Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

______________
12" White Stickers
______________
BallOfSpray $5 Donation
______________
BallOfSpray $10 Donation

Would you rather have a foot more rope or a foot narrower balls?

HortonHorton Posts: 25,685 Administrator
edited June 2013 in Technique & Theory
I am pretty ambivalent about the never ending Jim Michaels threads but I someone said something about a narrower course vs a longer line. Seems like an interesting idea.

Would you rather have a foot more rope or a foot narrower balls? 55 votes

Foot more rope
14%
HortonscotchipmanChuck_DickeyAggieSkierJim NeelyTylerRhammerskiRazorRoss3 8 votes
Foot narrower balls
85%
auskierDekeski6jonesmlangeRogerLZywicki1waterskicoreyBoneHeadKillerThan_Boganbf`DragoDanEGarnh2oskiBulldogbmiller3536ralski4xtcjayski 47 votes

Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

Babes / Connelly / D3 / DBSkis / Goode / Hobe Lake / HO Syndicate / KD Skis  

MasterCraft / Masterline / MOB / O'Brien / Performance Ski and Surf / Reflex / Radar / Stokes

«1

Comments

  • DragoDrago Posts: 1,254 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    Haven't done the math, but narrower course has GOT to make a bigger difference
    SR SL Judge & Driver (“a driver who is super late on the wheel and is out of sync”)
  • HortonHorton Posts: 25,685 Administrator
    Foot more rope
    @Drago
    I am not going for it. Longer rope has to be better to a point. Gimmie 3 feet. You take 3 feet narrow I am pretty sure I win. You still have the same arc on the boat and only don't need to be as wide.

    At some point it gets silly - 10 feet narrow is another story.

    Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

    Babes / Connelly / D3 / DBSkis / Goode / Hobe Lake / HO Syndicate / KD Skis  

    MasterCraft / Masterline / MOB / O'Brien / Performance Ski and Surf / Reflex / Radar / Stokes

  • DragoDrago Posts: 1,254 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @Horton , I'm not married to that decision. I'm thinking back before I completely busted my body apart: I was running 39 at least once a tournament. Could I run 41 with a foot narrower course? I think so. Could I run 40 off? I think so. Might be the same thing at that point(?)
    SR SL Judge & Driver (“a driver who is super late on the wheel and is out of sync”)
  • ozskiozski Posts: 1,568
    Foot narrower balls
    If we are talking changes how about an 8 ball course? As for the OP's question I'm taking the mini course....
    'Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better.'' Boat 2005 Nautique 196 6L ZO - Ski: KD Platinum

  • SBFLSBFL Posts: 36 Baller
    Neither, the reason we should ski is for the challenge and the fun.
    Ski hard or ski home.
    Ed_Obermeier
  • DanEDanE Posts: 829 Crazy Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    Soo much easier with a foot narrower Course vs a foot longer rope.
    Skied a tournament few years back were qualification round were held at a remote lake with surveyed Course.
    Finals in Town in 4 buoy Course, crappy conditions, buoys moved in a foot on purpose, felt like 3-4 feet of extra rope.
  • 6balls6balls Posts: 4,881 ★★★Triple Panda Award Recipient ★★★
    Foot narrower balls
    Narrow easier...where are our physics guys?
    Dave Ross--die cancer die
  • Than_BoganThan_Bogan Posts: 6,043 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    Not surprisingly, I have actually tried to answer this question with some math. I mostly failed.

    But I think I convinced myself that narrower course by the same amount is probably easier than lengthening rope. Qualitatively, it's because the lower amplitude impacts just about everything somewhat significantly: forces, rate of change of forces, speed, acceleration, etc.

    Still, I'm only about 75% sure I'm right. Could be an amusing tournament someday to test this!?
    Nathaniel Bogan -- GUT Padawan
  • bmiller3536bmiller3536 Posts: 298 Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    If the buoys are 1 foot closer you would decrease the total distance of travel which would in turn decrease the average speed which would make for less work on the skier (do not have to generate as much speed) Not sure if this directly implies it would be easier but anything that requires less work I am all for
    Brad Miller
  • BoneHeadBoneHead Posts: 5,897
    edited June 2013
    Foot narrower balls
    I only want the buoys 1 foot closer when @teammalibu is skiing against me. And only for me. Is that too much to ask?!?!?!
    Shane "Crash" Hill

    MattP
  • aswinter05aswinter05 Posts: 363 Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    After spending 5 months chasing green buoys..... I believe a narrower course was much easier than if I had an extra chunk of rope chasing the orange buoys. This is just from a 15-off standpoint. I bet it's MUCH different for you guys running shortline.
  • Skoot1123Skoot1123 Posts: 1,776 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    I answered as if the foot narrower balls were on each side of the course (ie as in a total of two feet). I would defintely take the narrower course over one foot longer rope.
  • ralral Posts: 1,691 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    1 foot narrower is better until the rope is the same length than the course width. Benefits of a narrower course are more at longer line lengths. 0.25 m reduction on the course is a 2.1% reduction, and a 1.3% reduction in a 18.25 rope.

    Course width tolerance is .022 m (+/- 1%) and rope tolerance is 30 cm over or at 14.25 and 15cm under that, so the proposed advantage is very near the course and rope tolerances.

    A 28 off or less capable skier would increase nada with either option...

    This is a simplified answer, but the full math would yield a similar result.

    @Skoot1123, the math beyond your reasoning is not that sound...
    Rodrigo Andai
  • Skoot1123Skoot1123 Posts: 1,776 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @ral - my reference point is 15 off. Sorry I didn't state that in my comment. However, we do come to the same conclusion in the end (a break even point/point of no gain for narrower buoys) as I just ran some calculations comparing narrower buoys and longer line lengths.

    Narrow buoys, longer rope - whatever: in the end all I want to do is progress my skiing and in the end a narrow buoy course or longer rope wouldn't do either, the baseline for my skiing would just be different.
  • bmiller3536bmiller3536 Posts: 298 Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @ral that made absolutely no sense
    Brad Miller
  • RazorRoss3RazorRoss3 Posts: 1,321 Mega Baller
    Foot more rope
    When I'm skiing I find that being higher on the boat and wider frees me from the boat and allows me to set more angle with less load than if I'm narrower and that this holds true for all the lengths I ski (15-32). I ski at 36 but more angle and less load are just as useful at 34 I would assume. Taking that personal observation into account I would say that some extra line to get me to buoy width would be easier than narrowing the buoys because I would probably ski to the same width I do already because that width seems to set me up for better turns and easier pulls.
  • scuppersscuppers Posts: 391 Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    What @Than_Bogan said. Amplitude
    Chuck Link, Deland Florida
  • ralral Posts: 1,691 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @Skoot1123, I was just teasing you on the "(ie as in a total of two feet)" thing...
    Rodrigo Andai
  • Skoot1123Skoot1123 Posts: 1,776 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @ral - no harm!
  • ralral Posts: 1,691 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    Bottom line, I thnk 12 inches might be very relevant for some body parts, but not for a rope or course before 38 off.
    Rodrigo Andai
  • ski6jonesski6jones Posts: 813 Crazy Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    Thread title should read "Would the course be easier with ...". I'm happy with the course and rope just as it is.
    Carl Addington, Lakes of Katy, Texas
  • DragoDrago Posts: 1,254 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @ral: in ref to your 1st post, I would think at longer line lengths, it would be unnoticed. Not until 35 off or so would either case really have a discernable difference.
    SR SL Judge & Driver (“a driver who is super late on the wheel and is out of sync”)
  • WaternutWaternut Posts: 1,511 Crazy Baller
    edited June 2013
    I don't really have an opinion but may vote later to see the results...

    We talk as if a narrower ball would be beneficial but at short line lengths, it looks like the pro's hook up so late that they're basically in the boats wake by the time they're hard on the line. If you bring the balls in 1 foot, it makes me wonder if we/they would be able to generate enough speed to actually get wide enough. We/they would get wide enough at the ball but may not be able to get as far forward on the boat which effectively reduces line length because the rope rarely get completely perpendicular to the boat.
  • JohnCoxJohnCox Posts: 355 Crazy Baller
    I would like more talent.
    Mapple T2
    www.mappleskis.com
    Skoot1123ski6jonesBill22
  • rfarfa Posts: 224 Baller
    @ski6jones...yes i suspect that was the intent of the original question. Without "any math" i think the qualitative answer is "narrow course easier than longer rope". This only important at the skier's limit not on "easy passes" (if you run 35off it's not a big deal whether the rope is longer or the course narrower at 22off...). I think it's the amplitude "thing" as @than suggests. Let me "offer" two pieces of empirical data. I have the green mini-course buoys on my course...10ft short of the regular turn buoys. My wife cannot ski the full course at 15off but enjoys running the mini-course at 32off/32mph. At a more relevant level, my older son can run 28off/36 (full-course) only on a "good" day, yet can run 38off/36 on the mini-course 'all day long"...so in my son's case, running a 10ft narrow course with a 10ft shorter rope is much easier than the 10ft wider course/longer rope. I suspect this trend holds true across varying line lengths (may be not linearly), such that if given a choice, skiers of all levels would choose a narrow course over an equivalent longer line.
    Rui Afonso
  • MattPMattP Posts: 5,973 Mega Baller
    @Horton a foot? Is that like .3048 of a meter?
  • AggieSkierAggieSkier Posts: 200 Baller
    Foot more rope
    I'd rather have a foot longer rope b/c I measured my rope today and it's more than a foot too short! Thanks Straightline!
  • SkiJaySkiJay Posts: 2,227 Mega Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @JayG80 Compare your rope to a good one to identify which section(s) is short, then contact Randy or Russ at Masterline. They're good guys and will make it right.
    masterlineusa.com/
    www.FinWhispering.com ... Your ski should be your dance partner, not a wrestling opponent
    MattP
  • AggieSkierAggieSkier Posts: 200 Baller
    Foot more rope
    @skijay It is short in the mainline section. Discovered it while prepping a new rope for our upcoming tournament. Shorty is a Straightline. Legit tourny rope is a ML.
  • DanEDanE Posts: 829 Crazy Baller
    Foot narrower balls
    @ral If you actuallly tried a narrow course you would be surprised how easy it is, this math thing Only takes us this far...
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.