MISkier

@Drago and others, here is the submitted bill. Nothing has been passed yet. https://legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billintroduced/House/pdf/2024-HIB-5532.pdf Edited: the definitions below and the bolded text at the bottom are essentially the sole changes to the existing law: "Wake boat" means a vessel that is equipped with wake enhancing equipment. Wake boat includes, but is not limited to, a wake surf boat and a ballasted boat. "Wake-enhancing equipment" means ballast tanks, ballast bags, compartments, containers, or similar devices or mechanical systems designed to enhance the characteristics of a boat's wake. "Wake sport mode" refers to operation of a wake boat with wake-enhancing equipment engaged. A person shall not operate a vessel in wake sport mode on waters of this state where the water depth is less than 20 feet. A person operating a vessel in wake sport mode shall maintain a distance of not less than 500 feet from the shoreline or a dock, a raft, a buoyed or occupied bathing area, or a vessel moored or at anchor.

@RAWSki, I assumed the opposite. I assumed a shallow lake would preclude any use of such boats/wakes and those desiring the related activities must seek out a suitable body of water with the correct dimensions. The same analysis would apply to lakes that are less that 1000 feet (plus the beam of said boat) in width. There would be no activities on lakes that cannot guarantee 500 feet from the boat to any shoreline.

@2Valve, I agree that the definition of "wake sport mode" in the bill will be critical. It will need to specify something like "an enhanced wake for wake surfing or wake boarding activities" and exclude wakes and wake heights usually associated with water skiing or (takes deep breath and exhales) tubing. I'm not sure I agree with your lake neighbor that a wave retains its full magnitude over distance across the lake. I believe (without actual measurement data) that it will dissipate and lose some energy as distance increases.

This was just sent to me. I hope the target is truly surf boats and not regular ski boats.

I may have found a clue to the mystery:

@chaloux and @UWSkier, I think your AI source has been watching too much 1960s “Jonny Quest”. Reminds me of the various henchmen.

It could only have been lower if he had just posted the URL for the main page of SIA and not the specific listing.

One positive I see here is that, regardless of my slalom skills relative to other skiers, I at least know more about water skiing than AI does.....for now.

They also seem to have incorporated your proofreading requirements into their renderings as well.

I guess when Skynet becomes self-aware, the Terminators will be programmed to go after anyone wearing yellow and black.

@KRoundy and @JPeckham, I had the same thought about some sort of knob-shaped end to the handle. Something like the end of a baseball bat, still with curves and rounded surfaces to avoid acting like a hook, might be a positive addition. It would need to be subtle and not too obtrusive in size, but with enough texture to provide that feedback to the skier's hands.

Apparently, it affects your proofreading capability also:

Best thing I ever did for an onside turn was put a plastic/nylon washer under the middle screw between the fin box and the top surface of the ski on one side to make the depth just a hair shallower there. Put it on the right side of the ski for LFF and on the left side for RFF. The Denali dudes were doing this a while back and even had an adjustment knob to turn to modify it without pulling the fin box.

@JPeckham, do you have any skier-mounted GoPro video of this handle in use during a pass?

I was going to suggest yoke for the name of that connecting piece, as @Drago did.

@skialex, in the 1989 Batman movie, there is a flashback scene where Jack Napier (who later becomes the Joker) shoots and kills Thomas Wayne and his wife. He also shoots Bruce in Vicky Vale's apartment, but hits the fortuitously placed and seemingly indestructible metal tray. There is an homage to that scene in one of the How it Should Have Ended animated parodies: Note the voice work for Joker in this one. Decent impression.

@Hortonand @rico, Cale Burdick has already done it in a class C (with SurePath). 1@34/-43 in 2023.

Awesome. Fantastic setup, great boat, and a tremendous value.

You needed one more choice - I know what I need to work on, but have no plan. For me, it is working on the gate items that Trent mentioned during a session I had last year. The big things were my gate turn in and timing it so that I was turning in on a tight line at the same moment I was about to drop back on the boat due to deceleration (but before I actually become slower than the boat). I was able to hit it a few times during the season, but it's not consistent and I'm not sure how to make it so. I don't have any drills or biofeedback cues to make sure I am doing it correctly. I guess the best thing I could do for a plan is keep taking and reviewing video - and more coaching sessions. I did buy a new ski, so I've got that going for me.

@Mastercrafter, if conditions on your lake don’t allow February, the channel at Lobdell frequently has open water in that month. Good deal on getting December and January checked off.

Note to self: if @BraceMaker is participating in a sport nearby, walk away quickly.

Google Earth Ski Sites.

This has some information on the proposed (and eventually retracted) legislation that @DW is mentioning. https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/2019/03/25/michigan-legislators-proposed-boating-curfew-law-draws-criticism-he-clarifies/ Terrible bill. Would have been catastrophic to water skiing in Michigan and would have affected many other water activities in all kinds of vessels that currently enjoy more access than proposed.

I’m still not writing any letters that give up one iota of available waterway for ski boats and water skiing activities. I’ll object to any legislation in our State that introduces or changes such regulations in any detrimental manner. I already didn’t like the effects of Public Act 451 of 1994 on slalom course permits and was disappointed that previous collaboration (or lack thereof) between legislators and the water ski association allowed it to happen. I’m not interested in giving anything else away. I do fully support the 200 foot limit for wake boats and surf boats, though, if they want to draft it accordingly. It could even be further for additional safety and reduced damage.

I've already advised our State Water Ski Association of this issue to ensure our designated legislative contact is looped into any pending legislation and that we contact the appropriate lobbyist for assistance. And, I have made my opinion on the matter clear that no ground (water) should be yielded, with respect to current ski boat setbacks/clearances.