SPSR- 1. SLALOM COURSE

[Claude Regnier]

Yes, I agree Pat. There are plenty of things you can do to stop a ramp from tiping or lifting.

The best thing however remains to be to build it properly from the design phase. I'm sure some of the videos will look great from the Worlds with 3 or 4 guys hanging on so the ramps wouldn't lift for the racers.

Ricky added 2x4 to the base and adds sandbags to weights. The ramps as they stand are simply not the way they should be.

[Pat Chewning]

Assuming you have a rigid ramp, here is one way to keep it from tipping:



This can be adapted to existing ramps by extending the cross-brace leg and adding a base leg.

[Claude Regnier]

Wesley, I've been building ramps for a long time and have never used nails. I guaranty they wont be any dofferent next year.

One of them will likely be used all winter in the indoor sk8park as well.

1 out o 100 would depend on whose pulling. A lot of guys back off on their pull because they no the ramps lift. It could happen to a lot of people.

We cannot fully reccomend something that is not techincally correct for everyone.

[Wesley Tucker]

Sorry Wesley, your wrong about the problem.

Claude,

Is this what you think happens on a ramp start?



You might be right . . . on one start out of 100.

What I illustrated happens EVERY TIME anyone strong enough to PULL on the handles exits a ramp.

Claude, those ramps we used in Ottawa this year seemed just about perfect - or am I missing something?

Rick,

NEW ramps that are freshly screwed, bolted and put together will feel very solid. Compare new ramps, though, at 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM after maybe 2 or 300 pulls. The woods loosens, the nails shimmy and the screws lose their bite in the wood. Then try wood ramps on their fourth, fifth or even sixth race . . . or more.

[Rick Floyd]

Sorry Wesley, your wrong about the problem.

Claude, those ramps we used in Ottawa this year seemed just about perfect - or am I missing something?

[Jack Smith]

I ran into this problem also. My fix was to rig a chain that went from the front lower brace on the starting platform to a brace near the bottom of the down ramp. I also incorporated a come-along so that I could really tighten the chain.

It seemed to work really well, about the only guy who could still lift the front of the down ramp was Pirnack...but hey, we all know Pirnack is an animal!

[Claude Regnier]

Sorry Wesley, your wrong about the problem.

[Wesley Tucker]

Steve the length has less to do with the actual importance of design. It's just a few pieces of wood extra.

The biggest issue with the Byrd style ramps is the lifting of the front end when pulling hard. You can add weights to the front but it's an extra duties on race day. Might just as well build them a little longer to compensate.

I troubleshot and solved the "nose lift" problem on ramps. Ricky's design is sufficient but as with any wood/hardware combination, play and loosening will occur. The nose lift is because the table will skew when pulling on the handles. Instead of remaining flat, the ramp will distort.

You could build them 15 feet long and there will still be skewing of the table which in turn lifts the ramps.





Ricky's design uses whole plywood pieces on the side of the table secured at the corners and anywhere along the sides. Unfortunately, repeated pulling on the handles leads to this force skewing the table and no amount of wood/hardware fastening will resist this bending moment.

I had the same problem on my ramp only more so. My tables are a little different from Ricky's as they have strong, heavy legs but no side panels. So my ramps twisted terribly the first time we used them. Hollien and Olsen were lifting the nose six inches.

But I was able to observe what was happening and the next created a fix:



With about $25 worth of pre-cut chain, turnbuckles and eyebolts from Home Depot, I made this crossbracing that took less than an hour to install. Now when pulling on the handles the skater must overcome STEEL CHAIN that is resisting the skewing. As the skater pulls, the opposite corners want to twist. With this chain installed that is no longer possible.



As time goes by if there is any play at all in the ramp the slack can be eliminated by giving the turnbuckles a couple of turns and tightening the chains.

Of course, I guess some gorilla could get up there and pull hard enough to break the chain, but then I'll install some beefier hardware.

[Stephen Lavin]

Marcos- I raced the Super G and would have preferred a ramp start. I pushed in hard and could not get my footing right and, as a consequence, did 4-wheel drifts around the first 5 or 6 turns!

Yes, you did but you still did real well and you kept your flesh where it belongs (that was a cool slide KD)! I like ramps for all the right reasons but I have the opposite foot placement problem; I place my feet in the wrong deck spots off ramps. I know this sounds odd but I think too much about it and invariably place them wrong. Sure..., practice, practice, practice, I know... I do not do enough of it.

LAVIN

[Claude Regnier]

Steve the length has less to do with the actual importance of design. It's just a few pieces of wood extra.

The biggest issue with the Byrd style ramps is the lifting of the front end when pulling hard. You can add weights to the front but it's an extra duties on race day. Might just as well build them a little longer to compensate.

[Steve Collins]

Thanks Wes. I'm probably going to borrow some of the construction from Byrd's design.

I drew Byrd's design, then raised the platform 12" and enlarged the ramp x 1.33333 to make it fit. The resulting ramp length was 8'-8", so still about 2' shorter than the one I drew. Makes me wonder if mine is too long.

I may use a different material for the ramp surface. Byrd has 1/4" ply, which is probably adequate, but I may add a layer of 1/8" skatelite if I can get a deal from a buddy of mine...

It's going to be cool to have ramps. Now I just need a place to run duals!

[Wesley Tucker]

Steve,

Download here:

http://www.slalomskateboarder.com/Stuff ... pPlans.pdf

[Steve Collins]

Thanks for the comments Eric and Wes.

I realize that the Byrd ramps are already the defacto standard, at least Stateside. I raced in both of the last two La Costas which, I believe used variations of the Byrd design. They were great. I just want to make something a little taller and longer.

Two other things I am considering are a way to add height (later on) and a way to connect two, with a reasonable space, for head to head starts and maybe even a gate system.

Wes, I searched for the Byrd plans, which I recall seeing before, but couldn't find them. Do you know where they can be found?

[Wesley Tucker]

but it sets a good baseline for a 'standard' design Startramp.

There's already a baseline for a 'standard' design Startramp and Ricky Byrd made it available in 2003:

Downhillbillies' ramps
La Costa Boys Racing ramps
Texas Outlaw ramps
Road Kill Racing ramps
COSS ramps
CSA ramps
Radikal ramps (whereever they are now.)

I have not seen Kenny's dual start ramps so I can't say he fashioned them to Ricky's specs, altough they sure do look like it.

Troy Smart's ramps are different and certainly very good.

I didn't include my ramps because they differ from Ricky's design. Mine are taller, wider and longer.

[Eric Brammer]

With the overall length of 14'-8", two 8 Ft plywood pieces would easily make the side templates for type of ramp. I've seen 12' plywood sheets, but their difficult to source readily, and thicknesses available might not be ideal for side-support. None of that matters, as anyone willing the cut twice can blend 3/8" sheathing into 3/4" of ramp side-template, it just takes more screws (and maybe some glue).

The upper curve would be started on one sheet, but should reach a straight-line tangency by around 7', so blending the two templates should be pretty easy. The Curvatures are fine, as is the down-ramp angle. Not too steep, not to mellow, and the 10' lower curve is great for those who pump transistions, yet won't put a novice on their butt (or face).

Lastly, this size can be moved about with only 2-3 people, yet will be stable (width/height/weight) enough to place wth minimal anchorring. So, IMHO, it's a very decent starting point, something buildable by most of the folk willing to put on a race. There's always room for improvement, but it sets a good baseline for a 'standard' design Startramp.

[Wesley Tucker]

I would really appreciate any comments anyone might have about the following dimensions:



Thanks

Steve,

my only comment would be the 10' 8" ramp length. I'm not fully cognizant of all building materials, but is there 12-foot plywood sections to create the side frame?

Most start ramps I've seen using a single 3/8" sheet. 2 "S" curves can be cut out of it for the two side frames. My ramps are bit longer than Byrddrogs at around 7'6" but still out of one sheet of lumber.

I know when building vert ramps multiple pieces can be put together to make outsized large radius curved side frames, but our ramps have to strong AND portable.

Again, I might be talking out of my hat. There may very well be larger plywood sheets available. I just know about the 8' x 4's.

[Steve Collins]

I agree that a ramp should be included if at all possible. I also agree that lower-sanctioned events should not be required to have ramps. Not requiring big equipment like ramps will make it easier for small local organizers to put on small local races, but still be able to be part of the overall international scene.

I've been thinking about our little upcoming race in the park, http://www.ncdsa.com/contest_registrati ... testID=332 and the possibility of using a ramp there. On the one hand, the park administrators might have an issue with it. On the other hand, I think it might make it a better race. I do have enough time to build one before the race (September 23rd) so I'm tinkering around with dimensions. I like a 4'-0" module because it fits the standard plywood sheet size.

I would really appreciate any comments anyone might have about the following dimensions:



Thanks

[Donald Campbell]

i have a remark to make on this discussion:
how do you skate a pool or a ramp?
you drop in
anything else would be stupid

so much for pushstarts

[Kevin Dunne]

Marcos- I raced the Super G and would have preferred a ramp start. I pushed in hard and could not get my footing right and, as a consequence, did 4-wheel drifts around the first 5 or 6 turns!

[Marcos Soulsby-Monroy]

Kevin Dunne Posted: 05 Aug 2007 07:34 Post subject:

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


I think it's very different. Push starts favor those who are the best at pushing and then placing their feet, in the right position, on their boards...Ramps are much more even so they tend to favor those who are just better at negotiating the course, which is what racing should be about. If you are referring to any advantage that park riders may have, by gaining speed from the transition of the ramp, that is something that is not conclusive...anybody can learn to pump the transition.

Yes pushing favors those who are better at push starting, but the same applies to ramp starts. If you are quicker on the pull a better pumper of the transition and better at utilizing the area before the 1st cone then you will get a better start then your opponent. I think that just like anyone can learn to start from a ramp they can learn to start from a push as well. And I'm Mongo by the way, and still suck at push starting.

Kevin Dunne Posted: 05 Aug 2007 07:34 Post subject:

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

On a side note: I think it is totally unfair to allow some racers to push-start simply because they choose to do so. If we are going to continue this practice, there should be another tape switch for the pushers and there should be a 1 push maximum...simply relying on another person to hit the tape switch on the ramp is unaccurate.

I agree with Kevin on this one, regulating the push start is the way to go.

The thing that I was saying from the beginning still stands though. I think that as much latitude should be giving to the organizer as possible on what his or her race needs. The Sizzler this year was a prime. If we were required to use a start ramp on the Super G (I am NOT using the Sizzler to stir anything up so PLEASE keep that in mind) It would have detracted from the running of the event and those of you who were there I think would agree that the last thing that hill needed was a start ramp. We did use the ramp on the next two courses on Sunday where they were appropriate for the venue. If we did not have any latitude, on Saturday then I think less people would have raced.

[Kevin Dunne]

If we allow push starts, Chaput will start pushing in California and build up speed all the way to Denver...Ramps allow for a much more even start whether it's TS, GS, SGS, HS or just plain old BS.

Is that any different than a park rider like Jason or Chicken who have so much strength and skill they are past the first cone when the other guy is still riding on wood?

Besides, there's a difference between a push start and an unlimited push start. Letting a guy push forever is different than a strict prescribed push area.

And as long as there's no restrictions on crow hopping.

I think it's very different. Push starts favor those who are the best at pushing and then placing their feet, in the right position, on their boards...Ramps are much more even so they tend to favor those who are just better at negotiating the course, which is what racing should be about. If you are referring to any advantage that park riders may have, by gaining speed from the transition of the ramp, that is something that is not conclusive...anybody can learn to pump the transition.
On a side note: I think it is totally unfair to allow some racers to push-start simply because they choose to do so. If we are going to continue this practice, there should be another tape switch for the pushers and there should be a 1 push maximum...simply relying on another person to hit the tape switch on the ramp is unaccurate.

[Claude Regnier]

First off Wesley, I built those ramps for the 1st event in 2004 and continued to use them as are trying to get new people into the sport. They were only 2 feet high with very mellow transitions.

It's kind of like course setting. The better people go faster. Ramp allow for a closer and fairer start. It looks better for the spectator.

This year and future ramps are 4 fet high with mellow tranies top and bottom. If you want to go fast off them you can. If you need to ease into the course you can. They are not intimidating to non-ramp (transition) riders.

The only problem with Ricky's ramp design is the fact that they are a little too short and quite a few rcers lift the front off the ground when they pull start. This is not safe in my opinion. There were more then the ramp issue in Germany that was unsafe to the riders and the spectators.

I do agree about some type of standard but there needs to be some variance allowed. Course setting can slow down any person that can push fast into a course as well.

[Wesley Tucker]

If we allow push starts, Chaput will start pushing in California and build up speed all the way to Denver...Ramps allow for a much more even start whether it's TS, GS, SGS, HS or just plain old BS.

Is that any different than a park rider like Jason or Chicken who have so much strength and skill they are past the first cone when the other guy is still riding on wood?

Besides, there's a difference between a push start and an unlimited push start. Letting a guy push forever is different than a strict prescribed push area.

And as long as there's no restrictions on crow hopping.

[Kevin Dunne]

If we allow push starts, Chaput will start pushing in California and build up speed all the way to Denver...Ramps allow for a much more even start whether it's TS, GS, SGS, HS or just plain old BS.

[Wesley Tucker]

JBH or Goad would have to fill in the details, but I believe one of the races (the 1st or 2nd,) had ramps . . . then they were either lost or destroyed.

I went to two St. Louis races and had a blast. No ramp start, great long push in and great racing.

[Stephen Lavin]

Wes, you're right re: ramp construction standards or expectations for safety sake. Just wanted to echo that point. After seeing the footage from Europe I think anyone would agree. I have seen a couple really good ramp surface designs on this site that would probably fit the "standard".

Not having ramps should not necessarily keep a "good" event from happening. Again perhaps a standard or rule-base could be developed for no-ramp dualies and push starts - keep in mind for the new skaters ramps can be very daunting. I'm thinking of the kids in particular. Any race I have ever been to regardless of status (Basic, etc.) have been flexible for newbies not able to start on ramps and this goodwill or sportsmanship should and I'm sure will continue anyway.

Ramps should be a requirement above Basic and optional otherwise IMO. The newbies have to learn to sail on them at some point and this should give incentive to learn. The St. Louis race events this year were done sans ramps and it worked fine. Pushing and foot placement is a skate skill that should be part of a race if the organizers wish.

LAVIN

[Wesley Tucker]

The only problem with requiring ramp starts is if it kills grassroots racing. I agree with Pat about Primes, Mains and Majors having ramps while basic and plains are optional. (He and I disagree on Primes, though.)

ISSA should also just adopt Ricky Byrd's design as a MINIMAL ramp requirement. If a promoter wants to go bigger then that is also optional. (I think Ricky's ramps are 36". Mine are 42".)

No offense, Claude, but what you had in Canada in 2006 were not start ramps. They were oversized back stops. I know you fixed it and had newer larger ramps this year, but that sort of thing can't happen in the future. We may also have to do something about construction so what happened at Encinitas and in Europe last year doesn't happen again.

So, does anyone want to INSIST a basic or plain race MUST have a start ramp?

By the way, this is all for dual racing. Whether or not ramp starts are required for GS and SGS is another whole kettle of fish.

[Marcos Soulsby-Monroy]

Chris Barker Posted: 03 Aug 2007 21:27 Post subject:

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

What makes the difference??? The MONGO factor! You must not be or you would understand completely.

Starts are always important in racing, but there can be a much larger difference in "starting potential" between using a ramp or using a push start.

Do you really want the race to be decided on how fast someone can push instead of how fast they can pump/accelerate their skateboard?

In a short track (less than 15 sec), a push start IS the deciding factor.

Some of my worse wipeouts, including eating cr@p at Hobby Park, are from not having my feet on my deck correctly after a push start, but ignoring that factor and going for it anyway.

I'll pass on any dual-lane push-start races that are held...

Mongo Boy
[/code]

Sorry to disappoint Chris, but I am Mongo too. I prefer the ramp start as well I just think that requiring ramps in unnecessary, organizers should have as much latitude as the rules can give them. It is true that mongo pushers have more foot placement issues than their regular counter-parts, but regular people do have them from pushing as well.

[Chris Barker]

I understand what your saying Claude I just don't agree. What makes starting from a ramp any different as far as starting a race then pushing from a set place. I can't see that it would detract in any way, it is just different.
I appreciate the process.

What makes the difference??? The MONGO factor! You must not be or you would understand completely.

Starts are always important in racing, but there can be a much larger difference in "starting potential" between using a ramp or using a push start.

Do you really want the race to be decided on how fast someone can push instead of how fast they can pump/accelerate their skateboard?

In a short track (less than 15 sec), a push start IS the deciding factor.

Some of my worse wipeouts, including eating cr@p at Hobby Park, are from not having my feet on my deck correctly after a push start, but ignoring that factor and going for it anyway.

I'll pass on any dual-lane push-start races that are held...

Mongo Boy

[Eric Brammer]

Two thoughts here about the ramps themselves; One, specs should be given, such that overly vertical ramps (ahem, Adam), or ramps without proper handholds, starts, or width would not be sanctioned. The other is the ugly specter of increased insurance. A ramp means more likelyhood of falls from that dreaded Waist-high type platform (ever notice how toast falls from the count butter/jam side down? Yeah, noticed the same thing at RailJams in snowboard parks. It's the Height. 1 to 1.7 M will put YOU or your Toast UpSide Down. It's in your Physics texts...), but a lower ramp is likely to not give enough thrust at flatter course venues. So, the guidelines need to pre-empt the insurance-company concerns with design standards that allow for a good race, but reduced head-over-heels trauma probability.

Push starts are fine in my book, as long as Gilmour starts with BOTH shoes untied!

[Karl Floitgraf]

If a race advertises an event as a push start before hand then they should still be able to get sanctioning. Push starts can be fun. Ramps are normally more fun- but push starts can still be fun. I hope we don't ban push starts from all big status races.

[Marcos Soulsby-Monroy]

Pat Chewning Posted: 02 Aug 2007 20:05 Post subject: Ramp vs push start vs sanctioning......

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



The thing is, if we insist that ramps are REQUIRED for ALL sanctioned events, then we will be limiting our sanctioning to fewer than 1/2 of the events we have sanctioned in the past.

A push-start can be a legitimate and fair starting method. For the sake of the spectators, I think a ramp start is more professional looking.

I just think that for the most part there should be as much latitude as possible to the organizers idea of what they want to do. I agree that start ramps are more professional looking but I still feel that both types of starts should be allowed.

[Nick Chamberlain]

I gotta say a 20* start ramp is not much at all. At the race in needham our ramp was 10* from Vertical at the steepest part, thats 80* and we skated it in the rain :)I'm not saying that is how it should be because some had trouble using that ramp but something more then 20*, even 30*, would be better in my opinion.

[Pat Chewning]

The ISSA currently sanctions events that run from the World Championships to a spur-of-the-moment local outlaw event.

I think start ramps should be required for the higher-status events (Main, Major) because they give a more professional appearance to the spectators. Ramps also are preferred for events on flatter hills, or hills/courses that take some time to get up to speed.

For the lower-status events (Prime, Basic, Plain) a push-start or a ramp start can be allowed.


The thing is, if we insist that ramps are REQUIRED for ALL sanctioned events, then we will be limiting our sanctioning to fewer than 1/2 of the events we have sanctioned in the past.

A push-start can be a legitimate and fair starting method. For the sake of the spectators, I think a ramp start is more professional looking.

[Marcos Soulsby-Monroy]

Claude Regnier Posted: 02 Aug 2007 18:04 Post subject: Starting Ramps

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

They are not hard to build nor expensive. Small unsanctioned events can run any way they like.

Sanctioned events should at least have Starting Ramps. Previous to the 2007 season there weren't really many clear rules.

This whole process is too let the racers know what to expect and give them a voice.

I understand what your saying Claude I just don't agree. What makes starting from a ramp any different as far as starting a race then pushing from a set place. I can't see that it would detract in any way, it is just different.
I appreciate the process.

[Claude Regnier]

They are not hard to build nor expensive. Small unsanctioned events can run any way they like.

Sanctioned events should at least have Straing Ramps. Previous to the 2007 season there weren't really many clear rules.

This whole process is too let the racers know what to expect and give them a voice.

[Marcos Soulsby-Monroy]

Claude Regnier Posted: 02 Aug 2007 09:29 Post subject: Starting ramps

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

If it's a sanctioned race then Starting Ramps should be mandatory. Unless it's Cyber Slalom.

There is plenty of room for racing without rules. Sanctioned events are different. If an organizer set his or her own rules then they run the risk of losing a sanction for future events.

I don't think that no start ramps equates to no rules, the 1st Sizzler had no ramps and it was sanctioned. Ramp are one more thing for the organizer to worry about pay for and lug around. Where as I prefer them to push starting I think that both methods are valid ways to start a race. I have no problem with ISSA having rules to govern races I just don't see the reason for this one.
Getting people to put on races can be hard. Making ramps mandatory is just making it harder.

[Claude Regnier]

If it's a sanctioned race then Starting Ramps should be mandatory. Unless it's Cyber Slalom.

There is plenty of room for racing without rules. Sanctioned events are different. If an organizer set his or her own rules then they run the risk of losing a sanction for future events.

[Marcos Soulsby-Monroy]

There should be no rule about start ramps so that the organizer has the latitude to decide on his own. As long as the racers start on equal footing who cares.

[Wesley Tucker]

3 feet is nothing but boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then don't come to the Worlds. You'll be bored.

[Jani Soderhall]

The 1.80 m ISSA rule was never enforced, and didn't really have the time to be followed. It was created late (probably in 1994/95) and meant as a new recommendation to bring more speed to the races, especially if they were held of flat or close to flat, which was often the case for the straight courses (less so for the other).

Personally I think that ramps of 1.20 - 1.50 m (4-5 feet) are ideal. Below four it gets embarassing, except if it's just a symbolic startramp. ie for giant slalom course where you just want everyone to start out in the same conditions, rather than really gain speed from the startramp.

With ramps higher than 1.50 we're removing one aspect of slalomracing - pumping. I think it's cool to show that the speed at the end of the course is higher than when you enter the course.

With the variety of statements in this single rule it was impossible to vote Yes/No:
- cone distances
- starting ramp mandatory or not
- starting ramp height and angle
- slope not more than 5 degrees
- distance between the two course

Maybe I'll go about splitting the topic.

[Donald Campbell]

3 feet is nothing but boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Wesley Tucker]

1.2 A starting ramp is compulsory, and it shall have a height of at least 1.8 m and a maximum angle of 20 degrees.

I just noticed this for the first time.

That's SIX FEET. I know Kenny built one that tall for his Giant Slalom in Ohio, but no North American slalom race I know of has ever has that tall of a ramp.

Things have changed since this was written. Probably a better standard would be the "Ricky Byrd Ramp" that most everyone has adopted. Ricky's plans are at 3 feet. That translates into .9 meters.

Claude, you'll have to upgrade those ramps of yours.

[Donald Campbell]

your reply sounds really resonable ramon and is reflected by a long experíence.

[Ramón Königshausen]

The cone spacing for Straight Slalom in the Pro category shall be

- 1.60m on a flat surface

- 1.80m on a fairly steep hill

- 2.00m on a damn steep hill


Furthermore:

The cone spacing for Straight Slalom in the Am Category shall (might*) be

- 1.80m on a flat surface

- 2.10m on a fairly steep hill

- 2.40m on a damn steep hill


*I think I cannot really guess what sounds most reasonable

[Jadranko Radovanovic]

1. SLALOM COURSE

1.1 The course shall consist of a start, a timing line, a series of cones placed in a straight line, a finish line and a run out area. The run out area should be at least 20 m long, of good surface and be free of objects. Straight parallel slalom could be held on a flat surface, and if it is held downhill it should be no more than 5 degrees.

Two identical courses shall be set up, with at least 2.5 m separating the two courses.

1.2 A starting ramp is compulsory, and it shall have a height of at least 1.8 m and a maximum angle of 20 degrees.