|
|
|
| Q&A: Slalom Pro Mike Maysey (2489 Posts)
|
| Topic |
Info |
|
Mixed-Combined-Combi Racing...
|
|
On 4/13/2003
Miko
wrote in from
(66.81.nnn.nnn)
Rav, Mike...
This format was so much fun to ride! I absolutely would like to see a trend toward blended discipline races like this.
So now... How do we incorporate just a bit of that excitement into the S.F. Gravity Fest? Use the ENTIRE hill! Richy! Gary! Are you guys listening? (I would guess that there's timing equipment set up for the downhillers... why not skip setting our own system up, and just figure out a way to Super GS the whole thing? I'm sure the crowd would love it, and I bet it would really trip out the downhillers. Give them a slight pause of wonderment? (I would hope... ) I think carving a 40mph hill would really bring it down to 25-35 max.
In keeping with the Alien theme... It was fun AND surreal hitting the BBQ joint from Mars in downtown Paso with John Ravitch and Mathew Shreiber after the event. Mechanical Bull... dancing waitresses in cow print getups. John told the waitress she was "in the presence of pro skateboard racers," and that it was my birthday (in honor of Chris Chaput's maybe?) And they came waltzing out with a giant piece of mile-high cake singing happy birthday! (My consolation for getting knocked out early... )
|
|
|
|
|
Paso
|
|
On 4/13/2003
mike maysey
wrote in from
(65.234.nnn.nnn)
David, speeds were in the 20-25mph...not too fast, but fast enough. No gates required sliding. I wore slider gloves, but really didn't need them until I crashed warming up! hehehe. Clayton got equal 9th...not bad for his first Pro event, if I may be so bold to point that out. I'm honestly going to push for more formats like this one as it was a great combination of both slalom and downhill.
|
|
|
|
|
I have seen aliens
|
|
On 4/13/2003
John Ravitch
wrote in from
(64.161.nnn.nnn)
Mike,
I enjoyed reading your Hut story having just looked at the photo - a legendary shot - I have never seen a closer finish - what struck me was the difference in the body language between you two. Appreciate the time you took to spell it all out...always fun to hear what goes through a racer's mind. My moment of infamy at the end of this...
Some general notes about the race - first, what a stellar day. Jack and his team really put alot of thought into this event and it showed in everything that went down. In short, racing just took a quantum leap forward - all the sudden technique, equipment and pumping were once again topics for discussion amongst riders.
Miko already did an good job covering the reasons why - interspersing pro/open races kept everyone focused, plentiful awards, commemorative t-shirts, accessible food, great views, clever awards for best slam, etc. I just wanted to add one other observation - about the way racing impacted qualifying and vica versa.
For me, the day came alive because qualifying played a bigger role than usual in racing eliminations as there was only one run for elims - so a racer's qualifying seed was critical for lane choice throughout the day. In addition, each elim run was riveting cuz it was always for advancement, not a ".124 second advantage going into the second run." So racers were running 100% every race. Who knows, one elim run vs. 2 may not be fair upon greater ncdsa forum reflection but for this format it sures makes for a shorter more focused day of racing.
Another observation - nice to see known riders fully terrorize a different format. Top shredders were Arab, Gareth, Hut and Judi. At one point I was walking up hill, tired from a long run when I look up and see Arab coming through the left hand sweeper like a friggin' freight train...bearing down on his monster truck Avilas and fully locked in for the next turn - he was on rails, get out of the way. Before Paso, Gareth was a solid midpack racer who clearly came alive at Paso to beat both Miko and Scott Johnston, probably the fastest Open rider. Clearly, Gareth is doing something different - probably, Red Bull protein shakes and practicing with Michael. Finally, great to see SC buds Judi and Hut in excellent form - it was a pivotal race for both of them.
As for my ran in the finals vs. Eli - it was surreal - like being visited by an alien space ship. I got the jump out of the starting gates and was madly peddling my little white avalons ahead of the Smouse B2 bomber before I was passed coming out of the S turn in a whisper smooth rush of kevlar, leather and Avilas like I was in slow motion - I hear this is a common phenomenon with alien encounters. So, naturally I do a Richie...or is it now a Maysey...and pump like hell to catch up. Of course, all I catch is wind as the Smouse craft mometarily hovers, smirks at me through his Lexan visor, then pulls ahead, preparing to land his aircraft. I think he was already signing autographs and cutting a new sponsorship deal with Nasa when I finally crossed the finish line. All kidding aside, Eli truly out strategized/raced/whupped me and others all day long to earn a well deserved victory.
Well done, Eli and Sully...Comet Bomb Squad 1..2..3.
Ravitch
|
|
|
|
|
Paso
|
|
On 4/13/2003
david
wrote in from
(192.211.nnn.nnn)
hey, mike , so give me a low-down on the race. what kinds of speeds are we talking about? did any of the gate involve sliding or drifting. man this whole "going to college" thing is getting in the way of my skateboard racing career and the tons of money involved!! i from gary's pics it looks like one of the best events i've seen, really wish i was there, to bad there was'nt any media people covering it.
oh yea, congrats to the COMET BOMB SQUAD on their victories!!!
how did clayton do?
|
|
|
|
|
Paso
|
|
On 4/13/2003
Miko
wrote in from
(66.81.nnn.nnn)
I too had a blast at this race... The Avilas were great and we've got to get to Tunnel Road for a little fun riding on them!
I wish I would have somehow focused better for my first bungee start in the elims. I heard racers ready? Said yes, and expected a small gap of some sort, (I stupidly looked down the hill instead of at Ed's hand!) ... the bungee flew by, and also hit my hand... Gareth had taken off, so I jumped on it and was in the chase, down by at least 2 cones. Almost squeezed by him in the left sweeper of the downhill, but he stayed in my path as we returned to the courses... at the very end I nearly caught him at the bottom, but he still had me by a wheel. This is a live-and-learn deal, but I'm a bit bummed because that was my very first bungee start and I blew it. Props to Gareth... He IS riding faster than ever and took down Scott Johnston too. I would have loved a chance to race Sully, Ravitch, Smouse... win or lose though, this race rocked! So much fun running the course with everyone... See ya all in SF!
|
|
|
|
|
SlalomCross
|
|
On 4/13/2003
mike maysey
wrote in from
(65.234.nnn.nnn)
Simply put...the most fun I've had on a skateboard in quite a while. I rode my FatBoy with the 23 1/3" inner hole measure. I also rode 76duro Avila's...which were carrying tons of speed for me until I went up against the 'Hut Tuck.' The Avila 76's are a perfect wheel for that type of course. I can't wait to try them out on my downhill board over in Berkeley. This is great, after everyone saw what happened to me against Hut, they learned quickly to stay as low as possible and out of the wind. ...guys, you're welcome for that little tidbit of help.
Here's the way my final race went from my perspective and from what Hut told me as well as others who saw it happen.
When Ed let go of the bungee, I blasted into the course. I knew I needed to get as far ahead as I could because Hut knows how to skate downhill...he knows how to draft. Anyway, I led the race through the pass throughs and was leading into the uphill section.
As I came around the sweeping left, I was of course tucked and got a shot of wind right in the face. I could feel it slowing me down but I held my tuck until slightly before the first cone in the uphill. I figured I was far enough ahead of Hut that he couldn't possibly catch me...
As we entered those uphill cones...I could barely hear him. I figured I was probably 10 yards or so in front of him. Hut reeled me in by using(and I didn't know this until later)his tuck until the first cone in the uphill section. He had momentum saved, while I was losing momentum. Since I could feel him overtaking me, I started pumping as hard as I could. We crested the uphill section together.
He immediately tucked again coming into the final set of cones at the bottom section. I was pumping my legs off against a crazy swirly wind. I figured I'd just try to overpower nature and John. It was weird too because every other run I had taken, I was tucking the bottom section of cones. This time, I got scared and was pumping wildly, standing up, while Hut just got down. While I was being pushed back by the wind, Hut slipped under it and simply rolled by me at the finish and beat me by just a few inches. Gary Holl took a 'photo finish' and to my disappointment, Hut beat me.
I got beat by a living legned. I don't feel bad at all about that. I think I might still have one of the fastest times of the day on the hill, whatever that means at this point.
Jack...if you're out there, that was THE MOST fun I've ever had on a slalom board. I say this format be used whenever possible. Sharing gates, the downhill element, the uphill, it was way way more fun to watch than a standard slalom race, which can tend to be kind of boring...everything but the wind next time please!!! I wish we could have had two runs per bracket, but them's the rules...you can bet if I'd had another run, I would have tucked the whole damn course.
|
|
|
|
|
give us the lowdown
|
|
On 4/12/2003
john airey
wrote in from
(63.198.nnn.nnn)
looks like the GGP open group with ravitch and sully in
the top three is doing well. congrats to those guys!
I need to hit another of those GGP practices and maybe
I'll learn something.
mike tell us the story. right board? wheels? how did it go
down?
|
|
|
|
|
Gilmours Rocket mail Account
|
|
On 4/11/2003
TK
wrote in from
(24.34.nnn.nnn)
A string and two dixie cups is more reliable than that account.
|
|
|
|
|
Hump up and be counted
|
|
On 4/11/2003
Wesley Tucker
wrote in from
(152.163.nnn.nnn)
Gilmour said, "Also Wesley- think about what life would be like without the "Cone catcher" nose that deflects cones away from the wheels?"
Well, since I always run the course clean, that's a situation I've never really concerned myself.
HAH!
P.S. Rocketmail is bouncing. Is your mailbox full or did you cancel it?
|
|
|
|
|
Humping...when are we going to get to the good stuff?
|
|
On 4/11/2003 John Gilmour
wrote in from
(141.154.nnn.nnn)
Also Wesley- think about what life would be like without the "Cone catcher" nose that deflects cones away from the wheels?
When I got my first Turner deck- I couldn't make it work the way I drilled it...mostly because I drilled it like I would have drilled a laminate deck- wheels to the edges to maximize wheelbase/stability and flex.
I was 12 years old.
I did not want to perforate the deck with 4 more holes and noticed that the curve of the camber increased more in the nose than the tail so to lower the camber which was high and to avoid making 4 more holes in the deck - compromising strength- I just moved the whole truck back and drilled two holes in the nose. What a difference! Then I decided it was time to really drill the deck to optimize the drilling- when the deck was done it looked like it had been in Afganistan but it rode great. So I wondered why it was that the boards had to be drilled so strangely to ride well. And as Wesley is a fan of the Classic Turners as am I ........- I figured I would try to explain why I thought they needed to be drilled like that to get those results.
Of you were to saw off the nose of a needle nose- a couple of things would happen- none of which would be good.
1. The "twist and peel" forces caused by flexing and pumping would be very close to the edge of the deck- either promoting delams or you would have to use a "tougher resin" with less pop to get the same strength.
2. No cone catcher
3. The deck would be tosionally softer in the nose. The best eample of this is a sheet of regular cardboard and another sheet of same thickness pressed into the shape of a "chinet" paper bowl. The Chinet paper bowl is stiffer. Now take a pair of scissors and cut off the edge of that plate and now the plate is easier to deform.
4. The decks would look less bad ass.
IMHO the closer trucks are the the edge of a deck the less material there is around the truck to support it. Mounting trucks at the edge of a board means that the truck will be less supported against twisting ie torsioanlly softer. That is why you see the Turner Needlenose ideal mounting position the way it is....Tosionally stiffer in the nose and then mounted very near the tail to make the tail "more forgiving" ie torsionally softer and more compliant with the road surface.
Cap construction in the Turner needlenose also has other benefits since according to "cap theory" as for most decks the height of the cap is too small relative to the width of the deck. You get a more torsionally rigid deck if the cap height is closer to the width. So the Needlenose or Cutaway Turner has a rigid nose that also has lots of wheel clearance (double bonus).
Making that same shape in a laminate deck is not as effective as laminate decks do not benefit from "cap" construction torsionally properties and as laminate decks get narrower they get more torsionally soft (only way around this is to add more plys in the nose or add carbon fibre to the nose). However narrowing the tail on a laminate deck makes for a more compliant tail.
Of course since most decks out there are Sandwich construction ...not much of this applies outside of the classic turners.
For the true Parallel stance riders out there- currently there are not many decks made with enough quick peak hump- though the Pocket Pistol stealth comes to mind- otherwise a Parallel stance rider might have to look at getting an older Turner.
|
|
|
|
|
Humpty Dumpty
|
|
On 4/11/2003 John Gilmour
wrote in from
(141.154.nnn.nnn)
IMHO...and I do ride Parallel at times- Since Parallel stance riders focus more of their weight in EXACTLY the same line across the deck they need peak camber. They need the camber to rise quickly and be of slightly higher slope.
Surf stance riders and modified parallel riders need the camber less peaked (since they are not hitting the exact same point across the board with each foot)and slightly less spread out an also need the camber to be more forward than the requirements of a parallel stance rider.
Other wise- if the surf stance guys ride a "high peaked board" they are punching the camber to the sides of the peak.....not great.
With slightly forward camber and the peak more spread the surf stance rider can punch the nose and start getting deflection and then finish with the rear foot.
To the Parallel stance rider....riding a board with spread out forward camber seems like the board doesn't have enough "pop" to pump and give peak traction.
So Wesley is stating his preference for a deck well suited for fast tight parallel stance riding on steeps- and he's right.
|
|
|
|
|
Drilling extra holes...
|
|
On 4/11/2003
Miko
wrote in from
(66.81.nnn.nnn)
All kidding aside... a wood-core board is usually fine for adding more holes, but be careful with the more exotic stuff. If there's not a solid plate or block in the truck mounting areas, it can seriously weaken a foam-core deck.
|
|
|
|
|
drilling other holes
|
|
On 4/10/2003 Dr. Ruth
wrote in from
(63.198.nnn.nnn)
Experimenting with extra holes is fun... Dr. P, get your
wife's permission first, but then go for it!
Dr. Ruth.
|
|
|
|
|
Hump / position / which holes?
|
|
On 4/10/2003
Dr P
wrote in from
(24.239.nnn.nnn)
...OK, ok, Sorry!!!
but aesthetics aside, is there any reason not to have several wheelbases drilled to help discover what works best- while minimizing expense in cash and marital accord?
Will extra holes start stress fractures in my "toy", or are they too close to the trucks to matter much?
|
|
|
|
|
Humpalicious...
|
|
On 4/10/2003
Miko
wrote in from
(66.81.nnn.nnn)
So just when did all this humping start up? Break it up guys!!! (Here come the crowbar jokes... )
W-Base stuff... I've been mostly riding about 24" (ax2ax) on my ICK Carrera. My Mini is a couple inches shorter and really is a tight board. I've mostly ridden the longer w/b so I'm learning to go shorter slowly but surely. It definitely has advantages on many courses... not necessarily tight ones either.
My new ICK Retro-Flattie (picking it up at Paso!) will be 23.5" on the bolts, and probably up around 26" ax2ax. This is gonna be a wicked stable big hill board. I keep hearing from others just how well it turns for such a big ride. Can't wait to bolt it up and blast off at Paso!
|
|
|
|
|
Hump free bogart
|
|
On 4/10/2003 John Gilmour
wrote in from
(68.162.nnn.nnn)
But for parallel stance riders the hump up front is better lots of Bruce Brewington's decks feature high centered camber
|
|
|
|
|
Hump-a-dump
|
|
On 4/10/2003 Wesley Tucker
wrote in from
(152.163.nnn.nnn)
"...torsionally stiffen the nose?"
Puh-leeze.
Just buy a flat board that's three inches shorter. Geez.
|
|
|
|
|
humping for pumping
|
|
On 4/10/2003 John Gilmour
wrote in from
(68.162.nnn.nnn)
The bottom deck is correct. The extra nose serves to torsionally stiffen the nose for more response. Fiberglass has maximum stiffness per weight when shaped in a curve.
|
|
|
|
|
Humpalicious
|
|
On 4/10/2003 tk
wrote in from
(24.34.nnn.nnn)
I like lower hump in my boards and Maximum hump in my women.
|
|
|
|
|
Wheelbase "Placement"
|
|
On 4/10/2003
Wesley Tucker
wrote in from
(152.163.nnn.nnn)
Another matter to consider when deciding on a shorter wheelbase is WHERE to drill the trucks. The hastily composed drawing below illustrates the differences between drilling forward and drilling farther back. As can sort of be seen, drilling FORWARD will allow for a maximum amount of "hump" from your cambered board.
Conversely, drilling farther back results in a "flatter" deck. To put it another way, if you drill your trucks to the back of the board, a goodly portion of your camber is transferred into nothing more than a droopy nose. Personally, I've never really considered the logic in paying a lot of money for a well-designed cambered board and then cancelling out most of the advantages by drilling a truck pattern that flattens the riding area.
Recently, when purchasing my new Pocket Pistol, Chicken asked me about the drill pattern. Although it is not a short wheelbase (18" inner-hole to inner hole on a 29" Stealth) I told him I wanted the truck as far forward as he could safely drill. For me, this provides maximum "hump," which is what I really look for in a board.
By the way, Chicken drilled it PERFECTLY:-)
|
|
|
|
|
Reponse or thinner boards
|
|
On 4/10/2003
Leo
wrote in from
(146.18.nnn.nnn)
Chris13:
well i weight 184 now, i used to weight around 160lbs, so my weight has increased with my skills, and maybe thats why i am havving this problem, when i get my "new" deck i will have to get used to the new one, and the response will become a normal quiver on the PSS classes.
if u check the pics posted on the other sites, (jim blanco, speedmasters site and the other slalom one) u can check some pics of me riding the deck thru 6´cones, i got used to ride with my feet at a high angle position, with the back toes touching the front heel (sendin pics to both of u mike and chris).
this minimize the feeling of having all my weight in the middle causing the back wheels to slide.
i am too new to start talking about torsional rigidity
leo
|
|
|
|
|
short wheelbase...finally
|
|
On 4/10/2003 ur13
wrote in from
(165.247.nnn.nnn)
god damn "enter" key......
lastly...the last component to your short wheelbase board is that it needs to be VERY torsionally stiff, any amount of "twist" in the deck negates your ability to effectively brake the board. You can still do it it is just ALOT harder to control.
|
|
|
|
|
short wheelbases
|
|
On 4/10/2003 ur13
wrote in from
(165.247.nnn.nnn)
...one further advantage (if you know how to control it) with short wheelbase boards is the ability to brake them more effectively in a course. Gilmour is the master of this (watch him at Cambria and La Costa 01). Braking, or controled slides, are key to really tight and technical courses, going full bore into one section but letting up not being enough for the next section requires a slight slide of the rear wheels, easy(easier) to do while maintaining control on tight wheelbase boards (sub 19.5" axle to axle being tight)....
Tight wheelbases on bigger courses also allow for a tighter more precise line (less arc more "Z" pattern) around the cones/offests and the ability to double and triple pump between gates. (Watch Paul Dunn from La Costa 02 or Avila for a good example of this...also Brent Kosik from La Costa 02 GS). Problem is is that your margin for error is WAY down and when things go bad they go REALLY bad (see Gilmour for this, when he blows out he REALLY blows out).
Bigger wheelbase board offer more stability and a larger margin for error (most of the time)....
|
|
|
|
|
Did you call?
|
|
On 4/10/2003 Smokestack
wrote in from
(217.39.nnn.nnn)
Hello?
|
|
|
|
|
My first couple slalom boards...
|
|
On 4/10/2003
mike maysey
wrote in from
(65.234.nnn.nnn)
...were short wheelbased boards. I had a Fluid Stinger that had something like 19" from inner hole to inner hole and then a G & S Response that had a similar wheelbase measure then a couple Comets (one long wheelbase 22" I think and another 18-19"..something like that) and now Turners with 18" and 23 1/4". I started on short wheelbases but I'm now beginning to find a place for long wheelbased boards out of necessity.
I think the short wheelbased boards did exactly what you suggest John...trained me to keep my weight centered over the little board. Also, most of my practice time in the my formitable slalom months coming on FLAT ground, I learned how to pump and generate speed while keeping centered on the shorter board. That's when I started to flipped bolt trick...barrowed from my days of street skating in the 80's. This was something some of us would do so when you ollie, your toe would catch the bolt and you'd land back on your board more often.
With the longer wheelbased boards, it's somewhat tougher to find that centered feeling I mentioned above. For me, it came not so easy due to my getting so used to the shorter wheelbase deck I find, on occasion, the longer wheelbased boards to be easier to lose traction in the front due to a weight shift which sometimes allows the front wheels to drift. At the World GS race, I rode 78's front and 80's rear...when everyone else was sliding, I was sticking. I never really have a problem unweighting wheels on shorter wheelbased boards like the fullnose, but I still prefer to ride softer wheels on it. It's only when I get my weight spread out between the widest truck setting on my Fat Boy that traction and weighting and unweighting becomes an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
