andjules

Like @ToddL, I think this a spot where the Radar RS-1/Stradas stand out. They perform best while still loose and allow quite a bit of heel lift, so you get the best of both worlds plus a very safe release system. So, for @Thager, you can essentially do what you're suggesting with the play btwn the liner and not-too-rigid shell. Seems like the majority on BoS are 40+ yrs of age. I'd hate to see everyone rush to a RTP setup because of this trend among pros. The advantage to your skiing is likely slight (plenty of folks taking their double boots to way deeper line lengths than I ever will) but the disadvantage to your falling is significant - you want both feet in or both feet out. I know my number one goal is to just keep skiing. I'd hate for one bad fall to take me out for a couple of seasons with a snapped ACL.

nice shot!

I've got a Boxee Box set-top-box - so I got to watch it on my 50" TV. A little grainy, but I don't recall watching slalom on live TV in the past ;-). Thanks, gr8 webcast.

If you're not going to speculate & start rumors, can we find someone who will? ;-)

I subscribed to Shnitz on Facebook a while ago (http://www.facebook.com/holyschnitz)... he recently posted about molds, a pneumatic press, heat controllers, large scale dye sub printer & other equipment for sale, clearly set up for slalom ski production. $75k for the lot, apparently located in Missouri. So, a) if you've always dreamt of making your own skis - and have $75k to spare - here's your chance; and b) does anyone know the story here? Did someone recently stop making skis/go out-of-business/start outsourcing or contracting?

@MrJones Maybe he shoulda painted out that "Overton's" on his swanky intermediate nylon vest :-)

@KeownFILMS they do have head & shoulders pretty level and pointing down the course, similar hips and knees, and are grabbing the handle very low at the hip (wish I could). But (and I'm just re-gurgitating what others have said elsewhere on the forums), Nate seems to have a talent for letting the ski come around more before hooking up - look how much closer Nate's tip is to going under the line (and yes, I realize Nate's shot is taken an instant further into the turn, but I still think his tip was further ahead @ hookup). The other thing is Jeff's outside shoulder is coming around more aggressively vs Nate's staying open. I think those two things have a lot to do with why Nate & Jeff tend to look so different an instant - or about 5' feet - later in the sequence. If that sounds like a critique of Jeff's skiing, i) I'm an intermediate nobody, and ii) although I love watching Nate & try to learn from his style, I think Jeff is a lot more fun to watch and brings out the all-heart/hang-on feeling that I love about course skiing. Great film. Thank you.

@Horton (or whomever wants to take a stab at it) there is an underlying suggestion here (and on other threads) that we've had a real revolution (or fast-evolution?) in ski design between - let's say -2008/09-2011/12... how would you characterize it? What are the design elements that are so different? @Wish, between @Horton's review and that anecdote which you shared earlier in the summer, as well as a few other comments here-and-there, I think I've settled on a CoX SL for my new stick this fall.

@454SS - I'm intrigued by the bindings as well... they look like wakeboard adaptations. They use the word 'liners' in the product info, but I didn't get any sense that the liners come out (unlike the Radars).

+1 "Comical" is a bit of an overstatement. As far as construction, I don't believe any modern (93' Echelon and later) Malibu ever felt cheap or flimsy in rough water (that's not to say that Correct Crafts aren't built even-better, but what's the point? It's not like Malibus are cracking or warping or...). You'll be fine with a Malibu (or a SN). I certainly agree with that.

It seems to me that one might argue the slalom wake to be a touch nicer and the hull to be a touch more overbuilt on the SNOB. However the RLX is still world class in both regards (I owned a 98 RLX) For me, the only major difference is the convenience/versatility with the wedge. If I put any value on boarding, it would be a no brainer for me: the RLX hands-down.

98 RLX is diamond hull (1st yr for it).

You may indeed need to spend more time (than you currently do?) with high-level coaches, BUT I'm sure most of us on BoS would agree you'd need less time than anyone else in the same spot: the way you digest and analyze all the subtleties of slalom technique, I believe you take more away from 5m listening to a coach than most students take from a week. We're all grateful here for thought you put into skiing and the posts you put out.

No, @DooSPX, I wouldn't say that. The Vice is (I think) 50-50 Carbon/Fiberglass and is a deep, deep shortline-capable ski - I think Trent Finlayson skis it. It's supposedly got a feel that's more 'dampened' than the Strada, but not necessarily any less capable in the right hands. The regular Senate may not have any carbon in it. From what I've read, it'll take you into 22 off, maybe 28off max. The Senate C apparently has riders getting into -39 and -41. I'm wondering if anyone has skied the Vice and the Senate-C at 34mph and can comment on the feel?

I'm not sure it's the key to it all, but the biggest visual difference I notice between Nate and the other 'greats' is the knees/body at the edge change. It's like his upper body is still in the lean and his lower body is already on the turning edge. As per @ShaneH no. 3 above. From Schnitz' Soaked photos: http://sphotos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/556480_10151022339946296_189078975_n.jpg

I've got the same question. In my case, I'm a -28 to -32 at 34mph skier. 5'7", 175-180lbs. The Vice, Senate C and HO CoX SL are all on my short list. I feel like I've got a solid lean, a slow edge change, and a tendency to get a bit forward/break on my offside turn.

I found it intriguing that when I lived in Williamsburg, Virginia for a year, folks started skiing about a month earlier than us, but stopped skiing around the same time (early-mid October).

Understood. I love mine because they feel so safe w/o sacrificing anything else. Just couldn't imagine mine ripping out of the ski before they let me out!

How tight are you pulling the laces? There is a lot of discussion about how most people pull them too tight (so that they feel more snug, like other bindings). When I switched to RS-1s, they didn't 'feel' secure - I wanted to tighten the laces, but from what others were saying I decided to resist and leave them fairly loose. Buoy count went up. Change is good. Anyhow, tearing the whole plate and boot off the ski w/o releasing sounds like over-tight laces or some very odd fall. My RS-1s certainly release when they ought to.

@crashman, I wasn't necessarily advocating the old 'pick a tree and ski for it' technique, just trying to open discussion on why we used to say it and how it helped... and wondering what others would say to a skier today, because - as @Than_Bogan hints at - we don't really want to pretend that we're going to ski @ 90º to the boat, especially in a zero-off speed-controlled world. I'd say tie a handle to a doorknob and do some dry-land visualizing and find what's comfortable for you, not too busy, and will help you to start leaning away from the boat harder (with hips up, of course!) through the wakes. Thinking about a spot 30'+ ahead of the ball helps me.

Just to be clear: when I wondered if there is still some value (for some skiers) looking across the course, it's not to "spot rollers", get psyched out by the wake or just mindlessly look across. Exactly the opposite: we used to say look across, pick a tree, and lean like you want to ski to that tree. That's the value of it. (Yes, there is a lot on these boards - between deep shortline skiers - about not getting too much angle, being light on the line, etc.; but for those just getting into course skiing and not getting enough angle...) You don't need to look across course to get more angle, and certainly can be at odds with the concept of skiing open, but back in the day we did teach it for a reason: it consistently helped newbie course skiers to i) stop skiing straight to the ball, and ii) increase their aggressiveness through the wake.

@crashman, I think we're mostly agreed that your coach is giving you some old school advice. BUT when I take myself back 20+ years when I might tell a skier the same things, I was usually saying those particular things because I didn't think that skier's "pull" (lean) was hard enough. When you are skiing your hardest pass, are you getting later and later? If not, ignore this post (your coach just doesn't like your modern, open-shouldered style). If you are getting later and later, I wouldn't take his old school advice, but I might take to heart that he's trying to get you leaning through the wakes more aggressively in a strong position, and to stop skiing straight towards the ball. As the amazing video above demonstrates, you don't need to close your shoulders to do this, but you do need to get your hips up and lean more away from the boat. I know I'm going to sound old school here but while Rossi's advice on where to look seems right for a seasoned shortline skier, I can't help but wonder if looking more across the lake might do more good than harm for a fifteen-off'r. When we look where we want to go, we tend to work (lean) only hard enough to ski where we're looking. If you find you're getting later and later at 31/32 mph, it might help to aim 30'+ in front of the ball (ie., look more across the lake, not at the ball). My 2¢, open to criticism. To be honest, I'm still trying to learn to not crank my head and look directly across the lake.

Yes, it's been years since my metabolism has been able to 'afford' ordering a poutine. But I remember those college days fondly.

Oh, sorry you didn't get to try poutine! It's kind of an embarrassingly unhealthy provincial - and increasingly national - treasure. It sounds gross, but it's fries + cheese curds + gravy (specifically the gravy you'd get on a 'hot chicken sandwich' in an old school diner). I think it tends to run between 800-1300 calories depending on the size and options.

of course these days, in comparing skis, it seems like it is increasingly about surface area, not simply length - for example, your 69 Senate C already has more surface area than a 69 Strada; as you know, that's their marketing angle: it's a Strada that's .2" wider, rides a little higher and (theoretically) better for 34mph.