klindy

That's AWESOME!!! Thanks for doing this!

@The_MS The legal argument is whether or not insurance is available at all or at a reasonable cost. Any payout is important but the biggest risk is making sure the insurance carrier pays it all (up to any limits). None are good but risk is at least partially controlled if you have effective insurance to handle any claim.

Nearly the $25k target.

@The_MS Correct. And SafeSport is FAR more than just a simple training program. But since you get the overall idea, it's a pretty small step to following thru with the training.

Part of the collegiate team skiing appeal is that ALL the skiers of one team/event ski together. In other words, you get to see ALL the women trickers or mens slalom skiers. The team points are based completely on the rank of the total number of skiers. So, as soon as the event is over, you can know exactly where each team is in the order of finishers. Same thing with the next 5 events (mens and womens slalom/trick/jump). With traditional 3 event skiing team members ski in various divisions/events at different times and it's nearly impossible to maintain some sort of 'live scoring' (or near real time) to know who's in the lead, etc. So once the tournament is over you can finally do the team scoring. At that time, most folks are headed home and the enthusiasm is gone. In other words, it's a great concept, but doesn't work well based on how tournaments are typically organized. Best to think how we can run/group tournaments differently to accommodate the team scoring or do the scoring differently to maintain the team appeal. Both can be done, just need to define the format.

@The_MS You're right, all common sense. But few who have actually taken the course have said "nothing new, I know all that". Most have said they learned something or it put it in a different perspective. No harm education really. Here's another perspective, do you know what do to do if you spot something that causes you concern? Any idea of what the "safesport" process or recommended procedure is? You might not agree with it but it might be good to know. @LeonL and others, it is a layer of protection that needs to be addressed. Regardless of whether we want to be part of the USOC (or if it's financially beneficial) or whatever, the world we live in will REQUIRE USAWSWS (or AWSA or any other organization) to have insurance to protect that organization against a very real threat. That insurance is IMPOSSIBLE to get without various processes and systems in place to mitigate the risks. Even if it's not impossible, it would be far FAR more expensive. So we can ditch the USOC system and develop our own. A group can split off USAWSWS and organize separately but eventually it will be part of a business decision on how to properly manage the risks associated with operating. SafeSport is complete, simple and free. It completely satisfies the requirements and recommendations our or insurance carriers. The way it operates, any investigation is handled outside USAWSWS and completely independent further protecting the organization. So lots of positives. As an officer of the organization we have a duty to make business decisions that protect that organization as well. I believe it would be bad decision to try and 1) manage it ourselves (no SafeSport or other program); 2) reasonably expect our insurance carriers to accept a "not a problem here, we don't need it" approach; or 3) recommend we go it alone without insurance. So, CYA? Perhaps. Options? Not many and few that make as much sense.

He does a SLO when both feet are on the ski. The second one is a WLO when the rear foot is out.

I’m the Southern Region this year there was exactly ONE OM slalom skier and exactly ONE OM jumper. Read that again — the region with by far the most Open skiers had almost no one show up. On the same weekend of the Regionals there was no “pro” event anywhere in the US. Point is, eliminate the requirement to go to Regionals and no one will come. These are the same skiers that get an automatic Senior judge rating for their abilities on the water. I get it about the costs and the time requirements. But it is where all the core skiers actually have a chance to compete. It’s also a social event as @Horton experienced. The model DOES need to be reinvented. But even in this short thread there are wide ranging ideas of what the Nationals and Regionals needs to be - elite and competitive, lots of people, social event, showcase for new products and sponsors. Which path should we take??? The basic premise makes sense. But it’s become too hard to commit to attend both. As @Bruce_Butterfield mentioned, out-of-the-box thinking like multiple regional sites on the same weekend would make it EASIER to attend. Not sure if it’s the right answer or not but probably worth a try. Regardless of the answer or path, we need MORE people participating and not less (aggregate numbers). Solutions which exempt or eliminate participation seems counter intuitive. This year there will be a US Open at the Nationals. Look at the numbers and who will ski. I’m positive it will be entertaining and a great event but almost none skied at their respective regionals where the demographic that could most appreciate them attends. Seems like a disconnect to me. As for skier entry fees, those are set by the sponsoring club and, ultimately, approved by awsa. If only one club bids on the tournament, guess what kind of leverage there is? The idea is it should be a competitive bidding process, it’s not really.

@Horton you just made an interesting point. You said, "For me this year it is more about Girls 1 than Men 4." and I think that's awesome!! However above you said if YOU didn't have to ski the Regionals, you'd "VERY likely" attend Nationals. I really do get the struggle with time off, cost to travel, cost to ski, practice time, family time, etc. But if you didn't have to ski Regionals, would you have not given your daughter the chance to ski HER 'biggest' tournament of the year? @unksskis also said that he has no reason to ski Regionals. I get it, Aaron you are a great skier and your ranking shows. But there are MANY more skiers that go to Regionals that either decide not to go to Nationals or, more likely, are not qualified to go to Nationals. That is the biggest tournament of the year for a lot of people. Point is there are no perfect answers and there will STILL be choices folks will have to make regardless of the pathway. Since you're going Regionals for Buford Danger, I assume you're skiing yourself. So you're literally ready to ski Nationals this year. I'm interested to know what choice you'd make if you didn't have to ski Regionals?

@Horton underdtood. One more question, so if you did not have to ski regionals this year, you would go to Nationals in Chicago right?

I’m surprised no one mentioned that we ran women’s and men’s brackets together. Was that better? No big deal? Didn’t notice?

@Fastguy888 What @Cnewbert said. You're over thinking this. The lake is similar to a lot of other lakes out there. It's generally assumed that the boat is "at speed" at the 55's and will remain at that speed thru the exit gates (not the far 55's as you suggest). I am not aware of anything specific in the AWSA rule book defining exactly where the boat must be "at speed". Seems there may be something in the boat drivers manual.

@Cnewbert again it’s perfectly adequate but not as long as some skiers may like. I would not necessarily agree with “but barely”.

@Cnewbert the lake is adequate but fairly short with the boat going straight in on both ends. While there were drop noodles for skiers to stop at, it's still a challenge to get up to speed. Couple that with 58kph speeds and it's tough to get up to speed. There really wasn't anything possible to do to improve it. ZO would lock in before the green buoys per the rules but many times the pullout for the gate is right there too.

@RichardDoane i can assure you that it’s NOT about making money for AWSA. AWSA gets far less than you think - I’ll get the exact number.

@Horton let’s explore your last sentence in the second to last paragraph a bit … “I would much rather see higher qualifications and lower financial costs get the filter for who does and does not go to Nationals”. The qualifications part is easy … which means (likely) fewer people attending a smaller event. How do you recommend lower the costs? Remember that more people means higher likelihood of vendors wanting to pay for space and sponsorships. Without which means net costs are higher. So I’m interested to know how you’d lower costs.

@teammalibu we did use SurePath. We also used end course video. In essence SurePath was use to aid the monitoring of the EC video. I watched a lot of passes in the prelims and the driving was as good as I’ve seen.

That's pretty awesome right there!! Coble's is a great place to make this happen! Every story is different and special, certainly to those who are part of the story, but you hear something similar repeated about Coble's frequently! We are blessed to have the whole Cobles team as part of the skiing community!

@Tkl127 For tricks you want a fairly rigid binding that helps hold your ankle. You want the movement of your legs to translate into directing the ski to edge or weight differently. That's part of the reason you see a lot of trickers using a hardshell binding. The Wiley's trick wrap is a higher wrap than a slalom (or even jump) binding. It's also typically more snug around the ankle. Use ample soap and you'll get your foot in there (just make sure your little toe is in the binding before you step your foot in hard!). For my jump bindings, I like to use shaving cream instead of soap because it tends to washout better for me. I used the Wileys trick binding for year and while it's tight, the only drawback is my foot tended to tire and cramp up faster in it than I wanted. I switched to a hard shell a couple years ago and have been really happy with it.

@Andre that was Jim Powell who is the Eastern Region EVP.

@BraceMaker I don't fully understand your comment? We never had one skier who was told they were late or to hurry up. The weather was quite cool and most skiers tended to huddle up behind the shed on the starting dock or in a nearby house. Also, the skier tent was literally directly behind the camera at the end of the lake which was steps from the dock. Point taken about the continuity of the webcast. @Kelvin can chime in but we reminded the camera operators to continuously "look for content" even between passes and between skiers. Let the broadcast directing pick what looked best. This was relatively "laid back" in the sense that we were not pressed hard for time. In terms of 'pow wow's' etc, Just like any dock there is some of that which always happens. We spent a lot of effort to get the skier info and put it on the white board for boat. Also, since we were lean on officials, most worked every event in one capacity or another. Sometimes human needs breaks are kind of important. Getting the crew back into the boat took a couple minutes. Every one was cognizant that the event was webcast and we worked diligently to keep things moving.

@jhughes That may be the case with slalom but for jump and tricks it's game on from the beginning. Relating your golf/tennis analogy to slalom, they don't play the same golf hole 4-6 time with the tee being 50 yards farther back either. Nor do they make the tennis court two feet shorter/narrower per game. Boxers take 12-15 rounds to wear down enough to start seeing a winner. Runners/cyclists tend to tire as physical conditioning and stamina begins to matter. For team sports you can make the case for football, basketball and baseball that the sports have rules 'raise the intensity and drama' near the end - pitching changes, strategic use of fouls, time-outs and player changes. For slalom specifically in later rounds the starting speed is routinely set higher than prelims. Perhaps it's not high enough.

Thanks for your help @ESPNSkier!! You guys did an awesome job!! Sorry for standing in your shot too often!! I really did try to stay in the background!

So far the weather is amazing!

@unksskis I am saying that splitting the west into 3 regions is a bad idea because what it does to the board (assuming the current bylaws). That said, I have been a BIG advocate to allow for more than one "regional tournament" in a region. For example, let there be 3 regional tournaments the same weekend. There can be a 'local' podium and a combined, virtual podium that combines the scores of all 3 locations. I get the different conditions issue - let anyone from the region pick wherever they want to ski. I also get that it's hard to coordinate schedules - do the best you can. In other words, same regional structure but the ability to have more than one "official" site for the regionals.