Paddle length, is there a formula?

Think and stellar boats have by far the longest cockpit adjustment.
Epic claim to fit tall guys but I have always struggled in their boats. I have owned Fenn's, Carbonology, Red 7's and custom kayaks and I have had to modify each foot plate and even then there is always a compromise.
The Thinks and the Stellar literally have inches of adjustment left after I sit in them. Contact bigadski to try a Think. If your down south I have a mate(Big Al)who can organise a paddle in a Stellar.

Me, I make a distinction between the arms, which are joined to the top of the torso and are attached to the paddle (adjustable), and the legs, which are joined to the bottom of the torso and attach via the feet to the footplate (also adjustable).


Aaaaah. There was an arm to leg segue in this thread just before the page turned.

Thanks Maireski!!!!

I thought I was going crazy!!!

I would like to come back to this thread.

As I wrote in another thread, I got mocked for my too long, too large paddle.

So I experimented with shorter ones. Substantially shorter. I bought some cheap blades and glued them to a 100cm carbon tube.

The result is something of 202 cm. And after some minutes where you think your arms have shrunk, it feels fine. For the first time I have the feeling that a steep angle pays off. I feel closer to the water, which is not a bad thing in choppy conditions.

I am 177 cm height. And here is the thing:

Oscar is something beyond 190 cm. He uses between 212 and 207 paddle length. BIG question: what, if we assume that height is the only difference between me and Oscar (haha, but let's stick to this assumption for a moment), what should be my paddle length?

If Oscar on average paddles, say, 210cm , I should use a proportionally smaller length equivalent to our difference in height, right?

Which would be 196 cm.

Put differently, if you would shrink Oscar (with his paddel in hand) to my size, his paddle would be that length. Or shorter, when going upwind.

Right? So the Oscar-Formula is [height in cm x 1.073].

A valid argument against this simple formula might be that the distance of Oscar's and my, say, shoulder joints to the water are less than our height difference, because Oscar is submerged 2 cm deeper. But only if I use a boat that alright for Oscar, but too big for me. If the ensemble of paddler, paddle, and boat are shrunk by the same factor, the formula should hold again more or less.

Right?

Hmm, maybe this is entirely wrong [and I'm very happy to be corrected] - but besides height, wouldn't shoulder width, arm length and other bodily dimensions also have something to do with it?

I'm about 177cm too, but I have really wide shoulders.

Still, just read this thread first time and tomorrow I'll try 205 or so and see how I go!

Started at 214, settled on 211 - excited to have a go at 205!

Shoulder width ... good point. Maybe shorter guys tend to be relatively broader than taller ones. But Oscar e.g. seems to have the same height-shoulder width ratio as me.

One may add arm length ... but what would it imply? Probably nothing: a) your grip will be wider, but b) you are closer to the water. Same paddle length, at a wider grip, that's all?

I am afraid you have your facts wrong about Oscar, his range is around 217-210

I am afraid you have your facts wrong about Oscar, his range is around 217-210

Damn, my paddle doesn't go to 205.

In any event, I had an entirely new paddling experience today, nothing to do with paddle length, much more to do with top arm guiding power in catch and ... a change in exit technique to assist in more powerful rotation - and more powerful catch.

I hope I had an epiphany, because I was motoring with very little effort and a surprisingly short stroke. Will find out tomorrow if it's all still there - and apologies, as clearly I've moved off topic. But, I'm excited

The bike guys have had this ratio thing worked out for years to arrive at the theoretical ideals for seat height, frame, bars etc. So I don't think you are wasting your time pursuing a paddle length ideal. Strength and fitness will be the variables. Technique however is not a variable as this is defined ideally .
I'm not sure that a %age of Oscar's ratio will work though. After all he is OSCAR!
Then again, the bike guys must have started somewhere and it may have been with some super star cyclist as the ideal.

"I am afraid you have your facts wrong about Oscar, his range is around 217-210"

That is correct, I will now calculate with 214cm paddle length.

But I also got his height a bit too short, he is reported with 195cm height.

214 / 195 = 1.0974

Applied to my height this results in a paddle length of 194.2 cm.

Maximum:

217 / 195 = 1.113 => for my 177 cm this results in a paddle of 197.0 cm length.

Minimum:

210 / 195 = 1.077 => for my 177 cm this results in a paddle of 190.6 cm length.

"After all he is OSCAR!"

Sure, but what could there be so special in Oscar's anatomy that would justify the use of specifically short paddles?

In accordance with other who reported similar impressions, I can say that a change from 216 (my old paddle) to 202 fundamentally changes my paddle style, almost by force:

1. I HAVE to use a more vertical style, as otherwise I do not reach the water

2. My exit comes earlier, and thus more in time.

3. I find rotating easier, and also I am a bit more forced to do it.

Re OSCAR - Maybe he just trained with what he had and adapted? I don't know.

Try going shorter with paddle length until technique breaks down and there's your short length limit and try the same for a longest length. See what happens.

"Re OSCAR - Maybe he just trained with what he had and adapted?"

Maybe he could not afford a longer paddle in his younger years ...

Good point about trying. The long end is exhausted in my case already. The short end is difficult to reach with available paddles