Jump to content

Sacha Descuns is the 10th man in history to run 41 off at 36 mph (58K)!


Horton
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Baller

I was looking at the gross incompetence that cost Jamie a World Record of 2 @ 43 back

around 2004 in France. And hoping something like that hasn't happened again, but

I remain skeptical of tournament quality. I never found any explanation of why no

centerline video for Jamie, or even whether the event had Cl. video at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I'm not sure if this question is dumb or insightful, but: How do you not run over a ball at -41?

 

I stopped on a few different frames and his ski certainly is initially outside of it and then he crushes it with his legs and/or feet.

 

Are we really saying that doesn't count? I would think that's exactly how you want to run ludicrously short shortline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Here we go again judging from an irrelevant perspective. It comes down to the view the event officials had and not shoreline video or @Hortons still shots from the bushes :-). All that said, based in the video in hand, it looks to me like he ran over 3. In motion is better than frame by frame. And all that said, still incredible skiing. I hope he hits major pro events next year and see how he does in the mix.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

At this point I do not think the ski or the binding has touched the ball yet. I guess if it is a bubble ball he could be center punching it but I do not think so.

 

cydniaddwo2n.jpg

 

 Goode ★ KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@bishop8950 correct that it's an irrelevant perspective! Completely agree with you.

 

@Horton you need to advance a frame or two. What matters is what happens at the front binding.

 

I stand by my call - he ran square over the buoy #3. That said he's an awesome talent and clearly capable. Incredible skiing and I hope we see a lot of him in the future!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
@klindy Yes the ball looks to go under in the next couple of frames. I am just unsure how the ball can look to be between the skier and the boat at the skier's toes and be under the ski 6 inches laster.

 Goode ★ KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_
@Horton, it looked to me like there is a small amount of orange graphic on the ski just in front of the front binding. I wonder if that contributed some sort of optical illusion on the amount of buoy that is between the boat and skier.

The worst slalom equipment I own is between my ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
@MISkier yea yea in the image I posted the ball looks low. I am not looking at the ski graphics. The ball may be good or not - all I am saying is it looks darn close to me. Need higher res video I guess.

 Goode ★ KD Skis ★ MasterCraft ★ PerfSki ★ Radar ★ Reflex ★ S Lines ★ Stokes

Drop a dime in the can

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@9400 plus probably destroyed a piece of his body.

 

Separate question on boat path. Suppose the driver keeps a straight path but is slightly towards the 2-4-6 side which at 41 would seem to be a definite disadvantage. I would assume that still would invalidate a record is that correct even though the boat path was straight.

 

How far back in the set do they go back and look at boat path for a record run? Do they examine every pass or just 41 and 43?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chef23 They look at the last full pass and the "record" pass. The variance is an accumulation of error as well as a max error.

 

So below are the limits based on the record score -

 

0.25-1.00 = 20cm

1.25-2.00 = 28cm

2.25-3.00 = 35cm

3.25-4.00 = 40cm

4.25-5.00 = 45cm

5.25-6.00 = 49cm

 

Also the max deviation for any single buoy is 20cm (approx. 8") towards the buoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ralph Lee A great driver holds the boat straight with subtle movements. You don't even know the driver is there. It's more "leaning" on the wheel rather than "turning" it. Watching the skier from the boat though is more like rhythmic violence - especially at the shortest rope lengths. Watching from the shore doesn't translate the same at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

@klindy, when certifying boat path, where do they take each measurement? Only at the boat guides - nose of the boat is between the guides? Only when a certain portion of the boat (pylon) is through the boat guides? Or, when the skier is at a certain part of the turn around the buoy?

 

I assume they can't take continuous measurements throughout the length of the entire course, as I am sure the cumulative variation would exceed 49cm for even record approved boat paths.

The worst slalom equipment I own is between my ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_
@klindy, then is it acceptable to have a skier yank the boat more than 20 cm off center between each buoy, as long as the driver recovers the path enough to be within tolerance at the measurement point at each set of boat guides while not accruing more than the maximum allowed cumulative deviation from those recorded checkpoints?

The worst slalom equipment I own is between my ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@chef23 Cl. video looks at the record pass and the previous complete pass. Noting

above, the boat can be perfectly centered in the gates, but the SL course needs to be

even, and not for one side wide and the other side narrow. Seen that. Also seen a bunch

of Cl. video, including through 41, and what @MISkier describes is very rare. Maybe the

boat getting pulled toward the skier's side right after the buoy when the towline force is

applied. Correct that the deviation is measured at one point, as noted. The SplashEye

system can measure continuously, maybe needing a target on the boat. See:

splasheye.com/products/slalom

 

When we first started using video overlay around 1983 for the AWSA Boat Tests, the boat

was tracked continually by a manual method that depended on the video-game type skill

of the computer operator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
@Than_Bogan if you run over a buoy or significantly displace it, you didn't run the pass, so I'd think that's NOT the way you want to run -41. By the way I think he did displace the three, but the view we saw is not what the judges saw.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Let me tell you a little story of boat path video. A few years back at Regionals I was leading when the number two seeded skier came up. He missed his opener, so I'm thinking no worse than second for me. Lo and behold the chief judge (from his home state) calls the boat and orders a reride for boat path. He comes back and skis up to his seed, knocking me out of second place. OK, you say sour grapes on my part for not wanting him to get a reride, but wait. I go to,the chief judge and ask if I and the chief driver can review the video in her presence and the she says no! I say "you mean I can't watch it"? She says "no you can't watch it." So, @rico that's my experience as to whether videos are made public.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LeonL the same process of posting $100 to challenge a call applies whether you're challenging your score or that of a competitor. So if you said you wanted to challenge it, posted the $$ and then you were denied, you would have had a protestsble situation for the CJ not following the rules.

 

For what its worth, if I was CJ and I knew the situation I likely wouldn't have let you see the video either. If the CD or TC gave you a copy later ... but if you want a change to happen and if you really think you were slighted, then follow the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@rico Jamie (not Jaime) scored 2.0 @ 9.75. It is listed in the Rankings as 1.5, since a

World Record score can only be used if it is ratiified. I have never seen any explanation

of what happened. There is very good boat video. For the Cl. video, that appears to

belong in the realm of UFO sightings.

 

As a Technical Controller/Homologator, I have always interpreted IWSF Rule 6.04:

 

6.04: Score Sheet Availability

The scoring sheets of each judge for every skier shall be made available for a period of

30 minutes for inspection

 

...in the broadest sense. If someone wants to wade through pages of data and computer

calculations, and a bunch of video: have fun. Just don't delay things.

 

It looks like @LeonL got screwed, and the Chief Judge maybe should have had a

complaint filed against her. At least, a formal Protest should have been made.

And the Chief Driver and event driver should have been spoken to. But, it is not easy

to 'think on your feet' about that. I have had something like that happen to me.

And, of course, your version may be one version vs. the CJ's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
Let me make it clear. I didn't mean to imply that I got screwed. I am aware of and understand the rules concerning challenge and protest. I just thought in the interest of keeping things on the up and up, it would have been incumbent on the CJ to show me what she saw that precipitated the reride. Maybe I got screwed maybe I didn't. Unfortunately, I'll never know. Everybody would have been better served if a bit of transparency had been instituted. Keeping it from sight only heightened the concern of impropriety, whether real or imagined. I just wanted to relate a situation in response to @rico asking about video being made public. @klindy, I respect your opinion on what you would have done in a similar situation. Oh, by the way, when have you ever seen this rule complied with: "A mark or small post on the top of the windshield that is visible in the end-course video camera (both directions) shall be placed 20 cm from the centre of the windshield on both sides of the centre to aid in the determination of the 20 cm deviation. " Rule listed under 14.15 IWWF.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

So people thought I was an uneducated idiot for posting "All tournaments should be record capability" I"m presently skiing with some great skiers much older than me that have well over 100 years of tournament experience between them. Their stories of shady judges and drivers is pretty embarrassing!! I think these guys are the true root of the sport and believe every word they are saying. Listening to Andy talk about Zero Off it sounds like one of the main reasons for its invention was to prevent people manipulating the speed, so that tells me there is just cause to doubt some peoples integrity. So, make all tournaments R class and video EVERYTHING! Or else go with the Chief Judges decisions and never mention your beef again.

 

Just one point of view from a long time die hard skier...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@rico Clearly my opinion about his 3 ball was based on the video posted. Frankly the quality is as good as it gets and the slo-mo makes it even easier to see. (Recall that slalom CAN be viewed in slo-mo and freeze frame to make the call unlike tricks). Also, while your comment about boat video is important, I'll bet the video was taken from the same tower the shore judges were positioned. So while the view isn't "from the boat", it certainly is a valid viewpoint.

 

The boat video is only required for the last two passes of an National record (OM/OW/MM/MW only) or for a World Record (OM/OW only). So the use of a boat video isn't a given but IF it is available there is a prescribed way to use the boat video.

 

First the boat video must be monitored but another judge and/or the CJ. It's reviewed only if the video review judge disagrees with the event judges call. In other words the boat judge (presumably similar view to the boat video) AND the tower judges make the call first. So @rico, saying he ran over #3 from that vantage point is not only plausible but highly likely and certainly not "silly".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...