Headzone Permitted in IWWF Tournaments

Barefoot skiing is quite similar to gymnastics re setup, balance, stance, movement, finishing etc...where imperfect "tricks" are downgraded. In fact some imperfect aspects in gymnastics- ie not perfectly sticking a dismount landing, is still granted full marks IAW quantifiable criteria. As long as a maneuver is completed, it is scored a value greater than 0.0. Having said this I don't think there is any place for style points in barefoot skiing

The rules for the toefront downgrade are well thought out and quantified. Don't see why one would contemplate giving a big goose-egg for imperfect in other areas. Personally, I think that corollary should go for all tricks including multiples with well established criteria to reflect the degree of "non-perfection".

I would like to see a possible 100 to 200 pt deduction for every hitch in a multiple turn or allow for a maximum of one hesitation in any multiple. Or, give the trick 1/2 value - ie hitched f-b5 = 850/2= 425. It is one thing to butt out a b-f (big mistake, minor deduction - 100pts) vs a small glitch whilst re-grabbing the handle at the 540 degree point of a 720 (small mistake, major deduction - ie 0.0 credit) I think this will help the multiple controversy. Also, I don't think frame counting is the answer. Just seeing it in normal or slo-mo gives you the right impression on whether it is continuous however the penalty seems draconian. I did the internet video judging on a few runs and found that I saw turns that looked ok in normal motion but when using freeze frame they did not. The exercise would become moot if we went to partial credit.

To expand on imperfection: some skiers are allowed to "get away" with more or less not really performing "the spirit" of a trick (deliberate butt out on line front, flop around toe front where there never was any intent to do it feet to feet) and are rewarded with partial downgrade. The only time one deliberately drops to one's ass are tumble turns, S'saults and SD, as that is the trick. Congrats to those making a b-f period, albeit butted out though striving to make it feet to feet and lost 1/2 the pts . However, those trying a 720 are definitely trying it feet to feet, at no time thinking they'll be OK with a few butt-outs. To me it is just excessively harsh to consider a minor glitch as grounds for a big 0.0. A minor glitch in a multiple should not be judged more harshly than a bigger faux pas as outlined above.

A little more on deliberate butts outs: In this case i believe the trick should score 0.0. Is it an easy judgment to see whether one actually tried the trick feet to feet? I think so in most cases. I think most skiers really try the 2 ft b-f feet to feet and might accidentally butt out because they started too leaned away or let the arm out - no big deal as they happily lose 1/2 their points because they completed the imperfect trick for imperfect credit and are still skiing. On the line front, that is a different story. If the rules defined the line front as "doing anything possible to somehow eventually get to front bsp without the rope between your legs (clinchers recommended)" then I guess the deliberate butt out would suffice; however the line front is in fact a TURN and I would hope it was meant to be skied to the front. If some are using the "fall/flop and hang on", that is easy to observe; at no time did that skier intend to do a line front on his/her turn foot. Just look at the turn foot. If it just rolls on its side immediately or one falls immediately onto side and back, there was no attempt to ski the 180 turn on the ski foot. Look at the axis in a deliberate butt-out - vertical to horizontal at the onset. I think all/most tricks should start and end with the intent of performing the trick with the turn foot "skiing" throughout the action. The "flop to butt" line front in my mind is just a positional turn to get to the front = 0.0. Perhaps there needs to be a preamble written in the rules that defines the intent of each trick...ie

Butted out turns of the earlier years of barefooting should go the way of the dinosaur. sh*t... even I can do the old tbtf because that's what happens when I miss the toeback!

As far as separating the stars from the wanna-be's, the deductions and timeliness will accurately reflect ability in the scores. When Keith gets paid 1050 for a beautiful b-b7 the lesser skier is at least trying the 7 with full knowledge of a substantial deduction for less than perfect; and the understanding that the imperfection might spell the end of a run/splat hence a bona fide 0.0 for that trick. On a slightly different note I still think the line back, the trick done by only the very best skiers, should be paid a lot more due to its overall difficulty and its do or die nature. To me, it is harder than a one foot 360.

 

PS - all the above is completely self serving...I'll change my mind/ask for a re-rule re-write on multiples once I can do these perfectly. Conversely am nowhere close to the line back therefore keep it at 450 until I get it and then raise it to a few thousand or so. Finally, all innumerable missed b-f's and linefronts are torpedo-like as I dont have the butt-out gene - only face-out DNA

Thank you for allowing me to forward my personal agenda

 

1 - Butted out turns paid the same as Perfect - very few people did perfect ones.

2 - Suggestion to pay MORE for perfect tricks was brought forward and accepted.

3 - Here we are and now the whole thing has been twisted to "Giving downgrades" or "assiging a penalty"

 

WE NEVER EVER came up with an idea to pay less for a trick if it was bummed. We paid MORE for perfect tricks because there were a few people doing them like that and we assigned a different point value to that skill......BUT we never EVER sat around and discussed a system of giving LESS points for imperfect tricks. There is a HUGE difference in the way you say it and how people interpret it.

 

By saying we should "never have allowed downgrades", and "I was never in favour of downgrades" is WRONG. NOBODY at all when we first brought in increased points for the Feet to Feet toe turn said "we should only have feet to feet toe turn. Nobody. Same goes for the time we decided to give a penalty for bum turns (we left the original points there for the Feet to Feet).

 

I do acknowledge Andy that you did AFTER a few years of seeing the increased skill levels and lets say a Majority of turns being Feet to Feet that you definitely were advocating only paying the Perfect versions of tricks. BUT, not on day one. You could not have been because the majority of all skiers were still bumming turns at that time.

 

At this point the discussion has to be about DISCONTINUING the original point system for turn tricks. Deleting a rule that has been there since day 1.

 

I am not so sure we are ready for that. Too many butted out Back to Fronts still that need to be credited. Toe turn? Perhaps, but why?  What's the big deal about paying a roll around toe turn. VERY obvious and easy to judge.