klindy

I have to go with Arilyt Waters in Lawton, MI,.,,Best kept secret in Michigan,

I didnt bring my stuff when I was there for the University Worlds...wish I did! Then @ral had to rub it in by taking me on a boat tour too! :) Just kidding, next time I bring my gear.... @rodltg2 awesome place!! Enjoy it!

MSU skis down stream of a power plant on the Grand River in Lansing Michigan too....at least they used to ski on the river, not sure if they have a different site now.

@skiron07 Pretty comprehensive list here - http://www.ballofspray.com/DropBox/ski_sites_16.9,_6-8-11.kmz

In DC Zip Car is your friend!

@Horton I understand there were a few bad accidents and none of them where AWSA. I don't know all the fact either but we're on the same page. My question is more fundemental. What is the rationale for AWSA/USAWS/whatever division providing secondary insurance to it's members? No question it helps some folks who are uninsured or underinsured. But I'm questioning the cost/benefit of the whole scheme. Competitive waterskiing is a sport which includes risk of injury and, perhaps even death. I accept that risk whenever I participate. I do have health insurance and, in the past, I have used the AWSA secondary insurance to supplement my deducibles, co-pays, etc. Point is, I understand it's usefulness but it's the "cost" that seems to be currently out of line. Which other competitive sport associations provide compulsary insurance for their members? Frankly, the insurance is what's been largely responsible for the increased dues costs, the additional back ground checks, and addtional tournament paperwork. Why, really, do we need it? My point is the post above is competitive waterskiing should look at other individual competitive sport associations for ideas. There are other far more popular sports out there which are more expensive and have similar challenges such as handicapping, pro vs amateur, etc. We seem to be satisfied with the status quo on how things are done and instead of questioning the individual issues individually, we're discussing starting our own thing.

Frankly I think the competitive segments of the market are quite small regardless of what discipline you look at. Being "affiliated" with other towed sports doesn't help competitive 3 event anymore than AWSA "supports" wakeboarding in the eyes of a boat manufacturer. The weekend wallys and other folks who would likely never see a ski lake, wakeboard tournament or the Masters are the target of the Water Sports Industry Association. The "water sports" afficianatos as a whole are FAR bigger than those of us interested in COMPETITIVE Towed Water Sports. If you don't think so, you haven't been at a boat show lately! This year the Dallas Boat Show had ONE slalom boat (a Malibu) and at least 25 wakeboard boats (CC, MC, Malibu and others). They market to the weekender who has money and time....as competitive folks, we just need some of the same goodies. Keeping all the competitive water sports under an umbrella organization makes sense as long as there is synergy as a group. Common rules (think drug testing, etc.), common causes (like the increased regulations mentioned above), common products (insurance?!) are where the synergy can potentially be found. My question is is what does AWSA REALLY gain from being a stand alone organization? I'd predict the same number of rules changes, same tournaments, same dues, same folks in charge, etc. Another words, same ole, same ole...... I think a better approach is to appreciate whatever commonality we have and leverage it wherever possible. Question what we do to be sure it adds value - for example I'd look hard at the whole insurance thing...it MIGHT make sense as a liability solution for lakes/clubs (common cause again) and it may make sense for boat owners but I really question the need for individuals to be covered. I also believe the individual coverage is where the biggest exposure risk lies and has the highest costs. Discontinue the insurance and you can significantly cut the membership dues. It's only secondary insurance anyway. I'd also recommend (from a competitive standpoint) looking at other successful single player sport organizations like golf and tennis for guidance. The USGA is a great example of how a competitive sport can grow significantly by leveraging the non-competitive players (weekend wallys who still need clubs, balls and a place to play). You can establish your own "without course" club just as easily as one with a course. A straight forward handicap system which lets any ability player COMPETE with a far better player - and uses practice to establish your handicap! I'd bet the cheapest golf course in the US cost more than the most expensive waterski lake ever built. And there's a LOT more golf courses than lakes!! The overall point is we keep contracting into a smaller and smaller group of 'speciality' competitors. We need to think outside the box to find ways to grow and leverage that growth for our collective needs (better equipment, etc). Then and only then will we (the competitive groups regardless of discipline) have the opportunities found in other sports. Anyway, I'm not sure breaking away from USAWS is any better than staying with USAWS...other bigger issues are at work here.

I'll be back some time this year! I still have an unused round trip to Santiago I need to use!

"Tower, this is Cessna N403CM requesting an unrestricted climb to 40,000."

Looks great Rodrigo!!! Coming along nicely!!!

@ral "5 blocks from my office..." Thats the same thing you told me when I was there!! :)

Yes sir!

So....Mrs MS would be redundant?!

Keep your arms and hands inside the forum until the forum comes to a complete and total stop....

Wasn't there a discussion on another thread about the funding available to elite skiers from USAWS? Pretty sure there isn't $1 spent of that funding on the BigDawg tournaments or skiers. Until that changes, I have a hard time calling a "self-funded" series bad for waterskiing. That said, I probably should think this through more before I share half-baked thoughts.

Really cool Rodrigo!!! She's having a ball!!

Right before Walter hit the ramp he could be heard yelling...."Bonzai"!

Has the handle assembly been approved by the AWSA technical committee? If not the rope must be attached to the handle by passing the rope through the handle twice. This can be a non-issue if the assembly is presented to the tech committee along with the appropriate testing results. (AWSA rule 8.04d). It also states that the handle must be between 1.00" and 1.25" in diameter which makes the triangular and eliptical handles a potential issue. Again, I suspect if Radar took a pro-active approach to get this in front of the tech committee (and they may already have) it would be a non-issue. Frankly I think it's a pretty good idea!

I'd agree that keeping the ski from moving around is the biggest goal. Anyone have a option for a slalom ski and a trick ski (along with any related stuff)? Looks like I'll be doing quite a bit of traveling at least part of the year so I'm looking for "shipping" options. I'll check the baggage with the airline but I'm wondering of there's a better alternative to my 3-event bag.

I'd agree that keeping the ski from moving around is the biggest goal. Anyone have a option for a slalom ski and a trick ski (along with any related stuff)? Looks like I'll be doing quite a bit of traveling at least part of the year so I'm looking for "shipping" options. I'll check the baggage with the airline but I'm wondering of there's a better alternative to my 3-event bag.

@Than Bogan intimidating or not there certainly has to be a situation where many beginners don't know and therefore don't get the "best ride" or at least the ride they may be more familiar. I'm surprised there is what appears to be a pretty good sized market for ZO simulators for older systems which leads me to think that lots of folks simply don't know or haven't had the opportunity to find the right setting. I'm not advocating for more options or few options but we can certainly agree the learning curve is steeper with more options to choose from and test.

I stopped by the Dallas Boat Show today to snoop around. It was the same basic boat show I remembered from a few years ago. The show (like most I'm sure) is a general mix of bass boats, ski boats, cruisers, pontoons, you name it with all the 'accessory' booths there as well from fishing lures to lake side property for sale. Some things were different however. There was every possible flavor/size/option displayed on (at least!) 50 wakeboard boats but one - ONLY one - 3 event boat on display! Kudo's to Malibu for having Response TXi on display and kudo's to Waterski America for having a very knowledgable staff onsite able to explain the new changes and new features very well! Ironically, they were the only place I was able to find a rack of slalom skis to look at too. Pretty much tells you where the market is today at least in north Texas! On a positive note, of the 5 or 6 various dealers I talked to (ranging from 40' cruisers to bass boats) all of them indicated the show was "very good" and they sold more boats than anticipated.

@xrated, I'd look at something like a diaphragm pump which generally work well on higher viscosity liquids. I know that sap is pretty much water but a pump like this with some creative plumbing and valving would have the ability to pump the sap/syrup/whatever to/from all the various tanks. here's a link to Grainger for some options - http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/pumps/ecatalog/N-bir

Fantastic Rodrigo!! Glad to hear you're back on the water!

Better use a really short rope or you'll find yourself staring the driver in the eye after some of those tight turns! That is some wild stuff!!