Triplett

haha priceless, the ad, not the ski, that might be work a few bucks, or a case of beer.

The lake my dad dug is 2100' by 450'. We do not have turn islands but I am not opposed to them. With ZO we get to 36 about 2 or 3 boat lengths before the 55m gates, and that is using all of the lake for it. Our ends are wider, so it is dog bone shaped to allow for spinning and getting out of the way of the boat. Our banks are lined with field stone rocks, about 3 - 4 inches in diameter on average. This soaks up everything, we never have back wash. Our depth is about 10 to 12 feet in the middle. We do have to treat for weeds with things like Aquathol K and some other stuff, I can't remember exactly what it is. We are all sand bottom that is water table, so we dont have to pump water in. If you go any shorter than 2100' I would build in islands. If you do not I think you will wish you did as you will be just getting up to speed by the pre-gates.

@EF23 I have the Goode Intuition liner in the my black reflex shell. It is possible and I recommend it. It is way better than the Reflex one. I have heard of people using orthotics to increase control. I don't use one, I just use the intuition liner.

USAWS site is fairly easy to navigate these things. I went to the IWSF site and I couldn't find the information on the current world champ, check it out, terribly set up website. I think the guys I ski with pay more attention than most, and I think I pay more attention than the average baller (I got it wrong by the way, but I did know the US Open Men overall champ, haha). But the IWSF and USA Waterski need to help the average member realize this sport is huge world wide.

@thager Wonder why, haha awesome, don't we all sometimes

For me during the week it is work, was go to school, maybe catch a set between classes, leave, come back, ski some more. Weekends it is either ski on the lake I live on, hang out, coach or go to one of the other lakes close by and do the same thing. Get a couple slalom sets in, maybe get some friends in the boat and hop on the trick. Overall it is sort of how I approach life. All vacations are to go ski, all summer travel is to waterski. It is basically just living the life on the lake and in the boat I guess. I wish I had the luxury to be in the south and enjoy it all year long, that would be the life.

Clio, MI. Mid Michigan, just north of Flint

It was Tyler Lorenz I think who won the Open overall title at nationals. He was at least the top 3

Global Marine is the insurance provider for USA Waterski.

This thread seems to have went on a slightly different path when the budget was brought up, I am glad Klondike kind of put it back on track. @klondike, sorry to hear about your experience the first time, I am kind of surprised. I am one of those people if you want to learn how to swerve I am all for it, I don't care the skill level you come with. When looking at other threads there seems to be a lot of private lake guys who are kind of isolationist, they don't want more skiers, they want a ton of ski time. I am a private lake guy, and yes more people will make my 3 hours on the lake at night to be 4 or 5, but that is alright with me. It is simple: More people, more lakes, more clubs, more tournaments, more money to grow the sport. The athletes will be paid more, the technology will increase with the skis and boats. More money would equate to higher performances, more record breaking. I know from experience that when I am working a 9-5 my scores are lower, even though I skied the same amount of time. That is really only benefiting out elite 50, but who doesn't like seeing guys run 41 off.

JT uses fluid motion. Willy uses the reflex with a kicker. Marcus, I am not sure what he uses. I am not sure the deal with the exos. I do know the design is finally frozen for 2012, in 2011 they were still not finished with them. That could be why.

@Horton, Totally agree we should have JT with a razor company, he is always clean shaven haha. @OB Your talking about lifestyle. Surfing, skate, snow, etc. are all portrayed as lifestyles, we are no different. There are plenty of people that just surf, like we ski, and work for a living. The pros are the one that live the lifestyle, same thing with us. And as OB stated a small percentage of us have the drive talent and so on to be good for a sport that doesn't pay in the end. I think we are all missing the point. I played hockey from the time I was 9 years old. It cost my parents at least $2000 in ice time a season, about $700 in equipment, and I am not even talking about travel, hotels etc. Yes it is a little cheaper but I got no where, never paid out for me. This sport, on percentages, is probably close to the same as those when it comes to pay outs and time involved. There are a ton of skiers who will never make it to the pro ranks and there are the few us that can. No sport is easy at a competitive level, you cant become a pro hockey player, pro football, pro anything without dedication, wake boarding is easy to learn, but hard to get really good, it runs into the same problems as us, maybe a little easier to get paid, but where they save money in boards, the boats completely off set. They have the same water problems we have etc. If you haven't, try to ride a wake board on a busy or even slightly busy public lake, it sucks. Jumping is our holy grail, something anyone off the street can understand, the farthest jump wins. We just need to get in contact with the right media avenues. We need to get a hold of the Fuel TV's to start a show or do an event, label this as a extreme sport (as it is, all 3 events kind of are). Purely exposure, if there is a kid who bugs their parents enough to ski, they will find a way to do it, same as kids who want to surf, it is pretty expensive to make it the surf spots. Another sponsor we should try to get is Redbull, or Monster. They could get our athletes exposure.

@chef23, that makes sense.

We talk about ESPN, Versus. Have you all have heard about Fuel TV? They cater to surfing, MX, snow, some wakeboarding, etc. If we could get them to cover our "extreme" sport it would be a start.

I am interested in growing the sport because lets face it, when I am 50, I want this sport to be still be around in the competitive sense. (I am 24) In Michigan we are seeing a growth of skiers in tournaments with the addition of our slalom series. But these are mostly Mens 3,4,5... As far as anyone in M1, W1 and lower, I can count the regular attendees on my hands. This, for me, is scary. We are a slalom state, anyone on here from Michigan knows that. On to how to promote this. Public knowledge!!!! Everyone I have ever talked to and introduced to the sport wants to do it. I honestly have never had someone see it, rode in the boat, seen it from shore, and said "ehh, that doesn't look fun." What it takes... events like Malibu Open, the Global (RIP for 2012), King of Darkness. And then follow these events up with things like demos, sort of what skaters to at shops, where you can get some local skiers to do their thing somewhere and allow people to try it for a minimal cost. If this brings out a few new kids, I am sure it would be huge gains for everyone. And making sure the college kids stick with it!!!! so many collegiate skiers graduate, or just go home for the summer and don't do anything with it.

I sort of skimmed this thread, so sorry if I ask questions that have been answered or made repeat statements. I don't understand why we need a narrower boat. The 200 is wider, at least by how it sits on my lift (had to modify the lift to fit it), than the MC or the CC 196. Wider would make the boat more stable, at least I would be led to believe. The 197 has a great wake, I can complain about it a little at 38, 39, a slight trough from what I have found, but I practice behind a 200, so every boat feels ridiculous. It is the best driving boat of the big 3 when it is balanced right so I would say they could put some dev dollars into the weight balance to make this boat as easy to tune as the 200 (literally all you have to do to the 200 is move the tab all the way right, and it tracks on rails) I am admittedly a slalom specialist (there are way funnier names, I know you all know them), so of course I think CC built the best slalom boat ever, but for trick the boat sucks, the wake is not "rampy", the table is bubbly, rough, even with the gate up. If I were MC, I would do exactly what Malibu did, make some minor hull tweaks to please your slower, longer line crowd, and maybe lift the back up to get rid of the trough at shorter lines. And with reading @eleeski's comments about the carbon pro feeling harder at c3, it is definitely the weight that makes the difference. The boat doesn't sit as deep in the water so it takes less torques to move the boat. CC's issue is drag. If you guys have had the chance or get the chance look at the bottom of that boat, it is crazy, and then look at what the hydrogate does to create that nice wake. It literally blocks a channel about 8 inches wide by 1 inch deep. Huge drag, to prove it, get the boat to plane and move the gate up, the thing launches. Now where is that $4, I need a beer.

I agree with @horton, deep.

Ok, I decided to be a nerd for a second, I looked at my Differential Equations book. @Than Bogan, are you considering this a free or free damped pendulum, or is it even an pendulum at all. The only way I think you can achieve constant accel is in a frictionless world. I could be very wrong as I sort of despise differential equations.

Thanks @Horton, I forgot about Seth for a second.

Brent Triplett, 24 years on this earth. Been skiing since I was really young, but really into it since I was 9. Live up in Michigan, ski on Hidden Lake in Clio. Been skiing tournaments since I was 9 and still do today. Placed at regionals quite a bit, taking 1st twice (2000, 2011) and placing at nationals 3 times, (2005(3rd), 2010(4th), 2011(2nd)). I just started skiing in the Open division after this past years nationals and hoping to take on some pro events, if there are any. I post on here occasionally, hopefully going to more. Also, looking to work and do some coaching in Florida, if you know anyone who is looking for some help, let me know haha.

So what is the differential equation you are using? I am curious and kind of want to figure this out myself.

Thanks for the comments guys! @matthewbrown is completely right. This is something that has been preventing me from running 39. The thread has some awesome conversation going on!

I finally joined this forum and this subject is very intriguing. I experience the most tip rise at 39 for sure. For me I have noticed is from a shift from my front foot in the pre-turn to the heel in the finish. I do this to bring the ski around faster. It is for sure not good, for example, out of 3 ball at 39 I get tip rise, fall back, and slingshot to the next buoy. I do this less on the 2,4,6 side but it is still there. To touch on @skiing2heaven comments on transition from 38 to 39 turns, I feel this is completely true. You absolutely run 38 super early, back siding the buoy. At 39 if you try to do, at least in my experience, you have issues with being too early. As long as your speed is up into the turn at 39 and you force the ski to turn down course you will be in a good spot to the next buoy. My perspective is from 36mph, comments from my 34 ski partners are much the same for 39, although I can imagine you have to work harder for the width. This video is of me skiing, you can see the tip rise.