EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Nastar Zero Par Time vs. elite racers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nastar Zero Par Time vs. elite racers

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Ran a Nastar course a few times yesterday. I haven't run gates but once in the last three years so I don't feel bad that I'm still 1/2 second off gold.

Got me thinking, how does the zero par time compare to what elite racers would do?

I'm 24% slower than zero-par time (on and admittedly easy course). How much slower am I than an elite racer?

Of course, the course the elite racer races on if I skied it, I'd probably go home in basket.
post #2 of 19
Most elite racers would approach the par time. 5 handicap or under.
post #3 of 19
Pacesetters are certified against a national pacesetter, usually a US Ski Team member, at regional pacesetting trials and receive a handicap based on that performance. They then use that handicap to detemine racer handicaps times for each race they forerun. It's actually pretty common for someone to beat the hill's pacesetter, but pretty rare for someone to beat the national pacesetter.
post #4 of 19
Anyone remember the rather rotund fellow who beat Hank Kashiwa head to head? Hank was the national pace setter, but the nationals were run on a course that was just too Nastary---a wax and skating race. This guy with some powerful legs and a good carve won.
post #5 of 19
The zero par time is what most of the US Ski Team members (depending on a few factors) would get for the course (or very low handicap like 1 or 2 at the most) the local pacesetter races against on of the US Ski Team (or retired US Ski Team members) travelling pacesetters (this past year it was AJ Kitt running as a 1.7 handicap, or Jake Fiala running as a 1 handicap). Darron Rahlves was the 0 handicap National Standard for this past year. So an elite non Pro racer would be doing good to get something like a 5 or so handicap. The variable is the local pacesetter and if the course conditions change of if they ran their best race of the day or slacked off, etc.. If anyone gets a sub zero handicap then the results are suspect and they are adjusted with that person becoming the new pacesetter for that day's race.
post #6 of 19
The par time is not exactly the pacesetter's time. It's the pacesetter's time adjusted by a known value (unique for each pacesetter) so that it turns out to be an estimate of what the national pacesetter would have gotten on the course, in those conditions, etc. The national pacesetter this season is Daron Rahlves. I think we can consider him "elite"

So basically, your handicap should be the percent difference between you and Daron, if everything was done correctly. Daron SHOULD get a 0 handicap on every course he ran.
post #7 of 19
Simma down. "Elite" is funny word. The top three Plat 35-39 guys at my teeny weeny mt in MA were:
1 Jerome GuerardSterling, MA0.73 2 Mark BudreskiWinchester, MA1.29 3 Jerome GuerardPrinceton, MA3.40 4 John TurbittShrewsbury, MA4.22

Washed up working shmoes. Fastest at the Mt? NO. Fast? YAH. "Elite"? hee hee!
post #8 of 19
Thread Starter 
I know the difference between the pacesetter time and zero-par time. What I wanted to know is how close the zero par time is to someone absolutely at the top the ski world. So, if my handicap is 25, I'm a 25% slower to some very good national Nastar guy or an Oympic racer?
post #9 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer256 View Post
Simma down. "Elite" is funny word. The top three Plat 35-39 guys at my teeny weeny mt in MA were:
1 Jerome GuerardSterling, MA0.73 2 Mark BudreskiWinchester, MA1.29 3 Jerome GuerardPrinceton, MA3.40 4 John TurbittShrewsbury, MA4.22

Washed up working shmoes. Fastest at the Mt? NO. Fast? YAH. "Elite"? hee hee!
The fastest racers in Nastar ARE washed up working schmucks... True elite racers don't usually race nastar. That isn't what the question was, though.

Nastar is generally a fairly easy course, set on a relatively flat run. If an "elite" racer raced Nastar, he would have a sub 5 handicap... same as the washed up schmucks. You can only go so fast on a Nastar course. When the course gets longer, turnier, and the hill steeper, that is when you see the elite racers separate from the "schmucks"

Either way, below 5 is fast on a nastar course.
post #10 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by learn2turn View Post
I know the difference between the pacesetter time and zero-par time. What I wanted to know is how close the zero par time is to someone absolutely at the top the ski world. So, if my handicap is 25, I'm a 25% slower to some very good national Nastar guy or an Oympic racer?
On a Nastar course, par time is very close to someone at the top of the ski world.

Bennie Raich is awesome. He would probably kill Daron Ralves (nastar national pacesetter) on a World Cup GS right now. On a Nastar course, they would be virtually the same.

(personally, I think I would rank Daron a little bit above "a very good national nastar guy.)
post #11 of 19

Shmoe v shmuck

"Shmoe" not "Shmuck." Shmoe is much nicer.


L2T - Skichair is always recruiting for Tues nights!
post #12 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer256 View Post
"Shmoe" not "Shmuck." Shmoe is much nicer.


L2T - Skichair is always recruiting for Tues nights!
Thanx for the offer but the last few years I've been working Thursday nights. I'd like to start racing again but live to far away to get up to the mountain another night a week and I don't know if it wouldn't be too much hassle to try to get two runs in between line ups on my work night. Still, if someone twisted my pinkie hard enough, they could probably get me on a team on Thursday night.
post #13 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer256 View Post
"Shmoe" not "Shmuck." Shmoe is much nicer.
Ah.. you're right. I read schmoe and it somehow registered as schmuck.:

I'm getting old I guess... reading comprehension ain't what it used to be.

-shmoe
post #14 of 19
Let's see, David Koop usually skis a 2 or 3 in our Monday night beer league. He's 924 in the world in GS on the durrent FIS list.
Does that help?
post #15 of 19
I used to think Nastar was a joke for a couple of reasons, it matters so much when the local pace setter was handycapped, like mentioned was he having a good day? was it early in the season and he didn't have his ski legs yet? but back in the old days I was an 8 handycap, IMHO I was not that good of a skier (and am still not) to get that low, I never received any real race training...ect.

From what it sounds like, I might have to take a run or two now to see how bad I stack up.
post #16 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLATZ View Post
Let's see, David Koop usually skis a 2 or 3 in our Monday night beer league. He's 924 in the world in GS on the durrent FIS list.
Does that help?
Koop freakin' rocks. My point is, someone as good as Koop, (even though he barely breaks the top 1000 in the world, would hang with any of those guys on a Nastar course. Like I said, you can only go so fast. I would bet David would be less than half a second behind Ted Ligety on a 20 second Nastar. I know that is still significant in ski racing terms, but a long way from the 6 or 7 seconds he would probably be out of first on a world cup GS.

Cary Adgate got a 0.17 at an official pacesetter trial this year. He beat A.J. by over half a second on a 18 second course. For those that don't know him, he's an ex world cupper from Michigan, who competed back in the late 70's. He's fifty some now and can still hang with ANYONE on a relatively short, flatter course.
post #17 of 19
If you can get in the 5 and lower HC on multiple courses, I'd say that would do it.
post #18 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by U.P. Racer View Post
Cary Adgate got a 0.17 at an official pacesetter trial this year. He beat A.J. by over half a second on a 18 second course. For those that don't know him, he's an ex world cupper from Michigan, who competed back in the late 70's. He's fifty some now and can still hang with ANYONE on a relatively short, flatter course.
I skied against him in the midwest championships in 1972. He won every race, then went on to win the overall at the nationals.

Guess I'm not catching up yet.
post #19 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by U.P. Racer View Post
The fastest racers in Nastar ARE washed up working schmucks... True elite racers don't usually race nastar. That isn't what the question was, though.

Nastar is generally a fairly easy course, set on a relatively flat run. If an "elite" racer raced Nastar, he would have a sub 5 handicap... same as the washed up schmucks. You can only go so fast on a Nastar course. When the course gets longer, turnier, and the hill steeper, that is when you see the elite racers separate from the "schmucks"

Either way, below 5 is fast on a nastar course.
This is true. I've had a five handicap in Nastar, but in real master's races I'm often not within 5% of the race winner, let alone the top USST GS skier.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Nastar Zero Par Time vs. elite racers