 Poster: A snowHead
|
Didier Defago of Switzerland, who clocked the fastest time in the super-combined event at Val d'Isere on Sunday, has been disqualified. Officials measured his Rossignol equipment after the race and judged that his boot sole was 55.1mm above the running surface of the ski. The maximum height permitted is 55.0mm.
As a result of the disqualification, Michael Walchhofer of Austria took his second win of the weekend, having secured first place in the downhill on Saturday.
Had he not been so ill-fated, Defago would have been the first Swiss male racer to win a World Cup race since February 2004.
Reports from Reuters ... Ski Racing.
-------------
Edit: Ski Racing has a helpful explanation of the new 'super-combined' downhill and slalom event here.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Mon 12-12-05 1:14; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
How can you measure that sort of thing to that sort of accuracy, and then say it has any sort of effect on performance? Crazy, but I guess rules are rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
David Goldsmith, unbelieveable. Poor guy he looked so happy and the Swiss really needed a win. Same thing happened to Alain Baxter last season. Wonder what the coefficient of expansion is if the whole ensemble? I'd imagine that such small differences might depend upon the temp of the room/tent where it is measured. It's total nonsense, reckon I could find 0.1 mm with different socks! Maybe Bode is right... just make anything legal!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
pants !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
and i am sure the testing was done with digital calipers AT 20 DEGREE C, as per their calibrated temp..........................
I am fairly sure the swiss could afford the 200€ to send to innsbruck uni to test if 100 world cup points are on the line.
interestingly no telerance is mentioned in the rules, but specifically is on some others, including a specific "without any tolerance" on min width. It also is specific about beween the base of ski and boot sole, nothing about the plate height per se. therefore unless the boot is clipped into the ski AND half the racers weight is pressed onto the boot, a fair measurement will not be possible. I would guess that this might just make 0.1mm difference.
BTW rossignol are stupid for milling the plates that close to the limit in any case, most likely a bit of PVA leaking out when it was being screwed down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
How can you measure that sort of thing to that sort of accuracy
|
The surgeon drilling into my jaw/skull last week was working to 0.5mm so I really hope you can 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Watching from behind the scenes there seemed to be dissent over the decision as Defago left the finish area with Vion (Rossignol) having a good go at the officials during the equipment check... to no avail. Defago was devastated, he didn't hang around in Val for the post mortem.
Confirmation at the press conference later on - the test results (a number were carried out) didn't appear to have produced uniform conclusions, some saying the measurement was ok, others revealing the limit had been exceeded.
Mind you the Rossignol serviceman seemed to be at fault in the first place, apparently having not measured the skis pre-competition.
An interesting question from an AP journalist at the conference, along the lines of "in the circumstances, surely the least you can do is give him the prize money!" Unsurprisingly, a question that went unanswered! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Maybe because it was a stupid question!
Yes, it seems that Rossignol screwed up, leaving their sponsored racer in the dreadful position of losing his prize - and, of course, prize money - so I guess they should be paying Defago the compensation (especially if they seek to retain a contract with him).
Why on earth should the FIS/Valsport pay Defago the prize money? (question for the Associated Press journalist, on the basis of what you're reporting, PG). Did the Associated Press report that question in their news and the lack of response? Presumably not!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How do they make these measurements. Such small measurements should be made at a standard temperature due to expansion, I would hope they are also done with some precision laser measuring equipment rather than callipers and manual equipment that is subject to temperature changes and operator error.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
A tenth of a millimetre is certainly a minute infringement, but the reports were that Rossignol had ultimately accepted responsibility. One report said that the measurement had been repeated ten times, with inconsistent results.
In speed skiing I recall an interesting test for the maximum size of the aerodynamic helmets. Each helmet had to fit through a hoop - in any orientation. That's a neat test, since there can be little dispute - the thing either fits through the hoop or it doesn't!
In the case of alpine ski racers, what ultimately matters to the FIS is that the height of the skier's foot above the ski running surface has to be acceptable, so the measurement in question yesterday was only one of two - the other one being the thickness of boot sole+insole of boot. That must be pretty difficult to measure, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Stupid question? In your opinion. In mine, the guy was put through the agony of a number tests that hovered between approval and rejection of the dimensions of the ski, and I think he was rather shabbily treated. Finally the letter of the law was applied. Bit like the Baxter case in some respects, where - without double checking - you have previously argued along the lines that Baxter might have been awarded his bronze medal when evidence had shown that he wasn't cheating. Neither athlete went out to obtain deliberate advantage. In Defago's case with reference to the equipment specs it's a safety measure rather than one aimed at stopping racers from gaining unfair advantage.
I think it would have been a nice gesture to have given him some form of award for his efforts and achievement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poor Defago - he was clearly so thrilled to have won, and the Swiss skiers have had such a hard time in their press in the last couple of years .......... If it didn't come out consistently, then surely they should have erred on the side of the racer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Any truth in the rumour that the Rossignol ski technician involved used to be Ian Woosnam's caddy? 
Got to feel gutted for the racer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Frosty the Snowman wrote: |
| Any truth in the rumour that the Rossignol ski technician involved used to be Ian Woosnam's caddy? |
no, but i expect it was the same people at rossignol that supplied the british childrens team with every single pair over the childrens height limit a couple of seasons ago.
in fact just looking at their website http://www.gbjuniorski.com/latest_news.htm
| Quote: |
| NB - those who have bought Atomic SuperG skis should check the ski/plate/binding height. Apparently some skis (perhaps just a single batch) have not had the plate tightened down properly in the factory, and this needs to be dealt with. 50mm is the maximum height allowed. Please contact your supplier for advice. |
it seems that atomic are running it bloody close as well.
Vist (who supply most world cup plates) mill them in 1mm size differences so the factory can have what they want, and still monkeys can't get it right.
daft rule to an extent as it really should be a ratio of min ski width to blocked height if you are goign to get all mechanical forces engineering about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
It's all quite funny and ironic, because if you go back not that far in ski racing history racers were trying to lower their feet (sometimes within the shell of the boot itself) - rather than raise them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
David, do you know what the thinking was on lowering one's feet ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
I'd guess they use a go/no go gauge, simply put a bit of metal machined like a C with the gap exactly the right distance apart if it goes on the ski passes if not it fails
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| paulhothersall wrote: |
| daft rule to an extent as it really should be a ratio of min ski width to blocked height if you are goign to get all mechanical forces engineering about it. |
Exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
PG, As far as you know, does the final .1mm or so offer an advantage to a racer? I wonder if the technicians might be wise to allow for measurement error, expansion in different temperatures, and so forth, and set the boot height at - say - 1mm under the permitted limit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Increased leverage (and strain on joints) the higher the distance from the ground, and I'm no engineer but with a fixed dimension I suppose a short racer of say 1m70 will gain a proportionately greater advantage from the 55mm rule than the likes of a Walchhofer, at (for the sake of argument) 1m 85? Maybe a techie here can work that one out!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PG wrote: |
| Increased leverage (and strain on joints) the higher the distance from the ground, and I'm no engineer but with a fixed dimension I suppose a short racer of say 1m70 will gain a proportionately greater advantage from the 55mm rule than the likes of a Walchhofer, at (for the sake of argument) 1m 85? Maybe a techie here can work that one out! |
Actually given the length of the leg "lever" the effect is not that great esp w.r.t the variance in peoples height you have just mentioned.
The more relevent issue is to do with the ski characteristics that a high blocked ski has when edged. <see below for my 1 minute diagram>
Once enough rotational force (ie rolling the edge and pressure) has been applied and gone past the point where it can be thought to act at the edge, any (downward component of) further force would act to increase the edge angle. shorter bigger sidecut skis add more force than in old school drift it round "scarve" turns.
As the racer goes through the turn, kids were finding themselves pressuring more, thereby increasing the edge angle, which made the ski turn quickler, which meant pressuring more, <repeat>
As the pressure is mainly downward and into the binding the knee could gve before either the racer would ping out of the turn or the binding. result 1 generation of kids with screwed up knees.
my 2p worth anyway
basically, 90mm wide fat boy skis can relatively safely be jacked up (to say 70mm height) without any real effect on the leg. a 60mm slalom ski is a different point.
the 55mm was brought in to match the 60mm width, which no-one uses anymore. As the racers increase the edge angles even more they need more boot clearance, and with modern materials and construction they can have it. hence the around 65mm waist for example used now for most race skis.
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Mon 12-12-05 17:16; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent and very clear explanation, thanks! All the more reason perhaps for race club kids to be doing more free skiing and having fun in soft snow than endless gates on the ice!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| D G Orf wrote: |
| I'd guess they use a go/no go gauge, simply put a bit of metal machined like a C with the gap exactly the right distance apart if it goes on the ski passes if not it fails |
many coaches have such a device, which typically doubles up to clear boots of snow in the start area, but the manufacturer makes no claim on the accuracy re FIS testing IIRC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
paulhothersall, sorry, few glasses of rioja reserva on board: is this a suggestion that plates can render skis unstable? (Having rioja related incomprehension issues...)
Very interesting...
Thanks,
DM
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| David Murdoch wrote: |
paulhothersall, sorry, few glasses of rioja reserva on board: is this a suggestion that plates can render skis unstable? (Having rioja related incomprehension issues...)
Very interesting...
Thanks,
DM |
just like the kids "paint pot stilts" are stable when on top of them, but unstable when unbalanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
CBS SportsLine is reporting that the Swiss team are appealing Didier Defago's disqualification: click here.
This was not predicted, according to this more lengthy report from ESPN Sports.
Rossignol are clearly very embarrassed about the episode. Their competition director Michel Vion was at the centre of the controversy, and was observed shouting at the key FIS official at the time:
| Quote: |
Vion said he argued with Guenther Hujara, the men's World Cup race director, after the race.
"Hujara did not invent our skis, he just applies the rules. They are not new rules," Vion said. "Rossignol was not vigilant enough and we assume our responsibility. It's our product." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
CBS SportsLine is reporting that the Swiss team are appealing Didier Defago's disqualification: click here.
This was not predicted, according to this more lengthy report from ESPN Sports.
|
I direct m'learned friend to my first post on this matter at the top of this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Nice one, Paul. I must admit I overlooked your point. Sorry about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
the thing is this is the easy measurement to take as opposed to the ski radius one. I have tried to do that on a few pairs of skis an been upto 1m radius out on the previous measurement if i repeat the process.
Testing my own riser plates with a digital measurer I get slightly different readings (variation 0.1mm+) on each attempt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Have to say this hurts my sense of justice - and not just because it was the Swiss guy disqualified! If 50% of the measurements were within the limit and the measuring device was not used at the optimum temperature, then the infringement could not be proven "beyond reasonable doubt" and there should have been no disqualification IMHO. It stinks
eng
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| D G Orf wrote: |
| I'd guess they use a go/no go gauge, simply put a bit of metal machined like a C with the gap exactly the right distance apart if it goes on the ski passes if not it fails |
is exactly what you are on about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
paulhothersall, what can I say, I'm an engineer  and that's the easy way to check, if they used such a device and it went on some times but not every time I'd have passed the binding setting but I'd have had words with the team and told them to double check their settings as it was so close
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
News just in: Daniel Defago has given a press conference and conceded that he was correctly disqualified. This report from Slam! Sports.
Presumably this means that the appeal of the disqualification, reported yesterday, will not now go ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Correction: from reading a subsequent report it seems that the appeal did go ahead. The result will be given Thursday. Defago was apparently anticipating a negative result.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
The Swiss appeal somewhat unsurprisingly turned down by FIS.
| Quote: |
FIS MEDIA INFO
FIS Appeals Commission rejects appeal from Swiss Ski Association against disqualification of Didier Defago On 12th December 2005, FIS received an appeal from the Swiss Ski Association against the disqualification of Didier Defago from the FIS Alpine World Cup Men’s Super Combined race in Val d’Isere (FRA) on 11th December 2005 for infringement of article B 2.1.2 of the equipment regulations due to the height of the binding-plate combination exceeding the limit of 55mm (55.38mm at the highest point). In their protest the Swiss Ski Association requested the skis used by Didier Defago be re-measured.
According to FIS rules the protest was dealt with by the Alpine Appeals Commission and the commission for the appeal was composed of Enrico Valle (Chairman) Jarl Forsmark and Walter Trilling.
On 16th December, the Appeals Commission, having reviewed the documents, found the jury decision of 11th December 2005 to disqualify Didier Defago (SUI) to be correct.
After examining the report in regard to the measurement of the ski of the athlete from Mike Kertesz, FIS Equipment Controller and the 19 points in his additional report, the Appeals Commission decided to reject the appeal of the Swiss Ski Association submitted according to the ICR, Art. 647.1.3.1 and 647.1.3.2.
Based on the above decision, the results of the FIS Alpine World Cup Men’s Super Combined race in Val d’Isere (FRA) on 11th December 2005 will stand and calculated accordingly in the FIS Alpine World Cup Men’s standings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure all the teams are well aware of resolution and repeatability that can be achieved with the FIS equipment and its therefore up to them to allow for this to stay on the safe side.
If a team wants to take a gamble by running to within a tenth of a mill of the limit then that's exactly what it is, a gamble and sadly bets don't always pay off. Its exactly the same in any sport, the advantage gain or lack of it by even an accidental minor infringement is besdide the point.
I feel very sorry for the guy, but he should be disqualified. Rules are rules, good or bad.
Maybe they (FIS) should, as happens in some other sports, check all equipment before competition starts and operate a parc ferme.
Going off thread a bit but intrigued
paulhothersall, By measuring the radius of the ski do you mean the natural radius the ski would want to turn or the arc of the sideut with the ski flat? If its the second there's a problem because as far as I'm aware the sidecut isn't an arc of a circle its parabolic or some compund curve. If its the first option you'd have to bend the ski until until the edge makes full contact with a flat surface and then try to measure ithe radius of the edge, or measure the curve form very accurately and do some clever trigonometry. Back in the real world if you can do that and get within 1/2 metre repeatedly i'd be surprised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| David Murdoch wrote: |
paulhothersall, sorry, few glasses of rioja reserva on board: is this a suggestion that plates can render skis unstable? (Having rioja related incomprehension issues...)
|
The move towards limiting height began after Ulrike Maier's fatal crash in 1994. She caught an edge and was quickly flipped on to her back. That was at the time of unlimited and very large "stacking" heights, when we had all began to notice that catching an edge had become more difficult to correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Martin Bell wrote: |
| David Murdoch wrote: |
paulhothersall, sorry, few glasses of rioja reserva on board: is this a suggestion that plates can render skis unstable? (Having rioja related incomprehension issues...)
|
The move towards limiting height began after Ulrike Maier's fatal crash in 1994. She caught an edge and was quickly flipped on to her back. That was at the time of unlimited and very large "stacking" heights, when we had all began to notice that catching an edge had become more difficult to correct. |
Not just in the speed events either, this shot taken last season of a Les Arcs team member in one of his first FIS slaloms...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
