BRY

WOW, Manon is one tough competitor. According to the front page article: "She didn't just get a piece of 3 to get the win, she ran the whole pass, the third time she has done so in tournament. This was the first time a female skier had ever run 39off in Europe." On a borrowed ski, crazy. Perhaps she should just let her old ski go and see if she can keep the borrowed one. It certainly seems to work for her. Stellar skiing.

@LeonL Kinda a main point of my post above. I agree in this thread, as you state, "the issue is apparently, what constitutes a complete pass, 6 buoys or 6 buoys plus passing through exit gates." The answer: Rule 10.01 A. (page 44 2016 rulebook, very first slalom rule) The contestant shall follow the towboat through the entrance gate of the slalom course, pass around the outside of any or all six buoys and proceed through the far end gate which constitutes a pass. If the contestant has not missed any buoys or gates, the boat shall turn and enter the course from the opposite end. The skier shall continue in this manner until he falls or misses a buoy or gate. In this, the very first rule for slalom, it is specifically stated what a complete pass requires. Three components: entrance gate, six buoys, end (exit) gate. Unless a skier completes all these components then it is not a complete pass and opt up credit should not be awarded. Specifically stated with a miss on the end (exit) gate (a miss also defined in the rule book so won't put it here), even if 6 points awarded, the pass was not complete so opt up credit is not awarded per Rule 10.06 D. 3. C (page 48 2016 rulebook, also in my post above.)

I don't see the issue. The rule book does cover this: Rule 10.06 D. 3. C (page 48 2016 rulebook) If the skier elects to opt up in this manner then the skier must complete the selected pass to receive credit for the skipped pass and/or passes. If the pass is not completed the skier will receive credit for buoys at what would have been the consecutive rope length or speed. Seems clear that the pass must be complete to get credit for the opt up. Brings the question "what is a complete pass?" The rule book does define this for us as well: Rule 10.01 A. (page 44 2016 rulebook, very first slalom rule) The contestant shall follow the towboat through the entrance gate of the slalom course, pass around the outside of any or all six buoys and proceed through the far end gate which constitutes a pass. If the contestant has not missed any buoys or gates, the boat shall turn and enter the course from the opposite end. The skier shall continue in this manner until he falls or misses a buoy or gate. In this, the very first rule for slalom, it is specifically stated what a complete pass requires. Three components: entrance gate, six buoys, end (exit) gate. Unless a skier completes all these components then it is not a complete pass and opt up credit should not be awarded. Specifically stated with a miss on the end (exit) gate (a miss also defined in the rule book so won't put it here), even if 6 points awarded, opt up credit is not awarded. I don't see it vague at all. One can agree or disagree as to if the rule is proper but I don't see any interpretation room. "must complete the selected pass to receive credit" and "proceed through the far end gate which constitutes a pass" seem pretty clear to me.

Huh, interesting they don't make them smaller. I would definitely go Reflex then. They are very, very safe. Set them to the release chart and go. Not too loose (unsafe) and not too tight (unsafe). And R style rear. Safer than Wiley with the Reflex. Vectors probably still OK unless she wants to crank them down for a tighter fit. Radars are bad if cranked down. She's at a level where a better boot would probably help but is not critical. If going to Regionals not sure I would make any changes until after.

"it was somebody involved with radar development that confirmed that the insert default location" @Stevie Boy If you look at the bottom of a 2016 Vapor is clearly states "Chris Rossi Design" He designed the ski. If anyone would know it would be him. My limited experience with Chris is that if the inserts were moved he would straight up say so. And say clearly and succinctly why from a design perspective. I have a 68 2016 Vapor and the 30" to 30.25" range is the second and third (middle) hole on my Reflex Medium plate. I slotted out between the second and third so I could be precise with mikro-just. Didn't have to slot to the first or fourth hole, five holes standard on the Reflex plate. On my 2014 68 Vapor I ran 30.25" to 30.5" and wasn't near edges of the standard hole range. Don't have exactly which hole any more as I sold that plate. So seems to be in the same spot, 30.0" to 30.5" doesn't even get me to the end holes on medium Reflex plate on a 68" 2014 or 2016 Vapor.

Best advise right here: 2. place your hand at your outside hip waiting for you to ski the handle back to it. Nothing else. Everything else about release hand is a distraction. Just put in on your hip and keep it there till you bring that hip back to the handle. Simple, leaves your mind for important stuff.

@igorski Sounds like you answered your own question with "I'd like to get her in some vapors..." give www.perski.com a call and they can set you up. She ski's very well, that's regional's qualified skiing there. Personally I would put her in Reflex White Cuff, size 6, thick liner, R style rear. Call www.miamiskinautiques.com and they can set her up. Bunch of G3 girls here ski Reflex, some G2. She certainly ski's well enough for it. R style rear will feel like a full rear but allow some heel raise which makes it much easier for her to get her hips over her front foot. www.perfski.com big on Radar www.miamiskinautiques.com big on Reflex Give them a call and let the experts advise you.

I never had it happen but have seen some 404's break right there, where the weld for the cross bar is. But that's a very old release mechanism, discontinued by Reflex years ago. There was the 500 and now the 750, which has been out for quite some time. My understanding is they purchased the rights for the 750 and make it or have it made themselves. Supposed to have some improvements for water application. Perhaps time to upgrade?

@jimbrake Only explanation so for that makes any sense!

Toe side and heel side makes no sense in slalom, particularly if referenced to the front foot. Someone may rotate their front foot, but I've never seen it. Wakeboard/snowboard terminology, waterski slalom predates both. So, since front foot square fore/aft on the ski then toe side would be an OTF and heel side and OTB.

@Bookm_dano Don't go too loose. The Reflex chart shows specifically not to use any setting below 3.5. Any spring based binding needs some tension to work properly. Too far into either end of the range gets bad, unexpected results.

@dillonski17 Bummer on the Achillies, hope is heals well quick. I ski mine at 6, 220 @34 -38 and I pop off with ease when I do come off. I can pop off easily on the dock or in the water also. At 180 -22 thought that does seem a little high. How old is it, how much skiing has that binding seen? Reflex recommends replacing the spring every 2 years. If the spring gets weak and you crank it down to compensate then the system is compromised. I had a similar issue with a couple pre-releases due to used up spring. Seems all good then pop it went right behind the boat. Sucks. As I ski year round now in FL I am replacing the rear horseshoe/spring mechanism. Like gas, ropes and handles, I look at it as a disposable item cost of skiing.

@Howa1500 The 200 is a relatively high drag hull. Lots going on under there to shape the wakes and get the tracking (the best tracking). The 5.7 is fine but it is working on short set ups and at altitude. With the 6L it is dial-a-speed, quick and locks in easy. Most importantly I find it ski's smoother. Both great, 6L better. The 6L is supposed to use slightly less gas (lighter, not working as hard), but I haven't monitored one to know myself.

@Howa1500 54K is a lot, but it's listed by a dealer. Dealers always seem to ask high. Orlando Nautiques, sure they have a trailer there somewhere to throw in. If interested, cash talks, make a reasonable offer (not based on listing price but market) and it's a yay or a nay. If nay, then next... At 250hrs its just nicely broke in, should show as new (if not, lots of $ off) and I thought the yellow purple was kinda cool, very unique, looked better than I would have thought. But it's not blue so tough sell colors, hence more $ off. Make a deal or don't, your boat (or not), bet they will come way off that $54K or they will have it awhile. Price, color and so forth regardless, still like the 6L 200's for driving and for slalom. Have a 2011 5.7 200 that is great, still think the 6L's better. Splitting hairs though. Any TXI, 200, Carbon Pro, ProStar (with fixed tranny) are great rides, wouldn't turn down a pull behind any.

@Howa1500 That boat has the 6L engine. I think the 6L 200's are the best skiing boats ever. The big 4 now are all crazy good, but the 200 and the 6L is a match from skier heaven.

Great deals on Ski-It-Again.com Here's a couple: 2012 HO S2 65" $175 2015 Radar P6 65" $175 Both great rides. Both very well regarded. S2 definately more performance oriented. Below budget to allow for $ for new bindings, bet you need those too.

The manual says 4.75 for my 2011 EX 343 5.7 but it always takes 5. I still put 4.5 then add, just in case, but always 5. No way to get 6 in there without being way, way over. Perhaps they used the 6th elsewhere due to the repair? Or just charged her for a little extra profit. Ask them, see what they say.

@toddl You are a killjoy... some of the most entertaining threads on this board are about trying to solve problems that do not exist. :)

Interesting system. Kind of like a dual implementation of Centurion's CATS system back in the 90's. It was a single tracking fin tied to the steering and was on their ski boat. Current CATS seems to be different in that it is independent of the steering and I think not available on the current ski boat. Seems if the MC system could be put on the ProStar without adversely affecting the wakes it would improve tracking. Also possibly a very unique drive where your actually could move the boat sideways to stay on center going down the course

Interesting system. Kind of like a dual implementation of Centurion's CATS system back in the 90's. It was a single tracking fin tied to the steering and was on their ski boat. Current CATS seems to be different in that it is independent of the steering and I think not available on the current ski boat. Seems if the MC system could be put on the ProStar without adversely affecting the wakes it would improve tracking. Also possibly a very unique drive where your actually could move the boat sideways to stay on center going down the course

@Kelvin @Beastmode When a score of 0 is called it can be due to skiing inside or displacing the 1 ball, gates could still be good, so no secondary call required as with missed gates. No way to say without being there but a 0, 1 and 2.5 sounds like a sketchy pass to start with. Perhaps 1 was sketchy also and T1 was there on top of it and the call was indeed correct.

@Kelvin @Beastmode When a score of 0 is called it can be due to skiing inside or displacing the 1 ball, gates could still be good, so no secondary call required as with missed gates. No way to say without being there but a 0, 1 and 2.5 sounds like a sketchy pass to start with. Perhaps 1 was sketchy also and T1 was there on top of it and the call was indeed correct.

Line length doesn't matter. The gates are always have the same position, spacing and angle and skiers direction is always from skiers left to right. Current camera positioning is very good. It's elevated, at a good angle to see L-R skier path and zoomed in so it't like your very close. And judges get a couple looks at it in slomo. My understanding is location was evaluated. My experience is it is very good. There are still rare occurrences where it is still just hard to tell. IMHO if after two looks two judges can't tell give it to the skier and move on, kinda the way its supposed to work now. But we could lower them so they have a much flatter view, say to boat judge height a few feet off the water, perhaps that would be better..... :) Speaking of the majority of tournament skiers, the majority can't run 32off. Do a quick browse of the AWSA rankings. Most tournaments are C and most of those don't have cameras. Getting too wrapped up in the high end chasing solutions that cost money does not grow or even maintain the majority, it alienates them.

There are supposed to be 5 judges, 2 in each tower & boat judge or 3 judges (2 tower & BJ) with gate video for both tower judges. The rules state: "The entrance and exit gates shall be judged by the boat judge and the two judges with the best view of each gate." So boat judge and the 2 in the tower right on top of it or (2 with video) make the call, the far two judges no vote for gate. So far judges and gates a non-issue. In a C at the CJ's discretion it can be run with just 3 judges, rather than 5, and no video. Makes it possible for smaller LOC's with limited resources to put on a good tournament. My guess these are over 50% of tournaments. Small, unsophisticated but none the less correct and to the same tolerances as an R. No records are being set here. @brettmainer In a 3 judge C setup the far judge can see the gates usually (if elevated) but it is a crappy view. In my experience if the gate is good the 1T and BJ get it right, if it is bad they also get it right so far judge non-issue. If it is so close the BJ and 1T split (assuming competent and best effort judging) to the far judge it will be impossible to tell so goes to the skier. IMHO this is fine for C's and better than a BJ only approach. Not perfect but if everyone is paying attention it works, very well. Any skier trying to catch the outside edge every time is low percentage, kinda nuts, and will get dinged on gates a lot. I have seen Nate miss gates in perfect conditions, to the hard side even, so IMHO there are a lot of things more important that being right on the right hand gate ball. I do not believe video is necessary at this time. I also believe most tournaments do not have the money or resources to have it at all, much less reliably. And I certainly do not want any tournaments going away due to video requirement. I do believe education of judges with a consistent and current materials, nationally, is necessary at this time. Make sure everyone knows the "nuts and bolts" and calls are consistent. AWSA is making strides towards this with online clinics and hopefully will continue to progress.

I disagree boat judge has the best view. Most consistent view through the course perhaps, but not the best view. Too flat and for the gates sometimes spray, wakes and/or airborne ski make it a poor view. Each properly elevated and positioned tower in a two tower system (one each side/end) has the best view of it's end of the lake and gates. That's why gate camera's are positioned there. I've been in lots of those towers at lots of lakes and the view of that end gate, 1, 2 and 3 is unparalleled. 4,5 & 6 still pretty good but getting a bit far for some people to see. But the other tower picks that end up with best view. Combine the two towers with pretty good view from boat and majority rule is damn good for C level. Everyone makes their calls and move on. No video reviews, stopping boat so BJ and towers can meet (huh?), keep it moving and in my experience bad calls are the exception. Not a big fan of center towers without gate video though. Now if you have judging that didn't really know the rule, won't pay attention, Seniors trying to influence the calls, ect then you (we?) are screwed. Doesn't matter where the judges are if that is happening.