RazorRoss3

I've never mounted the gopro on my ski but I have had a friend who had a harness and wanted me to wear it for a promo video for our collegiate team. It came out fairly cool, you could see the tip of the ski cross under the rope in the finish of the turn and it was an interesting view in the reach.

It's loud enough behind the boat that a speaker back by them would still have to be playing fairly loud. I think some kind of head set would be better.

Hey all you old ball(er)s, get in line behind the younger blood. Plus I still don't have anyone who'd be taking half.

@6balls, @jdarwin, @razorskier1, or the wager could be two shirts, if Mr. Darwin wins he gets two, one from each of you, if you both win he gets each of you one. He takes a little more risk for a little more reward and he's probably going to win any ways.

Good to know the sport is gaining popularity somewhere in the world.

I've had the toe plate from the start and don't think I'll be changing any time soon. I get out of the water easy, my foot stays secure in the water, and the toe plate is much cheaper than a back boot. Only thing I worry about is a bad crash where the back foot cone out but the front doesn't, makes your knee cringe just thinking about it.

@6balls, @razorskier1 started the thread not me.

Thanks for providing one of the many things that keeps me sane during the northern Midwest winters.

@MS, I don't think Iowa is going to the bowl because they are evenly matched but more because bowls want to fill the stands and no one travels like the Midwest does. We are 8 and 4 this year so I guess I'll keep a little hope.

Wonder what would happen on the reflex flow (subject of that basking shark discussion a month ago) if you tried to ski RFF on a LFF or LFF on a RFF.

Very true, wind chill/is this talk of chop worth it does play into it. Good idea but it might be easier just to say what the conditions are than do the multi variable Calc required to solve for BI

@6balls, I would agree with you (on the foot ball thing, delusional is right on) if I hadn't seen the Hawks choke in the fourth quarter quite so many times.

The problem with BI is that it is a multi variable equation where in Fahrenheit it is (air temp + water temp - 100) * (5/3). Because of the two variables there are multiple values of air and water temp that produce the same BI. I think that while a skier with air 70 water 40 and a skier with air and water 55 would have different opinions on how the weather was even though they both had the same BI. I don't want to scare anyone but I don't think we're using highschool algebra anymore.

without the carbon fiber the skis would be hard to do but it would be great for things like inserts, screws, and fins which would be nice. Might be hard for some of the complex stuff in the near future but some of the simpler replacement parts would be nice to have available at our fingertips.

Something must have gotten him excited, guess the cold shower wasn't going to do the trick so he had to burry it in the snow.

Ohio State or Michigan State could give them a run for their money but against Iowa, that's just gonna be ugly.

@Horton, with the corrected chart I believe it should be B = (5/3)*(F-100). That creates a ratio of 16.66666 B for every 10 F and matches the chart as far as I can tell. For an equation using Celsius I believe you would just have to apply whatever the Fahrenheit to Celsius equation is to the F value and the 100 and that should give you a C to B equation. Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen B's below -30 a few times.

@Horton, writing an equation for that would be interesting because for Baller values less than 100 B increases by 16.66666... for every 10 degree increase in F and for Baller values greater than 100 B increases by 12.5 for every 10 degree increase in F. Also I believe that all of us Northern Midwest skiers qualify as insane if since plenty of us have skied 40 degree air and 33 degree water.

I agree with @Horton, skiers of equal level creates some drama. Plus a little competition always pushes athletes to the next level.

I think it's really cool to watch Nate do things on a ski that at the moment no one seems to be able to compete with but that's the problem, no one can compete. It's cool to see amazing skiing but it would be cooler if 2+ skiers were a reasonable match in any event to see some good competition instead of the single super star.

I want to see the best skiers go head to head at that level, just cool to watch.

Looks like a good time.

I think @Bishop8950 is right though, trying to force the handle into that position if you haven't set yourself up for it in the edge change and pre turn is going to do far more harm than good where if you manage you line tension and body position throughout a pass I've found that a low controlled handle happens naturally. I found focusing on keeping the handle low and controlled this year helped me with control in the turn and overall consistency at all of my passes.

I think it isn't as much a matter of where the handle is as that the handle is being controlled. The line is being kept tight and as the ski continues outward at the apex of the turn more handle will be let out but by keeping it low the rope remains tight and when the rope is tight the skier maintains a level of control that is lost upon giving slack rope to the boat. The options to accomplish this would seem to be; 1. Handle low 2. Elbows bent holding the handle in 3. Handle above head I think we can all agree that option 3 is bad and I've had plenty of people tell me not to pull/hold the handle in (option 2) which leaves keeping it low and controlled (option 1).

I'm a 185 lb 36mph skier and my favorite so far is C2. I like the idea of the boat accelerating during the time I'm pulling because it seems like the boat does all the work and kicks me to the buoy early.