• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Upcoming demise of Alpine Combined, and rise of Parallel SL on the WC?

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
So, I've heard that this was likely to happen, and was in the works. over the past couple of weeks, I've heard more, and Steve Porino mentioned it in his most recent Podcast. If you search deep into the FIS site, you can see the preliminary calendar for the upcoming seasons. I believe that the 2019-2020 calendar is up, and......there are no more alpine combined events on the schedule. I have NOT bothered to search for it. I actually think they may "kill" it before next year's FIS Worlds.

In addition to that, there are apparently five Parallel SL's on the calendar, and I believe that they are in addition to the City Events.

So, the thinking, evidently is that alpine combined is old, ancient, boring and in reality there are NO current WC skiers who are both at the top of the game in speed and SL. Think men, not MS. Because, right or wrong, these decisions are made thinking of the men. In Porino's broadcast he commented that he couldn't bring himself to watch a combined. There is basically one skier who should crush every one. Alexis Pinturault. The fact that guys like Svindal and Jansrud can contend or podium is sort of a joke in the opinion of many.

Meanwhile, Parallel SL, which is in no way SL, and the City events are very popular. And, there is a whole other group of skiers who are developing special skills. There is ski development going on. It could be that parallel might replace combined as a separate discipline, with a separate WC title.

More interesting conversation is that DH, other than the true Euro classics {and maybe BoP} is becoming too boring, too predictable, too "safe and gentle". And, the calendar is too long. 45 races or so, in total. So, what is being considered there/ Perhaps more two run "sprint" DH's. Perhaps some rethinking of where to run SG, versus DH, and a reduction in the number of speed events.

At any rate.........sounds like a lot of change on the horizon, or being contemplated.

At one point, I think there was conversation about doing away with SG, which was shot down quickly. Sounds like SG is immensely popular with the athletes, coaches, fans. It's my favorite.

I won't miss the combined, one bit. Not in this day and age.

Any thoughts, comments, ideas??
 

S.H.

USSA Coach
Skier
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
1,822
Location
New England --> CO
Random list of thoughts:

Hard to see getting rid of SG. Without the need for training runs, it's easier on athletes and, I'd have to think, venues (though I don't know for sure). It allows someone like Shiffrin or Hirscher to jump into the occasional speed event without necessarily having to be there for an entire week, potentially foregoing training tech events. Plus, getting rid of SG would just skew the overall even further towards tech skiers.

Getting rid of the combined is sad, IMO. It's a classic discipline and to me one of the most interesting to watch. But ... on the men's side, there just isn't anyone actually good besides Pinterault. Hirscher could be, especially in a SG/AC, but I can't see him spending the time to train DH just to compete in an AC. That said, it's *fun* to me to watch the downhillers ski SL. Sure, they may be 4 seconds out in the SL, but ... that's the equivalent of ~40-50 point SL skiing for people who probably spend a max of 4 days on SL skis each year, which is pretty impressive IMO. AC is an event with history at classic venues like Wengen and Kitz, and it's a shame to see it go.

On the women's side, I think there are enough athletes to make it interesting (Shiffrin, Gisin, Feierabend, Vonn used to be, Stuhec last year).

To me, parallel events (PSL/PGS/City Events) are just hard to justify giving world cup points for. They're interesting, they're good outreach, but ... they don't seem like World Cup. Also, the fields are too limited, IMO, to make it fair. 70+ athletes start a SL, but as far as I know only 32 get to enter the parallel events. The most well-attended events are still classic disciplines. To increase interest, I think organizers, FIS, and federations need to do a better job marketing (and TV can do a better job with camera positions and production), rather than tweaking what ski racing actually is.

DH can be a bit of a drag to watch, and I get that. Even some of the classics (Wengen, Val Gardena, Bormio) have long gliding sections that are illuminating if you're really into ski racing, but ... really, it's kind of boring. Air, rattly terrain, and super dynamic turns are visually interesting, but ... taxing on athletes and are safety issues. But, it's the heart of the sport and I find it hard to believe they could get rid of Kitzbuehel and Wengen and still have a sport.

Calendar is too long ... for whom? Is the sport financially viable with fewer opportunities for prize money (and more relevantly, exposure for sponsors)?
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
BTW.....those are NOT my ideas. This is FIS, and what they are pondering and discussing. Just wanted to clarify that one.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
As I understand it, this is all being examined and possibly {or likely} changed, based on FIS's research and insight about how to make the sport more interesting and appealing to a wider audience. They always creates a lot of conflict with those of us who already follow the sport. I'm an ancient purist in most ways. I hated SG when it was first introduced, came to love it.

I forgot to mention that Porino had heard that the US will soon be hosting "an early season City event".....I think he said November. Where?

Lots to ponder. The SL specialists and the amount of time needed to train is, I'm afraid going to kill and form of combined. Agree that there seem to be more female contenders. Should we pick the Pyeonchang podiums? HaHa.

Some of what makes the city and parallel events evidentky a hit bother me. First of all, how do you get in. Right now City events are invitational. You go right off the WCSL. But, which list? The parallel right now has a qualifier. The whole thing is too confusing, as Porino said, his eyes glaze over trying to follow it.

Some of the big appeal is that in these events, the spectators get to see "the faces" of the big names, over and over all night long. Guess that's big and far outpaces the the short drag race like runs. Perhaps the close margins are a plus?

Just sounds like there will be some consistency in whatever this new event will be called. Sounds like it will be full panel stuff, with a jump or two, and barn door starts. It's confusing, to me anyways!

I think that when FIS does their research, to this day the Klammer 1976 DH run at Innsbruck blows everything else away. Porino hinted at that. When we want to watch DH, we want "real" DH. Like the classics?

A lot of DH is evidently boring to most.

Calendar too long? Move Soelden and Levi. One option, maybe.

I guess that there is also talk of having smaller field, more like a limit of 45-50.

Guess we'll see. Just thought I'd throw it out there, as some change is brewing.
 

S.H.

USSA Coach
Skier
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
1,822
Location
New England --> CO
As I understand it, this is all being examined and possibly {or likely} changed, based on FIS's research and insight about how to make the sport more interesting and appealing to a wider audience. They always creates a lot of conflict with those of us who already follow the sport. I'm an ancient purist in most ways. I hated SG when it was first introduced, came to love it.

I forgot to mention that Porino had heard that the US will soon be hosting "an early season City event".....I think he said November. Where?

Lots to ponder. The SL specialists and the amount of time needed to train is, I'm afraid going to kill and form of combined. Agree that there seem to be more female contenders. Should we pick the Pyeonchang podiums? HaHa.

Some of what makes the city and parallel events evidentky a hit bother me. First of all, how do you get in. Right now City events are invitational. You go right off the WCSL. But, which list? The parallel right now has a qualifier. The whole thing is too confusing, as Porino said, his eyes glaze over trying to follow it.

Some of the big appeal is that in these events, the spectators get to see "the faces" of the big names, over and over all night long. Guess that's big and far outpaces the the short drag race like runs. Perhaps the close margins are a plus?

Just sounds like there will be some consistency in whatever this new event will be called. Sounds like it will be full panel stuff, with a jump or two, and barn door starts. It's confusing, to me anyways!

I think that when FIS does their research, to this day the Klammer 1976 DH run at Innsbruck blows everything else away. Porino hinted at that. When we want to watch DH, we want "real" DH. Like the classics?

A lot of DH is evidently boring to most.

Calendar too long? Move Soelden and Levi. One option, maybe.

I guess that there is also talk of having smaller field, more like a limit of 45-50.

Guess we'll see. Just thought I'd throw it out there, as some change is brewing.

I'm with you on the start lists for PSL/PGS and City Events. Seem like a specialized thing, and if you want to create a new discipline, I guess I'm okay with it. It's a joke to me to lump them in with the "normal" SL and GS standings.

Unclear to me what limiting the fields of normal races will do. In tech, most coverage cuts out after the top 30, and who doesn't like to see somebody with a high bib number punch one in there and root for them to ski clean 2nd run for some points? But if that's something they want to do, I guess it won't make a huge difference. It will, however, make the number of nations participating in the world cup smaller, I'm pretty sure, which is probably not the best way to grow the sport.

In speed, similarly, most coverage cuts out after the 30, or even after the 20, with "provisional results".
 
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
I'm with you on the start lists for PSL/PGS and City Events. Seem like a specialized thing, and if you want to create a new discipline, I guess I'm okay with it. It's a joke to me to lump them in with the "normal" SL and GS standings.

Unclear to me what limiting the fields of normal races will do. In tech, most coverage cuts out after the top 30, and who doesn't like to see somebody with a high bib number punch one in there and root for them to ski clean 2nd run for some points? But if that's something they want to do, I guess it won't make a huge difference. It will, however, make the number of nations participating in the world cup smaller, I'm pretty sure, which is probably not the best way to grow the sport.

In speed, similarly, most coverage cuts out after the 30, or even after the 20, with "provisional results".

Again, this is not my thinking. This is what I understand the FIS discussion to be. I agree with your points, as well. So, folks, I'm just trying to offer up some of what's being kicked around. So don't shoot the messenger, OK?

Some of this really confuses me.

On limiting fields, I think it has to do with holding the attention of those who come to watch in person. So the 50K+at Schladming, etc. I guess that some what they have observed tells them that. The crowd wants to watch fewer skiers.

The City, parallel, etc. is apparently that they want to see the big names over and over again. You want to see MS? Great. How about seeing her over and over again over and hour and a half, maximum? I dunno. Like I said, I'm old school. I've been in this game since I was a toddler....six decades ago.

The high bib numbers qualifying for the second run are pretty rare at the WC level....and again, say they limit the field to 50. I guess that bibs 45+ would be the new "from the back" group. Not sure if I like that.

Somebody made the comment to me that it would be like having bib 125 back when NorAm fields were a whole lot better. No chance of bib 115 getting a second run. Except, they have before......And it's pretty cool when everybody is leaving to get lunch when that skier skis into the flip.

We have three family friends who are starting every WC tech race this season in the 50's or 60's, and I'm pulling for them in every single start to get that second run.....and they keep closing the gap. So, personally, I don't like a smaller field. For the USA, it would mean, today, a LOT fewer starters, I think. That can't be good, I agree.

If you limited the field would you have skiers like Dave Ryding where he is?

Maybe there is an expense factor since the Euro TV feed shows every skier. Doesn't it? Money obviously comes into play on every one of these topics.

Again, not my thoughts, but the discussion of the governing body on how to make things bigger, better, bring more interest, more sponsors, more money.

I was surprised to learn that so much of this is being discussed, and that so much may be so far down the road.
 
Last edited:

Rudi Riet

AKA songfta AKA randomduck - a USSS coach, as well
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,462
Location
Washington, DC
The FIS is looking at the monetary end of the alpine racing spectrum, and these city events are perfect "made for TV" and "made for live viewing" spectacles. They rake in sponsor money, bring in on-site spectators who buy souvenirs, concessions, VIP seating, etc. It's fast-paced and exciting, it's easy for the casual spectator to tell who is winning. The FIS would be foolish to drop these events from a PR standpoint, even if the athletes aren't the biggest fans (and let's be honest: limiting it to a sub-set of the WCSL is playing favorites, any way you look at it).

Combined events - whether the old-school, two-day model or the newer "one-and-one" alpine combined - are really for the alpine racing wonks: those of us who are students and hardcore fans of the sport, its nuances, its quirks.

That said: if the alpine combined is fully eliminated, so is the true title of Hahnenkammsieger, who traditionally is the athlete with the best combined result between the DH and the SL. It was an event made for folks like Pintarault or Ivica Kostelic (the latter won said trophy a few times). And even though the race committee will still award the trophy, it would be a loss for the alpine skiing community.
 

Tom K.

Skier Ordinaire
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Posts
8,402
The only constant is change.

Gotta get a$$es in the seats (or watching their devices).

I wouldn't miss combined a bit, either. Always seemed contrived to me (admittedly NOT a detailed historian of the racing aspect of skiing, but enjoy it nevertheless).
 

scott43

So much better than a pro
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
13,552
Location
Great White North
Yeah I was going to say what Rudi did. Traditionalists..I get it..but sometimes you need to do things for the good of the sport. Other sports I follow more closely and sometimes the changes make me want to strangle the life out of someone.. But..how many people come out to Kitzbuhel? The finish is accessible right in the town..right at the train station actually. Some people are willing to sit through 3 hours of racing to see who won after parking and walking and not really knowing what's going on..racing wonks. But putting people head to head creates a whole different dynamic. It's like a bye run in drag racing versus having a competitor running against you.
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
Muleski

Muleski

So much better than a pro
Inactive
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
5,243
Location
North of Boston
Some of you may recall that back in the day, at every NCAA carnival, there was a Skimeister award.

Best combined results in SL, DH {which was more like a gentle SG, or open GS of today}, cross country, and jumping.

It was a big deal. Being the Skimeister at the NCAA champs was a very big deal, until they did away with it.
My older brother was a skimeister guy, and winner.

Of course today, at a carnival, the nordic and alpine are combined for scoring, but at most venues one side never even sees the other. Some notable exceptions: Middlebury is close. Dartmouth is doable.

That's a long gone tradition! At least 40+ years ago.
 

4ster

Just because you can doesn’t mean you should!
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,219
Location
Sierra & Wasatch
I like the idea of a separate parallel discipline with its own skis and specs. I could do without the lake Louise downhill but the big ones and classics should go on forever.

I think super-G was originally meant to be a super giant slalom. Early on it seemed to just morph into a shorter downhill with more gates. I would like to see it return to its roots.
 

Ross Biff

The older I get, the faster I was....
Skier
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Posts
223
So, I've heard that this was likely to happen, and was in the works. over the past couple of weeks, I've heard more, and Steve Porino mentioned it in his most recent Podcast. If you search deep into the FIS site, you can see the preliminary calendar for the upcoming seasons. I believe that the 2019-2020 calendar is up, and......there are no more alpine combined events on the schedule. I have NOT bothered to search for it. I actually think they may "kill" it before next year's FIS Worlds.

In addition to that, there are apparently five Parallel SL's on the calendar, and I believe that they are in addition to the City Events.

So, the thinking, evidently is that alpine combined is old, ancient, boring and in reality there are NO current WC skiers who are both at the top of the game in speed and SL. Think men, not MS. Because, right or wrong, these decisions are made thinking of the men. In Porino's broadcast he commented that he couldn't bring himself to watch a combined. There is basically one skier who should crush every one. Alexis Pinturault. The fact that guys like Svindal and Jansrud can contend or podium is sort of a joke in the opinion of many.

Meanwhile, Parallel SL, which is in no way SL, and the City events are very popular. And, there is a whole other group of skiers who are developing special skills. There is ski development going on. It could be that parallel might replace combined as a separate discipline, with a separate WC title.

More interesting conversation is that DH, other than the true Euro classics {and maybe BoP} is becoming too boring, too predictable, too "safe and gentle". And, the calendar is too long. 45 races or so, in total. So, what is being considered there/ Perhaps more two run "sprint" DH's. Perhaps some rethinking of where to run SG, versus DH, and a reduction in the number of speed events.

At any rate.........sounds like a lot of change on the horizon, or being contemplated.

At one point, I think there was conversation about doing away with SG, which was shot down quickly. Sounds like SG is immensely popular with the athletes, coaches, fans. It's my favorite.

I won't miss the combined, one bit. Not in this day and age.

Any thoughts, comments, ideas??
Interesting to hear there is ski development going on. Any ideas on specs? Would we be looking at around 180 with maybe a 17 or 18 MTR radius for the guys for example? I do find something a little out of rhythm when watching PSL on 13 MTR skis with the occasional cross block on a full panel gate. Sometimes looks a little awkward.
 

dbostedo

Asst. Gathermeister
Moderator
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Posts
18,096
Location
75% Virginia, 25% Colorado
As someone who's only started watching/following the WC the last couple of seasons, I can understand getting rid of the combined. It never stands alone as its own event, and always seems to be something a few of the top names do as a side task, just to pick up another award.

I don't understand why getting rid of SG would even be discussed. From my point of view, they have a nice mix/progression from SL to DH, from very "turny" to less "turny".

Parallel SL is kind of a cool addition, just because it's a completely different kind of event; I do like watching it, though maybe in part that's because it's new. And I think the courses could use a little more variety. Though it does seem more in-family with things like ski-cross to me. Perhaps there should be a set of those kinds of events that are part of the WC as well? I.e. go even further to add variety and different types of events to the WC, and maintain the usual 4 disciplines.
 

James O

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Mar 10, 2016
Posts
50
Location
S.F., CA, USA
To me, parallel events (PSL/PGS/City Events) are just hard to justify giving world cup points for. They're interesting, they're good outreach, but ... they don't seem like World Cup.

Can you imagine losing the overall in a parallel SL?
 

Sponsor

Top