dave kalama's ideas for racing inflatables

[PonoBill]

Also, I don't agree with taking turns winning.  Shouldn't everyone always be a winner?

We need a winner.  As Admin it seems that beginning the winning order alphabetically is only fair.  By the way, Aaron is an unfair name.  I want to lodge my protest against the name Aaron right now.

ZZ Top needs some kind of subsidy to address alphabetiquality.

[pdxmike]

Also, I don't agree with taking turns winning.  Shouldn't everyone always be a winner?

We need a winner.  As Admin it seems that beginning the winning order alphabetically is only fair.  By the way, Aaron is an unfair name.  I want to lodge my protest against the name Aaron right now.

ZZ Top needs some kind of subsidy to address alphabetiquality.

ZZ Top?  They'd be at the bottom of my list.

[Admin]

Also, I don't agree with taking turns winning.  Shouldn't everyone always be a winner?

I have reconsidered.  You have swayed me and I agree that no one should lose.  Even an abundance of categories does little to ease the pain of the overall place number.   That is one cruel sheet of paper.   In a recent race I finished first in 47-49 year olds on 12'6 and under inflatable 15-20 PSI boards in the refuse to work out sub discipline.  I still cried like a baby when I saw the overall results. 

[Admin]

Furthermore we can't stop at board spec or construction.  We will need a more comprehensive handicap system.

Live in a warm climate: + 4 minutes
Parents who surf (or wanted to): +2 minutes
Good at sports: +4 minutes
All cartilage in factory condition: +2 minutes
Sober (or close): +1 minute
Started below the age of 15: disqualified

[pdxmike]

Don't call it a "handicap"!  It's not appropriate.

[Chan]

I continue to be astounded by some race promoters focusing on odd ideas about what constitutes rational race rules. At the otherwise enjoyable Paddle to the Point the elite class was limited to 12'6". The open class was under 12' for stock and then "unlimited" up to 14'. They seemed disappointed at the lower turnout.

Lots of things affect turnout, but certainly eliminating your race board from the competition is going to be one big factor. Somebody showing up with a 14' race board was relegated to the "also ran" unlimited class of the recreational race. Why bother going?

I don't have a dog in this fight--I brought my 18' speedboard which wouldn't have been "legal" in any class, but would have still used it. But the choppy conditions and my continued recovery from surgery made it an unwise choice. Bob offered to let me use his 12'6" Starboard (which, despite being clearly a surfboard was in the "unlimited" rec class) while he paddled his 9'8". We both had fun.

I'm not holding these guys up for ridicule, they put on a fine event, but this kind of "tower of babel" approach to SUP racing limits the success. If they were looking to grow the event they went about their rulemaking in exactly the wrong way. The so-called organizing bodies have added to the confusion by assuming authority they don't have and crafting rules for their own purposes and benefit. It's probably time for a broad coalition of SUP racers and recreational paddlers to try to do something that will add to the sport instead of limiting participation. The Zone is probably a good place to do it. I don't have a clear idea of what the process might look like, but it might be time to talk about at least that piece.

Hi Bill,

Are you harkening back to the thrown Zone gauntlet which through a circuitous series of events ended in the Unpleasantness at Spartans?

Deep wounds fester the longest.

[pdxmike]

Seriously, in regard to fairness, there was a big debate a few years ago in masters swimming (and swimming in general) about the expensive tech suits that were ultimately banned. 


One stance was that they weren't "fair" because you could basically buy an advantage (suits were around $300 or even more--10x more than a standard Speedo).  On the other hand, there never has been any fairness in masters swimming or any other sport, in the big picture.  Take the guy who lives in Wise River, Montana, and has to drive an hour each way to a pool, where he does workouts on his own because there's no team or coach.  He can afford to do that twice a week.  He's competing at national meets against the rich guy in Mission Viejo who trains twice a day at any of several Olympic outdoor pools, with coached workouts available 3x/day, run by world-class coaches for world-class teammates.  So, if the guy in Wise River wants to buy a suit to shave 1% off his time, who cares? 


I think the consensus in masters swimming was the people with the greatest advantage were people with no kids.


Swimming is different than paddling, because you can pretty much take the gear entirely out of the sport, whereas any paddling involves at least a board, fin and paddle.  So banning the expensive suits didn't mean restricting people to slow suits, as much as it eliminated the influence of the suit on results almost entirely.


I do understand the concepts of not wanting people to win races because they can afford better gear, travel with more than one board, etc. but there will never be fairness. And that's just on a financial level, without even going into genetics, location, etc. 

[PonoBill]

Actually I was referring to that debacle more in this response


Quote from: SaMoSUP on Today at 01:16:25 PM

    Is it possible in 20 years that we'll have 10' boards, hard or inflatable, going faster than current 12'6 or 14' boards?


Yes, but only if they have motors. Or surgically altered athletes.

I remember the heated debate in the early days of the zone when Stu Campbell and I made the outrageous comment that longer boards were faster than shorter ones. There were people that really wanted to punch my lights out for saying that. They told me so. It's not the first time I had someone want to hit me for understanding physics, but then I graduated from high school.


Spartan's was the denouement--resulting in the nineteen foot banana upon which I did the paddle of shame into Kahalui Harbor weeping like a little girl. So yes, it is, though I was just going back to the general debate rather than the actual result.

They do fester.

Oh, and please make Admin stop responding to PDX's ever more PC replies. If they escalate just a tiny bit more I will find them both and hurl on their shoes. I know where they live (more or less).

[Admin]

Don't call it a "handicap"!  It's not appropriate.

That is re...apologies..differently tarded. 

[Chan]

Actually I was referring to that debacle more in this response


Quote from: SaMoSUP on Today at 01:16:25 PM

    Is it possible in 20 years that we'll have 10' boards, hard or inflatable, going faster than current 12'6 or 14' boards?


Yes, but only if they have motors. Or surgically altered athletes.

I remember the heated debate in the early days of the zone when Stu Campbell and I made the outrageous comment that longer boards were faster than shorter ones. There were people that really wanted to punch my lights out for saying that. They told me so. It's not the first time I had someone want to hit me for understanding physics, but then I graduated from high school.


Spartan's was the denouement--resulting in the nineteen foot banana upon which I did the paddle of shame into Kahalui Harbor weeping like a little girl. So yes, it is, though I was just going back to the general debate rather than the actual result.

They do fester.

Oh, and please make Admin stop responding to PDX's ever more PC replies. If they escalate just a tiny bit more I will find them both and hurl on their shoes. I know where they live (more or less).

I had a writing professor who taught that there are only 2 ways to end an epic, you can either ride off into the sunset or you can die a noble death at sea.  I think we need to eliminate the harbor.

[TallDude]

In his post Dave mentioned something that has been on my mind as well as a few local shapers.

[Switch to the Battle of the Paddle at Salt Creek, where perhaps we score solid 4-5 ft surf and it turns out the optimum length is 11’6.

We’d simply choose the best board for the day.]

If Salt Creek is anywhere near 4' to 5', you will see twice as many pieces of boards coming out of the water as you will see going in. The lip at the Creek is super thick and will jamb gravel down your board shorts. I've been thinking about doing the BOP race on a surf / touring cross over. Maybe an inflatable?

This is what Salt Creek looks like on a decent day. I'm not taking my unlimited in and out of that.

[AJR]

Using his logic of letting everyone make their own board choice seems fine but why limit it to inflatables?  Seems like a lot of folks would be ticked that they can't use hard boards that they've already purchased...

But I don't race so what do I know...

[surfcowboy]

In the end, pdx is right, it's more his delivery and the premise for the rules. It let's people talk themselves into a corner til they can see reason.

As to BOP, you'd be crazy as an amateur to run a hard race board if Salt Creek is big. A big surf board would also be a great choice for that day. Dig out those old Laird soft tops boys.

[pdxmike]

AJR--I had the same feeling.  Just get rid of the inflatable part, and you still achieve just about all the good aspects of his idea, while getting rid of the biggest drawback (not being able to race the hard boards people already have).  And if inflatables are really going to be improving, you can still be competitive, if not exactly equal, on an inflatable.  And if you still do lose a bit of performance by choosing the convenience of an inflatable for travel, well, at least it was your own choice. 

And as surfcowboy noticed, what I like best is his whole approach.  No histrionics, no pressure to agree with him, and no claims that we not only have to do it his way, but we have to do it his way right away, or the sport will be ruined forever.   

[PonoBill]

I'm definitely bringing along the 12'2". And the 9' just in case. Who knows, that little manhole cover might be the fast choice. At least it will be hard to break.