Messages

1246

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 08, 2016, 12:38:30 AM »

Since this is about the 21.5" new Starboard Sprint board, I thought I would add a few facts (for those who are interested).

The new board 14x21.5 is more stable than my 17.6x23.
On flat water, it's almost as stable as my 14x23 Sprint, or at least very close to it.
The hull closely resembles that of the Allstar.
The nose is completely different.
The tail is wider than ever, making turns faster.
The Sprint has finally been modified, after 3 years of nearly no modifs.

People who will love that new board:
Top racers on flat water.
Lighter paddlers, including women.
Recreational paddler who want to continue to work on their balance on the flats.

Perhaps muffled is the 14x23 Sprint that has also been modified (hull, nose and tail). That board should make people realize that if you can handle a 14x25 in Open Ocean, you WILL in fact easily handle this new 14x23 Sprint in flat water.

Anyway, thought I'd share the above, for it's quite interesting to see a board geared towards lighter paddler too.

Something I'd like to ask - I still have a 2014 sprint in the 26 inch width and at my size and weight (6ft 3 and 94Kg), its at the limit I'm currently happy with in a mass start race. However, I am curious about the 2016 23 inch wide sprint. With its improved shape, is a board that narrow still going to be beyond me ? I'm also worried that manufacturers just aren't producing boards in a high enough volume for larger paddlers.

1247

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 08, 2016, 12:35:19 AM »

So no need to worry about pricey 1% elite narrow carbon boards killing the sport. 

If it's really a problem, we should all know at least a few.

The sport is still on an upward trajectory with an identity crisis so it may be too soon to judge. I'm certainly seeing a big swing locally to where I am for mid pack guys moving from race boards in the 26-28 inch range down to 23-25. Having not paddled much of the latter, I can't say with any robustness if those boards are beyond the skill of the average racer.

However, just to add something else in the mix - guess what our biggest attendance was in any one class in the UK last year ? - Naish N1sco one design. I'm going to be slightly biased (as I'm on their team this year), but the N1sco national champs in the UK this year are slated to see over a 100 paddlers. We have never had a single event in the UK that has had anywhere near that in the 12'6 or 14 hard board class so there is obviously some appeal or defining factor for the expansion here in one design racing.

1248

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 08, 2016, 12:29:10 AM »

I'm sure this is blasphemy to some...but getting the masses involved...I never quite figured that out in any sport...hasn't worked out so well for surfing (windsurfing, Kites)...overcrowded breaks, no place to park, and the aggression that goes with it.

That's exactly the point. SUP doesn't suffer the geographical restrictions that surfing requires and doesn't have the same level of technical demands kiting does so it has a massive and potentially wider appeal. This all said, I suspect a significant percentage of the sport want it to remain elistist and smaller in scale.

1249

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 07, 2016, 06:01:37 AM »

.

1250

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 07, 2016, 05:59:37 AM »

An intersecting factor for racing these days is the cost of boards in some markets worldwide, and the types of races used. In Europe a carbon All Star 14 costs 3714 Dollars US at today's exchange rates. 3714 dollars US. Three thousand seven hundred and fourteen US dollars.

Now, this might not be a problem if two other things weren't also happening:

1. Distributors are importing fewer and fewer race boards, and especially the cheap construction ones. Over the last few years, retailers have been burnt by old stock that has not sold, and the tendency for brands to completely change their models every 5 minutes. The margins are much higher on carbon boards. And they reason that since people buying new narrow raceboards will be serious racers rather than recreational paddlers, it is better to import a few high-spec carbon boards than rush getting stuck with several cheaper-but-heavy glass boards. So there is simply not that much stock around. Long waits for delivery are common, alongside the high prices because not much stock is held. There are cheaper local brands and customs, but their re-sale tends to be very weak.

2. Several races these days involve running with your board (eg. Lost Mills) or have portage sections, or many places where the ability to be able to lift your board easily is a necessity (eg. beach starts, some races on canals and rivers). This puts a premium on having a light board. Have you ever tried running with a 35lb Naish Glide? Or a beach start with one, or lifting one out of the water for a portage section on a long river or canal race? The sheer weight of the cheaper boards becomes a huge disadvantage, to the point where for what you are asked to do with the board during a race is almost impossible for some people and board combinations.

And then there is the durability issue... Or rather the lack of it. I've got a 2014 Ace carbon that was raced (hard) for just one season and it's value dropped over 2500 US dollars in ONE YEAR. Who can afford that? The boards just aren't fit for purpose really: an expensive racing board should be able to stand up to the normal rigours of racing (including clumsy buoy turns, getting bumped through drafting etc). But they can't. Constant expensive repairs and heavy depreciation follow. We need a revolution in construction methods, or else change the format of races so that there is not as much "rubbing" in racing.

So, combine these factors with the move towards race boards that beginners have no hope of standing on, this meaning that they will have to invest a year of balance training and several iterations of (hard to find) ever-narrower boards in order to acquire the skills to stand on anything remotely resembling what the elite few are on, hoovering up the prize money, and you are creating a huge gap between the entry-level paddler and the serious racer. The issue is as much about money and time as it is the equipment.

It is likely that the growth in racing has already levelled out. Paddlers are still turning out in their droves for big events where you get to paddle somewhere you don't normally (eg. the Paris Crossing). These are the equivalent of big marathon running races which attract weekend warrior runners looking to challenge themselves - and then possibly never race again. I can see these events still succeeding. But will there be a continued growth at the club level as costs continue to spiral and equipment gets extremely hard to use and source? I doubt it. Then, once racing has become so specialised that it is essentially an oddity (like Olympic Canoe), even the big event races will start to disappear. Unless your dad forced you to train on a 18" wide SUP every week between the ages of 6 and 14, you won't be able to stand on the boards you need to stand on to take part.

But that's OK. I'm not sure how much racing is really contributing to the general SUP community anyway. SUP originally emerged out of the desire to make the most of unpromising conditions, and to generally have fun. Racing SUPs actually seemed a bit odd when it first started - a bit silly, even. A bit like having a paddling race for boogie boards, or doing the M2O on a rubber ring would seem peculiar. And I guess that in time that is where SUP racing will return, leaving the all the fantastic recreational  uses still going - on cheaper and more durable boards, just like it was back in 2007.

Good answer. Lots to think about there (pretty much all of it I agree with).

The flipside I'm seeing is that there is no secondhand market. The carbon boards are more competitive but their depreciation is horrific. I suspect competitive riders buy new (and top of the range) gear (and not secondhand) but your garden variety participant will buy what they can afford and don't mind if the board is glass rather than carbon.

1251

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 07, 2016, 05:56:32 AM »

This illconcieved threat of the narrow board theme...the whole premise seems silly to me...following this line of thinking any sport or activity that has a elite level of participant would die.
 
Did people stop driving cars on vacation trips because of Nascar? Do people quite using ski & fishing boats because of racing Formula1 tunnel hulls no weekend warrior could handle? The examples could go on for ever...Does the sport of horse racing die because a 6'-6" 260lb rider can't be competitive at any serious event? ....or how about basketball... Did it die because a 5' center would have a snowballs chance in hell in the NBL?

There never has been, and never wil be, a fair competition. Someone is always going to have an advantage over another. Be it Gods gifting, genetic, more time to devote to improvement or a hundred other factors.
If we would be brutally honest with ourselves...the naked truth is the only time people think something is fair is when they hold an advantage or special privilege over others.

The Nascar example and your other examples are flawed as you're comparing products inside and outside of the sport. This is all about comparisons of equipment used within the same sport (or race). Would you (if you were able) want to race a Prius in that race if you could ? By the time you'd been lapped a few hundred times (but realised the fast cars were either too expensive or too undriveable) you'd go elsewhere in the end to do another form of driving. The concept of high skill equipment making a sport elitist has been seen in K1, some classes of sailing, canoeing and a few others. SUP has done nothing so far to demonstrate it won't end up the same way - i.e. niche. However, it doesn't have to (and that was Jims and my point in our respective articles). However, you might not see mass participation as relevant (at which point, lets get on with developing the most stable narrow boards we can). Mind you, we might as well abandon length restrictions if we're going to ignore width restrictions.

It's not about being advantageous to one type of person or another (you're spot on with that - and board width isn't going to change that anyway), but the point is you won't get mass participation (if that's what the sport wants), if you make the learning/skill curve too steep to be mid pack competitive.

1252

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 06, 2016, 11:54:12 PM »

Nice to see Starboard building narrow boards.  And it looks like dropping below 23" width may not be leading to the downfall of SUP racing, contrary to the dire warnings of a couple years ago.

I'm not sure how you can say that given that the board isn't even out for purchase yet.

Good point, but on the other hand, I said "may not" instead of "will not". 

And although the it may not be for sale yet, the decision by Starboard to sell it has already happened.  And that means Starboard has broken away from the group of manufacturers that supposedly agreed 2 or 3 years ago not to sell 14' boards less than 23" wide. The rhetoric of a few years ago was that it absolutely would destroy SUP racing. To me that means that at least Starboard--one of the largest manufacturers--has decided that selling a narrow board isn't going to ruin the sport.  Or it may mean they believe it may kill the sport, but they don't care.     

That's just market push and pull (coupled with the lack of a governing body). Gentleman's agreements never last in sport because competitive influences would mean there would be advantage for someone to test the water. Mind you, there are two paddlers in the UK that were using customs below 23 inches already so its not Starboards fault really.

However, some of this might well be avoided if the newer but narrower flatwater boards in the 24-25 inch range are really as stable as people claim as that will maintain a realistic gap to what the weekend warriors might use.

1253

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 06, 2016, 11:38:33 PM »

Yes, it is almost three years to the day when Jim Terrell wrote his influential article on the future of SUPS racing:

http://www.supracer.com/the-death-and-rebirth-of-sup-racing/

It seems to me that pretty much everything he predicted is slowly happening. I have no reason to think that the final outcome that he warns about won't happen too.

Jim was spot on.

Here was my own article I wrote on the subject on Supracer and (aside from the 4 metre class proposal) agree with Jim wholesale.

http://www.supracer.com/the-board-class-debate-again/

SUP's beauty (in fact the whole reason I tried and left surfskiing and moved to SUP) was that its accessibility and gentle learning curve would mean racing would eventually be well attended. Boards this narrow will kill that off.

1254

Gear Talk / Re: New 21" wide Starboard Sprint?

« on: June 06, 2016, 08:26:50 AM »

Nice to see Starboard building narrow boards.  And it looks like dropping below 23" width may not be leading to the downfall of SUP racing, contrary to the dire warnings of a couple years ago.

I'm not sure how you can say that given that the board isn't even out for purchase yet.

Don't get me wrong, this board is awesome for driving performance onwards and seeing how fast we can go. However when you look at the sport as a whole (not just at the elites), allowing boards this narrow is going to be an unmitigated disaster for growing the sport. There has been too many examples in other sports of high performance equipment killing off (or preventing) mass participation.