Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Area 10

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 147
1
Downwind and Racing / Re: What would you ask Michael Booth?
« on: Today at 12:59:22 AM »
This conversation has got a very '80s feel about it ;)



Don't spend too much time stroking your biceps in the mirror, guys :)

2
IMO needing a rudder up to 17ft isn't about length it's about volume and rail shape. There is no problem steering a board without a rudder if you can carve. But most current UL boards have rails that are so chunky that this is not possible. You are just a passenger on a boat. So a rudder is of benefit - at least in some conditions. There are some DW conditions (big, steep, messy short period) where you'll be always right on the tail when on a bump so a rudder isn't much help: it's either foot steer or not steer. But I realise that you guys probably won't accept this, because you've only ever tried thick-railed high-volume UL boards so you know no different, and you DW in conditions where you can steer on a bump from towards the middle of the board without pearling.

3
Random / Re: What a got damn shitshow. [warning politics]
« on: March 24, 2017, 03:51:08 PM »
Has Trump had ANY successes yet?
Apparently with Trump, defeats may be bigger than de hands.
Nice! :)

4
Random / Re: What a got damn shitshow. [warning politics]
« on: March 24, 2017, 02:46:30 PM »
Has Trump had ANY successes yet?

5
Downwind and Racing / Re: What would you ask Michael Booth?
« on: March 24, 2017, 01:52:11 PM »
Those links give lots of answers. I might be preacheching 70s science per ukgm, but in the ballpark i am right  ;)

I wonder just how much endurance training load (or hours) he does paddling.
It's not the hours you put in, it's what you put into the hours ;)

6
Gear Talk / Re: Race boards, prescribed paddle weights and volume.
« on: March 24, 2017, 02:50:44 AM »
The Vortex is intended for flat water only. If you want a board for rougher waters then that's the Equinox. I liked the 2016 Equinox - it was similar to the Ace but easier to use, except in surf. Very fast, and more stable than the 14x25 Ace. One of their team riders won the Fiji race on one, against the usual Starborg competition, and conditions were pretty choppy.

7
Gear Talk / Re: Finally some shoes that fit
« on: March 24, 2017, 02:45:02 AM »
Haha! Wish I was. It's the start of a long working day for me, with a 6-hour round trip commute, and won't be home until 10:30pm. Won't even be time for lunch. And it's dull, cold and windy. Peachy.

8
Gear Talk / Re: Finally some shoes that fit
« on: March 24, 2017, 01:18:51 AM »
Do you mean Moab, rather than Moah?

9
Random / Re: What a got damn shitshow. [warning politics]
« on: March 23, 2017, 05:47:07 AM »
I'm a foreigner so don't really understand the US healthcare system or the proposed changes. But a brief reading of Ryancare on Wikipedia makes me wonder in what way the act would result in benefit for Trump's core supporters. The arguments presented there seem to suggest that older/poorer voters would likely lose out (and indeed, die earlier) relative to younger/richer ones. Is this correct? If it is, why would Trump be shafting his own voting base? If it isn't correct, who does the bill actually help, and why? I'm not sure I understand the logic of it, overall (but then again, as I say, I know nothing about the US healthcare system so please excuse me if this is a stupid question).

To understand this you have to understand the reality of Obamacare.  After all of the bloviating is though, Obamacare made healthcare significantly more expensive for most people.  You could stop reading this right there and already understand what set the stage for he current plan.  Did Obamcare insure anyone that was previously uninsured?  Yes. Did it prevent the bankrupting of some really sick people by insurmountable bills?  Yes.  While there is quite a bit of argument about how many people moved into the ranks of the insured, one thing is for sure, rates went way up for the huge majority and painfully so for many.  Keep in mind that wages have not increased and many people are entirely maxed out.  There are a lot of political topics where the population does not understand the nuances and those are easily BS'ed, but there was no selling into this shit.  People were paying their actual bills and Hillary clamoring on about "It was called Hillary Care first" was another way of saying "I'm a dipshit".

Obamacare was good intention reduced to garbage by committee.  But...the classic mistake is to assume that because something sucks that it can not be made worse.  It always can.
Ok, thanks very much for that explanation.

So, if the problem is that healthcare insurance is too expensive, then what mechanisms exist to put pressure on the insurers and healthcare providers to be more efficient and reduce costs? The job of a company is to maximise returns for its shareholders, and screw as much money out of the customers as possible while staying afloat. That's fine if we are dealing with a company that makes TVs because you can always do without one if you don't like the deal. But surely it's not the same with life-and-death issues like healthcare? So, although it is clear that your government is clipping the wings of the insurers in various ways (e.g. not being able to refuse insurance because of existing conditions), who decides what is a reasonable cost either for the insurance or the healthcare, and even whether certain treatment decisions should be allowed (i.e. to avoid over-prescribing etc)? I'm not sure why in these discussions I don't hear more anger directed to the insurers/healthcare providers rather than the government. Looking at the amount you pay relative to other countries is pretty clear you are being ripped off. But instead you principally blame Obama, Trump etc.

But as I say, I don't understand your system and I'm not party to the numerous discussions that must happen in households throughout the US, so forgive me if I've got this wrong.

10
Random / Re: What a got damn shitshow. [warning politics]
« on: March 22, 2017, 11:18:51 PM »
I'm a foreigner so don't really understand the US healthcare system or the proposed changes. But a brief reading of Ryancare on Wikipedia makes me wonder in what way the act would result in benefit for Trump's core supporters. The arguments presented there seem to suggest that older/poorer voters would likely lose out (and indeed, die earlier) relative to younger/richer ones. Is this correct? If it is, why would Trump be shafting his own voting base? If it isn't correct, who does the bill actually help, and why? I'm not sure I understand the logic of it, overall (but then again, as I say, I know nothing about the US healthcare system so please excuse me if this is a stupid question).

11
Random / Re: What a got damn shitshow. [warning politics]
« on: March 22, 2017, 08:10:56 AM »
Breaking news - the British Parliament has been suspended because of a firearms incident outside Parliament in London and on Westminster Bridge. The situation is ongoing so it's not clear at this point exactly what is happening but it looks like a car has been used to mow down at least 5 people on the bridge, and a man stabbed or attacked a policeman outside Parliament, and then someone was shot (probably the attacker) outside parliament. Details are still coming in, but the area around Parliament is shut down and our government is being held inside while security deals with the situation. It is not clear at this point whether the bridge attack and the one outside parliament is part of one incident or two separate ones.

12
Downwind and Racing / Re: What would you ask Michael Booth?
« on: March 22, 2017, 07:59:25 AM »
If his sponsors would make him any board he'd like, what width does he think would be optimal for him and why?


13
Sessions / Re: Amazing f-one vid.
« on: March 22, 2017, 04:57:33 AM »
Wow - that was a labour of love. Some serious numbers of hours work there, and a lot of skills displayed by the film-makers never mind the SUPers. The f-one boards have got a lot to live up to now...

14
Gear Talk / Re: Race boards, prescribed paddle weights and volume.
« on: March 22, 2017, 04:16:17 AM »
At your height and weight I don't think you'll be any faster on a 14x25 than a 14x26. You might even be slower over a reasonable distance.

Purely out of curiosity, what makes you say that ? Increased wetted area in the wrong places or lack of stability ?
Those factors for sure. But first let's assume that you are tall enough that 1" narrower width makes negligible difference to how easy it is for you to execute your stroke properly. Then perhaps the main one (and linked to those) is how well you can keep your board on an even keel. This is something that Danny Ching (who has tended not to use uber-narrow boards) used to emphasise in the early days of race SUP but is rarely mentioned these days. A board design (especially a flat water one) is created with the assumption that the board remains flat in the water. Each design will vary in how much efficiency it loses as it comes off its unweighted lateral plane. Some suffer remarkable rail steer, and/or an increase in drag. If you are a tall, heavy, power paddler then inaccuracies in your technique will be multiplied in terms of yaw relative to a lighter less powerful paddler. So the powerful paddler can find a loss of tracking and increased drag that far outweighs any theoretical advantage of a small drop in width. This can be compensated for, to a degree, but going wider and by other design differences.

In general, I have a different emphasis than you do about where speed comes from, which probably reflects the fact that you compete at eg. cycling whereas I used to compete at swimming. pdxmike and UKRiversurfers for instance will know what I mean. In swimming, someone who used to be a fast competitive swimmer but has now gone to seed will always be faster than someone who is supremely fit but has never developed good technique. So, for me, I tend to look at technique and the way it interacts with the board as the easy way to increased speed, rather than emphasising so much aspects of fitness and strength as you guys have mainly been talking about (and yes, of course power at the blade captures some important aspects of technique, but technique is hugely more than that).

It is scary to see someone who is a skilled paddler from another discipline apply their feel for the water to SUP. They just seem to be able to extract speed from the water effortlessly, in a way that a much fitter stronger newbie will never do. SUP is an intensely technical sport IMO, far beyond that in cycling, running etc (whilst not denying that they have technique aspects also).

To my mind, the reason why Kai was able to kick ass at the ISA relays in 2016 was substantially that he was able to maintain impeccable technique that was perfectly matched to the conditions. Sure, he might be fitter also. But he probably leveraged his superior feel for the water that day, honed through thousands of hours in the water since he was a baby, combined with superb training and instruction from the likes of Dave Kalama. I think this is why the ocean guys generally do better in flat water than the flat water guys do in the ocean. They are used to thinking about how to maximise efficiency through the water, working with the conditions rather than fighting them. Just like in swimming.

15
Don't worry, Trump will make backs great again :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 147

* Recent Posts

* Recent Topics