RazorRoss3

I think the hard thing with nationals is the week long part, if you could fit it into a thurs-sun that would be easier to go to. It would also make it easier for the competitors to stay the while event and create a big crowd for every skier so you get out of a pass to some noise. I think just a duration adjustment could make it feel more elite by making it easier for fellow competitors to stay and watch. How would either be limit the field or grow the lake count.

At the collegiate level (in the Midwest where many early slalom skiers only run 0-2 passes) the regional tourbamebt is held at a 1 lake site and has about 80 men and 80 women slalom trick and jump over the course of a long weekend (Friday, Saturday, first half of Sunday) if the field was limited at the state, regional, and national level to about 60-80 skiers total on a two lake site I would think it would be possible to run a 2-3 round 3 event tournament (so a single skier can ski all 3 events all rounds) over the course of a 3-4 day event. So all of Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and the first half of Sunday leaving Sunday afternoon/evening for travel. This would of course require a limiting of the playing field in many states particularly in the most competitive age groups. Obviously skiers in non collegiate events tend to take more time on the water in slalom but 3 jumps is 3 jumps for the most part and trick is trick. I'm sure I'm missing some logistical piece here that makes this impractical.

Numerous possibilities for sure. I would have to agree with Horton though that I will likely not ski regionals unless it's local and will likely never ski nationals because it will never be local living in Minnesota. For 1 round of slalom, the math just doesn't add up.

I think that is a great idea, I haven't skied state, in 5 years and never regionals or nationals because the tine and money for a single set if slalom isn't worth it to me. I love a good 3 round slalom or 3 round there event because for the travel, time, and money I feel like I get enough water time to make it worth it. You have my vote

I work almost exclusively with college kids trying to run the course (I'm on a college team, what would you expect). In my experience they pull too hard in the wrong place and stamp the back foot trying to power turn it at the buoy. If you could get them to settle down and work from hook up to wake and relax in the turn you'd have a while ski team of ran passes.

-28 is easier than -22 when you are skiing right. Same thing every time you shorten or speed up because the boat does more work. The flip side is a mistake becomes more severely punished as far as a smaller error can keep you from making the next buoy.

I don't think there is danger in a real name on this forum necessarily but I can understand how some jobs may want a blanket statement a lout online anonymity. I can also understand a police officer or anyone in a similar role trying to achieve some online anonymity for piece of mind. As a college student I can guarantee that I could find pictures I'm in on Facebook that are far more detrimental than anything I post here. That said I work very hard to be out of the cameras scope wherever I am to mitigate that.

@Than_Bogan‌, in the first dilemma at 36/-32, I'd say that since you didn't see it and that you weren't sure, that you leave the call to the judges because there is no way you could know for sure. The second part I can't agree with enough. The idea that an honest skier is disadvantaged is really annoying. It does make winning despite it all the more rewarding.

There are done people who would game the system but I think most of us would come clean if we were expected to. Especially if everyone else is watching you, knows you missed, and then you don't do anything. Very few people who value a score above their self respect, the respect from others, respect for others, respect for the sport and the officials, and their reputation.

Wow. All I can say with certainty is that those two are amazing athletes showing us some amazing skiing. As an opinion I would say that my eyes registered more flashing and distractions on Millers passes than Ridgers. Now that is just flashes caught by the camera abd others could exist. Final piece is that I have a question about the brightness off flashing cameras vs the brightness of flash photography. I would think unless they had their brights on with some serious LED lights. All together I would have a hard time granting a re ride if the debate is "were his distractions noticeably worse than Millers" if the question is was their a problem caused by something out of the skiers control ie duck in the course, significant roll back, flashing lights, lots of glare, etc then I'm sure that every skier from the elite 8 onward could have gotten a re ride.

Publish it, have the results, congratulate Mapple, Rodgers, and Miller for great skiing, mention the re-ride but don't talk controversy. Need to cover this event, don't need to bring in the politics.

The family friends discount is a hard one. If you aren't a judge it's your call to mention anything, if you're a judge I think you have to make the tough call for the sake of the sport.

@ScarletArrow‌, that sounds like a rare case of losing either way. I think the right choice is honesty and sportsmanship but I'm not sure anyone could make that choice in the moment and if the judges gave it to them I think you would immediately rationalize that you must have seen wrong.

Only exception is the close call where you yourself aren't sure, big wash to the face on a hail marry throw for the ball. In that case if you magically hook up and are still on top of the water then I say keep going and let the judges make the call. If you know you missed be a good sport.

If you could get the shorelines to be black abd only have light on the water (possibly under the water) and lights in the buoys then maybe you could keep it in the dark but I'd rather see the skiers at their best.

I think Miller should have gotten a warm up, past that I can't argue unwritten rules, written rules, and I wasn't there so I can't comment on conditions. For changes I would be for anything that allowed skiers to ski at their best, if that means day skiing then Aye

Always fun to watch ski video. My comments are the height on the boat for the gate like Mattp said and then trying to stay tall/head and shoulders level as you come off the second wake

For the sake of the sport if we piled all our event advertising into a power week of water sports I think you could possibly grow the sport by creating some awareness outside of the sport.

The night ski works fine with good lighting but you could barely see the skiers from the boat so I'm not sure the site was lit as well as others have been. In the case of the re-ride I think if there was a legitimate distraction faced by Rodgers that miller DID NOT have (most important part there) then you could argue a re-ride. For other skiers whose complaint was glare on the 1,3,5 for example, both skiers had the same problem. I have to agree that for the sake of seeing the best skiers ski at their best that running the event in daylight would be better, no one had to ski a buoy at 39 in any elite 8 match up and I have to think the light conditions played a part since they were averaging buoys at 41 in the prelims.

I used to compete in bench so on top of training it harder than other lifts I have really good technique so it's still my strongest lift. I only started squatting this year so my technique and balance are still a work in progress but I've broken 315 so far. Before this year I used the leg press machine and would do sets of 10 at 1000lbs+. In general all around strong, been accused of looking like a keg with arms and legs, my legs have been referred to as tree trunks, you get the idea.

Thought about trying to be a walk on to the football team going into sofmore year but decided all I really wanted to do was ski. I think there's a competitive power lifting club but I got my fill of that in high school, broke an MN state record for my age group senior year and don't feel a great need to do it competitively anymore.

@Than_Bogan‌, thanks, that strength is the result of an off season caused by Minnesota (and for the past 3 years at college, Iowa) winter. Something about hitting it hard 5 days a week and eating a lot for six or seven months of the year.

@xrated‌, as a third Ross built like the other two, I'm 180, 5'9. It's not strictly body weight but also lift distance. For example, I push or pull a much shorter distance than the other two who are around 6'0 each. A smaller person has an advantage of not traveling as far as a taller guy. For a squat you don't push as far so you can do more than a larger guy if he's also taller.

Not having anyone outside the sport know we exist is bad for the sport. Too bad we can't get into summer X games, summer Olympics, some espn channel that only shows every other Tuesday at 2:30 am... Anything that gets some public awareness.

Right now new Germany is a farm with a lake in the middle io it. In 15-20 years when the suburbs have spread out that far I could see people building but right now it would be a very inconvenient place to live in my opinion. (Other than skiing of course, that would he very convenient)