New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New equipment rules are out

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
The USSA posted its revised equipment rules for the upcoming season, at

http://www.ussa.org/magnoliaPublic/ussa/en/sports/alpine/rules.html

For USSA races, they went back to last year's rules about length, radius and width. The only changes I can see are lower binding stack height (50mm instead of 55) and lower boot sole height (43mm instead of 45).

So we get to use the same skis for one more year. Yeah!

Richr
post #2 of 12
Yay, my GS skis meet all requirements :P. Now all I need is compliant SL/SG/DH skis.
post #3 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richr View Post

The USSA posted its revised equipment rules for the upcoming season, at

http://www.ussa.org/magnoliaPublic/ussa/en/sports/alpine/rules.html

For USSA races, they went back to last year's rules about length, radius and width. The only changes I can see are lower binding stack height (50mm instead of 55) and lower boot sole height (43mm instead of 45).

So we get to use the same skis for one more year. Yeah!

Richr

They've been pretty lax in enforcing the length rules in "regular" USSA events, which I applaud. Hell, I'm 31 and pretty strong and feel a lot more comfortable on 180's with a 21m radius GS than 185's, skied 4-5 USSA events last year on them without being questioned.  I know a lot of 16-17 year old girls who wouldn't be strong enough to bend that ski and I see them on 175's and 170's without any flak from officials. Overly aggressive equipment could cause injury, especially on narrow Eastern courses which aren't built for 27m turns.
post #4 of 12
Thank god.

Not that it really matters for people purchasing news skis as most of them are 27m now.  But I really think there is a disconnect between having 27m skis and courses on some of the lesser vert hills in the east.
post #5 of 12
Damn you 67mm DH rule... they have to make things difficult, don't they? Why couldn't it be 66mm?
post #6 of 12
RTTP,

I've mentioned it before, but there are the rules and then there is enforcement {which in terms of skis means measurement}. The USSA is following FIS certainly want the waist of DH skis now built to be wider than in the past. I get it. And the people skiing at the upper reaches of the FIS world will certainly be on the very latest stuff, which complies. Or real close. There will be an awful lot of people racing in domestic {to include Canadian} FIS DH races, and in USSA DH's who will not be on skis that fit the latest rules. Just won't be. It's not really fair for somebody to have recently bought DH skis to have them ruled to be useless. At the lower level, I truly believe that the USSA wants more participation, and having a 1mm difference in the waist is not going to make a huge difference. So I think people will be fine on a variety of speed skis.

Perhaps somebody from the industry can weigh in, but all of these rule changes create problems for the ski manufacturers. At a time when their business is facing more pressure and challenges than ever before, do they really need FIS to mandate the continual changes? If I were running production and had to retool for a 1mm increase in waist, I would not be pleased.
It has to be a pain in the neck. Hopefully it will slow down. It's a big enough challenge for a lot of these companies to stay in the race business without that BS!  We don't need more to exit.

I know that you're aware of the rules vs enforecement reality. Just thought I'd weigh in for some others. I doubt anybody has seen much enforcement.
post #7 of 12
I'm not concerned about the USSA DH races up at the loaf... as far as the rules go they are still legal since USSA can use SG skis in DH... and going by the specifications, the older DH skis meet all of the SG specifications. That said they will be legal forever unless the SG waist goes up to 67mm as well, which I don't see happening in the near future.

My main concerns were regarding the FIS races up in Canada and the FIS series at Sugarloaf, where the SG ski rule does not come into play. After talking with TMAS for a bit, I was re-assured that they aren't that big on enforcement up there until Nor-Ams and National races. Not sure about Sugarloaf, but they seem relatively laid back up there.

And yea, 1mm? Cmon, exactly how much safer is a ski with a waist that is 1mm wider? Where do those old hags on the council come up with this crap? Do they even ski, or have they ever? It's almost as bad as enforcing a 17m GS rule for J3s, then throwing them on 27m skis once they are J2s. How the hell is that "safe"?
post #8 of 12
 This is at least a bit off-topic but nevertheless :) In my opinion ski companies are not really hurt by this changes. Skiers on the other side are. I know there's not much, if any at all, profit in race stock skis, but "redesigning" skis to be 1mm different doesn't make all that much of difference. On the other side you guys (at least those of you who are not sponsored) need to buy new skis every year... because of 1mm difference. Is this 1mm really safer? I don't know, maybe it is, maybe it's not, but I don't think safety is main priority behind this. Sure it is officially, but in reality I doubt it's really about safety.
PS: At least some people behind this were skiers themself... some even really good ones. Guys like Skaardal, Pieren and Hujara, who are race directors, are also in team who is deciding about safety issues. So at least some of them know skiing better then any of us ever did or will :) But then again, they also know their responsibilities to companies financing WC business. And at least for this last part, even if has nothing to do with equipment rules, I can tell myself and from my current experiences as photographer on WC, they really know how to handle this. And because of this, it's real pleasure to work with these people.... at least most of times 
post #9 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rise To The Top View Post

I'm not concerned about the USSA DH races up at the loaf... as far as the rules go they are still legal since USSA can use SG skis in DH... and going by the specifications, the older DH skis meet all of the SG specifications. That said they will be legal forever unless the SG waist goes up to 67mm as well, which I don't see happening in the near future.

My main concerns were regarding the FIS races up in Canada and the FIS series at Sugarloaf, where the SG ski rule does not come into play. After talking with TMAS for a bit, I was re-assured that they aren't that big on enforcement up there until Nor-Ams and National races. Not sure about Sugarloaf, but they seem relatively laid back up there.

And yea, 1mm? Cmon, exactly how much safer is a ski with a waist that is 1mm wider? Where do those old hags on the council come up with this crap? Do they even ski, or have they ever? It's almost as bad as enforcing a 17m GS rule for J3s, then throwing them on 27m skis once they are J2s. How the hell is that "safe"?

RTTT, Will you  PLEASE post a video of your current racing?  I always read all this FIS this, Nor-Am that stack height, multiple hot box treatments...  bla, bla, bla...

And ALL I CAN PICTURE IN MY MIND IS THIS!!!!:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8516987665363470068#

MAKE IT STOP!  POST SOMETHING OF YOU TOTALLY KICKING ASS!!!
post #10 of 12
I've been trying to get pictures and video of some of my GS races as the end of last year where I started to pick things up, but non of the photographers have been responding. I have like one or two videos on fb of a citizens DH and a SG at Okemo, but they are like 8 seconds long. I'll try and throw them on youtube if I can find them on my computer.
post #11 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rise To The Top View Post

I'm not concerned about the USSA DH races up at the loaf... as far as the rules go they are still legal since USSA can use SG skis in DH... and going by the specifications, the older DH skis meet all of the SG specifications. That said they will be legal forever unless the SG waist goes up to 67mm as well, which I don't see happening in the near future.

My main concerns were regarding the FIS races up in Canada and the FIS series at Sugarloaf, where the SG ski rule does not come into play. After talking with TMAS for a bit, I was re-assured that they aren't that big on enforcement up there until Nor-Ams and National races. Not sure about Sugarloaf, but they seem relatively laid back up there.

And yea, 1mm? Cmon, exactly how much safer is a ski with a waist that is 1mm wider? Where do those old hags on the council come up with this crap? Do they even ski, or have they ever? It's almost as bad as enforcing a 17m GS rule for J3s, then throwing them on 27m skis once they are J2s. How the hell is that "safe"?
 

I would be willing to guarantee that nobody is going to notice, or care if you're on a DH ski that's out of compliance with a narrow waist at MSA. That's very much an "entry level" type DH, and a very gentle one at that. I feel like a broken record saying this. I have never seen or heard of anybody questioning, let alone protesting a ski at a FIS race below the NorAm level in North America. I've seen stand height measured at maybe two NorAms.  Don't waste any more energy on it. It's a non-issue for you. You'll be fine. 

And Primoz may be right on the money, but I have heard a lot of industry folks bitching about the changes. For one thing, it "technically" makes a lot of stuff obsolete quickly, which makes some of the stock harder to unload. Fact of the matter is that anyone racing at a level where it would matter, be enforced, etc. is going to be on the latest stuff anyways.

Done on this topic.
post #12 of 12
 Hey Same in the MidWest. The Runs are only 35 - 45 seconds long,... I don't like the Minimun Ski Size. For one, Im a 140 lb guy here, not really enough to get everything outta 180 FIS gs skis. I have used my older sisters LT 180s and flew on those, but those are cheater gs skis, so basically i put 1,000 dollars into skis i cant turn to race USSA
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home