Topics

76

SUP General / Idiots on the Willamette

« on: September 29, 2010, 11:38:40 AM »

Boater hurtles 48-foot yacht 50' onto the rocks (see photo).  Ironic, coming only a week after PonoBill said, "The Willamette River is kind of special for really idiotic boaters."  This was the same night I saw more SUPs at one time than ever before on the river (but a few miles north):

http://www.oregonlive.com/milwaukie/index.ssf/2010/09/willamette_river_boater_launches_48-foot_yacht_onto_the_rocks_1.html

http://www.columbian.com/news/2010/sep/28/vancouver-mans-yacht-stuck-on-willamette-river-roc/

No alcohol was involved (apparently the only thing on the rocks that night was the boat)--but I can't say that that reassures me.

Neither article mentions whether the boater was carrying a valid Invasive Species Card.

77

SUP General / Willamette River SUP Crowds

« on: September 28, 2010, 10:37:03 AM »

Saw 7 SUPs last night (in 3 groups) last night while paddling around Ross Island.  I've never seen more than 2 besides me before, excluding races or demos.  It could be everyone trying to fit in a last bit of paddling in the sun before it leaves until next July.

78

Downwind and Racing / Round the Rock race TV news blurb

« on: September 10, 2010, 11:31:07 AM »

http://www.king5.com/on-tv/evening-magazine/Walking-on-water-102487804.html

300+ people expected

79

SUP General / offbeat invention

« on: August 26, 2010, 03:20:38 PM »

Check out the first invention, the "Aquaplane" from 1938:

http://photos.denverpost.com/mediacenter/2010/08/offbeat-inventions/#name

The photo is dying for a caption.

80

Gear Talk / Why not more sunken deck boards?

« on: August 21, 2010, 09:16:07 PM »

I'm curious--why don't more boards have sunken decks?  If you take any racing board, and depress the deck, it will become more stable.  The other main way to make a board stable is to make it wider, but that slows it down.  So instead of making a board X inches wide, why not depress the deck and make it narrower and therefore faster?  Or leave it the same width, but sink the deck and make it more stable without slowing it down?

I understand why a surfing or general purpose board is better off with a flat deck, so you can move forward or backward on it easily.  But for racing boards, what are the drawbacks of sinking the deck?  More complicated/costly to build, I assume?  A sunken deck means a narrower area for your feet (since your feet can't go all the way to the outside of the rails) but does that matter?  Sinking the deck also takes some volume out of the board, but it doesn't change its footprint in the water, or its rails, so if reducing the volume is a problem, why not just thicken the non-depressed areas to equalize the volume?

Two recent board designs in particular got me thinking about this--the Lihue Kai Jamie Mitchell Board, and the Naish Javelin.  Both have been described as tippy by several people. That may or may not be true, but at the same time, what would have been the drawback in sinking their decks?  In the case of the Naish, people have described the Naish Catalina as a "Javelin with a sunken deck" which does look to be true.  But if it is true, why would anyone choose the Javelin over the Catalina (other than that the Catalina isn't available yet)?  Two equal boards, but one is more stable.  Doesn't the Catalina make the Javelin obsolete?  Or if the Catalina and Javelin aren't otherwise identical, why didn't Naish make the Javelin with a sunken deck?

81

Environment / the hazards of paddling in the Willamette

« on: August 09, 2010, 06:33:47 PM »

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/portland_streetcar_contractor.html

If I go out tonight, I'm going south.

82

SUP General / how to profit financially from SUP growth?

« on: August 08, 2010, 09:31:30 PM »

This may be a bit off the wall, but anytime I see a trend I wonder how to make money off of it.  Most people here are probably pretty certain that stand-up paddling will be a much bigger sport in 5 years than it is now.  It is just now getting mainstream attention (i.e. an article in the Wall Street Journal last month, and even more telling of its recent growth was a subsequent article in the WSJ about youth activities at resort hotels, which featured a photo of a kid with a paddleboard--and the editors didn't feel a need to explains what that board was). 

If there was a public company specializing in paddleboarding, I'd certainly consider investing in it (theoretically at least, since all my spare cash just went to buy a new board).  However, I'm assuming that all the equipment companies are small and privately held.  It would be nice if there were a publicly-held paddling company around the way Nike was around near the beginning of the running explosion.  Maybe there is?

Then there are the companies that make foam, fiberglass, carbon, etc.  Some of these are public (i.e. easy to buy stock in) but are so huge that the SUP market isn't going to affect them much, no matter how much it grows. 

Or large companies that might enter the surfing/paddling market.  Again, it might not be enough of a market to have a huge impact on those companies.  Nike just announced plans for huge expansions into the "adventure sport" market, and it owns surf/skating related companies.  Maybe Nike is the answer?  Anyone want to guess whether they'll be riding a Nike SUP in 5 years?

I suppose someone with money could buy up real estate near the best downwinder runs, although some of those (Hawaii, Columbia Gorge) are already pretty pricey for other reasons. 

I know someone who bought Starbucks stock early on, then sold it to pay for his MBA.  Ironically, if he'd kept his stock, he wouldn't need the job he got from the MBA.  I'm not saying that the SUP market is potentially as large as the gourmet coffee market turned out to be, but I do feel like we're in on a secret that the rest of the world hasn't really noticed yet. 

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?  It would sure be nice to make some $$$ (or whatever the equivalent is in Australia, etc.) if for no other reason than to afford some new equipment!

(I don't mean to take any focus of the sport here, but this seems like an obvious question.)

83

Gear Talk / Anyone using Quickblade Kanaha or other adjustable carbon paddles?

« on: August 06, 2010, 01:16:58 AM »

I'm planning to get a new carbon paddle.  I paddle in the Willamette River and Puget Sound--no surfing.  I'm 6'-1" and feel that I could benefit from a paddle longer than my current 82.5" one.  I've tried 84" ones and liked them, but might be happier going even longer. 

From reading a million posts and PonoBill's excellent Kenalu article on paddle length  http://www.kenalu.com/2010/04/measure-twice-cut-once/  it seems clear that 1) choosing the correct length is a process, not a fill-in-the-numbers formula, 2) what will work for me now may become too short as my technique improves or changes, 3) if I get a thicker board, I'll then need a longer paddle, and 4) people are now recommending longer paddles than even a year or two ago, so who knows where the advice will be next year?

An obvious solution seems to be to get an adjustable carbon paddle.  One that appeals to me is the Quickblade Kanaha--it sounds like a great paddle in general, and it adjusts from  80" to 88", which could be ideal for me. 

Have other people gone the adjustable route, with this paddle or others?  Do you feel the adjustability creates compromises (weight or otherwise) that outweigh the adjustability?  Am I better off getting a fixed length, and if so why?

Would greatly appreciate your thoughts.