Does Regionals Requirement & Location impact Nationals Participation?

[Horton]

The question is if reimagining the Regionals would positively impact Nationals attendance.  

This year a skier who lives in Orlando would have had to travel 800+ miles to Regionals in Paducah. A skier who lives in Seattle would have had to travel 1100+ miles to Regionals in Newberry.  If this skier was to attend Nationals it would very likely require 2 fly away trips.

At a time when we have declining participation, I cannot understand why we are not talking about the relationship between Regionals & Nationals.

If you have read my previous posts on this subject you may recall that I advocate for State Championships or some other more local qualifying event to replace Regionals. The regions are simply too big for one regionals. Personally, I like Regionals for what it is but if it is in Colorado and Nationals is in West Palm that is 2 fly away trips and that is ridiculous.

[Spencer_Shultz]

The voice of reason. 

[Horton]

@Spencer_Shultz

let's not get carried away. I'm just here to ask questions and poke the bear a little bit.

[Kelvin]

What if attending 1 regional tournament allowed you entry into nationals for 2 or 3 years?  I've heard arguments against it that regional participation would decline, but would it really?  In @Horton example, I would assume many of the florida skiers didn't travel to KY anyway.

[ETskier]

Ok, I was just about to redo the whole system. Maybe another day. For these days, going to the regionals is my pinnacle. If they are are 4 to 5 hrs away from me in central FL, I'll go. If nationals happen to be 5 or 6 hrs away and I qualify, I might go. If somehow podiumed, it would be like the preacher in the thunderstorm in Caddy Shack.

[Horton]

@Kelvin as a parent I do see the value of Regionals. For a lot of kids, it is a highlight of the season.  Otherwise, I would be tempted to say "do away with it altogether".  I do want to preserve some of the goodness that is regionals but I think we need to address the time and cost to attend an event that is too far away for most to drive to. That brings me to the idea of State title or something similar. Instead of 5 regional tournaments, there could be 10 or 20 so almost no one would be required to travel 500 miles. California and Florida would have State titles but maybe Colorado and Utah would have a combined event. 

Our current format was designed at a very different time economically and socially. 

When we move qualifiers closer to the skiers we can get rid of the rule that lets Open skiers skip nationals qualifying.  That rule is another artifact from decades ago.

@ETskier if the second biggest event of the year ( behind Nationals ) was within driving distance would you want to go every year?

[ETskier]

Yes, when I'm healthy.  It's a great time to revisit with old friends as well. Like this year I would have gone to FL state, but I wasn't in shape yet after major surgery for either. 

[GaryJanzig]

If I am able to make the trip I will go to Regionals even if I am not qualified for nationals. 
 

[Deanoski]

hear is a thought if you are a master snow  ski racer .

And you want to go to regionals or nationals  you just sign up no pre-qualification. You sign up a go

it does matter if you are slow and finish 80 th.  You still get to go and enjoy the event.

waterskiing you have to be top dog to even go to regionals  it make no sense to me.

time to open the events to anyone that wants to go. Imo

my 2 cents  

 

 

[LeonL]

@Kelvin offers a good solution. Attend regionals every 2 years and maintain eligibility to enter Nationals.  @Deanoski offers a solution to avoid low attendance at regionals,  let everyone in. @Kelvin is correct, many FL skiers did not attend Regionals in Paducah (yet several of them skied Nationals??)  As I mentioned in another thread, there are 15 M8 SR skiers listed on the ranking list in slalom, only 1 showed up at Paducah.

Another point.  Attendance was low at Paducah.  A reason given was the location of Nationals.  Too far to travel, thus no desire to ski Regionals.  Mixed priorities.

 

[Wish]

Not a solution for the big picture but I did ski a Regionals outside of mine to punch a ticket to Nationals. Had to get approval from both Regional directors and was not allowed a podium spot but since it was in the state all my family lived in, it was a no brainer with my own regionals being 12+ hrs away. 
 

Always like the idea of States as the ticket to Nationals. If a state has low attendance, have a tristate championship. 

[JackQ]

An interesting idea is that Nationals requirement be either Regionals or State tournament.   Obviously would have decreased attendance at Regionals and increased attendance States.   Another change should be changing the Top 5 at Regionals getting qualification to attend Nationals.  I think having the number of “qualifiers” dependent on the number in the division that are skiing, IE if there is 25 in the division maybe more than top 5, if 5in the division only the top 2, etc.  This is similar to the World’s where the number of skiers going to the finals, is dependent on the number of skiers in the preliminaries. This would prevent someone entering Slalom event  on their trick ski running a buoy and qualifying for the Nationals. 

[Horton]

@JackQ I think it should be an either/or. Meaning a Regionals or a States. Think if it as more regionals and all closer to home.

As for the podium from Regionals as a qualifier for Nationals I think that should just go away. We should set the ranking list standard wherever it needs to be to get the right number of skiers to Nationals.  I wonder how many skiers on the podium at any regionals are not already qualified for nationals. I speculate it is a very small percentage. 

[sunperch]

@Horton  I would leave the podium as qualifiers for Nationals.  With National's numbers down, what is the harm in letting the small percentage of LCQs getting their chance??  Call it a perk of actually attending Regionals.  It might be a way for a unqualified family member join the fun and be able to ski at Nationals.  It would be an easy way to increase participation.

[JackQ]

@Horton I meant either Regionals or States would be sufficient for National's but would not preclude anyone who wanted to attend both.  

[Booze]

I've always considered Regionals a 'mini Nationals', so placed a fair amount of value or priority to it.  I could count on the best skiers in the region to show up.  I would not want it's relevance diminished.

I do totally understand the traveling issue though.  Perhaps some coordination in planning Regionals and Nationals locations to minimize distances?   Is that a pipe dream?

 

[NoahVieke]

On 9/17/2024 at 7:23 PM, Horton said:

When we move qualifiers closer to the skiers we can get rid of the rule that lets Open skiers skip nationals qualifying.  That rule is another artifact from decades ago.

You want to require open skiers to attend local tournaments to be able to attend nationals? Or am I misreading this?

[buechsr]

1 hour ago, Booze said:

I've always considered Regionals a 'mini Nationals', so placed a fair amount of value or priority to it.  I could count on the best skiers in the region to show up.  I would not want it's relevance diminished.

I do totally understand the traveling issue though.  Perhaps some coordination in planning Regionals and Nationals locations to minimize distances?   Is that a pipe dream?

 

Enough bids to host regionals to allow a choice might be the pipe dream

[Horton]

@NoahVieke

Yes, I think Open rated skiers should have to ski under the same rules as the rest of us.  Why not? If there is a conflict with a Pro event I can see the problem. As it is, few or no elite skiers go to Nationals so what is the point of letting open rated skiers ski Regionals? 

[NoahVieke]

51 minutes ago, Horton said:

 

@NoahVieke

Yes, I think Open rated skiers should have to ski under the same rules as the rest of us.  Why not? If there is a conflict with a Pro event I can see the problem. As it is, few or no elite skiers go to Nationals so what is the point of letting open rated skiers ski Regionals? 

 

I do believe if you make that a requirement you would have little to no open skiers at nationals. This year was disappointing as it was.  
 

Im In the opposite camp… stop requiring regionals participation for the top (5? 10?) skiers in a division. open up those spots and possible podium positions for others to try and qualify for nationals.   I’d be more than happy to still pay the entry to the regionals site so they don’t lose money but there is no way on this earth I will travel to Kentucky to then to California to compete in a sudden death tournament.  
 

I applaud people like the Burdick’s who travel with a basketball teams worth of gear and people and commit to the long weekend and then the better part of a week for nationals because the schedule is so spread out.  
 

Based on how unpopular the masters qualifying series is where athletes qualify for an event they can actually make money at… I think you’ve (potentially) found an excellent recipe for not having open skiers attend nationals… 

 

maybe I’m wrong.  Maybe they would be more than happy to participate… I know Nate has tried to ski regionals when he can.  Not sure how many others do this though.  

[Horton]

@NoahVieke

We're coming at this from different directions but I'm not really sure we disagree. All I'm saying is in the case of open skiers, I don't know why they get special privileges.

On the subject of you traveling from South Florida to Kentucky and then to California, you and I are 10,000% aligned. 

The whole system needs to be reevaluated

[NoahVieke]

Agree on reevaluating the system. 

 

I don’t mind that pro skiers don’t have to attend regionals.  When I was younger it was exciting getting to see them ski up close and in person.  A pro skier already travels to so many more tournaments (generally) than I would at a much higher expense to get to those events.  If they are willing to pay the entry and travel to nationals, great! The young skiers will have something to watch that I would hope excites them like it did me when I was in that position.  

[Jody_Seal]

Wait! the nationals are a "amateur" event the regionals are a 'amateur" event. This is the exact reason the rule there shall be no distinction between amateur and professional needs to go away. I too think that Open divisions should follow the same requirements as all the other divisions. as well as if skier a wants to ski on a usa team that skier needs to participate at nationals. 

Edited yesterday at 09:13 AM by Jody_Seal