Zero Based Scoring

[GK]

I'm surprised that there has been very little discussion on here about Zero Based Scoring that was recently approved, yet I learn tonight that there is a massive campaign to have it reversed and that the regions are currently discussing and will be voting on whether to keep it in place. I know that the squeaky wheel gets the grease and I'm afraid that's what is going to happen with this GREAT new rule. Finally our leaders have passed a rule geared towards the betterment and growth of tournament skiing for ALL potential tournament skiers and NOT just the elite "record capable" crowd. Zero Based Scoring allows skiers of any age and ability level to start shortening the rope at ANY speed they deem best for them. No more losing people at tournaments because they are forced to go 36 mph and they're not comfortable with it. People want to shorten the rope, that's FUN. On the other side of the coin, we've had discussion on BOS for years about why people are forced to reduce their speed at a certain age? We finally get a rule that allows some flexibility and we've got a bunch of people who are afraid of change because it might affect their placement somewhere in the future. They may argue that it's a safety issue but that's BS. You can get hurt at any speed and if the data is out there I'll bet it's a similar percentage of skiers getting hurt regardless of the speed. Our sport should be about the best skier on any given day winning an event. If you can edge out your competition by going 2 miles per hour faster, then good on you. There will be just as many instances where they make a mistake from which they could have recovered if they were going 2 mph slower. If you are in support of Zero Based Scoring, then I strongly suggest you contact your state representative and tell them you are in favor of it and they should vote to keep it in place. If you don't, a few squeaky wheels are going to get it reversed for the many skiers that it would greatly benefit.

[GK]

Give me a panda all you want but none of those threads present much of a discussion on ZBS and I thought it important that people know what is happening with the attempt to overturn the new rule. Perhaps the lack of discussion proves that the rule is supported by the vast majority of skiers on here otherwise there would be much more "complaining" happening. If the people who support it don't speak up in a big way, then a small minority of our membership are going to have it overturned. I just don't want to see that happen.

[MISkier]

I would be massively bummed if ZBS is rescinded.

[unksskis]

I do feel it needs tweaked, such as any M3 and higher going 36 needs to go Open or in MastersMen for example. It will help with newer competitors and transition from divisions where the speed changes. Or implement it in college, and in 5 years it will seem more normal and more widely accepted and understood.

 

I do hope they keep the Level 10 rule, that will greatly benefit the sport and competition.

[lottawatta]

ZBS is coffin nails for the sport. As someone who has made great personal sacrifices in an effort to put the sport in front of the public, I consider this ZBS a big step backward. The rules need simplified and streamlined, not complicated with this crap. The rules are hard enough to explain to the skiing public now. What are we going to do, pass out buoy charts at the few events that still get public exposure? If an outsider can't watch two consecutive skiers ski in an event and determine the winner by who ran the most consecutive buoys, then we are headed for even deeper obscurity. ZBS is spectacle and not true competition. Skiers of the same age division need to be skiing under the same rules with the same maximum speeds and the same progression up the rope. Not because that is the way it has always been, but because it uniform and is a true measure of who is the best skier on that day. @GK, I respect your opinion and all that you have done to bring otherwise recreational skiers to tournaments, but I couldn't disagree with you more on this issue.

 

At the VERY LEAST, AWSA needs to reconsider this and promote it as an option in local or class C competition, but leave it out of state, regional, or national championships, and leave it off the ranking list.

[Edbrazil]

For me, the transition from 36 to 34 when I got to age 35 (many moons ago) was worth

two passes in slalom. However, I did ski on some squirrelly skis that would do some

nasty face plants to you, when I was at 36. So, the full pass adjustment may be OK. But,

I'm not talking deep shortline, which I never got to.

[elr]

Yep - according to a Facebook posting by a reliable source the Southern Region has sent in a request to rescind ZBS. Personally this would remove any motivation to remain with AWSA - so a skier/official would be lost. @Horton @GK maybe this should be retitled "Request to Rescind ZBS." @JeffSurdej why did I learn about this on FB?

[RazorRoss3]

Any rule you make, there will always be people who attempt to abuse it for personal gain (slowing down for no reason other than they think they could edge out the person going full speed). We can't discard rules for the fear of small scale sandbagging but need to look at it's potential to retain youth skiers and, with any luck, keep them interested into and out of college. On the men's side, 36 can be extremely physically demanding, not all 14 year olds are in a place where there bodies can do that yet. Let's face it, at that age it's just as easy to look 10 as it is to look 18. I see little detriment to letting someone stay at a slower speed so that they can remain competitive rather than allowing them to become discouraged and leave the sport. I am not saying I'm going to use the rule, I am not saying I'm in love with the rule, and I'm not saying I won't be irritated if I get beat by someone my age who has no reason to be skiing 34 is skiing at 34. But looking beyond myself the rule has the potential to be good for the sport as a whole and we all need to be willing to at least give things a try before getting all hot and bothered.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@elr "Personally this would remove any motivation to remain with AWSA - so a skier/official would be lost."

 

Huh? Am I understanding you correctly that if this rule is rescinded you will completely leave AWSA? So if it hadn't recently been passed would you be on your way out?

 

If you, or anyone else, is so close to the edge of quitting over such a minor rule change, I'm sure there is a long list of other things that would be a convenient excuse as well.

[ForrestGump]

@lottawatta Hell, an outsider can't figure out what they're seeing anyway. Have you ever actually tried to explain what's happening at a slalom tournament to someone outside the sport? They just get glassy eyed.

[LeonL]

It's a rather big change, but I honestly don't see a real problem with it. For me I gives me some options as to how to get the most buoys ( can I get more by skiing 34 as opposed to 32? I don't know without trying it) After Nationals I would be forced to slow to 30 and I was really dreading that, so this alleviates that potential problem. Now, if it gets rescinded I'll just keep on keeping on and struggle with 30 after Nationals.

[lottawatta]

@bonehead, I fully agree, hence my reason to call a moratorium on any additional rules. I have long protested against the constant rules changes every year. Many of them are change for the sake of change. The rule book has nearly doubled in size in the last 20 years. Technology may be the reason for some of it. However, we should have the goal of reducing the rules, not making new rules. There is NO REASON a class C slalom tournament shouldn't be run with rules printed on one 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper. If the powers that be want to have some real change for the better, they can form a task force that has the goal of cutting the current rule book in half! The rule book is the single most intimidating factor to a new tournament skier. A ZBS buoy count score chart is nothing but more complication in explaining how a tournament works.

 

[ForrestGump]

While I agree that there should be FAR fewer rules, I don't feel this is a bad one. There are PLENTY of people who I know won't ski a tournament because of the way the rules are written now. This helps them to want to try tournaments, IMO.

[jcamp]

Has anyone who has posted on the forum against ZBS, either on this thread or the rescind one, gone through the trouble of emailing their Regional reps and letting them know their opposition?

[LeonL]

Explaining how a tournament works -- before ZBS. The boat speed increases after every completed pass until you reach your division max, then the line gets shortened after every completed pass until you fall or miss

Explaining how a tournament works -- ZBS. You may choose to increase the boat speed after every completed pass or shorten the line, your choice.

Not so much more complicated.

[lottawatta]

Most of the skiers at my lake are tournament skiers and they will ski tournaments regardless. However, I know of several deep shortline skiers in other local clubs who either don't ski tournaments, or quit skiing tournaments for various reasons. ZBS does NOTHING to bring them in.

[animal]

My biggest concern with the new ZBS system is that it makes every mens division speed 36. If you want to be competitive in your age group, you will have to ski 36 to score with the best. Do we really want to see Mens V and VI skiers trying to ski 36 to keep up with the big dogs?

[RazorRoss3]

I don't think it was aimed at them. I think this rule was primarily aimed people in the age divisions where speed changes and for some reason they do not want to change speed either because they ski well at __ and don't want to slow down to __ or because they ski well at __ but don't feel physically able to speed up to __. The rule isn't geared towards short line skiers or skiers who have stopped for reason XYZ. The rule is looking at ways to make the sport more fun for the weekend warrior putting up buys at -22 or maybe -28, and to maybe make it more attractive to completely new skiers who think shortening the line from -15 to -22 at 28mph sounds more entertaining than working through speeds.

[GK]

@lottawatta I'm all for reducing the size of the rulebook but I'm not sure the ZBS rule has anything to do with that. Heck, the entire change didn't add more than a few sentences to the rulebook when you account for the sections that were deleted because of it. I agree with LeonL that it doesn't complicate things any more than they already are and this rule has merit for growing tournament waterskiing at the local level which is where we should be focused. An event with true public exposure can be run however the organizer wants to run it. In other words, if it's a pro event, big dawg, etc then the organizer can force the skiers to go whatever speed they deem best for the event. I've known a number of skiers coming out of college who had no interest in skiing AWSA tournaments because they couldn't consistently ski 36 mph. If they had the option to go 32 or 34 that may have been different.

 

I always ask myself the same question in these instances. Would this change make events more COMPETITIVE or more FUN. In this case, I believe it would make our local events more FUN. If it does one of those two things then it will help grow tournament waterskiing.

[ForrestGump]

I completely agree with you, @GK

[lottawatta]

@razorross, Great, let AWSA promote ZBS as an option at class C local tournaments for the weekend warrior to try to run -38 at 15.5 on a trick ski, whatever floats their boat. If ZBS appeals to a new tournament skier, great, go enter local tournaments that run under ZBS. When they get to a serious competition like state, regional, or nationals, they should be running the same speeds and lengths to determine who is best on that day. Keep ZBS out of state, regional, national championships, and the ranking list. There is no serious comparison that can be made to equate LL at 58k to -32 at 46k to someone outside, (nor many inside) the sport.

 

[Chad_Scott]

Guys I think the ZBS scoring is s great idea for younger and new skiers in the sport However allowing a skier to gain a six buoy advantage by skiing faster is not fair. I am a 34 mph tournament skier. I often ski at 36 with my son just to keep things interesting. I can daily run 38 at 36 mph. Often getting 2 or 3 @ 39 off. Let's make an example. This year I am skiing at the regionals and I am the last skier in the division. The leading score is 3 1/2 @39 off at 34 mph. Without notice I decide to ski 36. Turn 4@38 and win. Is this the true spirit of competition. How do you explain to someone watching what just happened

Or I run 3 1/2@38. We tie. There's a runoff. My competitor goes off the dock cold at 38 off I go off at 35 off.

 

This is really what people think is good for the sport.

 

This is not very well thought out and should be rescinded or amended to disallow the ability to ski above your speed as set forth by your age

[JackQ]

Seem like a tempest in a teapot. I am not looking forward to trying to determine depending on my competitors in a particular tournament, and the conditions, if my chances are better to run 35 off at 36mph or 38@34mph. Although it has 30 years since I skied 36, but I would prefer all my division ski 36 or 34, pick one and suck it up.

[Triplett]

This rule is just allowing us to use the score sheet that was implemented years ago.

 

Tournaments the public sort of cares about (Malibu Open, etc.) already have rules regarding where you can start and what speed you can ski. I don't think the concern for AWSA at the moment needs to be how to engage the general public. No matter what we do, short of a major overhaul, will make a dude off the street understand how we score things with out a long explanation.

 

We first have to grow the sport from the inside, involving the kids who skied in college in AWSA events, novice skiers who started later in life, and hope these skiers spread the sport to others. This rule will hopefully do that, and if we don't try then how will we ever know. We simply cannot be afraid of change. I have been in AWSA for 21 years this year and it feels like there have been no significant changes, except the ranking list. We have to change to grow.

 

 

 

 

[Chad_Scott]

@Triplett Giving the scenario I discussed you think the rule is fair and promotes a level playing field for regional and national tournaments?

[walleye]

@Chad_Scott totaly agree with you on 34 mph skiers. I disagee it is good for juniors for many reasons. If all this passes why would it not be allowed for all divisions to increeas speed. It appears m3 and up have choices to improve thier score. My son can run the same at 36 or 34. Why would he not be able to gain the 6 buoys by going 36. I disagree with either rule. It makes no sense and messes up long standing records.

[Triplett]

@chad_scott I understand that 1 @ 39 - 36mph could be easier or harder than 1 @ 41 - 34mph and with this rule it would be the same 109 score. This would force a decision for you to either get 1 @ 41 - 34, 1 @ 39 - 36, or 1 @ 43 - 32. Both take high levels of skill, they are just different approaches to the same score with varying degrees of difficulty. I don't see how this changes the playing field at all, it changes your approach to the task at hand. You get the choice to ski the speed you want to get the maximum amount of buoys.

 

@walleye I don't think you will see score improvements of more than a buoy or two, but I could be wrong, depends on if we see the rule. 34 and 36 are different animals and switching all the time is not an easy task.

 

*edit: second comment

 

 

[Horton]

my 2 cents

 

Most skiers are unaffected. A small group who were previously mostly happy are now happier and another group who was also mostly happy is now S***ting bricks mad. If no change had been made, no one would be super angry and everyone would just abide by the rules they way they were. There would be no unintended consequences. Just freeze the darn rule book and let's go skiing.

[Chad_Scott]

And for the guys that have transitioned to 34 mph for several years and now having to compete against a guy who is skiing 36 mph with a six buoy advantage. @Triplett where did the data come from to provide a 6 buoy handicap. Competition at a regional or national level is all about everyone having the same conditions Each skier should ski the same speed and the same rope length to determine a winner. No reason for a handicap at a national level tournament.

 

There is no doubt it is easier for some to ski 36 than others. That certainly does not make the playing field level with a six buoy advantage. Part of the reason the speeds we're lowered was because they didn't want a 50 ye old skiing at 36. There is no way one can say it is not a competitive advantage to have a six buoy handicap based on no real data.

 

38 is easier than 39 at any speed. 39 is short 41 is short. So why should I be able to win with a longer rope and more room to get around the buoy.

 

Just require everyone to go 36. And see how that works for the membership. Because in essence that is what it is coming down to. Everyone maximum speed is 36 no matter the age.

 

Are we now going to discriminate if a women wants to go 36 for another 6 buoys.

[disland]

Just curious where all these max speeds came from anyway?

 

Why was it decided to make guys slow to 30MPH? Was this just a guess by someone as what is "safe"? Maybe what was safe way back when is way different now with new boats and skis?

 

I see where @Chad_Scott is coming from, but maybe it will be fun to try for a year and see where folks decide to ski. My guess is the big dawg guys will start skiing 36 for the reasons Chad explained.

 

Is that bad?

[GK]

@Horton, you are correct, if we leave it the way it is then nothing changes...and we continue to not grow the sport of tournament waterskiing.

 

@Chad_Scott, You say it is an advantage if you can go out and ski 36 mph, is it not true that there is less room for error at 36 mph? You may make a mistake at 1 ball from which you can't recover that you would have recovered had you been skiing 34 mph at one length shorter. For guys running into 41 off at any speed, should they not be considered MM or Open and perhaps those divisions should be capped at both 34 & 36 for those truly elite shortline skiers?

[elr]

@Bruce_Butterfield @skier2788 - "If you, or anyone else, is so close to the edge of quitting over such a minor rule change, I'm sure there is a long list of other things that would be a convenient excuse as well"

 

So you think I'm making excuses - In the last four months I've had my 4th back surgery and a total hip replacement and I'd like to stay involved. ZBS is a MAJOR rule change for me as I am unlikely to ski to speed until a couple age groups have passed and chasing speed at 15off is not appealing to me.

 

I get it - the traditional tournament structure works for world list skiers.

 

Over the last 15 years I've advocated for increasing access to tournament skiing for the other 95%, e.g.:

 

- Removing minimum start speeds - minimum start speeds caused my older son to stop

- ZBS - after watching my athletically immature younger son chase speed for 8 years, tricking and overall kept him in the game until he made speed.

- Tournament on Demand - for those who the traditional structure doesn't work

 

So yes - if ZBS is rescinded I will not feel welcome, nor have fun, at tournaments and my advocacy will have proved fruitless. An official that kept the 2nd lake running at numerous tournaments will not be on hand. And, an HOA advocate for hosting tournaments at a Nationals, US Open, Junior US Open, Regionals, and record tournament site will go offline. By the way there are now only 4 tournament families (including me) at a 60 unit subdivision.

 

All of this over a false sense of equivalency. Trick scores are trick scores and jump distances are jump distances for all age groups. But a B3 that runs 22@34 scores 66 and a M3 who runs 22@34 scores 78 under the traditional system.

 

I am a firm believer that placements will not change under ZBS but if you want to maintain the false equivalency run those classes or tournaments under L/R rules.

 

[Chad_Scott]

@GK you are right depending on the rope length I do not know of any big dawg skiers that gained 6 buoys upon dropping from 36-34 mph

 

Take the big dawg for example. No former professional have dominated in the series just because they slowed to 34. 39 and 41 are still short no matter the speed

 

@GK How do you perceive this will grow the sport and send people flocking to tournaments. And what information do you have to support the theory that this is the answer

 

Honestly the issue is attracting new skiers. How does a rule which changes the competitive fairness at the other levels going to attract them.

 

 

 

[Horton]

@GK I fully agree that we have an enormous problem with the state of the sport but I do not think the solutions to our ills are found in the rule book.

 

I see ZBS as being the full of unintended consequences. Even for the skiers that are happy with ZBS I do not see how something like this is a HUGE game changer in a positive direction. For those who are unhappy with it I see it as unnecessarily discouraging.

 

Re-reading your original post I see that you think this is a big deal. I respect that. In my mind rule changes - even good rule changes - may cause enough disruption that they overshadow the good.

 

I guess you can mark me down as respectfully disagree.

[sunperch]

@Chad_Scott I have already been told that women cannot be scored at 36. Juniors are also not allowed to score above their traditional max speed. I do not like the rule, it makes it easier for the lower level skiers to increase bouy count but not will not allow advanced junior or women skiers to increase bouy count by speeding up. Kinda sounds like robbing the rich to pay the poor. I could live with this rule in Class C tournaments as an attempt to increase tournament participation (I don't think it will work), but to allow it for Nationals is nuts.

 

@Jody_Seal Where is the petition for repealing the ZBS rule? I would happily sign it!

[Gloersen]

.

[Dirt]

I agree with Chad. I think ZBS will force us to ski 36 mph to be competitive.

[Chad_Scott]

@sunperch I agree with you. However it is only an AWSA rule. L and R tournaments are run under IWSF rules which don't allow a skier to exceed his/her maximum speed. This rule only effects a state regional or national tournament.

 

The big dawg series will not use zbs scoring. Everyone will ski @34 and compete fairly

 

You can contact your regional board members who have voted in favor of this rule. Ironically in the SCR two of the deciding votes are trick skiers how have never been on the end of the rope at 39 or 41 off and do not know the difference between different speeds and rope lengths.

 

It really will not effect me I just do not think that if I run a longer line at any speed I should beat out a guy that is skiing his maximum designated speed on a shorter line length

 

Most of the opinions I have seen via email are from board members who don't compete

 

We should just give everyone a metal and stay home.

 

The reason the big dawg has been so successful is because of the competition and the people involved.

 

Give younger skiers a series which actually consist of competition. Head to head formats do away with boring ratings tournaments

 

Show up a badals pro am. Watch how much people of all ages enjoy competing in the head to head events. Rules rules rules forever changing do not help the sport will not bring people flocking to us

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gloersen]

When the proposed ZBS rule was cited it was surprising to see an allowance for current division speed caps to be exceeded up to 36 (M only). For the most part skiing ZBS below cap speed made sense to entice < level 8 skiers to participate in tournaments more. The effect on >level 8 skiers does present a strategic debacle.

 

What Chad states, keep the current division speed caps, makes sense. Maybe a reasonable compromise would be to amend the proposed rule to follow the ZBS grid but only up to current division speed caps. I doubt skiing a speed lower than the cap would have much impact on level 8 skiers, certainly not mid-level 8 on up. This preserves the current higher level competitive status among all divisions but allows less competitive skiers (for the most part level 7 and under skiers and it's applicable to all, so "fair") a chance to run a few more passes at shorter lines and derive some vindication for their effort; more fun for more skiers as well as retain current competitive cachet.

[RazorRoss3]

I was unaware the rule allowed for speed caps to be broken, I should start skiing 61K and take an advantage on everyone ;)

 

Joking aside being able to exceed speed caps certainly creates an issue since at -38 and beyond it's possible the same skier can consistently put up a score within 3 buoys at 36mph or 34mph which certainly forces everyone's hands to ski at 36 if they want to win. I would certainly be in favor of preserving speed caps in the age divisions, if you want to go 36 and you're older than 35 good for you but it should count as buoys at 34.

[MISkier]

@RazorRoss3, I believe you already can ski above your age division max (i.e., after M2) and still be scored at the lower division speed max. Nobody does it because there is no payoff, as there would be with ZBS.

[Triplett]

@sunperch I believe it has been said that for IWWF sanctioned events you have to adhere to the international rule book. So that would leave class E and C events being affected. In these you can already choose to ski 36mph if you are 35+, you just ask to entered in the scoring program as IM.

 

This seems to be a stepping stone to ability based divisions, which is why it seems clunky and awkward for the age divisions (assuming at least). After some thought, I do believe that you cap MM to 34mph. This keeps the division for what it is, since a 36 cap on this would make it 35+ Open with similar scores. For 35+ guys that qualify for it, it would allow a level playing field like @chad_scott and @dirt feel they are losing. I do not see anything in the rule change for this, I am not sure if that is implied or not.

[Klinger]

Great discussion on this topic. I'm curious what the perception of this new rule would be if all age division speeds were kept in place?? That probably gets rid of the safety aspect that has been brought up.

 

If B3, M1 or M2 skiers thought they could get more buoys at 34 than 36, go for it. I think that may be true for some of the middle of the pack people, but not many.

 

I also think it could add a lot of fun at tournaments. You could get a group of friends together from different ages, set a max speed of everyone's choosing, say 30 or something and go have a friendly competition of how short you can go. Who cares what the buoy count would be, just stay at 30 and compare your count at said line length.

 

The other area that I always think about is the poor kid trying to run 36mph 15off. That is a big hurdle to get over. Some never do. Some start at 32-22 , then 34-22, then 36-22, just so they can skip 36-15. I always really hated 36-15, it's a terrible pass.

[RazorRoss3]

@MISkier, yes, I was saying that should stay as it is, and I would support it remaining that way. Allowing for a skier to cut the line before max speed may prove to be a positive but allowing advantage to be gained from speeding up just forces everyone to cap out speed to remain competitive as mentioned by many above.

[skier2788]

@elr sorry didn't realize liking a post was so offensive. Thanks for all you do for the sport. I hope you keep doing it.

 

Is it ski season yet? I think we all could use a few ski rides.

[GK]

OK, there isn't a ton of data from the past few years but here is what I found when skiers moved from M2 to M3 (using initials to save on space). This shows skier, their top score, and their average for the year.

 

D.H. - 2015 - M2 - 4.5 @ 38 off - 105.33 avg

D.H. - 2016 - M3 - 5 @ 39 off - 106.17 avg

 

A.W. - 2015 - M2 - 4 @ 38 off - 106 avg

A.W. - 2016 - M3 - 2 @ 39 off - 104 avg

 

G.F. - 2014 - M2 - 2 @ 38 off - 102.33 avg

G.F. - 1015 - M3 - 2.5 @ 39 off - 104.17 avg

 

T.B. - 2014 - M2 - 3 @ 39 off - 108.83 (typical scores much lower)

T.B. - 2015 - M3 - 3 @ 39 off - 104.33

 

B.S. - 2013 - M2 - 4 @ 38 off - 105.5 avg

B.S. - 2014 - M3 - 4 @ 39 off - 105.8 avg

 

M.P. - 2009 - M2 - 2 @ 38 off - 102.83 avg

M.P. - 2010 - M3 - 4 @ 39 off - 106 avg

 

I'm sure there are more examples out there if I wanted to go back further, but there are a few things I learned...

 

1. Those with higher scores are in OM and typically continue in OM beyond 35 years old and ultimately end up in M3 or MM at some point. That's why you don't see data into 41 off.

2. The average adjustment really is approximately 6 buoys even for those few skiers who are into 38 off 36 mph / 39 off 34 mph. T.B. above was the biggest exception but he had a couple serious outliers at 36. I wanted to include so it didn't appear that I was cherry-picking data.

3. I was surprised out how small the percentage of skiers getting into these ultra short line lengths really is. Just in the last 3 years there were only 5 examples. I started in just M3 Level 9 and had to expand into Level 8 to get a few more data points. You would think there would be more but a lot of the skiers didn't even have M2 scores or they were much lower level skiers back when they were in M2 so the data was less valuable for true shortline conversion.

 

@Chad_Scott, I don't believe that this is THE answer, but I do believe that over time it could have a very good impact on our tournament numbers as it's more skier friendly for the vast majority of waterskiers who might be interested in skiing in a tournament.

 

I'm not against adjusting the rules to exclude "E" events. If keeping Regionals and Nationals at a capped speed will keep people happy then so be it, we'll still get the benefit of the change at the local level. Keep it in the rankings list though because that's important to the lower level skiers.

 

The compromise of capping speeds at current levels is not a horrible option either, however I think it takes some fun out of it. I'm was forced to drop to 34 mph last year when I entered M3. I like skiing 34 and will continue to do so but I also am a little bit excited about giving 36 a go if I'm feeling good for a round or 2. It's not about whether I can get an extra .5 buoy, it's about having fun. In Ohio (where we had 18% membership growth last year) most of our primary tournaments are handicapped with actual competition for every skier who participates. No age levels, no ability levels...true handicapped competition against the entire field of skiers on that day. ZBS will just add another element of FUN to those great events. Those types of handicapped events are THE answer.

[ToddL]

For those clubs who do skill-based overlay competitions, doesn't this just create more of a mess to try to figure out who skied what when looking at the WSTIMS scorebook? Will it be clear how the score and progression occurred? How will we know what speed or line change happened when? Does this impact the Buckeye Buoy Tour scoring spreadsheets?

 

Currently, the scores show total buoys and ending speed/line. So, now I would have to reverse engineer those data points to figure out if the skier how the skier got to 3 @ 22off? Maybe it's not an issue. I haven't really figured this out, yet. But it could be.

[MillerTime38]

I don't see this as a 6 buoy handicap it is just giving skiers credit for opting to ski a faster speed. Admittedly I am a M2 skier who goes into m3 next year so I like the idea that I do not have to slow down and get credit for taking the risk of skiing a faster speed if I choose

 

if skiing at 36 is so easy and it's an automatic free 6 buoys than why not ski at 36? Take advantage of the rule change

[ALPJr]

I may have missed it. Will skiers be able to ski faster than the max speed for their division - i.e. 36 mph in mens 3 and up?

[BRY]

@MillerTime38 "if skiing at 36 is so easy and it's an automatic free 6 buoys than why not ski at 36? Take advantage of the rule change"

 

As @RazorRoss3 said "On the men's side, 36 can be extremely physically demanding." I have found this to be true as I have been going 36 now (after almost 2 decades of 34). I feel it the next morning in my back where at 34 I did not. You M1-M2 kids have no idea, truly no idea, but you will... It's going to beat up a lot of older guys.

 

I find the extra line length trumps the extra speed for which is easier, i.e. the extra 3 feet at -32/36 trumps the slower -35/34 for having time/space to recover from errors. I believe going 36 and longer is easier than 34 and shorter for the -38 and longer crowd (almost all skiers).