Announcing the Course

[Karl Floitgraf]

I was just wondering if a description of a race course be announced prior to a race. Not just announcing GS, Hybrid or Tight, but like range of cone spacings, speed of the hill and possibly a general idea of the layout. Why? When traveling far on tight schedules with tight suitcases, it would help a lot to be able to know exactly what to pack, and have it dailed in for the course before you get there.


You don't even need to have set the course already to do this, just race organizers should announce their intentions.


I don't think much is lost in competition, it just makes travel easier.

[Chris Eggers]

I think a short description about the pitch, the surface and roughly how tight the course will be should be enough.

[Stefano Bellingeri]

Hallo guys,
we spoke in Zurich Luca, Chris Hart (if I remember well because it was during the race) and me, about the possibility of better defining the slalom cathegories through standard objective parameters.

Luca suggested to link the slope with the cone distance thorugh the curve frequency.
In other terms you would define the type of slalom through number of cones AND the average-rider number of curve/sec.

I think that this could be a good idea for defing in a proper way what a tight, a slalom and a GS are. Moreover this would allow to train everywhere in the world with standard tracks without loosing in competition and challenge.

I just wanted to promote Luca's idea with which I'm completely in agreement.
What do you thing about?
Cheers
Stefano

[Ramón Königshausen]

Skills vs. practice?

"The more you have been practicing, the better you will be in a competition."

That's not my in opinion (apart from practicing the really nasty tight stuff, this "should be allowed")

For example: I have never practiced that kind of slalom we rode in Antibes, it was (must have been) my skills that made me compete so strongly...

If your skills are good enough, you won't have any problems with any course.

You can get your skills here

[...]

rmn

[Donald Campbell]

know what the strongest point of skateboarding is and will ever be?independence.

you can do whatever you want whereever you want.

so there's no predictable course as i saw it and will see it,if you're good enough you qualify,if you're too bad-train more.
easy and simple as it is.
anything preprescribed would destroy a lot of the surprise/fun-factor.

[Stefano Bellingeri]

Dear Ramon and Donald,
I do not see a sort of “conflict” between skills and practice. As far as I know, in all the sports, the more you practice the more you get in terms of skills (i.e technical improvements). This gives you the possibility of being faster and faster (and reaching your top level that is constrained by your muscular characteristics as well).
So, I agree on leaving degrees of freedom by let be the course decided in terms of what course (tight, super G, giant etc.).
In my opinion, anyway, if you define what a giant is in term of curve frequency you are not giving any constrain. In fact, nobody will tell you what angles you will have and what kind of sequence you will have. This could only help you by training in a SIMILAR course not in THE RACE course. You are not destroying any surprise/fun factor. The unpredictability of the course, contest and what ever, remains as it is and as it has to be.
You are right by telling that:
>If your skills are good enough, you won't have any problems with any course.
In fact your skills are the drivers it has to be like that.
The only point is to have the chance to improve them by training in mock-courses which will be similar to the ones you will get in our contests. For example, I never rode courses as Zurich’s ones (which I liked a lot!!!) and from that race I’m trying to design hybrid courses in order to improve my skills in several different situations.
So, I’m for freedom, I’m for fun; please do not misunderstand me. The only point was to know, in average when I leave for a race what kind of course I will get. Otherwise it should be said that what you will get is a slalom contest without specifying if you get a giant, tight, etc.
To sum up, please it was only an idea without any sort of complaining purpose!
Have fun and see you next season.

Stefano

[Ramón Königshausen]

This could only help you by training in a SIMILAR course not in THE RACE course.
Stefano

Please define what's similar to you and what is not.
I mean, you've got every possibilty of practicing any course at home. (If you want to/ are able)
You will easily find out which discipline your worst is - this is the one you will have to practice most. The rest is skills and a matter of your head.

For example: I have never practiced that kind of slalom we rode in Antibes, it was (must have been) my skills that made me compete so strongly.

rmn

*Of course you first have to get some basic skills and some kind of overview

For example, I never rode courses as Zurich’s ones (which I liked a lot!!!) and from that race I’m trying to design hybrid courses in order to improve my skills in several different situations. There you are
So, I’m for freedom, I’m for fun; please do not misunderstand me. The only point was to know, in average when I leave for a race what kind of course I will get. Otherwise it should be said that what you will get is a slalom contest without specifying if you get a giant, tight, etc.

Specifying: There have always (in most cases) been specifications given by the organizers either it was Special, Special Tight, Giant, Hybrid etc. And there must be a list somewhere on the internet, I've seen some time ago, which tells you what is what.
I've just not been able to find it...

rmn

[Marcus Seyffarth]

The question wasn't about if you have skills or not, the question was if race organizers could specify what course they are planning to put down in order to know what gear to bring.

I think it's a good idea though it doesn't necessary have to be that very exact that Stefano is proposing. Though it needs to be more exact than just saying 'special' like it is today. The ISSA rules are out there (http://pcpal.se/issa/html/rules_parallell.html) but they are not saying anything about the pitch of the hill, just the cone distance, if I remember correct. Also they are not enforced at all, most of the time they are just mentioned somewhere in the sentence 'the race follows the issa rules' - whatever that means.

Anyways, I think it would be a great to have this since you don't wanna pack to much when travelling - overweight is expensive. Secondly I hate to stand at the startline knowing that this 'special-course' would be much faster with my GS board that is at home (PSWC '05, Antibes '05) or that I need to drill new holes in my board during practice to shorten the wheelbase (Morro '04).

[Ramón Königshausen]

Sometimes the best was is to think about what could be required when they say Spacial, Tight whatever. This season I could nearly always guess what was to expect but I also brought the board (The other out of TWO) that would not be required for the courses. (e.g. Antibes)

"You won't get any problems if you not more than bring 2 boards." that's my perspective...

rmn

[Stefano Bellingeri]

Hi,
>Please define what's similar to you and what is not.

...trivial my friend (rmn): similar means in this specific case, with the same curve frequency.

The point is to understand how to optimize the training the last week before the race. With better defined slalom types it could be easier. The other way round could be know all the locations end their slopes. Unfortunately it is not my case yet.

>"You won't get any problems if you not more than bring 2 boards." that's my >perspective...
I agree on that. Two boards should be enough for all courses if you have different trucks as well.

>Anyways, I think it would be a great to have this since you don't wanna pack to much >when travelling - overweight is expensive.
I agree on that as well. It can be very expensive!

>Secondly I hate to stand at the startline >knowing that this 'special-course' would be >much faster with my GS board that is at home >(PSWC '05, Antibes '05) or that I need to >drill new holes in my board during practice to >shorten the wheelbase (Morro '04).

Yes, you are right; in fact, in Zurich I raced with Luca's giant board since it was so wide (at the beginning at least...) and I did not have my giant board (because I left Torino for special slalom).
Unfortunately I'm not able tell you anything about the final course....before I have to improve on wide courses....The only think I know is that I trained on very tight slalom before the race.

Anyway, I liked so much the way it was in Zurich, so do not change formula.

The only point is that I should have been able to understand that before. Now I know it: never go for a race without two decks!

[Ramón Königshausen]

Hi,
I did not have my giant board (because I left Torino for special slalom).

[...]

Anyway, I liked so much the way it was in Zurich, so do not change formula.

Okay, Zürich was quite a special race modus. Special can be +/- wide (defined as "Special", "Hybrid" or even "Special-Hybrid") or Special Tight / Tight Special (Tight course with offsets, chicanes, rhytm changes and all that kind of nasty stuff)

Next time just ask when they propose the contest (for example you could have asked me about what was expecting you.)

rmn

[Stefano Bellingeri]

Hi,
I did not have my giant board (because I left Torino for special slalom).

[...]

Anyway, I liked so much the way it was in Zurich, so do not change formula.

Okay, Zürich was quite a special race modus. Special can be +/- wide (defined as "Special", "Hybrid" or even "Special-Hybrid") or Special Tight / Tight Special (Tight course with offsets, chicanes, rhytm changes and all that kind of nasty stuff)

Next time just ask when they propose the contest (for example you could have asked me about what was expecting you.)


rmn

Thanks Ramon, very kind from you; I will. In the meantime I will train on different courses (actually I have to improve in all of them!).

BTW, may be you are right; do you know why? I did lots of alpine skiing races and there nobody spoke about frequency (therefore ther was no link between the slope and the gates). I thought about that yesterday evening when I was driving home.
Mmmmhhhh may be you are really right!
Anyway let's think about that. Ok?
Enjoy your WE!

Stfn