No Class restrictions - what would happen?

[peterp]

Steve West has posted an interesting article on the absurdity of the current classes 12'6, 14 and unlimited, arguing for opening it up and say: Bring what you got. http://www.supracer.com/sup-racing-board-restrictions/

I'm in full agreement that the 12'6 class is kept alive on dubious arguments about storage and transportation and the sport would be better off without it.

But does it make sense to have a single maximum length that designers could work within or should it just be opened up?

What would happen? Would each "weight-category" and "skill-category" of rider have their preferred length with a more or less standard width? We know longer as well as width makes more stable - we also know narrow and longer makes faster.

So what's your take on the future Race board line up if there were no rules - would we all be on 24" wide boards with a 14' for 150pound rider, 16 for a 200pound rider and 19 for a 250pound rider? And would that be desirable?

[PonoBill]

It's self-adjusting. The maximum practical length for a board that is balanced by just standing on it (no gyroscopes or hydrofoil outriggers) is about 20 feet. Longer than that, given the width required for balance the hull drag is just too high.

Smaller people can go as fast on smaller boards over typical race distances (except perhaps sprints). There's an inescapable advantage to being lighter when it comes to a vessel that gets pushed down into the water. Take two athletes of equal power to weight ratio and equal skill. One weighs 150, one weighs 220. Both have 10 percent body fat. The 150 guy is carrying 15 pounds of dead weight on his board, the 220 pound guy is carrying 22.

The only way to bring the competition closer other than carrying handicap weight is opening length. The big guy can paddle a bigger board faster than the smaller paddler can--his higher power can overcome more hull drag and move the board close to hull speed. The smaller paddler will be naturally use a smaller board that suits his power output better--and he'll be about as fast or faster. He'll be overcoming less form drag and holding the speed closer to hull speed.

[pdxmike]

I love his comment about keeping rules to a minimum in the sport, since we already have to deal with so many rules in daily life. 

Peterp, you and PB already answered well what would happen.  Your idea that boards would hit some standard width of about 24", then get longer as paddlers got heavier, is a good comment on what's wrong with length limits.  When the length is limited, heavy paddlers must go wider to accommodate their weight, and width kills speed.  If you take away the length limit, width becomes governed only by what's needed to stand comfortably and to balance.   A tall, heavier paddler may need a bit more width than a short, light one, but not much. 

It'd be great if technology (inflatable boards getting better) blew out the transport argument, but 17' inflatable boards are a ways off.

I don't have any problem with shorter classes being kept for people that want to race in them, but would like to see racing changed so nobody was FORCED into a length class, as they are now when races limit elites to 12-6 or 14, or limit women to 12-6, etc.  or when there's no unlimited category at all for anyone. 

Also remember that course layout and type has a lot to do with it.  A BOP-type course, or any with lots of tight turns, could very well mean even heavier paddlers would choose boards that might be 14' long at the most. 

[peterp]

Agree with PB on the leveling of the playing field effect - but what effect would it have on the growth potential of the sport and evolution of board design?

Would we see less people racing because it's getting to specialised, hence more complicated to find a board. And would more specialised push up prices to a point where the broader market loses interest?

In favour of, say, a 14' class, is that manufacturers and customers only have to focus on a suitable width and therefore most of the market can be covered with about 3 models which surely will be more economical for both parties?

[pdxmike]

It seems like board design would really be opened up. 

If there was a limit, 14' would be better than 12-6, but it's still artificial, unfair and limiting.  I don't see opening up board lengths creating any big problems.  It actually solves some, such as people needing shorter boards now just because they can't use their longer boards at some races.  Most people aren't going to stop racing because they don't have the perfect board for every situation.  They might end up with a longer board than they use now, and will use it in most races, vs. feeling compelled to have a whole range of boards. 

And certainly the sport is being limited now when heavy racers can't be competitive, and others can't go as fast as they're capable of because the board lengths are holding them back. 

And you could still keep shorter divisions for people who have shorter boards and want to race on them.

I'd love seeing more companies selling off-the-shelf models over 14'.  I think that's a real stumbling block to unlimiteds.  In most places, unlimited means "custom board required". 

[Pierre]

speed is limited by hull speed, but for liht and skilled paddlers who can use narrower boards, hull speed is pushed ahead compared with a wider board...  means a light paddler ( expert level) on a 12'6" can go almost as fast as a heavy one on a 14'... almost but not completely!
when increasing hull length to a value where hull speed cannot be reached, drag is increased due to increased wetted surface. so best performance compromise is dificult to find, depends mostly on paddler performance and conditions... i believe in upwind conditions there is no need of much more than a 12.6, in choppy light downwind condition, same thing: a longer hull may be as long as wavelength, limiting the potential speed. las race with a 14' I got smoked by ( narrow) 12'6" on a light DW... in loger wavelenth r flat water this would not be the case.
breaking rule of board length shold have a drawback: race to pric... the limited length offers the advantage of improving naval architecture search at cheaper prices to offer a board which fits to a paddler. but this is a false idea: the sport becomes so specialized that a expert will use boards which fit better his/her level, weight, size vs conditions: on a crosswind choppy race he/she may choose a 27" wide and on a flat one choose the 24" wide toothpick....
This is just a different approach of board design.
my wish is AT FIRST to see more opportunities to run events open to UL's, especially here in Europe, and especially rankings to be applied on ULs....

[SlatchJim]

The phrase "We're gonna need a bigger garage" would be said more often.

[pdxmike]

The phrase "We're gonna need a bigger garage" would be said more often.

I agree. Otherwise there'd be no place to put all the furniture you'd be moving out of the living room to make way for the longer boards. 

Pierre, you're right--first step is for more races to open up UL opportunities.  Then we wouldn't have to guess what would happen. 

Look at 14' boards.  I remember being at a race a couple years ago (coincidentally, when I was picking up a board at the shop sponsoring it) and considering entering it, only to be told I wouldn't get a place because it wasn't open to 14s.  I felt like a leper.  Now, I bet 90% of the people in that race use 14s almost exclusively in races, because races have opened up that category.  It reminds me of switching vets for my dog when she was a puppy because the old vet said to limit her to 3 cups per day of food.  The new vet said give her as much as she wants, and she immediately went to 9-12 cups. 

If you open up the possibilities for people to use longer boards (14 instead of 12-6. UL instead of 14) people will make the switch if it makes sense for them.  If it doesn't, they can stay in the old categories.  The only ones who can't will be the elites, where most races will want to keep them all in one category.  And of all people, it seems like it's them that you especially don't want to restrict to boards that are shorter than is ideal for the race conditions or paddler. 

[bretrwarner]

When I started paddleboarding I was floored by how short racing sups were. I had taught sea kayaking for about five years and was used to a 16-17 foot boat. I remember asking different shops why there were two main board lengths and I think I got a different reply at every store I asked. I didn't even learn about unlimited boards until I had been paddling for a while and saw someone on one that was obviously bigger than 14'. I would love to see how designs would develop if there were more races open to or courting unlimited designs, not necessarily getting rid of the 14 or 12'6". I would not love the argument my wife and I would have when it came time to get one, but I can deal with that in time.
Just my take, but I am also one of those skinny guys who can benefit from the lenghth restrictions.

[PonoBill]

If you don't change the rules, the races won't change. If the races don't change the unlimited boards will die--dying already--and a whole category of very interesting racers go away with them. The board classifications are uniformly bad for the sport IMO.

Time for a rework of the rules. Rationalize drafting, establish an alternative race format that runs without board specification. Most other forms of paddlesport have no such specification other than ICF craft, which have endless and highly restrictive specifications. Anyone here doing K1? Class, class, anyone?

The interesting thing to me is that racing in rule-specified paddle-powered classes always devolves to very specific body types. Sprint canoe guys are generally big. Distance racers are small. But in the surfski world, which is pretty open for design, you have skinny, light guys and you have guys like Oscar. Seeing someone like Oscar Chalupsky kick ass and take names inspires me. It makes me think I might want a surfski. But for damned sure I'm not going to buy a frickin' 12'6" race board.

We have 1/10th of a horsepower to spend. The idea of limiting the performance of the craft we can spend that on seems completely absurd. Surfskis and Canoes race all around the world. Racers will figure out how to get the best board for them to the races they want to compete in.

Let's go as fast as we can.

[sup_surf_giant]

Bill, do you see it helping to simply go to weight categories?

[mastman]

Here is another really good article about class size restrictions:

http://www.davidkalama.com/do-we-really-need-a-126/

Obviously this is not a recent article, but it still makes a lot of sense.

[pdxmike]

One good thing that could happen is that races could respond with a greater variety of types of races.  If you take away the current detriment to heavy racers of short board limits, then heavier paddlers are going to start doing better in long flatwater races than they do now.  (They still won't dominate at all, since lightweight guys are already doing well in races that do allow unlimiteds.)  But if there are plenty of BOP-type races, with surfing and/or even just many turns, that will mean longer boards will be at a disadvantage.  So there'll be no need to worry about shorter boards becoming extinct, if anyone is worried about that.

I don't like weight classes very much, although if the cutoff were just under my weight, I might not mind.  Most races don't have enough people to have multiple weight limits.  Maybe a "Clydesdale" category as with marathons could be OK.  One thing to consider is that the Clydesdale cutoff (often 185 lbs., I think) is at least 20 pounds--and probably much more--heavier than anyone is who's actually competitive in a marathon.  So for running, it really doesn't matter if it's 180 or 185 or 200 since its basically a category for people with no chance of placing highly anyway.  If you wanted to do weight classes in a race to make it really competitive and fair, that would be a lot more complicated.  It actually makes the rice sack handicap system look very reasonable.   

[DavidJohn]

I like this idea.. Always have.

It might even help make the manufactures give us the boards that we really want .. (Well me anyway).. Boards around the 15-16' range.

DJ

[JeanG]

I suspect that weight classes would not be necessary in sweeper races.