Author Topic: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101  (Read 6151 times)

Luc Benac

  • Teahupoo Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 1872
  • Super Natural British Columbia
    • View Profile
    • When not paddling...
    • Email
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #15 on: July 23, 2016, 09:03:44 AM »
Hello Bryce,
One thing that might be worth noting in your test protocol in regards of the tool used to take the measurement.
Obviously the same tool and tool setup would need to be used for each measurement as a matter of course.
And also to compare result between sessions.
Out of curiosity, I had a look at some of my data looking at the GPS speed instead of the Doppler speed from the same unit (Canmore GT-102) and depending on the sub-set you are looking at, the GPS shows consistently higher speed over the Doppler. On average you would thing that the + and - of the GPS should cancel each other the same way than the + and - of the Doppler do, but for short interval measurement like the one you are doing, there could be a significant difference between the two tracking technology adding or subtracting to the margin or error.
Cheers,
Luc
Sunova Allwater 14'x25.5" 303L Viento 520
Sunova Torpedo 14'x27" 286L Salish 500
Naish Nalu 11'4" x 30" 180L Andaman 520
Sunova Steeze 10' x 31" 150L
Blackfish Paddles

PonoBill

  • Cortez Bank Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 25864
    • View Profile
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #16 on: July 23, 2016, 03:42:58 PM »
The short upright stroke like Candace Appleby's is very tough on the body and whilst it clearly works for her, I'm not sure that a man (with inherently less flexibility) is likely to be able to do it with a blade with such a firm catch if you use a short stroke without straining something eventually.

Candace has had to battle more than her fair share of physical issues over the last few years, some of which I suspect are related to her stroke--powerful, but hard on the body. If I did that for ten miles I'd be in the ER getting muscle relaxers.
Foote 10'4X34", SIC 17.5 V1 hollow and an EPS one in Hood River. Foote 9'0" x 31", L41 8'8", 18' Speedboard, etc. etc.

ukgm

  • Teahupoo Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #17 on: July 24, 2016, 12:35:34 AM »
The short upright stroke like Candace Appleby's is very tough on the body and whilst it clearly works for her, I'm not sure that a man (with inherently less flexibility) is likely to be able to do it with a blade with such a firm catch if you use a short stroke without straining something eventually.

Candace has had to battle more than her fair share of physical issues over the last few years, some of which I suspect are related to her stroke--powerful, but hard on the body. If I did that for ten miles I'd be in the ER getting muscle relaxers.
It's also worth noting that (due to information I have access to) many of the top men paddlers are using proportionally smaller blades than the women.

ukgm

  • Teahupoo Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2016, 12:37:40 AM »
Hello Bryce,
One thing that might be worth noting in your test protocol in regards of the tool used to take the measurement.
Obviously the same tool and tool setup would need to be used for each measurement as a matter of course.
And also to compare result between sessions.
Out of curiosity, I had a look at some of my data looking at the GPS speed instead of the Doppler speed from the same unit (Canmore GT-102) and depending on the sub-set you are looking at, the GPS shows consistently higher speed over the Doppler. On average you would thing that the + and - of the GPS should cancel each other the same way than the + and - of the Doppler do, but for short interval measurement like the one you are doing, there could be a significant difference between the two tracking technology adding or subtracting to the margin or error.
Cheers,
Luc

Yep, an excellent point. Also the sampling rate also needs to be maintained too. This enters the age old importance of stating the accuracy and the precision of any tool you use.........

ukgm

  • Teahupoo Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #19 on: July 24, 2016, 12:39:30 AM »
ukgm - why not just keep on using 3 different paddles that are best suited for what you want to accomplish?  For instance Travis noted he uses like 4 different shaft lengths when he races in the M2O to give him variation.  This way he spreads the load over more muscle groups over the course of the race to lessen overuse and fatigue.

Using 3 different paddles like you did seems normal.  Are you trying to find the perfect one paddle solution?

And A10 - is the QB round shaft you have less forgiving because it has a stiffer flex?  We only have only one oval shaft from Blackfish - and that seems less forgiving than our round SB and Riviera paddles.  The flex in all 3 brands is about the same.

I think you are right. The purpose of this article was merely to demonstrate to people there is a noticeable difference in paddles to people but I actually own 5 and I do use different paddles for different races (mainly based on their length and level of technicality).

ukgm

  • Teahupoo Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #20 on: July 24, 2016, 12:40:51 AM »
The oval tapered shafts from QB are not like ordinary oval shafts. They are tapered. In other words, they have a smaller diameter at the handle than they do at the blade. A LOT smaller. This means the section between your hands bends more than the section from your lower hand to the blade. Also, if the paddle is shorter the overall flex proportional to the length will be greater. In effect, therefore, on average the paddle will give shorter people a flexier shaft than tall people, which is generally appropriate since taller people will generally weigh more.

It's extremely clever, and must be very hard to make. It results in a paddle that is surprisingly kind on the body to use without losing power. You have more flex up high to protect the upper shoulder, and less flex between the lower hand and the blade, so there's no loss of power.

I hadn't thought of that - that is clever. The downside though is that you can't choke down on the paddle as the diameter is too small for my hands.

blackeye

  • Peahi Status
  • *****
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2016, 11:27:43 AM »
Doc,

I'm a bit surprised that you got such consistent results when your input control was "merely" human self-regulation, ie maintain a race pace and an all-out sprint. I would think that the physical effort you put in for these tests would be measurably variable despite your efforts to maintain a constant effort level. But since you did manage consistent power application (surprising to me, but I'm not much of an athlete or scientist), should you not have also measured physiological variables? I can't dispel the notion that you unconsciously altered your effort to achieve consistency. If so, that you were so successful in doing so is impressive.

I would think that
a) using a Bill's strain gauge would be necessary to quantify power applied to the paddle to prove your methodology and therefore illustrate the paddle differences, and
b) to test physiological effects such as, I dunno, heart rate, to prove which paddle is best for you as an individual. ie the paddle that required the least physiological effort to make your race and sprint paces.

Am I muddling this up?

ukgm

  • Teahupoo Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 1255
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Flatwater Racing Paddle Testing 101
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2016, 03:53:56 PM »
Doc,

I'm a bit surprised that you got such consistent results when your input control was "merely" human self-regulation, ie maintain a race pace and an all-out sprint. I would think that the physical effort you put in for these tests would be measurably variable despite your efforts to maintain a constant effort level. But since you did manage consistent power application (surprising to me, but I'm not much of an athlete or scientist), should you not have also measured physiological variables? I can't dispel the notion that you unconsciously altered your effort to achieve consistency. If so, that you were so successful in doing so is impressive.

I would think that
a) using a Bill's strain gauge would be necessary to quantify power applied to the paddle to prove your methodology and therefore illustrate the paddle differences, and
b) to test physiological effects such as, I dunno, heart rate, to prove which paddle is best for you as an individual. ie the paddle that required the least physiological effort to make your race and sprint paces.

Am I muddling this up?

No, they are indeed good points you raise. Part of this process for me personally was to see if something as dynamic as paddling would produce repeatable results - which they now have done on several occasions. However,  as you say, power output would be the best way to define effort and to quantify the differences. Until a commercial rig is available, it's too time consuming to come up with a system I could use feasibly when field testing. Heart rate is a poor metric to use though as it is of little value when the efforts are so high and the durations so short. Modern research tells us though in other sports such as rowing that stroke rate correlates broadly with work intensity and other metrics such as stroke index are objective indicators of effectiveness. For the meantime, they'll have to do but my confidence is pretty high using them.

The next stage of my testing will be to look at even smaller changes between conditions by switching out between a selection of fins. I'm hoping to start this next week so watch this space. I've got 6 fins so far but if anyone knows any of the main manufacturers (other than black project or futures that I've already got), I'm happy to try theirs.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal