Triplett

At my club we figured it out roughly how much was used per set. For two sets (8 passes) at 34mph it was about 2.5 gallons. For 36 it was closer to three. This was with 2011 SN 200 5.7L.

This is true, but we have you guys already. And kids that really want to learn to ski and get into it because of these athletes will eventually convince their parents to pick up a boat or go to ski school or whatever. I understand buying a boat is for the more privileged but I am more concerned about the young kids than adults for this sport to survive. The best bet is get kids wanting to do it and the parents follow. It is hard to get a manufacturer to go out on a limb and fund this stuff, I don't see why we cant get Monster or Red Bull to sponsor a tour, or have these avenues been traveled.

Interlock is actually pretty good but it degrades and it is a skecthy process to figure out how much you need, at least it was for me. I was on a Powershell front with an RTP, the same set up Asher used back in the day. I had my fair share of pre releases without getting hurt. I had one where it released after kicking the tail at the buoy and my rear foot didn't slip out. I think for two boot systems it is one of best. Fogman has its quirks, and from an engineering stand point it just doesn't make sense to release when the ski is flexed. For the interlock I would go with two strips of 250 on each side, clear. Clear because it is easier to pull off when you need to take it off and holds a little better. If you want a binding that releases under rotational load I would go with Reflex and get the half boot for the rear, it is a great system. I use a Reflex with an RTP and love it. I have released twice, both times I didnt really want it to, but it was good it did I suppose.

I hate reviving posts but as Marcus did link this in his new article I felt it was necessary to spark some discussion. I saw this tweet when it came out and I initially agreed. I feel that I have a different perspective than offered by either the elite guys, who have been skiing for the past few years, and the guys who ski big dawg caliber. I suppose I should tell a little back story on this. I started skiing in the 90's when pro-skiing had a legit tour and I, of course, was a wide eyed kid with all these guys I looked up to and an eventual goal to be like them one day. For most this would be just that, but I had the opportunities and talent to take it to that level. I have skied Jr. Masters and the end goal was to be on the main stage. I decided to go for an actual career and went to school for Mechanical Engineering in Michigan (not at Michigan though). But as the dream was still there I still worked hard at skiing and got to the level I am now. Now to the meat of this. I decided to pursue the dream, in an effort to not regret the chance I have, and I moved to Orlando to work with Jodi Fisher and ski professionally, what is left of it at least. I know I am in the minority as I decided to turn down the 60,000 a year job and decided to train. But to be elite it is the only way and I wanted to live my dream. I know I am not alone with this, I know two other guys who have done the same. Elite skiing gave me the drive to train hard and push my limits to get to the point I am now. A big dawg series wouldn't have. I have mad respect for these guys but for them motivate a 12 year old, I just don't see it happening. I know growing up I looked up to Chris Rossi, as I trained with him a lot in the winter and with the big dawg skiers kids don't get that chance, from what I know at least. We have kids come out to train with Jodi, and there are plenty that look up to him, with good reason. All of the coaches we have in the sport come from the elite ranks, but with less events how are we going to legitimize the new pros, I mean Jodi, Lucky, Drew Ross, etc. are not going to coach forever. From my perspective when I was 12, I would rather look up to a 25, 26 year old pro, or maybe even younger, than a 35+ guy my dads age, nothing against dads or anything but you guys get the point. Just my perspective on this. They can coexist but in an effort to grow our sport.

I skimmed this. This kind of links into the thing Marcus put up about the elite and BD events. This would be like the pros deciding not to ski when Nate all of a sudden jumped on the tour and dominated. Andy has the same chance of running 41 than any of these guys, just a matter of time, if it can even be run at 55kph. Anyway we all know that anything can happen in head to head competition. Stranger things have happened. This, from my perspective, hurts the image of big dawg skiing. I understand Andy withdrawing, he was on the waiting list and depending on where he was, might not have even got entry to the event, so might was well just end all controversy over him skiing.

haha Nicole isn't British, kind of. She is Scottish. @mattp come on now!

Look at @mattp being a great investigator. I am not sure about Nicole but I have a good feeling CP is on the Mapple ski. We shall all know this weekend!

I skimmed the thread so forgive me if I re-iterate some things. It has been established that A and 3 need to stay, being I am on A3 I would hate this, haha. I am in the minority with this setting since I am a 36mph, 39.5 off skier. I would have to agree, there is a better way than zero off for speed control but what is it? The GPS that ZO uses is super fast and accurate, so whatever algorithm/transfer function the system is using is getting the input fast enough, and it is limiting the amount of overshoot. If we implemented a force gauge inline that reports back to the cruise, which then figures out the amount of rpm apply through some other transfer function or differential function, or some crazy magical algorithm. Sounds like making an expensive system more expensive and slower. I know I am talking milliseconds but our passes are only 16 to 17 seconds long. Using the jump switch wouldnt work because the is a simple on off switch, or it might a two stage switch, I am not sure, I just know it isnt precise enough to work for slalom.

I like where this is going. I was talking to a student today about this subject. If you stay in the direction of your ski your weight will be even, I think we have established this, but we all keep referencing the video of Nate above. Jodi and I watched the video multiple times and the hips are NEVER open to the boat in the pull. Being this is 38off at 58kph it is really fast and your really need to slow it down to see what is happening. You see the hips open up during the edge change, which is pretty much necessity. From what we saw he is in the neutral position, for the most part through the wakes. Now back to have this make more sense on why having this position is the best. In every sport we have the athletic position, knees over ankles in a stable position. When in this stance nothing can knock you down, it is super stable. Now move your back foot behind your front without moving your position. You end up with a good amount of hip flexion and square hips. Now standing in the slalom stance you are solid, not much can knock you down. Now "open" up as you would to the boat and all of a sudden you are slightly off balance, the smallest disruption will cause you fall, this can equate to your ski searching for edges. Acceleration and so on will be greater, you will ski easier and so on. If you study the top athletes in this sport you will see they are either exactly in this position or nearly there.

This a great thread. I would have to agree with what Seth has said as well as Matt. I have worked, and work extensively with Jodi on this idea of getting squared up to the ski, not the boat. With my experience of getting instruction from many different coaches, I would have to agree Jodi's philosophy is in the minority from everything I have heard before and, in a way, against what I learned from Rossi at a young age. I do believe the answers are in physics and physiology. The more center you are the more symmetrical the sport can be. I know we have an on side and off side but the goal is to make them the same. This is where I believe Jodi's philosophy make the most sense. As @mattP said two posts up the more center you are the easier it is to rotate. In the students we have had at Jodi's school this is the biggest thing and most common thing we have worked on and they move to this more neutral position the easier they say it is. Pretty much all this boils down to what @sethski has put, the rotation just make it all easier and more symmetric, so we all can look like Nate when we ski. Now to touch on @Sully s comment about tucking the back knee more. This has to do with the rotation of the hips as well. The more rotation you have of the back leg the harder it is to rotate the hips to the 0 degree position, it also helps quiet down movement and just overall stay more connected. Good coaching is the key to success in this sport no matter the level! There are plenty of awesome tips here in this forum but whenever you can get a chance go to a ski school. These are better than day clinics, we have more time to help you with any problems, a day, a lot of time, just isn't enough. And you get to vacation. I, of course, would say come to Orlando and see Jodi and myself, but Seth is awesome, Jacks is great, Swiss, etc. the list goes on and on.

From my experience with zero off I find it way more rewarding. I skied on perfect pass until zero off first came out on the nautique, and over the past few years I have messed around on stargazer here and there. I ski about the same on either but feel I can get away with literally anything on PP and quite a bit less on ZO. I use A3 and I ski 36 into super deep shortline and feel in the minority, which according to the poll I am. I always pay attention to the letters on the nationals dock for men's 1 and there is literally no correlation to a preferred setting. I apologize if this is choppy but writhing from a phone sucks.

@AB Apparently. haha

Emissions kill gas mileage, so to be cleaner we use more gas, pretty messed up. But I digress. As long as the automotive industry is pumping money into battery and electric motor tech, the boat industry will benefit. The problem is charge time, too fast a charge batteries will over heat. Solar panels on the bow of the boat would be a genius idea. As far at a paddle to recharge, I don't think you can do that. I could be wrong though.

Mostly a mirror distraction or while we were sitting at the dock haha.

I mean I have been distracted at the collegiate tournaments during the Womens event.

It might a goode, I remember when Rossi was on Goode all of the R&D skis he had were all black. It would be pretty sick if it was a one off ski that his buddy made.

This must be a Global Insurance directed. Show skiing is a different animal than what we do, except for coming back to the dock after a fall and dropping. I do think it would be pretty easy to spot a drunk boat driver in any of the disciplines, all you have to do is look at the path.

I think CP skis at Lucky's. Maybe?

Do you know what exactly they are trying to achieve? I am not sure I would like to pay for a background check when I have proven to be a safe driver.

@horton I did see Zack is not on the list. From what I know he hasn't been on the water much or at all this winter. But this is what I see on Facebook.

If you want an example at how an announcer than make things exciting just listen to Tadd Schreiber announce. I am pretty sure he could make basket weaving exciting. I think if you can get millions of people to watch an entire nascar race we could get a head to head tournament happen. You don't really even need to know the line lengths to make it exciting, just who ever gets the farthest.

I am slow on this apparently, but I 3rd Jodis! If you go there I will probably see you there.

Lets be honest though. Olympic ski racers make way more money than our pros, people watching or not. I have thought about this sport science thing when seeing this on during the X Games and other ESPN things. I believe How Its Made went to Radars facilities to show how they make the strada. I think a show like sports science would be great for this sport. I always wanted to put a load cell on the rope and see the forces we put, maybe some accelerometers on the ski and skier to see the g's we subject our bodies to and etc. I suppose it is the engineer in me. I just know this stuff is expensive and the software even more expensive to capture all of this data.

My philosophy behind it is the more degrees of freedom the weight your lifting has the more benefits you get out of lifting it.

I cannot bench press much at all, nor do I very often. I feel a dumbbell press is more effective. I do some Olympic type presses and lifts. They engage core in every exercise and work nearly every muscle you can think of. I have heard that crossfit is really good for this sport.