skosney

As many suggested work on technique first and foremost. @than_bogan hit the nail on the head with staying connected as did many others. Make sure you are not staying on the pulling edge too long as well. The transition should start somewhere between centerline and second boat wake. By your description of a "turning tight" you may need to move your fin back which should increase radius of your on-side turn. Personally I found moving my rear foot back slightly helped keep the tip down on my on-side (previously I had always mounted my rear foot as close as possible to my front).

With the Vapor coming online, there are some great deals on slightly used (and even new) Stradas or Senates. As for size, you may want to consider a 66" over a 65" to make the slower speeds easier and you may find it works well at 34 mph as well. I too came back after an 11 year break and found the Strada to be a very stable ski to ride that is packed with performance. I have not tried the D3 or Goode (in any model) but I did take a couple rides on the Connelly V I think it's called and like the way it felt. What ever you pickup, make sure it is setup correctly (fin and binding placement) because a bad setup will make any ski suck. Good luck and welcome back!!!

Fun discussion, but I know it's time to bow out of the conversation when people start to "Dislike" what I'm staying and I can't for the life of me figure out what I said to prompt such a response. Just so you all know. I'm a little slow to catch on (obviously), but I do respond well to feedback (positive and negative) if I understand it. So go ahead and tell me what you don't like rather than just poking at me. :-)

Well that sounds pretty hi-tech for the 80's ... You should dig it out and run it on a newer boat.

@gator1 Interesting information. To add some perspective, what year was that and what speed control system? Certainly the LaPoint's are great examples of big power skiers. Are you contending that the current boats are capable of maintaining a true constant speed (meaning virtually no +/- variations in speed throughout the entire course)? If so, I contend that scores would suffer very little, because in order to achieve this, the boat pull would need to be in near perfect rhythm with the skier (much like ZO is now with a very light skier). I've taken some passed behind a Correct Craft setup with more torque for jumping and I found the pull much smoother (less variation). It would be interesting to try an even stronger pulling boat. Perhaps it is possible, but the fuel economy really suck :-)

Personally I'm a "shut up and ski" kind of person too. However, the system does not work for all skiers. I'll admit I am old school and took an 11 year break from the slalom course so I may not be in the best position to critique ZO. After 3 years I'm figuring it out and starting to reach the same buoy count prior to my 1st retirement. I understand that ZO senses the load but it's is how it deals with that load that needs improvement. The programing options certainly helps, but it is limited and will punish a skier to achieve a near perfect time. Adding more mechanical load sensor like the one used for Jump may provide a more rhythmic throttle control and possibly eliminate the need for ABC123. Simply stated, added throttle would engage when load increases (i.e. skier pulls) and the required intensity could be regulated by the "accelerometer" readings as described by @MISkier , and then when the load comes off the rope (i.e. skier stops pulling) so would the added throttle. Perhaps the times wouldn't always be perfect but each skier would have a fair ride. It has been mentioned a couple of times that the settings are there to "wean" us old timers off of our "ego stroking" hand drivers that let the speed vary by 1.5 mph to move toward a true constant speed. First of all, I think it the pull could be a true constant speed, meaning NO variation regardless of the amount of pull from the skier, this old dog would be ok with that. But even todays boats with all their size and horsepower can be slowed down which means they needs to accelerate to "catch up" and achieve an overall perfect time. Second of all, in regards to hand driving, a driver that varied the speed by 1.5 during a pass wouldn't last very long pulling me, as that would be a terrible ride. Maybe I was spoiled by a pool of skilled drivers, but I would contented that the boat speed varied very little throughout the pass. The only exception would be when a skier overloaded a particular buoy which may result in that segment time being off, but most likely still in tolerance. I have no ZO data to support this, but it would be interesting to see the speed variances +/- throughout a pass using speed control. I suspect they are similar to a good hand driver, the only difference being the timing of the required added throttle within the course. I'll end my rant with a simple statement that I believe speed control is good for the sport and I fully support it's use. I just hope for continued improvements that move toward making the pull similar and fair for skiers of all sizes and styles. This is a great discussion topic and hopefully the passion we all share for this sport can inspire constant improvements.

Laser sighting might be good as an aid to the driver, but I don't thing a path guidance system is even close to being required, especially with the new boats. There have been and continue to be a lot of great drivers out there that can drive a straight line so if they know they are on center they can keep it there. Even with the new boats (and certainly with the old boats) if you react to what happing you won't drive straight, but if you are pro-active and almost anticipate what to do, the boat path will be nearly perfect and certainly better than any mechanical/automated system. Rails systems will kill an already dying sport, I don't know about you, but the skier to boat communication/interaction in both practice and tournaments is a big part of the sport for me, which last time I checked, is suppose to be fun. I do think there are some positive merits to speed control and a focus on improving those systems is where the effort should be made. There are too many good skiers that are being penalized because their style or size adversely effects the boat pull quality. Again, systems that react will never match a good manual driver. I use to drive each skier at near perfect actual times (even with all buoy timing) and many skiers assumed I was driving on the slow end of the tolerance. That being said, I do like the concept of speed control and my arsenal of drivers has expanded dramatically. However, when the best pull you can receive is achieved by not actually engaging the system, there is a problem. Perhaps the speed control systems could be programed to allow a bit more deviation from buoy to buoy, that way if I skier digs in deep on one term they won't be blasted into the next buoy just so the time can be perfect for the next timing segment. How about a rope load sensor, like Jump, to help the system determine when and how much throttle is required. Between that and knowing the boat position in the course, a more program could be developed that could be fair to all skiers. Perhaps this has been attempted without success, I know Perfect Pass used a load sensor for slalom.

Hmmm ... apparently my previous comment of the type of boot I use was deemed "off topic" ?????

I think I had my brother pulling me at 10or 11 ... at first I told him to just bring into the course at 37 MPH and let it ride. On his own he started developing a sweet slalom feed. I also had him holding a stop watch to make sure the times were good. It was just the two of us sometimes skiing on our course across from Crescent Bar. Probably not the smartest idea, but is was the 80's and I've never been much of a "handle popper". Good Times!!!

I'm am also running middle hole on the strap and I also don't crank the top buckle overly tight. The only buckle I run really tight is the middle one. I find this gives me great control without sacrificing forward flex.

Weeds or not, your strategy is a sound one that we employed for years and is especially helpful when dealing with weeds and lack od depth. If possible / allowable, once you have the course set, I would place permanent anchor below each buoy location as the starting point for a permanent course. With water that shallow it would be a snap and easy to fine tune the measurements with tape measure.

Add some epoxy to the screws/hole (same size or bigger) and put them back in. Once the epoxy cures, they should stay put. I have also added some additional material (i.e. small pieces of wood or plastic) to screw holes with the epoxy which has always worked well. The glue or epoxy must be water resistant of course.

Bad angle and benefit goes to the skier. Skiing position maintained past the ball and a the short line length I would conclude the ski broken the buoy line plane to score 3.5

I concur with @Shane‌ with improved body alignment you'll pick a bunch (technical term) more buoys.

Funny how times have changed. Wayne Hanzel used to bring a few skis up to the lake to test and neither of us had calipers so we use to use a tape measure and start with the settings of a 7" length, 2.5" depth and we'd measure the DFT from the front of the fin at 8". The skis usually worked pretty well with only minor tweaking required. We were mostly testing 66's and I want to say stock binding placement was 28 1/2 but that's not as clear because we would just put them in center position of the Iconn binding. We also used to make multiple changes between sets or half sets because we were either short on daylight or stamina to make one change at a time and, of course, Pat was looking for feedback ASAP. Now a days I have a hard time breathing on my ski without taking a calibrated measurement. My how times have changed.

Some of the best rides I've had in the Zero Off era has been behind a 6L 200. I'm a bit old school and find myself over-loading rope from time to time and the 6L has always be very kind to me.

Moving the rear binding back was a big help for me as well on my on-side to keep me from falling back and almost slam-dunking at finish of the turn. Definitely worth a try in the quest for an improved on-side turn.

If your off-side is killer, I'd start with moving the fin forward which should tighten the on-side turn radius. It is always a bit of a balancing act sometimes to adjust one side and not through off the other. This particular adjustment worked well for me just last week for a similar scenario.

For the offside I think you might be on the right track trying to get a bit more ski in the water. Rather that moving the fin back more, you might try added a bit more length (add leading edge). If your not having an issue blowing out the tail, you could try reducing the fin depth. The warmth of the water should help counter act the shallowness in terms of tail depth. How does the ski turn at other, deeper sites? When I have skied sites that have varied depth (ie a buoy that is significantly shallower than the rest of the course), it was important to approach a bit more patient and not force the turn to avoid a blow out. Like skiing on really cold water, as soon as you try to push the ski to finish, your done.

@pgmoore The above is all good information and certainly personal preference. I am a finger gripper, and over the last few years I have gone from a small diameter to an elliptical. I find it provides the same good in my fingers and is a bit easier on the hands. I wear a medium glove which fits me well in the fingers to give you an idea of my hand size. I have also gone to a curve handle as I find it much easier on my aging elbows. @DW you probably already know this, but Proline makes a decent curved elliptical handle. Sidebar Comment Best Handle of All Time (in my opinion) was the "Performer" But that was a long ago in place far far away ...

I run with the white cuff, having never tried the black cuff I can't offer a comparison. I will say that the transition from a rubber binding to the reflex was very quick. Personally I would want the boot too be any stiffer.

I agree there could be some ski setup issues as well, but I think it all boils down to too much weight on the back foot. I agree with @Horton about your back leg collapsing. Before you even hit the first wake your back knee is nearly ahead of your front knee. Front Leg Straight and Back Leg Bent Equals Too Much Weight Back. Risk your right shoulder and take Horton's advise. Starting in the glide, stand tall and get up over the ski by bending your front ankle and keeping that back leg a bit straighter and behind the front knee. This should help maintain your angle behind the boat and help propel you out and into the edge change/turn.

Should one not be able to cause the front boot to release in the water while putting a fair amount of pressure on the back of the ski (like jamming your foot into a rear binding)? I bet there is a bit of twisting going on as well during that process. I have been using a Reflex with a RTP for few weeks now, and I too have released it while kicking my rear foot back into the RTP. I just figured that was normal and I take a bit more care while doing so now. Thus far I have only one fall (blow out) that was release worthy and it operated perfectly.

@BraceMaker - So far it hasn't been an issue in terms of fit. I run the bottom and top buckles relatively loose and crank down the middle one. I have thought about putting a mark on each but so far I've been getting a consistent fit based on feel. Mine is on my slalom with a RTP. A friend of mine has the aluminum buckles on his boot and next time we ski together I was going to give it try. I will say this, there is no really rocket science to installing those aluminum buckles if I decide to do my own upgrade.

no orthotics (yet) and I'm using the standard buckles. I think they work just fine.