klindy

Definitely a class act. Looks like it was a great tournament!!

@Horton conceivably it’s possible to hit the outside of the buoy enough to knock you off the ski but not enough to”significantly displace the buoy. So you “graze the buoy” then fall still going outbound. In the video and pictures posted above its pretty clear it’s a zero. Not even close to a 1/2. Just a missed call.

@Gloersen those rules exist. There are options fo use. It’s video../ or not. We’re in classes have fewer options ( lClass R needs body video for example). But nothing needs to change for a LOC go use it. also there is a Class X option which literally gives a LOC the ability to make up and “test” any rule they want too. Just provide some feedback on how it worked. Experimental rules can be used for a single round or the whole tournament.

Lake of Dreams is amazing! The can Ams have been there several Times and I’ve been fortunate to help as an official several times. Beautiful with amazing people like Dave. Interesting place in that there is no location on either shore where you csn see all 6 slalom buoys pearly. For the Csn Ams we used a tracking live feed camera from the boat and a couple shore/gate cameras to judge slalom. Unconventional but worked great. All the judges and scorers just sat on the dock and watched the big screen TV.

@The_MS please show me where USA WsWs pays ANYTHING to use oe be a part of safesport. You guys keep making stuff up.

What practice lake?

@escmanaze WHILE YOUR point is taken there is no additional fee whatsoever to taker he safe sport training. Free. No cost. Zippo. I

@Horton Boat Video is ONLY required For class R. And legitimately there are probably fewer than 15 skiers (male and female) at any one time capable of breaking a record. And it’s extremely rare they ALL show up at the same place on the same weekend. And even then there just needs to be a video recording. It does not have to be hi def and (most importantly) it does NOT need to be transmitted to the shore for immediate review. The change you’re recommending would mean you need to transmit Hi Def video to a judges tower for immediate review. The rig TWBC uses is about 10k a pop ( plus camera). You suggested just use a handheld iPhone and basically text it to the judges. As a CJ I’d say no thanks. It’s bad enough already when everyone has instant access to the webcast. While the coverage is great, you get dozens of arm chairs judges all with separate opinions and “proof” they’re right. There’s a reason there is an “official video that reviews a a judgement. Calls are made from. I’m all for using the Bree possible but this is asking for chaos. I’d rather consider adapting the rule that requires $100 or $250 to challenge a call and get it reviewed. I’d suggest it should be free, should come from another competitor or legit representative ON SITE and have some credible”evidence” the call is wrong. It won’t be long before we have surepath data showing up on everyone’s cell phone too.

Cool!! Great video!! Dee, Connie and Robert are awesome people!!

@lpskier MBUU is their ticker symbol.

Chin strap with plastic snaps. Otherwise it should be fine. I’d also keep the face cage installed. A “plopper” is probably at as high a risk as any for weird falls where skis go where they’re unintended.

@ScottScott the OPEN Worlds has an Open division. Nothing says you can’t ski both. Likewise, several skiers skied both the U17 AND the U21Worlds

I’m not sure who disagreed with my comment above (you certainly can). But like to know why and what part you disagree with?

First as @lpskier said, if you qualify to compete, you can. (E.g.-“U21” is for anyone under the age of 21. It doesn’t matter if your 4’ tall or have 2 other jobs or if you’re family is Uber wealthy or you’re a 10 year old phenom - if you’re under 21 you are eligible based on the selection criteria for team skiers and/or independents. As for defining who is a “pro” … the Pro Tour points system is probably the best thing we’ve had ever to help define a pro. Points are based on tournament finish, strength of course the field and the number of tournaments you attend. Seems it would be fairly easy to say if you finish in the “top 50%” at the end Of the year you’re a “pro” (pick whatever percentage you want). Or if you’re on the “top 80% of the current list, you’re a pro (again pick whatever percentage you want, point is now it’s a dynamic model). So assuming we want to define a pro, The next question as @Bruce_Butterfield asked us “why”? I personally believe we SHOULD distinguish between an amateur and a pro. And rules for each group should be catered to allow each group to achieve their goals. For example, pros probably need more flexibility to better deal with alternative formats like night skiing and head to head where things are more of a “show” but you want to maintain a competitive atmosphere . Where as amateurs might be more concerned with fair age groups and even ranking lists etc. My point is some blue sky thinking could help develop traction on the pro side and simplify the amateur side while still providing an incubator for the pros. If the goal is to keep the best of the best out of some level of competition, I think that’s a bad idea.

@tjs129 I agree with you. Soccer can be fun to watch but can also be painful boring. Of course it lasts almost exactly 2 hours because the clock never stops. But the “add time” is an anomaly only known to the head ref. So all of a sudden the game is done. Point I was making before is constant action. The 12 Swiss pro broadcast was probably only 2hrs of action too. I recall a Collegiate Nationals in Chicago where they even had action between events - Cory Pickos trick demo, 3 guys on inner tubes, bare footing, etc. Non-stop action.

@tjs1295 have you ever watched baseball (long change overs, pitcher changes, etc?), golf ( takes a long time whether you’re camped at a hole or walking with the players), cricket even soccer (typically the ball never leaves the middle half of the field) or football live? “TV timeouts”? All live sports have challenges to live TV. Waterskiing isn’t special in that case. As for how to describe the action, I think consistency is the key as much as anything. I recall the Hot Summer Nights broadcasts and thought the “actual” line length was great. However it was hard for me (an avid skier) to get it and I never heard any of my casual waterski friends complain or complement the decision to call “feet on”. My point is, in the US imperial units may make sense and “feet off” may wrk fine. Everywhere else in the world may get along with metric units just fine. Context seems important. I think it was Ed Brazil who was responsible or claimed some responsibility of color coding the rope lengths to match the spectrum of the rainbow. It wouldn’t be hard to describe the “purple loop” as 2’ short of the buoys and just latch on to the color sequence. The constant action on the water probably means more to an audience than knowing the specific details to the cm (or inch). Things like head to head competition or side by side competition is easy to follow. Perhaps “marking” the water somehow for jump might help. I think it’s intuitive to an extent to watch tricks Ana have a pretty good idea that pass A was better (or not) then pass B. The hot rods who “race” monster trucks don’t spend a lot of time on measuring jumps but they do know how to put on a good show! Again the activity will keep the fans interest.

If the forces are different between 28&38 I’m confused why you’d practice anything but 38 all the time. Just put the rope on the purple loop and do it until it becomes automatic. Why even mess with anything else that might mess up your timing? <\end sarcasm font>

@PatM I have a nearly new Mapple 6.0 just sitting there collecting dust. What size?

This is a good example of thinking a rules change is the best way to handle a “problem” that doesn’t exist. What problem are you really trying to solve? Personal preference? How about practicing 32, 32, 35, 38 2-3 times a week. On Friday before a tournament just run a tournament set straight up the line. Maybe ski your hardest pass twice or even three times. Perhaps throw in starts at 28 or 32 or even 35 some days (never know when you’ll be in a run off. Try opting up once in a while. Get used to running a “tough pass” cold. Putting the effort in to be unstoppable regardless of the conditions or circumstances seems like a better idea than trying to tweak the rules to fabricate some kind of perceived advantage. @horton aren’t you also one of those who complain the rule book is too long already?

HO Extreme Slalom skis. Man that was fun to ski on!!

@dave2ball let’s say I agree with you. How do you propose to compel “the parents” to take that responsibility? How do you change the lack of guidance that you referred too? Again what I’ve heard over and over in this thread is “it ain’t my problem, don’t force me to do anything I don’t want to do or disagree with”. So how do you propose to change the behaviors of those parents that you feel are not doing what’s necessary to avoid this issue? If your idea is to ignore it until someone else solves it, I think there are plenty of highly publicized examples of how that won’t work.

@jayski Good questions. First, understand that the SS mandate and the affiliation is with USA-WSWS and not with AWSA directly. That said, even if AWSA stepped out alone, there would be a mandate or strong "motivation" to have a program in place which does the same (or effectively the same) thing that SS does - so SafeSport would be a leading candidate for a solution. Could it be done without a program? Perhaps, but insurance would be either difficult to obtain or expensive which tends to close the loop back to where your question started. For several years there SS training was required for people (officials, coaches, others) who had potential contact with minor members. USA-WSWS made the decision to expand that to "all members" following the lead of some other National Sport Organizations and, anticipating that requirement at some point anyway. It this another hurdle which makes participating more difficult? sure, but the question is whether it's potentially worthwhile. I can't tell you how much lower our insurance premiums are because of this decision, I have no idea. As for your first question, would it matter if any member had a better solution? The resounding answer to that would be YES! It would matter. But so far all I've seen are rocks being thrown at what's in place without any alternative presented. Including inappropriate "bend over" cartoons suggesting this is all some conspiracy or similar. So, the question is real....kids aren't brought up the same as they were years ago. Clearly other sports have had REAL issues which were left unchecked for decades due to ignorance or lack of training or coverups. Either way, it involved 10's of thousands of REAL members of other organizations - I haven't heard one person deny any of the stuff that happened in the boy scouts or gymnastics or other organizations. It would be foolish to think we can operate without insurance coverage and equally foolish to simply think this stuff can't effect us. So what other option makes any sense?

So @The_MS (and/or others) let me get this straight. You're convinced that SS training wont help everyone who may be vulnerable and therefore think it's worthless for everyone? You're offended somehow that it's mandatory and you feel that it's the parents obligation to raise, protect and isolate their own kids in an environment with more than a few examples where that's not being done? So, since it's someone else's responsibility it's ok for you to ignore the potential? SafeSport isn't going to solve the entire problem. It isn't going to prevent every lawsuit nor will it become a substitute for being raised in a healthy loving environment. But I haven't heard even one alternative - only sarcasm and disdain towards those who are trying to improve what we have.

@JeffSurdej why is Ali Garcia listed twice?

Slightly smaller group and all skied on the same lake but Mike Morgan went off the dock #6 in M2 in 1992 in Fort Walton Beach. Mike finished first out of 71 skiers. I remember since I met him for the first time as I went off the dock #5....Got to hear my name as the "leader" for the total time it took me to get out of the lake after falling. Then heard Mike's name for the next 6+ hours!