I came here as opposed to Epic because I want to know what midatlantic people think are good skis for this area. I want recomendations for what to demo and where. Thanks in advance. I have my post broken down to the quick facts and the longer ramble. For those who want to be able to quickly offer an opinion and those who constantly ask for more details.
Briefly:
Who I am:
5'11" 30" legs, 175 lbs, advanced skier, short turns on Blue knobs rt. 66. Capable on ice and steeps. Need to continue improvement on expert terrain, especially bumps.
What I have:
174 K2 3500s (all mtn: now rock ski)
181 K2 Mod 7.8 Mid-fat, off piste, crud, pow, long GS turns on groomed, soft ski
What I need:
one ski that is good in: fall line short turns, bumps, and Ice. I expect this to be a shorter SL or carver type.
The full details:
I am curious about what skis people are on in the mid-atlantic. I am 5'10" and my legs are ~30" long, so they are short relative to the rest of my body. I have been skining since age 11, now 25, but never owned my own and was an intermed skier before a 4 year hiatus form the sport during college. I returned to skiing 2 years ago and I am now advanced skier capable of making carved short turns on various expert terrain.
My goal:
Is to complete my 2 ski quiver, which from my research is the most versatile set for skiing in the east. In the typical 2 ski quiverthere is the mid fat all mountain and then there is the short SL type ski.
What I have: I started 2 years ago with K2 3500s in 174 (at that time I weighted 245 LBs.) These were basicly my learning skis and the first shaped skis that I owned. They got me through my change over to modern technique and last season out of the intermed rut. I still intend to use them for rocky days.
Last season I bought a pair of K2 Mod 7.8 (same as K2 Axis (no x)) in 181 (I weighted 190 Lbs last season). And these are still in fairly good condition and will remain with me as my mid-fat / off-piste ski. Over the summer my weightloss has continued and I now weigh 175 Lbs. I think that since my Mod 7.8s are so soft that the weight loss wont be a major issue in that size, and hopefully they wont be too much ski for me. My current skis cover rock skis, and a midfat excellent in crud, trees, and off piste and at least capable in GS turns on soft groomed, terrain.
What I need: I am looking for a shorter SL type ski to complete the 2 ski package. Since I was so heavy, my legs are very strong and capable of really working a ski. I want a quick fall-line ski to take to trails like Blue knob's extrovert or roundtops upper gunbarrel. It should be torsionally still enough to be good on Ice. However the ski must also be soft enough to work the bumps effectively (White Tail's bold decision). I think a Rec SL ski is probabbly my best bet. I have no K2 brand loyalty and I think i would prefer a stiffer ski if I do go short. Thanks in advance,
Tromano
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
Or VOLKL P60 SC RACE STOCK around 165 cm but
be ready to ski it very technically.
May not be good for moguls
ATOMIC SX9 is a good hard-snow short turner and could be used in moguls.
The problem with the Mid-Atlantic for ski shopping is the demo issue. There just are not that many demo days at the local hills. Snowshoe and 7 Springs have on-slope ski stores that allow you to demo and that's one good option. Another option is to rent demo equipment at Ski Center or Ski Chalet. If you buy skis, they will credit some of the rental expenses to the purchase of new skis. The only problem with this approach is that you can only try out one pair at a time. A final option is to buy skis on a trip further afield. Big resorts in the West and VT have a lot of stores and demo centers from which to choose.
The most knowledgeable person on the DCSki Forum with respect to gear is Tom/PM (Otto is a close second). He's also active on the Epic Gear Forum. I suggested that Tom demo some equipment locally and write an article for DCSki about GEAR. I think he will do this if he can convince one of the local ski stores to lend him the equipment. In any event, once Tom/PM's articles begin to appear on this site, we'll all be much smarter shoppers... 
[This message has been edited by johnfmh (edited 11-28-2003).]
You left out an important piece of information - what boots are you using?
>> Capable on ice and steeps.
>> advanced skier capable of making carved short turns on various expert terrain
What trails or sections of trails do you consider steep / challenging to you? Anything else besides the Mid-Atlantic? (If you get too much ski, you may be able to handle it locally, but not on some tougher trails out West or in New England.)
>> Need to continue improvement on expert terrain, especially bumps.
How well do you currently ski the bumps? How aggressive is your bump ski technique & line? You mentioned Whitetail's Bold Decision. Can you reliably string together 10 turns in a 15 foot corridor on the headwall when the trail is bumped up? Or only when there are just a few bumps? Can you do this on the gulley section to skier's far left, or the lip section just to the right of the gulley (some funky lines in there) or only in the middle (most travelled) section?
If you are a relatively accomplished local bump skier with decent technique, upgrading to a (significantly) detuned SL ski would probably make your bump skiing much more exciting and agressive. If you are not relatively accomplished, the above ski would probably make your bump skiing worse (by amplifying bad technique). Depending upon your skiing level, the breakthrough to the next level may be more a factor of taking bump/steep-specific lessons (locally or further afield) than of buying new equipment.
Since, from your post, it sounds like your skiing ability is still evolving, I'd really suggest demoing if you can. This will eliminate getting too much or too little ski. Finding higher-performance demos in the DC area is a bit of a hassle - search this site for other threads on this topic.
>> Or VOLKL P60 SC RACE STOCK around 165 cm but
be ready to ski it very technically.
May not be good for moguls
From your post I'd say this is a very bad piece of advice. Way too much ski.
The VOKL SUPERSPORT 5 STAR is definitely a ski to consider. It may still be too much ski - demo to find out. Definitely skip the 6 Star for moguls. Consider the 4 Star also. (you may not like it as much on the groomed but may prefer it in the bumps / tight steeps.)
Good luck.
I am using Technica's Rival x5. They are relatively soft "intermed" boot. They are comfy and easy to use on groomed terrain. I actually havent had complaints wiht the boots yet. I was contemplating buying new boots first since any ski I get may not be fully utilized by the softer boot.
From Blueknob, I am comfortable skiing lower high hopes, I actualyl enjoy tha trail alot. Rt. 66, is a little too narrow and bumpy for me and I have never skied it with decent cover. I am comfortable sking on lower extrovert. Upper and lower together is still a litle too gnarly for me, I am affraid fo all the vertical and the crossing trials. I wimp out every time I am at the top (of upper extrovert).
I am pretty capable on all trails on the liberty head wall, white lighting is very comfy. The upper eastwind, etc are also a pleasure for me. I am a much better skier on steep ice than steep bumps. I can do the blue bump run pretty well, especially if conditions are softer.
Whitetail:
On a more challenging mogul slope like bold decision its a mixed bag. I am a slave to the conditions, if it is softer or the bumps are small, I can hold my own. I prefer a direct line and ski that when I can. I prefer the middle line simply because the line is the most clear to me visially and even if I do get knocked arround it is easier to know where to go and to keep fighting through. If its icy and the bumps are larger, and I get knocked arround too much I tend to fall apart, especially if there is no clear line. The right side is of bold decision is ok too, but the skiers left, (ditch) is very difficult and best avoided (by me). Even thought it is not "intimidating" (scary) I think that it is the trail that most challenges me and its deffiantely the trail I fall on the most.
I seldom ski outside (1-2 3 day trips per year) the mid-atl, and if / when I do I may end up renting if I am unconfortable with my equipment.
I don't think of my self as acomplished, yet, but perhaps with in 1-2 season I will be able to get the local bumps firmly in check. Last season I kept wanitng to get my instuctors into the bumps but they kept telling me to work on short turns and carving technique, and I have. I am still not sure if I am to the point where I can go to bold decision and be really succesful, but they day isn't far.
I agree that I need to find a good instructor for bumps. And probabbly for steeps to. I am at least 2 good exper level lessons and 1-30 day season from being able to confidently navigate all the mid-atl expert terrain that I mentioned.
The last lesson I took, which was at whitetail, in february last season, we stayed almost completely on the exhibition and bold decision. It was a "group lesson" of 2 people me and the instructor. From that I was able to learn alot as far as how to get comfortable in the bumps. I know I still need work on my ability to absorb and etc... but I assume that will come with time, and experience. My point is that I am not sure "where I am" as far as bump skiing. The 4 star is a softer ski than the 5 star longitudianlly right? Is it softer torsionally as well?
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
Definitely check out both the Vokl 4 Star and 5 Star. I suspect you may like the 4 Star better in tougher terrain. To differentiate between the two, I'd rely less on manufacturing specs and more on your demo. From what I've read, both are very good skis so don't get into an ego thing about more stars being better...
The Vokls are definitely very pricey compared to other skis in their category.
As part of it's normal rental stock, Ski Center in DC rents the Atomic R:9 (a plus so you don't have to rely on one day demos fitting into your schedule). Check them out. I'll be renting them for a day myself sometime this season just to check out Atomic skis. If you rent them before me, please don't hit any rocks!
For K-2's, the Axis X, Axis XT, Escape 5500.
Since you are progressing with your skiing level, if you have the choice between buying a ski which feels more confortable now versus one that will feel better two years down the road, consider buying the lower-end ski used on eBay.
On Ski Center's home page (www.skicenter.com):
Ski Center Demo Day at Ski Liberty
Wednesday, January 7th - 9am to 3pm
[This message has been edited by JohnL (edited 11-28-2003).]
As I recall from previous discussions on DCSki, your main complaint about your current skis is that they are too long and geared more toward high-speed GS turns. I'd say any shorter ski with a smaller turning radius and lighter swing weight will be a big improvement.
The Atomic Crossmax SX:11, SX:9 and Atomic R:9 would certainly meet those criteria.
I already have an old pair of the K2 Mod 7.8 (same as Axis (regular))in 181cm from eaby. I like them alot and they are incredibly easy to ski, so soft, so forgiving, great for the wet snow we see arround here. And deffinately not too much ski for me, even on more challenging slopes. I bought them early last season when I was tiping the scale at 195. Now my weightloss has continued to 175. The Mod 7.8 is so soft and damp that hopefully, it wont be too much for me in that size. I am not worried about losing much more weight, not much left to lose, so I think I can safely invest in something more pricey.
Questions: Is the axis x, xr, too similar to the older MoD 7.8 in 181 is 110/70/101.
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
I *believe* that the axis x & axis xr are a step up from the older MoD 7.8. A K-2 gearhead or ski shop employee could confirm or refute this. K-2's have a reputation for being somewhat damp skis without huge amounts of energy (compared to other brands). Find out and compare for yourself.
When you said your current ski was mid-fat, for some reason I was thinking of a ski in the 74-80 mm waist range. Just about all the skis discussed in this thread are approximately the same dimensions of the MoD 7.8 (110/70/101). They will be stiffer and be a slightly shorter length than your 181's. I'm not certain if the skis we've been talking about will really be a complement to the skis in your quiver; they may be more of an upgrade.
Hmmmmmm.
[This message has been edited by JohnL (edited 11-28-2003).]
I think that 181 is probably too big for me on steeps, in fall line, and in bumps. I think I am best off with somethign stiffer and smaller. Keep in mind my legs are short only 30" long. Depending on stiffness, I was thinking of something smaller than what I am on now maybe in the 165 - 175 range. Here is a current list of what I want to demo In no particular order:
1. K2 Axis XT 167, 174
2. K2 Axis XR 167, 174
3: K2 Axis X 167, 174
4. Volkl SS 4* 158, 168, 178
5. Volkl SS 5* 161, 168, 175
6. Rossi TP Viper SX: 167, 174
Since I already have a longer ski, I would like to buy a shorter ski for versatility and contol on the more narrow trails. I think I will end up with something arround 168, and much stiffer than what I am on now.
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
Don't think your leg length is too important.
Depending upon your technique and how much of a performance upgrade the new skis turn out to be from your current pair, you may find the 168's ski as long as the 181's. Demo several lengths if you can.
Have fun!
To be honest I wrote with Tom/PM in mind. I think epic is almost too open a forum, and that manytimes asking for specific help will not get you information that is pertinant to the situation we have here. I am sure that if i posted (in epic) someone will recomend that I buy pocket rocktes to complment mk "k2 triumvirute". And the rest would say just go demo. And i agree that is the best way. But unfortuantely because of ther lack of options I need to be more focused rather than tryign to demo everything. If ic an pare it down to maybe 4-5 skis from a total of 2 mfgs. then I will be able to find what i am looking for more easily.
I think the demo review from Tom/PM, focused on local skiing is a great idea. I would love it if there were better demo options in the mid atlantic.
Crush, I intend to check out the volkl demos on 12/28 at bryce. I will be sure to demo both those skis.
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
Wisp has Ski Challet on 1/15/2004. It looks like maybe for the proactive consumer demoing may be possible. If you are wiling to meet the schedule they set for you.
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-28-2003).]
Hopefully Tom/PM will comment. In the meantime, I'll throw out a question to JohnL--someone whose opinions I also respect.
What about this ski:
Atomic Crossmax SX-11
http://www.skimag.com/skimag/buyers_guide/app/product/0,15058,ski200,00.html
From SKI:
"Comments: OK, so you are Reggie Crist. Or you want a ski built just like Atomic's full-bore GS:11 race ski (titanium reinforcement, racing base and a dimpled, aerodynamic topskin), but with a wider footprint and deeper sidecut. The SX:11--all power and stability and guts, says Lewis--is ideal for heavier hard-chargers, says Sabanosh. It's great for must-carve skiers who love the feeling of standing against a solid, surging platform at high speeds. It lets you move it out away from your body, says Thibeault. And it stays strong even when forces build up."
It's not quite an SL ski but it looks good for someone like myself: someone who skis steeper groomers such as White Lightning or Thunderstruck at Timberline for most of the day and only ventures onto the tougher stuff (Drop/Off The Wall) for 3 or 4 runs a day. How do you think this ski would perform on Bold Decision or Off The Wall? Is it too much of a cruiser....?? It might fit Tromano's needs as well--an alternative to the P-60.
[This message has been edited by johnfmh (edited 11-28-2003).]
Johnfmh thoughtfully sent me an email alerting me about this thread (Thanks, John). We are concluding the Thanksgiving family gathering today, so I should be able to respond more fully either later tonight or early in the week.
In the meantime, I have a question/comment for Tromano: The discussion thusfar in this thread has been predominently what I would call "terrain-based". From the comments of instructors or from your own self-evaluation, what basic skiing skills (not terrain capabilities) do you feel you would like to improve?
One example of what's behind my question is that on your present equipment and former weight, it might have been difficult for you to get familiar with short radius, lay-down-the-trenches carving. If you don't have this skill your bag of tricks, and your turns are a bit skidded even when you intend for them to be pure carves, deep soft snow and crud will likely be difficult for you and will present a limit to your personal "all mountain" capabilities.
In this case, as I think has already been mentioned, it might make sense to pick up a modern, short sidecut radius hyper-carver, and use it to incorporate the corresponding techniques into your overall skiing expertise. Such skis themselves are not the best for "all terrain" versatility. For example, often they don't skid particularly well when that particular function is needed, and they certainly don't do well in soft crud. However, using such a ski on the groomers will undoubtedly teach you new ways to ski more difficult terrain and snow conditions (as well as being a complete hoot in itself).
OTOH, if you already can lay 'em over and drag your knuckles just fine, you don't need a hypercarver for training and fun. Rather, you might want to consider going in the direction of stepping up from your Mod 7.8 to a wider, shorter ski with a long-ish sidecut radius and hence more "all mountain" versatility. Skis like a 170 Head IM 75 Chip (75 mm underfoot) come to mind. BTW, I have skied a 188 Mod 7.8, and compared to skis like the 10ex and g4, I found its performance to be quite disappointing, even in "its element", soft snow. I think this was the approach JohnL was discussing in his post of 11-28-2003 02:56 PM.
The above discussion of sidecut pertains mostly to edging skills. However, analogous discussions could be formed around rotary issues such as the need for controlled skarving on narrow steep trails (ie, low polar moment of inertia) versus all conditions stability against being buffeted around in crud (ie, high polar moment), etc.
Thoughts?
Gotta run.
Tom / PM
PS - I just noticed you last comment about ice and bumps. A discussion of just this could occupy its own thread, but let me just say that IMHO, for normal recreational skiing, 50% of ice skiing is pilot skills, 40% is the condition of the edges, and only 10% has to do with the other aspects of the ski (flex, swing wt, vib damping, etc.), assuming that each ski is being used within its capabilities (ie, not using a beginner ski by an expert).
[This message has been edited by PhysicsMan (edited 11-30-2003).]
I have a very jaundiced view of ski gear and ski gear hype/marketing. For example, the magazines really push the idea that new skis can radically improve your skiing. They can't. There are some really great skis out there and the Volkl 5 star is one of them. Dynastar is making some really nice short skis now too.
But new skis won't make a difference if your skills are the problem. For example, ice demands good edging and pressure control skills and, in particular, good fore and aft balance. Personally, I am also not sure that shorter skis are so great on the ice, but that may be an irrational prejudice.
Neither your skis or boots are what I would choose for ice or for a higher level skier, but I wonder what shape your edges are in. Most people (and an awful lot of instructors too) are skiing on skis that are in serious need of a tune. Good edges make a world of difference on any ski when the "packed powder" starts to get gray and hard...
The Volkl five star is a great ski and holds very well on ice. It may be what you need, but it may not be the answer. More skiing on well tuned skis may help you just as much as new gear.
[This message has been edited by Otto (edited 11-30-2003).]
Thanks for replying.
>>From the comments of instructors or from your own self-evaluation, what basic skiing skills (not terrain capabilities) do you feel you would like to improve?
Last season, I was gaining confidence in my carving ability. I think I am fairly well developed. But I am not an "expert" and I want to find some unbiassed feedback. If I could find someone to critique me that would be the best for my confidence and I think would help me improve.
As I said I am more ocnfident, but I am still not sure if I have fully eliminated all residual skidding form my carves (or if such a thing is possible or even desireable). I am able to carve fairly well on groomed intermediate or "advanced" terrain, for example whittail's limelight or exhibition (when groomed) come to mind. I am able to make a veriety of turn shapes at various speeds, and in various conditions (soft, hard, ice, small bumps, crud). I was able to work on my edgeing last season. Mostly I was working on applying edge earlier and more evenly through a turn. In addition I tried a number of the lessons from http://skismarts.com/lessons.htm. I tried most of the advanced lessons, focusing on short turns and I was able to understand most of the concepts that were presented there. This was done in conjunction with a number of lessons (from instructors).
>>One example of what's behind my question is that on your present equipment and former weight, it might have been difficult for you to get familiar with short radius, lay-down-the-trenches carving. If you don't have this skill your bag of tricks, and your turns are a bit skidded even when you intend for them to be pure carves, deep soft snow and crud will likely be difficult for you and will present a limit to your personal "all mountain" capabilities.
This is a very good description of where I was at the begining of last year.
>>In this case, as I think has already been mentioned, it might make sense to pick up a modern, short sidecut radius hyper-carver, and use it to incorporate the corresponding techniques into your overall skiing expertise. Such skis themselves are not the best for "all terrain" versatility. For example, often they don't skid particularly well when that particular function is needed, and they certainly don't do well in soft crud. However, using such a ski on the groomers will undoubtedly teach you new ways to ski more difficult terrain and snow conditions (as well as being a complete hoot in itself).
I think that going shorter and with a smaller radius will "force" me to perfect my carving technique, which is probabbly at least has some residual skiding. What skis would you recomend to add for my demo list.
>>OTOH, if you already can lay 'em over and drag your knuckles just fine, you don't need a hypercarver for training and fun. Rather, you might want to consider going in the direction of stepping up from your Mod 7.8 to a wider, shorter ski with a long-ish sidecut radius and hence more "all mountain" versatility. Skis like a 170 Head IM 75 Chip (75 mm underfoot) come to mind. BTW, I have skied a 188 Mod 7.8, and compared to skis like the 10ex and g4, I found its performance to be quite disappointing, even in "its element", soft snow. I think this was the approach JohnL was discussing in his post of 11-28-2003 02:56 PM.
I agree with your assessment of the MOD. It is a very capable ski on softer conditions. But, I have often thought there must be better skis for those conditions. Further, I have often felt that it was just too soft and floppy for more agressive skiing especially on harder surfaces.
The above discussion of sidecut pertains mostly to edging skills. However, analogous discussions could be formed around rotary issues such as the need for controlled skarving on narrow steep trails (ie, low polar moment of inertia) versus all conditions stability against being buffeted around in crud (ie, high polar moment), etc.
My longer carves are getting smoother and cleaner, when I want them to be, and still skidded when I want. My short turns are athletic. I tend to rebound and push off my tails agressively and bounce down the mountain in small hops, with out the skis leaving the ground. I think this is a combination of trying to force the skis to turn shorter than they really want to at 181, and perhaps some residual skidding. When I ski my 174s my short turns are cleaner, and less forced. They come out easier, but I still blow some snow at times. On cruisers my turns uslaly blow snow sideways. On the steeps, "J" turns are usally what comes out blowing snow down the mountian.
>>PS - I just noticed you last comment about ice and bumps. A discussion of just this could occupy its own thread, but let me just say that IMHO, for normal recreational skiing, 50% of ice skiing is pilot skills, 40% is the condition of the edges, and only 10% has to do with the other aspects of the ski (flex, swing wt, vib damping, etc.), assuming that each ski is being used within its capabilities (ie, not using a beginner ski by an expert).
This seems to make sense to me. I havent noticed much differnece in my ice abilites wiht my various skis.
Thanks again, Tom. I think that from demoing a veriety of skis I will be able to learn something about my techniques and what skis like me. If my current ski are too forgiving and covering up my bad technique then I will know as soon as I strap on a pair of 5 stars, or some other "challenging ski" and point them toward expert terrain. I actually look forard to seeing how I do. And the skis too.
[This message has been edited by tromano (edited 11-30-2003).]
While I agree with Otto that most of Ice skiing is technique & not equipment - without the proper equipment the best technique won't do you any good. Also - there is definately a difference in skiis in their Ice holding ability. Most (but not all) of that comes from their torsional stiffness with some coming from their longitudenal (did I spell that right?) stiffness & flex pattern. I tend to try a couple of different skiis a year & the Mod's (as are the upper end Dynastar's) are at the top of the list for Ice hold.
Case in point - I was working on with my wife on skiing on the harder snow (some call it ice although, it wasn't translucent - yet). She had reasonably decent technique, but was still skidding way too much. Since I had just tuned her skiis - I knew it wasn't the tune job. So - I did what I tell everyone NOT to do... We swapped skiis. She jumped onto my 174 Mod-X's, I jumped into her entry-level Fishers. WOW! Suddenly she was doing everything I was asking her to do & I felt like I had a pair of $1.99 toboggans strapped to my feet.
Also - I dont' understand your oppinion on the Mod's. I haven't skied the Mod 7.8's but I did own a pair of 174 CM Mod X's for 2 seasons. I am 5'10 - 180 lbs & a rather aggressive skier. Those Mod X's were the best all-mountain ski I have ever skied. I like to do it all... Slalom, trees, bumps, ice & all out speed. I will admit that they aren't the best Giant Slalom ski - but they held up quite well without any chatter (as long as you had them tipped in a killer GS turn) at speed. I tend to ski with the faster people on the mountain & had no problem hanging (or leading for that fact).
Again - Technique is the key. From reading your self-diagnostics on your ability - a pair of Mod's would fit quite well. Your bigger problem sounds like size to me. If you tried a 188 - & are less than 300 lbs - they were WAY too big for you. Whatever shop gave you them to try should think about refreshing their sales people's skills.
I'm currently on a pair of 174 Dynastar Speed 64's. They aren't as much fun as my Mod's were - but they are still a fun all-mountain ski for the higher-end agressive all-mountain skier.
Stay away from the skier cross style skiis (twin tips) unless you really want to spend time in the parks going backwards. The bindings tend to be mounted more in the middle of the ski on those & can really mess up your skiing if you aren't a park style skier.
I hope I didn't offend anyone - that wasn't my intention... just giving my $.02 worth.
jimmer
[This message has been edited by jimmer (edited 12-01-2003).]
I ski on the 2001 Rossi T-Power Salom ski, 160 cm. I use it for making moderate GS turns, SL turns, some moguls, powder less than 5", steep skiing .. everything! I did both GS and SL club racing on 'em and I think they are a joy to use ... you can lay trenches with them!
Me: 5'8" tall
140 lbs
I like to pure carve and lay out on all groomed runs with medium to large radius turns, usually take the rut line for moguls.
Take everyones' advice below, and demo as much as you can (gee life is tough eh)?!?!?!
Good luck ... LOL skiing is a life sentence!
