[2007] Paris Slalom World Cup 2007, May 26-28, 2007

[Vincent Berruchon]

The official PSWC website is online since a few days

Online registrations are not yet open,
but everything should be OK really really soon.

I just want you to know that PAYPAL SERVICES ARE BAD BAD BAD
they block our account (thanks to Adel and his famous true/false payements!)
and they are not able to do anything to get pur account back after hours on payphone to resolve this on the last months.
PAYPAL IS CRAP, customer services is just inefficient and inexistant!!!!!
So be careful, the paypal address won't be the same than last year. We'll use the one of another association linked to us.

Official PSWC website:
http://event.riderz.net/pswc

(Karl got sober, but for others, here's the english version if you miss the little flag because of Tequila :
http://event.riderz.net/pswc/index.php? ... me&lang=us )

[Karl Floitgraf]

Actually I just sobered up lately. I quit 'amateur sticks' as Ramon likes to call them. No more crazy nights with bottles of tequilla for me for a long while.

[Donald Campbell]

you never understood because you are always drunk when in europe.
just wait,i'm gonna tell daddy what his son does on his vacations!!!!!!!!!!

[Karl Floitgraf]

I never understood strait slalom. Good for training to work on technique- not something I'd want to compete on. Riding the course and finding the technical line is my favorite part of skating.

So lemme get this all figured out. Is the TS strait cones? Or is the tight and the strait and the special all different events?

I'm just curious though, I'm not trying to suggest change in anyway I don't know anything about the organization of this contest.

[Ramón Königshausen]

Whenever the course has (technical) offsets it means Special. Therefore special can be Tight or wider, if it is much wider then I would call it a Hybrid but most of the Europeans rather call everything that is not GS or Straight a Special Slalom....

rmn

[Karl Floitgraf]

What is the difference between hybrid and special?? When I race in the US, it's called hybrid- with less flow. In Europe it's called Special- with a little more flow. Either way they are practically the same event.

[Ramón Königshausen]

Well Hybrid with cone distances less than 1.80m is a contradiction since Hybrid is supposed to be somethin in between Tight and Giant...

However, the Special ought to be technical. The one from last year was great!


rmn

[Stefano Bellingeri]

I'm for a killer special and a killer hybrid: not more than 1.80.
Thanks
Stefano

[Ramón Königshausen]

Cheers! That's good news!


rmn

[Peter Klang]

It has to be 1,80. We been running 2 meter for ages now.

Just a thought, drop GS, the hill is not a GS hill anyway and run a killer Hybrid.

Hybrid parallell, now thats a crowd pleaser.

Yoooooooooooooo
PK

[Guillaume Saint-Criq]

and the ams get 2m then?

yes sir

[Donald Campbell]

coolio
and the ams get 2m then?

[Vincent Berruchon]

Was it decided? Is Pro Straight going to be 1.8M or 2.0M?

Finally really few racers gave their inputs. Just a few are pushing for 1.80 but many hadn't problem with 2m (the quiet majority?).
But even if we couldn't have real meeting with Jani, I think we'll go for a more challenging straight race at 1.80m for PROs!

[Chris Barker]

Was it decided? Is Pro Straight going to be 1.8M or 2.0M?

[Mike Cividino]

Chri, I know how to get there.

[Chris Barrett]

Offtopic:

Anybody want to help a canuck out with some info on the park with the bowl that people went to last year? I really want to try and hit it this time. Thanks.

It's a type of concret bowl with plastic on the bottom... no huge vert but realy fun, and about 3m deep in the huge part. Check yourself :

http://static.flickr.com/58/164689959_62e59d400b_b.jpg

A video of the event: http://media.putfile.com/PSWC-aftershow or http://uploadfile.putfile.com/videos/14619570235.wmv

Thanks david, I've seen it and been there. I want info on where its located. Thanks.

[Ramón Königshausen]

Ah, well then I fully agree with you.

(I didn't notice this was linked to lifting wheels, rather I thought you were generally speaking...)

Maybe that's what we should use until we have a technical solution in place. If you're seen doing it, you're penalized. The timer team could probably check it at least on bigger events.

Please don't seriously consider trying to have a "judge" determine whether someone lifted his/her wheels or not. It's complicated, subject to interpretation or bias, and requires yet another person to implement. (What if someone just takes an extra-hard pull and accidentally wheelies over the switch?) We don't have such judges any more (thank God!) for hitting the "wrong" side of a cone, because it's far too difficult to judge, and IMO, we shouldn't have them for this either.

I guess if we would strictly prohibit it but abandon the idea with the judge, the consequence for being caught lifting the wheels would be harder ever.

rmn

[Jani Soderhall]

However we don't know how to penalize the guy that goes to early. At least it won't work with a false start penalty of 2x because we have nothing to multiply by two. So we need a fix figure like 0.5s penalty.

0.5s penalty is pretty tough charge for doing a false start. Imagine you have a very good reaction time then you either start only a hundreth of a second late or a hundreth of a second early.

Ramon,

You misunderstood the discussion. I'm talking about the case when someone lifts their front wheels over the tapeswitch.

/Jani

[Jonathan Harms]

A new question for you: what about DQ penalty? 1.5 sec always or re-estimated according to a % of the time of course. At the Trocadero I think 1.5 sec is OK, but in the rule book we may have to make it a % of the estimated course time.

Because the length of courses varies widely, it seems fairer to use a percentage of some sort rather than a fixed time. At Morro Bay, I think they used 10% of the fastest qualifying time. That seemed pretty fair.

[Jonathan Harms]

Placing the tapeswitch half way down the ramp makes it difficult for racers to time their start with the beeps and estimating the time it takes to roll down half of the ramp. Wouldn't work.

The timing in Brixlegg worked just like anywhere else where Trackmate has been used in Europe: In the quals, individual clocks are being used. The beeps are only there to let the skaters know when they can go. In the elimination rounds, the clock is reset to dual racing mode and the time starts with the 4th beep.

For qualifications, which are virtually always individually timed, put the first tapeswitch halfway down the ramp or at the bottom of it. (As you mentioned, in Brixlegg they placed the switches at the bottom and it worked fine.) Any skater tries to "wheelie" over the switch in either of those places will likely hurt his/her time more than help it. Try it sometime: you'll see it's very difficult to do at all, much less to do effectively.

For dual racing (in which, as Jani mentioned, the timer starts with the last beep instead of by the tape switch) put the switches back at the top. It would take maybe an extra three minutes of time to do so.

Thus, in qualifying, nobody can gain an extra advantage, and in dual racing, you simply run over the switch at the start the way God intended.

Maybe that's what we should use until we have a technical solution in place. If you're seen doing it, you're penalized. The timer team could probably check it at least on bigger events.

Please don't seriously consider trying to have a "judge" determine whether someone lifted his/her wheels or not. It's complicated, subject to interpretation or bias, and requires yet another person to implement. (What if someone just takes an extra-hard pull and accidentally wheelies over the switch?) We don't have such judges any more (thank God!) for hitting the "wrong" side of a cone, because it's far too difficult to judge, and IMO, we shouldn't have them for this either.

Having thought about it further: Perhaps the best solution is to prevent it in qualifying (by putting the tape switch at the bottom of the ramp), and simply allow it in dual racing as part of the skill of anticipating the start. When combined with an effective false-start penalty (I recommend 2x for simplicity), I think any advantage gained would be very slight.

[Ramón Königshausen]

However we don't know how to penalize the guy that goes to early. At least it won't work with a false start penalty of 2x because we have nothing to multiply by two. So we need a fix figure like 0.5s penalty. Maybe that's what we should use until we have a technical solution in place. If you're seen doing it, you're penalized. The timer team could probably check it at least on bigger events.

0.5s penalty is pretty tough charge for doing a false start. Imagine you have a very good reaction time then you either start only a hundreth of a second late or a hundreth of a second early. In the worse case it is early.

So I think starting so close to the limit should not be charged by a fix time penalty but rather be determined individally. It's like differential calculation: you're getting closer to the optimum point and whether you come from one or the other side, the closer you get the better you are and the less you should be charged for (e.g. in case you just missed the point by 0.01s)


rmn

[David Rudnianski]

Offtopic:

Anybody want to help a canuck out with some info on the park with the bowl that people went to last year? I really want to try and hit it this time. Thanks.

It's a type of concret bowl with plastic on the bottom... no huge vert but realy fun, and about 3m deep in the huge part. Check yourself :

http://static.flickr.com/58/164689959_62e59d400b_b.jpg

A video of the event: http://media.putfile.com/PSWC-aftershow or http://uploadfile.putfile.com/videos/14619570235.wmv

[Jani Soderhall]

Using light beams at the start never worked very well, because the ramp constructions are not solid enough, so the light beams are kind of jumping around. Sticks would work fine, but I don't have any (and they tend to break).

Placing the tapeswitch half way down the ramp makes it difficult for racers to time their start with the beeps and estimating the time it takes to roll down half of the ramp. Wouldn't work.

The technical solution we're working on knows if it's the first pair of wheels or the second pair. That would solve it.

However we don't know how to penalize the guy that goes to early. At least it won't work with a false start penalty of 2x because we have nothing to multiply by two. So we need a fix figure like 0.5s penalty. Maybe that's what we should use until we have a technical solution in place. If you're seen doing it, you're penalized. The timer team could probably check it at least on bigger events.

The timing in Brixlegg worked just like anywhere else where Trackmate has been used in Europe: In the quals, individual clocks are being used. The beeps are only there to let the skaters know when they can go. In the elimination rounds, the clock is reset to dual racing mode and the time starts with the 4th beep.


A new question for you: what about DQ penalty? 1.5 sec always or re-estimated according to a % of the time of course. At the Trocadero I think 1.5 sec is OK, but in the rule book we may have to make it a % of the estimated course time.

/Jani

[Stefano Bellingeri]

I agree as well: NO jumped starts allowed, please....as well as skateboards with MORE than 4 wheels...
CU in Paris,
Stefano

[Michael Dong]

For single lane tape switch starts, hopping the front wheels over the tapeswitch should never be allowed. It is poor sportsmanship outside of the intent of a fair start. Could be monitored just like foot faults in tennis. Tapeswitch hop = false start.

I have participated in many races with the 2X penalty. This has worked very well and seems about right for this penalty. You jump by 0.1 and you are screwed with a 0.2 penalty and your competitor knows it. I have never liked being on the side of the penalty. It has never helped. When my competitor jump started against me, it always worked in my favor.

[Chris Barrett]

Offtopic:

Anybody want to help a canuck out with some info on the park with the bowl that people went to last year? I really want to try and hit it this time. Thanks.

[Ramón Königshausen]

Let's simply prohibit lifting wheels, only allow optical beams or put the tapeswitch on a reasonable position.


Everything else would need extra rules to be added - I think we should concentrate on the actual competition that takes place on the course inbetween the cones and not at the start. The start actually is "merely a means to an end", shall mean it is there for physical reasons (because you cannot really start at the first cone when v=0). (might be an abstract explanation but I guess you know what I mean)


...



rmn

[Pat Chewning]

You can always just put the tapeswitch half way down the ramp...

Yes, that might work, until the racers figure out how to lift their wheels part-way down the ramp ...... Another problem might be if the weight on the wheels in that part of the ramp is not enough to reliably trigger the tape switch.

Where, exactly, is the definition of the start of the race? How do racers adapt to these variations (timing of their pull from the ramp, raising wheels, etc.)
A) At the top of the ramp. (MOST COMMON)
B) Partially down the ramp.
C) At the bottom of the ramp.
D) At the 1st cone (Used for the 100-cone challenge)

You have to admit that the nature of the starts are going to be much different for option A than for option D. I'm talking about the timing of the racers pulling out from the start. My guess is that for option D you will have a much wider variation of early/late starts among the racers than using option A (even taking into account lifting of wheels).

I'm still in favor of option A for races. If it looks like the winning racers consistently use this technique, then two options come to mind:
i) Everyone learns this technique and it becomes standard start method (lifting wheels)
ii) Race organizers install wands, optical beams, or other start indicators which take away the advantage of lifing the wheels.

What I cannot see working well is a judge at the start ramp trying to see if racers have used this technique and then doing something about it (Restart? DQ? Start-technique penalty?) I don't think that will work.

[Chris Barker]

Isn't it worth something being first out of the starting blocks? Like that you don't have to worry about cones flying.

If there are lots of cones flying and you could strategically spray one into the opponent's lane, then that is an advantage. With 3x, I don't think it is worth the penalty.

On the other hand, it may be an advantage for the other guy if you start early. You become his rabbit and he is trying to track you down.

I understand that in Austria, the clock started when you crossed the strip, not when the beep started. So essentially each lane was individually timed and the beeps were not really meaningful. I heard that some riders purposely stayed in the gate just to have a rabbit to track down.

The "lift your board over the timing switch trick" is very well mastered by some and it's been tolerated over the last two years. I personally don't think we should allow it. To me it's a method that was invented to "fool" the clock, not to try to go faster, thus not worthy of keeping. If in addition you ride a longer board, you save more time. Where's the logic? Time to stop it, I'd say, but maybe we should discuss that in another topic. But we may have to wait until we have a hardware solution to the problem.

For those that master this trick, I know it is an advantage. It obviously is exploiting a hole in the tapeswitch technology. Yes, you could eliminate tapeswitches to fix this. But couldn't there be similar issues with a beam, depending on where it was placed? If someone could make a wand/gate for the price of a tapeswitch, I believe that would solve most of the problem, unless someone was daring enough to start their board and remove their front foot to avoid the wand. Doesn't seem like a benefit. Others would try to start with their front leg as far back as possible. Not a great benefit either.

It seems like a beam that runs several feet vertically is ideal, so you have a true plane that is monitored. When the first part of your body or equipment breaks the plane, it is detected.
Is there something like that out there for reasonable cost?

[Ramón Königshausen]

2x = You are adding back the early start time plus a penalty of 1x the early start

Well this is what I meant. I'm not good at mathematics...sorry.

rmn

[Patrick Allan]

You can always just put the tapeswitch half way down the ramp...

[Jani Soderhall]

Chris,

Isn't it worth something being first out of the starting blocks? Like that you don't have to worry about cones flying. Until of course that faster guy you're racing actually catches up with you. But that's another story. Didn't happen often before. Happens all the time nowadays... So, my current vote is for 3 times the penalty.

Pat,

The "lift your board over the timing switch trick" is very well mastered by some and it's been tolerated over the last two years. I personally don't think we should allow it. To me it's a method that was invented to "fool" the clock, not to try to go faster, thus not worthy of keeping. If in addition you ride a longer board, you save more time. Where's the logic? Time to stop it, I'd say, but maybe we should discuss that in another topic. But we may have to wait until we have a hardware solution to the problem.

/Jani

[Chris Barker]

I'm afraid that the x2 doesn't discourage the rider enough from false starting (and thus getting a better position throughout the race, with less cones flying in front of him). I'd always try to start too early.

As Jani mentioned, the clock actually starts at the beginning of the last beep, not when you cross the tapeswitch. So if you leave before the start of the last beep, you are not being "charged" for the time between crossing the tape and the clock actually starting.

2x = You are adding back the early start time plus a penalty of 1x the early start
3x = You are adding back the early start time plus a penalty of 2x the early start

Jani, I doubt you would try to always start early with 2x. Sure, if you could always
plan your start .001 early, but that is not realistic. You may find you leave .3 early,
costing you that same amount of penalty under 2x rule. Why give your opponent .3 secs?

Under 3x rule, it is even more penalty, costing you .6 secs or 6 cones worth in a TS race.
Not a wise strategy in my opinion...

[Pat Chewning]

What about racers who lift their front wheels over the tape switch?

If a racer lifts his front wheels over the tapeswitch -- I see no problem.

A) The timing equipment and the 2X (or 3X) start penalty can still apply -- being automatically done by the timer.

B) The racer who does this successfully has probably lost the 0.1 advantage by the extra effort of raising the wheels and being slightly less able to pull harder and be on balance.

So if they have the skill, then I say its OK. Similar to ski race starting where the skis are kicked back, the body gains momentum, and the boots are delayed from tripping the start wand.


However, should a racer do this lifting motion and the tapeswitch is not run over with sufficient force to trip it, then tough luck racer -- you just DQ'd by not getting a proper start.

This could be solved by replacing the tape switch with a start wand or an optical beam switch at shin height...

[Ramón Königshausen]

Hm, the earlier you leave the harder you'll get charged, isn't that logical?

What about racers who lift their front wheels over the tape switch?

rmn

[Jani Soderhall]

However. I'd suggest to add the time you left too early to your run time: e.g.: false start by 0.05 + raw time 11.93 + 3 cones = 12.28

Ramon,

If you don't double the false start time, it's as if you haven't done any. The clock doesn't start until it has reached the official starting moment. So I assume you're proposing x2.

I'm afraid that the x2 doesn't discourage the rider enough from false starting (and thus getting a better position throughout the race, with less cones flying in front of him). I'd always try to start too early.

/Jani

[Ramón Königshausen]

Well, making a false start on purpos can also have tactic reasons; to make your opponent nervous.

However. I'd suggest to add the time you left too early to your run time:

e.g.: false start by 0.05 + raw time 11.93 + 3 cones = 12.28

rmn

[Chris Barker]

can someone from US/Can explain what rule you use for false start?

We try something at our last Pirate Race :

penalty for false start = ABS(negative false start delay) * 5

It s very dissuasive, maybe too much

I think 5x penalty is too much.
Most races have run with a 2x penalty, but 3x has been used.

3x is more severe, for example, leaving .05 early (which is a pretty close start),
will cost you .15 sec, which could be 1 1/2 cones of penalty in a TS.

Paris 2005 was the only place I attended a race with the "blow the horn and do it over" rule.
It seems to lend itself to a lot of gamesmanship, leaving early on purpose, making the other guy stop, walk back up, and get ready all over again.

If you are going to blow the horn, I think it should be automatic DQ and that heat is over.

[Guillaume Saint-Criq]

Just wondering if the Paris event this year will due away with the false starts and change to the added penalty for the races?

can someone from US/Can explain what rule you use for false start?

We try something at our last Pirate Race :

penalty for false start = ABS(negative false start delay) * 5

It s very dissuasive, maybe too much

[Ramón Königshausen]

Sorry Vinzz I didn't want to put stress onto you but as Donald explained I just wanted to emphasize my point about the cone distance in the Straight Slalom. I've been telling that for so many times to so many organizers and each time it was, almost, the same: They skiped it or didn't care. Therefore we found ourselves at the race site running 2m, sometimes even on a flat surface.
This forum is work in progress. People give bare inputs hoping for elaborate outputs. It's like a brain-storming or having a brainchild that has to be written down immediately if it ought not to be forgotten, or even, never been proposed.
I understand that people have lives outside the slalom scene. Every single one of us has a life out there, away from cones, starting ramps and keyboard-surfing.
That's not the spot I'm pointing at because I have been proposing this single issue for so many times and now it just tends to be postponed again.

But it doesn't help screaming about it, or repeat the same requests over and over again. We do follow this topic and we're listening to every comment.

I explained why I kept repeating the same requests over and over. I'd like to have those things done properly...
And btw. USING CAPITALS means screaming. Frotunatley I'm not that far yet. I'm not accusing anyone nor do I want to annoy you.

(Ramón, may I pls borrow some of your old wheels? *LOL* )

Of course you can


rmn

[HUYNH BACH SAC Frédéric]

VinZzZ, it is a FORUM, remember ? a place when you can share opinions, feelings, ideas, and so on... ( even if you're not a race organisator... ) !

[Vincent Berruchon]

Maybe it is simply because many people, me included, have given their opinion here stating that they would prefer a tighter course, and that you seem to be ignoring them...

cheers

As I said I have no time to check this forum and nobody talk to me about that - so we just need to discuss about it with the people involved.
But we listen to inputs and enjoy them if they can better the contest.
Jani ever told you.

Ramon: I have a full time work, girlfriend, friends to see, to move from my appartement in the next week, an association and website to run and many other things that don't let me a lot of sleep.
So please propose your good ideas, wait a few days and keep your comments away!
I should say that I'm really fed up with polemics on this forum!

[Donald Campbell]

hey jani
that's not screaming for me,that's emphasizing.
i was just wondering if all this might be understood the way it was meant when i read your post.

good suggestions from all sides again
you guys heard the racers...

[Jani Soderhall]

Thank's for all your comments. Keep 'em coming, but better be quick. We're about to settle all of the rules of this event, so if you want to propose changes let's hear from you now, no later than in the next few days. But it doesn't help screaming about it, or repeat the same requests over and over again. We do follow this topic and we're listening to every comment.

Once we've heard your comments, we'll make the decision and then the discussion can end.

/Jani

[Patrick Allan]

What is going on? Once you've made a compliment about that you finally want set the course at reasonable measures you contradict yourself again?

rmn

I don't understand whom and what you say Ramon, but perhaps it has something to do with the facts that some parisians write things here but they never came to any meeting of the organization or anything, or didn't even report anything to us about what you asked here.

Maybe it is simply because many people, me included, have given there opinion here stating that they would prefer a tighter course, and that you seem to be ignoring them...

cheers

[Donald Campbell]

i get your drift hans,but as a matter of fact so many compromises have been made here and there on so many contests that it really gets boring for all the "better" ams f.e. at some point.
going to the course length posted above at least creates some challenge again.
as you may have seen i organized a few contests myself last year and i'm likely to do it this year again.so there is a certain experience coming from my statements.i am also able to reflect the input given to me by riders all across the globe because i'm a good listener.
fact is,that some courses need improvements to create a bigger challenge here and there.
if you think that's too hardcore or whatever for you,then skip it,but let the more experienced riders have their challenge.
the quality of the races and the riders has vastly improved over the last few years.
so the challenges have to be imprroved too,end of discussion.
if you visit a race out of a touristic aspect,please do so,but-on the other hand-respect the demands of the more experienced riders


i,PERSONNALLY,would LIKE to see more CHALLENGE
especially in paris

[Hans Lucas]

...
so bring the 1,80m course for the pros and the 2,00m course for the ams.

and stop this discussion...

As I read elsewhere on this forum: GS skaters can always try to make larger curves around the cones to slow down the speed.

I have succesfully experimented with simply mounting smaller wheels for the TS to still make the track without hitting any cones -> this means a slightly slower speed, which works for me. If that doesn't do the job, I have very old and rusty bearings waiting for me... (Ramón, may I pls borrow some of your old wheels? *LOL* )

After all, I think every decision should be up to the chief organiser, without any discussion by others.
To quote a fanatic Dutch slalom skater: "Don't worry about the contest, go skate and leave the organisation to the organisers!" Whoever has a problem with that, should organise his(/her!) own contest with his/her own rules.

Remember one of the basic rules of "Concrete Wave": Everyone should have fun! I support that; why else skate?

[Donald Campbell]

interesting story to the cone disctance debate from uncle don:
last years's great western was 6 foot pro and 7 foot am
our hill generated the same feeling when you go down the trocadero.
first some were like"hey that's brutal" or"are you serious about that?"
but after a few runs everybody really liked it and i favour the possibility
to upper the ante at bigger contests anyway.
if you want to go easy,visit some grassroots or smaller fun contests.
bigger contests should demand something from the experienced riders and they should not be seen as a starting point for beginners or just as a touristic attraction.

so bring the 1,80m course for the pros and the 2,00m course for the ams.

and stop this discussion...

[Ramón Königshausen]

Whatever you all say, one last beg before I can't take you serious anymore:

Please, as several persons in here have proposed, set the PRO Straight Slalom at 1m80cm (5.905 ft). Altough it seems to be 20cm (0.656 ft) less than last year, it indeed is a step forward to a higher and more compeditive level in the Pro category. Not only it tends to make more sense for compeditive reasons but it also looks more impressive.

I don't see any reason why we should stick to those 2m (6.56 ft). Everyone in the Pro category is (or should be) able to make it at 1.80m (5.095 ft).

rmn

[Hans Lucas]

You have to warned them about the "natural speed" of the Trocadéro slope too...

I have; they train on much steeper slopes than that...
Anyway; those speed freaks are a lot faster than I am; but still I can finish the 2m track (c-t-c) flawless, hè hè

Anyway, whoever wants to see some Dutch slalom tracks/skaters on video (<2mb, no sound, MOV), just let me know and I'll mail it.
And of course, you may also join us during our training. The next one is scheduled on Sunday April 8 on a pretty steep slope.
See our longboard forum, "Meetings".