More Tight racing in 2003

Discussion Forum
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:24 am

I have a neat little device that measures degrees I got at Home Depot for about $9.00

Its a good way to a see what the pitch of a hill is and might contribute to the cause just for referance purposes.

I'll bring it along when we run some times just for that purpose.

But I dont think pitch/grade is relevent, run as steep as you want or need, to go as fast as you can.

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:20 am

M. Dong
At this point there is no time, but there is a Challange.
30 cones 6' centers, Timed from first to last cone, unlimited push.
Same goes for 7', 8' centers and so on.
Start clockin times.
Any grade of hill, lets just see whos doin what on what,
Whos the fastest cone to cone guy around, NO STOP WATCHES though, If its gonna be real then timers need to be used.

Richy Carrasco
AXE Army
AXE Army
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Garden Grove, Cali
Contact:

Post by Richy Carrasco » Fri Jan 10, 2003 6:19 am

The bottom line is We like to train on hills!Big hills big GS ,Moderate slopes with decent asphalt full speed tight is a adrenaline rush and something we hope to see in future races!

Michael Dong
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Bothell, WA

Post by Michael Dong » Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:28 am

Arab,

What is the time to shoot for in the SSS challenge?

Michael

Glenn S
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Glenn S » Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:12 am

Hans,
Great Post.

I suggest that someone with good course knowledge start a new "Topic" and let East Coast, West Coast, Europe, and the rest of the slalom world define the disciplines here and now in 2003 so that “all” slalom skaters have something to go by.

I say, don’t let just Andy and his group decide this. Let the slalom “world” define the disciplines here and now and petition that the USSSF accept these definitions, or that any race organizers around the world accept them too. If we are the current world of slalomers here on this fourm, then we should set the rules so that we are not confused about discipline definitions.

Could someone post what the ISSA had done in regards to this? Or is there a place on the web to view Hans is talking about?
Glenn


On 2003-01-06 11:56, Hans Koraeus wrote:
This discussion is the main reason why ISSA (International Skateboard Slalom Association) was created many, many years ago. But then again when did we humans learn from our history. Sure the current ISSA rules could need to be overlooked again but the purpose stays the same. There is a need for all sports to define their discipline(s).
Otherwise it's bound to lead to misunderstandings.

It's always up to organizers to decide what rules to use but we could help them/us with a setup of standardized rules and disciplines. That is what ISSA did. This is a huge but important task but this topic is not the place to go further into that. That will need a section of it's own in this forum.

There is already some confusion regarding european discipline names and the one used in the states. And apparently inside the states as well. It's maybe time to put all our forces together and evolve the current ISSA rules with the current american reality whatever it may be.

We all wish to be able to know what kind of competition and disciplines that awaits us before going to a contest. But without a documentation of what the discipline names mean they won't mean anything. They will be interpreted differently by each person anyway.

There are many possible disciplines in skateboard slalom. Often some of them are more suitable to us and our equipment than others. Some are in our liking more than others. Here we will always have different personal views. This is normal. But when we are talking about our sport terms there shouldn't be.

Let's make history! This is the forum where it could be done. Let's join our forces into clarifying our sport for ourselves.

Adam Trahan
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Adam Trahan » Thu Jan 09, 2003 10:51 pm

Eric,

I get the clue.

I don't think California needs defending by anyone, including you.

I am guilty of not reading the whole thread, I am guilty of loosing my temper and my humor although I understand why I lost it...

I don't know why I feel that I have to "cure" your post's attitude, maybe you don't want to change how you are perceived online. I only know that you write your opinion online at this site and a different skateboard site and you aggrivate a lot of people AND make a lot of people laugh. I have laughed so many times from your posts, more than I have been pissed. This is not about me not liking you, it's about our behavior online.

So, I will go back to being behind the screen on this subject, my appologies ARAB for trying to get you to see things my way. I mean no sarcasm, just pure and simple truth.

I never once have doubted what you do for slalom skateboarding in the REAL world where things really matter.

We should meet at the new Pipeline skatepark one time before or after a race and skate, I think I can give you a good run there.

Peace man.

adam

http://www.gscottimaging.com/images/arc ... tml#Desert Pipes (1977-78)

I'm the one in the yellow flyaway...

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Thu Jan 09, 2003 8:16 pm

Adam again I beleive you have failed to read all the post on the tight slalom subject, Remember, this thread was 3 pages long before I showed up, People were fighting about what the Californians are doing, Telling the Slalom Community that The Californians are a bunch of begineers so on and so fourth. Take the time to read the whole thread and you will see the writing on the wall. When I showed up the graffiti paint was already dry, I just broke out my can and sprayed over their graffiti.

Call it what you want but rememeber 3 pages whining about Californians and ME before my first post, I simply offered a challange to those that offended me and my friends.

Adam dont make yourself look like Brady over on NCDSA, Get the whole picture befor you come down on me, Get the Clue?.

Arab

Adam Trahan
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Adam Trahan » Thu Jan 09, 2003 5:19 pm

Thanks Hans, you pretty much summed it up.

I like Eric Groff, I spoke in behalf of Eric when he was banned and I invited him here and that invitation still to this moment stands.

Editing content is not my cup of tea, it is hard enough to get all of us to use our own names...

On any account, I simply wish that Eric would not DRILL us (he does not do this all the time) on the California vs. the world subject, that's it.

I am just a guy who wants to be a part of this community of racers, I don't want to snuff anyone out and I won't.

Thanks again Hans.

Hans Koraeus
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Posts: 2075
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Hans Koraeus » Thu Jan 09, 2003 1:16 am

Eric, you shouldn't take Adams comment as anything else than his personal. I.e. a punch as good as anyones in this matter. So you should not demand of him to be neutral unless he is speaking as moderator. But I agree it is a problem to know weather it was intended from his part to speak as moderator or personal. I think personally that unless he uses the Moderator login he is speaking only for himself.

Me as an outsider on this subject, I don't think anyone is out of line so far. A little heat in the discussions we must be able to accept. And hopefully most of us will be able to judge it for what it is anyway, "gorilla talk".

Brian Morris
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Hawthorne, NJ
Contact:

Post by Brian Morris » Thu Jan 09, 2003 12:54 am

Arab,

This thread is about Tight Slalom in the new season. Not about how you think California skaters are better than East Coast skaters, not about Gilmore losing or wining on Cali courses. Its not about East Coast/West Coast, its about slalom. So I don't understand what the nonstop bitch fest has to be about?
I think your a cool guy,and I have alot of respect for you. You do alot for slalom and for skateboarding in general, and I can't wait for the chance to skate with you and learn from you because I know you have alot to teach. I know you'll most likely flame me, and just write me off as another East Coast kid who hasn't done as much for slalom as most California residents have, but jeez man give it a rest.

"Brain"

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Wed Jan 08, 2003 9:06 pm

"You got snuffed, then you come back with renewed vigor and it is pointed at the people in the community. You side step this and I see it as "bowing to the man" You side step this and pound the community with your tyranical approach. "

Could you explain what your saying here?

"I don't look at this community like East coast vs California or anyone. I want to see it as a INTERNATIONAL community. Not a specific geographical web site."

If this is the case then why dont you tell YOUR moderator of this forum not to californicate it, then you wont need me to step in and tell it like it is!

See Adam its a 2 way street and at this point you are only playing on one side, Why have you chosen to admonish me for telling the facts, and not those that have attacked the people who are doing something about slalom.

Play by our rules Adam not yours!

Adam Trahan
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Adam Trahan » Wed Jan 08, 2003 8:35 pm

Eric,

You got snuffed, then you come back with renewed vigor and it is pointed at the people in the community. You side step this and I see it as "bowing to the man" You side step this and pound the community with your tyranical approach.

I don't look at this community like East coast vs California or anyone. I want to see it as a INTERNATIONAL community. Not a specific geographical web site.

Fortunately, I am from Arizona. I am proud of where I am from but in the scheme of things, all I want, and I can only speak for myself, is to be a part of this International community.

I will speak to you with the same value that I speak with GBJ or anyone else. I'm all about free speach, I'm all about having you say what you want BUT I believe you are on a "high" centered around yourself and you are using slalom skateboarding as your soap box.

http://www.slalomskateboarder.com is a communty based site. I gathered us together at this web site with the help from people accross the globe. This is my contribution and alone it speaks for itself. I am not better than you nor do I look at competition like you do. I strive to make good choices and am comfortable with who I am.

You are a racer who has valuable information to offer the communty but you mess it up with your attitude. Sure, you have a lot of friends, yes, you are on the "winning" team and most importantly, you have "heart" but are you really doing your part? Are you doing the best job that you can do?

I don't think so.

I think you can do better than some sarcastic self centered act. Try being who you are in person. EVERYONE will attest that you are a nice guy in person, almost everyone will attest that you aren't online.

Best Regards to you Eric Groff, I truly mean that.

From the land of "Bow to no man"

Have a nice day.

adam trahan

Mike Gorman
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Altadena, CA

Post by Mike Gorman » Wed Jan 08, 2003 8:32 pm

I take exception to Vlad's statement that we won't like tight when we see it, and that the course setting is a reflection of the participant's desire. We are the ones asking for tight! And trust me, a lot of courses we ran this year were NOT a relection of the participant's desire. That's why you will some West coast outlaw tight this year. And it won't be on flat ground, and it won't be beginner courses, and nobody will be stuffing 36 inchers through it either. We practice tight and we practice GS, but up until now we haven't been setting the courses.
That might be about to change.

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Wed Jan 08, 2003 7:37 pm

Adam "chill out and be a part of the community" Why dont you use those same words for GBJ when he threatened John Gilmour

Is there alittle East Coast Bias here Adam, Who you suckin up to! the people that are doing something for the slalom community or the people that are fighting over what the people that are helping the slalom community are doing.

maybe you should get your prioritys straight and do something for the slalom community instaed of defending those that are bashing it.

Arab

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Wed Jan 08, 2003 7:31 pm

Adam,
Start from the begining of this thread, Its eastcoasters fighting about what Californians are doing, Its all right there on your website, did you miss it? I only defend those I ride with when people start bashing them. Its all right here on your website did you miss it, go back and read it again, Like I said this thread was 3 pages old before I showed up to set the record straight, did you miss that it was on your website right here! Tell me where I was wrong? could you please point out where I was wrong in defending my friends when others are bashing them.

California Begineers! Step up or shut up!
Arab taking over NCDSA, I'll take over this place next because it has turned into the East Coast Slalom Site, Cater to whoever you want Adam, I dont! I tell it like it is, sorry if the truth hurts. I didnt californicate anything on this thread, it was done by the others long before I got here, I just came to set the record straight, if you have any other facts to displace mine feel free to try.

People dont like it when somebody steps on their toes with the truth!

Facts dont lie only those that have no facts lie!

Give me facts not opinions on this matter.

Arab

Adam "chill out and be a part of the community" Why dont you use those same words for John Gilmour who came on your site and bashed the communtiy that is doin something for slalom.

Adam take time to see the whole picture, read all the words, remeber 3 pages of BS before I got here to set the record straight.

Adam Trahan
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Posts: 795
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Adam Trahan » Wed Jan 08, 2003 6:46 pm

Eric,

I really don't understand you. When I try to, I think of how cool you are in person, then I think of the psychology books that I want to reference...

You get bannished from NCDSA by Adam N and when you get re-instated, you trash your fellow slalom skaters and not Adam N, the guy who "snuffed" you out. What in the hell is wrong with you? Did you forget something?

An old punk rocker like you?

You bow to the man, I don't get it at all.

You are stuck in California in more ways than one. California has absolutely nothing to do with anything, free thinking is everything Eric. Grow up.

Talk smak? Cool, whatever.

Why don't you let your racing speak for itself. Statistics can be twisted any way you want. I like reading what you say, but I'm very tired of your bullshit online Eric. Chill out and be a part of the community, don't trash it.

I apologize to the rest of you for going off topic but Groff is so far out of line...

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Wed Jan 08, 2003 6:19 pm

Hey Michael,
You cant get those PVD's adjusted to turn?
The 1 push thing seems alittle silly, I bet even I could make it through a 1 meter course with 1 push, SSS ran 3 courses yesterday,
1. 30 cones or so 6.5 straight, unlimited push, we all pretty much hit it at full speed, David Carrasco was smoking second time out in 20+ years.
2. 30 cones or so 6.0 with small offsets nothing more then 6 inches I would guess, unlimited push, We all hit it at full speed, Myself if I went into it with about 1 or to less pushes I would run it cleaner(I'm getting about 10-15 pushes into it)
3. 30 cones or so 6.0 straight, unlimited push, I love running 6.0 straight, it is good exercise and just about the right length to make it challangeing at speed.

6.0 can be diffecult on steeper hills with unlimited push for some people, thats why we ride it everywhere so we are prepared come race day.

Anybody want to take the SSS challange?

30 cones 6' centers unlimited push on any grade, .10 penlty per cone Timer starts at first cone ends at last. Whos the fastest cone to cone guy around?

Michael Dong
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Bothell, WA

Post by Michael Dong » Wed Jan 08, 2003 10:26 am

Well, I tried Vlad's 5.5ft, 30 cone flat course tonight. First off, I think that a single push with 5 meters before the first cone sucks. It should be like cyberslalom where you can push as much as you want from 5 meters back, otherwise its just too slow (or maybe its just that I'm too slow).

I tried this after doing an hour of cyberslalom. I only got one clean run and I forgot to reset the Tway timer so I didn't get a time for it. The next cleanest time was 8.002 sec with 2 cones down. My setup was a Roe Bullet with PVD trucks and I shortened my wheelbase by 1" from the cyberslalom setup and swapped out the flashbacks for cambrias. I immediately noticed that the board was HARDER to turn. It felt almost like I had less leverage. Are there any secrets here for tight slalom board setup - wider trucks? Super short wheelbase? Any words of wisdom from Mr. Gilmour?

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:13 am

Oh and did I mention about the Californians that go out of state to put on races,
Kona,Albkurky,Colo,Oregan,W.Va. and win!

Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Eric Groff
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: CA, USA

Post by Eric Groff » Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:09 am

Might I just join in here! Let me Califactecate this here conversation, Troy I would love for you and Vlad to come out and race us California boys, Gilmour has tried and failed whos next? John when you say that I have calicentricated NCDSA what the f##k has that place been for the last year? A bunch of Least Coasters (I like that one it came from one of the east coast guys, he is ashamed of living where he does).

Califacts
How many people that live outside of California have won in California?
How many people that live outside of California have won outside of California

Or should I just say with the exception of 1 or 2 races Californians win everything and thats a fact!

John I spoke with somebody that was present this past weekend in florida and I said "Gilmours pretty fast isn't he?" his reply was "yeah he looks fast but he plows cones over", Yeah anybody can look fast but can you do it without hitting cones.

John as for our begineer courses out here in California you have lost on everything, TS,GS,Hybrid whats your excuse, beat by Californians. SSS we practice everything and we are prepared to beat anybody anytime anywhere, Why dont you grab your 8 fastest east coast professional friends and we can do a little side pot at the next major race, yeah like yer new pals in Florida, bring it on, you can set up yer professional courses and we will set up our begineer courses our 8 agaist your 8, heck our 8 isnt even the best in California, but you can have whatever 8 you want to chose along the whole eastern seaboard, florida to maine, actually the 8 guys you are gonna race here live within a 30 mile radius. hey John we will even let you have Chaput since he was originally from the east coast, we can total the points at the end of the day.

This converstaion has gone on for 3 Fuckin pages, my name has been brought up and I wasnt even here, Its so fun to watch east coasters fight over what the californians are doing. And what they are doing is putting on Races, Winning Races, Not only in California but every where else they go.

I love being part of the winning team!

Arab

PS SSS practiced 6ft centers on a hill we useally run 40+mph GS/Super G on in anticipation of a true TS race at La Costa, Jack did what he had to do to accomodate the racers, I dont think there was maybe 20 people in that field that could have run 6 ft down La Costa, TS looks great on Flat, but looks really stupid on a hill with to much speed. SSS we do it everywhere because we can.

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Tue Jan 07, 2003 5:42 am

Can you tell that I get cranky when I'm tired?

It is interesting to see this thread literally take off.

over 3 pages in less than 20 hours. Many page views. Perhaps there is demand for tighter slalom than "slalom".

I do think that there is a biomechanical relationship here in cone width spacing, pitch of the hill, and wheelbase- to optimize the set up for maximum speed and CPS. And I am talking about a technical course not just straights.

You'll note that many racers are within 100ths or tenths of each other for a relatively long course.

Because we are rolling and not climbing- fat percentage, and body type don't really play in much. You'll see a Well fed practiced Arab to extremely well against a Lean Michael Breem. The power to weight ratio for human muscle tissue is likely very consistent. Having better power to weight ratio is achieveable and desireable- but who wants to work that hard :wink:.

So our power to weight ratio is pretty much equal.

So now on to Transmissions. The Tranny is the wheelbase and truck geometry of the deck as well as the flex of the deck that translates our upper body movement into forces that turn our wheels with each pump.

Clearly it is important to have the right gearing to be successful in a race- especially if the power to weight ratios are similar.

The wheels are our tires and we - for the last season have mostly been running on Avalons so this is pretty equivalent. if not we were using laCostas or stingers. And of course Flashbacks as well.

So we are seeing development in the transmissions the most active at this time. truck manufacturers and Deck manufacturers.

It is all so interesting. And really so much like car Racing that I have dubbed the sport- poor man's formula one-

I'm offline for a while as I also try to head to ECES- but I do need a ride in a snow worthy car. Anytakers?- I'm covering gas and tolls and lunch for the way up there.
I would like to go up any time after Tuesday afternoon, Wednesday is good also.

Email me a private message through slalomskateboarder.com as my yahoo email is always full.

Vlad Popov
Moscow-Washington
Moscow-Washington
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Moscow, Russia
Contact:

Post by Vlad Popov » Tue Jan 07, 2003 5:18 am

I'm sorry, I read some of the posts after all. This is fun! With regard to Gilmour's "2003-01-06 03:29" post: Gilmour, you are loved even more now.

Leitah.

Michael Dong
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Bothell, WA

Post by Michael Dong » Tue Jan 07, 2003 5:14 am

Brian,

I think that when TK said "at speed" he means in the range of 20 to 25mph. If you are on a decent slope, 5.5ft will cause most humans to have a major screaming conegasm, spraying cones everywhere. I think I remember calculating the 100 cone world record and it was something like 20.05 mph at 6ft centers. 5.5ft centers at that speed is inhuman (5.35 cones/sec). But I do think 5.5ft on a flatter surface where you generate your own speed would be doable, fun and look fast as hell running somewhere around 4 cones per second. For Vlad's Russian Gauntlet (30 cones, 5.5ft centers), 4 cones per sec would be 7.5 sec (14.5mph avg speed)running time, so here is the first mark to beat.

Vlad Popov
Moscow-Washington
Moscow-Washington
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Moscow, Russia
Contact:

Post by Vlad Popov » Tue Jan 07, 2003 4:08 am

Damn it, I just got here after a busy day at work. Sorry, I don't even have enough time to read all the posts.

I will get back to this (intersting?) TS discussions after the East Coast Expression Session.

Andy, Jack - nothing personal (on this forum). :smile: Politics behind your courses summed up in one sentence: "good looks" on TV. Politics behind Brian Parson's courses: accommodate everyone form beginner to expert. I have nothing against anyone's policies nor am I proposing to change the format of the existing competitions/series.

My idea is to have super technical TS on the side of the regular competition for the few interested skaters. That is all.

Sorry if I missed anything, I gotta go pack. CMC might give me a lesson of proper shoulder position; hopefully I'll get my shoulders moving the right way for the upcoming longboard and Super Gee-A-triplle-S-y and Downhilly courses next season!


John, see you in Vermont.

DA DALV 30-5.5ft-cones on flat challenge is on. I can't wait.

Cheers.

Vlad/out on vacation.

Brian Morris
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Hawthorne, NJ
Contact:

Post by Brian Morris » Tue Jan 07, 2003 3:41 am

Thanks alot TK!!!!

Terry Kirby
Team RoeRacing
Team RoeRacing
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Hampton, NH USA

Post by Terry Kirby » Tue Jan 07, 2003 3:29 am

Brain, I might have some orange soccer cones with the bases cut off you can have. TK

Brian Morris
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Hawthorne, NJ
Contact:

Post by Brian Morris » Tue Jan 07, 2003 2:18 am

On 2003-01-06 19:49, John Gilmour wrote:
is that 6.0 center to center or 6.0 cone edge to cone edge?
When I set 6' courses when I practice, I don't use cones cause I'm a broke college kid. I put plaster in some SOLO cups and set them up. They're about 1/2 the size of a turner cone. So I set up 6' edge to edge. I don't know what UR13 and Noah set, they said 6'.

"Brain"

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Tue Jan 07, 2003 1:49 am

is that 6.0 center to center or 6.0 cone edge to cone edge?

Brian Morris
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Hawthorne, NJ
Contact:

Post by Brian Morris » Mon Jan 06, 2003 11:22 pm

Anyone who can run 5.5" ON CENTER at speed is a hot rider. I doubt I could do it. TK
Big ups to Vlad, Noah, UR13, Tway who ripped it beyond belief at the NJ TS race. They chewed up the 5.5 spit it out, and asked for seconds.
said 6.0 feet, but not many people would be able to make that.
John,
6.0 feet isn't that tight. Last September was the first time I ever road a slalom board, the course I rode was lots of 6ft with offsets, set by Noah and UR13. I think if a newbie can make a 6ft course at speed after a few tries, than a slalom vet shouldn't have a problem with a little practice.
On 2003-01-06 16:08, Wesley Tucker wrote:
Hans, I GOT the right equipment to wiggle!
Whenever I pull it out, women point and yell, "ICK! . . . ooh, and it's all 'cut away' too!"

(Nothing like a little gentile humor to spice up a languid afternoon I always say!)
Oh man Wes, thats just horrible...:smile:

"Brain"

Wesley Tucker
1961-2013 (RIP)
1961-2013 (RIP)
Posts: 3279
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Wesley Tucker » Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:08 pm

Hans, I GOT the right equipment to wiggle!
Whenever I pull it out, women point and yell, "ICK! . . . ooh, and it's all 'cut away' too!"

(Nothing like a little gentile humor to spice up a languid afternoon I always say!)

Jack Smith
Morro Bay Skate legend
Morro Bay Skate legend
Posts: 736
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Morro Bay, California
Contact:

Post by Jack Smith » Mon Jan 06, 2003 10:06 pm

Howard, Dylan, Dave Baker and Terry Brown-Benko.

We all had a blast, much more difficult than I thought it would be. My best time was in the 30 second range with six cones.

I claim the over 45 record!

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Mon Jan 06, 2003 9:53 pm

Hey Jack I was just making up that set up :smile:

Who else did the 100 cones? Times? Did they like it?

Jack Smith
Morro Bay Skate legend
Morro Bay Skate legend
Posts: 736
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Morro Bay, California
Contact:

Post by Jack Smith » Mon Jan 06, 2003 9:42 pm

When running the 100 cone challenge, on six foot centers, I used a 30" Bahne Classic, Seismic Trucks and Cambria Wheels. Later in the day I switched to a Turner.

At the present time Cadillac is not making a slalom specific wheel.

Hans Koraeus
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Posts: 2075
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Hans Koraeus » Mon Jan 06, 2003 9:26 pm

Wes,

I'm in favor of cones per second rather than "wiggle per second" even though wiggles per second might be better in bed. This is because wps depends on your equipment (Gentlemen! No nasty thoughts please) while cones per second are not. At least almost not.

Once again, this is an interesting topic and hopfully we'll soon have a place in the forum to discuss rules and definitions further (Adam, the last sentence is a hint for you).

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Mon Jan 06, 2003 9:15 pm

On 2003-01-06 13:59, Jack Smith wrote:
John,

My recollection of the posted course description for the 2001 MB race, stated that there would be no gates tighter than six feet. I may be wrong, but that's what I thought I said. It was difficult to give a good pre-race course description due to the fact that I was only able to take two, police escorted runs down the street.

The course that Henry set was not a Super Offset GS course by any means. Henry is incorrect in saying that I did not give him a course description. He and I discussed what kind of course should be set. John, as you know the talent pool at that race was quite wide, the course was set accordingly.

Once again John, you take the facts and tweak them to fit your agenda. I am speaking of "Race Day on Kennedy Way" held in the early 1990's. The race was never advertised as a tight slalom, it was termed a "slalom race" Yes the course was on a slight pitch, it even had a curve in the road. The course was set by committee. Yes, there were some skilled racers there...who hadn't raced in years. Ransom was not in attendance. I'm surprised you didn't mention the Morro Bay race we held in 1980 as well, won by Hutson. Or even the 1977 Pro Slalom event held in San Luis Obispo, Hester won it.

John, I could care less if you can "forgive" me.

I do agree that there should be different courses for different abilities. We have been unable to do this due to time constraints. We only have the hill for so many hours a days. Even if were able to extend the number of days we have the hill, and divide up the racing by categories, certain classes running on certain days, there would still be the problem of staffing the event over this extended period. I am of course speaking of FCR events. John, Don and myself, along with much of our volunteer help have job and family commitments.

John, I didn't say that the newer improved gear prevented you from doing tight gates. I said "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 think that we are fast appoaching a point where wheel traction will not be able to keep up with wheel speed. The contact patch of a skateboard wheel is very small, and it very difficult to create a whole lot of downforce on the wheels.

As for the Turner Memorial event. Yes, the course could have been tighter. Once again I was somewhat handcuffed by the reasons mentioned above, wide ability level and time constraints. Please describe to me historical "Turner" course.

I am not opposed to "tight courses", I am opposed to "super tight courses" where only a handful of racers can make them without plowing cones. At every race this year, clean runs, almost always got more applause and "oohs" than fast runs where numerous cones were hit.

I agree that there is room for course setting and sticking to course descriptions. Often times we (FCR) are unable to pre-run the venues far enough in advance to post a course description in a timely manner. We will work on this problem next season.

I truly do like constructive comments on the races I have been involved with, all I ask is for you to have your facts correct (I sound like Arab). It is very discouraging to spend thousands of dollars of personal funds, not to mention hundreds of hours on promoting slalom and then be scolded by people who do not have their facts correct.

Vlad,

Please fill me in on the "politics" behind the FCR courses. Who called American Football a "traditional sport" on the global level? I have never said that TS shouldn't has no right to exist.
I do not understand your editor remark.
Also did I somehow personally attack you? I re-read my post and don't think I did.

In consideration to your post- no malice intended.

I think the problem that arises is in definitions. lets say Bugs Bunny hears the word "slalom race" and thinks 6.5 foot to 7.5 cones with some slightly wider offsets.
When Bugs hears TS he might be thinking 6.5 foot to 7.5 cones with some slightly wider offsets- perhaps the same course but on a steeper hill.

Donald Duck on the other hand Hears "Slalom" and thinks 6.5 - 7.5 foot on center cones with some wider offfsets. When Donald hears "tight Slalom" he shudders and imagines 4.0 -5.5 on center courses.

When The Queen Of England hears the word slalom she thinks 4.0- 5.5 centers on flat. When she hears the words "Tight Slalom" she gets a mental picture of Martin Sweeny doing 3 foot cones and Anatoly Matsukevich doing 1 meter 100 cone slalom.

When Jack Smith hears the word slalom (Now I am not trying to put words into your mouth I am just trying to guess at your definitions) he thinks of 8- 12 foot gates. When Jack Smith hears the word "Tight Slalom" he thinks of a course with most cones being 5.5 to 6.5 foot on center (Certainly necessitating a tight wheelbase board and a very high skill level which few have).

When GBJ hears "slalom" he thinks of 7 foot to 9 foot gates on center set in groups of three typically on a mild but pumpable pitch
allowing for the racer to use his own power as opposed to a long push start or huge ramp to athletically generate speed. When GBJ hears "tight slalom" He thinks of 5.5 centers.

When Anatoly Matsukevich hears "slalom" he thinks of gates 1.7 meters- 2.3 meters on center on a slight grade. When he hears "tight slalom" he wonders where the race will be...Russia = very tight, england = very tight = possible $$$ for living expenses for the next 2 years. Switerland = possible podium....etc.

When John Gilmour thinks of "Slalom" he thinks of teh bulk of gates being about 6.5 feet on center for straights and about 7.5 feet on center for offsets. very high technical difficulty levels for the pros- lesser difficulty levels for the ams.

When John Gilmour Hears "Tight slalom" he thinks it is probably the same as "slalom" and that they could be just dropping the prefix "tight" like they do in skiing. or that it could be tight flatland slalom. cone distances of 1.7 meters or slightly closer- short wheelbase deck and narrow trucks a necessity.

As for the course definition at MB 2001 I do remember it and unfortunately it is on my ex's computer. TK and I trained for a very different race. and by your definition of the length of the stinger and tightness of the stinger a short wheel base board was going to be competitive with smaller wheels and a long wheelbase deck was not. Hey we all make mistakes.....so what. But I am not wrong on this course description. Someone else might have a copy of it. Indeed there were no gates "tighter" than 6 feet. But then again there weren't any gates that were 6 feet as your stinger was defined.

Some of the other racers at Kennedy Way may have had Bugs or Donalds or whoevers different idea of what "slalom" was. That is what I heard. And I don't really think I bothered to look at races older than 12 years.

We just need some good definitions and need to stick by htem and hopefully be able to post a valid description of the course that is rated by the racers anonomyously after the race has finished. we could learn from this info. We could ask if the racers liked the course. What they would have changed. Did the course meet the criteria of the course description?

The alternative is to do what Tucker did and post a course and stick with it.

MB's street is a bit of a "minefield" of paint, cracks/ uneven pavement and crosswalks. The Pitch is less than appropriate for a World Championship level event. So of course Andy had his hands tied.
Could I have done better- well I think so or I wouldn't be bothering to post- but in reality I wouldn't know unless I was faced with the same problems Andy had.

Maybe there is another street - just off main street which would be better suited. I think we could have had the second course at Avila and done just fine.

"Sub 6.0 foot courses might be a thing of the past with the new gear." Again we may be just having a communication problem.

You may be thinking ...the days of 24 inch fibreflexes and ACS 430 trucks with OJ Slaloms are Done. I would rather see the racing be faster with wider cone spacings. you could not get a Bahne With Seismics and the New Cadillac wheels through one of the courses as it would be too fast- and perhaps too wide. (and you would be completely correct)

I am thinking..... no 6.0 foot, and now we are getting 8 foot and 12 foot courses, lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Why not any 6.5 foot and up courses? (And When I quote a lower number I am always refering to just the spacing to be set for a series of straight cones)

Catalina was about 6.5 to 7 foot on center with offsets more proportional (just guessing- it might not be factual) to what I think many racers expect as a "TS" defined course. I think racers liked the speed- the difficulty level, and that the course was nearly what they expected.

So perhaps this has all boiled down to expectations and definitions. Posting the course to be set would remove a lot of those problems. Sorry if I offended you Jack and I apologize- I was merely reacting to what I wrongly appeared to me as the death of "Pro level TS". (6.5 foot on center high speed technical racing with offsets that do not remove speed and instead let the speed build until it must be managed- hits a ridiculous upper limit- or until controlled braking becomes an issue).

Wesley Tucker
1961-2013 (RIP)
1961-2013 (RIP)
Posts: 3279
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Wesley Tucker » Mon Jan 06, 2003 8:39 pm

And what's wrong with "wiggle per second?" Are y'all too proud to admit where 'ya came from?

Don't forget, "cones per second" completely disregards the talents and attack of the successful DOUBLE PUMPER. Maybe one guy is wiggling 4 times a second, but right next to him is someone smokin' him at an dizzying 6 or 8 wiggles per second. The possibilities are mind boggling!

(Not to mention the sexual innuendo. You think a dame gives a damn how many cones you can run? But just mention your "wiggle-per-second" and watch her eyes just roll back in her head! That's the trouble with you people: you got no VISION! :razz: )

Richy Carrasco
AXE Army
AXE Army
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Garden Grove, Cali
Contact:

Post by Richy Carrasco » Mon Jan 06, 2003 8:00 pm

As far as the cyber challenge- We have never attempted it, I will get with the guys and propose it. The courses GBJ set are good but if put on more pitch hills would be great!He did the best he could with what he had to work with!Morro course at Avila hill-- WOW! I have to admit that we run courses with about 6 1/2 to 7,8ft spacing on hills. I think if you go any less with the speeds we are going would be mega blur! As far as TS technique, if you cant do it, Get off the couch and practice! I think it takes more balance,reflexes,Drive than any other event.As far as 36 inch boards chicken is a freak and charges almost anything with it! And Lacosta I rode my TS board 18 inch wheelbase and was charging until i slid out!I know Jack did the best he could setting the course and did it with the intentions of less cone carnage! The pitch of the hill made it alot of fun. Vlad you should have been at Catlalina-- Good speed TS course! Dunn-- Hows about another Cambria Outlaw!

Jack Smith
Morro Bay Skate legend
Morro Bay Skate legend
Posts: 736
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Morro Bay, California
Contact:

Post by Jack Smith » Mon Jan 06, 2003 7:59 pm

John,

My recollection of the posted course description for the 2001 MB race, stated that there would be no gates tighter than six feet. I may be wrong, but that's what I thought I said. It was difficult to give a good pre-race course description due to the fact that I was only able to take two, police escorted runs down the street.

The course that Henry set was not a Super Offset GS course by any means. Henry is incorrect in saying that I did not give him a course description. He and I discussed what kind of course should be set. John, as you know the talent pool at that race was quite wide, the course was set accordingly.

Once again John, you take the facts and tweak them to fit your agenda. I am speaking of "Race Day on Kennedy Way" held in the early 1990's. The race was never advertised as a tight slalom, it was termed a "slalom race" Yes the course was on a slight pitch, it even had a curve in the road. The course was set by committee. Yes, there were some skilled racers there...who hadn't raced in years. Ransom was not in attendance. I'm surprised you didn't mention the Morro Bay race we held in 1980 as well, won by Hutson. Or even the 1977 Pro Slalom event held in San Luis Obispo, Hester won it.

John, I could care less if you can "forgive" me.

I do agree that there should be different courses for different abilities. We have been unable to do this due to time constraints. We only have the hill for so many hours a days. Even if were able to extend the number of days we have the hill, and divide up the racing by categories, certain classes running on certain days, there would still be the problem of staffing the event over this extended period. I am of course speaking of FCR events. John, Don and myself, along with much of our volunteer help have job and family commitments.

John, I didn't say that the newer improved gear prevented you from doing tight gates. I said "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 think that we are fast appoaching a point where wheel traction will not be able to keep up with wheel speed. The contact patch of a skateboard wheel is very small, and it very difficult to create a whole lot of downforce on the wheels.

As for the Turner Memorial event. Yes, the course could have been tighter. Once again I was somewhat handcuffed by the reasons mentioned above, wide ability level and time constraints. Please describe to me historical "Turner" course.

I am not opposed to "tight courses", I am opposed to "super tight courses" where only a handful of racers can make them without plowing cones. At every race this year, clean runs, almost always got more applause and "oohs" than fast runs where numerous cones were hit.

I agree that there is room for course setting and sticking to course descriptions. Often times we (FCR) are unable to pre-run the venues far enough in advance to post a course description in a timely manner. We will work on this problem next season.

I truly do like constructive comments on the races I have been involved with, all I ask is for you to have your facts correct (I sound like Arab). It is very discouraging to spend thousands of dollars of personal funds, not to mention hundreds of hours on promoting slalom and then be scolded by people who do not have their facts correct.

Vlad,

Please fill me in on the "politics" behind the FCR courses. Who called American Football a "traditional sport" on the global level? I have never said that TS shouldn't has no right to exist.
I do not understand your editor remark.
Also did I somehow personally attack you? I re-read my post and don't think I did.

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Mon Jan 06, 2003 7:12 pm

Wesley- absolutely correct. CPS might be a better determinent.

So from a course setters perspective a few things might have to change to better accommodate each racer.

Suggestions- just brain storming- lots of holes in these ideas I'm sure.

ramp heights could be different- specifically much higher, and we could offer box starts just in front of the ramps to the kids and women.

That way Women and kids could at least regulate their entry speed.
________________________________________

You could set a course that got progressively more difficult as the speed increased and the course got longer.

That way the Kids with less powerful pump wouldn't hit the more difficult sections with as much speed.
______________________________________--

In setting a single duel course for all ability levels. Using tape switches you could all use the same starting point....but have different finishing points for each racers class. The longer the course the hard it gets and so forth. Split times would allow some comparison and no cones would have to be reset.
___________________________________________

You could change the difficulty level of a few cones or merely modify a section or two to covert the difficulty of the course (this is perhaps the hardest thing to do- and would not allow all skaters to practice on the same course).
-----------------------
of course that all means we are trying to process more and more skaters on the same course. At some point very soon this is unrealistic. I certainly don't want to see racers turned away.
____________________________________-

more single track might help as we can process racers faster. We could still hold a duel event...but not every event be Duel just like the San Francisco GS was Single track.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: John Gilmour on 2003-01-06 13:25 ]</font>

Andy Bittner
GBJ
GBJ
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Gaithersburg, MD

Post by Andy Bittner » Mon Jan 06, 2003 6:54 pm

Bingo! Right with you there, Wesley. Cones per second at full speed is what should really determine whether a course is tight, loose, Giant, etc. The whole thing is like one big sliding scale, which is why, since I can't exactly measure whole hills (in the short time permitted while setting a course for a race), why bother measuring the cones. FLOW (creating it or taking it away)is always something I am constantly considering when setting courses, and those decisions are most influenced by the hill and the conditions.

Wesley Tucker
1961-2013 (RIP)
1961-2013 (RIP)
Posts: 3279
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am

Post by Wesley Tucker » Mon Jan 06, 2003 6:46 pm

I really think y'all are hung up way too much on DISTANCES and not enough on RELATIVE SPEED.

A 6-foot course on flat IS NOT tight. I do it first thing everytime I practice. Big deal. An 8-foot course, though, on a 15% grade is EXTREMELY tight. Again, it's the not the cone spacing that makes a course tight or otherwise, it's an issue of "wiggles-per-second." (or some such nonsense.) If you're going through cones like a jackhammer through butter, it makes no difference if the cones are 5-feet or 15-feet, it's still TIGHT.

I guess the best example I can think of is comparing the Cyberslalom challenge to the dual straight races we had in Boston. The Cyberslalom was 6-foot on a dead flat course. Hard for me to consider that "tight." An almost identical course, though, was set at Boston on an almost 12% grade (John, wouldn't you agree that underpass is about 250 feet long and drops around 20 feet from the top of the bridge to under Massachusetts Avenue?) That course made you wiggle like a salmon trying to swim upstream. Almost identical course (6" difference in spacing,) but two totally different experiences.

Again, I know there are some generalities we can all agree to. Arbitrarily, though, just deciding a course is tight or not by the spacing only address half the issue.

Oh, here's another thought experiment: What if Andy had set the exact same course he did at Morro Bay but on the hill at Avila Beach? Personally, I think that would have indisputably altered the description of the course from "slalom" or "hybrid" to clearly a TIGHT SLALOM course. Why? Just imagine how you'd be wiggling to make the course by the time you got from the start ramp to the Red Bull arch. Your hips would still be sore!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Wesley Tucker on 2003-01-06 12:49 ]</font>

Hans Koraeus
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Posts: 2075
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Hans Koraeus » Mon Jan 06, 2003 6:31 pm

Hans, what a wonderfully intelligent post.
Well, thank YOU. You really got me flattered there. :oops:

Andy Bittner
GBJ
GBJ
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Gaithersburg, MD

Post by Andy Bittner » Mon Jan 06, 2003 6:07 pm

Hans, what a wonderfully intelligent post. Thank you. What you mentioned will eventually be among the purposes and tasks of the USSSF. We're not going to rush into anything, and want to know that the community is well polled before any Rules Committee begins drafting "official" rules. It has alway been my personal intention that, when such a Rules Committee finally exists, I was going to refer them first to the ISSA rules. I think much of the rules work done by the ISSA was excellent. There were some occasional oddities that were probably, as much as anything, a result of language and tranlation differences. There are also a few loopholes left to be closed, but, all in all, the ISSA rules will be a great reference for and maybe even a launching point for any USSSF Rules Committee.

...and all of this from a guy who is shamelessly (for my age!) ignoring the past fifteen years of slalom history.

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Mon Jan 06, 2003 6:05 pm

I would certainly have trouble running a true 5.5 on center course with my current roe bottle rocket set up. I can assure you I would not have a single run with fewer than 5 hit cones.

Even true 6.0 on center is a tall order. perhaps you were refering to the distance between the cones?

In fast TS a few inches will make the difference between makable and impossible.

Now do keep in mind that I would have to have a different set up entirely for flatland TS to be competitive at that spacing.

I am relatively certain that I could make a tighter course with a 24 inch fibreflex kicktail with highly wedged bennett hijackers and shaved down cambrias.

In flatland TS "truck height" can be your friend :smile: as otherwise even making the spacing with the board won't stop your legs from hitting the cones.

But again as I was saying with "Course integrity"the promoter must make an good faith effort to describe the course accurately so that a racer can make a determination of what kind of event he is preparing for both in terms of equipment and training.

Mr. Morris can set anything he likes and hopefully he will post an accurate course description that is "tested"and to stick by it as closely as possible.Try to make an educated guess as to what type of set up range would work for the course so that a Newbie wouldn't have to buy a $1500 quiver of gear to be ready to race a single race.

Corky, you were posting as I was composing. I do completely agree that we need course definitions. ISSA had a good description of that. to stop strange rule "twisting" there was also an ISSA judge- who obviously did not argue the clock, but merely made sure things ran smoothly and used good sense to make a determination to fix unusual problems when they arose.

An accurate course description that is adhered to by the promoter for a course would be great. I do realize that with paint, reflectors and pavement imperfections this might be hard to do unless the course was tested. then of course we run into the problems of the Home team practicing the course well in advance.

But stating the actual course will allow everyone the opportunity to prepare for an event. I think Mr. Tuckers course diagram for Folly Beach was a good idea, and though the course was difficult for longboards, people knew what to expect and could start working with the course at hand early and decide what equipement to bring beforehand.

I just brought one set up deck. Barely had to make any changes as a result and was able to borrow other gear from Deb Gordon and Brady Mitchell. Much easier than the equipment scramble that occurs after the course is firt set....right up to the qualifiers we have had in the USA over the past year.

Hans Koraeus
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Corky - World Ranking Supervisor
Posts: 2075
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Hans Koraeus » Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:56 pm

This discussion is the main reason why ISSA (International Skateboard Slalom Association) was created many, many years ago. But then again when did we humans learn from our history. Sure the current ISSA rules could need to be overlooked again but the purpose stays the same. There is a need for all sports to define their discipline(s).
Otherwise it's bound to lead to misunderstandings.

It's always up to organizers to decide what rules to use but we could help them/us with a setup of standardized rules and disciplines. That is what ISSA did. This is a huge but important task but this topic is not the place to go further into that. That will need a section of it's own in this forum.

There is already some confusion regarding european discipline names and the one used in the states. And apparently inside the states as well. It's maybe time to put all our forces together and evolve the current ISSA rules with the current american reality whatever it may be.

We all wish to be able to know what kind of competition and disciplines that awaits us before going to a contest. But without a documentation of what the discipline names mean they won't mean anything. They will be interpreted differently by each person anyway.

There are many possible disciplines in skateboard slalom. Often some of them are more suitable to us and our equipment than others. Some are in our liking more than others. Here we will always have different personal views. This is normal. But when we are talking about our sport terms there shouldn't be.

Let's make history! This is the forum where it could be done. Let's join our forces into clarifying our sport for ourselves.

Andy Bittner
GBJ
GBJ
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Gaithersburg, MD

Post by Andy Bittner » Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:56 pm

One meter racing is too tight and is absolutely a maturbatory experience, because those who set such courses usually end up playing with themselves only. However, I absolutely agree with the notion that flat and tight is an excellent slalom practice and exercise.

I'd also like to point out something, particularly to Vlad. The courses I enjoy most are what I call "slalom" and what many others call "hybrid". As odd as it seems to me, I've even heard the whole course type referred to as "GBJ-style". However, this does not mean that I don't also enjoy other types of courses, or that I've been exclusive and close-minded about "MY" type of course all my life. Even today, there is no question in my mind that I already have more time practicing tight (4.5-5.5'), flat slalom courses than you have had on a skateboard altogether. I just want you to know that my choices don't come from lack of experience.

Terry Kirby
Team RoeRacing
Team RoeRacing
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Hampton, NH USA

Post by Terry Kirby » Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:43 pm

On 2003-01-05 23:20, Brian Morris wrote:
On 2003-01-05 19:14, Terence Kirby wrote:
I feel that the super tight stuff like 1 meter is just spastic masturbation slalom. Its got to have some speed and challenge to be good ts.
After my race in NJ, you should have heard some of the kids talking about how amazing it was to see people doing that "spastic masterbation slalom" I think long tight slalom courses are not only challenging to the rider, but appealing to the eyes of a spectator because it is so spastic and differnt. I am already planning the next NJ 5.5 TS race, as well as another street race featuring TS, Hybrid or i guess now its just called Slalom, and maybe even the 100 cone challenge. Off topic of this post, Jack how is the USSSF promoter package coming along?
Brian, one meter is 39.37 inches, 5.5 feet is 65 inchs. Big difference. Next time you set a course try 39.37" on center, when you are done ,email and tell me what you thought. Anyone who can run 5.5" ON CENTER at speed is a hot rider. I doubt I could do it. TK

Andy Bittner
GBJ
GBJ
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 2:00 am
Location: Gaithersburg, MD

Post by Andy Bittner » Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:21 pm

Again, John, I think we are on the same page here (and more than just literally). The oddball thing about Main Street, Morro Bay is that, to make the courses move laterally at all, you have to set the occasional big offset to get people over those two ridges that run down the length of each lane. I won't re-write the whole post I once made about setting that course, but will summarize it by saying that it is a very unfortunate road to race on in an absolutely wonderful, welcoming, hospitable and stoked town to race in

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:16 pm

Andy you were composing as I was posting. I would have changed the above post.

I certainly do feel your plight of having to set a course that meets all ability levels.

I've had to do it myself. It is hard. Quickly it becomes impossible.

I think the courses really can't be made much easier without the higher level racers feeling that they should not bother to attend. As the overall skill level increases...as it has... the rank of skaters wanting more challenge will grow very quickly as the times between the top 20 racers are relatively close.

The Kids certainly don't want more dificulty- Dylan and Josh Byrd are certainly exceptions to this. but a Kids event should be realtively non threatening and give kids a taste of racing.

Kids courses should be slower, less technical , shorter, and as a result of their shortness... individually timed- or the start will dominate the outcome. Less threatening.

In buying a car you'll see lots of variety in different classes of cars. Many different sports cars, sedans, luxury cars. But trying to make a car all three is a tall order. Trade offs are made back and forth. Eventually the sports Luxury Sedans all seem to have similar dimensions and features and many drive extremely similar.

By trying to make a course for everyone we lose variety.

It certainly isn't your fault as you were asked to create a course that met those criteria. But I agree with you that it is ridiculous to have the Pros racing on girls courses.

I think for the pros you want to maximize the speed for the hill, ability level, and course.

For the Ams you want to match the course to the hill by making it a little less technical- but still giving a good sensation of speed, albeit a slightly slower speed.

For the women you want a slightly less technical less fast course. Say speeds sub 20mph. but tight enough to display some skill. And if GS fast enough to show some guts.

For the Boys and novices you want a medium fast to fast less technical course.

The Younger Girls should have a fun course, non threatening, and completely un technical- with the ability to ride that course on a wide variety of gear.

And of course any racer should feel free to move up the ladder at will. I would certainly expect Dylan to want to race a course with challenge. But mind you just a little over 1 year ago Dylan like all the other kids would have prefered to race in the Boys class- frankly it was a miracle he was making it through the courses, and he did stick with it. So setting a challenging course in the end can result in a better racer.

John Gilmour
Team Roe Racing
Team Roe Racing
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:00 am
Location: USA

Post by John Gilmour » Mon Jan 06, 2003 4:48 pm

English slalom ie cone distances under 5.5 feet most liklely evolved in an effort to make the sport harder when English skaters were running shorter wheelbases and ran lots of flatland. Then once those skills were developed on the flat it is likely they took them to steeper hills.

The cone spacing is somewhat relative to the speed of the course (ussually ....but not always (Avila etc..) related to the pitch of the hill).

On flat ground you may never hit that "high speed" and as a result you gear the cone spacing and the set up to maximize speed on flat. 8 foot centers on flat would result in very slow racing.

Running a longer deck won't speed things up much either- you just get fewer pumps in per unit of distance.

Now....Take 6.0 spacing and run that on a much steeper hill like Avila beach. Quickly you would "top out" in terms of speed for the pitch and cone spacing and the rest of the course would likely remain a wiggle....merely trying to prevent yourself from gathering too much speed in a 40-60 cone course. Likely most would blow out..... not good.

Tighter cone spacing on a shorter wheel base board is like a smaller gearing.

As humans we only generate so much Horsepower.

At some point- the biomechanical dimensions get out of hand. For instance you won't see a downhill speed skier racing on 600 cm skis. Going longer would only make the gear too difficult to manage and times would likely be slower.

We enter a course with some speed from a ramp or push start.....why? because slalom boards have much reduced ability to start from a standstill.

Most slalomers want a sensation of speed. They want to go faster and select the appropriate "gearing" of combination of cone spacing and wheelbase to try to hit a higher top speed.

If MB Slalom course had been set on Avila Beach- speeds would have been extremely fast for more practiced racers and of course slower for less practiced racers.

If Cambrias course had been set on Avila beach- the gearing would have been wrong and everyone would have blown out.

Andy I appreciate your course setting, your hope to advance the sport of slalom is the same passion that I have. I'm just trying to make racing faster......like any other racer.

The closest match of cone spacing , offset, and pitch to date at FCR was at Catalina in the TS. **(please note I did not attend Tahoe, Oregon, or the Banked slalom race in New Mexico).

The worst match of cone spacing, course layout for the pitch and offset of the hill was Avila beach. This is merely going by Fluitts poll.

IMHO you take a look at teh hill. Decide on the hills pitch and roll speed for the length of the course you want to set.

Then decide whether the hill can be used for TS, GS, Super G.

MB's hill is not IMHO suitable for GS or Super G. nor would I find it suitable for anything must less than TS (cone spacings of 6.5 foot or greater with the bulk of cone spacings at about 7.0 feet for straighter cones and of course slightly wider for offsets.

I can't really say it is an ideal hill for Longboard (over 35 inches) TS. I would think that to match the gearing we would need a steeper hill for longboard TS with cone spacings in the 7.75 and upwards range.

This thread is supposed to be to define and improve on Tight slalom courses. I apologize for my being so vigillant. But if we can't get stuff sorted out here- what chance do we have of improving the racing? We can't punch each other through the computer.... and that is a good thing. But we can address course issues we feel passionate about that we might not feel was appropriate to do in public in front of others.

Racing is about - improvement. We fight for tenths and hundreths. Of course it will always be nit picking...because it is about nitpicking.

We do have to try to match a course to a particular hill. We want the things most racers want in a race course. We want Speed, cornering, excitement- thrill. It should show some skill. It should also match the expectations and skill levels of the racers..... and hopefully exceed the expectations of spectators.

Post Reply