Who is open, who is pro?

[Dan Hughes]

In the first round of the GS of the worlds('02), it appears that an open rider had the fastest time (Scott). I don't think a separate course is the answer, those who are less experienced, simply will go slower. Not a problem. We've all been there.

If pros want more difficult courses, that's no problem, those who are less experienced will just go slower through those courses. Which is fine. I watch in awe how those guys can make a tough course look so easy.

[Eric Groff]

PROS DONT WANT DIFFICULT COURSES!!!!!,
Just because you can make a dificult course shouldnt make you a pro, it is about speed and time, not difficulty and obstacles.

Perfect example, Avila saturday, Difficult courses look stupid, fast courses look BITCHIN, Morro had half the grade as Avila but was faster, Go figure, what made for more exciting racing and spectating, Morro.

Please Difficulty is for Figure Skating, Speed is for racing.

If you want to break and go slow get into another sport, skateboards dont have breaks.

[Claude Regnier]

Dan that is my point exactly. There was quite a difference in the wind at Avilla on both the Friday and Saturday events.

On both days the AMS raced faster times then the Pros but in head to head at the same time I doubt it would have been that close in some cases.

[Dan Hughes]

I like speedy courses also.
I didn't get enough runs to have a problem with the wind factor, so I didn't notice it too much (I need to learn to count to four, barged the gate on three).

[John Gilmour]

The fastest run a racer is likely to put in is the run where he feels most threatened by someone fast.

So likely you'll see the fastest run a racer does in a race in one of the runs where he is eliminated in that round.

I know people are woirried about sandbagging-that is why the proposed "JG" bracketing system a few pages back would give incentive not to sandbag.

In the JG bracket system to get the position you deserve you should try as hard as you can in qualifying. Sandbagging will do nothing other than get you a worse place or perhaps getting the same place with having to do more runs.

We also want to try and limit the total number of runs taken by any racer for a number of reasons.

1. Why bother running the same course 12 times? (number of runs for a winner of a 32 man bracket)-actually up to 20 times if you count practice .

2. Why should the top racers get the most racing- wouldn't it benefit the up and coming racers to get more racing in as opposed to standing around?

3. Slalom skateboarding is a "sprinting sport" it is not an endurance sport like marathoning. It is also not a sport that lends itself to bracketing like Chess. Spectators and skaters alike are interested in seeing the fastest possible runs through a course- and that fastest person who has the lowest possible time through the course- to be crowned the winner.

4. I would rather see skaters limited in the total number of runs and more courses and events set. That way a beginner who is almost always out in his first round can still look forward to racing several times in one day....not just hanging out waiting for the finals some 5 hours from now. I experienced this first hand when Duane Peters eliminated me at Avila beach and I would have liked to have seen Avila used for more racing than just one course per day. Also with more courses set there is a greater likelyhood that the racers will enjoy at least one or several or all of the courses.

5. The 1 vs 32 and 3 vs 30 and etc rounds are useless. The system is not optimized for our sport. At best these rounds only tire out the faster racers so the spectators see slower runs in the finals- at worst they can cause huge upsets.

Realistically I don't see why we don't take the top 4 fastest qualifiers and run those off- place the others according to qualifying and move onto the next race.

From that bracket we can seed people closer together for the next race for all teh racers in qualifying to make qualifying even more fun- we certainly could qualify in a dual format.

In Hans' proposed runoff I think it is good for small groups of racers, but in larger groups there may be a lot of runs done? I'm still not exactly sure of the method. But it certainly would deter sandbagging as it would take a lot of runs to get to the top if you were to go slow on pupose in qualifying.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: John Gilmour on 2003-02-01 11:15 ]</font>

[Dan Hughes]

On 2003-01-31 11:59, John Gilmour wrote:
Realistically I don't see why we don't take the top 4 fastest qualifiers and run those off- place the others according to qualifying and move onto the next race.

This sounds interesting. Basically, this would put most of the emphasis on the qualifying, eh? Which sounds good. And we could run how many different types of courses all in one day? Cool!

[Andy Bittner]

...and we get closer and closer to the concept of doing away with dual slalom altogether. Back when this whole "Re-birth of slalom" began, I made an impassioned argument against emphasizing dual slalom, because, although it could be more exciting to watch and maye even more exciting for the riders, it was waaaay more complicated and required much more time to contest than simply running 1, 2, or even 3 runs on a single course, and letting some version of the fastest guy (best of 3, best 2 of 3 combined, etc.) decide who wins.

All of this discussion, and agony, and hairsplitting, and the possibility of sandbagging and purse and outcome fixing all come, primarily, from the fact that complicated but exciting won out over simple, but somewhat less exciting.

[Dan Hughes]

All the banked events (NM and NY) and the Park event, were timed only. Were they boring by comparision? I wasn't able to attend any of them, so I can't tell you.

[John Gilmour]

With the current Duals system there is a lot of room for error.

Some of which I have experienced firsthand. This past season,

I've been bracketed wrong for instance (La Costa 2002 GS),

I even considered tossing a race to an adopted East Coaster who had more endurance than I did La Costa TS (all caffeine loaded as I was at the time),

I messed with the dual eliminations in (Sandbagging like crazy) DC- likely eliminating others like Curt Kimble who should have placed higher had I not done this- and allowed Geezer-x to continue in the top bracket (GO Geezer-X!).

I sandbagged hard at the GS at Catalina which, though I did get eliminated it is likely that had I not sandbagged I would have eliminated others...a single racer abusing the system will ALWAYS skew the results for others.

And I'll continue to do this....why? because it is part of a racer's strategy and until a better system is implemented racers will ALWAYS do this.

First off Duals racing over a long course isn't ever fair- because road variation always makes the courses different and sometimes cones are not placed correctly. Cone Spray can affect other racers. It takes too long to reset Duals and get "Okays" from both racers as opposed to running them independently. Spectators never know who actually won the Duals anyhow until cone penalties are counted- in fact it is even more confusing for them than SINGLE TRACK where a spectator knows the time to beat and merely has to count cones to see if the time has been beaten.

Sorry Dual racing, though fun, takes too much time to process (Well said GBJ) and always adds controversy. There is a place for DUAL racing. IN Straight cones (it is our version of Drag racing). There cones can be set to either side of the crown of the road. The strip used is short due to the shortness of the course (typically fewer than 30 cones). It is manageable for cone marshalls and compact enough to bring a a slalom event to a flatter area where spectators are. You can see the whole race from a single vantage point. And the timing is done idependently so as not to put all the emphasis on the start. A .4 second advantage in a start in a 30 cone course is pretty much insurmountable in the finals (and we are interested in the slalomers skills in the cones aren't we?)

Finally Duals racing means we are always looking for a hill that is straight....that takes out so much of the fun of a course that can wind and curve about.

I'm not saying eliminate Duals- just lets not try to make every race a Dual- and only mkae races Duals when the venue is perfectly suited for duals ie. some straight area where you can set a Dual straight slalom- or a perfect uncrowned road that is straight (very hard to find).

[Eric Groff]

JG-I have never enjoyed the dual format racing, to many variables. Let the timer decide a race, not the uneven road conditions and other things that factor in.