The WWWSC announced it's rules recently, with some changes, I think possibly they are significant from past years. <BR> <BR>You can find them <a href="http://www.worldwakesurf.com/news/2008%20WWSC%20Contest%20Rules%20&amp;%20Format" target="_blank">here</a> <BR> <BR>The last part of the rules made changes in the scoring criteria, they read as follows: <BR> <BR>Maneuvers Completed – log and valuation of successful tricks within the course <BR>Difficulty / Diversity – skill level and variety of tricks completed <BR>Proficiency / Execution – ease of performing clean and controlled maneuvers <BR>Power / Amplitude – ability to work the entire wave generating power and/or height <BR>Fluidity / Style - degree of composure through maneuvers, transitions &amp; linked tricks

I am trying to score a huge surf style air in comparision to a set of three or maybe four shuv's in a row. <BR> <BR>This is about 2.5 feet of air and I believe that it would score less than 2 shuv's done in succession. <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/559019/615815.jpg" alt="Upload">

In applying the criteria, and I could be wrong becaue I haven't been informed how this will actually be applied, but from outward appearance: <BR> <BR>1) Maneuvers Completed – log and valuation of successful tricks within the course <BR> <BR>The aerial above takes a great deal of time to complete, fading back and then pumping forward, plus the hang time. So two shuv's would score higher here. Is that reasonable? <BR> <BR> <BR>Difficulty / Diversity – skill level and variety of tricks completed <BR> <BR>This is one seems like a bad combination, IMO. It would seem that two shuv's would score the same as a backflip. Obviously a backflip is significantly more difficult than two shuvs, but it's only one trick. Does that seem reasonable? Or I wonder how this will be applied equitably. <BR> <BR>Proficiency / Execution – ease of performing clean and controlled maneuvers <BR> <BR>There is nothing easy about 2.5 foot of air and it looks hard. So, easy smoothly done tricks score higher than powerfully done and difficult tricks. <BR> <BR>Power / Amplitude – ability to work the entire wave generating power and/or height <BR> <BR>The aerial wins this category, hands down. <BR> <BR>Fluidity / Style - degree of composure through maneuvers, transitions &amp; linked tricks <BR> <BR>There is no way that someone landing from 2.5 feet of air is going to link another trick in there, so again two shuvs linked back-to-back outscores 2.5 feet of air. <BR> <BR>To reiterate, I'm not sure that I fully understand the criteria and how it will be applied, but it would seem that two shuv's linked back-to-bck would outscore 2.5 feet of air, or even a backflip for that matter. <BR> <BR>Anyone else have opinions?

Sounds perfectly acceptable to me. The size of an air is covered in the execution/ difficulty/ amplitude and style. Sounds like they have their bases covered. Yes, it makes perfect sense that fluidity and the number of tricks completed are criteria to be considered the same as in every single other boardsport competition in existence. <BR> <BR>Also you're making shuv-its sound like they're a basic trick. Airs are considerably easier than shuv-its. I could be wrong but swear that James was doing airs for years before his 1st successful shuv-it.

Isn't the person just linking a bunch of shuv-its going to get a low amplitude score so what's the problem with balancing out the way a run is scored. Airs are sick but they aren't the end-all be-all of wakesurfing.

I should have used top and bottom turns, I think the same could be true there. I can do 50 in the time it takes James to do an aerial, so that would be 100 tricks done smoothly and linked. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> James was doing shuv's on his skateboard before doing aerials behind the boat. I don't think, for James it was a difficulty issue as much as a desire...he just didn't try them behind the boat. <BR> <BR>I also will disagree that 2.5 foot of air is considerably easier than a shuv. Not that either of us is right, but therein lies one of the issues, IMO.

I honestly don't know Caskimmer, as I cautioned, I don't know how the scoring will be implemented. I just had a few questions in my mind and it would seem to me that in a joint class/division, that you'd want to equalize the scoring criteria - where possibly 3 would reflect skim style and 3 would reflect surf style. It seemed, in my mind and I could be totally wrong, that the criteria favored rapid but less risky tricks.

SURFDAD I think your looking at this one sided and not realizing the potential of riding. Here is my Breakdown <BR> <BR>1)2shuvs would take as much time as a big air. As for scoring higher. The air is definelty big But if some does a regular shuv and then a shuv grab that is technically 2 differenty tricks done in the same time as an air.However I think you do a big air in about the same time as shuv (if your doing a good shuv not water spinning) <BR> <BR>2)Again here there are many ways to do shuvs. And to compare it to a back flip is a little exagerated. As for it compared to an air. I think a shuv it and landing with your board backwards is harder than doing an air. And that is on any board surf or skim <BR> <BR>3)just do your 2.5 ft air clean and smooth and then theres no arguement. I think points should be rewarded for to clean tricks. <BR> <BR>4)How does the straight aerial win hands down. Why can't someone do a shuv it that is as high or higher?? (it can be done quite easily) <BR> <BR>5)as for linking tricks from big airs that is also something that is do able. I have been doing one lately but will not reveal how it works just Yet. muahahaha (that was my fake evil laugh <BR> <BR>I agree with Wardo your making it sound like a shuv is so easy. If they were easy everyone would ride a skim, style board and do them right? <BR> <BR>This just my opinion but it seems everytime something comes up for this contest that is new someone else starts tearing it apart. It also seems everyone is just looking for a pro skim and pro surf seperation. It is pro Bring what you ride and your best game and let loose. This is reflected in this post but just from alot of talk I have heard. This is not pointed towards surfdad in no way he is doing good things for the sport but I think this is a great criteria and foundation for good judging.

I really shouldn't have used the shuv as an example that opens up the surf vs skim argument and that isn't the point. So let me compare top and bottom turns to an aerial. <BR> <BR>I'm confident that I can complete 50 top and bottom turns in the period of time that James can do a single aerial. I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that my 50 T&amp;B's are woefully less difficult than 2.5 feet of air. In fact I'd be willing to bet that just about anyone can rip off 50 top and bottom turns. <BR> <BR>Applying the criteria: <BR> <BR>Maneuvers Completed <BR> <BR>The 50 t&amp;b significantly outweighs a single aerial. This category goes to the turns. <BR> <BR>Difficulty / Diversity <BR> <BR>There is little diversity in the two I am comparing, that is just for ease in comparing, but the top and bottom turns reflect two <BR>unique tricks. Obviously the aerial is much harder. So let's give this criteria to the aerial, under the assumption that was the intent. <BR> <BR>Proficiency / Execution <BR> <BR>I can make 50 turns look much easier/proficient/smoother than an aerial, plus the likliehood of bobbling the landing on the aerial is greater than my 50 turns. I think the 50 turns takes this category. <BR> <BR>Power / Amplitude <BR> <BR>No question, the aerial wins here. <BR> <BR>Fluidity / Style <BR> <BR>My 50 turns are linked, there is no linking in the aerial. I think my 50 turns wins here, or at least satisfies the criteria, as stated, <BR>more fully. <BR> <BR>So very possibly, my 50 turns takes 3 of the 5 categories and would score higher than a single aerial. <BR> <BR>There is no way that I would consider my riding more accomplished than James, in this or any other context. <BR> <BR>It just really appears to me that the criteria, at least on the surface, favors number of tricks <BR>performed to difficulty or at the least doesn't offer enough weighting to the difficulty of the trick being performed. <BR> <BR>Without knowing how it's going to be implemented, I can't genuinely get the same warm and fuzzy feeling that Wardo and Drew feel.

My only thing is either you are the fastest person to do top and bottom turns or it is going to take james the entire length of the course to do 1 air(which I know isn't the case) i would bet you might get maybe 5 little top to bottom turns in the time it should take to do an air. <BR> <BR>Also you are forgetting about the difficulty level and in any contest if you do one trick over and over the exact same way you don't get scored with the same high score for each trick. So I guess I still disagree with your comparison.

No Drew, the difficulty is the second criteria, I addressed that. I've actually done this test and I can do 50, but honestly in the trick count 5 is still more than 1 and so would still take that catergory...so whether it's 5 or actually even 2 it's still more than 1 and wins that category. <BR> <BR>I hear your concern about repetition, but I don't see that specifically listed in the criteria, so I don't believe it's safe to make that assumption. Difficulty and diversity are combined into a single category, I'm not sure that is the same as what you are saying. <BR> <BR>As I said, the comparison was an over-simplification, looking just at how to structure a run. I am still getting the impression that doing more tricks, smoothly regardless of difficulty actually "wins" more of the categories and, at least on the surface, would win against a more difficult but more time consuming set of tricks. <BR> <BR>Maybe that's all that's really needed, break the diversity out from difficulty and then it would be hard to have 50 t&amp;b turns compare equally with an aerial.

I think you are looking into this way to much. This is a foundation for judging. That doesn't mean there is nothing else taken into consideration. I wouldn't think that Centurion Needs to lay out every obvious in the rules. If this were case it wouldn't be a contest or we would have 100 contestants in the open division. And the way the "rules or Judging" is listed doesn't mean there in order of importance. I think this is a great step in forming a judging criteria for each event. I mean in tulloch you guys ran OPEN GIRLS AND OPEN GUYS TOGETHER but want to complain about this set-up. It just makes no sense to me. <BR> <BR>And not to call you a liar but if it takes as long to do one air as it does 50 turns your going to struggle in the event anyways because you will only have time for maybe 4 tricks in your total run.

So there are other things taken into consideration, but they are secret? Interesting. Seems to me that if you publish the criteria and rule set, that has to be everything. Otherwise, only those that know there are other criteria can adjust their run accordingly. <BR> <BR>I'm not complaining Drew - although I'll remember your statement above, rest assured. I'm trying to determine the best way to structure a run and I am of the belief that more tricks, more fluid, regardless of difficulty or repitition will win this contest. So far I'm seeing nothing to the contrary, although I do see your attempt to attack us.

Jeff- I am not ATTACKING ANYONE. Shouldn't everyone that you do in a contest be as many good clean hard tricks that you can fit in it. I mean that is what they do in wakeboarding , and we do the same in wakeskating. I'm not saying there is SECRET things that you will be judged on. I'm saying the do take the DIFFICULTY of a trick in mind that is why it is listed. And I am not sure what statement your going to remember or what that was suppose to mean but OK. All I am saying is that the tricks you are comparing above Bottom Turns and Airs are not even in the same category of riding. Or comparing an big air to a shuv it like a shuv it isn't a hard trick. Centurion is setting a foundation for the WWSC and I think that is great. For the event to continue to grow we need structure otherwise you end up with unorganized contest. ANd I wasn't attacking you on the Guys/girls things it's just that so many people say the skim vs surf isn't Fair so how is Guy Vs Girl Fair???????

Wakesurfing is a subjective sport, some people have technical styles, some are aggressive and to say one style is better than the other is just as subjective. I think the judging criteria does a good job of reflecting that. The only thing I could see to improve it is to divide the difficulty &amp; diversity and have 6 scores per contestant instead of 5. <BR> <BR>edit: Drew posted while I was writing my response <BR> <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 18, 2008) <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 18, 2008)

but as it is I think the rules are as fair to <b>ALL</b> contestants as much as any set of rules can be. That set of criteria is pretty standard among boardsports and I personally don't yet see a need to reinvent the wheel. Not saying that need won't present itself as the sport grows and evolves just that it hasn't yet. (and I'm someone who primarily does airs on the water and only do shuv-its on my skateboard) <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 18, 2008)

The score should be higher if you are playing really good music while surfing. Of course, the music I like is really good, and some other music is not.

I like that. I felt that Phelps should have had one of his medals taken away just for admitting he listened to Lil Wayne before swimming

"Shouldn't everyone that you do in a contest be as many good clean hard tricks that you can fit in it." <BR> <BR>I would think so Drew, but I'm not convinced that is what would win based upon the criteria, presented. If a rider has to choose between a difficult, but time consuming trick and an easy but quickly performed set of tricks, I believe that the latter would score higher in more categories than the former. Since diversity and difficulty are combined, NUMEROUS smoothly performed, but easy and repetitive tricks would beat difficult but time consuming tricks, I believe. <BR> <BR>"All I am saying is that the tricks you are comparing above Bottom Turns and Airs are not even in the same category of riding." <BR> <BR>I absolutely whole-heartedly agree, but there is no definition within the total trick count criteria that defines "substantive". It's just "tricks". If what you say is the intent then shouldn't that be spelled out somewhere, IF you are going to the trouble of establishing that criteria? <BR> <BR>The criteria spells out valauaton of the tricks, is that an attempt to establish difficultly or appropriateness of the trick within the division? If so, what is that definition? Riders may very well do tricks that score nothing, OR omit tricks they can do that would score and add to their diversity score. <BR> <BR>Structure is good, structure created in a vacuum, I'm not convinced is good.

Yeah - quoting Wardo: <BR> <BR>"The only thing I could see to improve it is to divide the difficulty &amp; diversity and have 6 scores per contestant instead of 5." <BR> <BR>I really think this is the only thing that I have an argument about also. If those were split, then folks would be forced to ride hard and do a bunch of different tricks. <BR> <BR>Well done Caskimmer.

or have diversity as part of number of tricks. Those 2 criteria are more closely related than difficulty &amp; diversity. It's entirely possibly to have either an extremely difficult redundant run or a really diverse run lacking any real degree of difficulty. <BR> <BR>I also think that part is common sense and is reflected in the judging <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 18, 2008)

So number of unique division appropriate tricks, rather than just "tricks" is your suggestion, for the first criteria (or something to that effect)? Then Difficulty becomes it's own stand alone criteria? <BR> <BR>Then there is no harm in spelling it out, right? Clarity before brevity and assumptions, I believe, is the standard with regard to rules and criteria.

Kind of (I think). That's where it's tough (because everything overlaps a little) but generally speaking I do think that both the overall difficulty of a run and the diversity of tricks executed should be judged separately.

I see your point but I think it is layed out very well to help both skim style and surf style riders. Thats the end of my arguement I am just going to show up and ride and see what happens.

Drew, it really isn't about surf vs skim, that's a dead horse and won't change in this contest, ever. It's about determining how to best set up a run. James can do a 1080 very quickly and he can throw a 3 shuv, sometimes, but it takes forever for him to set up for the 3 shuv. <BR> <BR>The 3 shuv is harder, but it doesn't seem to make sense to pursue practicing that when a 1080 has a greater liklihood of success and can be done more quickly and then drive into the next aerial. The rotation of the 1080 places him at the back of the pocket ready to drive out to the next aerial. The 3 shuv is HARDER, but not "he wins the contest" - hard, so strategically speaking, doing more, less difficult tricks is a more sound strategy. He has enough tricks already to fill a 90 second run and he'll have to forego doing some. He can meet the difficulty criteria, so he'll need to focus on quantity rather than difficulty in constructing his run. <BR> <BR>Personally, I'd rather see the 3 shuv with 4.5" fins, but the criteria will favor doing the 1080 and then some other aerial, I believe. <BR> <BR>Similarly, Bri Chmel has this backside switch surface 5 with the board revert that is truly amazing, but when I watch her I find myself going - DO THE TRICK ALREADY! <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> It just takes her ages to concentrate and huck the trick. I would think that she would be better served by doing several other tricks instead and then at the end, doing this trick if she has time. <BR> <BR>Hey Wardo, I think I understand your perspective - the one trick pony, even if it's a difficult-as-all-get-out single trick, shouldn't beat someone with a diversity of skills that performs myriad difficult tricks (even though none of them is quite as difficult as the one trick pony).

great topic! imo at the pro level,a 180 shuv ties a huge air with a grab..3shuv beats a 360 but ties a 360 air,360 air with grab beats 3 shuv..a refined combination of amplitude and style should even out the rest..i cant wait to watch all these mad pros go off behind the boat at the next contest..who will be the judges??? that should be the debate..

That's an easy one. I should <BR> <BR> <BR>j/k

you need people to judge, who can do all the tricks,and know what they are, other wise it dont matter,if your going to do surf style you need people who knows what the newest tricks are Like I rode with chase and i make surf movies with some of the best people out there and as far as im considered,chase is the kelly slater of the sport .If your going to do skim style you need the people that know the best tricks in that, and know whats super techy ,other wise it isnt fair

Like chase has afew tricks where his so far ahead that people dont know how to judge right,I dont see anyone pulling that 360 frontside air like chase thats crazy when he pulls that most people that dont spend time at the ocean dont relize how narly that is

Jamesz, <BR> <BR>There won't be a split in the divisions at the WWSC, so the individual judges, in your opinion, would need to be familiar with both riding styles, as well as the judging criteria and system. I think that reflects your thoughts accurately. <BR> <BR>I believe that there are probably only three folks in the world that can do that frontside 3 and at least two of them will be riding in that contest, so...it's doubtful that there will be folks that can actually DO the tricks, as you mention, judging. <BR> <BR>I was talking with Dean Jones, in Ohio over the weekend and he is a certified snowboard judge - I can't for the life of me remember the acronym of the entity that did the certification, but they trained the judges and offered a certification process. <BR> <BR>The WWSC obviously won't have any sort of certified wakesurf judge by 9/6, so in your opinion, Jamesz and I do hope that folks will allow James to express his opinion freely, <BR>what would you see as a reasonable option for judges that would allow you to conclude the contest was being judged fairly? Keeping in mind that there are certain tricks that only a handful of folks can do, or have seen. <BR> <BR>Waterdog, you posed the question and seemed to offer trick comparisons, so perhaps you have an opinion on this also? <BR> <BR>Chase either doing a reverse, or entry into the frontside 3. <BR> <BR><img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/messages/559019/616796.jpg" alt="Upload">

In the WCT contests Kelly Slater is being judged by people who I am sure cannot ride and do the tricks that Kelly and the rest do or they would be competing. They use competent and well trained judges with a very simple criteria:A surfer must perform radical controlled manoeuvres in the critical <BR>sections of a wave with Speed, Power and Flow to maximize <BR>scoring potential. Innovative/Progressive surfing as well as variety <BR>of repertoire (manoeuvres) will be taken into account when <BR>rewarding points for waves ridden. The surfer who executes these <BR>criteria with the maximum degree of difficulty and commitment on <BR>the waves shall be rewarded with the higher scores. <BR>This is the same basic criteria for skimboard competitions I believe. Pretty simple criteria and each Judge gives a score from 1-10 based on this criteria. Asking a judge to give 5 or 6 scores for each rider based on separate criteria will not give IMO accurate scores but will lead to far more guess work from each judge. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by dennish on August 19, 2008)

Back when we ran contests and didn't split the divisions, we always struggled with comparing skim and surf tricks, so I asked an individual that I considered an expert in both surf and skim - former pro skimmer that had no vested interest in who won a contest to compare and contrast a shuv on a skimboard behind the boat and an air as done on a surf style board behind the boat. <BR> <BR>His opinion differs from Caskimmer, but that doesn't mean that either is right, only that there is a significant difference in opinion. It's the difference in opinion when combined with a subjective judging system that is problematic. <BR> <BR>The former champions response to me: <BR> <BR>As for the comparison of a shovit to a solid air the air is much harder and should be compared to a three-shove. A big-spin would beat an average good air and a frontside bigspin beats almost everything in my opinion if it is over a foot of air. They should measure the height of air on all shovits to assign points because a 180-shove is a very basic trick on a skim these days. On a surf style board all shove-tricks and big-spins should get awarded MAJOR extra points because it's twice as challenging to shove on a surfboard. <BR> <BR>Finding any sort of consensus will always be hard and, of course, with such wildly different opinions, contestants will always wonder where the judging falls. Is a shuv harder than an air as suggested above, or a very basic trick as suggested by a former skim champion? In the five components, how do the two tricks compare? In throwing an aerial there are so many components, fading to the back of the pocket, pumping up into the wake, a huge bottom turn, then the landing that can take the rider into the flats. <BR> <BR>Potentially a judge could see an aerial as five or more combined tricks. That has a BUNCH of linked tricks. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> <BR> <BR>Lots of potential for divergent opinions in here. <BR> <BR>The point of this "dissertation" is not that surf is harder than skim, only that it doesn't take much to find differing opinions on the difficulty of the two different styles of riding. When you combine THAT with a subjective system, the trick scores will have a bais. <BR> <BR>If you split the divisions, that bias doesn't matter - all folks doing the same trick will have a relative score, without the split, the bias will affect the outcome. <BR> <BR>I think that as Waterdog and Djjamesz point out, the judges become key to the outcome of such a contest.

No matter how you slice it airs are easier than shuv-its. I think the fact that there are 10 people doing airs for every 1 doing a shuv-it clearly demonstrates which is harder. I can regularly do airs over 2 feet high, I can't however land shuv-its as consistent as I'd like. Almost everyone in my crew can bust air yet only the people who have ocean skimmed for more than 3 years can do shuv-its. <BR> <BR> <BR>Eric Roush is a really good skimboarder but he was never a champion. Shuv-its might be easier for him because he's been doing them for 10 years but 99.6545% of the time that's not the case. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by CAskimmer on August 20, 2008)

I have nothing but respect for you and what you've done Jeff but this really sounds like you're try to change the scoring to benefit James style of riding. These set of guidelines really do a better job of leveling the field than anything before them and it's kind of disheartening to hear someone in your position do this. A good competitor adjusts their run to give them the best chance of winning not the other way around. \ <BR> <BR>BTW- I also have absolutely no interest in who wins or loses. The outcome is irrelevant to me, the integrity of the sport isn't

In this contest, Caskimmer, the contest is organized by Centurion, the judges are picked by Centurion, the rules are developed by Centurion, the judging criteria is developed by Centurion, Centurion has developed a significant ad campaign that proclaims Drew is the 4 x WWSC, Centurion sponsors the rider that has won the most frequently, Centurion determines the calculation methodology AND Centurion does the presentation. There is not one iota of independence within that system, yet you would argue that system is sound? I would love to have that argument sometime. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0>. I would suggest that you are biased in favor of this system because it favors your style of riding, not because it offers equity. You do not argue anything to support your opinion, only resorting to your usual tactic of character assasination, which has no merit. <BR> <BR>My point isn't that James or Drew should win, only that as you point out, your view point differs from mine and Eric's. I do not suggest that you are wrong, ONLY that it's different. <BR> <BR>In an objective system, let's say that EVERY rider in the world gets together and agrees that a shuv is worth 82.75 points and an aerial is worth 80.10 points. Then the difference of opinion doesn't matter. But in this context, your opinion would bias the results in favor of a skim orientation. If I were to judge, which of course wouldn't be appropriate, I would no doubt feel the aerial would be worth more points and would bias the results in favor of a more surf orientation. <BR> <BR>If you split the divisions, that bias doesn't matter. The score remain relative so you say a shuv is harder, since it os only compared again other shuvs you can rate them all as a 9 or whatever. The split in divisions, eliminates the effects of the bias. <BR> <BR>Bias exists everywhere, it's human nature. It's not a bad thing, especially for advocates. Attempting to minimize the impact of bias, as I do when I perform random samples during audits, is the purpose of a scoring/judging system. That's one of the principal reasons we split the divisions. No matter how hard you try, a human will still have a bias. <BR> <BR>There is nothing within the judging criteria stated that minimizes this bias, and I can argue that several of the criteria favor quickly performed but not difficult tricks. <BR> <BR>I'm sorry that you believe that my discussion is disheartening, I would suggest nothing I say or do will have any change on this contest, so it's pretty moot. I do NOT believe that you can have a contest with such a lack of independence perceived or apparent without a discussion of minimizing the bias involved. Although I can see how you and Drew would prefer that be avoided here. <BR> <BR>Your opinion is that shuv's are harder than aerials. I have found at least one opinion that differs. That is the very definition of bias. The system employed here, without the appointment of disinterested and appropriately trained judges, or a concensus of scoring criteria (objective definitions) produces biased results. <BR> <BR>If the judges were all surfboard manufactures that had never seen a skimmer, the bias would be evident and unquestionable. If, I believe you were to sit as a judge, that too would produce an obvious bias. <BR> <BR>I do not want to indicate that your opinion of the difficulty of a shuv in comparison to an aerial is wrong or misguided. You could very well be 100% accurate. The only thing that I suggest is that it isn't shared by all, as such, judges that share your opinion would affect a bias in the scoring, COMPARED with judges that share Eric's opinion. The system presented, with combined styles, will result in biased scores. <BR> <BR>I would think that if your concern for integrity was so great, you would have a discussion on the objectivity and independence involved in this format. My profession has no less than 4 standards codified in the context of professional conduct that address this challenge. Let's have that discussion, next, shall we?

Caskimmer, not quite sure where in this whole discussion Jeff once fought and complained to have the judging changed to benefit James. If you would actually read and articulate what he is saying, you might understand. Let me break it down for you. Surf and skim are truly two distinct styles of riding and the tricks preformed in each differ completely in difficulty. Each style has benefits to certain tricks and draw backs to others. example; surface 360 much easier on a skim style board than a surf style (examples are what people use to help make educated points in a discussion, you should try it some time). Because of this reason one of two things should be done when judging. One, judges should be educated in tricks preformed on both skim and surf style boards and the difficultly on both. That way when both styles are judged together a judge can make an educated decision on scoring. And yes, they should be scored differently on some of the same tricks because they are more or less difficult on the different styles. Or you separate the two classes. Another option is to create a points system, where specific points are awarded for specific tricks. Here comes that example thing again; surface 360 on a skim = 1 on a surf = 1.5 or a big 2.5ft air on skim = 2 and surf = 1.5. That way it is universal across the board. Someone can plan their run based off the scoring model and points can then be deducted for things such a fluidity and amplitude. <BR> <BR>Instead of attacking someone for expressing their opinions maybe try having a conversation like normal people and working together to advance and grow this sport. Jeff takes his own free time and money to put on tournys so that people like you can ride and compete. What do you do to expand this sport Caskimmer? Try helping and giving some insight instead of attacking. Give your opinion and reasons why and maybe you too can help this sport grow.

james is spot on.i agree you have to be a highly skilled rider with skills from both styles aswell as a seriously awesome boat driver to be qualified to judge a pro level contest.. <BR> <BR>as for 180 shuvs,at a pro level they are a cakewalk..180 shuv big spin or body varial and now were talkin money triks. <BR> <BR>i feel like the contest should be judged just like a real surf contest minus the snake session in the line up..how many turns,how many airs,combined with how you put it together ie;STYLE...the big money triks during the run will only personify your style points which should be 50% of the score..25% airs,25% carves..compulsory style just like at the king of dirt and x games and gravity games and velocity games,olympics.. <BR> <BR>wardo- i think surfdad was simply tryng to collectively figure out what would be the best strategic run for all competitors.its the world title were talking about.imo it totally deserves this attention.. <BR> <BR>on a side note,my close personal friend kyle bennett will be racing BMX tonight in beijing,representn the USA.dont miss it,this kid is the baddest dude i have Ever seen hang a leg over a bike.u wont be dissappointed.sorry for the hyjack,i love the bmx

btw- besides me,i know 4 guyz in austin who are landing that frontside 3..its was played out last summer..wes beck throws it with a grab all the way out to the flats now.who ever pulls it in a contest gets to name it..who will it be??

I know I've seen more people throw shuv's, than people throwing 2 feet of air. I like seeing both though(especially 360 airs).

"In this contest, Caskimmer, the contest is organized by Centurion, the judges are picked by Centurion, the rules are developed by Centurion, the judging criteria is developed by Centurion, Centurion has developed a significant ad campaign that proclaims Drew is the 4 x WWSC" <BR> <BR> <BR>So now it come sdown to Favoritism. I think an air is a great trick. But seriously Jeff you are really taking this whole thing way to far. And even if you can do a big air if you only have a handful of tricks it wouldn't matter anyway. Doing abig Air isn't going to win the contest. And as for a 360 air well that is harder on a skim style, on a surfer you have to BIG fins to stop your spin when you land, on a skimboard you have stop your rotation. And there are more than 3 people that can do frontside 3's. The Question is what links after that???

Waterdog, <BR>As I said before there is no sport where the riders doing the highest level tricks judge each other. Show me one sport where the judges are capable of doing the tricks the competitors are. Watching the Olympics the judges are typically older people without the ability to land any of the tricks they judge. This doesn't mean that they are not excellent judges capable of scoring correctly. What does being a "seriously awesome driver" factor in? <BR>CAkimmer, <BR>I have seen several women doing shuv's and none doing 2' airs. IMO basic shuv's are no more difficult than a basic air. The points differences would come in the extra factors ( height, grabs, body varials, combinations and such). These extra factors would apply to both tricks. I have seen a simple trick fire hydrant which at the pro level would not mean much, with the addition of starting a 360 from the fire hydrant turn into a point trick.

Dennis I agree with you on the shuv to air factor. They are both really basic tricks. The question is how big and how different is it from the rest.

Drew and Waterdog, <BR>What is the exact trick that everyone is referring to as a frontside 360? I am thinking of a trick where the back of the board is thrown over the top of the wake and as in a reverse in surfing then the rotation is continued to complete a full revolution.

Correct but I think we are all talking about Frontside 360 Airs ( i was anyway)

Waterdog, How is it possible to land a " frontside air 360" with a grab in the flats? Do you have it on video even if he doesn't land it?

No Drew, you're the man to beat, no question. I've said that a bazillion times. Do I think Centurion has a vested interest in you winning? Absolutely and that being the case, I think the sport and Centurion would be best served by taking measures to eliminate the appearance of bias. I don't believe the system or the recent changes improve that. <BR> <BR>I'm certain that if you swapped MY NAME or Jerry Price for that matter and the duties performed by Centurion in that list there would be a howl of "unjust!" <BR> <BR>The BIGGER issue for me, is that the WWSC is seen as the benchmark due to it's size and funding. It's lack of independence or oversight by a sanctioning body, and the reluctance to spilt the divisions in the open class, while recognizing that a division is appropriate in the amateur class - gives the appearance of bias, when combined with the existing structure. <BR> <BR>I do believe that the WWSC could make better efforts to establish an event free of bias in the judging. <BR> <BR>That's what I want. <BR> <BR>That can be accomplished in a number of ways. One is a judging criteria that doesn't favor minor but quickly performed tricks. Another is some agreed upon standard for the difficulty of tricks and what constitutes style or linking. The criteria, IMO, is so vague as to not allow skilled riders to adjust their ride to best suit the judging. Another, which I understand won't happen, is to split the open division by style. Lastly, the sponsor of a rider who wins most all the time, can't control every aspect of the judging, recording, rule development, criteria development, calculation and presentation. To do so, will cause a reasonable person to assume bias. That's not that big a stretch.

I humbly offer a simple answer -- Split <BR> <BR>If the top surfer is also the top skimmer, they they can claim a "double crown." <BR> <BR>If in the Olympics they can have 15 different types of swimming events, we can surely split the two divisions.

Easily said, would you or anyone else here care to match the prize money Centurion has put up so they can split the division?

WOW! I had no idea that long division was illegal in Nashville! I'll have to remind the family that they shouldn't attempt to try anything like 15,000 / 4 = 3,750 per division. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> <BR> <BR>Just teasing! The purse that Centurion puts up is very generous. Also, if you ask any of the open riders, that are truly in contention for making the podium, if they would prefer LESS money but a greater chance of winning, they all say no. However, those that are in the top five, but don't ride skimboards also say - make the judging criteria equitable. THAT is the reason for the clamor behind the surf vs skim. <BR> <BR>It's not so much surf vs skim as it is: recognize there are two unique styles and some of these folks are truly the best there is out there - judge them accordingly. <BR> <BR>If a rider that chooses to ride a surfboard can NEVER win an open division, which by the way is fine - it's Centurion's contest and they can do whatever they want, but let's recognize that early on and we can refer to it as the World Skimboarding (boat) Championship and let it be. <BR> <BR>Equitable judging criteria, please OR a statement that Centurion believes that folks that ride skim style are just better than folks that ride surf style...like Tim Lopes formerly of Centurion used to say in a highly prejudical remark referring to surf style boards: "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight". In those days surf style folks were openly second class citizens. <BR> <BR>I believe what folks are saying is, lose that prejudice. <BR> <BR>I sure hope that James makes it through the qualifying rounds after all my dissention! <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> That would certainly open up lots to talk about if he loses in the first round after beating the best of the best (that attended) in state championships and nationals. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0>

Lastly, the sponsor of a rider who wins most all the time, can't control every aspect of the judging, recording, rule development, criteria development, calculation and presentation. To do so, will cause a reasonable person to assume bias. That's not that big a stretch. <BR> <BR>Well Centurion was the one putting up the money, organizing the event, using new technology to better there boats for wakesurfing and have been the Soul behind the WWSC since the first year. That was before I was with them. Then I cam e along and hooked up with Centurion after the first WWSC. I took 2nd in 2004(as a rider for Centurion) I son't see any other boat company stepping up for this Sport. Where is Malibu, Tige or Mastercraft.I'm not knocking any of these companies but CENTURION is the reason we have WWSC. And what SANCTION should they be apart of?? And I really have to thank you for this whole thread Jeff this is seriously Feeding my FIRE and I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ride hard 'bro you are the man to beat. I've been privy to some stylings and you'll see manufacturers offering surf specific "stuff" in the near future. No doubt though, Centurion has been the manufacturer to give life to the sport. <BR> <BR>I'd be happy to assist Centurion create a separation of duties that would allow an independence in fact and appearance. Somehow I don't think they'll take me up on that offer. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0>

Thanks <BR> <BR>How would you assisting them to create a seperation tie them in with a Sanctioning Organization?

Nah, we tried that and it didn't work well. The truth of the matter is that when the contest and the organization behind the contest is 5 million times larger than the sanctioning body, it's pretty tough to say: sit, stay, heel. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> Although we'd be happy to assist in that capacity should Centurion deem it appropriate. <BR> <BR>When we look at creating a system to provide assurances that there is no wrong-doing OR just simple math errors, the system is designed to prevent any one person/entity from following a transaction from start to finish. That is, we have someone overseeing it OR the transaction has to be handed off to another person/entity. <BR> <BR>In this situation Centurion handles all aspects of all transactions. Which would be ok, if they were NOT sponsoring you OR if you weren't so dang good and therefore didn't win so dang much! <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> <BR> <BR>The changes in the current judging criteria, arguably favor performing more tricks, regardless of the difficulty. The trick count criteria will favor a skim rider. Also, the linking of tricks is pretty hard for someone that is concentrating on boosting huge air. Amplitude in this instance, will detract from a separate criteria. While the criteria should stand alone, they shouldn't become mutually exclusive. The three criteria used in prior years, I believe, was more equitable. It really would be hard for either style to argue that the three criteria used in prior years favored one style or the other. This criteria has been discussed and used in many other contests. Without a concensus, the new criteria will not lend itself to independence. <BR> <BR>The last change that would be needed is the selection of judges. I just can't get behind the theory that the judges should be able to do the tricks that are being done in the contest, if we could we'd be competing against you folks. <BR> <BR>However, folks that CAN ride well and don't have a business relationship/family relationship with Centurion OR any of the riders would be acceptable. Ed Sullivan would be one example. He is not affilated with anyone. Then, the judges do the math ON THE BOAT, and confer to establish the ranking. Everyone of the judges is part of that process and each has an equal voice. They know what the ranking will be and so there can't be any mistake going into the next round, OR the final placement. <BR> <BR>Those changes, will give the appearance of independence, they also implement a sizable separation of duties AND a built in check of the results, because the independent judges, are performing a rudimentary statistician's function. <BR>Alternatively, the judges could supervise the statistician's function, they sit and peer over the shoulder of the person doing the math, or READ to the statistician their scores. Then the statistician can be a Centurion/rider affilate, without issue. <BR> <BR>To summarize: <BR> <BR>Inasmuch as, there isn't consensus on the new judging criteria, restore the criteria from prior years, until consensus can be reached by folks outside of the WWSC organizers. Recognition to the folks involved that it is a great effort, but needs general acceptance before implementation. <BR> <BR>Judges have no affiliation business/familia with Centurion or any of the riders. Judges also have some skill as a rider. Preferably, without preferance to style OR an equal representation of skim, surf and longboard. <BR> <BR>ALL the division Judges are involved in some capacity overseeing or performing the statistician's function. <BR> <BR>Everything else can remain exactly as proposed, and folks performing those functions can be a Centurion affiliate/rider affiliate or not. <BR> <BR>I'll argue against anyone that says that isn't fair and independent. <BR> <BR>I had to edit it to insure that family relationships can NOT be allowed - so I have no business relationship with James other than as his ATM <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0>, but I should never be allowed to judge any division that he is competing in. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by surfdad on August 21, 2008)

if centurion marketing is so out of touch that they cant see how purists have elevated the level of wakesurfing and wakeskimming and now demand to be judged separately,its my firm belief this will be the last year all the top pros will care about this contest..if the wave gets sabotaged again,james,chase,wes,bubba dont advance to the final because they dont have a kikflip..C marketings goose will be cooked

if the wave gets sabotaged again,james,chase,wes,bubba dont advance to the final because they dont have a kikflip..C marketings goose will be cooked <BR> <BR>What the heck does that mean?????? Where did the wave get sabotaged???? <BR> <BR> <BR>Jeff, What is the sanctioning body your talking about???

In this situation Centurion handles all aspects of all transactions. Which would be ok, if they were NOT sponsoring you OR if you weren't so dang good and therefore didn't win so dang much! <BR> <BR>So my ability to be good comes back to centurion How??? Or because I am good they can't sponsor me and run the vent. Tis makes no sense at all <BR> <BR>I really wanted to leave this post again but you keep throwing myself and Centurion who has done more for this sport than anyone under the chopping block. Honestly I have never been so excited for the contest as I am for this year. And this thread is half the reason.

"Also, the linking of tricks is pretty hard for someone that is concentrating on boosting huge air." <BR> <BR>Just so you know It is very possible to do HUGE airs and link them with other tricks.

Also how do you put a point system on tricks when the sport is so new. The last 5 years there have been a ton of tricks that have never been done. If they aren't in the point system what would they be Worth???????

Seems to me that the point system is included in the new criteria presented by Centurion. "Maneuvers Completed – log and valuation of successful tricks within the course " Valuation is the act of giving a point value for each maneuver logged. I don't think that a point value can be presented for every trick that has been done or will be done in the future.

Dennis That what I was trying to get at. You can't do it

Waterdog, with all due respect, I disagree. This contest is huge, it draws folks from all over the world. There is a community involvement, as well as, competitive involvement. I don't expect to place at all, in the baldING division but for that one day I'm riding in a contest that features the likes of my son, Chase and Drew. <BR> <BR>If someone lands a kickflip - I want to be there to watch it AND to watch that person walk away with the money and title. <BR> <BR>I don't believe that a separate division is necessary and I am probably the biggest proponent of that split, but you do have to recognize that the two styles exist and that the best of the best are just that - the best. Establishing judging criteria that is equitable is hard, but can be done. What it should not do, however, is inadvertantly favor one style over the other. The very best surf style rider should be on a "competitive equal footing" as a skim style rider. <BR> <BR>Drew asked for input in his post above. He certainly didn't need to. I for one, would like to see a cooperative spirit moving forward, as it obvious a hand has been extended. <BR> <BR>This contest is here to stay, AND it's huge. I appreciate that Drew has solicited input and hopefully the folks at the WWSC will give it due consideration.

Drew then you agree that the first section of the criteria for the Worlds this year is flawed.

Just cause someone does a Kickflip They should win. If that is true then there is no need for judging. <BR> <BR>This topic is going in circles!!! <BR>I know the people at centurion will run an excellent contest and the person who rides the best with the best tricks and style will be the winner. I am now done talking in circles and Can't wait for CENTURIONS WORLD WAKESURF CHAMPIONSHIPS THIS YEAR!!!!!!! <BR>SEE YOU GUYS THERE<img src="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/biggrin.gif" border=0> <BR> <BR>(Message edited by ollies_drew on August 21, 2008)

Sorry i was misunderstood. I don't think you can give a point system to the tricks that have been done. <BR>Meaning you can't say <BR>Floater 100pts <BR>360 150pts <BR>Air 200pts <BR>Shuv it 300pts ETC... <BR> <BR>I do think that you should be rewarded for how well you use the time you have. If someone does 15 tricks going one way, with all of them being mediocre and some does 3 "HUGE" airs in the same amount of time I would say the airs will have a higher individual scores then the other person but the other person will probably advanced because he has more scores. 8 scores of 5 are better then 2 perfect scores of 10. That is what I was saying. <BR>But now I am going to refer to my last post and I am done.

Thanks for clearing that up. So a system that advances a rider for doing 15 3 point tricks ( 45 pts) over a rider doing 4 perfect tricks (40pts) is a fair and equitable system. Something is lost on me.

Actually I do see your point but i am thinking in the open division If your doing 3pt tricks then your in the wrong Division. And in the amatuer div. if everyone is doing the same tricks for the most part so if you can throw in a few more and other riders didn't do a few big tricks then you should advance.

Gentlemen, if I may. We are nothing but fortunate to have this contest and the incredible efforts from all involved. The contest is only a few weeks away, tossing a pile of changes or requests on TOP of the horrendous task of organizing the event is unfair. <BR> <BR>This is the biggest, most influential contest in existence. I'm certain that the folks associated with the WWSC will seek cooperation in this and future events and the issues and concerns have been adequately expressed. <BR> <BR>Let's go, ride hard, commune with fellow enthusiasts and let the WWSC deal with the huge task of finishing up this organizational effort, unabated. <BR> <BR>Drew, thanks so much for all of your input and communication and also for your efforts to address concerns and explain reasoning. For all others I appreciate all of your input. Your point is clear and heard. Now, let's band together cooperatively in supporting this event and move forward. <BR> <BR>I would respectfully request that we all put this matter to bed, and join in supporting the contest, even if only from afar. <BR> <BR>See everyone in Nashville.

I agree Jeff, But remember this was your baby I have been supporting this event since the beginning you were the one Questioning the new judging style as well as centurion and Mine relationships. So I agree lets support this event and go out and just ride and do our best, But lets also practice what we preach.

Drew, respectfully, lets put this to bed. Ok?

I'm Done see all you guys in Nashville.

Here's what I tell Chase on the subject: "The people putting on the contest see Wake Skimming and Wake Surfing as the same sport. So, If you do not want to go ,do not. But, if you choose to go, Don't bitch, Don't complain, have fun, and thank Shell, Vickey and Kayce when it is over. If that is asking too much, stay home". <BR> His response, the same every year, "I don't care. I just want to ride" <BR> He's going to make a good soul surfer some day!! For those who do not know, That's someone who surfs just for the love of it. I got kicked out of the club when I founded Shred Stixx in "99". Oh well, just chopped my hair too, guess it is time to grow up.$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Go have fun and hear some great music. Because of the buis I have to be in Austin the weekend of the contest. GONNA MISS YOU ALL!!!, <BR> Your Yuppi Friend, Jerry

Jerry, you cut you hair? Really? <BR> <BR>We'll miss you all up here at the shallow pond, today. I think the water temp is about 99 degrees. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0>

I apologize for not letting you put this to bed yet, but I do agree with Drew. Jeff brought this up (as he always does) and now it seems as though he is back-pedaling. He criticizes the event and implies that it’s been biased and dishonest and then in the next post humbly praises Centurion for their wonderful job. I also take issue when someone quotes me and then proceeds to interpret the meaning of my comment. Obviously, Jeff has an agenda of his own and if that isn’t obvious to all, then this SPORT is doomed to extinction. <BR> <BR>Jeff wrote “If a rider that chooses to ride a surfboard can NEVER win an open division, which by the way is fine - it's Centurion's contest and they can do whatever they want, but let's recognize that early on and we can refer to it as the World Skimboarding (boat) Championship and let it be.” He also goes on to say “Equitable judging criteria, please OR a statement that Centurion believes that folks that ride skim style are just better than folks that ride surf style...like Tim Lopes formerly of Centurion used to say in a highly prejudicial remark referring to surf style boards: "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight". In those days surf style folks were openly second class citizens.” Hmm…..me quoting Jeff quoting me! That’s funny. I can’t speak for Centurion but I have never felt or stated that surf style folks can NEVER win an open division nor do I believe that folks who ride skim style are better than those who ride surf style. I have never implied that surf style riders were second class citizens. In my opinion, a person who feels that I have any kind of bias against surf style wakesurfers has no idea what I went through to make such an event possible. I’m sure Jeff didn’t realize that before the first event at Yosemite Lake, neither I nor anyone else organizing that event had ever seen or had any idea what a skimboarder could do behind a boat. Besides that, I grew up on and continue to surf on traditional style surfboards both in the ocean and behind boats. I also seem to remember that two of the SurfTech surfers placed very high at the first event. <BR> <BR>My remark “Don't bring a knife to a gun fight” does not imply that skim style riders are just better than surf style riders. It references equipment, not individuals. Not Surf Style vs. Skim Style, but Surfboard vs. Skimboards! If you are planning to compete at the Pipeline Classic you don’t bring a longboard and whine about how unfair and biased the judging format is against longboards. <BR> <BR>Almost every complaint that arose at the event that I spent five years organizing, working on, and jeopardizing my credibility with the tow boat industry for, went something like this, “how can you judge a guy on a SKIMBOARD against a guy on a SURFBOARD. It’s not fair” or “this is bull$#!!!, my boy should have won, we got robbed!” and then it would be followed up by more whining, and crying. I also recall making sure everyone left with more than they came with. The first event almost every competitor left with a new board and more swag than they could carry. The really funny thing is that the check that paid the entry at that first event for one particular family (that is now so unhappy with it’s format) bounced and we never were compensated. I wonder if that was because the Surfdad and Surfmom or their Surfson didn’t win. It must have been because they were riding surfboards. They got new boards and Centurion got the shaft. Oh well, it still hasn’t changed. <BR> <BR>I have said openly and LOUDLY…from day one…that the sport needed to grow and that the equipment needed to be allowed to evolve (the EQUIPMENT needs to be ALLOWED to evolve!). Just a few years ago Jeff and his AWSA were trying to divide the divisions based on the type of boards used. Wouldn’t that had been one of the worst things that could have happened? Look at the boards now! They are finally becoming what they need to be - HYBRIDS. Now, for some reason, they need divisions based on the style. If there is anything that is subjective, it is style. Don’t get me wrong or misquote me again! I have also said from the beginning that a good separation of divisions would be longboard and shortboard divisions. Just like surfing, the two disciplines are light years apart and scored accordingly. What I find amazing is that in the traditional ocean surfing world, shortboarders and longboarders show a mutual respect for one another. Hey, if you want to have a big air competition, have a big air competition! There’s nothing stopping anyone from having the World Wakesurf Big Air Championships. Sure seems to be a limited factor for scoring but who I’m I to judge. Besides, I think Drew will still kick everyone’s ass but hey, you never know. <BR> <BR>Lastly, I don’t agree with any organization that’s sole purpose is to hijack a sport and then attempt to change it for their own agenda. I feel that if this sport is going to grow its only hope is for the industries involved need to get behind and guide its direction. It should not be directed by participants who cant compete with the current rules so they need to charge them or by an organization trying to make a buck by saying it’s not a legit event unless they sanction it. If the industry cannot make a profit on the sport then they will just ignore it. I have spoken to many of the people in both the wake sport and ocean surfing industries and they all agree the sport of wakesurfing has a lot of potential. Unfortunately, none of them want to see another AWSA running the show. I was a competitive water-skier for years and watched as the original AWSA (American Water Ski Association) took the sport of waterskiing from one of the biggest growing industries in the 70’s &amp; 80’s to almost bankruptcy in the 90’s, all for the good of the skiers who had access to private lakes. Unfortunately, not too many people can afford to have their own private lake. Let me quote Jerry Price “Oh well, just chopped my hair too, guess it is time to grow up, $$$$$$$$$$$$$”. Before the first event at Lake Yosemite, he didn’t even understand why someone would want to let go of the rope and surf a little tiny wave. He understands what it’s about now! <BR> <BR>I’m sure that this will all be twisted around, but what the hell. I’m very proud of what I accomplished and I’m saddened by all of the dissension!

Yes Tim, It was because of you, after over a 20 absence, I went back to "Freeboarding" after you showed me the waves that could be had behind the new V-drives. Thanx for that. Do I understand what it is about now? <BR> I understand that the future of wake surfing is not totally in skim boards, as you told me. <BR> And doing very well, thank you, because I refused to believe it. <BR> Heard me stopping by your house last year to say hi and show you the Panel truck I had been telling you about for 3 years, was not appreciated. My public apology. Did'nt know we were at odds. It will not happen again. <BR> Surfing behind boats has been around longer than you and I have been alive. And will be around long after we are dead WITH OF WITHOUT CONTEST.

Jerry, <BR> <BR>I truly am sorry if I offended you, I don’t know were you heard you stopping by wasn’t appreciated. We are not at odds and I’ve considered you a very dear friend and I still do. The issue is, WHAT is good for the growth of the sport not what is good for certain individual persons or companies. I think your post was right on! <BR> <BR>"The people putting on the contest see Wake Skimming and Wake Surfing as the same sport. So, if you do not want to go, do not. But, if you choose to go, don’t bitch, don’t complain, have fun, and thank Shell, Vickey and Kayce when it is over. If that is asking too much, stay home". <BR> <BR>If someone doesn’t agree with the format, then they should go find their own $30.000 prize money and put on a big air wakesurf contest. <BR> <BR>You are also right about wake surfing, Its not only about skim boarding. Your boards have evolved dramatically over the last 8 years. You and I have had many conversations on the future of wakesurf boards. I also see that Drew is using fins on his boards. In my opinion, that would no longer classify it as a skimboard. Or is it that it’s molded not a hand shaped board that makes it a skimboard. If that were true wouldn’t Jeff Page have named his company Inland skimboards. <BR> <BR>You are also correct that surfing behind boats has been around longer than either you or I. But not as a professional competitive sport! And even if some people stifle or pollute its growth as a legitimate competition sport, I’m sure it will always be around for a long time as a soul searching recreational activity. I still see a lot of knee-boarders on the water! <BR> <BR>We go back way to long! You will always have my respected and I wish you nothing but good fortune. You’re contribution to wakesurfing will always be appreciated and valued.

this is why i hate contests. why cant people just have fun and be happy with what they have?

Tim it's so good to see you are still around. <BR> <BR>My agenda is what I perceive to be fairness. While this conversation got convoluted into surf vs skim, the more important concept is independence and separation of duties in the administration of a contest. <BR> <BR>The reason that I stopped my part of this discussion, as I did, was that I got "the call" that requested that I stop and I promised that I would. <BR> <BR>Tim, your efforts and the efforts of the succeeding admininistrations of the WWSC should be admired and applauded. That does not mean there isn't room for improvement and I will continue to strive for what I believe to be an improvement. No doubt some folks will tell me that I am wrong and others won't. For purposes of the WWSC, it's pretty easy, they just have to say: no. <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0> <BR> <BR>I am bound by my word to refrain from further substantive discussion on this matter until a later date, but after that, I'd be more than happy to debate the issue, sir.

Good call! This is starting to resemble politics. All the mud slinging only makes both parties look bad.

he rides a skim board with fins on it.imo that would no longer classify it as a skimboard.lol!your correct its a skimboard with fins on it,nothing more. <BR>i make,sell,and ride skims with fins in them too,they are still called skimboards.as for inland,they have softer rails,3x"s the displacement and they market their stuff solely as wakesurf specific,have since the beginning.surfdad simply tried to collectively discuss what would be the most strategic run for all the competitors.you dont know if he was asking for himself since he competes too,yall just poured salt all over it out of fear,because you know the wakesurfing and wakeskimming split is about to be reality..sux we cant even have a simple dicussion about the correct direction of contest wakesurfing..

Tim, <BR> <BR> I just want to one once again personally thank you for your vision with the WWSC. You were the one who put the hard work in to get this event up and running. Because of the WWSC in 2003 I have had the oppurtunity to work with amazing people, see amazing places and lakes, and enjoy doing a sport that I really Love. One of the saddest things at these events the past few years have been the absence of you involved. But it was great to see you last year and I hope our paths cross again. Tell Blaine and Kris I said HI. <BR>Thank You for your hardwork and vision to see waksurfing grow. <BR>Drew Danielo