If you are using OC-1 time trials to determine fitness for OC-6 sprints, obviously the time trial only has to be 5 or 6 minutes. But for longer events (1 hour plus) how long a time trial is needed to show relative strengths?
SoCal OC-6 races run 2 - 21/2 hours for open men. I don't think you'd have to have everyone TT that distance. But is 20 - 30 minutes a good indicator of aerobic power and endurance?
What I have noticed is that short time trials do not demonstrate real abilities of the paddler. Often weaker paddlers have been able to do relatively well on a 30 min course. Additionally, you need to consider the water conditions as this is the most effective way to show who is better. This doesn't only concern the ability to use the water but also shows how comfortable the paddler is in the boat on rough water (you don't want panic monger in your oc-6 crew).
A good time trial would be anything from 60 to 80 min on a course which offers different currents and surface conditions.
oldguysrulepaddlin on Guam
I forget who said it 1st, but I remember reading a coaches comment on this very subject that said "Everyone's fast for 45 minutes." Go an hour or more, assuming there is an aerobic base to see where you're at. Obviously water, wind, surf conditions change day to day (or minute to minute here), so comparing times is relative; but if you can match paddler to paddler...
That's basically what I was after. Just admit you should be sitting 5 and grumpy Steve should stroke.Actually, I was trying to discuss the subject seriously-thank god you're always there to reduce everything to the ridiculous. I was amazed you didn't satirize my "greatest paddler" topic.
goto, if it's any consolation, i suck at one AND six mans. at least you're good at one out of the two.
but seriously, i had a coach in the past that had a valid point, look at any race or time trial. 90 percent of the time, the order that the field falls into will stay the same as it is after the first 20 to 30 minutes. there may be some reshuffling by a place or so, but for the most part things are set. I didn't believe him so when I started coaching i took note of where everyone fell into place after the start of a race. And sure enough, he was right. My buddy believed in time trials of no more than 20 to 30 minutes. Also, as a coach, he thought that it never really mattered who won a time trial. He wanted to see where the big drop off was. After say the 8th, 9th, or 10th paddler. Things almost always fall into that bell shaped curve.
but then you have clubs like outrigger that do a time trial from the OC to DH bouy, to Kewalo or Honolulu Harbor, and back to the OC. That seems to work for them. Pretty sure that would be longer than 30 minutes.
BTW goto...too bad your gonna miss out on the alumni race this year...
Guys, download this and tell me what you think. It's an excel spread sheet program that ranks oc1 paddlers for inclusion in the OC6, adjusted for weight. It was designed as a "first pass assessment. By that i mean when you retrieve the ranking, you then trial those paddlers in OC6 seat swaps and so on. I think this is similar to what Lanakai do the pick their Molokai crew. See Attached file. Open in Excel and Change the values in the blue cells only and watch the difference it makes.
Rambo, that's very interesting. Being a Hawai'i public schools product, I couldn't make heads nor tails of it,though. I'm sure one of the brighter guys in our gang can figure it out. I'm pretty sure Lanikai uses a similar method, but without all the math. That is, a time trial to figure out where guys are generally, then using various combinations of the top paddlers to dial the best nine or six. I've noticed that some paddlers, especially larger fellas, who may not be great one-manners, happen to be essential to six man success. This year in Molokai, for example, Lanikai replaced one of their taller guys with an average size guy who's fast on the OC-1, not that it would have made much of a difference in the final result. I've always been biased towards having at least 3-4 tall guys in any group of 9. Do you remember the Lanikai crew of 95-96? They had 3 guys over 6'6" , one 6'4" and one 6'3"as well as the 4 smaller guys to balance it out. I'm a firm believer that it takes a mixture of sizes, like a rugby or basketball team. Then, of course, you have guys like Judd and Bartlett etc. who are average size with the strength and power of much larger individuals. For us mere mortals, it's good to have some bigger guys to move the big boat.
Rambo,
If I read the spreadsheet correctly, a heavier paddler would win the seat - all other things being equal. However, doesn't that create more work for the rest of the crew (and therefore slower speeds?) If I had the choice of a 160 lb paddler who paddled a 50-minute time trial and a 200 lb paddler who paddled an equal 50-minute time trial, I would choose the 160lb paddler to lighten the boat. Everyone in the canoe has to pull that extra 40 lbs for two hours. I guess I'm confused as to why a heavier paddler gets extra credit for pulling his own weight around. If you look at it from a strength-to-weight ratio, isn't the lighter guy a better choice?
Someone please clarify is I'm not thinking about this correctly.
Because all else being equal, the biiger guy(me) will be able to pull the extra weight of the boat itself and the steersman more efficiently than the smaller guy(Goto).
I tried out lots of different combinations while coaching high performance OC6 crews and agree with the posters who observed that;
OC1 time trials are essential to forming an OC6 crew,
the finish order often doesn't change after the iniital 20-30 minutes,
everyone can be fast to 45 minutes,
time trials need to reflect race durations, AND
I will add that time trials should be used to evaluate paddlers AND to evaluate your coaching skills. Being able to use these evaluations to modify your coaching plan is essential, otherwise you are not treating your paddlers with respect by guiding and preparing them to meet your team boat selection criteria.
First, time trials are a central component of an unbiased and open crew selection process, some may argue this is the right of any paddler looking to make a club team. Time trials are one of the few selection criteria that can be considered relatively objective.
Second, the finish order doesn't change much after the first 20-30 minutes in a long distance event. I would say this is mostly due to teams having settled into their race pace by this time, or if they haven't will blow up very soon. It is usually somewhere in the initial 15 minutes where the most changes in race order occur, coincidentally this is the physiological point where any errors in pacing will catch up with a vengance.
Usually, only tactical errors will affect the final standings after the initial portions of the race. This can include a bad line, inability to surf, go upwind, hydrate or feed properly, etc.
Third, I would agree that pretty well anyone can show potential up to 45 minutes, after 45 minutes race experience begins to show. Those with experience will be hydrating properly, will have warmed up properly, fuelled up well before the time trial and addressed those "little details" that inexperienced athletes either neglect or don't know about. Any small errors in initial race pace will show up big time here.
Our club used a 5 km (3 mile) time trial loop for program evaluation and crew selections. Early season we would do 1 loop only and as the year progressed towards six man season we added loops on. The top paddlers always did better on laps 2+ than the other paddlers. In many distance based sports, the idea of knowing how to "negative split" or go slightly faster as a race progresses is essential to elite performance. From 4:00 minutes and up, negative splitting is the most reliable way to win a race.
Some real world sport examples;
All of the 10 km running world records were set with less than a 0.5% difference between the first and second 5 km splits, with the second 5 km being faster,
A study of splits at rowing world championships showed that a negative split strategy yielded the most medals while the least successful medalling strategy was start fast and progressively slow down.
Lastly, on time trials reflecting race durations, I would add it it not how well paddlers do in those longer duration time trials, but the experience they get from being out there in a solo with no one to relie on but themselves. In some early races we had lots of "experienced paddlers" racing with no fluids, bonking, or just not giving 100%. Our coaches decided that when our goal was a top long distance event (2 hour race) we required all potential crew members to have done one longer (20 km) individual time trial to know what their abilities were. This taught them the importance of hydration, pre-race planning, pacing, mental toughness and respect for their team mates. It also added a level of camaraderie by sharing the experience as well.
A good coach can also learn a great deal by varying the time trial format from mass start to dual starts to individual starts; slowest first to slowest last. Each race format will tell you more about your paddlers and potential team.
For change races, choosing OC1 trial formats gets even more fun!
Once paddlers started to learn about their own strengths and weaknesses when racing solo, they became stronger team paddlers as well. Those who didn't or wouldn't do the trials to learn were often seen as liabilities or unknowns.
All that being said, top solo paddlers do not make top team paddlers. A progression from OC1 to OC2 to OC6 is needed to see who can make the leap from good solo paddler to good team boat paddler. Evaluating OC2 combos is the next step, you'll see non-team paddlers show up very easily at this level as well as stronger and weaker combinations. You'll than need to evaluate seat specific skills from stroke to steersperson, and more so in change races and sprint turn race crews.
And yes it will take more time, but add in that next level in a small team boat, you will learn more about your paddlers and illustrate it in objective, measurable ways.
As a good coach, you should then take that OC1 and OC2 info and use it to direct your training plan. A good OC1 and poor OC2 paddler needs team boat skills and you need to teach them those skills. A poorly paced OC1 paddler needs to work on pacing and learn how it can make them faster. And so on.
One observation on the perception in OC that bigger is better. In many gliding sports, this is true.
Bigger more powerful athletes have an advantage over smaller athletes in some conditions. However, this comes with a warning label that it is functional lean muscle mass that lends power to the boat. Too often I have seen bigger (in some cases overweight) paddlers treated preferentially over smaller (leaner) paddlers despite faster solo time trials by the smaller paddler.
An example is a paddler who showed great solo time trials at 210 lbs was pegged for first crew material, while a 160 lb paddler of the same speed was not. The 210 lb paddler slimmed down over a few seasons to 160 lbs, and got faster. As did the other 160 lb paddler. The 210 paddler was always perceived as bigger and more powerful in the OC6.
Alan C., that OC2 thing is a great idea! I'd have to say the whole being fair thing is overrated, though. The greatest outrigger coach I've ever known prided himself on making unexpected crew decisions the day before the race just to f**k with your mind. There's probably a happy medium somewhere between that and total openness, but when the coaches every move can be questioned by the paddlers, alot of energy can be wasted. Ultimately, the coach has to have the final say without having to explain himself to everyone, and the paddlers must respect that. Some things just aren't quantifiable- there's no way to measure what's inside the paddler with a stopwatch.
I have always been baffled by theory that there needs bigger paddlers in a six-man to be successful.
False logic.
If a person cannot pull his or her own weight in a one-man, how the hell is that person going to pull his or her weight in the six-man, and be more productive than the person who is pulling his or her weight and then some? Just more dead weight for everyone else to carry.
I think what the they were trying to say is that if the big guy and the small guy are the same on the oc1, then take the big guy for the oc6.I've lost my seat to a bigger guy who's slower on the oc1 before, too,numerouno.
Heavy paddlers may be essential for the current OC6 hulls if the average hull requires 1100 lbs to be at the sweet spot for optimizing performance. If a crew has a light stroke, two seat and steersperson it may well require a few bubbas in the middle to float properly. Or a few 45 lb Olympic barbell plates, sandbags, or...
In flatwater kayaks and underweight crew (re hull specs) in a team boat have a very difficult time controlling the hull, as do an overweight crew.
Alan, you are awealth of info. I always kind of instinctively knew that 1100 lb. thing. It seems like when you start going too much over that #, things start to bog. Any insight on that theory?
You should just do what our club does, vote for your favorite paddler, even though your best OC-1 guy, pissed everyone off, he is off the 1st crew. Put him on 2nd crew and let him think about his actions.NOW that works. But I feel that you should use the OC-1 as a tool, some people don't have OC-1, what if they are good paddlers, do you screw them over. And leave them off the crew. NOW rambo that whole excel spread sheet is junk. And well Alan your just a wealth of knowledge, write a book..
Jim I love seat 5, that way you can blame everyone in front of you, when you don't win.
Lot of great info being shared here. It would seem that it boils down to paddler strength-to-weight ratio being one of the largest factors. "Strength" being endurance/sustained power. Couple threads earlier talked about the glide, and I agree w/the theory on how bigger guys will affect the momentum - was always a big believer in the bell curve makeup of crew (light, medium and heavy mix) it would also seem that different ocean conditions would favor or hinder a lighter or heavier crew - (if all else equal). Think about it like racing an RX-8 versus a Challenger through a winding course (lighter/heavier, similar strength to weight ratio). If there's lots of turns, slowing and accellerating, I think the RX-8 has an advantage. Straigher course, conserved momentum, and I think the Challenger has an advantage. Of course skill, efficiency and balance have a lot to do with the equation as well, but intuitively there has been something there that has always nagged at me. Thoughts?
AlanC, you are correct about proper weight distribution, in any condition wieght distribution is key.
However, the theory that you need heavier paddlers to make the boat float properly seems quite problematic.
First, the heavier the boat, the more boat in the water which translates to more drag. Also the heavier the boat, the lower in the water which makes catching or harnessing the waves’ power much more difficult. It has been my experience that the lighter the boat, the easier it is to catch waves. This is especially true in rough water, I don’t know of one experienced steersman who would choose a heavy crew over a lighter crew of equal ability in rough water.
It is not OC but we need to engage ourselves in some comparative biomechanics and poach a basic understanding from other sports where ever possible as far as I am concerned!
OCpdlr sums it up well saying certain conditions favour certain crews re stick figures and bubbas.
This leads into the good coaches selecting crews based on expected conditions as well as them being able to justify those seemingly arbitrary last minute crew changes. Very often gut instincts in top coaches and paddlers are empirical observations that science has yet to understand and explain.
For anyone who cares there is a sport scientist in SA by the name of Tim Noakes who loves reverse engineering sport science from what he sees in elite coaches and athletes rather than a skinned frog leg hooked up to a Duracell 9V in a peti dish.
And Nalu, there is no reason a peer evaluation of team mates can not factor into a good crew selection process. After all, a coach may not know that 9 out of 10 paddlers perceive the tenth paddler as dead weight. The top paddlers I have worked with over the years have allowed me to learn as much about sports as my academic and sport technical training!
Nalu, the purpose of the spreadsheet is for a "First Pass" assessment only. I agree with AlanC about using OC2's as a tool to build combinations for the OC6. My club Mooloolaba are doing that right now and it is proving to be very valuable and giving the coach more options. There is no where to hide in OC1/OC2 trials.
Alright, I'll jump in here. I think there are several issues. From personal experience, the first 30 minutes doesn't always matter. We do a 5.5 mile oc1 course every week. Often the guys in 3rd and 4th place at the half way mark win the piece. I think some people pace themselves better and some people just get warmed up at 20-30 minutes. The last two years I coached we did oc1 time trials for seats in the six man. I found that the people who really wanted it were the ones getting the extra time needed in the one man to break the top six mark. They were not only faster in the one man, they were also the guys in best shape. Luckly for me as coach it never came down to two guys about the same speed with one being much bigger than the other to chose from. If it did I would do multiple seat races in the six man (though this would be difficult as they likely wouldn't sit the same seat in the six).
There is definately a "blend" component in the six. If you are fast as hell in a one man but can't keep time with other paddlers, you better be a good stroker!
I still think time trials should be close to the length of the race, or at the very least over an hour, and should be done in the OC1.
As coach I had people complain that it wasn't fair because "I can't afford" or I don't have" a one man, but my response to these people was always "so I should put you in the first crew because you are slow and poor?" Though it wasn't a very popular response, I usually didn't get much flack and it invariably was the lazy fat guy who thought he deserved a seat even though he was slow in the one man and the six man.
Numerouno, I know for a fact that Lanikai likes putting a heavier guy in seat 2, especially in downwind conditions. The truth hurts, all else being equal, bigger is better.I can say that cause I'm short too.
Jim, I am not referring to Lanikai. I think that is an inappropriate to compare what Lanikai does. Their big guys are not only big, but badass in a one man also. I have no qualms with letting a big guy in the crew if he can fly on a one-man. What I am talking about is placing the big paddler on the crew just because he is big.
1968 you really have a way with words,a regular Knute Rockne with that "slow and poor" line. That must've really whipped the troops into a frenzy right before the big race!
Gotcha, Numerouno. The preface to all the "big man" comments was that the big guy was just as fast on oc1 as the "small(er)" guy. I think everyone agrees that paddlers should not be judged on size alone-there's also intensity and endurance-not to mention motion of the ocean.
1968, I think that the OC-1 does have a place. But what if the guy was a athletic paddler, not fat and lazy. But some guys don't want to lend them there canoes, did you or would you allow them to atleast compete for a seat. I think that blending in the canoe (OC-6) is very important. If the guy did other factors like, conditioning, always at practice, was comfortable in most of the seats, does he not deserve a shot.
P.S. My club has guys that think because they have been with the club since forever, they always deserve to be in the 1st crew. And they have to get along with the new guy, before he is accepted to be in the 1st crew.
I guess that sounded harsh, but the only people who complained were the non athletic guys who felt, as you said above, "I've been here forever, I should have a seat".
The fact is everyone had a shot. Our club had club boats. There were guys who did not have one mans who trained on the club boats and made the 1st crew. Everyone could compete. If someone wanted to challenge for a seat, the people with OC1s were always lending their boats. As a coach, I felt that the OC1 was the best way to objectively rank people. Before I was coach there was a lot of favoritism, and seat races in the six man were less than objective (especially since you could see guys throwing a piece to get their friends in the boat.) There is no hiding in the one man. I also think it raised the level as guys in the top six were holding on to their seats and guys in the 7,8,9 and 10 spots were gunning for them. I was in the top six at the time and made it clear...if I am bumped in a time trial, I will paddle in the second crew happily, but I will train my ass off to get back in the top six...The "slow and poor" did not want to work that hard.
By One man pull, do you mean one guy in the six man with a steersman poking only over a specified distance? Our old coach did this a few times and the big strong guys always won...but in our club these were the same guys who got crushed in OC1 trials. I think the biggest problem with tractor pulls is the risk of injury.
Sorry for not clarifying. It was a big issue in my crew this past Regatta Season. Some wanted to pick the top 6 by oc-1 sprints and the others by tractor pulls. We never really resolved the issue, but we wasted alot of time discussing it. Any 6 of us usually got second place, so it didn't really matter. The same issue is likely to come up again this coming season and I would like to have some ammo for the discussions. I am lighter in weight and spend alot of training time in the oc-1, so I favor it.
How about 3 facing forward in an OC6 and 3 facing towards the rear, Then paddle and try and move the canoe in your facing direction past a stationary marker. Just don't break the canoe in half. Haaa Haaaa.
Look at the top crews. Outrigger was one of the first to do weekly hour-plus time trials that cover all conditions (upwind, downwind, and a little flat). Our club picked up on it a couple years later and it's been very successful. They keep people honest. Once a week you line up against everyone for 60-80 minutes. If you're not doing well or have an off week, you usually find a way to sneak in extra workouts. If you are one of the frontrunners, you realize you have to keep working hard because the other guys want to beat you the next week. From what I can tell, there are three important factors. The time trials need to be weekly or close to it, over an hour, and diverse conditions. The consistency makes it more like a hard workout than a test. It also keeps people working hard throughout the season and not just when that time trial to make the big race is coming up. On several occasions, I've seen first crew guys crack at around an hour and have done so myself. When it happens, it's a big wakeup call and you usually do something about it. The diverse conditions are important because everyone is strong in one type of condition and if they had their way would only paddle in that type of water. Races are held in all conditions and you better be ready for it. Finally, after a couple of seasons you see that the regular time trials raise the bar for everybody. Everyone's times (and fitness) improve because even those guys who say the aren't one-man paddlers put time in because they get tired of being beaten every week (if they didn't get pissed would you want them in your crew?). Again, I think consistency is important for this effect. If you only hold them for big races those guys will go slow and then talk about how they can't paddle the one man. All that said, they are still just one tool for training and testing guys for the six man. The best clubs are also putting their time in the boat together.
I think most people agree that time trials are an important part of measuring a paddlers ability, mostly because you cannot hide your flaws. I think the debate about the weight of paddlers is another issue. Big guys usually move the boat because they are inherently stronger, but if all other things being equal, doesn't a heavier guy create more liability? A heavier paddler lowers the water line of the canoe, thus creating more resistance with the water. A heavier canoe takes on more water in rough water in the absence of spray skirts. A canoe with an average weight of 200lbs per paddler vs. a canoe with an average weight of 170lbs per paddler must carry 180 extra pounds. With "all things being equal," who would volunteer to have 180lbs of sand poured into the bottom of the canoe? I think the simple formula is strength-to-weight ratio. Every person in a six-man canoe must carry his/her own weight and appr. 80lbs. of canoe.
OK, just to make sure I understand everyone correctly... Regardless of how well/fast you paddle in the OC1, unless you're AT LEAST 210 lbs. you should NEVER be allowed into an OC6, right? Lucky for me, (and unlucky for all my competition) that jives perfectly with my training regimen. I am taking the winter season to focus more on eating, and less on paddling. I suggest you all do the same (one stick of butter wrapped in an Eggo, six times daily in addition to my regular meals, seems to be working so far) Fatter guys are faster... that's a scientific fact!
Nevah mind manini kine time trials. Magic Island, DH buoy, Kewalo basin, back. Slam a beer and a buttah-wrap eggo at the start, beer and spam musubi at the buoy, beer and manapua at Kewalos, den pau. If you can keep it all down til the finish, you reddy.
Den next time, try it while paddling on your OC-1...
there's gotta be a few shots of tequila in there somewhere. maybe at each mile split. or maybe everyone gets a camel back filled with beer which they are required to finish by the end of the time trial.
A few contributors have suggested that they do weekly time trials in OC1 to keep paddlers competitive and challenging each other.
I agree 100% that regular competitive workouts can increase the depth and fight in the paddlers looking for seats in the top crew(s). These can be intervals workouts as well, not just trials races.
However, I will caution coaches and program leaders to keep an eye on the paddlers' training to make sure thay are not training just for the next OC1 trial and neglecting their long term training development. No one likes ot losse when up against the main competition for an OC6 seat, even in training.
This is the difference between the "training to race" and "racing to train" approaches. Racing to train is an excellent part of a seasonal program (6-9 months long), but it is not ideal in long term athlete development (LTAD). It is hard to teach a new paddler, harder yet to teach a crusty old paddler that there are "training" events and "racing" events. If your program has too many racing opportunities in it at the wrong time it can leave you flat on the important race dates.
One way around this problem is to record no times or finish order in the training events and then every 4-8 weeks designate an event as an evaluation time trial or race. Many high performance sports programs use 4 weeks as an evaluation interval. This allows for good training time but not too much time in case you really botch things up!
Lastly, I have to set up a soap box to advocate for ethical coaching. Not just in crew selection but all the time. Sure there are iconoclast coaches out there who bully and demean athletes but they needs to be seen as exceptions, not ideals or role models for new coaches. They are also more obvious in the media driven "entertainment sports" rather than those sports that follow the Olympic ideals, such as OC.
There are four cornerstones to ethical coaching;
Respect for Participants
Responsible Coaching
Integrity in Relationships, and
Honouring Sport
While it is often quoted that a World Class athletes needs 10,000 hours of training, a World Class coach requires the same if not more preparation time.
I'd like to comment on seat racing being unfair due to the possibility to an individual "throwing" a race by slacking when they don't like the individual being raced... I certainly know that if that ever happenned in our club that person would not be given a seat in ANY crew! Does that REALLY happen and what do you do if one of your teammates does it?
There is something that can be done by coaches to prevent this (save from stringing one of these poor sports on a thin line by their ankles over the Ala Wai)... keep the seat racing quiet and add an element of randomness. Our coach doesn't usually tell us who is being seat-raced and no one knows who may be next to be seat-raced. The offensive "slacker" could be the next one changed out.
The bottom line though (as mentioned by Jim) the coach has to have the trust of his crew to take all these tools available to him (spreadsheets, time trials, seat races, cross-training, experience, attendance, attitude, size, etc...) and make the best decision he or she can for the given race on the given day with the established goal of the club in mind! A couple of years ago, our final seat for Molokai was changed the morning of due to a change in conditions. Keeps it interesting!!
Also, it was interesting to read the "racing to train" comment. Hadn't thought about that but it makes sense!
Hey Andrea,
It happened the year before I was coach (people throwing pieces during seat races). I was steering and I saw it happen. I let the coach know (I was assistant) and we randomized. But people know what is going on. It is strange, cause it was never "first crew" guys, rather the guys not working that hard to begin with. When I was coach, I made it clear, unless we were working on technique drills, EVERY piece is a seat race. And one man trials became the standard. All of the guys who "threw" pieces the year before stopped paddling with our club once oc1 trials were implemented.
If you are using OC-1 time trials to determine fitness for OC-6 sprints, obviously the time trial only has to be 5 or 6 minutes. But for longer events (1 hour plus) how long a time trial is needed to show relative strengths?
#1 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 4:28pm
However long the race is , I guess.
#2 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 4:32pm
SoCal OC-6 races run 2 - 21/2 hours for open men. I don't think you'd have to have everyone TT that distance. But is 20 - 30 minutes a good indicator of aerobic power and endurance?
#3 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 4:39pm
What I have noticed is that short time trials do not demonstrate real abilities of the paddler. Often weaker paddlers have been able to do relatively well on a 30 min course. Additionally, you need to consider the water conditions as this is the most effective way to show who is better. This doesn't only concern the ability to use the water but also shows how comfortable the paddler is in the boat on rough water (you don't want panic monger in your oc-6 crew).
A good time trial would be anything from 60 to 80 min on a course which offers different currents and surface conditions.
peace
#4 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 5:02pm
Have you ever known a paddler who was ok in oc1 but really exceptional in the 6? Or vice versa?
#5 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 5:10pm
oldguysrulepaddlin on Guam
I forget who said it 1st, but I remember reading a coaches comment on this very subject that said "Everyone's fast for 45 minutes." Go an hour or more, assuming there is an aerobic base to see where you're at. Obviously water, wind, surf conditions change day to day (or minute to minute here), so comparing times is relative; but if you can match paddler to paddler...
#6 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 5:18pm
Yes, Jim, it's true. I do just fine in the OC-1, but when we paddle the six every second lost is MY fault - and mine alone.
Is THAT what you wanted to hear Jim?!? Are you satisfied now?!? Is admitting it in front of the entire paddling world enough for you?!?
Hopefully my public embarrassment will keep you here for one more season.
I love you.
(...race you to the bridge and back?)
#7 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 5:29pm
That's basically what I was after. Just admit you should be sitting 5 and grumpy Steve should stroke.Actually, I was trying to discuss the subject seriously-thank god you're always there to reduce everything to the ridiculous. I was amazed you didn't satirize my "greatest paddler" topic.
#8 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 5:35pm
ho, jim...
whattabout me sittin' stroke eh? are you gonna try to make the club go and time trial in hurricane conditions too now?
heavy
#9 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 5:58pm
kev, you should stick to mixed.
#10 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 6:00pm
goto, if it's any consolation, i suck at one AND six mans. at least you're good at one out of the two.
but seriously, i had a coach in the past that had a valid point, look at any race or time trial. 90 percent of the time, the order that the field falls into will stay the same as it is after the first 20 to 30 minutes. there may be some reshuffling by a place or so, but for the most part things are set. I didn't believe him so when I started coaching i took note of where everyone fell into place after the start of a race. And sure enough, he was right. My buddy believed in time trials of no more than 20 to 30 minutes. Also, as a coach, he thought that it never really mattered who won a time trial. He wanted to see where the big drop off was. After say the 8th, 9th, or 10th paddler. Things almost always fall into that bell shaped curve.
but then you have clubs like outrigger that do a time trial from the OC to DH bouy, to Kewalo or Honolulu Harbor, and back to the OC. That seems to work for them. Pretty sure that would be longer than 30 minutes.
BTW goto...too bad your gonna miss out on the alumni race this year...
#11 Thu, 11/30/2006 - 9:11pm
Guys, download this and tell me what you think. It's an excel spread sheet program that ranks oc1 paddlers for inclusion in the OC6, adjusted for weight. It was designed as a "first pass assessment. By that i mean when you retrieve the ranking, you then trial those paddlers in OC6 seat swaps and so on. I think this is similar to what Lanakai do the pick their Molokai crew. See Attached file. Open in Excel and Change the values in the blue cells only and watch the difference it makes.
Cheers Rambo
#12 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 12:47am
Rambo, that's very interesting. Being a Hawai'i public schools product, I couldn't make heads nor tails of it,though. I'm sure one of the brighter guys in our gang can figure it out. I'm pretty sure Lanikai uses a similar method, but without all the math. That is, a time trial to figure out where guys are generally, then using various combinations of the top paddlers to dial the best nine or six. I've noticed that some paddlers, especially larger fellas, who may not be great one-manners, happen to be essential to six man success. This year in Molokai, for example, Lanikai replaced one of their taller guys with an average size guy who's fast on the OC-1, not that it would have made much of a difference in the final result. I've always been biased towards having at least 3-4 tall guys in any group of 9. Do you remember the Lanikai crew of 95-96? They had 3 guys over 6'6" , one 6'4" and one 6'3"as well as the 4 smaller guys to balance it out. I'm a firm believer that it takes a mixture of sizes, like a rugby or basketball team. Then, of course, you have guys like Judd and Bartlett etc. who are average size with the strength and power of much larger individuals. For us mere mortals, it's good to have some bigger guys to move the big boat.
#13 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 2:31am
Rambo,
If I read the spreadsheet correctly, a heavier paddler would win the seat - all other things being equal. However, doesn't that create more work for the rest of the crew (and therefore slower speeds?) If I had the choice of a 160 lb paddler who paddled a 50-minute time trial and a 200 lb paddler who paddled an equal 50-minute time trial, I would choose the 160lb paddler to lighten the boat. Everyone in the canoe has to pull that extra 40 lbs for two hours. I guess I'm confused as to why a heavier paddler gets extra credit for pulling his own weight around. If you look at it from a strength-to-weight ratio, isn't the lighter guy a better choice?
Someone please clarify is I'm not thinking about this correctly.
#14 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 6:27am
Hey jc90 you may suck at both but its OK cause you suck soooo gooooood.
Hey, BTW I pounce my seat as steersman in the alumni race.
#15 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 7:54am
Because all else being equal, the biiger guy(me) will be able to pull the extra weight of the boat itself and the steersman more efficiently than the smaller guy(Goto).
#16 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 8:07am
Now we're talking!
I tried out lots of different combinations while coaching high performance OC6 crews and agree with the posters who observed that;
First, time trials are a central component of an unbiased and open crew selection process, some may argue this is the right of any paddler looking to make a club team. Time trials are one of the few selection criteria that can be considered relatively objective.
Second, the finish order doesn't change much after the first 20-30 minutes in a long distance event. I would say this is mostly due to teams having settled into their race pace by this time, or if they haven't will blow up very soon. It is usually somewhere in the initial 15 minutes where the most changes in race order occur, coincidentally this is the physiological point where any errors in pacing will catch up with a vengance.
Usually, only tactical errors will affect the final standings after the initial portions of the race. This can include a bad line, inability to surf, go upwind, hydrate or feed properly, etc.
Third, I would agree that pretty well anyone can show potential up to 45 minutes, after 45 minutes race experience begins to show. Those with experience will be hydrating properly, will have warmed up properly, fuelled up well before the time trial and addressed those "little details" that inexperienced athletes either neglect or don't know about. Any small errors in initial race pace will show up big time here.
Our club used a 5 km (3 mile) time trial loop for program evaluation and crew selections. Early season we would do 1 loop only and as the year progressed towards six man season we added loops on. The top paddlers always did better on laps 2+ than the other paddlers. In many distance based sports, the idea of knowing how to "negative split" or go slightly faster as a race progresses is essential to elite performance. From 4:00 minutes and up, negative splitting is the most reliable way to win a race.
Some real world sport examples;
Lastly, on time trials reflecting race durations, I would add it it not how well paddlers do in those longer duration time trials, but the experience they get from being out there in a solo with no one to relie on but themselves. In some early races we had lots of "experienced paddlers" racing with no fluids, bonking, or just not giving 100%. Our coaches decided that when our goal was a top long distance event (2 hour race) we required all potential crew members to have done one longer (20 km) individual time trial to know what their abilities were. This taught them the importance of hydration, pre-race planning, pacing, mental toughness and respect for their team mates. It also added a level of camaraderie by sharing the experience as well.
A good coach can also learn a great deal by varying the time trial format from mass start to dual starts to individual starts; slowest first to slowest last. Each race format will tell you more about your paddlers and potential team.
For change races, choosing OC1 trial formats gets even more fun!
Once paddlers started to learn about their own strengths and weaknesses when racing solo, they became stronger team paddlers as well. Those who didn't or wouldn't do the trials to learn were often seen as liabilities or unknowns.
All that being said, top solo paddlers do not make top team paddlers. A progression from OC1 to OC2 to OC6 is needed to see who can make the leap from good solo paddler to good team boat paddler. Evaluating OC2 combos is the next step, you'll see non-team paddlers show up very easily at this level as well as stronger and weaker combinations. You'll than need to evaluate seat specific skills from stroke to steersperson, and more so in change races and sprint turn race crews.
And yes it will take more time, but add in that next level in a small team boat, you will learn more about your paddlers and illustrate it in objective, measurable ways.
As a good coach, you should then take that OC1 and OC2 info and use it to direct your training plan. A good OC1 and poor OC2 paddler needs team boat skills and you need to teach them those skills. A poorly paced OC1 paddler needs to work on pacing and learn how it can make them faster. And so on.
One observation on the perception in OC that bigger is better. In many gliding sports, this is true.
Bigger more powerful athletes have an advantage over smaller athletes in some conditions. However, this comes with a warning label that it is functional lean muscle mass that lends power to the boat. Too often I have seen bigger (in some cases overweight) paddlers treated preferentially over smaller (leaner) paddlers despite faster solo time trials by the smaller paddler.
An example is a paddler who showed great solo time trials at 210 lbs was pegged for first crew material, while a 160 lb paddler of the same speed was not. The 210 lb paddler slimmed down over a few seasons to 160 lbs, and got faster. As did the other 160 lb paddler. The 210 paddler was always perceived as bigger and more powerful in the OC6.
Thanks for a great topic!
#17 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 8:40am
Alan C., that OC2 thing is a great idea! I'd have to say the whole being fair thing is overrated, though. The greatest outrigger coach I've ever known prided himself on making unexpected crew decisions the day before the race just to f**k with your mind. There's probably a happy medium somewhere between that and total openness, but when the coaches every move can be questioned by the paddlers, alot of energy can be wasted. Ultimately, the coach has to have the final say without having to explain himself to everyone, and the paddlers must respect that. Some things just aren't quantifiable- there's no way to measure what's inside the paddler with a stopwatch.
#18 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 8:59am
Here's a monkey wrench. The fastest one manner ever in our club weighed 145. He smoked everyone.
PoOpOo
#19 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 9:03am
if you take 6 then i'll just be watching. so good luck!
#20 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 9:46am
I have always been baffled by theory that there needs bigger paddlers in a six-man to be successful.
False logic.
If a person cannot pull his or her own weight in a one-man, how the hell is that person going to pull his or her weight in the six-man, and be more productive than the person who is pulling his or her weight and then some? Just more dead weight for everyone else to carry.
#21 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 10:03am
I think what the they were trying to say is that if the big guy and the small guy are the same on the oc1, then take the big guy for the oc6.I've lost my seat to a bigger guy who's slower on the oc1 before, too,numerouno.
#22 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 11:02am
Just a thought, again...
Heavy paddlers may be essential for the current OC6 hulls if the average hull requires 1100 lbs to be at the sweet spot for optimizing performance. If a crew has a light stroke, two seat and steersperson it may well require a few bubbas in the middle to float properly. Or a few 45 lb Olympic barbell plates, sandbags, or...
In flatwater kayaks and underweight crew (re hull specs) in a team boat have a very difficult time controlling the hull, as do an overweight crew.
#23 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 11:07am
Alan, you are awealth of info. I always kind of instinctively knew that 1100 lb. thing. It seems like when you start going too much over that #, things start to bog. Any insight on that theory?
#24 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 11:21am
You should just do what our club does, vote for your favorite paddler, even though your best OC-1 guy, pissed everyone off, he is off the 1st crew. Put him on 2nd crew and let him think about his actions.NOW that works. But I feel that you should use the OC-1 as a tool, some people don't have OC-1, what if they are good paddlers, do you screw them over. And leave them off the crew. NOW rambo that whole excel spread sheet is junk. And well Alan your just a wealth of knowledge, write a book..
Jim I love seat 5, that way you can blame everyone in front of you, when you don't win.
#25 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 12:28pm
Lot of great info being shared here. It would seem that it boils down to paddler strength-to-weight ratio being one of the largest factors. "Strength" being endurance/sustained power. Couple threads earlier talked about the glide, and I agree w/the theory on how bigger guys will affect the momentum - was always a big believer in the bell curve makeup of crew (light, medium and heavy mix) it would also seem that different ocean conditions would favor or hinder a lighter or heavier crew - (if all else equal). Think about it like racing an RX-8 versus a Challenger through a winding course (lighter/heavier, similar strength to weight ratio). If there's lots of turns, slowing and accellerating, I think the RX-8 has an advantage. Straigher course, conserved momentum, and I think the Challenger has an advantage. Of course skill, efficiency and balance have a lot to do with the equation as well, but intuitively there has been something there that has always nagged at me. Thoughts?
#26 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 12:32pm
OK maybe we can work somthing out. I'll stroke. Haha riiiigght
Gregg
#27 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 12:56pm
AlanC, you are correct about proper weight distribution, in any condition wieght distribution is key.
However, the theory that you need heavier paddlers to make the boat float properly seems quite problematic.
First, the heavier the boat, the more boat in the water which translates to more drag. Also the heavier the boat, the lower in the water which makes catching or harnessing the waves’ power much more difficult. It has been my experience that the lighter the boat, the easier it is to catch waves. This is especially true in rough water, I don’t know of one experienced steersman who would choose a heavy crew over a lighter crew of equal ability in rough water.
#28 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:22pm
There is a a great geekology site on the physics of rowing.
It is not OC but we need to engage ourselves in some comparative biomechanics and poach a basic understanding from other sports where ever possible as far as I am concerned!
OCpdlr sums it up well saying certain conditions favour certain crews re stick figures and bubbas.
This leads into the good coaches selecting crews based on expected conditions as well as them being able to justify those seemingly arbitrary last minute crew changes. Very often gut instincts in top coaches and paddlers are empirical observations that science has yet to understand and explain.
For anyone who cares there is a sport scientist in SA by the name of Tim Noakes who loves reverse engineering sport science from what he sees in elite coaches and athletes rather than a skinned frog leg hooked up to a Duracell 9V in a peti dish.
And Nalu, there is no reason a peer evaluation of team mates can not factor into a good crew selection process. After all, a coach may not know that 9 out of 10 paddlers perceive the tenth paddler as dead weight. The top paddlers I have worked with over the years have allowed me to learn as much about sports as my academic and sport technical training!
#29 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:24pm
Nalu, the purpose of the spreadsheet is for a "First Pass" assessment only. I agree with AlanC about using OC2's as a tool to build combinations for the OC6. My club Mooloolaba are doing that right now and it is proving to be very valuable and giving the coach more options. There is no where to hide in OC1/OC2 trials.
Rambo
#30 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:25pm
Alright, I'll jump in here. I think there are several issues. From personal experience, the first 30 minutes doesn't always matter. We do a 5.5 mile oc1 course every week. Often the guys in 3rd and 4th place at the half way mark win the piece. I think some people pace themselves better and some people just get warmed up at 20-30 minutes. The last two years I coached we did oc1 time trials for seats in the six man. I found that the people who really wanted it were the ones getting the extra time needed in the one man to break the top six mark. They were not only faster in the one man, they were also the guys in best shape. Luckly for me as coach it never came down to two guys about the same speed with one being much bigger than the other to chose from. If it did I would do multiple seat races in the six man (though this would be difficult as they likely wouldn't sit the same seat in the six).
There is definately a "blend" component in the six. If you are fast as hell in a one man but can't keep time with other paddlers, you better be a good stroker!
I still think time trials should be close to the length of the race, or at the very least over an hour, and should be done in the OC1.
As coach I had people complain that it wasn't fair because "I can't afford" or I don't have" a one man, but my response to these people was always "so I should put you in the first crew because you are slow and poor?" Though it wasn't a very popular response, I usually didn't get much flack and it invariably was the lazy fat guy who thought he deserved a seat even though he was slow in the one man and the six man.
#31 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:27pm
Numerouno, I know for a fact that Lanikai likes putting a heavier guy in seat 2, especially in downwind conditions. The truth hurts, all else being equal, bigger is better.I can say that cause I'm short too.
#32 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:32pm
Jim, I am not referring to Lanikai. I think that is an inappropriate to compare what Lanikai does. Their big guys are not only big, but badass in a one man also. I have no qualms with letting a big guy in the crew if he can fly on a one-man. What I am talking about is placing the big paddler on the crew just because he is big.
#33 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:46pm
1968 you really have a way with words,a regular Knute Rockne with that "slow and poor" line. That must've really whipped the troops into a frenzy right before the big race!
#34 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:48pm
Jim,
Just called it like I saw it. Love You Man,
Oakley Sinclair
#35 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:50pm
Gotcha, Numerouno. The preface to all the "big man" comments was that the big guy was just as fast on oc1 as the "small(er)" guy. I think everyone agrees that paddlers should not be judged on size alone-there's also intensity and endurance-not to mention motion of the ocean.
#36 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 1:58pm
1968, I think that the OC-1 does have a place. But what if the guy was a athletic paddler, not fat and lazy. But some guys don't want to lend them there canoes, did you or would you allow them to atleast compete for a seat. I think that blending in the canoe (OC-6) is very important. If the guy did other factors like, conditioning, always at practice, was comfortable in most of the seats, does he not deserve a shot.
P.S. My club has guys that think because they have been with the club since forever, they always deserve to be in the 1st crew. And they have to get along with the new guy, before he is accepted to be in the 1st crew.
#37 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 2:28pm
I guess that sounded harsh, but the only people who complained were the non athletic guys who felt, as you said above, "I've been here forever, I should have a seat".
The fact is everyone had a shot. Our club had club boats. There were guys who did not have one mans who trained on the club boats and made the 1st crew. Everyone could compete. If someone wanted to challenge for a seat, the people with OC1s were always lending their boats. As a coach, I felt that the OC1 was the best way to objectively rank people. Before I was coach there was a lot of favoritism, and seat races in the six man were less than objective (especially since you could see guys throwing a piece to get their friends in the boat.) There is no hiding in the one man. I also think it raised the level as guys in the top six were holding on to their seats and guys in the 7,8,9 and 10 spots were gunning for them. I was in the top six at the time and made it clear...if I am bumped in a time trial, I will paddle in the second crew happily, but I will train my ass off to get back in the top six...The "slow and poor" did not want to work that hard.
#38 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 3:58pm
Thanks for the excellant Info. My club is fixated on the 1-man pull (aka the tractor pull). Does anyone else do this?
#39 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 4:16pm
By One man pull, do you mean one guy in the six man with a steersman poking only over a specified distance? Our old coach did this a few times and the big strong guys always won...but in our club these were the same guys who got crushed in OC1 trials. I think the biggest problem with tractor pulls is the risk of injury.
#40 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 4:22pm
Sorry for not clarifying. It was a big issue in my crew this past Regatta Season. Some wanted to pick the top 6 by oc-1 sprints and the others by tractor pulls. We never really resolved the issue, but we wasted alot of time discussing it. Any 6 of us usually got second place, so it didn't really matter. The same issue is likely to come up again this coming season and I would like to have some ammo for the discussions. I am lighter in weight and spend alot of training time in the oc-1, so I favor it.
#41 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 4:33pm
Greg,how 'bout a combination of the two?oc1/tractor pull showdown! Now yer talkin'!
#42 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 6:49pm
How about 3 facing forward in an OC6 and 3 facing towards the rear, Then paddle and try and move the canoe in your facing direction past a stationary marker. Just don't break the canoe in half. Haaa Haaaa.
Cheers Rambo
#43 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 7:07pm
Look at the top crews. Outrigger was one of the first to do weekly hour-plus time trials that cover all conditions (upwind, downwind, and a little flat). Our club picked up on it a couple years later and it's been very successful. They keep people honest. Once a week you line up against everyone for 60-80 minutes. If you're not doing well or have an off week, you usually find a way to sneak in extra workouts. If you are one of the frontrunners, you realize you have to keep working hard because the other guys want to beat you the next week. From what I can tell, there are three important factors. The time trials need to be weekly or close to it, over an hour, and diverse conditions. The consistency makes it more like a hard workout than a test. It also keeps people working hard throughout the season and not just when that time trial to make the big race is coming up. On several occasions, I've seen first crew guys crack at around an hour and have done so myself. When it happens, it's a big wakeup call and you usually do something about it. The diverse conditions are important because everyone is strong in one type of condition and if they had their way would only paddle in that type of water. Races are held in all conditions and you better be ready for it. Finally, after a couple of seasons you see that the regular time trials raise the bar for everybody. Everyone's times (and fitness) improve because even those guys who say the aren't one-man paddlers put time in because they get tired of being beaten every week (if they didn't get pissed would you want them in your crew?). Again, I think consistency is important for this effect. If you only hold them for big races those guys will go slow and then talk about how they can't paddle the one man. All that said, they are still just one tool for training and testing guys for the six man. The best clubs are also putting their time in the boat together.
#44 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 7:29pm
I think most people agree that time trials are an important part of measuring a paddlers ability, mostly because you cannot hide your flaws. I think the debate about the weight of paddlers is another issue. Big guys usually move the boat because they are inherently stronger, but if all other things being equal, doesn't a heavier guy create more liability? A heavier paddler lowers the water line of the canoe, thus creating more resistance with the water. A heavier canoe takes on more water in rough water in the absence of spray skirts. A canoe with an average weight of 200lbs per paddler vs. a canoe with an average weight of 170lbs per paddler must carry 180 extra pounds. With "all things being equal," who would volunteer to have 180lbs of sand poured into the bottom of the canoe? I think the simple formula is strength-to-weight ratio. Every person in a six-man canoe must carry his/her own weight and appr. 80lbs. of canoe.
#45 Fri, 12/01/2006 - 8:18pm
You have to read Alan C's comments about waterline and crew weight.
#46 Sat, 12/02/2006 - 3:32am
OK, just to make sure I understand everyone correctly... Regardless of how well/fast you paddle in the OC1, unless you're AT LEAST 210 lbs. you should NEVER be allowed into an OC6, right? Lucky for me, (and unlucky for all my competition) that jives perfectly with my training regimen. I am taking the winter season to focus more on eating, and less on paddling. I suggest you all do the same (one stick of butter wrapped in an Eggo, six times daily in addition to my regular meals, seems to be working so far) Fatter guys are faster... that's a scientific fact!
Tractor pull THIS, losers!
#47 Sat, 12/02/2006 - 7:58am
Nevah mind manini kine time trials. Magic Island, DH buoy, Kewalo basin, back. Slam a beer and a buttah-wrap eggo at the start, beer and spam musubi at the buoy, beer and manapua at Kewalos, den pau. If you can keep it all down til the finish, you reddy.
Den next time, try it while paddling on your OC-1...
#48 Sun, 12/03/2006 - 5:49pm
there's gotta be a few shots of tequila in there somewhere. maybe at each mile split. or maybe everyone gets a camel back filled with beer which they are required to finish by the end of the time trial.
#49 Sun, 12/03/2006 - 6:43pm
A few contributors have suggested that they do weekly time trials in OC1 to keep paddlers competitive and challenging each other.
I agree 100% that regular competitive workouts can increase the depth and fight in the paddlers looking for seats in the top crew(s). These can be intervals workouts as well, not just trials races.
However, I will caution coaches and program leaders to keep an eye on the paddlers' training to make sure thay are not training just for the next OC1 trial and neglecting their long term training development. No one likes ot losse when up against the main competition for an OC6 seat, even in training.
This is the difference between the "training to race" and "racing to train" approaches. Racing to train is an excellent part of a seasonal program (6-9 months long), but it is not ideal in long term athlete development (LTAD). It is hard to teach a new paddler, harder yet to teach a crusty old paddler that there are "training" events and "racing" events. If your program has too many racing opportunities in it at the wrong time it can leave you flat on the important race dates.
One way around this problem is to record no times or finish order in the training events and then every 4-8 weeks designate an event as an evaluation time trial or race. Many high performance sports programs use 4 weeks as an evaluation interval. This allows for good training time but not too much time in case you really botch things up!
For anyone intersted in long term athlete development check out this great LTAD resource.
Lastly, I have to set up a soap box to advocate for ethical coaching. Not just in crew selection but all the time. Sure there are iconoclast coaches out there who bully and demean athletes but they needs to be seen as exceptions, not ideals or role models for new coaches. They are also more obvious in the media driven "entertainment sports" rather than those sports that follow the Olympic ideals, such as OC.
There are four cornerstones to ethical coaching;
While it is often quoted that a World Class athletes needs 10,000 hours of training, a World Class coach requires the same if not more preparation time.
#50 Mon, 12/04/2006 - 8:00am
I'd like to comment on seat racing being unfair due to the possibility to an individual "throwing" a race by slacking when they don't like the individual being raced... I certainly know that if that ever happenned in our club that person would not be given a seat in ANY crew! Does that REALLY happen and what do you do if one of your teammates does it?
There is something that can be done by coaches to prevent this (save from stringing one of these poor sports on a thin line by their ankles over the Ala Wai)... keep the seat racing quiet and add an element of randomness. Our coach doesn't usually tell us who is being seat-raced and no one knows who may be next to be seat-raced. The offensive "slacker" could be the next one changed out.
The bottom line though (as mentioned by Jim) the coach has to have the trust of his crew to take all these tools available to him (spreadsheets, time trials, seat races, cross-training, experience, attendance, attitude, size, etc...) and make the best decision he or she can for the given race on the given day with the established goal of the club in mind! A couple of years ago, our final seat for Molokai was changed the morning of due to a change in conditions. Keeps it interesting!!
Also, it was interesting to read the "racing to train" comment. Hadn't thought about that but it makes sense!
This has been a great thread to follow...
#51 Tue, 12/05/2006 - 2:40pm
Hey Andrea,
It happened the year before I was coach (people throwing pieces during seat races). I was steering and I saw it happen. I let the coach know (I was assistant) and we randomized. But people know what is going on. It is strange, cause it was never "first crew" guys, rather the guys not working that hard to begin with. When I was coach, I made it clear, unless we were working on technique drills, EVERY piece is a seat race. And one man trials became the standard. All of the guys who "threw" pieces the year before stopped paddling with our club once oc1 trials were implemented.
#52 Tue, 12/05/2006 - 3:38pm