EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Any news on summer USSA or FIS meetings?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Any news on summer USSA or FIS meetings?

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 

I think the summer USSA meetings have already taken place, but it takes them forever to put together their written summer update. Any info on equipment or rule changes coming up?

post #2 of 24

Why don't you ask your divisional ACC chair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richr View Post

I think the summer USSA meetings have already taken place, but it takes them forever to put together their written summer update. Any info on equipment or rule changes coming up?

 

post #3 of 24

Check out Skiracing .com there is a report from FIS meeting

post #4 of 24

No news on the equipment yet... may be another delay for the 21m radius rule. Frankly, I like being able to use a 21m, 23m, or 27m ski. At the FIS level, coursetters are still not used to setting for 27m skis, which makes it alot more difficult to move around, yet there are some courses (ie, Sugarloaf and Okemo) where a 27m ski is completely appropriate. In my opinion they should just leave it as is. Manufacturers are only releasing 23/27m skis anyway.

post #5 of 24

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rise To The Top View Post

At the FIS level, coursetters are still not used to setting for 27m skis, which makes it alot more difficult to move around, yet there are some courses (ie, Sugarloaf and Okemo) where a 27m ski is completely appropriate. In my opinion they should just leave it as is. Manufacturers are only releasing 23/27m skis anyway.


For almost the entire history of ski racing GS courses were set and skied on skis with a far greater radius than 27.  I understand that you can/should set the course a bit tighter where sharper turning skis are used, but a lot of coaches are around that were around and setting courses long before shaped skis were used at all.  As long as everyone skis the same course the politics are usually more akin to a course being set to favor a particular skier rather than a particular ski in general. 

 

Still, it will be interesting to see if the ax 21 all together in favor of even wider radiuses.  If so, then maybe they should just do away with Super G since GS will be a lot closer to that event.

post #6 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

 

 

Still, it will be interesting to see if the ax 21 all together in favor of even wider radiuses.  If so, then maybe they should just do away with Super G since GS will be a lot closer to that event.


Word on the street (and by street I mean coaching seminar) is that we are looking to bring down vertical distance in all events in hopes of reducing speeds. Your going to see many many more DH races that look like what Bankso was last year. DH average speeds would optimally be around 100Kph. Slalom max distance to 10m and GS down again as well.

RTTP if your skiing men's ski over 180 FIS stock I don't remember them being under 23-24m also I haven't seen a course tighter than 21 down through unless its a kinder race or on a steep pitch, I skied a GS race where there was a 10 gate corridor down a steep chute that was set at 19.... It was a pivot-a-thon. But coming in was 26 and out 29-30 almost.

Right now for local non FIS races I would imagine that the average is 26-27 with sections at 24... Which I never had a problem negotiating with 193 28m skis...
post #7 of 24
Well, particularly in my state, alot of the gates are set right around 21m, maybe 24 max, which is one of the main reasons why I do more out of state racing nowadays. In comparison, I raced in a GS at Okemo in January that was set like a SG, the gates were a minimum of 27m, some going up to the high 30s. To add to the speed, the winds at Okemo blow downhill, and it was a particularly windy day. It was so fast that like 5 or 6 of the top 25 finished the the first run, and the whole Dartmouth team and kids from Bates were in the race. Like I said, it varies from mountain to mountain, and I think they should just leave the rules as they are. To me, I find no advantage using a 21m 180cm ski on a courses at Sugarloaf and Okemo, if anything it would hurt from instabilaty.

Another opinion of mine is that there are alot of kids that I know and see at races that should be on "Mens" skis but are on shorter "Womens" skis, simply because they can't turn em the right way or they are too small to move them. There is also the issue of putting a 1st year II on 27m skis. I have also observed from my traveling that alot of 1st and 2nd year IIIs ski on 170s @ 17m. That kind of jump could mentally kill some kids, and could even discourage GS all together.

As for reducing the vertical, I find it retarded. There are speed events for a reason, and there are technical events for a reason. If coaches/clubs want their kids to ski slower and not be at risk as much, they should put them in slower events. What happened to the DH definition of "technique, courage, speed, risk, and condition"?
post #8 of 24
Thread Starter 
The new draft regs were posted today. They can be found at http://www.ussa.org/magnoliaPublic/ussa/en/sports/alpine/rules.html

It looks like they are abandoning the "new rules" FIS had proposed last year. For FIS and USSA races for J2 and older, they left the GS length at 180 for men, but set the radius at 27m. They also increased the minimum widths and decreased the maximum stack heights.

A footnote says that some of the proposed changes may be postponed. I sure hope so. What do I do with the brand new 182's I got at the end of last season for my J2 son to use next year? You cant buy a GS ski stamped with a 27m radius that is shorter than 185cm, so requiring 27m is the same thing as requiring 185cm. For women, the length is still 175 but the radius goes to 23m. I think most skis are currently longer than 23m, but are stamped at 21m, so they wont be legal even though they have a long enough radius.

Any thoughts? 
post #9 of 24
Seems kinda odd.  I thought a lot of this cranking r back up was to prevent injuries.  Women at 23 and men at 27.. are they trying to imply that women have stronger knees than men?

Sudden demand for 180 cm r 27 skis?
Sounds like a plot in cahoots with ski company marketing departments to sell more skis to me.
post #10 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richr View Post

The new draft regs were posted today. They can be found at http://www.ussa.org/magnoliaPublic/ussa/en/sports/alpine/rules.html

It looks like they are abandoning the "new rules" FIS had proposed last year. For FIS and USSA races for J2 and older, they left the GS length at 180 for men, but set the radius at 27m. They also increased the minimum widths and decreased the maximum stack heights.

A footnote says that some of the proposed changes may be postponed. I sure hope so. What do I do with the brand new 182's I got at the end of last season for my J2 son to use next year? You cant buy a GS ski stamped with a 27m radius that is shorter than 185cm, so requiring 27m is the same thing as requiring 185cm. For women, the length is still 175 but the radius goes to 23m. I think most skis are currently longer than 23m, but are stamped at 21m, so they wont be legal even though they have a long enough radius.

Any thoughts? 

Yea, makes no sense. Manufacturers are going to have to increase Jr radius' now. Like I said, I think there will be more injuries in the JII category from kids being thrown on 185s+ to meet the 27m rule. Most manufacturers are making 186s, 187s, 188s, etc, straying away from a 185. Like I said, going from a 170 or 175, which most JIIIs ski on to a 185+ 27m ski is going to break alot of kids physically and mentally.

As for the stamping, you could ski on them anyway and if they contest have them measure up and waste their money. I know for sure that the pair of 190s you sent my way are well over the 21m stamped on them.
post #11 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rise To The Top View Post

As for the stamping, you could ski on them anyway and if they contest have them measure up and waste their money. I know for sure that the pair of 190s you sent my way are well over the 21m stamped on them.
 

The summer update from last year said that the radius has to be marked on  the ski. I would interpret that as meaning that the number marked has to meet the regulation. That is, if the regulation is 27m, the number has to be 27m.  A ski that is marked 21 or 23 but measures at >27 would be disqualified without even measuring. That was how our state interpreted it, anyway.
post #12 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richr View Post

The new draft regs were posted today. They can be found at http://www.ussa.org/magnoliaPublic/ussa/en/sports/alpine/rules.html

It looks like they are abandoning the "new rules" FIS had proposed last year. For FIS and USSA races for J2 and older, they left the GS length at 180 for men, but set the radius at 27m. They also increased the minimum widths and decreased the maximum stack heights.

A footnote says that some of the proposed changes may be postponed. I sure hope so. What do I do with the brand new 182's I got at the end of last season for my J2 son to use next year? You cant buy a GS ski stamped with a 27m radius that is shorter than 185cm, so requiring 27m is the same thing as requiring 185cm. For women, the length is still 175 but the radius goes to 23m. I think most skis are currently longer than 23m, but are stamped at 21m, so they wont be legal even though they have a long enough radius.

Any thoughts? 
 

Actually...at least in their catalog, last year, Atomic did have a 27-meter GS ski in a 181 length.  I'm not saying that's the right approach, just that there were such skis available.  I'm glad I'm a Masters racer, where you can use anything you want.  Last year, I started the season with two pairs of 186 cm., 27-meter sidecut Atomic GS12s, and they quickly turned out to be too much for yours truly.  I donated them to the local kids program and got myself two pairs of 183 cm. 24 meter sidecut GS12s, and I've been happy ever since.  Hey, I don't mind skiing on a FIS legal women's GS ski...

post #13 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richr View Post



The summer update from last year said that the radius has to be marked on  the ski. I would interpret that as meaning that the number marked has to meet the regulation. That is, if the regulation is 27m, the number has to be 27m.  A ski that is marked 21 or 23 but measures at >27 would be disqualified without even measuring. That was how our state interpreted it, anyway.

Nothing that a sharpie can't fix ;)
post #14 of 24
From the Summer update on USSA's site:

Highlights:

"Competition Guides
Competition guides will no longer be mailed to athletes. Guides will continue to be mailed to alpine coaches, officials and clubs. The USSA Directory will not be printed. The Competition Guides and Directory will be posted online to view and download."

"Slalom – single pole and course setting
FIS has approved the use of single pole slalom for races below the World Cup and Continental Cup level. USSA will review this for application at USSA level races."

"Super-G course setting - FIS has made the following changes to the course setting procedures and standards for super-G. USSA will review this for application at USSA level races.
603.7.2 The course setter sets the race course respecting the existing safety measures and course preparation. The course setter must take speed control into consideration.
1001.3.4 The Super-G has to be set as follows:
For FIS level events 7% of the vertical drop equals the minimum number of direction changes.
For OWG, WSC, WJC and COC level events 6% of the vertical drop equals the minimum number of direction changes.
The distance between the turning poles of two successive gates must be at least 25 m (exception: art. 1003.1.1). Children´s competitions: minimum 8%, maximum 10% direction changes of the vertical drop. Entry League (ENL) Men: minimum 7% of the vertical drop "

"Alpine Course Homologation – All USSA DH and SG events must be conducted on USSA (or FIS) homologated courses. Homologation or registration of courses for USSA GS and SL events is required as follows:
  • 2008-09: all championship events (as defined by USSA ACR)
  • 2009-10: all scored events and all J3 events
  • 2010-11: all sanctioned events (including Masters events)"

Also, there will be no DH at next year's US Nationals.
post #15 of 24
Quote:
Also, there will be no DH at next year's US Nationals.
 

Really? Where did you pick up on that info? Very surprising to hear. Shocking, if true.
post #16 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muleski View Post

Really? Where did you pick up on that info? Very surprising to hear. Shocking, if true.
 

The calendar listed SG/GS/SL for nationals, and is only 3 days long. Not sure why they cut it.
post #17 of 24
I wouldn't put too much stock in the preliminary FIS calendar. Placeholder for the dates. I'm not even sure if they have finalized the site. Can't imagine the NC without a DH, and probably a second FIS DH tacked onto it. I've been wrong before, a lot, though! We shall see.
post #18 of 24
"As for the stamping, you could ski on them anyway and if they contest have them measure up and waste their money. I know for sure that the pair of 190s you sent my way are well over the 21m stamped on them."

Richr already said this, so I'm just going along, but my understanding is also that a ski has to be marked as legal to be legal, no matter how it measures. Among other things, a ski with no sidecut radius marked on it would not be legal; and one marke >21m wouldn't be legal if the minimum is 27m, no matter how it measures.

A - Marked legal + measures legal = legal, obviously
B - Not marked legal + measures legal = not legal
C - Marked legal + measures illegal  = not legal

There's reason to this, if you consider that it's difficult to measure a ski, and it's almost never done except at the World Cup level. If B were legal, anybody who wanted to ignore the rules could just use an unmarked ski. And C doesn't happen very often.

"I think there will be more injuries in the JII category from kids being thrown on 185s+"

Maybe, Then again, when I was that age, I don't think anyone used a ski as short as a 185. A smallish 15-year-old might've use a 195.
post #19 of 24
According to the FIS calendar, the national championship downhill will take place during the Nor-Am speed events. Location still TBD. By removing the DH from nationals, it opens up the field of areas to host the event. It is also much more cost effective to combine the downhill events. Running a DH is very expensive, especially with a small field.
post #20 of 24
What does "Single Pole Slalom" mean???  Turning "gates" only!?!?

Or does this mean you can just use bamboo for the outside 'pole'?

How do you define a DSQ when there is one pole?  What if you have to hike?   How hard is it to throw some colored bamboo in for an outside pole?
post #21 of 24
It means no control gate exept for combos (Pins and flushes). Saves a lot of time with course setting and reset. Also less confusing to look at from an outside perspective.

Not many TDs around here allow for bamboo anywhere on course so I personally prefer no control than a bamboo one.
post #22 of 24

Article 801.2 of the ICR requires that a slalom gate consist of two poles.  One is the turning pole, the other is called the outside pole.  The turning pole must be a flex pole, and the outside pole could be a bamboo pole if it is suitably protected against splintering.  That's a big "if" for most bamboos, so around my area we just use stab-in flex poles for outside poles.  No keying in required, so they go in pretty quickly.

 

Last year FIS experimented with single pole slalom, which means only the turning pole was used for regular gates.  Combinations still use two poles, including a closing pole for the last gate in a combination.  There was an idea to use an outside pole on the very first gate to set the line clearly, but I don’t know if this is how it was finally implemented.  The line for clean passage is defined as the line between the turning pole of the designated gate and the turning pole of the gate immediately above (i.e. preceding) in the course.

 

There is an ambiguous reference regarding hiking up that a racer might only have to hike to an imaginary line through the turning pole and horizontal to the fall line.  It would be helpful to have the new precisions clarify this.  If not, hopefully the jury lets competitors and gate judges know what is expected in an event.  In practice, hiking up is encouraged less and less, so "down & out" might become more of the general rule.

post #23 of 24
Single pole slalom format clarification from FIS Council notes:

First and last gate require a turning pole and outside pole.

Combinations (hairpins, flushes), vertical gates and blind gates also require outside poles.
post #24 of 24
Thread Starter 
I've done some more digging on the equipment regs. Attendees to the USSA Alpine Congress in May got a book that included a draft of the equipment regs. These matched last year's plan, with the "new" GS length and radius rules delayed until 2010-2011 for the US. The draft posted at the end of June adopted the radius rules for this year, but not the length rules. I dont see why they would adopt one aspect without the other. Perhaps it was an oversight. Hopefully they'll clarify this soon.

The book from the Congress is available at http://www.ussa.org/magnoliaPublic/dms/athletics/comp-services/docs/2009_Congress_Alpine_Book.pdf. The draft equipment regs are on page 109

The draft regs that come out of the Congress are available at http://www.ussa.org/magnoliaPublic/dms/athletics/comp-services/docs/alp_equip_09-10_draft_063009.pdf

Richr
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Any news on summer USSA or FIS meetings?