100-cone slalom course

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 1:05 pm

We have had the discussion of clean runs or not for the 100 cone discipline and I think it was clear that that was not the way to go. Doing a clean run or not for 100 cones is more luck than skill. At least if you are pumping the s#it out of your board. And that is what we want to do, no? Otherwise this discipline will be lame. I'm ok with Wes though that it would be nice to have an eye on the fastest clean runs as well. And even having a price for this as well.

If the cone fobics are numerous we could always add a rule of maximum cones allowed to hit.

Maybe we should add to the rules also what official results means. In my view it is an official competition with the 100-cone discipline annonced. 2 runs for each racer. Best time counts (including cone penalty of course).

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 12:46 pm

These are the current proposed rules...

100 cone rules ver 1.2
-------------------------------------------
1. 100 straight "full sized" cones, timed from the middle of first cone to the middle of the last cone.
2. Cone penalty 0.1 sek for each "cone hit".

- "Full sized" = Minimum base diameter 12,5 cm / 5" and minimum hight 20,5 cm / 8".
- "Cone hit" = Fallen cone or outside base circle.
-------------------------------------------

Blaze into a 100 cone straight course with whatever start you like, on any hill, with any slope, with any surface, with any wind, with any cone spacing in any temperature and adjust your time with penalties. The smallest adjusted time wins. Do it with your friends and you have an unofficial time. Do it at a sanctioned event, you might just have a world record.

[ This Message was edited by: Hans Koraeus on 2003-07-28 07:09 ]

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 8:40 pm

As I said last winter, I don't understand the problem with a "clean run 100-cone record." Ok, Luca has a 100-cone adjusted record of 20 seconds. If someone wants to run that, great.

But a 100-cone CLEAN RUN RECORD would stand on its own. If the best CLEAN RUN is 23 seconds or 24 seconds, then that's the CLEAN RUN record.

Earlier this year, there was some controversey regarding "raw times." Some skaters were touting their "raw times" as an indication of slalom prowess. Whether that is legitimate or not is another discussion. In terms, though, of the 100-cone challenge, there would be no need for discussion: raw time and adjusted time would be synonomous. Also, by making the clean run the standard, there would be no argument regarding "appropriate" penalties: .10th of a second? 2/10th? 10 cones max without penalty? Or as someone facetiously suggested, hit 100 cones in 10 seconds, take a 1/10th penalty per cone and post a 20 second adjusted time.

Whadda 'ya gonna do?

Michael Stride · Post by **Michael Stride** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 7:42 pm

I'm sure that to get a true "world record" some form of rules whould need to be set. I quite like the idea of the harshness of "no cones or your out". But second choice would need to have a limit of, say 3 cones, with a time penalty?
As for the chance that timing of events would leave contenders having only 2 runs, my own view is that for a true world record to be set it would need to be limited to 2, or certainly under 5 competitors going for the record, under tight scrutinization. For a cyber style timing thats a different matter, and less closely regulated.
In conclusion, I'd favour this: 100 cones, unlimited push, any spacing so long as it was dead straight, any hill, and no cone hits. Second choice, 3 cones max, with time penalty of one tenth?
Id also suggest we decide where timing beams should be, and I reckon that should be at first and last cone.
Does anyone know what the current "rules" are??? If there are any then stick with those maybe?

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 7:12 pm

When we tried to run 100 cones clean, that is without hitting one single cone- as in zilch, zero, none- our times were up to 10% slower.
Given the unlimited amount of runs it is possible to score a good time on a clean run. Eventually.

Given the constrains of the official slalom competition where official records are set an exercises for cleanness might just turn a 100 cone challenge in 2 runs into a joke.

To each his own. At our racetrack 23 sec clean would have been -and I'm sure is- no problem.

Michael Stride · Post by **Michael Stride** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 11:57 am

Cone spacing and hills vary, but when us UK guys tried 100 cones the rule was, no cone hits, none, not at all...zilch, zero. cleans runs only count.

Hitting the last cone at Brands on a 100 cone run is a bummer. I know.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Sun Jul 20, 2003 6:36 am

We ran 100 cones at 6ft at the RFK racetrack in Washington, DC. The surface is ideal. 100A wheels would be useful there. 92As back/front were used without a slide.
The place is perfect for outlaw races/events, but it’s not a good 100-cone place. About ½ the Trocadero slope with flat and uphill sections toward the end. We had a nice tail breeze that helped quite a bit.

I used GS wheels and got into 19s but hit too many cones. 21.2 with 3 cones was the best attempt. Hard wheels are about 1 second faster. If that hill was a bit steeper, 18s would have been possible. We will train.

I’ll try to have videos/pictures in the future.

Vlad.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Tue Jun 24, 2003 7:49 pm

I’m going to try 4 feet gates. Plankk-R is making me a board for that. Sweeney-Matsukevich model. One foot axle-to-axle.

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Tue Jun 24, 2003 11:49 am

Rumours say that Luca is convinced that one can do much better than his record. He was too tired after 70 cones and after a full day of skating he couldn't do his best. Hold on to your hats! He thinks he can shave off another 1-2 seconds of that old record! So if someone wants to have a go at that world record you better speed up before he gives it a second shot.

By the way he wasn't happy about the new rule we "inofficially" have decided upon about free cone spacing. He thinks it should be 1.70, period. But I haven't personally spoken to him about this. And I'm sure I could convince him of the reason why it is a good idea with free cone spacing.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Tue Jun 24, 2003 12:16 am

A 100-cone "world record" attempt is to be held in Maryland during the first Summer Outlaw series race next weekend.

Adam Trahan · Post by **Adam Trahan** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 3:52 am

I was watching old (10-15 year old) video of Keith Hollien and Myself. I came across a 100 cone 6'center to center on a 7 deg. slope. the times were under 25 seconds. Tight-fast-down-hill courses are raceable when you are good.

[ This Message was edited by: Mark McCree on 2003-01-27 18:00 ]

--------------------

I just read this post by Mark McCree. By any account, this claim is close to the top recorded timed runs by the fastest Europeans in the middle of their last wave of interest...

--------------------

On 2002-11-23 12:22, Jani Soderhall wrote:
I finally located the complete results of the 100 cone World Record breaking at Verrieres Open, France 1995.

World record holders:
Men: Luca Giammarco, Italy 20.56
Women: Yelena Sinadolova, Russia 23.55
Juniors: Alexey Alekseyev, Russia 33.98

These times are including time penalties (0.1 per cone).

Judging from the results it is difficult to make a perfectly clean run on a 100 cone course. Actually the only one who did in the contest was myself in my second attempt and my time was 2 seconds behind Luca's.

Luca hit 4 cones in his best run, 2 in his second attempt. John you hit 6. I hit 2 in my best run.

When the next official world record attempt shows on TV it would be great if the new record man does it clean, but if others in their attempts hits cones it'll just add to the excitement. If everybody makes clear runs it might actually look too easy.

Chris Eggers · Post by **Chris Eggers** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:49 pm

I just heard we may have a side event of a 100 cone course at Grueningen for whoever still has power to go for it after the race, so show up and lets try.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 3:49 am

Well, now I got a hundred cones.
And, no, you can't have any.
Behave yourself, though, and maybe I'll let you ride around mine!

Simon Levene · Post by **Simon Levene** » Fri Jan 03, 2003 5:52 pm

So did you break the record Mike?

I guess not!

Simon Levene · Post by **Simon Levene** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:21 am

You go for it Mike!

Mike Maysey · Post by **Mike Maysey** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 2:04 am

I'm doing this thing on New Years Day and I'm going to break the "record."

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:10 pm

John, about problems with a tapeswitch on the first cone I can only speak for myself (not very experienced slalom skater).

I guess if you use a tapeswitch that is too high it would be annoying. The only tapeswitches I have experience of is Jani's (that has been used on many european competitions for as long as I can remember). Those are very flat and he puts silver tape over them to attach them to the ground. I have never had any problems with them and I've never heard anyone complain either.

Furthermore the first cone (and the last) you normally don't take with a full turn anyway which should minimize the problem.

But if using tapeswitches inside the course for 50 and 75 cone timing for example then it would increase the risk of annoyance. But here I don't have any experiance. I can't remember any slalom competition using "intermediate timing" (I don't know the english word for it). I for my self like the idea very much and for 100 cones it would be very interesting since the course is long enough.

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Mon Dec 16, 2002 5:10 am

Well center to center would be more accurate- I did not notice where the tapes were at the 95 race. Do you ever have a problem with people in a turn while riding on a tapeswitch?

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Sun Dec 15, 2002 1:41 am

The fact that the start is at the first cone and finishes at the last cone (we could assume at the edge of the cone not the center of the cone) and that the start is open...makes the start a non issue.

John, I'm afraid to say that if you assume start and finish at the edge of the cone it is an issue. I don't know how Sweeney did with his record but I'm sure we measured from the center of the cones in Paris -95 (for Gianmarco's record).

[ This Message was edited by: Hans Koraeus on 2002-12-14 19:47 ]

David Hackett · Post by **David Hackett** » Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:16 am

YOU WANT FREEDOM OF CONE SPACING?

HERE YOU GO-

"THE DEATHBOX EXPRESSION SESSION II - PARK PARTY"
and PARK SLALOM EVENT!

Sponsored by:

Deathbox skateboards, Osiris Shoes, Gravity Boarding Company,
and RedBull

During the January ASR tradeshow - Jan, 24th, 2003 from 7PM - 12

Complete, with the f irst ever PARK SLALOM EVENT!

Imagine, the first 60 invitees to the party, pay a $20.00
entry fee to race best of two timed runs on a course through
out the free/streetstyle area of the SkateLab indoor park!
Sign Up will be at the event. Directions t o the park, and other info can be
found at: http://www.skatelab.com (California Park)

This course will be fast, and will include between 15 and 25
cones, some of which will be mounted on vertical surfaces!!!

This will be a unique event - merging sla lom (The Soul of Skateboarding) with Street and Vert riding talent to determine the victor!

You will
need a banked slalom / vert board to be competitive in this event.

The event will pay to 3rd place and award trophies, ribbons, medals
or plaques to 10th.

There will also be either a live band, DJ, Food and Beverages, and
plenty of bowl riding and free skating and hanging out going on.

Be there, with your RACE FACE ON!!!

HACKETT - BLACK LEATHER RACING

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 4:57 pm

Michael,

it is always inner hole to inner hole around here. On the other hand, DC's longboard class requires 30 inches between the axles.

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Mon Dec 09, 2002 5:04 am

IMHO the great thing about the 100 cone event is that there are no set standards except we can expect to use "the standard" cone size. So there is really little bickering over hill- surface, wind conditions- whatever.

The fact that the start is at the first cone and finishes at the last cone (we could assume at the edge of the cone not the center of the cone) and that the start is open...makes the start a non issue. The 100 cone length makes the cone spacing a near non issue- all I think we could expect is that the cone spacing is consistent from cone to cone.

So part of the record involves finding an ideal place to do it- getting a good skater in great shape on good gear....or any combination of 2 the above.

This event encourages a good pump and stamina and is grueling training for all slalomers who want a shot at skaters they may have never met. It also encourages people to BUY 100 cones so you would have enough for 2 dual 50 cone courses or certainly anough to double up your cones for a single course of 50 on a windy day....(btw Turnerdownhill.com just reduced the prices of the cones.... Christmas is coming....so ask for those cones in your stockings).

It also encourages all skaters to find a good area for 100 cones which would mean a good pitch, good surface, and a long course- which means you will have probably found a good place to hold a contest if you find a place you could try to run 100 cones withou getting kicked out.

Just try it for kicks....not something I would reccomend practicing much, but you've got to do it once.

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Sun Dec 08, 2002 5:44 am

The advantage with freeform cone spacing is that you can set it to fit the slope you are using. Since 100 cones is a long way it's hard to get a perfect slope (even though I agree that we don't know what the perfect slope is yet). If steep you might want to set longer spacing. If flat you might want tighter spacing. This to simplify for the racers to get a good rythm through the whole course. But then again. What is a good rythm? Maybe fast in the beginning and slower towards the end. Who knows. And we shouldn't forget that there is not an exact cone spacing for a particular racer anyway. The skater is flexible within a certain margin. From where it is so fast the he will only wiggle as fast as he can through the cones to where it is so slow that he will pump his maximum to keep his max speed. Going over your speed limit you will start hitting cones and probably not even make it. Going under your speed limit you will loose time.

I remember the course in Paris -95. The first 1/3 of the course was steep and way to fast for any normal skater (like myself). The last 2/3 was almost flat and you could choose the speed yourself. In this case I would have liked to have longer cone spacing in the first 1/3 compared to the last 2/3. And then the question arises. Would this have been a disadvantage for the better skaters? Personally I don't think so. They would just have increased their speed to have their max limit with the longer cone distance anyway. I guess what I'm trying to say that maybe the course setting is not that delicat after all. In the end you can just go as fast as you can. And if you are the fastest you will have the fastest time as long as the course are within the skaters max/min speed margins.

Chris Chaput · Post by **Chris Chaput** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 6:33 pm

Hans, I'm glad that you see my point about the cone size. I had proposed a 5" minimum diameter and think that an 8" minimum height could work. That's 12.7cm and 20.32cm respectively.

The upside to having freeform cone spacings is that a lot of R&D could take place before any standard is decided upon. We've all seen what happens when one person imposes his course style on a group of racers who would never have set a course that way. It sucks. If standards are put in place after a large number of riders have tried (and liked) them, there's a better chance that the resulting course would have a more universal appeal than if someone just said "my race, my course".

The downside to having a freeform statndard is that at some point in time, a world record event will be held and there won't be time for everyone to set "his" course and the slope and surface won't be "his" either.

For now, freeform is okay with me. Let's see where it takes us. I think that having a course on a relatively fast hill and that allows for an unlimited push will tend to favor a guy like John Gilmour. It's about as fast as we're going to see 100 cones run. Aim high. Even if you fall short of being as fast as Gilmour, it's probably going to be faster than you would have done on your own.

As a matter of fact, Gilmour has been telling me how fat and out of shape he is lately. I agree. If we're going to have a non-freeform standard, let's have John choose it, John run it, and John set the course record. Then we have someone to blame for setting a type of course that caters to his style and there will be no speculation. Then there's only the issue of trying to beat him at his own game. Now THAT'S a challenge.

How about it John? Are you a willing fall guy? What's the game? What is the mark?

The plot thickens...

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 5:08 am

Chris, that's the best I've seen so far. I think we are closing in on the official rules here.

1. 100 straight full sized cones, timed from first to last.
2. A cone penalty (and possible cap for a DQ)

Blaze into a 100 cone straight course with whatever start you like, on any hill, with any slope, with any surface, with any wind, with any cone spacing in any teperature and adjust your time with penalties. The smallest adjusted time wins. Do it with your friends and you have an unofficial time. Do it at a sanctioned event, you might just have a world record.

You do have a point about the cone size. That is actually an issue running different course setups. For me the standard cone size is approximately the one we see on the fixed forum picture on the top of all pages. A turner cone I believe. That one is 13,2 cm in diameter. I don't know how much that differs from other similar cone types. I guess what we need is a minimum cone diameter. Actually the height could be a thing to consider as well. For example imagine a cone with correct diameter but only an inch high. So we need a minimum hight as well. Same thing again. The turner cone is 22,7 cm high. I don't know how much that differs from other similar cone types.

So here we go again. 100 cone rules ver 1.1
-------------------------------------------
1. 100 straight "full sized" cones, timed from the middle of first cone to the middle of the last cone.
2. Cone penalty 0.1 sek for each "cone hit".

- "Full sized" = Minimum base diameter 12,5 cm and minimum hight 22 cm.
- "Cone hit" = Fallen cone or outside base circle.
-------------------------------------------

Blaze into a 100 cone straight course with whatever start you like, on any hill, with any slope, with any surface, with any wind, with any cone spacing in any temperature and adjust your time with penalties. The smallest adjusted time wins. Do it with your friends and you have an unofficial time. Do it at a sanctioned event, you might just have a world record.

What about that?

Michael Dong · Post by **Michael Dong** » Sat Dec 07, 2002 2:53 am

Vlad,

Are those actual axle-to-axle wheelbases or inner hole to inner hole measurements?

thanks,

Michael

David Eye · Post by **David Eye** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:32 pm

Chris; yup, no two courses will ever be the exactly the same, but I do not see that as a problem. Track and Field events have a similar challenge to standardize courses, but they do just fine
I really like the idea of these "canned course" challenges like Cyber slalom cup, 100
cone-r, etc. The head- to head races will always dominate, but its good for guys who live in out the "boon-ies" to be able to race themselves on these and compare to others, elsewhere.

Claude Regnier · Post by **Claude Regnier** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:26 pm

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:18 pm

I used 16.5 and 18-inch wheelbases depending on the slope. I’d say 19 is the logical max unless the course is flat.
Snow is everywhere. We’ll try again next week.

Chris Chaput · Post by **Chris Chaput** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:03 pm

Michael, That's a pretty long wheelbase for "quick" pumping.

David, That reminds me, altitude and humidity will effect the density of the air. Add that to our list of uncontrollable factors and arbitrary standards.

David Eye · Post by **David Eye** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 5:51 pm

If weather co-operates, I'll set a 100 cone course at the B. W. Pickett Equine Center parking lot sunday morning here in Fort Collins, CO.
We typically set a 60-70 cone monster course
for our local races that has a fast dog-leg
turn, dividing the course into two sections.
For 100 cones, we can stick to a straight course with a continual slight down grade. Typically, by mid-day we have a slight tail-wind here.
Any Colorado / front rangers lurking about
that are interested email me at home ;
David.Eye@attbi.com

Michael Dong · Post by **Michael Dong** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 9:39 am

I'm working my way up to 100 cones. 41 cones, 6 ft centers, perfectly flat, rough textured concrete surface, 38 degree temp, 25 ft push start, 11.99 sec (3.42 cones/sec). 4 cones/sec on the flat will be my goal for now.

What wheelbases (axle-to-axle) are working for you 100 coners? Mine is 22 3/4" right now and I think maybe shortening this a bit would go along way to help pumping at the start

Chris Chaput · Post by **Chris Chaput** » Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:46 am

That "cool" picture of me is from the Mollica clan at the SF GS.

Guiness is not the only "world record" game in town. In track and field and other sports there are "Olympic" records and "World" records, etc. Guiness tends to cover some bizarre records that aren't found in organized sports. "World" records are commonly accepted because the governing body de jour is respected enough to pass muster. Harry Egger holds the world speed skiing record at 154mph. Who is the sanctioning body? Do you know? Do you care? Probably not. Was the "100 cone" world slalom record set with a cone penalty in place? Few will know. Fewer will care. Whether or not the the 100 cone course was navigated perfectly, navigated with nudges that didn't count against the rider or navigated with cone penalties is largely immaterial. The only thing that really counts is that some allegedly "official" organization ran an event and an outcome was acheived. The title is awarded to the individual(s) who won with whatever rules were in place at the time. Period. After that, if someone wants to start a campaign to discredit the winners because his or her vision of what the race "should" have been about, it will fall on deaf ears. To the victor the spoils.

When you think about it, a 100 cone course that triggers timers which are positioned at the first and last cone isn't really "100 cones". Sure you can count 100 cones on the ground but there are only 99 spacings. In other words (and technically speaking), the 100 cone course isn't a 100 cone course. Most all courses have a finish line that is positioned at least as far away from the last cone as an average cone spacing. Combine that with a generous distance between the starting line and the first cone and you quickly realize the number of cones almost NEVER reflects a consistently defined course length. Add to that the various methods of entering the course (ramps, gates, unlimited, limited, push counts) and you quickly begin to realize that the "standard" is arbitrary and usually becomes whatever is popular. I have no problem whatsoever in calling this a "100 cone" course. Hitting one of the ONE HUNDRED cones doesn't suddenly make it a "99 cone course".

I'm really curious as to why no one responded to my question about the size of the cone's base for the 100 cone race. I think that it really needs to be stipulated in the rules. Just about everyone would whine if the fastest recorded time ever was done on a course set with thimble sized cones. It's one of the few things that can and does allow for much faster times.

What's very, very interesting about this whole debate is that there seems to be no agreement on what pitch or spacings will yield the best possible times. That means that no one really knows who (if anyone) is benefitting from a course setting of his own choosing. It seems as if we're all hung up on choosing a standard when we still don't even know what is optimal.

It seems to me that the best thing to do for now is to run it "freeform" until the best of the best have competed on various courses and have come to some unanimus conclusions. If racer X sets 100 full sized cones six feet apart on a straight line down a gentle slope and gets a time of 24 seconds, we'll never know how much that slope/wind/surface/temperature was a factor when comparing Gilmour's time of 23 seconds on a "similar" course. If Gilmour beats Racer X on one course, and Racer X beats Gilmour on another, it might be fair to say that courses are both good, but favor one rider's style. If Racer X beats Gilmour on ALL courses, it's fair to say that Racer X is faster than Gilmour. Take the average times from a GROUP of the fastest riders to find out which slope/spacings is the fastest. If there's going to be a standard, let's make it fast.

The fewest possible standards are:

1. 100 straight full sized cones, timed from first to last.
2. A cone penalty (and possible cap for a DQ)

Blaze into a 100 cone straight course with whatever start you like, on any hill, with any slope, with any surface, with any wind, with any cone spacing in any teperature and adjust your time with penalties. The smallest adjusted time wins. Do it with your friends and you have an unofficial time. Do it at a sanctioned event, you might just have a world record.

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Chaput on 2002-12-06 01:53 ]

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Chaput on 2002-12-06 01:54 ]

Claude Regnier · Post by **Claude Regnier** » Thu Dec 05, 2002 12:59 am

Cones, cones and more cones. Fast, faster and fastest.

Dat's it dat's all. If there is an attempt to try organise a World record attempt day then perhaps Brain's competition day could be a qualifier.

There could be a series of qualifiers held and perhaps the top 20 or 30 could qualify for an Official attempt.

Noah, I don't think the G2 locale is very good for the 100 cone try. Fisrt road would be tooooo fasssst and although the picth on the second road may be a little slower that curve at the bottom, whewwwwwwww!

Hell you know me I'll go anywhere and am almost willing to try anything.

HH, barfing is all part of the game. Some of us got lots of game,eh!

Henry Hester · Post by **Henry Hester** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 10:52 pm

Why did Chaput get such a cool picture?

Henry Hester · Post by **Henry Hester** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 10:49 pm

Arab, correction, I usually puke on cone # 86.

Does that count as a downed cone?

[ This Message was edited by: Henry Hester on 2002-12-04 16:50 ]

Eric Groff · Post by **Eric Groff** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 7:48 pm

Anybody no everybody can run the course clean, Thats simply go as slow as possiable and you've done it........

I'm more into the racing aspect of it, I want to go as fast as I can and I really dont give a damn how many cones I hit, I'm going to try and hit as little as possible in my quest for speed and the fastest time, after all isnt that what racing is all about SPEED.

Trying to make it clean to me sounds like the Compulsary Round of figure skating, where as its not about the time it takes its about how good you look doing it.

I'm an over weight balding 41 yr old that doesnt look good doing anything, but I like to go as fast as I can when I can because when you get to be my age looks dont mean much anymore.

Lets come up with some type of standard
Actually no standard is needed at all, Hows this.
You run any cone spacing ie: 5 centers, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5 and so on.

Its 100 cones, timed from first and last cone, plain and simple.

Pitch of hill? Big deal run the course on the fastest hill you can handle, Whats your fastest time in the 6? I'm actually faster in the 7.5 then Giammarco but he is faster then me in the 5.5.

Arab

Noah Heinle · Post by **Noah Heinle** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 7:06 pm

I like it clean, but sometimes, dirty is more exciting. Enough chitchat. See you Saturday.

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:42 pm

It's quite amazing how we get all this discussion on the rules when the initial idea was to make the rules so damn simple. I fear the day we will start to talk about the rules for the already existing disciplines.

I don't see the 100-cones thing as a media spectable. It's a discipline like the others. That's why the cone penalty discussion is farfetched if the idea is not to implement the "clean run" strategy on all disciplines. And I don't think that will happen. I'm totally with Chris and ARAB that it's all about speed and not about making clean runs.

And Wesley. About the comment on "...whole day running..." that is alright for any inofficial results I guess. But for official results you have 2 competition runs, not the whole day. If we would have let Luca (and the others) continue running he would probably finally have made it clean and probably made an even faster time. For you who do care about clean runs though Jani did one at the same occation. I think he mentioned that very early on in this thread (which is becoming very long by the way...) with the time he made.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:23 pm

Why would I be hard on you , Noah? You tired to make it clean, you made it clean, you enjoyed it. You’ve actually done it, we can talk not just hypothetically, but actually comparing what we felt

Chitchat time:

Were your clean times even close to your dirty times?
Was it about going as fast as you can?
Or was it more of going as fast as you can make it clean?

We had a little spectator’s crowed last time we ran a 100-cone course, the clean run looked the most spectacular. I was really upset to hear that, because it really felt like shit.
I ride it, I don’t care how it looks. All I care is how it feels and what’s my time.

“Dirty” Vlad.

Noah Heinle · Post by **Noah Heinle** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:00 pm

This is a great discussion. While there seem to be a lot of views on how to actually do it (spacing, pitch, latitude(!?), etc) I think everyone agrees that none of us will actually break the current record in our feeble attempts. There are just too many factors to consider if that were the point of this whole thing. But it's not. It's about fun and the challenge of doing it. Bring it on.

So I have to jump on the Tucker bandwagon and set my sights on making it clean while going as fast as I can. This is the only standard we can hope to have here. I disagree with Vlad's assertion that this is a different exercise all together and isn't fun. While JG was setting our course last Friday, I rode in at about cone 20 and made the remaining cones clean. It was my first attempt (ever) and the first 20 or so cones that I skipped were set on the steep part of the hill leaving a relatively flat surface for the rest. Getting through without hitting any was not hard and I was able to adjust and think about what I was doing. Do this a few times...don't concentrate on getting through fast (at first). Rather, focus on getting through and as in ANY course, you'll get faster and faster. But not Luca fast. Be realistic.

I know GBJ has been working hard on the organization of the USSSF so I understand why there are are no announced plans for 'The Gathering.' At this time last year, many of us had our calendars marked. I'm not suggesting that we need confirmed dates. If you were there last year, you'll likely bust your ass to get there this year and if you weren't there, you'll work harder not to miss it again. But may I suggest that this might be an ideal venue for a 100 cone challenge? Not only do you have 50+ skaters from around the world, but the 'main' hill at Seneca State Park would (maybe) be a great place for 100 cones. Of course, this idea is not meant to hamper the CyberSlalom cup at the Gathering, but rather, an activity to compliment it.

Go easy on me, Vlad.

Brian Morris · Post by **Brian Morris** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 5:28 pm

A "world record attempt" thats what it would be isn't it? I don't want to seem like I am getting wrapped up in the idea of the Guinness Book of Records, and leaving the skateboarding for last. My plan is to have a 100 Cone skateboard race in Hawthorne New Jersey, I think it would be great if one of us breaks a world record, but when you come from a town like mine, were its run by old folks who see any activity other than football in the park, stickball at the school, and pick up basketball games, dangerous and a waste of the towns time, using a marketing trick wouldn't be such a bad thing. I want to get something together to present to the town, maybe if they like it we will have a regular place to hold races.

On 2002-12-04 11:02, Vlad Popov wrote:
Well, then. People from other towns will not come to your town, as you just confessed in calling a simple 100-cone course run a ”world record” attempt as a simple marketing trick.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 5:02 pm

Well, then. People from other towns will not come to your town, as you just confessed in calling a simple 100-cone course run a ”world record” attempt as a simple marketing trick.

Brian Morris · Post by **Brian Morris** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 2:21 pm

Cause people in my town are like that. They would like to see something happened in our dumb town except for Debbie Harry.
[/quote]
Yeeep!
What value and face validity will the "world record" set in your city have?

Vlad.

[/quote]

Eric Groff · Post by **Eric Groff** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 9:08 am

Cones are what make up a slalom course, Since day one you take a penalty for hitting them, show me a race since the first organized profesional slalom race in 1965 in Anahiem, ca. where there was no penalty for hitting a cone? Why change things now?
Hit a cone take a penalty, go as fast as you can and try not to hit any cones,that is what makes a great racer, but great racers are also the fastest racer that post the fastest time with as little penalty as possiable.

As for pitch of hill, all hills are different, run whereever you can run it, post a time and lets see whos doin what, I do agree that there should be a standard as far as distance from start to first cone, Timer set at first and last cone and cone spacing.

Chicken Richy and I set a tight course(6ft centers) with a few small offsets to mix things up to practice for La Costa this year anticpating that we would see a true tight course on a fast hill, the hill we set it on we run 40mph GS on it is scary fast, How fast ? Ask John Oshei,Evans,Olson,Attila,Gorman,DP,Dave Hegstrom and a few of the others that ran it, it was bleepin fast. So we set this tight course about 50 cones and by the time you got to the last 20 cones they were coming at you so fast that it all looked like 1 long cone, it was all a blur at that point and it was all instinct and luck to get thru it, Chicken was the only one to run it clean. Running the 100 at 6ft on a hill like this would be near impossiable.

So come up with some sort of a standard, run it on a hill of your choice, If your times arnt as fast as my times, find a steeper hill and see if your times increase, if that hill is to fast for you to get a time then your fastest time is from the hill you recorded a time at, lets compare!
Arab

Chris Chaput · Post by **Chris Chaput** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 8:03 am

Define clean. We routinely hit, nudge and clip cones. If they don't fall or wind up completely outside of the circle, we act as if the run was clean and no penalty is assessed. Do you want to stipulate that even nudging a cone is grounds for disqualification too?

Why would you only want to consider clean runs when every form of organized slalom racing (save the CyberSlalom) has cone penalties instead of DQs?

Go out and pump as fast as you can with NO cones present for the same distance as 100 cones. You'll find that you won't be going much faster (if any) than if there were cones. This means that we're pumping as fast we can and IT WOULD NEVER BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO HIT A CONE than it would be to just go around it. It could only hurt the rider's time.

If hitting a cone were to be a DQ, we'd be standing around watching guys quit after 20 cones, quit after 43 cones, quit after 68 cones, quits after 77 cones quit after 91 cones (golly gee, he almost did it), quit after 93 cones... ...until someone finally made all 100. We'd then look at the invariably lame time that he posted and pretend to act as if we really cared that he ran clean, when what we really care about is his speed.

Cleanliness is NOT next to godliness. It's on aisle 3, next the shampoos and toothpaste.

Speed is what we care about. That's why we time our runs.

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Chaput on 2002-12-04 02:08 ]

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 5:13 am

....once a year is a enough for that.

Yeeep!
What value and face validity will the "world record" set in your city have?

Vlad.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 5:11 am

Brian, if you have the space to run a 100 cone 6' OC dual race...more power too you, it should be straight though.

Maybe it is time with this 100 cone thing to standardize it and run it like the cyber slalomw is run for NCDSA. Lets call it the slalomskateboarder challenge....run 100 6' OC cones on as fat of a surface as one can and post your times here, we can compare and such. Lets not worry about world records at this point until we can all agree on a standard course setup. Granted setting up 100 cones and finding a place to do it takes alot more than the cyber slalom, but it is do-able...

personally I would rather run a 80'ish cone TS with some curves and hips in it, mixed switch backs and stingers.

Straight drag races are fun for a little bit then they get boring quick. I enjoyed the 5.5' race you had but honestly that was enough of that for me, once a year is a enough for that.

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Stepanek on 2002-12-03 23:15 ]

Brian Morris · Post by **Brian Morris** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 4:56 am

Would anybody be interested in running a 100 cone race? Maybe even a duel 100 cone course? I'm trying to orginize some races for next season. Not to sound like a sleezy race promotor, but I am pretty sure my town would love the idea of possibibly being involved in a World Record.

Regards,
"Brain"

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Wed Dec 04, 2002 4:37 am

And the fun begins. Again!

Dear Slalom Theorists. Would you please try running a 100-cone course and then try to run it clean? Compare the "feelings", then come back and we'll chat.

Maybe anyone wants to add wet pavement for more fun? No?
It would be the ultimate edge control exercise, which will allow only the best "all around" slalomer to make the course clean. "Lucas" will never be able to make it to the 10th cone because they use 94-97A wheels and pump like crazy.

Pardon my sarcasm, I just had an irresistible desire to imagine the consequences of the "people's vote".

Andy, how many 100-cone runs do you think a human can afford during a race session? Will the race organizers and participants have all the time to wait for everybody to finish their "clean" attempts? Who would want to run it as a separate race, i.e., not in conjunction with other races?

I seriously don't know. What do you think?

Vlad.

Join the ISSA 25-cone series. 5 international sessions per year.
Create your own local race. Discover slalom skateboarding now!

| World Ranking | 25-cone Series | Calendar