A good reason for not setting FIS-style GS sets is that many courses where they have Nastar courses are not large enough to accommodate the gates. Another good reason is that it is recreational - for all comers - and they make a set that anyone can try and have fun with.
A good reason for not having FIS-style GS sets at Nationals is that they set up what, six or eight race courses, and they need room enough to accommodate the courses - and still have regular customers ski. People who show up are at least presumed to be used to skiing a certain style of course and they get a decent facsimile or that at Nationals.
I understand that you may not agree - but I score this discussion at about 10 fer and 1 agin, which might mean something to someone.
Would I complain if they set up a so-called real GS course? No. I would ski it - and see how I did. I don't complain when the course is set on the tight end of the spectrum either. But I can understand why they might set the courses the way they do.
And in any case, skiing is not four separate disciplines - sl, gs, sg, and dh - it is all skiing. Keep your weight forward, initiate the turns, carve if you can, turn high, keep a good line, go as fast as you can without being thrown from the course. Nastar is just another race within the spectrum of race sets.
Last edited by hga1976; 04-17-2012 at 07:27 PM. Reason: Wanted to be clear to Villa that I include myself in the group of recreational racers not at the World Cup level.
Villaski - cannot speak for the other courses but we measured the snowboard course on day 2 at the tightest gate(vertically)... like I said it was spot on the minimum... Day one was tighter - but only a bit...
I can't speak for Lower Hughes except for Sunday. This was the third straight year I've done the ROC on that course and I can't recall if it was any tighter this year than prior years. When you're on a 178 cm snowboard, it seems steep and tight. You can get a pretty good idea yourself by watching this video my wife shot of the pacesetters.
Looks like SL to me.
If you're gonna have the first based on all the reasons people like yourself think they should, then complementing the incredible challenge of Lower Hughes with an equally-challenging and genuine GS set is a must.
I mean, if 1092 of the participants are truly at the core just recreational racers, then perhaps that calls into question the rationale for having hills like Lower Hughes for the Gold/Platinum races. But if that is OK, there is no reason FIS GS sets aren't OK.
Last edited by villaski; 04-20-2012 at 02:58 AM.
I don't think they set slalom that way anywhere, but then again, I have never taken the time to ski / race at B Milly or B WHINEEEEEEEEEEE.
The video says what ever you want it to say to support your argument.
To me it's a fairly typical Nastar course, if on the shorter side of the 18-22. But it also looked very rhythmic and it was set accommodate racers ages 4 to 90.
I will support my thesis with math.
23 turn gates in 30.59 seconds (for Doug Lewis) is a gate every 1.33 seconds
At my home hill 12 turn gates in 17 seconds is a gate every 1.41 seconds or 6% slower per gate (8/100ths per gate) than Lewis' time.
Maybe it the speed that's makes the course feel the interval is shorter. If your skiing clean, the gates are coming at you +/- 6% faster then your used to, if your on a ski you are still getting used to, your really going to be overwhelmed..........
Last edited by cinciracer; 04-20-2012 at 04:30 AM.
In that video there is not a single gate that is vertically-displaced 56 feet away from another one. It is well UNDER 18-22 meters.To me it's a fairly typical Nastar course, if on the shorter side of the 18-22
If they are compressing their courses to accommodate a hill or conditions and are violating their own stated rules, it might be time for them to go back to the drawing board.
Last edited by villaski; 04-20-2012 at 03:49 AM.