Here's the latest on the issue of the gates.

[Horton]

From Gordon:

 

Here in Acapulco we're going with Solution C where we now leave the right gate ball in, but lower it so it's only approx. 2 inches out of the water, making it less of an obstacle. We will move in the right gate ball 4 inches because it helps the driver when all the boat guide buoys are in line. (for those of you who do not know, the gate buoys are currently allowed to be out or wider approx. 4 inches on each side.)

 

Now, people need to know that if we decide to not judge the gates, they don't automatically become easier. They don't go away. They are still a challenge. For the pros, running the gates will be just as difficult as before. They require strength, timing, rhythm and great technique. They just aren't judged. This morning Greg Badal, the former Big Dawg champion and current world record holder for Mens 4, said he needs the gates to put him in the right place coming into one ball. If he starts early, he screws himself. With the top 4 skiers in the world in agreement that they will still go where they go in practice, hopefully, you now realize that at the upper levels of the sport, the gates are not easier. If we make them a bit easier for the longer line skiers, what the heck. It's a gift. It's still the same for everyone in competition. Nobody has an advantage. We just don't piss anyone off when they spend all that money to go to the Regionals and Nationals and get their gates pulled. One year over 7 gates were pulled in the Open Men's Slalom Division when the event was changed to the East West lake at Okeeheelee and the buoys were not on bungy and they disappeared when skiers went by them and the judges pulled the gates thinking the skier was sinking the buoy. Also, as Will Bush pointed out, there is spray coming off the ski and one cannot always get a clear look at this on the video.

 

I can promise you that if you run some experimental rounds at tournaments, you will find that not judging the gates is the way to go.

 

For the mid shortline slalom skier (say near 28 off or 14.25m) they become a bit easier, but does that matter? That's a small price to pay to keep your membership happier. In a sport that has a decreasing base, one needs to come up with ideas that continue to encourage skiers and spectators.

 

Let's keep up the debate.

 

Gordon Rathbun

[MattP]

I usually do not like to get into the political things. It's funny International Affairs is my major... I will say I'm one of those who just say leave well enough alone, keep it the same, no change.

 

Changing the gate rules would progressive change for the sport and far from something done in the recent past for sure. I like sound of the proposition by @MarcusBrown on the other thread. I believe it is used on the World Cup tour?

 

If there is going to be a change I think it should only happen to class C, not L or R tournaments. We should not look back and see an "*" next to the records from here on out. If records are going to be broken it needs to happen with what we have now. Even if the skier were to go through the gates and set a record I dont think it would still feel the same knowing they could have done it differently or that someone would break their record by doing something that was less scrutinized by officials and cameras.

 

If you do not want Pro or Elite events to have to deal with the pains of pulling a gate of a skier for the sake of the crowd don't sanction it as a Record. We all know there will not be a record set at sites like Moomba or the Masters so why do we hold them to these high standards of gate review? They are challenging places to ski and that is also apart of their history and drawl for the skiers competing. Judge them like records if you want, but just not the gates. Sanction them as F, or my proposed "Class C".

 

I know it is unfortunate to see your favorite skier get pulled because they missed the gates, but did the skier not register and fly who knows how far to risk potentially not even rounding a buoy at an event? Yes, they know all the possibilities before they even wake up in the morning.

 

I feel like I could "rant" longer but I will leave it at that.

[9400]

Something I witnessed last year in gate review. At very short rope (10.75), 32 mph, the boat wake washes over the gate ball at the same time as the skier comes through the gate making it almost impossible to accurately review the gate.

[buoyboy1]

As a senior judge and someone that has installed a camera or two I would love to see judging the gates go away. Think about all the time saved not having to deal with cameras and video feed back to "base camp". No more tourney delays when one goes out either. Tech Controllers will also love this new idea.

[ral]

@9400, who runs 10.75 @ 32MPH in a tournament?

[MattP]

@ral that is what I was going to ask, but I know some kids that do..

[9400]

@ral, our mens 7 record is 3 at 10.75

[Edbrazil]

Men7 run shortline at 32mph, and their record is into 10.75. Girls2 also, and their record is just one buoy short of getting into 10.75.

 

As a Technical Controller, I would sure welcome not having to deal with gate cameras.

Back when the Pro Tour was running strongly, 10+ years back, we tried a Buoy Zero, just as a marker, at one tournament. But, left the gates as and didn't change the scoring. The Buoy Zero was back at 41 meters, and 4 meters narrower (@ 7.5 m). At least one skier found it distracting or in the way, and we took it out the next day.

 

There is a Buoy Zero of sorts, at places where there is an overlapping 6-buoy course, aka 8-buoy course. Such as at Phil Hughes' site near Swiss in Clermont, FL, and Kris LaPoint's new Orlando site. But, they're set at full width, since it's Buoy #5 from the other direction. Around 28--32 off, it tends to be a bit of an obstacle before the gate.

 

I come from way-way back, pre-1965. Up to about that time, the endgates were a full step before #1 and after #6. Great for some of us running 2-ski slalom, and longline. When the endgates were shortened, most of us thought it was just to make it harder, but the real shortline people liked it. Joe Cash said that at 30 off, with the long gates, it was hard to get #1, as you had to pull through the gates, then do a double-turn, where you ran straight a bit before hooking #1.

[ral]

@MattP, in IWSF only U13 girls would shorten @32, and do not think too many can run 38.

 

@9400, thanks for the clarification. IMHO, if in doubt, the skier should be favored.

 

@buoyboy1, what about video feed from the boat and path feed? If you have video feed from the boat, the other are just marginal. In a continental championship a couple of weeks ago, the leading skier in one category scored 4@38. No boat feed, just two towers. A kid in the shore took a pic sequence @ 2, and the skier clearly missed that buoy. With boat feed, it would have been an easy catch.

 

I am in favor of simplifying life for C class tournaments, but believe that L and R need to be strict.

 

[auskier]

one big problem that the world rules dont address (AWSA may, not sure?) is the vertical angle of the camera to the gates. The rule only mentions the height it needs to be, regardless of the distance to the gates, therefore a flatter angle view makes it much easier for the ball to get lost in the spray/wake/trough. Unfortunately another rule is needed to fix this if we continue with this increase in technology trend.

[Edbrazil]

Auskier may be correct there. AWSA does have Rule 10.08C2b at about Page 51 of the Rules that addresses the question of the view angle:

 

"If a camera is located more than 100 feet back from the course centerline, it is recommended that it be elevated approximately ten percent (10%) above the water (one foot in height for each ten feet back from the course centerline)."

 

I don't find that in IWWF Rules with a relatively quick search. Although, IWWF has this:

 

"A pole mounted boat camera may be used in conjunction with normal gate cameras to get a view that allows the most accurate result."

 

Which I don't find in AWSA. Question for those with experience with pole mounted boat cameras: how do you find that works? Think it may be more of a European option.

[jwr]

How hard is it to tell the judges that unless it is blatantly obvious the skier missed the gates then call them good. No need for cameras at class c tournaments. On r tournaments use cameras as a backup only when gates are pulled and there has to be Indisputable evidence. No need to change all the rules just how they are applied.

[Stevie Boy]

Guy,s put me straight here, I have only ever heard one Pro, have issues and complain about the rules, regards the gate, everybody else accepts it, for me thats what makes the likes of Andy Mapple etc, so good at the sport, as well as being able to cope with the pressure, they know when and how to apply the pressure, if the opposition cannot deal with it and bomb out on their gates, tuff, that is what competition is all about.

Sounds harsh, but many competitions are won, with scores that are more than achievable by most Pro,s , it,s who is in the groove on the day.

All comments are purely my individual thoughts.

[GK]

I think the argument for the change isn't about one group of skiers. If it was only going to benefit the pros then there probably wouldn't be much of an argument. The argument is for the good it would do for the sport overall. 1) It would benefit EVERY tournament skier in the world who spends anywhere from $100 to $1,000+ to attend a tournament only to have their day ruined because they missed a gate. 2) It would reduce the amount of controversy and time delays at events. 3) Most importantly on the professional level, it will make for a better show for the crowd if you don't have skiers pulled from the field for a missed gate. 4) It will make running the slalom course a little bit easier for novice skiers and collegiate skiers who are just learning and just entering the tournament scene. 5) It allows the skier to choose the optimal start for THEM as opposed to a set point that some pro skiers chose back in the day. 6) It reduces the amount of technology needed for an event.

[mwetskier]

no one really knows what could evolve if the gate requirment is removed. top skiers might experiment and find a completly different approach like much earlier or much later pull to 1 ball. if a new world record is suddenly set it would forever make a distincton line between 'old' records and "new" ones just like when the rope loops were changed from feet to metric

[ral]

@Edbrazil, pole mounted boat cameras are better suited to judge turn buoys. I do not recall having used the boat camera to judge gates as, because of the angle, it is unclear where the ski exactly passes when airborne or over the buoy.

[GK]

No matter how you approach 1 ball, 2 @ 43 off is still going to be 2 @ 43 off and it's going to take some insane skiing to beat it. Nate or Chris or Will or ??? will beat it eventually with or without the gate rule. You could make the same argument that there should be a distinction from records run on a fiberglass ski instead of wood, and a carbon ski instead of fiberglass, and behind perfect pass instead of hand throttle, and behind Zero Off instead of Perfect Pass and smaller buoy sizes instead of larger buoys, and 55 meter buoys instead of no 55 meter buoys, and man made lakes instead of public lakes. Does that mean we shouldn't have allowed those changes? That's the problem with records in any sport, you can't keep the same constants forever and since 99.9% of skiers will never be chasing those records, we shouldn't base our decisions around them if something could better the overall sport.

[The_MS]

We will not see anyone turn 3 ball at -43. We may see someone touch 3 ball and yard sale but no one will turn it and hang on.

[Texas6]

@MS I respectfully disagree

[The_MS]

@Texas6 I wonder if anyone has even seen it happen in practice with a weave? I was in the boat for most of CPs attempts at the record and it just does not look possible.

[Texas6]

@MS, given that data you have a better perspective than I on the subject. I just struggle with "never" and hate to think we've reached the maximum potential of our sport, or any sport for that matter.

[lpskier]

In my experience, very few gates are pulled in Class C events, at least where I ski. It has to be pretty blatant, and in all cases, the tough call goes to the skier. That's not to say a missed gate is ignored by the judges if it is seen, I am just saying that it doesn't happen very often.

 

If we are going to worry about someone's feelings getting hurt because of a pulled gate, next we will be concerned about a fall at one ball. People who are rookies and likely to miss a gate should get their starts in Grass Roots tournaments that offer a mulligan. Miss your gates, no problem, try again (maybe with a little coaching from the boat crew). I attend a Grass Roots tournament every summer in Vermont and the "rookies" get a ton of support from the "regulars" and have a blast. Some come back the next year and ski the class C and others ski the GR year after year.

 

If you are a "real" tournament skier and you miss your gates, tough noogies, you screwed up. Make an adjustment the next two rounds. Not familiar with the site and miss your gates? Tough noogies again. Next time show up Friday for practice.

 

Sorry, but I just don't see the issue here. My two cents.

[RichardDoane]

@lpskier - I agree

[The_MS]

@Texas6 You are correct about the term "Never". I think that the main reason we see the bar raised to this level is that kids today are seeing 41 be run and they expect that at some point they may be able to run it. When I was growing up, we all thought that running 39 would never happen and thus our minds were blocked from thinking we could. Who knows, maybe we will get a 6' 10 kid with arms to his feet that will have the never say never attitude and he will run 43.