Another sanctioning organization for 3 event waterskiing. Would you consider joining?

Jody_Seal

If another three event waterski sanctioning body came into fruition would you consider joining? This organization with less policy baggage, dedicated to economic competition and would subscribe to practical rules and policy's for the advancement of it's skiing membership within the sport.
Please be advised this question is not just for current members of USAWS but also of those site lurkers and skiers that currently are not members of AWSA/USAWS

Taperflex

yes

The NBSWSA
The No BullS**t Water Ski Association

ALPJr

maybe

Only if USAWWS folded. Thought about signing up for INT back when they were in New England and the kids were young and just getting started, but always ended up asking myself... Why? The only reason I considered it was that they included wakeboarding which at the time meant that a couple of our kids could participate too. Just didn’t make sense to join both org’s as I was only doing a couple local tourneys a season and the kids had plenty of fun hanging out on our boat or at the ski club once or twice a week.

Chef23

maybe

It is hard to tell in a vacuum. I skied some INT events when I was just getting into tournaments and when my daughter was skiing some and couldn't run a full pass. The INT events were fun but expensive for the amount of passes you got. We migrated to USAWS events and I think the INT has kind of died in NE.

In general I don't have a big issue with current tournaments. In NE they are mostly Class C, the costs are pretty reasonable and you generally get 2-3 rounds per tournament.

jcamp

no

BraceMaker

maybe

The USAWS is what it is due to the members who have pushed it to be that way.
It would seem that if the same people start to get involved the same nonsense would come to pass just over more time.

I would like to see the individual states worry about what promotes skiing in their state and be a larger component of the day to day situation. IE. All states become affiliates that you deal through; not through USAWS as a whole.

Than_Bogan

maybe

VIVE LA REVOLUTION!

But seriously, probably not. Sports organizations have inherent problems, and USAWS doesn't seem worse (nor any better) than most.

John Brooks

Would I ski any better?

Second to @Than_Bogan comments about sports organizations.

Although I think any sports organization needs to be run (officers and board members) by those who participate as athletes.

JeffSurdej

no

@Jody_Seal will you be president?

Horton

no

I have some strong opinions about some of the things the organization has done over the years but splitting off is like voting for a 3rd party candidate. No one wins.

ScottScott

no

I would be more inclined to get involved in whats there, and try to (I won't say fix, but...) make improvements. Nothing is perfect, but hopefully there are well meaning people trying to do the best they can. I can only guess that this new organization would have similar issues a few years down the road.....then what.....start another?

RichardDoane

yes

There is possibly a need for a one event organization (slalom) but not another three event. It would be a better idea to improve what exists than start from scratch.

Jody_Seal

maybe

@JeffSurdej you flatter or inflate yourself with that question . Why must another organization have a president?

I asked this question due to the continued rules, policy and mandates that keep coming down without membership knowledge or up front information. Transparency from the organizing body continues to be non existant and it seems mandates like the safe sport came down with out even any discussion with the sports leaders about how or if it fits or can better be implemented.
It seems our organization can send out electronically requests for renewing membership but struggles with bringing forth information of direction and policy for consideration to its general membership.
Like the question should usaws remain a partner with USOC? What benefit does this relationship bring to the awsa and what amount of financial support does this partnership provide. Most if any members know nothing about this partnership and what it entails or what kind of burden this may be.


Looks like so far the votes show yes many would move or consider another option.
I think that's says something for a small spot sampling.

nikandsteve

no

The grass is always greener on the other side, isn’t it? Good luck with a new organization, I prefer to water my own

Golfguy

yes

I will help you organize it.

ForrestGump

yes

Jody speaks what people outside of the Southeast region have been speaking about for years.

Nando

maybe

I did seven terms as pres of my state association (plus three as VP) and still hold a grudge that the INT screwed up what was our primary tournament site for us by disrespecting the few homeowners on it, the city officials who tried to help them out, and the county parks people who ran the park they used. It took ten years to get back there, so I'm skeptical that a new governing body would be better. I do think that by trying to be everything to everyone, USAWS is doing skiers a disservice.

ski6jones

Don't forget, that's USAWS&WS.

lpskier

maybe

I answered maybe, but I did not say anything about leaving USAWS. I looked at as belonging to two rather than one or the other.

KRoundy

yes

I said yes before looking at the comments. I was assuming this would be in addition to USAWS&WS, and thought it could not hurt to have more people doing skiing stuff. After reading the comments and thinking some more I might have to say, "it depends". If the idea was to be "anti-USAWS&WS" I'd pass.

Drago

maybe

I say maybe, meaning maybe I would do both. (You realize only awsa members that provide their # can can comment on "politics" on BOS? )

Jody_Seal

maybe

A number of years ago in another sport that closely has some very similar attributes and policy's as our sport a large group splintered off and started a separate sanctioning organization.
The American power boat association was the overseeing sanctioning body.
This overseeing board had a one size fits all divisions set of policy's. The group of racers that splintered off was the small outboard racers. Their biggest reason was they were being charged the same insurance rates as the large inboard class on up to the unlimited where their speeds were nearly 200 mph. The fastest speed at the time for these small outboard classes was in the high 70s and was not seeing the catastrophic life ending accidents that the faster classes were seeing. Now this small outboard group made up membership wise nearly 40 percent of the organization. This was a true financial crisis for the apba as in one year they lost thousands in revenue that crippled the organizations working structure. Now eventually these racers came back to apba only because the organization buckled to the needs and policy's that these classes needed to compete.

Today Like the apba the awsa is a near shadow of its glory days yet our organization is being policed, ruled and insured in a one size fits all system by usaws. The awsa is structured and has been structured from the start of its exsistance to be self governing and supporting. The usaws experiment has really put a damper on this organization's ability to grow, renew and reinvent if needed. We are that 40 percent now that are being burdened with policy's and direction that continues add to the demise of our sport.

I voted maybe also in this poll that I started and as a officer in the largest sanctioning state of our organization I hear our membership loud and clear and also field questions of how and why many of these policy's get implemented without membership consideration or vote where applicable.
If that AWSA had the opportunity to splinter away from usaws most every one in this federation would welcome it.
If another organization came into being that was three event (slalom, trick and jump) oriented that had an all inclusive ideology it would probably gain momentum and grow quite rapidly and yes I would jump ship and support it.

Going back to the question mr Surdej asked would i be president of an organization? answer is no. I know the burden of leadership that he has and truly respect what he does for our sport. Yet he does this with in many instances with one hand tied behind his back sometimes both.
Thank you Jeff Surdej for your continued commitment and dedication to three event waterskiing.
Where can I get a pair of those red white and blue shorts ??

3 event Waterskiing will never be an Olympic sport! It is time to administer to a realistic direction.

ALPJr

maybe

I've been a supporter or active member since I found out about the AWSA in my high school library's card catalog back in 1975. I voted maybe only on the outside chance the org goes away someday. I've never had any problems. Only suggestion I've had for the past 20ish years is that we might see more family participation in tourneys if a wakeboard round was part of it.

RichardDoane

yes

@ALPJr not to get off topic, but we should encourage kids to ride the right sized/shaped WB (30% rule) as a trick ski whenever possible

Kelvin

yes

@RichardDoane it’s now 35%. Almost all wakeboards fit. The only issue now is the depth of the built in ridges.

skiinxs

yes

As a few noted above my yes was in addition to, not instead of. I also don't believe AWSA derives any benefits from USAWS (and whatever), on the contrary I believe costs are significantly higher due to the increased risk.

sunvalleylaw

maybe

I checked maybe. It all depends if the new organization put on economical events near me. I am more about the grass roots, family events.

And also maybe because another organization in a sport with limited participation could dilute participation and resources further.

motoskier

They did this same type of thing with Indy car racing a few years ago
, (ruined the sport)

Horton

no

@motoskier if there was a "Cupcake & Water Ski League" would you join?

I just give myself an off topic

sunvalleylaw

maybe

deleted.

aupatking

yes

I just think the actual sport needs to be focused on the actual sport. 3 point shooting contests are pseudo interesting to watch, but they are not basketball.