More Tight racing in 2003

Eddy Martinez · Post by **Eddy Martinez** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 3:24 pm

I did a story on slalom for the local newspaper on Sunday. The course I set up was not giant or a huge hybrid course. The course consisted of 6 fts,5ft and 5 ft 7 in cones. It seems the more I traveled up the East Coast this year,the more I was exposed to tight slalom. During the photo shoot for the newspaper I was able to control a feather slide at speed. The reporter and the photographer were pretty stoked when they left . Dam East Coast influence. There is something to be said about wiggling like a madman through a tight course. Eddy Texas Outlaw.

William Tway · Post by **William Tway** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:48 pm

This picture is very deceiving. It's very had to tell the course is nearly 3 city blocks long. The condos on the left are a dead giveaway that this was Saturday's race.

Camera is a 35mm Minolta 7000 with an oldschool Minolta telephoto lens with skylight filter.

It's also interesting to note that Brent crashed directly in front of his kids. His oldest son was hysterical but not to worry, Brent quicky calmed him down and everyone was fine.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:37 pm

What camera did you use on this so-called-tight-but-we-all-know-it's-a-SuperG-in-reality course? Evil Smily goes here.

William Tway · Post by **William Tway** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:12 pm

Good Eye Noah. This is the only pic I took of Saturday's 88 cone "Slalom" killer. After racing CBarker, I was so tired I hardly even remember taking that pic.

Noah Heinle · Post by **Noah Heinle** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:06 pm

dat ain't da tight

William Tway · Post by **William Tway** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:32 pm

TK Orders A Taco To Go

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:11 pm

TS hurts innocent people.

William Tway · Post by **William Tway** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 5:41 pm

Click to Enlarge

Not sure who fell here but it looks like Kenny got it all on tape.

This is the last of my world’s photos and it's not great but it does depict the course pretty well.

-2003 Worlds-

Jim Slater · Post by **Jim Slater** » Mon Sep 01, 2003 11:54 pm

Great call Vlad
you know..........

JIM SLATER

Slappy Maxwell · Post by **Slappy Maxwell** » Mon Sep 01, 2003 11:37 pm

FDA warning!!! Product Recall!!!

They are pulling it from shelves for causing constipation problems.

Let's face it...it wasn't exactly brain food.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Sun Aug 31, 2003 10:54 pm

This site is getting popular. Quotes are (re)posted in other parts of the net where human filth is still allowed to hang out and humiliate slalomers and slalom fans.

Congrats! I say to this forum. I’m glad to be part of something that accomplishes so much and more…

Slalomskateboarder Vlad.

PS. A DC ”nice and tight” open comp will be announced on Labor Day.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Wed Aug 27, 2003 6:31 pm

So where will the next true TS race be?

September, the dates you know.

RFK racetrack.

Parallel @ 6 ft, & special withza twist. Something you ain't gonna see at the other races around that time.

Hungry? Deprived? Tired of being cheated many times? Tired of empty promisses? Tired of being beaten by beer-belly longboarders? Tired of traveling far-far-nowhere? Tired of being humiliated by somebody's sick interpretation of Tight? Tired of being dictated how a good course should be set?

Then WHY wait? Grab a Cab, get to DC. The dates you know. Lottery decides who sets the course. 3 people. Refer to ISSA.

Vlad.

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Tue Aug 26, 2003 6:05 am

No wonder 66 is so good. He is running difficult courses.

5' 7" ......can I assume that is not the center to center distance but the distance between the cones?

We do need challenging TechSl courses and the faster the better.

Braking at speed can be hairy- but one of the coolest things to watch when it is done properly.

I just think it takes a lot of skill and also raises the bar when a racer runs a difficult course at speed. Everyone leaves with a new goal.

I haven't been a huge advocate of start ramps because I don't think the racer should be limited by what little speed a small start ramp provides. At Trocadero for instance I think it would be amazing to see a pro ramp that started way up on the stairs the spectators were watching from (20mph entry speeds) but currently not that many skaters would be into that. Of course with no run out we would have to have impact bags at the bottom like we had at the Swiss Contest in Hombrecktikon.

For really good TechSl you do need a great surface so the surface can support the speed and traction needed to run a tech course and support your body in all of its various contortions at speed. I think the thing really limiting good TS races is having a great surface and pitch at the same time.

But a good surface means more than just the ability to have a good course- it means that the racing will likely be safer for both the spectators and contestants. Also lesser experienced racers can safely charge harder without leaving skin.

So where will the next true TS race be?

Glenn S · Post by **Glenn S** » Mon Aug 25, 2003 5:47 am

Jim,
You should ask Jani about hosting it (the video) here. Great post too.

Jim Slater · Post by **Jim Slater** » Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:11 am

Thanks TK, we have a lot of footage and are working on somewhere to post it!
I'll keep you posted as to where etc.

once again thank you.

Terry Kirby · Post by **Terry Kirby** » Sun Aug 24, 2003 5:50 am

JIm ,great post. Do you all have some video running those type of courses. I would love to see it. Cheers, Terence Kirby

Rick Stanziale · Post by **Rick Stanziale** » Sun Aug 24, 2003 2:29 am

More tight racing?

How does 5'7" centers sound?

See you next Saturday.

Jim Slater · Post by **Jim Slater** » Sat Aug 23, 2003 6:49 pm

Firstly, let me say that this is the most informative forum I have ever had the Honour of being part of.
I find the UK-US devide in this matter interesting.
This is the origin of English slalom and why it evolved as "tight" partly due to terrain and partly due to ignorance on our part.
I started slaloming in London in spring 1975 and (I say slaloming because I had tin cans and no-one else to race!) just little old me, thinking I was the only slalomer in the world.
My 1 board quiver was a wooden deck with clay wheels and loose ball bearings that rolled faster than the wheels!!!! LOL
Skating was banned all over London and I was "moved on" my Mr Policeman every half hour or so.
Others soon joined the following year and I started Slalom racing-tough cones were a distant luxury. Myself and Tim Panting were able to watch a video clip of Hutson Vs Hester on what we now know was playing at double speed! We left there convinced that the cones had to be really close together for them to be gyrating so fast, so our 6-7ft spacing quickly became a standard 5ft. around mid 1977.
I went on to enter 47 slalom competitions 3 of which were on hills and 7-8ft ft. spacing was known as Giant slalom.
The UK has six months winter and six months bad weather and due to the lack of indoor hills flat-masterbator type courses were our only choice.
In 1977-78 Skate parks started opening everywhere and freestylers and Bowlriders were catered for but Slalom racers were left to our own devices.
Martin Sweeny used to sit and watch us skate probably wishing he could do what we were doing. Our amarican heroes BP hh jh etc were stills in magazines but that film spurred us on. Faster tighter and not a hill in sight.
I had photos taken for skateboard magazine at Crystal palace on a hill!!!!! the magazine got permission for us to use it for a few hours and we were lost. it took 2 hours to get the cones right because our tight corses were too fast for the cameraman. 6ft spaces were like football piches (way tooooo wiiiiide!!!)
I quit Slalom racing in 1981 and Chris Linford and Jani continued to euro legacy of true tight. Jani's s-camber is the best I have seen for Euro tight.
There's much more but I don't want to bore you guys totally.
Just like you guys drive on the wrong side of the road, so do we in the UK!!!! our steering wheel is on the wrong side. Our television systems are different. They were invented on different sides of the world st the same time.
They all work fine they are just different.
Watching Richy pumping his GS is stunning ly good and seeing all of you slalom is such a thrill , we are just different.
I ran 5ft offsets yesterday in Hyde Park and it was a real buzz. (For me) and one day I would love to join you all on the other side of the pond and indulge you in 5ft wide offset as long as you promise me that you will show me how you do the wide stuff.

Gentleman you are all right in what you say and what you do. We are all part of the brotherhood of slalom in all its forms.
I am just bias and love bombing flat! we have little choice.
regards to you all and bye for now

PS: UK slalom in the 70's had 1 cone dq's w(e weren't allowed to knock even 1 over!)
eh' lad it were tough in them old days.
PSS: As I was 13 in 1975 mastubating was as good as it got.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Mon May 26, 2003 5:14 pm

Hans,

Over on the "other website" last year I got into a short discussion with Richy Carrasco about this very subject.

One of the limiting factors in promoting world-wide slalom skating is the simple matter of getting all the equipment you need to a race. My example to Richy was the comparison of a California skater going to an FCR event with an East Coast skater making the flight. The California skater can in most cases if he chooses pack every board he owns and always have an option for set up depending on the course. The East Coaster, though, has to consider how much he can pack and that usually ends up being a couple of decks, maybe one alternative pair of trucks and some hard plus soft wheels.

I agree that we need to see all types of skating. I've never really considered myself a tight skater or a giant slalom skater. I just like to run cones. What I would like to see, though, is a little more specific information about race courses before making trip arrangements.

A good example of what to do is the St. Louis race that occured this weekend. Jeff advertised well in advance a 100-cone course at 7 foot spacing. Simple enough. The only real option a competitor had to consider is road surface. Sure, Jeff could say it was "good," or "acceptable," but that sort of thing is always subjective. You have to see the road to know what to expect. So packing one board with three sets of wheels would probably cover your options.

My opinion is pretty much that it's all good. I just hope we get to the point where what's all good isn't kept a secret til we get there and maybe it's too late. A lot more communication before an event will make any type race more enjoyable.

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Mon May 26, 2003 4:17 pm

Tight slalom may be fun but you you really need a proper setup for it. If not it's depressing. I rode JG's and Vlad's tight courses at Trocadero (Paris) before this weekend and it was no fun with my setup. My board was set up to get speed only. That gave me way to much speed in their course. For tight slalom you need to be able to control speed much more accuratly. I.e. increase AND decrease it. Maybe this is the reason why tight slaloming is not getting more attention. People just don't have the proper setup for it.

Funny is that we tell beginners to learn to pump. You have to pump really good. And after a lot of hard work learning this they will realize that it's only half the truth. "Okey man, you pump is good but you have to learn to decrease your speed." Maybe it would be better to know this from the beginning. It's not just about getting speed. It's more about controling speed. With this in mind one will probably end up with a different board setup more suitable for tight racing.

Mark McCree · Post by **Mark McCree** » Sun May 11, 2003 12:09 am

Vlad, It was fun skating with you at the G3. It was fun seeing everyone. It was also fun showing how a 48 year old fat man can make TS look easy. Keith's hands behind his back routine makes for some heads to turn also. TS IS COOL.

We are looking forward to St. Louis and Brekenridge for some TS venues.

Hey Vlad-check out our picture inserts- same positions- very close.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mark McCree on 2003-05-10 18:13 ]</font>

William Tway · Post by **William Tway** » Thu May 08, 2003 11:04 pm

No beginners courses at the farm this year. A tough GS with a little TS mix and a true TS is what you can expect at 3.0. And of course there will be the Vintage Race, which will be an easy Hybrid. A little bit of everything. Hope to see you there.

Vlad Popov · Post by **Vlad Popov** » Thu May 08, 2003 10:58 pm

Andy and other DeeSeers put TS back in US! We skated true TS and TechSL courses at the Gathering. The Farm 3 will probably be another race to host a fast TS course. That’s 2 big TS races in one season! Roe is working on some new TS models. Cambria is a great TS wheel, and 100mm PVDs with Radicals make a nice TS package. Equipment is not a limiting factor anymore.

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 12:03 am

It is interesting that the most popular course according to Fluitt's poll was the Catalina tight slalom. Yet we really haven't seen that much tight slalom. Most people in a voting situation will always opt for "el Macho" Bigger faster. I think that is what happened at Elsinor- though since I was not there I can only assume that the hill was too scary for anyone in their right mind to run a tight slalom. Except me.

This year I think we can expect some good very fast technical slalom offered in the East. What I hope will happen is that a race site will be choosen that has a good GS hill and another less steep hill nearby or adjacent to the steeper hill. in this way we can run a amatuer men's Tight slalom + Women's tight slalom, and Kids GS course on the lesser grade and a Pro level GS on the steeper grade as well as a Pro men's Tight slalom on the steep grade. Of course people can run whatever course they like as long as they qualify.

Glenn S · Post by **Glenn S** » Sun Mar 02, 2003 6:00 am

Looking at all the disciplines here at http://www.slalomskateboarder.com . The "Tight Slalom" forum has the most interest with the most posts by far. I get the feeling that FCR is probably paying attention to the intrest in TS here, and that there will be tighter courses throughout this next FCR season. Don't others of you out there think this might be the case or should be the case?

Richy Carrasco · Post by **Richy Carrasco** » Sun Mar 02, 2003 5:37 am

Sounds like there will be some tight at Elsinor FCR -- Bring it on Baby!

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 12:40 am

Compared the the 1970's someone starting today has a much better chance of doing well his first season.

In the 70's we had a few articles on slalom- but not much info in terms of equipment set up- I think I read an article about HH who said he used to take the seals of his IKS bearings off and race with them off using wd-40 alone + ran with a 1/2 inch riser in the front only.

You would see a few static shots of the course and have no idea as to the true cone spacing or the pitch of the hill.

Try writing into skateboarder mag to ask a question and have to wait 3-5 issues for an answer- now that was slooooow.

I did write to Hester once- and believe it or not he wrote me back- handwritten no less-in about 3 weeks and gave me some stickers + a Christian G & S cartoon book. Hesters response time at the time was A+ behavior for a pro.

Now all you have to do is ask what to buy- order it online and in 3 days it is at your door- faster probably than getting on a fibreflex waiting list for 6 months at a store in the 1970's. How about Turner? You used to have to wait for up to a year or more for a deck. Now- they either have it- or a few weeks later you can get it.

Now download a few videos- and start skating-jump online, buy some discount airfare + car + hotel package from Orbitz- and fill out an online contest form. Show up and have 1000 instant new friends. Likely- the new skater would still have his doors blown off, but not nearly by as much in the 1970's.

In regards to tight slalom- just set the course used at Folly Beach and you are well on your way to becoming accustomed to what is set on the East Coast.

The West Coast has larger hills which might seem daunting for anyone who has not had the opportunity to skate large hills before, but at least today.....you can ask where they are-= do a mapquest search to find them and go and skate them.

The gear has improved, though the top gear of yesteryear is still pretty competitive with today's TS gear. Avalons have been the bg stride for GS as well as the longer boards and newer trucks. But again....it is all available.

Mollica's DVD's bring lots of video info into the hands of the newest slalomers. Glen Darcy, Maria Carasco also have video available of other races outside of FCR- and there are lots of slalomers at each race constantly taping.

This is the take off stage for our sport. All systems go.

A new slalomer could dive into this sport in 4 months and become a decent racer in that time frame.

Richy Carrasco · Post by **Richy Carrasco** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 8:31 pm

As far as equipement and the state of racing,I started racing thanks to WLAC,My Bros were racing slalom and downhill in the 70s. The Gear we have now I believe is better than the stuff they were riding back then. This should make it way easier for beginners to catch up quick with lots of practice and tips.......

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 4:42 pm

I also looked at the tape and Hollien's Position is almost exactly the same for each cone- no fade.

Mark McCree · Post by **Mark McCree** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 11:57 pm

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.

Brady Mitchell · Post by **Brady Mitchell** » Fri Jan 24, 2003 5:41 am

I like what CKnuck had to say. Maybe tight should be defined as allowing speed to increase without large offsets that decrease speed. Steepness of hill and surface of will dictate cone spacing.

While my preferance is those large offsets at speed, I am generally lacking true tight slalom skills. And my aging body might not allow them to get much better no matter how much practice.

I will add that straight line courses are boring to me to watch. And ride. I like to ride or see courses that have differant aspects to it.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Brady Mitchell on 2003-01-23 23:42 ]</font>

Mike Maysey · Post by **Mike Maysey** » Thu Jan 23, 2003 11:12 pm

Jack Smith wrote..."As I have said before, the days of 6' and under courses on hills may be a thing of the past. Faster wheels and bearings along with higher performance boards will render the really tight courses un-makeable. Skateboard steering systems cannot keep up with the demands placed on them in truly high speed tight courses. Plus beyond a certain speed pumping becomes impossible."

I have to disagree with this statement...the better gear allows me to set my courses tighter. When wheels grip better, boards accelerate faster and the bearings roll farther you can most certainly set tighter courses. Nobody wants to see popcorn, but nobody wants to see a 'tight slalom' course like the Bob Turner Memorial either.

Eric Groff · Post by **Eric Groff** » Wed Jan 22, 2003 8:36 am

Rich-You will always see carnage and whining if I'm racing, I cant wait til JPL so I can change the course and make it better then what ever you kooks did to it!

Richy Carrasco · Post by **Richy Carrasco** » Wed Jan 22, 2003 3:37 am

The SSS crew runs tight every week! 6.5 average on moderate hills- We also run GS and hybrid to be well rounded in all phases of racing! Every one of us has quivers. I think alot of racers should also be rounded so that when a good TS course is run at an event, Organizers dont need to see cone carnage and whiners.

Claude Regnier · Post by **Claude Regnier** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 5:36 am

I agree with Richy on the setting then tweaking them to make them better.

Bring cones in and out in order to accelerate where possible and maitain your speed and increase it through the next series and so on.

I liked the SF hybrid course Sundays was Okay but I had never ridden anything like that. La Costa, Morro and Avila were too loose and the top section just don't belong in those types of races.

The wide offsets are more suited to a long drawn out SGS which of course I have never ridden either.

5'5" OC to 9 (with offsets) can be run on most types of terrain. Controlling speed and Braking for cones or sections are two seperate skills and we should watch, where and how they are used.

TS - I think should be defined by acceleration and control skating. Not braking no major offsets. The offset should be placed in as close an area to allow the racer to race it like an extended line a reach not a turn.

I hope some of this makes sense to one of you.

EH!

Richy Carrasco · Post by **Richy Carrasco** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 4:56 am

Catalina had a good element of speed and reflex twitching! The main reason I brought up the subject is to talk about having more variety at the races!!!!!!!!Hybrid is fun,But just that! Big GS is a rush! and full speed tight is The rad ! On setting courses: Your all right! Every hill is different! The cones need to be set and tested! (Fine Tuned) Then its on!

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 1:37 am

So what distances do you guys think are the fastest/most exciting to race and watch?

Also at what steepness do people think is too steep for TS? Lets take Avila beach as one extreme and Battle by the Bay "hybrid" as another.

interesting to note that the steepness of teh hill doesn't always have an exact indicator of speed. To be sure a 90 degree ppitch is fast- but in some degrees of steepness the surface takes a lot or the responsibility in provideing "roll".

for Instance Catalina was not particularly steep but the surface had fast "Roll". Morro Bay's surface does not have fast "roll".

In Europe the Trocadero surface had incredible "roll" when I skated there in 1990 and 1995.

Terry Kirby · Post by **Terry Kirby** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 6:07 pm

For me slalom has to be about speed. Slow tech courses are ok for drill work but for pure exhilaration nothing beats flying down a course driving your line and contorting your body to make a gate. The problem is its hard to find hills that accomodate this. The best courses of the year for me were always the fastest ones. I think most other fcr racers will agree. TK

Brian Morris · Post by **Brian Morris** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 6:52 am

John,
I don't really thing New Jersey has a regional club. In fact the only racers I know of in Jersey are Noah and I.

As for cone spacings, this is what I do you determine the exact distance. Remember I use Solo Cups, I put one cup down, count off 6 paces (size 12 foot) Place another cup slightly behind my toe and mark it. I either set a straight course, or I just walk and not pay attention to where I place cones, so it usually ends up being some nice offsets and curves. Thats how I practice.

Brian

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 5:50 am

So with all this talk about racing I am curious as to what distances people would like to see in tight slalom.

Please post what you are running and also which spacings allow you to generate + sustain the most speed.

Also please make this relevant to TS board lengths. Ie. saying that you like to run x.0 foot centers on your 42 inch deck will should not be considered TS.

I have run cone distances of 6 foot but I do feel that the speeds hit are lessened with such tight spacing- at least for the current practice levels. In 'da farm 2 I set spacing no tighter than 7.5 foot centers with the exception of the final 4 gates which were 7 foot.

In practice I'll set things a little closer. But I don't want to have to go to a narrow width truck as I feel that would be speed limiting in terms of handling offsets at speed.

And please tell me distances using standard cones and actually measure the CENTER to Center distances. No "guesstimates". Many a time I hear people tell me that they run 6 foot centers only to find that they are not.

Also tell me what types of spacing and offsets one might find in one of your courses.

S0 lets get an idea from some regional clubs.

SSS?
MB?
San Fran?
Mississippi?
Florida?
New Hampshire?
Connecticut?
New Jersey?
New York?
Massachusetts?
Washington DC?
New Mexico?
Seattle?
Portland?
Chicago?
Rhode Island?
Vermont?
West Virginia?
Georgia?
France?
Germany?
England?
Australia?
Trinidad?
Switzerland?
Sweden?
Czech Republic?
Estonia?
Latvia?
Russia?

etc.

Mark McCree · Post by **Mark McCree** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 4:50 am

Any way, My post picture is better than Eric's.

So there.

Mark McCree · Post by **Mark McCree** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 4:39 am

Well, Well, Well, I see the climate here is as frigid as in NCDSA-ville.

The course issue is valid. PRO'S should be TESTED. Not just for speed, but for technical ability.

MORO was a speed fest, Not a technically challenging venue.

And this East coast-West coast thing has been going on since before time- I like it- it gives the racers more to chew on.

I can't wait to bow to the GREAT WHITE ARAB, LOL.

I will expect him to do the same to me when I beat him. And the more races we have- the more he will be beat. The more I will be beat. And on-and on- and on-on-on.

Get used to it.

Eric Groff · Post by **Eric Groff** » Tue Jan 14, 2003 7:18 am

John, great reply, a universal international reply, of course, only my opinion.

Thank you for sharing yours.

Arab

Brian Morris · Post by **Brian Morris** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 6:18 pm

I don't like sick speed when I skate slalom. I like a mild hill or slope when i set a course, because I like to skate really tight courses, tight offsets, ect. I like to set a course with all one distance between cones, 6' is what I prefer, when I started to slalom I thought 6' was standard Tight Slalom.

Richy Carrasco · Post by **Richy Carrasco** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 8:43 am

JG- Your right when you came out last time to ride in OC,we were all just getting started and with time and races we have progressed in our practice of racing. last summer we had a hill that was about 3oo yrds long with about 35mph finish brand new asphalt we named the Black Hole!We ran super G, Hybrid top to Super G finish,Evans set a TS full speed course! We run everything and are up for racing anything fast! SSS is all about the racing crew!

Henry Julier · Post by **Henry Julier** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 4:15 am

Well, I would have to say that I think more technical courses, tight or gs, are more fun and allow me to improve faster, so i'm all for them. Speed is last on my list really- if I wanted to go 35 miles per hour just for the sake of going fast I would hop on my bike or maybe go automobiling.

Henry

_________________
Ickboy

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Mon Jan 13, 2003 1:46 am

Just so no one gets offended- I want to make it perfectly clear that I feel Ransom and Chicken are excellent racers- I have never raced them head to head...but I don't have to because of the clock.

On a GS course in the beginning of the FCR season in San Fran- Ransom simply blew every racer out of the water in the GS. No one was even close. It was single track and there were some wind conditions- but after Ransom got on some Avalons- he bettered his time by an unhead of amount.

I ended up running my Turner Summer Ski Full nose in that event as I never felt comfortable with the Turner Downhill Hybrids.

Interesting to note as that was a course that required a lot of skill- the times got more spread out. You saw Ransom putting some distance between himself and lesser skilled racers.

On a simpler course- one with less speed- it is likely that rest of the racers would have come closer to Charlie's time. Charlie would not have been able to demonstrate his skill at running fast GS courses.

In terms of the California Beginner courses- realistically a course that has to meet the criteria to be able to be run by girls under 15 - without a high percentage of them DQ'ing-simply is by definition, an easy course.

I read in Skateboarder mag about so many great California races. I want to see some screaming fast racing.

I also want to see a type of racing done that can be accessible to all racers from all continients. That means that the courses should be representitive of what could be run in other areas. Yes, in California, you have roads that are super wide with good surface and pitch and unfortunately these roads aren't accessible for all racers. I would still like to see wide open racing done in California, but at the same time I would like to see courses set at "title" races to be representitive of what is possible in other areas of the World.

I mean - if no one but California can practice it, for lack of terrain (Ie. 6 lane wide roads with no crown and no traffic), then it is more a California type event.

That is not to say we can't have fast racing.....we can have fast GS but perhaps at some races it should be limited in width.

The San Fran Battle by the Bay GS race was done on a narrow road with lots of pitch. Any country or state with a wide steep road could practice this type of slalom.

Slalom with gates under 5 foot on center is limited to flatland slalom (unless you want to ride a 8 inch wheelbase deck- not fun).

6 foot on center is also very tight still for the skill level of the slalomers we have today. I would not set a course in competition with 6 foot gates at this point in the sport- unless I were setting a course in England where flatland is so strong.

The 'Da Farm 2 race had a TS on a steep grade that had gates no tighter than 7.5 foot on center- with possible exception for the final 4 gates which I think were 7 foot on center. I don't think any children entered that race, and it was a high intermediate level course. Setting a course with a higher difficulty level let the spectators differentiate between the racers.

Not all the racers were within .2 seconds of each other....looking virtually idential through the course. In this race there were wide spreads in times- different "attack Strategies " by the racers in regards to approaching the course, readily identifiable different styles. I thought it was very interesting to watch as did many of the spectators who were not slalomers.

My hope was that it would showcase TS racing as a skilled
sport- and perhaps motivate or inspire a few racers to further their skills or - hopefully to make someone want to try our sport and get hooked. It was very interesting to see the expressions on some of the "non skater neighbors" who were spectating when I told them that I had been skating slalom for 28 years and then countered with Tway, Vlad, Troy, Noah, Ur13 had been slaloming for less than 2 years and that a person could develop this skill in a short period of time.

I was hoping to inspire people to try to learn something that looks "impossible" and impressive- and I am sure that setting a course that let the racers show what was possible had a part in that. If I had set a course with 10 foot gates I don't think we would have held the spectators intense attention for as long (this is based on what made spectators hang around in Memorial Drive in Boston on a course area that is set regularly every Sunday).

In terms of the courses- I have skated SSS courses (1999 Banks and the oil drilling spot) and I think that SSS has in part gotten so good because they have set challenging courses during practice. SSS is certainly ready for some high level courses and I am sure that the Morro Bay crew is ready for some more challenging courses as well as are the Badlanders.

Simon Levene · Post by **Simon Levene** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 3:21 pm

Andy,

I don't know. But, it's not so hard to match those times as its downhill. Pump acceleration is the hard thing which I seem to have lost a lot of. That particular spot had a very slow start so I was getting to max speed by about cone 15. Easily 6+ cones per second after cone 15. If the local authority would resurface the spot it would be great. It was the only place I ever practiced downhill. BTW - I could run 5.5' flatland almost as fast. In fact, terminal speed on a long, flat, straight course is little different. I could probably probably pump one of those faster than someone push a board next to me, even now (as long as the old lungs held out!).

This comes back to TK's question on NCDSA ...
'Also To the guys who raced in the 70's and 80's (Evans, Ransom,Dunn, Hester, Simon, kimbal etc) Has the performance level increased from then to now?'

I reckon that I can now run at no more than 80% of my peak. More practice than zero would help of course. Fitness and desire is a problem. I was 21 when I ran those times and probably maintained or increased that level of performance until I was about 27. Then I just didn't bother to slalom anymore.

I don't believe the performance level has increased. There aren't that many fast younger slalomers coming up (not that I've seen anyway). I comes down to the skating environment you grow up with. Slalom was just a standard part of one's repertoire back in the day, and was practiced all of the time. Young skaters don't ride like that anymore.

Although, saying that, some tighter offset courses must be faster because of the grip levels of the new wheels e.g. Cambrias.

I do believe that the FCR style racing is faster than it would have been as wheel technology is so much better now. I don't believe that deck performance is much better, just better suited to more open courses i.e. longer/fatter decks.

Tight straight downhill slalom times wouldn't be much different as it's more down to the riders ability i.e. max speed was always available to the rider.

I love riding straight downhill courses!

Andy Bittner · Post by **Andy Bittner** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 2:09 pm

That's just %*%#!^ NUTS! Now I remember why you were the slalomer I had as my "mark", back in the late-80s! Of course, when I look at photos from back then, it looks like your physical build has changed completely. Do you think you could still run times like that?

Simon Levene · Post by **Simon Levene** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 1:40 pm

I'm re-posting this from NCDSA, just to give you guys an idea of what to shoot at for a 30 cone course.

1985 - 22 cones (no room for more on slope), 5.5' apart, steep local spot (now sadly gone), electronic timing (just before 1st cone and after last), 3 pushes (no space for more) - my best 3.82 seconds. Easy sub 3.9.

30 cones, same place and conditions with cones 23 - 30 onto flat then very very slight uphill - 5.28 seconds.

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

More Tight racing in 2003

Tight Slalom

VP

Tway,

Correction

Nice Shirt TK

OUCH!

A True "Slalom" Course at The 2003 Worlds