Re: Ocean racing and ICF regulations

Read the draft rules for ocean racing.

www.canoeicf.com/site/canoeint/if/downlo...aft%20%2010Nov06.pdf

The bulk of the rule is made up of competition details. The only craft limitation is that the ski must be more than 4m long and currently must be over 13kg. I foresee the weight limit being scrapped before the rule is ratified.

On what basis do you foresee the weight limit being scrapped. Considering their stance with other disciplines, K1s as an example.

BTW, the only rules for K1 are max length 5.2m, min weight 8kg for marathon, 12kg for sprints.

Well aware of that, thanks for clearing it up. Minimum beam rule was done away with in 2000 or 2001.

I wonder if the ICF is setting wt limits for ocean racing based on a formula - one that is either unspoken or simply assumed. For instance, sprint / marathon K1 = 12 / 8 kg. Maybe they are thinking sprint spec ski at 19 kg / distance ski at 13 kg - like it fits into their 'formula'.

I can see the ICF keeping a wt limit for skis. It will likely be one that is not only seen with the exotic layups. It might also reflect a certain safety quality to the ski that includes the weight of internal flotation, build strength, etc. 13 kg might be here to stay. I guess that I really don't care if it is 13 kg, but any more would be too much.

I can see the ICF keeping a wt limit for skis. It will likely be one that is not only seen with the exotic layups. It might also reflect a certain safety quality to the ski that includes the weight of internal flotation, build strength, etc.

So if safety is the point. Why not ask every manufacturer to pass a standardised safety test. A new model of car has to pass a lot of tests before it can be sold. Why not test new models of skis ? If they can pass the test, then they can race.

The bulk of the rule is made up of competition details. The only craft limitation is that the ski must be more than 4m long and currently must be over 13kg.

There are still stupid rules about carrying a rope on the ski, having handles at both ends of the ski, etc.
and some are not very clear :
page 7
-Weighing a minimum of 13 kg for a K1 and 21 kg for a K2.
If weight must be added, it must be attached in a way so
that it can only be removed with the help of tools.
Does that mean I can paddle a 6 kg ski (dreamin' ) if i attach a 7 kg weight on it ? where is the security point if so ?

My advice is that the actual world cup is running quite well... why not use their actual rules instead of using rules once written for sea kayaks ? Sounds like asking you to wear someone else's shoes.

As I mentioned before, these are DRAFT rules. It is important to getthe national federations involved to make sure that any final rules actually reflect the sport. The working group for Ocean Racing is headed by Tim Cornish from CSA. Why not go directly to him or have a club representative present some ideas and proposals.

Its great to discuss what would be good or bad here, but if the working group is not aware of what the paddlers want then they are unlikely to take action. Our national federation (NACF) presented a set of proposals for the rule, including ideas on weight limits, flotation, doing away with safety ropes and making a clearer separation between sea kayaks and skis.

There were ICF reps in Durban and Dubai in 2007 and they were very impressed with the level of organisation. Lets present a good case and make sure that a workable rule package is put in place. I don't think that the rules need to make the sport any more "fair" than it is already - just to standardise it so that if you race in Tahiti, you are doing the same sport as in Sweden or Australia.

Whew.....too early in the morning for this, I must go do some training now.

So, with some fresh oxygen in the brain, here are 2 suggestions:

How about a group of senior paddlers from different countries (Lewis, Dean, Ash, Oscar) get together and discuss the rule and make some positive suggestions to the right people. Its easy to just criticize, but actually come up with a workable set of points.

Also, how about the major ski manufacturers get together and come up with a proposal regarding minimum weight, flotation etc. Hi end skis are good for the manufacturers because they can make more profit on them (although there is a bigger risk) and I believe that they do benefit the sport in general.

I think that what I'm trying to say is lets work with the ICF to get a good, workable set of rules that reflects what is actually happening in the water rather than booing them from the sidelines.

wouldn't it make more sense to scrap the minimum weight in favour of minimum flotation when broken? ie a real safety criteria, rather than a manufacturing/price criteria? Ski builders don't want lots of press about broken boats, so let them build it as light as they can, while maintaining some sort of reserve bouyancy when broken.... being able to paddle a semi-submerged ski to safety (land or escort boat) has it's advantages!

this is a problem that needs to be addressed in the outrigging community as well, not exclusive for skis..

As I said on a different thread a while back, maybe it would be a good idea if the manufacturers declared their reserve flotation - maybe even print it on their maker's patch. That way there is no legislation necessary, just let the consumer decide.

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I apologize if I am), but I seem to recall an interview in which Greg Barton seemed to have expressed some reservations towards handing over control of the sport to the ICF? The last thing I would want to see are rule parameters of any kind that would stifle design innovation. Not at this juncture when we are still seeing exciting new concepts being released. Furthermore, the major players in terms of design and construction have been, at least from my perspective, very responsible in producing safe seaworthy boats so do we really need or want legislation in that area?

Honestly, at this stage I do not see any good that would come from giving over the fate of surf-ski racing to an international body (ICF) that is not dedicated to our sport. Might it not be more prudent to allow the sport to continue to mature and when the time is right, perhaps an official international organization could be formed from within the sport itself? Once fully established this organization could dictate and define the sport to the ICF from a position of strength (if ICF affiliation was infact deemed necessary).

But lets back up a second. Why the contemplated affiliation with the ICF in the first place?