I was hoping that someone else would raise this topic but no-one has.
Anyway at the weekend we had boat weighing after second runs and I understand that several paddlers were reported to be underweight. Now I have no issue at all with boat weighing and ensuring that equipment used meets the required standards, but I do have issues when measurements are not performed in a controlled manner. That is why I would like to propose that we try and better manage the equipment scrutineering that takes place at competitions.
I have had a few thoughts that I'll now share with everyone:
- Establish a control area at the end of a course that paddlers must remain in then they can be easily called to be scrutinised. This would stop the few who insist on making up the weight out of view of others.
- No outside interfence with paddlers until they have been through scrutineering. To prevent equipment being tampered with between water and scrutineering.
- A pre-race area where paddlers can go to confirm that there equipment meets the required standards. This would not have to be a formal check before a race, but meerly a place that paddlers could confirm that their equipment measured up accurately against the monitoring equipment.
- Establishment of a "Scrutineering Team" to manage and oversee ALL equipment inspections at UK competitions (Mainly Div 1 and Prem in a simlar way to the Timing Team). This would probably involve several individuals to measure, thus avoiding conflict of interests.
- For boat weighing the creation of three control weights at 8, 9 and 10 Kgs to ensure that the scales read accurately over the range (poss a few more for C2 weighing).
Just a few thoughts what does everyone else think?
Boat and Equipment scrutineering
The idea in its self is fine, the problem comes with getting the volunteers to actually make it happen.
This subject has been broached in the past and it comes down basically to lack of bodies, if a team of people could be found I am sure that the organisers would welcome this job being taken off them. It would also be a better method for reporting illeagal boats back to the organisers for them to take action.
I did not see anyone disqualified at the weekend for under weight boats? but the results are not on the site yet.
This subject has been broached in the past and it comes down basically to lack of bodies, if a team of people could be found I am sure that the organisers would welcome this job being taken off them. It would also be a better method for reporting illeagal boats back to the organisers for them to take action.
I did not see anyone disqualified at the weekend for under weight boats? but the results are not on the site yet.
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
Although I wholeheartedly agree with Quaker there is a need for a team to look after equipment scrutiny, yes there were a number of dusqualifications on Sat, but Geebs has hit the nail on the head! We have enough trouble getting enough peaple to run the timing team and to section judge so finding yet another regular team will be a nightmare!
Perhaps after the euros in August we can convince a few more people that actually helping at races is great fun and very sociable - after all hanging around for hours between runs is very boring! Come on folks we are all in this together, the more that get involved the less each individual has to do!
Perhaps after the euros in August we can convince a few more people that actually helping at races is great fun and very sociable - after all hanging around for hours between runs is very boring! Come on folks we are all in this together, the more that get involved the less each individual has to do!
I would offer to help if a team was setup.
The notion of a team was just an idea to try and control the way in which things are done. It is at present far too easy for a paddler to get round the equipment standard rules - e.g. popping a bit of lead or swirling water into a dry underweight boat, or paddling with an underweight buoyancy aid.
Others who would like to help can pop their names as replies to this thread.
The notion of a team was just an idea to try and control the way in which things are done. It is at present far too easy for a paddler to get round the equipment standard rules - e.g. popping a bit of lead or swirling water into a dry underweight boat, or paddling with an underweight buoyancy aid.
Others who would like to help can pop their names as replies to this thread.
A team of about 10 or so people would be the ideal solution as that way it is not relying on the same few people to cover all the events, let's face it we all have other comitments and can not always make event's, perhaps some of the parent's and partners that would like to help out to see fair play for their respective paddlers?
Quaker do you fancy taking on the job as team leader?
Quaker do you fancy taking on the job as team leader?
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
I would certainly offer to help, although possibly being Team Leader could cause conflicts of interest when I am competing.
I guess that we need more offers of help to get an equipment scrutineering team runnning... not only from parents but from paddlers and coaches.
I will try and encourage some others this coming weekend!
I guess that we need more offers of help to get an equipment scrutineering team runnning... not only from parents but from paddlers and coaches.
I will try and encourage some others this coming weekend!
I have a number of points to raise and agree with a lot of Quakers comments.
Firstly in order for the scales to operate correctly they need to be levelled. (move your bathroom scales around your bathroom floor and see what difference you get).
Secondly at what temperature was the calibration of the scales carried out because temperature can effect measuring equipment and it certainly was hotter than 20 degrees on Saturday.
Nothing against the young lads who where sent to operate carry out the weighing. But I would not class them as competent personnel. Especially see some one stand on the scales at one point.
I also saw some paddlers deliberately putting water in boats to make sure they were in weight.
Also the cock up with year book shows rule 7.1" There are no longer any minimum measurements of boats in domestic competitions". Has every paddler been contacted in writing?
My finally point is the rule for boat weights has been outdated by the advances in materials. The boat weight rule was first published in the slalom year book in 1986 for no other reason than safety before the advent of epoxy resins vacumn bag processes and composite materials. I would suspect a modern 5Kg would be as strong as a 1986 top of the range slalom boat made to 9Kg.
By the way my boat weighed 9.98Kg and I don't consider a person with a 8.8Kg boat to have a significant advantage.
Firstly in order for the scales to operate correctly they need to be levelled. (move your bathroom scales around your bathroom floor and see what difference you get).
Secondly at what temperature was the calibration of the scales carried out because temperature can effect measuring equipment and it certainly was hotter than 20 degrees on Saturday.
Nothing against the young lads who where sent to operate carry out the weighing. But I would not class them as competent personnel. Especially see some one stand on the scales at one point.
I also saw some paddlers deliberately putting water in boats to make sure they were in weight.
Also the cock up with year book shows rule 7.1" There are no longer any minimum measurements of boats in domestic competitions". Has every paddler been contacted in writing?
My finally point is the rule for boat weights has been outdated by the advances in materials. The boat weight rule was first published in the slalom year book in 1986 for no other reason than safety before the advent of epoxy resins vacumn bag processes and composite materials. I would suspect a modern 5Kg would be as strong as a 1986 top of the range slalom boat made to 9Kg.
By the way my boat weighed 9.98Kg and I don't consider a person with a 8.8Kg boat to have a significant advantage.
I do agree with Mick H about the conditions of taking the measurement, but I can't agree about changing the minimum weight.
Ideally the scrutineering should be carried out at a set place set aside, where the scales can be levelled and calibrated before any measurement starts. Of course this is not really feasible under the conditions we have to run our domestic races, so a degree of uncertainty will always apply to the results, and maybe this can be taken into account when the decision is made whether to disqualify a paddler. On the other hand, the weight should be a dry weight (although this doesn't appear to be specified in the rules), and AFAIK everyone's boat was weighed wet. Even if the inside of your boat is dry, the weight of the water on the outside of the boat must weigh a significant amount, so in fact Mick's boat will probably weigh a little less than the scales indicated.
As far as changing the regulations goes, I think the weights allowed are just about right. We are getting stronger boats than we were 20 years ago, but even now, if you make a 6Kg boat, it will not last too long. Indeed I have heard rumours that certain boat manufacturers are making light boats, and making the weight up. Since the added weight is centered in the boat, it has a minimal effect upon the performance of the boat, so there is a temptation to do this (it may explain the differences in longevity of the boats between manufacturers though). I would suggest we need to modify the rule so that a maximum of say 0.5Kg, or 1Kg, is allowed to be added to the boat to make it meet the regs.
Non slalom paddlers already think our boats are fragile enough already. We know better, but if we reduce the minimum weights, it will give them more of a case, which is the last thing we need if we are going to try to promote our sport to these people.
Ideally the scrutineering should be carried out at a set place set aside, where the scales can be levelled and calibrated before any measurement starts. Of course this is not really feasible under the conditions we have to run our domestic races, so a degree of uncertainty will always apply to the results, and maybe this can be taken into account when the decision is made whether to disqualify a paddler. On the other hand, the weight should be a dry weight (although this doesn't appear to be specified in the rules), and AFAIK everyone's boat was weighed wet. Even if the inside of your boat is dry, the weight of the water on the outside of the boat must weigh a significant amount, so in fact Mick's boat will probably weigh a little less than the scales indicated.
As far as changing the regulations goes, I think the weights allowed are just about right. We are getting stronger boats than we were 20 years ago, but even now, if you make a 6Kg boat, it will not last too long. Indeed I have heard rumours that certain boat manufacturers are making light boats, and making the weight up. Since the added weight is centered in the boat, it has a minimal effect upon the performance of the boat, so there is a temptation to do this (it may explain the differences in longevity of the boats between manufacturers though). I would suggest we need to modify the rule so that a maximum of say 0.5Kg, or 1Kg, is allowed to be added to the boat to make it meet the regs.
Non slalom paddlers already think our boats are fragile enough already. We know better, but if we reduce the minimum weights, it will give them more of a case, which is the last thing we need if we are going to try to promote our sport to these people.
This can a big issue for quite a few people. Where do you go to measure the weight of a boat! I use my batroom scales, not the most accurate of measures. A boat will behave differently if it has additional weight placed in it so a paddler would need time to get used to it! There could be a case of no manafacturer releasing a boat unless it is 9kg!
I do feel that the weight regs are out of date and why shouldnt people be allowed to paddle a more hitech light boat with todays technology this is possible. If a boat is made too light then generally it would not be as rigid and a floppy boat is more detremental than a heavy one.
I do think that if anyone was disqualified last weekend then they would have grounds for appeal as the rules quite clearly state there are no restrictions on boat measurements. Yes there is a retraction of those rules on the unoffical website.
I do feel that the weight regs are out of date and why shouldnt people be allowed to paddle a more hitech light boat with todays technology this is possible. If a boat is made too light then generally it would not be as rigid and a floppy boat is more detremental than a heavy one.
I do think that if anyone was disqualified last weekend then they would have grounds for appeal as the rules quite clearly state there are no restrictions on boat measurements. Yes there is a retraction of those rules on the unoffical website.
Putting weight in a boat does not affect the handling significantly. My weight can fluctuate by a couple of kilos over the course of a week, but if I have an extra couple of pies, I don't get in my boat and start thinking that it is handling a bit funny.
If you put the weight in the wrong place, it will affect handling. Put a kilo weight on each end of the boat and then see what difference it makes. This is why boats are made underweight, in order to get the weight down at the ends (mischievous aside: unless it is simply to save cost on materials :;): ). Unfortunately, it is the ends of the boat that are most prone to damage.
I repeat, lowering the weight of the boat will reduce its life, and the last thing we need to do is to make our sport more expensive.
If you put the weight in the wrong place, it will affect handling. Put a kilo weight on each end of the boat and then see what difference it makes. This is why boats are made underweight, in order to get the weight down at the ends (mischievous aside: unless it is simply to save cost on materials :;): ). Unfortunately, it is the ends of the boat that are most prone to damage.
I repeat, lowering the weight of the boat will reduce its life, and the last thing we need to do is to make our sport more expensive.
And another thing....
I am sorry if I seem to be going on about this, but I must also take issue with Mikey's statement about modern manufacturing techniques making stronger boats. The modern foam sandwich construction used today has been developed more for adding stiffness than strength to the boat. At the same time the manufacturing techniques have been developed so that there is a reduced skill element in laying up a boat, and this has improved the consistency of the boats.
However, you could always get a strong boat built within the weight regs, if you knew where to go. AFAIK Pete Wignall at Impulse never made a bad boat, Nick Pink's boats were always very good, as were most boats made by P & H and Gaybo. In fact, I would say that these boats were tougher than today's boats, as they were always a bit flexible, so that they would bend when they hit a rock, where a modern boat will simply crack.
I am sorry if I seem to be going on about this, but I must also take issue with Mikey's statement about modern manufacturing techniques making stronger boats. The modern foam sandwich construction used today has been developed more for adding stiffness than strength to the boat. At the same time the manufacturing techniques have been developed so that there is a reduced skill element in laying up a boat, and this has improved the consistency of the boats.
However, you could always get a strong boat built within the weight regs, if you knew where to go. AFAIK Pete Wignall at Impulse never made a bad boat, Nick Pink's boats were always very good, as were most boats made by P & H and Gaybo. In fact, I would say that these boats were tougher than today's boats, as they were always a bit flexible, so that they would bend when they hit a rock, where a modern boat will simply crack.
Dave the boats are deffinatley stronger than they were a few years ago! Yes agreed new technology has meant that boats are stiffer! But these boats are in no way dangerous! I would also argue that it has made the laminating process easier! The actual process is exactly all that is different is the materials that are used! My point which I thought was quite clear is that if boat weights came down much under 6-7kg then they would more than likley be too flexible to improve performance! So there would be no point in going for a stupidly light boat! If you feel that a couple of kilos dosent affect the way a boat performs then why have a restiction if it gives no advantage to have a light boat?
I think you will find at an elite level a paddler will be able to notice differences in the performance of a boat if there is a kilo difference and could mean an extra 10th of a second here or there which is often the difference between gold and silver!
At the end of the day the rule about boat weights has been around for 20 years now and as has already been mentioned technology has moved and and boats have even decreased in length which must take some weight off!! These are facts which cannot be dennied! If we have the expetise then why not use it. Would we limit the weight of a training shoe or football boot?? It would be nice to see the ICF look into boat weights and see if they could be SAFELY reduced!
I think you will find at an elite level a paddler will be able to notice differences in the performance of a boat if there is a kilo difference and could mean an extra 10th of a second here or there which is often the difference between gold and silver!
At the end of the day the rule about boat weights has been around for 20 years now and as has already been mentioned technology has moved and and boats have even decreased in length which must take some weight off!! These are facts which cannot be dennied! If we have the expetise then why not use it. Would we limit the weight of a training shoe or football boot?? It would be nice to see the ICF look into boat weights and see if they could be SAFELY reduced!
A lot of the stiffness of modern boats comes from the foam sandwich construction. You could build a boat with just one layer of carbon each side of the foam, and it would be stiff, and very light. This boat would have a performance advantage over a boat made to the regs, so what is stopping manufacturers supplying them? Nothing, as far as I can see, other than the expense of having to provide a new boat to their sponsored paddlers for each race.
I agreed that a light boat has a performance advantage, but when you put weight in a boat, it doesn't make the boat itself any heavier, so any difference in performance is due to the boat sitting slightly lower in the water. If you have a light boat, the boat is lighter along its whole length, which reduces its moment, which makes it easier to turn.
As for boats being stronger, just take a look at some of the boats that crashed into the rocks this weekend on Bala Mill falls. Don't look stronger to me
I agreed that a light boat has a performance advantage, but when you put weight in a boat, it doesn't make the boat itself any heavier, so any difference in performance is due to the boat sitting slightly lower in the water. If you have a light boat, the boat is lighter along its whole length, which reduces its moment, which makes it easier to turn.
As for boats being stronger, just take a look at some of the boats that crashed into the rocks this weekend on Bala Mill falls. Don't look stronger to me
Thinking on, I suppose it depends upon what you mean by strong. Today's foam sandwich boats are very strong in the sense they resist bending. In a pinning situation, they will resist bending a lot better than a traditionally laid up boat (I know, I saw Kay pin her boat pinned on the groyn below Davies's with most of the back half sticking into the current, and it survived with only a few scratches)
However, I would argue that the are less "tough", that is they resist impact less well than the older boats. The reason is that they have very thin skins over the foam, so in an impact with a sharp object (such as the rocks below Bala Mill), the outer skin will puncture a more easily than the old boats did. For proof of this, just look at the deck most peoples C1s - they are all punctured, and this never used to happen before the advent of foam construction (unless you happened to have a Krakatoa that is)
Reducing the weight will make impact damage more frequent, and lower the life of the boat.
However, I would argue that the are less "tough", that is they resist impact less well than the older boats. The reason is that they have very thin skins over the foam, so in an impact with a sharp object (such as the rocks below Bala Mill), the outer skin will puncture a more easily than the old boats did. For proof of this, just look at the deck most peoples C1s - they are all punctured, and this never used to happen before the advent of foam construction (unless you happened to have a Krakatoa that is)
Reducing the weight will make impact damage more frequent, and lower the life of the boat.