Pro Tour needs "Big Air"

Just watched the Shapiro vid. It is a lot more fun to watch going big than 16 or 18 tricks wake to wake. I watched the PWT finals again and it is like an INT run. Throw as many tricks as you can. While impressive they weren't big and stylish. More emphasis on going big and stylish should be in the point system. I would much rather see 8 big tricks than 18 hurried wtw tricks.

Anyway- that is my 2 cents. Make the tour fun to watch- GO BIG!!! The riders in the finals can all go big so it is not a knock on them- they are doing what it takes to win and they should. It is up to the PWT to change the format. I like the point system they have but they should give more emphasis on Big than quantity.- So instead of a guy winning spins section that throws 4 spins have the guy who threw 2 really big and grabbed spins win the spins part, as an example.

I think a double up contest kinda like parks double or nothing would be better... Riders have to throw a sick trick and go huge--whats not to love?

^^^^ they did this a couple of years ago the day before the portland pro tour and out of nineteen riders maybe 4 riders landed there double ups.

I couldn't agree more! Seeing guys get punted is way cooler then seeing someone doing low wake to wake stuff. I would attend a big trick contest it doesn't even need to be a double up contest. Most of these guys get booted when they are out free riding.

"low wake to wake stuff", Not...

Even if they had say 2 tricks per run that had to be big(into the flats)that would make it a lot more interesting to watch imo!!

Agree. When your watchin Snowboarding at the x games or something you got slopestyle, pipe,and big air or whatever they call it. Personally don't care about pipe, which reminds me of your typical wakeboard contest.

I agree with Roger. Even without going big, having more style based free riding would increase the uniqueness of the sport and make it even more enjoyable to watch. I am not saying that these guys and gals aren't throwing down some serious stuff on the PWT, but it does become predictable.

I thought they changed the judging format for the 2008 season, giving more weight to big stylish tricks... from the interviews I heard, it seemed the pros were stoked on the new format.

Last year I saw a little change in riding, it seemed everyone would throw one big 180 or something into the flats.

So far this season, it looks the same, and tech wins.

Randy I will for sure call you out on this. (since you chose to take the other side) Contest rides for the most part are much lower and tighter(which they have to be for getting it all in I get that part not hating on it) EVERYONE rides bigger freeriding and outside of the double up in contest most tricks are not bomb droppers. I am in no way saying that the technical tricks aren't hard. I am just saying that they should make going big count more. Or even make it a whole different contest. I would love to go watch guys do a run that only consist of like three BIG tricks. If this sport wasn't about going big we wouldn't slam our boats! We can use Simon Duemont (sp) Big Trick contest win this year a perfect example. Big is more of a crowd pleaser to the average person then technical.

Scott, I hear what your saying, and agree that when free riding tricks tend to be a little bigger, that said the tech tricks on the tour are big, trust me your not landing mobe 5's & heel 9's going "low on wake to wake tricks".

Why don't make a system were you only count the 8 best tricks of every rider's run? Then people would concentrate much more on quality and hammer tricks rather than throwing as many tricks they can.

I think the current scoring system will work well if they counted big and style more than the number of tricks. Right now a guy will want to throw 3 to 5 tech tricks wtw than 2 really big and stylish ones. Same with spins. Obviously a bunch of 5's don't mean anything but a guy who throws 4 spins vs 2 will win that category even if the 2 are huge and grabbed really nice.

Maybe like Mathias said or limit the number of tricks per category to 3 or take the best 2 or 3 per category. Their are only 4 categories- Tech, spin, big air and obstacles. The 5th is overall presentation or something. So if you took the best 2 per cat that is 8 total tricks that count. You could throw more but they only count the best 2. Guys could put it out there and risk a fall since they still have time to get in 8 tricks. It would reduce the number of obstacle hits since only 2 will count. Hey- we could be on to something here. PWT are you listening?

I think Roger and Mathias are on to something. Need to put more reward and focus on Quality and Hammer tricks instead of Quantity in the scoring system and just counting the two BEST tricks in each category would seem to do that. The pro runs would be dope if they were riding behind your boat and that was all that you saw, but string the riders together in a tourney and the overall appeal gets a little ho hum after you watch several riders.

Roger, I'm with you. Get the Big and the Stylish back into the comps!

Just putting it out there, at all the contests I've been to the riding, even wake to wake, is huge. I like the DRIVE format for sure and would definitely agree it's opened the door for more of the big, floaty tricks into the flats that many, including myself LOVE. For example a wake to wake Toeside 9 from Danny Harf @ last years Nautique Nationals here in Wisconsin.
Looks BIG to me.

Not knocking the riders. It is common knowledge that the tour riding is kind of boring to watch after a while. Watch the vids of finals. There's one on one of the web sites thats from the boat. It is a ton of tricks and bigger than most riders go but definitely not big and stylish. We all want the tour to be something more people want to go and watch and something that people would enjoy on watching on tv. Last weeks run would not be that fun to watch.

I remember one year watching the stop in Orlando when Patterson went out. His rope was 5 or 10 feet longer and he sailed. People were going "wow" and it was cool to watch. He did not get as many tricks in but the ones he did land were a lot better than most all of the techie wtw tricks. Remember the commercial several years ago "Where's the beef"? Well my question is "Where is the wow"?

The kicker in front of the crowd had always been a good addition. I remember everyone crooning bout Harf going huge off of it 2 years ago in Fort Worth at Worlds. That is the only comment I remeber from anyone. "He went so big he almost hit the dock"

I agree. The "wow" factor needs to comeback.

I think a big reason the PWT vids get a bit dull has a lot to do with the available camera angles.

When you're watching freeriding vids, it's usually from a chase boat, well edited, etc.

Gene, i think this is the picture your talking about...HUGE.

Umm... Beefy?

Wakeboarding is a terrible spectator sport, but that doesnt mean it cant be successful (like NASCAR).

1. Consider the spectator. The bigger the riders go, the less a person gets to see from his vantage point. With the fast techie stuff, each person gets to see more from their spot.

2. Consider the money. Riders are there to earn a paycheck. Its easier to get consistent with techie stuff wake to wake than it is to blow them out into the flats.

3. Consider the course. its much easier to set up the course and space out the tricks to hit the obsticles if everything is kept fast and tight.

4. Consider the judging. Like it isnt already subjective enough. "BIG" in itself is subjective.

IMO, the "wow" factor will only be in the competition when people are constantly doing new tricks, like back in the day. In modern riding, everyone does basically the same stuff as everyone else, and at least the same stuff weve seen over and over. Nobody is gonna waste a paycheck opportunity to "wow" you. If you want "WOW" take the top 3 to 5 innovators, pay them all a flat rate and say "show me the cutting edge of what can be done on a board".

Then you will see WOW.

Yeah that is the one. Massive.

You don't go big like that for years without sustaining some knee wear and tear.