andjules

I mentioned this years ago, but the funny thing about Joel is that when he first came on the scene, he was slaloming in a helmet (most over cautious on the tour?) and now wears that boot (most under cautious on the tour?)

Canadian ballers: I'm looking for a used 69" course ski, like a Senate Lithium or Pro — but will consider other high-level skis. Let me know what you have.

I went to an early-season, 35+ tournament called the Ibuprofen Open :p

It's kinda been hinted at, but there is a difference between what is assumed in US vs Europe re: brakes. It's pretty certain that the US tow rating for the Bronco is assuming no brakes, and it is almost certain your trailer has surge brakes. In other words, you'll be fine, especially on a not-too-often, 2 mile journey to the ramp.

how do Brett Wing and Chuck Stearns always get forgotten in these conversations? I don't know enough about Stearns, but Brett Wing was SOOO good at EVERYTHING. Barefoot, show skiing, 3-event, hot-dogging… everything.

Does anyone have a logical or data-based opinion on pros of using this boot in a clip-release vs fixed to a traditional plate? If on a fixed plate and dependent on the liner releasing, is the new boot any less-safe than in previous years (Radar RS-1/Strada/Vapor bindings)? Is there some meaningful advantage to using a Reflex clip instead of depending on the liner release, besides the (I think generally unnecessary, right?) desire to over-tighten the boot lacing (which makes liner-release less safe/reliable)? I'm totally open to a better understanding of why I keep seeing this new boot in reflex-style clip-release hardware, but my first impression is it seems like a great way to make your binding setup more expensive, more finicky (and admittedly, look a little cooler on the starting dock). The marketer in me wonders if it's a strategy to go after serious skiers already invested in Reflex ('hey you can snap our better boot into your existing system')? (Note: if you use the MOB system, I get it, torsional release and all. I'm just asking about normal forward-fall clip-releases like Reflex)

Photographer David Crowder just posted this on Facebook:

@aupatking, you say: I honestly like the idea of 10.5, 10.25, 10, 9.75 but we’d still end up where we are Why do you think we'd still end up where we are? What problem(s) are we trying to solve for? a stuck world record and very rare threats to it? every tournament getting a pile-up around 2 or 3 @ -41 (and resulting time-consuming run-offs)? slalom's spectator problem (too many warm up passes before things get interesting + too many runoffs)? a future possibility that more skiers not-named-Nate may figure out -41 consistently but find -43 near impossible to make much headway what else am I missing?

I don't think @So_I_Ski's only argument is that "no one can run 9.75" and I think the idea that any fiddling with line lengths (adding a 10m loop) is futile because (@Horton) "the end result would be the exact same show we have today" nor that (@keithh2oskier) "if nate goes and runs a 10, then we are right back where we started." There is some nuance here that needs to be teased out. It's true that there is not an urgent issue right now: no one other than Nate is getting through 10.25 (-41) with any regularity, and most tournaments bunch up around 3@10.25, as they have (increasingly) for several years now. Maybe that will continue to be the case — that every tournament bunches up around 3@10.25 (-41) for the next two or three decades, and the sport doesn't 'progress' much. Personally, I'm still excited anytime someone actually turns 3@10.25 and makes a real attempt at 4, but I suspect it won't be as thrilling (at least for me) if that's still considered a great score in, let's say, 2031 or 2041. More to the point: if we ever start seeing skiers run 10.25 more often, we have 24 years of evidence that suggests that what comes next (9.75m/-43) won't be that exciting: it seems incredibly difficult to do anything more than 1 @ 9.75 and we could find ourselves stuck there for eons. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe some ski designer makes it easier… I dunno. To be fair, it's true that other sports' world records can get stuck for a long time and the competition is still (somewhat?) exciting (Track & Field's High Jump has been stuck @ 2.45m since 1993; Pole Vault got stuck for 25 years but last year made a bit of progress). On the other hand, the rule to go from 10.25 to 9.75m is arbitrary (we could change it if we all agreed!) and if skiers ever start running 10.25 with any regularity, we may regret having decided that 9.75m is the best, next line length. Adding a 10m line length would improve the chances that we might start seeing skiers-not-named-Nate turn 2 or 3 or even 4 ball @ 10m over the next couple of decades. I could be totally wrong, of course: maybe every few years someone adds a 1/4 ball to the record @9.75m in the coming years. But over the last 24 years, threats to the world record have been few-and-far between, compared to 1980-1997 when the world record was being threatened regularly… a way-more-fun era for the sport, in my books.

It's been a long time coming, but it looks like Jacinta Carroll finally started the women's 200' club in jumping. Reminder: Yes, that's on a 5.5' ramp and max speed of 33.5mph (thanks @jjackkrash) https://www.instagram.com/p/CVrD-BIvcFb/?utm_medium=copy_link

@So_I_Ski no you're not the first person to bring it up, although we've had more discussion about adding a 10m line, not a 10.5m one. As @RazorRoss3 points out, that would make events even less spectator-friendly/boring, unless we also make skiers start at 12m or even 11.25 at elite events. Personally, I think 10m would make watching Nate Smith more interesting, as well as a future generation of skiers who (hopefully) start figuring out 10.25 with more consistency. I think it would make the next few decades more interesting. Put it another way: I've noticed, as a spectator, it's really fun to watch someone run 10.25. So far it hasn't been much fun to watch them barely squeak around 1 @ 9.75. I'm not sure how many times someone has gotten outside of 2 @ 9.75 in the last 24 years since Jeff Rodgers first ran 10.25, but it hasn't been many.

Is your ski brand new? I'll be the reckless contrarian: yes, it's a gamble (no matter which route), but I've flown internationally a number of times, never more than pipe insulation + padded ski bag + cardboard fin guard inside a (cheap, soft) downhill ski bag, never had an issue. The idea of spending several hundred on buying a sport tube and/or shipping it separately (every time you travel?) seems like very expensive and still-unreliable insurance on something that simply isn't that big a risk. Then again, I don't buy $2500+ skis brand new, and generally wouldn't mind that much if my ski broke and it gave me an excuse to upgrade :wink:

Fix It Again, Tony

A couple of thoughts: - it's true that free-skiing lacks the course's intensity but it's also a great opportunity to build body awareness, and deliberately practice sequences of movements, etc. While more time in the course would be great, remember that it's also true that people who only ski buoys can really struggle to practice new habits and make them consistent. The course has a tendency to consume all your attention on the next ball instead of being aware and deliberate with all the subtle actions you're performing. Not having course access 100% of the time can be as much a blessing as a curse. Sometimes I really miss having the opportunity to free ski. - one thing I see sometimes with skiers about your level and who — like you — were freeskiers trying to become course skiers, is a free-skiing tendency to flat-glide after the wakes instead of a clear and decisive edge-change/preturn. You may want to try focusing on that: changing to your inside-edge-while-still-heading outbound, after the wakes. Maybe that's what's going on, maybe not… easy to diagnose with video and watching the spray coming out from your ski, and comparing it to videos online of great skiers' passes (search YouTube for "Terry Winter 1/4 speed" or "Seth Stisher 32mph" or "Regina Jacquess slow motion"). - 'turning into slack' isn't exactly a skill you want to spend time mastering, but just from your description it sounds like you're alright coming into the turn but ending it (especially when the rope isn't tight) too far back. That suggests you're doing something towards the end of the turn: maybe letting your shoulders come forward/hips back (something I struggle with), maybe trying to fisish with your shoulders instead of your knees or center-of-mass (something I also struggle with). So… even if it feels slow, try to let the ski finish the turn on its own, on your offside (2-4-6), patiently waiting for the ski to come under the line. Can't be sure about any of this without seeing video, but a few things to consider and maybe some of it resonates.

Two thoughts: it's really tough to be a GOAT in overall, if your requirement is being head-and-shoulders dominant over a long period. Regina & Patrice have each won overall @ worlds 5 times, but over their career they always had stiff competition and on any given weekend, I don't think you'd expect them to win overall the way you'd expect Regina, Nate or Andy to win slalom. Liz Allan was the only skier to ever have a grand slam at Worlds: in 1969, she won slalom, tricks, jump and (obviously) overall.

@Drago @Bruce_Butterfield it's a "2nd try" for those athletes only and most view that as not fair That argument makes theoretical sense, but in practice, I've never heard a pro skier even hint at it. What I do hear them say is how hard it is to run -39 off the dock, especially if its been an hour since they last skied. (not arguing it should somehow count in the books; but don't think it needs to be robbed of its pride)

I'll be honest, I haven't skied behind either. But, going from what I remember reading/hearing about: both are likely to have worse bumps at -22 off than a 2003 TSI neither is likely to have a particularly soft wake - I don't think either had any of the shaping tricks that would lead to something soft by modern standards. I'm pretty sure the Malibu Skier was the narrower of the two which is likely to result in it being marginally harder. As for flatter, I can't guess/recall. at 30 years old and wood-floor/wood-stringer construction, I'd lean heavily in the direction of whichever was stored and maintained best/spent the least time in the elements (also likely to have the best upholstery). The cost of fixing any of those things would change the economics significantly. At their peak, American Skiers were probably better built than that era of Malibu, but by 1991, I'm not as sure. Is the Volante open-bow? $8k is 60% more expensive than $5k, so unless it was much better maintained/cared for, that's quite a premium. On the other hand, at least in my region, open-bow boats always fetch a serious premium — families want 'em.

So we know the rules, and that run-offs don't count towards official scores. We also know there's an informal thing called the 41 off club. I find myself amused at the idea of a bunch of dudes on the internet (myself included) debating the entry requirements for the 41 off club. There are 12 guys who can decide if TGas and Mechler are in the 41 off club. We aren't them. Can you imagine yourself being at a lake with Mechler and TGas and throwing shade on their 41s, to their face? I know I wouldn't.

@Jordan are you sure he's on a 67"? I believe he tried a 67" in the spring but was back to 66" by early summer. Did he go back up?

Only one skier in Series 4 made it through -39 Only one skier in Series 3 made it through -39 Includes some big names. Worlds' isn't easy.

@Mastercrafter I notice the way you articulate it is essentially "too fast too early" and it's probably partly true (too fast for you at your current skill level), but the way we think about it matters, so I'd change "'I'm going too fast and I launch over" the wakes to "I'm going too fast so I back off/flatten off and launch over the wakes". The point is: you don't go airborne because you're going too fast (the best skiers go faster without going airborne). You go airborne because you flattened out… and you flattened out because you weren't comfortable with the speed (possibly with good reason — the most likely reason is that your stack isn't strong enough to hit the wakes, on edge, at high speed, with confidence). The good news, is you're still on the right track with the solution: you want to build your lean/speed more progressively, which will result in the ski being on a sharper edge when it hits the wake. I realize @Horton may see this as antiquated, but I'm guessing his comment above is more applicable at short line lengths, and the concept is still pretty valid for where you're at.

TOP 5 MEN Nate Will (will he win? maybe! but is he ever not in the top 5? rarely.) T-Gas (will he win? probably not; but is he ever not in the top 5? never!) either: Fred + 1 wildcard or 2 wildcards (Descuns, Detrick, Caldwell, Pigozzi, Mechler, Travers, McCormick, Hazelwood, Charlie Ross, either Dailland, Vaughn, Sedlmajer, Stadlbaur, etc., etc., etc.) TOP 5 WOMEN more predictable, but no less exciting: Regina Jamie ("the race for 2nd") Whitney ("the race for 2nd") Manon ("the race for 2nd") +1 wildcard ("the race for 5th")

@Horton just noting that your likely top 20 is 31 names long ;-) it's also missing 3rd seed Sasha Descuns; whereas I think Geels and Marenzi have never seen -41? (hadn't heard of them, so I looked them up)

If you're about to post about some larger boat you think is great, but you've never skied behind a '99-04 Sunsetter LXi, I'm not sure your opinion counts. Yes, in most boat categories, SN and Mastercraft come out on top. But not his one. And yes, I've skied a SN 206, a (meh) MC X14/214 and (augh) a Sport Nautique. None are in the Sunsetter LXi's league. I wished they'd kept making them, so you didn't have to buy (at best) a 17 year old boat.

One oddity watching the slalom finals: maybe it's just me, but Jamie Bull's and Adam Caldwell's 2nd place finishes felt more exciting to me than Whitney's and Nate's wins (but all due respect to the winners). Of course, "close" only counts in horseshoes, but both Jamie and Adam were inches from getting their skis outside the next ball, instead of ending on an S-turn. Jamie was the only woman who got a real look at ball 3 at -41; and Adam got a look at 5 at -41, his first time on a pro podium… how old is he again?