to content

sunperch

Baller
  • Posts

    303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sunperch

  1. I have skied behind it numerous times, and also driven it. We played with the micro-tuners at every line length at 34mph. The micro-tuners being engaged or disengaged did not make a difference at -22 , the hump was still there but manageable. We moved the passenger closer to the driver and no more than 1/2 tank of gas for the best ride. If you had a passenger >200# or a full tank of gas, the hump was not friendly. All of the other line lengths and speeds were great. Both of my kids skied behind it the most (promo at our lake, thanks Todd!) as they were training for their boat draw for Regionals and Nationals. They both liked it a lot.
  2. FROM MY HUSBAND (who is not able to post in this thread): "Well, I was the dock start for W4 and I will confirm that they driving they received was poor. The driver pulled the women up at extreme angles and often did not have the boat lined up prior to the 55s, making last second corrections. Some complained that he did not have the boat up to speed when entering the course. The driver hit the dock 3 times, and would have been more if I had not pushed him off. When I alerted him that the women were voicing concerns about his driving and that he needed to have the boat lined up with the course prior to the 55s he replied that he knew what he was doing. The ACJ and ACD were alerted and they came to the lake, with the driver having to have his boat path corrected 3 times, they saw the crazy starts and then told the women that they all had the same poor conditions so it was considered fair. As far as the lake conditions, it was very busy water despite the wind. The main lakes had almost ideal conditions while Lake 3 had windy, busy water. Almost every woman came back to dock mad and complaining about the poor driving and poor conditions they had to ski in, especially since they were the only group originally scheduled to slalom on that lake."
  3. @JeffSurdej My husband and I are both active members along with our 2 kids, and 3 of the 4 of us are officials. Trust me I understand the "pay to play" model. Every time we need new skis it is x4, tournament entries x4, flights to go to Nationals x4, boat gas for practice x4,etc... now it is AWSA membership x4. Why on "pay to play" model do single event skiers have to bear the brunt of the cost for participation, but the 2nd or 3rd event cost only a fraction more? Nationals cost $165 for single event, $192 for 2-event OR 3-event skier.
  4. My daughter has said she will quit skiing tournaments if the divisions are changes to ability based. She wants to ski with her friends, she does not want to ski against "old men". This sport is male dominated, which is fine, but I don't want to ski against men either. I have learned the most when I have competed against better skiers, gives me the motivation to strive to get better myself!
  5. +1 @Chad_Scott My kids said they will quit skiing if they have to compete against adults. They said it would be no fun . There are far too few kids skiing as it is, all my kids want to do is ski hard and have fun with their friends at tournaments. We traveled to Alabama from KS so our kids could ski with friends over spring break, friends they made from attending Nationals.

    The question has still never been answered - what are we trying to accomplish by changing the rule book? I don't think that these changes will increase membership, all it is doing is making the majority of current active core of skiers mad. A lack of a real answer leads me to believe that it is a way for some to increase their rankings by getting rid of some of the better competition. Same with ZBS, a way to increase bouy count by overspeeding because they could not get it done with traditional scoring.

×
×
  • Create New...