Can we kill board length limits?

[PonoBill]

It would work just fine. It would ultimately lead to exactly what this thread started out to discuss. And by the way, the 4 meter system proposed by Jim would do the exact same thing, and looking back at the posts, you loved that. There would be 4 meter and unlimited--that's it. 14 would be part of the unlimited group. So figure out what you're for and get back to us.

[teamalty]

I've already said what I'm for: the three classes. No change is necessary. Just limits on weight and width. Pretty simple. And, I've said it all along just like you want to say size doesn't matter. I'm sorry, it does.

[pdxmike]

I think making the limit 12-6, or making it 14', both have solid, intellectually honest arguments in their favor.  

Stoneaxe caught why DJ's 12-6 makes sense.  It doesn't pretend to be an inclusive stock class.  It's for lightweights, BOP-type races, and casual racers.  Everyone else goes to unlimited.  

But if you want an inclusive stock class, that really does work well for most of the population (and not force a high percentage of people into UL due to being over 170 lbs. or so) if they want to be competitive, then the limit needs to be 14'.  

Wanting to keep both 12-6 and 14' is also a perfectly valid position.  I'm not that bothered by getting kicked into UL with a 14', but it's a valid concern.  It's obviously the best for not rocking the boat and making boards obsolete due to length.

The one I don't like is 4m.  It pretends to be an inclusive "stock" class, but it can never be that, because it's just too short for the pretty high percentage of non-lightweight people.  And it creates chaos for current boards.  It doesn't solve anything that going to either 12-6 or 14 wouldn't solve, but it has drawbacks worse than either of those.  And it WILL throw a lot of people into UL, like a 12-6 limit would, but pretends that it won't.  

Of course, just killing all board limits is also a completely honest position.  It has the most problems but also the most purity.  It's like being able to vote Libertarian without having to associate with nuts.  It'd be interesting for someone to start a thread about that sometime, but I doubt it would get much attention.  

[SaMoSUP]

What's really great is when a guy on 12'6" beats all the guys on 14' or unlimited. Even more impressive is when a woman on a 12'6" beats all the men overall. Saw it happen with Annabel Anderson in this year's Malibu downwinder. I wonder if she's complaining about board limits.

[DavidJohn]

What's really great is when a guy on 12'6" beats all the guys on 14" or unlimited. Even more impressive is when a woman on a 12'6" beats all the men overall. Saw it happen with Annabel Anderson in this year's Malibu downwinder. I wonder if she's complaining about board limits.

She's done that here as well.. afterall it is 90% the paddler.. 

DJ

[pdxmike]

What's really great is when a guy on 12'6" beats all the guys on 14' or unlimited. Even more impressive is when a woman on a 12'6" beats all the men overall. Saw it happen with Annabel Anderson in this year's Malibu downwinder. I wonder if she's complaining about board limits.

Round the Rock has had a setup where if someone in a shorter class beats a money-winner in a longer class, they get their own prize money for winning their own class, plus the prize money for the person they beat.  So it adds some strategy to what class elites enter.  If you're confident, you enter a shorter class and potentially make more money.   At least that's what I remember. 

There also are some great individual battles created by people being in on different board sizes that wouldn't happen if everyone was on one length board.  Greatdane (UL) edging out Chuck Patterson (14') was a classic. 

[SUPerSwede]

Has anyone tried flying with a 17-footer? How did that work out for you?

[PaddlingParadise]

What's really great is when a guy on 12'6" beats all the guys on 14' or unlimited. Even more impressive is when a woman on a 12'6" beats all the men overall. Saw it happen with Annabel Anderson in this year's Malibu downwinder. I wonder if she's complaining about board limits.

Happened here too. Also I think it's interesting that people think you have to be under 170 or so to ride a 12'6. All 12'6 are not created equal. 

[Pierre]

a recent local race 2 months ago: about 16 km (10 mile)- medium ocean downwind.
participants in 12'6": about 30,  participants in 14': 3
I was paddling a 14' and finished 2nd on 14', won 100 euro prize-money.
but my overall ranking was 7 ( the overall winner was on 12'6" and the overall 2nd on 14') even the last on 14' got prize-money and was ranked around 10th !!!


.... a single class would have solved it... especially for  prize money on such race.  anyone else on ULs with cases of wine as prizes

problem of long boards fit for heavy or short for lightweight, i'm sure , is mainly a problem of design.

[pdxmike]

I don't know--if I ended up winning prize money because only 2 other guys in my class showed up, that's a problem I could live with.   

Seriously, in cases like that where one board length dominates in an area, or for a particular type of race, the race director has the option of deciding upfront to limit prize money to that one class. 

The Round the Rock solution might have worked out nicely (for the 12-6s) in your race also--the 12-6 winner would have taken the 14' winner's prize, and the second 12-6 would have taken yours. 

[PT Woody]

I think we have more chance of killing board length limits than we do of killing this thread,

[pdxmike]

I think we're close to a resolution--maybe only a post or two away from getting everyone in agreement. 

[SUPlime]

Larry Cain joins the debate.

http://distressedmullet.com/should-there-be-restrictions-paddling-technique-keep-sup-changing-no

[TallDude]

I love my new unlimited. It's so fast, I smile when I'm out in the ocean just cruising by myself. It's my peace.    I tried it on a 14', no smile.