|
|
|
| Q&A: Slalom Pro Mike Maysey (2489 Posts)
|
| Topic |
Info |
|
TS, HS, GS, or BS!
|
|
On 10/5/2005
HACKETT - BLACK LEATHER RACING
wrote in from
United States
(68.66.nnn.nnn)
There have been some great points made here on this forum, and I too agree that we need to have a common vernacular for the disciplines.
The statement:
"Only the standard disciplines are counted into the World Rankings."
Super Tight
Tight
Slalom
Giant
Super Giant
To me, this seems kinda' redundant; as far as I remember racing as a teen, we had TS, (Tight slalom), and GS, Giant Slalom. Period.
Of course, you could set those cones "super tight" in your version of TS, or "super giant" in your version of GS! It really is the race organizer/promoter's
choice.
To have SO many disciplines just seems to dilute a final standings. Or create more "World Champions"...let's see here, we have the "STS" World Champion, the "TS" World Champ, the "S" World Champ, the "SS" World Champ, the "GS" World Champ, and the "SGS" World Champ...where does it end?
Oh, yeah, almost forgot! We have the "CS" World Champ! (CYBER SLALOM)
Specialty races like 100 cones, Cyber slalom, SlalomCross, or ParkSlalom should really be treated as seperate disciplines not big enough for world rankings at this time IMHO...
There is always this talk of how to grow slalom, and why isn't it happening?
Iv'e said it before, and I will say it again: We need to bring a form of racing around cones into the skatepark. PARKSLALOM will and does attract kids and younger racers into the "Race game" It also plants into their little minds the word "SLALOM" - Which to them, probably means "Going as fat as you can through a course around cones to get the fastest time"
Isn't that what we do when we race TS, or GS? So what if the terrain is a park for their first experience of a race. Sooner or later, those same kids will be better prepared to race on the street. I firmly believe that this is one of the best ways to grow slalom racing.
I also believe we need to create an AWESOMELY EXCITING Pro Racing circuit with huge prize money that all other racers (open class and young guns) will aspire to be part of one day.
Like Chris suggested earlier, I would, if given the chance, skate a slalom race on the flat floor of the Staples Center too. And yes- there should be a big ramp like the Bahne/Cadillac Ramp? Or just a big start ramp, so there could be some speed.
The concept Olson, McCree and myself have been kicking around is this:
Imagine a Semi Truck outfitted and painted like an Indy Car Support truck- but painted up for the new "THE RADIKAL PRO STREET SKATEBOARD RACING" tour.
This semi has been outfitted with two identical start ramps dropping in from the top of the truck (about 15-18'). This truck can be placed across any Main Street USA town or in any arena.
There is an announcer who is an amazing promoter hyping the crowd..."AND NEXT UP IS THE DUAL OF ALL DUALS" - THE BROWN BOMBER AGAINST RACER-X! (An army of BIG Breasted "Cone Babes" all dressed up like Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders are busy checking cone placment and getting the crowd further excited)
The racers are taking their place in the electronic gates atop the truck...their gaze focused on the Funny Car Christmas tree starting lights...the announcer quiets the crowd so the racers can focus...(Gilmore and Olson are making plans with cheerleaders 4 and 9) The starting lights go...BLINK, BLINK, BLINK...and their off!
Both racers execute the 18' drop and are immediatly speeding towards the first cone which is 15' past the Christmas Tree; the navigate the course of 60 cones at high speed to determine the winner as the crowd, the cheerleaders and everone else go nuts! (Then of course all those HOT CHEERLEADERS will be bending over to reset the cones...)
(The 60 cones are set: first 15 @ 15' apart; next 15 @ 10, then 15 @ 8, and the last 15 @ 6'- they could be straight, or offset...whatever it we decide..)
The great thing about this format is it's new, there's HOT CHEERLEADERS! it's exciting, there's HOT CHEERLEADERS!, we can set it in the space of any 2 city blocks, there's HOT CHEERLEADERS!, and or any Stadium, there's HOT CHEERLEADERS!, and promote it almost like a WWF event (What will YOUR "Stage name" be? - I'm thinking, "HACKMAN THE GNAR") or performance that ATTRACTS SPECTATORS!!!
Racers will be racing for BIG PURSES. Oh, did I mention; there's HOT CHEERLEADERS!
"RADIKAL PRO STREET (or STADIUM) SKATEBOARD RACING" - Who's in?
HACKETT - "THE EUROPEAN TS CHAMP" - HA HA!!
|
|
|
|
|
Good reading...
|
|
On 10/5/2005
Dave - Skaterbuilt
wrote in from
(72.129.nnn.nnn)
This is a great discussion going on here... I frickin' learn more on this forum then from anywhere else...BUT, I must interject...and say...that:
SLALOM IS GAY - I'd RATHER LEARN EGGPLANTS! Heheheheheheheehehehehheehehehe!
Juz kiddin kinda...
Slalom is slalom and Downhill is downhill...no matter how you slice em'...
Totally and completely non-comparable IMHO...and I have the upmost respect for those who truly excel at each or both...it's all juz skating to me...
|
|
|
|
|
San Pedro slalom spots
|
|
On 10/4/2005
sc
wrote in from
United States
(68.111.nnn.nnn)
Hey Nic, don't give up buddy, if you're reading this, drop me an email
at southswell@cox.net
|
|
|
|
|
The Gap - it's not just jeans.
|
|
On 10/4/2005
john Gilmour
wrote in from
United States
(209.6.nnn.nnn)
How to use gaps to keep speed and skill ina course without making it a course that is only fun for novices.
For a perfect example of a run with gaps- see the Criddle king video of Micheal dong at da farm 3.0.
You'll see him use a top gap as a speed chute to generate speed where other skaters may have slowed down. He pumps other gaps where slower racers turned wide to dump speed.
As a skilled racer Dong went for a criddle he executed perfectly in practice. Ironically he thought he missed it and DQ'd...and nearly gave up before he ended his run....I think he podiumed instead! very exciting run.
would someone post up a link. or send me your email and I'll email it to you.
|
|
|
|
|
Novice class slalom
|
|
On 10/4/2005
John Gilmour
wrote in from
United States
(209.6.nnn.nnn)
Quote snipped ---"If you don't like "Hybrid", come up with a better word. And after you figure out what the hell to call it, define it. Define it so that it's not subject to interpretation."
- Chris Chaput
Well looking at skill levels If you set a good La Costa GS course I don't think a novice would be able to complete it. If you set a good TS course I don't think a novice can make it. If you set a good hybrid course a novice CAN make it- easily. Hybrid slalom should therefore be called Novice slalom .
Novice slalom is set on a hill of medium to low pitch with no gates tighter than 7.5 feet and no gates larger than 15 feet. The courses are from 30-50 cones with top speeds no faster than 2-3 cps and sub 20 mph speeds.
All equipment can be run on the Novice course without fear of wobbles or being to tight to make the course. The differences in times as a percentage of times are the closest in this discipline making it possible for a novice ot post a respectable time to the pro.
So Why call a course "Novice" instead of "hybrid"? Because you can't have Novice without defining the Pro. And no one would run two "Novice courses" back to back.
It also gives spectators more information on the courses and the skill level of who is runnign them. It also tells NOVICE slalomers which races they should get ready to participate in. How long does someone have to read NCDSA as a novice wanting to get into slalom before they can pick a race suited for them? Any Hybrid course is a good novice course. You almost can't adjust your gear wrong to run it- you don't need fast reflexes, great power, stamina, or the ability to get low. It is perfect for the novice. Which is good and shows the novice that we care enough to make a class for them to race when they decide to get into the sport.
Don't you see "AM Hybrid" and "PRO Hybrid" are ridiculous terms when you realize that Hybrid is absolutely for novices. "AM Novice" makes sense. "But PRO Novice" does not. So- don't have the pros run a novice course. Reset either a PRO GS Or PRO TS according to the speed of the hill.
Fluitt in regards to cone carnage in TS (This coming from a Criddler to to the core) I agree that there can be a lot of cone carnage in a TS.
I hear you loud and clear.
There is , However, a way to limit cone carnage.
If a racer gets into a straight line of TS cones and finds that the cones are either too tight or the hill is making him go too fast to the point that the cones are too tight.... he will begin to plow cones.
One way to prevent this from happening is to allow some gaps in a course to allow racers with less skill the ability to:
A. Get a breather to take back their line when they start falling behind in their turns
B. Give the racer a chance to go wide on a turn or two to scrub speed AND take back their line before entering the next string of cones.
C. Give the racer a chance to look up for a moment to rethink his line + strategy before attempting the next line of cones.
D. Allow a racer a chance to quickly chirp his wheels during a gap to dump speed.
It's not that TS is ridiculously hard- (of course running 5.5 gates with wide trucks and long wheelbases is asking for trouble) its that often the course setters make it hard.
It takes a course setter with a very high skill level of racing to set a course that the top pros find changing and yet middle pack ams can complete without difficulty.
It can be done- you just have to get in the racing mindset and give the racers of varying skill levels distinctly DIFFERENT options.
The Mid pack am will scrub speed at every chance possible and criddle 2-4 cones to make the line easier.
The top pack am will not scrub speed and will criddle a cone.
The bottom level pro will add more speed and criddle 2-4 cones but likely not the same cones as the Am- likely they will be ones later in the course when his speed is higher because he did not have difficulty with the beginning of the course.
The Mid pack pro will pull out all the stops and risk pretty major cone plowage in hopes of perhaps gettting a perfect run to put him within striking distance of a Top pro.
The Top pro will run clean when racing lower pros. The top pro will Attempt to stay clean and pump hard when racing mid pack pros. And top Pros pull out all the stops and race the fastest possible race even if it involves a strategic criddle or two when facing the fastest pros.
I've set courses that UR13 could run without too much difficulty before he was a skilled racer- yet they were ones where I could run really fast- with perhaps a clean run or 1-2 hit cones to take a faster line.
The problem is a long single line of tight cones that go down a pitch where racers gain speed. Then only the racers with the correct set ups and skill level can survive.
Toss in a few gaps and there is a lot less cone carnage from the less skilled racers....and surprisingly the faster racers use those gaps to toss in some extra juice.
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong Mike
|
|
On 10/4/2005
Chris Chaput
wrote in from
United States
(66.116.nnn.nnn)
I was responding to the oxymoronic Michael Stride, who managed to put British and Downhill together...
|
|
|
|
|
easy fella...
|
|
On 10/4/2005
mike maysey
wrote in from
United States
(66.214.nnn.nnn)
Alright Chris...sheesh...I seem to remember hearing that come from a downhillers mouth on a day when, I think it was IGSA had this race and Richy and Gary Holl piggybacked a slalom race on the other side of the hill from where the downhill was going on...unfortunately I do not remember any specifics...I don't even remember the name of the park the hill is in and I LIVED in SF....my point is someone who was racing the downhill saw what we were doing and didn't want anything to do with it because it looked gnarley...it was too...the hill was steep, the surface was old and crappy, the course was tough and the speeds were fast...by anyone's standards. Chris, calm down, I wasn't going after you...and after all we've been through!! : )
As for tight on fast hills...as Evans said...we have a crazy ass course that we run and...I swear, the cones are literally a blur as they go by. You have to look so far ahead you have to be on autopilot to make each cone, there's no other. Sure, I can pump on flat...but where's the fun in that? How about a tight course on a fast hill, where you have to decide each time you step on the rail...Am I gonna jam on it, or glide it, or take a wide line to set up for the offset ahead or whatever...that's the kind of tight I prefer to run. Something that's not a drag race, something that has elements thrown in that are close to impossible. So that you have to run as ultra-fast, ultra-accurate and ultra-focused as you possibly can. This is a true test of your tight slalom abilities.
Like Chris suggested earlier, I would, if given the chance, skate a slalom race on the flat floor of the Staples Center. Or maybe there could be a big ramp like the Bahne/Cadillac Ramp? Or just a big start ramp, so there could be some speed.
Set the cones how you like...if you like it tight and fast, do it...if you like open and slow, do it...
Slalom gets boring to me if I don't challenge myself. Skateboarding in general does. I mean, I get bored with my bowl attack...hitting front side and back side grinds in the Bear Bowl is already getting old. I'm gotta try to learn some variations so my skating stays fun and isn't limited. Grab the rail, grab the nose, whatever. Maybe even try to get above the coping, or slide the tail, or boardslide...Same with slalom. I wanna always progress. Always want to go faster and faster on more and more technical courses on steeper and steeper hills.
|
|
|
|
|
Who Are You Asking?
|
|
On 10/4/2005
Chris Chaput
wrote in from
United States
(66.116.nnn.nnn)
Downhillers are saying that they don't do Slalom because it is too dangerous? Gimme a break. Who are you asking? Are you also asking Eddie the Eagle about jumping really far? C'Mon guys. Guys practice slalom without pads, gloves or helmets. Who is going hang with me in a downhill run without leathers, gloves and a helmet? Do you really think that we wear that stuff to make a fashion statement? We go twice as fast, into corners, and in packs of four or more. We are not afraid of slalom. Just the spandex.
The reason that most Downhillers don't do slalom is because they don't have the equipment, the know-how or the circle of influence that would get them running cones, and keep them running cones.
The reason that you might consider slalom to be dangerous is because you could fall in an akward position. But it would be at a relatively low speed, in a straight line, without a guard-rail, haybale or cliff to run into, and without contacting another rider. It would be self-induced, and you could be as padded/protected as you wanted to be. I can only remember coming off my board and hitting the deck three times in a Slalom Race. One at Hamm's race at the finish line, once at the Kona Banked Slalom finish line, and once in practice in Catalina. In all three cases, I went down onto slide gloves and plastic knees and finished later finished on the podium. Not my idea of risk and pain.
And I don't think that we should attempt to market Slalom as an "extreme" or "dangerous" sport. There is so much skill, style, and finesse involved that we really don't need to bang that tired old "gnar" drum. It's an artform as well as a sport. The general public thinks that skateboarding is inherently dangerous anyways. They will appreciate the artistry and skill that it takes, more than they will be in awe of its speed. They clap for a slow clean run and yawn for a scorcher when two cones are hit. What does that tell you?
I'm sure that when motorcycle racers first heard that "some idiot wants to try and put a moto-x course inside an arena", most of the riders snickered and jeered and claimed that they'd never ride such an abomination. I don't follow motorcycle racing but I've heard of Jeremy McGrath. My point is, that there is opportunity to take advantage of Tight Slalom's compact nature, and to promote in a variety of venues. Yes, even in flat, drizzly England, where the Downhillers are afraid to Slalom.
|
|
|
|
|
The Future of TS
|
|
On 10/4/2005
Evans
wrote in from
United States
(66.214.nnn.nnn)
TS is one of the fastest disciplines when properly set and you have properly trained racers.
Gilmour you should come out here and see what the SSS boyz are up to in the world of TS and try one of our, in your own words “ideal for flatter venue” TS courses. It’s set on a medium speed GS hill (30mph max) with a 5.5’ lead-in with 6’ straights, 6.5’ offsets, stair-steppers, curves, an occasional offsets and a stinger out the bottom.
It’s extremely technical, very fast and scary…….. one bad slide and your pitched on your head. We run small wheelbases (17-19” hth) with narrow trucks (80mm-90mm) and it’s a far cry from hybrid.
I’ve made comments to my boyz, that this kind of course on a similar hill should be the “Future of Tight Slalom”. It f#$%ing incredible to watch a racer fly down this course clean. Rick “ICK” came by and nearly sh#t his pants watching the SSS boyz skate on it, he couldn’t believe what he was seeing.
Gilmour you showed a video in previous post in the NCDSA slalom link, what TS is not, it was fast but not tight enough you stated. Now you say that we just space out the cones to allow for faster speeds? 5.5’ can be run at 20+ mph, 6’ gates 25-30mph, the fastest GS’s are around 25-30mph, where’s the speed limiting problem? When you start using wider trucks the gates will have to go wider to handle the slower turning, which turns your course into a hybrid. Sounds like the Swiss know what’s up!
Racers always bitch about courses, in Breck I heard the course rocked, but a lot of racers just don’t know how to run a real TS and that’s the real problem. So Promoters go back to an easy hybrid and the racers don’t grow and neither does the sport.
So, what’s the answer? I don’t know but changing to a easier course isn’t helping anyone except the Promoters.
When we went to La Costa back in the 70’s, we saw what was set and ran it. We learned what was required to win and adapted. When we went to Colorado for the ARA races, the tight slalom they ran were very different from what we were practicing (5-6’). They raced on faster hills and the tightest spacing was around 6’ and it was super fast! We learned, we adapted (changed deck designs) and we won.
Racers seem not to want to learn…….. or are the Races teaching them wrong? I don’t know, it’s sad but I don’t see any progress happening in USA TS except for a few dedicated Pro’s who know what’s up.
Real Tight Slalom is dangerous!
Evans (SSS) Badlands
“The House of High Speed”
|
|
|
|
|
one more thing...
|
|
On 10/4/2005
mike maysey
wrote in from
United States
(66.214.nnn.nnn)
I've asked guys who race downhill that same question and they've mostly responded the way your buddies did...they thought Slalom was way too dangerous. Interesting statement coming from someone who bombs hills faster than I really want to go. I do like downhill, did lots of it in the Bay Area....I have tons of repsect for those guys that hurl themselves downhill at speed in excess of 50 mph. To hear them say they thing Slalom is dangerous actually gives me some hope that we may make it to the 'Big Time' sometime soon...hopefully I'll still be young enough and fast enough to compete when it does.
: ) , I'm only 33, so by slalom standards...I probably still have another 20 years in me!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Races in Amusement Parks...etc
|
|
On 10/4/2005
mike maysey
wrote in from
United States
(66.214.nnn.nnn)
Michael, I think...back in the day (I love to say that) there were some races at Magic Mountain here in Southern California. I've seen photos from the race. One that sticks in my memory, was one of Hackett rounding a cone.
On that note, I was thinking...back when I lived in San Francisco there might be another way to expose people to the sport. North of SF, in Sonoma County...there's tons of wineries. They almost all have great driveways that lead up to the tasting rooms. Almost all of them have some sort of pitch to them, at least the ones I've seen. I wonder about a Slalom/Winery Tour? Or some other sort of cross marketed event like that. Some way to piggy back on something that's already happening, ya know? I know, back in the days when large corporate sponsors were involved with skateboarding, there were lots of demos and such in places where people go already. Disneyland demos, Magic Mtn, Knott's, etc...the possibilities are there I beleive.
|
|
|
|
|
slalom names...
|
|
On 10/4/2005
mike maysey
wrote in from
United States
(66.214.nnn.nnn)
How about...tight slalom, medium slalom and giant slalom? : ) I don't know
...good points Chaput makes about bringing a 3 wood to a mini golf game. Bring the bag and decide at the race. Although for some that might be a pain, at least you'll be prepared for whatever courses are set...regardless of the definition.
Personally, I have 3 boards for slalom. I don't need half a dozen sticks...I've ridden enough slalom courses in the 4 years since I started slalom, that I can basically look at the course, hill and surface in order to decide which board, wheels and width trucks to ride. That's just me though. Perhaps definitions don't have a place in the sport, but I do beleive that everyone in the slalom community should try and decide on naming. After all, like I mentioned earier today...Is it Special Slalom or Tight Slalom? That is the question. I have to explain sometimes to people about my finish in Stockholm in the Special Slalom. I have to continue by making a comparison to Tight Slalom.
Ah, whatever...I'm gonna go run some slalom!! : )
|
|
|
|
|
TS and Downhill
|
|
On 10/4/2005 Michael
wrote in from
United Kingdom
(80.47.nnn.nnn)
Good answers so far! Lots to think about. One reason I like Morro Bay Tight day is that we practice on a crowned road in London, I know from experiance that this kill syour ankle if your not used to it, and takes a while to get the hang of it. Thats why I love the right hand lane at Morro. I know the road has obsticals and appreciate we all ran the same course....but I'd still like it to have been more offset....but maybe thats so I could be one of the four people liking the course as in Chris's description. Mind you, each year someone has run clean...usually Gareth Roe, if you can run clean then you can run faster in my book. That may mean hitting a few cones but thats where penalties need to be judged correctly. What was the .3 about on Saturday????? Huh?
And one for Chris Chaput...I asked my downhill chums why they didnt do slalom much...they said (all of them I assure you!) that "Slalom is too dangerous!!"
It was something about the twisting falls. Now I REALLY respect downhillers and their bravery...I was astounded. I'm scared when I do downhill. So do people percieve what we find to be a fun activity (slalom) to be a really dangerous sport? If so are we missing a trick? Could dual tight slalom really be marketed to a wider audieance. I have long hoped to arrange a series of races in theme parks in the UK. The deal would be this:
Racers get full family passes for the Theme PArk.
Racers get a weekends or a day racing.
The park get a FREE cheap attraction for the public. No need to line up for a ride. Keeps lines down elswhere in the park.
Hopefully a sponsor (perhaps a drinks vendor with the concession at the park) will provide cash incentives for racers.
Slalom is put in front of the masses.
And we get to use the park afterwards!
|
|
|
|
|
Slalom Slalom
|
|
On 10/4/2005
Chris Chaput
wrote in from
United States
(66.116.nnn.nnn)
Definition - Absolutely. I don't have all the numbers, but the numbers are necessary or in essence, WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT WE ARE DOING. Numbers are the only thing that we have that are measurable and black and white. "Kind of a combination of TS and Special Slalom on a fast hill" is a COMPLETELY ARBITRARY description and TOTALLY SUBJECTIVE without closely adhered to definitions.
Let's say for example, that Tight Slalom is defined as a course where:
1. No cones are spaced more than 8 feet apart on center.
2. No cones are spaced less than 5.5 feet apart on center.
3. At least half of the cones are spaced on or between 6 feet and 7 feet apart.
4. There are no fewer than 50 cones and no more than 100.
Other definitions could overlap some of the numbers, but no single course could or should be set in such a way that it satisfies more than one definition. This would force us to know what we're doing, and what to call what we're doing.
Is "Hybrid" a good name to call medium spaced courses or course that combine a bit of TS and GS? Perhaps. Perhaps not. I just haven't heard a better word and I think that calling one of several slalom disciplines "Slalom" or "Slalom Slalom" is ridiculous. Every single slalom discipline has (and should have) a descriptor in its name. The absence of a desriptor as in "Just call it 'Slalom'" is confusing to say the least. Just because we didn't use the term "Hybrid" or another word back in the 70's doesn't mean that shouldn't now. Do kids who were born in the 80's, 90's or after the turn of the century care what we "didn't call it back in the day"? I doubt it. If you don't like "Hybrid", come up with a better word. And after you figure out what the hell to call it, define it. Define it so that it's not subject to interpretation. People are tired of bringing a 3-wood to miniature golf course and a putter to a driving range. Asking everyone to bring a bag full of clubs to every race is convenient for the promoter, but a pain in the ass for everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
TS is hard and easy
|
|
On 10/4/2005
Chris Chaput
wrote in from
United States
(66.116.nnn.nnn)
Here's my take on the situation.
1. Tight Slalom is hard to perform
2. Tight Slalom is easy to promote
1. There's really no way to get good at TS unless you practice it. Skaters (myself included) are notorious for wanting to run before they learn to walk. They often lack the discipline it takes to learn something new that doesn't offer instant gratification. Plowing cones is a drag, and having to set them back up is even worse. It's very tempting to just say "screw it", and loosen up the course. I was experiencing some of this pain the other day when running cones with Maysey and Evans. I made the comment, "I don't want to practice, I just want to be good already...". The first half a dozen times down the course my head was filled with too much noise - "go slower, wider turns, lean forward, hands in more, turn earlier, look ahead...". After a while though, with the advice from the TG's (Tight Gurus), I was able to slow down, clean the course, and actually feel the results of doing something different than what I had wanted to do (pump like a bat out of hell). It takes practice to get good at TS, and it takes being good at TS (or at least competent) for it to be any fun. It took special equipment, and special advice from some specialists, before I was able to improve. I'm not "there" yet, but I see the light at the end of the tunnel. Not everyone is so lucky. Most budgets would tend to exclude any specialty equipment, and most schedules tend to exclude time for "unfun" skating disciplines. We repeat what we already know. Once however, enough skaters have turned the corner and gotten past the humble beginnings of Tight Slalom, the future looks pretty darn bright.
2. Although I have mixed emotions about "compartmentalizing" sports into arena based venues (motocross, vert ramps, arena football), many of the "longer-faster-steeper" sports have been dropped from major venues because they are a logistics nightmare for media coverage. No media coverage, no money. No money, no growth. No growth, no racers or races beyond a grass roots gathering.
Tight Slalom has more opportunity to be promoted than any other "gravity" based form of racing. If I wanted to have a TS race on the Huntington Beach Pier, it could be done. Inside of Staples Center, done. Parking lots, race car tracks, soap box derby tracks, downhill/GS/Hybrid venues, flatland, you name it. Sure, not all of these are ideal, but at least they are doable. You can't Streetluge at the Reno in Las Vegas, but you could do TS just about anywhere. If modular ramps/and or tracks were perfected in the same manner that Skate-Lite ramps and metal coping has been, setup and takedown could happen all over the planet. But we are putting the cart before the horses. If we don't have at least 16 to 32 horses (with personalities) that can clean a TS course on cue, there's no point in "building it". I'm a big-fast-turny-mountain-road-downhiller kind of guy, but if the TV cameras are inside taping the SFU's (Six Foot and Unders), I'm all over it.
One surefire way of getting more racers involved in Tight Slalom is to hold high stakes "tight only" races. Perhaps two or three TS variants at a race, resisting all temptations to "open up the course" to a Hybrid Standard. If there's money and TS is the only game in town, racers will race Tight. At first they may not embrace it, but they'll definitely race it. I would.
|
|
|
|
|
Euro defintions...
|
|
On 10/4/2005 ur13
wrote in from
(72.43.nnn.nnn)
The traditional breakdown of slalom disciplines from Europe in the 90s goes something like this (this is from memory)
Straight (Parallel) Slalom
-Straight Parallel courses set at no more than 2.5m OC (can't remember if the minimum was 2.5m or that was the maximum)...36 cones
Special slalom
- Cone distance ranging from 1.5-4m OC with an average cone distance of 2m(?), offsets and a "varied" course are required. Around 40-60 cones, can be flat or on a slope.
Giant Slalom
- Cone distance ranging from 2-10m OC with an average cone distance of 4-5m(?), offsets and a "varied" course are required. Around 20-40 cones on a slope.
Now I remember years ago all the debates and arguements that went on about those rules on this very site. Many people around then found those rules too limiting and too strict for their tastes. Plus the skill level to make said courses wasn't there.
I remember when "hybrid" slalom was first being thrown around here in 2000 being used to describe courses for lack of any better word. There always was a HUGE backlash I felt against honoring the ISSA's terms. I don't know if the term "hybrid" was ever coined...it just sorta lingered around and became the default term for lack of anything better.
I think GS now-a-days means much bigger courses. The ISSA defination seems sorta small (10m = 30'ish feet). I've noticed here in the Northeast recently (this summer) that the term hybrid course isn't used as much. Terms like "tighter GS" or "small GS" are used more....only when someone else, usually not the course setter, brings the term hybrid up do others call it that.
|
|
|
|
|
discipline definitions
|
|
On 10/4/2005 fluitt
wrote in from
United States
(192.18.nnn.nnn)
Mike, I agree that we need to have a common vernacular for the disciplines if we want a level playing field. And this would help manage expectations when racers cross continents for races.
I recommend that we lobby Jani and Corky if we want to come up with a common set of definitions for the disciplines. Currently this is how they have it on slalomranking.com
"Only the standard disciplines are counted into the World Rankings.
Super Tight
Tight
Slalom
Giant
Super Giant
These courses can be set straight or irregular (special).
Odd disciplines will not count into the ranking unless they correspond to any of the standard disciplines. For disciplines like 100 cones, Cyber slalom or Cross slalom this is no problem. 100 cones could be marked as a Straight Tight or Straight Slalom. Cyber could be a Straight slalom. The qualification of Cross slalom could be a Giant slalom or Super G."
|
|
|
|
|
tight slalom
|
|
On 10/4/2005
mike maysey
wrote in from
United States
(66.214.nnn.nnn)
It is TS, but they should do plow a lot of cones!! : )
|
|
|
|
|
Q & A...
|
|
On 10/4/2005
mike maysey
wrote in from
United States
(66.214.nnn.nnn)
Chris, asks, "Is this typical of fast slalom setups? Or is this maybe unique to him? How do you run yours?" Referring to truck tension...
In fact that is the way I run my boards most of the time. I do have a slalom board (hybrid some call it) that is longer than maybe it needs to be...on this board, I have the trucks relatively loose front and rear, compared to my other boards. The tension is still slightly tighter in the rear for stability, but loose enough to make courses like the one we saw on Saturday at the Worlds.
Michael, I think what you're talking about might be called 'Special'. This brings me to a question of my own...the 'Special; in Stockholm was something more like what I would have liked to see at the Worlds. But Main St. in Morro is very crowned and has a bunch of obstacles that make course setting somewhat limited. I agree though, a "bendy straight line" isn't all that exciting, but then again...we all have to run the same course, so the playing field is levelled. This train of thought leads me to ask a question of my own...
Should there be standardized names for courses?
For instance, in Europe, you guys call 'Special', what we in the US might call 'Tight'...now I know Tight (in Europe) is usually considered 6' - 6.5' and straight. I only know these 'facts' from the Stockholm race and from hearing about Paris, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
Should the 'Tight' in Morro be called a 'Special'?
Should 'Hybrid' just be called 'Slalom'?
Seems to me, the standardized naming would be a no brainer, but then again maybe not. I think it makes sense because someone travelling half way around the world to race shold have a better than good idea of what to expect from the courses. This way they can decide well in advance if they want to skate the race or shine it on for the next race that has formats more to their liking.
Ideas...thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
TS
|
|
On 10/4/2005
FLUITT
wrote in from
United States
(192.18.nnn.nnn)
Most race promoters loath putting on TS races not just because of the horrendous cone counts or the number of people the discipline tends to alienate, but rather because they can never please everyone with Tight Slalom. It's either too tight for the masses, or too loose for the specialists, and the bitching and moaning always occurs around the TS, rarely true for HS, GS, or SGS.
Breckenridge this year was a perfect example. Everyone universally loved the GS course, because it was a blast. But the TS was a love-hate relationship. The top 4 guys loved it. Everyone else had some reason to hate it (not simply cone spacing).
Why has Hybrid (a.k.a. Slalom) replaced Tight Slalom? First of all, TS was never a mainstay of this sport in the U.S. Certainly more popular with the Euros throughout the 90's, but never the meat and potatoes of American slalom, which has generally been dominated by GS and what we now call "Hybrid" thanks to Chaput. TS has alway been around but never the dominate discipline. So the question is misguiding. The question really is "Why is there not more 'real' tight slalom in America"?
IMHO the answer is really really simple. This sport it T-I-N-Y. You want to grow the sport like Tway, TK, and Joe are doing? Like Marion is doing? Like Martin is doing? or anyone who puts on Grass Roots races? You set courses that people can get into and enjoy, and get better, and get hooked. TS doesn't do that initially. GS and Hybrid do.
So, you want more difficult courses? Sure, once you get better, you want more "Expert" courses that take more skill and agility, and you begin to create classes of racers. But we've not grown our numbers to support a true multi-class racing environment in America. Nor have they in Europe. Until we have maybe 5000 people in the US that are actively participating and racing 10 times a season, we will not have the population to support multiple tiers of racers with the associated ranking system to support it like they do in Skiing, Mtn. Biking, etc.
So what happens? Race promoters put on races drawing from a potential market of maybe 200 racers. By nature of the cost of permits, insurance, etc. they must attract about 25% from that market. Besides, that's more fun the 10 guys. And so Mr. Race Promoter puts up a course that "most" racers can make but is still just challenging enough for the elite guys that are there, so that it's fun for most racers. Race promoters can't afford to put on a race for the elite 24 guys in the sport. We could put on that kind of race if you wanted to pay a $300 entry fee. I think FCR tried that this year and got 3 people signed up. I guess that's the choice at this point. Super high entry fees so we can run elite races for the top 10% of the sport, or, races for the masses. Sure, sponsorship could pay for elite races of extreme difficulty, but that doesn't grow this sport. Grass roots races grow this sport. This is what we need more of. Races like Martin's that have 30 new stoked slalomers joining the sport. TS is cool. I want to see it survive and thrive, but don't expect it to be the discipline of choice in a sport that is fully in it's infancy, trying to attract the cross overs and newbies, and struggling to survive.
|
|
|
|
|
hybrid killed TS- TS board sales lower
|
|
On 10/3/2005
john Gilmour
wrote in from
United States
(209.6.nnn.nnn)
I have watched THIS happen.
Races are announced to be a Hybrid + TS. The hybrid course is offset and the "TS" is just a hybrid without any offset. No pump no speed.
TS should be one of the fastest disciplines.
About 5 years ago there were only a handful of USA racers that could run a TS with any degree of speed. Now there are lots of them. At any continental championship there are no less than 20 guys who can tear up a tech TS.
Even the kids can rule a TS course. But why are there no more TS courses?
MM I also agree that TS is slalom. TS might be a "misnomer" because the idea of TS isn't to run the tightest possible cone setting you can. The idea is to go as bloody fast as possible down the hill while slaloming. So fast, …. that the cones may seem to be impossibly tight.
I think it is a good drill to practice very tight cones lik 5'6" cones. but IMHO I think it isn't a good idea to set lots of competitions with them. They suck speed out of TS and limit the pitch of the hill to a gradual one. Not what Tech TS is about- but running them as a drill sure helps balance and reflexes and rhythm.
You see we are very worried about alienating anyone from slalom- but we are in danger of alienating the top rung of racers....the very racers we need as the seed to get some good media and some respect.
It isn't much fun to drive 4 hours for a lame course.........
….but it is a lot less fun to take a train for 3 hours, transfer to a local airport, get to an International airport, have two layovers in the USA, and drive another couple of hours for a lame course. This is what a Japanese slalomer could expect if he attended the last Farm outlaw series courses. They should still have an easy course- but you've got to offer a high level course for the top guys- if nothing else as a demo for the younger racers to aspire to.
From looking at the outlaw farm finale photos the racers got two hybrid courses which were not either GS or TS courses.
So I do not blame the course setters, but I think there should be some guidelines for what constitutes a slalom discipline.
I think we worry a lot about the less skilled racers having a good time and forget about the ones who really put in the practice to get good. I am referring to the kids. Not the weekend warrior adults. Some of the kids try to practice everyday (yes every SINGLE day)- in hopes of becoming a great racer in a season or two- and want to run a great course like they do in practice.
Deb (Fibreflex) Gordon's son is a perfect example of a kid just eating and drinking slalom everyday until he turns into a powerhouse. What happened to Saili? Well, if I have to choose between a hanging out with a girlfriend or waiting to race a lame course- I'll go with the girl. But if the course is awesome- I'll drag her to watch me race.
You’ve got to reward those kids with a good course- or they just lose interest. As Adults we want to see the sport continue- and will tolerate a entry level course for newbies as the ONLY course set in order not to alienate the newbies. ...But what is the point if the youth sees no challenge in a course, and starts to lose interest and put his attention towards another activity.
I'd really like to hear some response from the kids here.
Dr. Evans (You are the PHD of slalom who has given it tons of in depth thought and produced great racers as a result) I think your TS is technical and tight and best run with very short stiff boards and small wheelbases and narrow high geometry trucks- similar to what was run in the early 70’s. And this type of TS definitely has a place. It is ideal for flatter venues that rely on ramp starts. It is far easier to find a smooth flat area in a populated area that can be used for slalom than a steep high speed tech TS.
It’s perfect for Public plazas and parks. That type of TS can expose people as spectators to the sport.
But when promoters have a race at a GS venue- use the damn GS hill for TS as well. You’ll be surprised at how many racers step up. And some will step down…. Which is fine, because TS isn’t for all the racers. It is for the ones that practice most.
And hold TS races in the middle of the other slalom events. It gives some newer racers a chance to rest that are not able to run the course.
I have yet to see a great Tech TS course set. In Switzerland the courses they set were fast, downhill and very tight. Too tight for me in fact and I struggled to make it through with a full Nose Turner. Their courses were optimized for Midtracks.
I think that is a little speed limiting as a Wider truck can hold a better line at speed.- but it was amazing to watch these guys skate. So amazing that they had no trouble drawing out the majority of the inhabitants of the town. If they ran hybrid slow courses…..I doubt they would have even 1/4 the interest.
Hybrid courses reduce cone carnage- but also they aren’t much fun to watch because they bunch up the times.
Sure we have a lot of close hybrid races- but you never get to see any one go really fast and it is difficult for the lay person to identify the fastest racers.
For a spectator identifying and waiting for the fastest guys to race is part of the fun. It isn’t much fun to watch when everyone is the same speed and no one hits cones…
One heat looks exactly like another.
|
|
|
|
|
TS
|
|
On 10/3/2005 Michael
wrote in from
United Kingdom
(80.47.nnn.nnn)
Mike, you speak a LOT of sense. BTW it was fun racing you at Morro, and well done on your win.
TS does help ALL your slalom skills, probably in the way that all skating helps in some way. Personnally I love tight, and I ever used to, I always went for the easier option. Things change.
Id like to see more offsetts in the US tight courses though. (Though I'll admit I can only use Morro as a benchmark). Tight is fine but not really when its nothing more than a bendy straight line. I'd like to see tight and offset. More like a hybrid course but with less space between cones.
What dya reckon?
|
|
|
|
|
Truck tightness
|
|
On 10/3/2005
Chris
wrote in from
United States
(216.243.nnn.nnn)
Mike,
I was checking out Mitchell's slalom board last weekend at Sandia, and I noticed his rear truck was very tight in relation to the front.
Is this typical of fast slalom setups? Or is this maybe unique to him? How do you run yours?
|
|
|
|
|
