Quantitative measure of "Bombproofness?"
 

On Jul 19, 4:41*pm, Wilko wrote:
Davej wrote:

Well, I guess that is a question for hand rollers. Can you hand roll
as easily in aerated water as you can in a pool? I would doubt it.

That's not the point. The point is that you should not train a roll for
a certain specific situation. What you are asking is something that
will barely suffice in a specific situation. [...]

No, my whole idea is to consider some form of handicapping device in
order to practice for a more difficult situation than you are going to
have in a pool.

Quantitative measure of "Bombproofness?"
 

Hello Davej, you wrote:

No, my whole idea is to consider some form of handicapping device in
order to practice for a more difficult situation than you are going
to have in a pool.

Something I do for handicapping is to restrict the use of various
limbs in as many different water conditions as I can find. And of
course, practicing rolls without a paddle. This type of handicapping
is, in my view, more practical than trying to figure out how you're
going to fit your boat into the jacuzzi for aerated water practice.

If you think about the types of conditions that would capsize you,
it's good to think in terms of not just water and/or wind conditions,
but of your own potential condition as well. If you're in already
gnarly conditions that you can barely handle when you're feeling
great, what if you become injured? Might you then be more likely to
capsize in the first place? And still need to find a way to bring
yourself back up? Or, of course, end up swimming without the use of
a limb or two?

There are endless scenarios one can come up with to practice, and I
feel that all too often, we only think about practicing as if nothing
could ever happen to us physically, and ultimately, that's just not
realistic. There's always an exception to "bombproofness" lurking,
just waiting for the right moment to strike. Will we be ready? Or
at least as ready as we can be?

--
Melissa

Quantitative measure of "Bombproofness?"
 

Hello Davej, you wrote:

No, my whole idea is to consider some form of handicapping device in
order to practice for a more difficult situation than you are going
to have in a pool.

Another thing I forgot to mention...

While it's never a bad time to practice rolling, perhaps the best time
to practice is at the *end* of a long day of paddling. Practice when
you're tired. Practice when you're sore. Practice when you're
really hurting. Practice when your mind, as well as your body, is
tired. It's when you're feeling your weakest that 1) you're more
likely to capsize, and 2) you're going to need all the muscle memory
and will power that you can muster. If you only practice at the
beginning of your day, or only *until* you're tired, you're not
really giving yourself the most realistic scenarios in which to
practice.

--
Melissa

Quantitative measure of "Bombproofness?"
 

Davej wrote:
On Jul 19, 4:41 pm, Wilko wrote:
Davej wrote:
Well, I guess that is a question for hand rollers. Can you hand roll
as easily in aerated water as you can in a pool? I would doubt it.
That's not the point. The point is that you should not train a roll for
a certain specific situation. What you are asking is something that
will barely suffice in a specific situation. [...]

No, my whole idea is to consider some form of handicapping device in
order to practice for a more difficult situation than you are going to
have in a pool.

What do you think that handrolling is compared to normal rolling? It's a
handicap alright, and one that you can make progressively harder, by
starting out with an ever shorter paddle (hold the paddle ever closer to
the blade), hand paddles and finally only one hand...

No need for contraptions that only mimic aerated water, but a way to
make your normal roll even stronger and better than what you need for
aerated water.

But why bother with the easy way when you can achieve nothing even close
to it the hard way, right? :-)

--
Wilko van den Bergh wilkoa t)dse(d o tnl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.---
http://kayaker.nl/

Quantitative measure of "Bombproofness?"
 

On Jul 20, 11:51*pm, watersprite
wrote:
Hello Davej, you wrote:
No, my whole idea is to consider some form of handicapping device in
order to practice for a more difficult situation than you are going
to have in a pool.

Something I do for handicapping is to restrict the use of various
limbs in as many different water conditions as I can find. *And of
course, practicing rolls without a paddle. *This type of handicapping
is, in my view, more practical than trying to figure out how you're
going to fit your boat into the jacuzzi for aerated water practice.

If you think about the types of conditions that would capsize you,
it's good to think in terms of not just water and/or wind conditions,
but of your own potential condition as well. *If you're in already
gnarly conditions that you can barely handle when you're feeling
great, what if you become injured? *Might you then be more likely to
capsize in the first place? *And still need to find a way to bring
yourself back up? *Or, of course, end up swimming without the use of
a limb or two?

There are endless scenarios one can come up with to practice, and I
feel that all too often, we only think about practicing as if nothing
could ever happen to us physically, and ultimately, that's just not
realistic. *There's always an exception to "bombproofness" lurking,
just waiting for the right moment to strike. *Will we be ready? *Or
at least as ready as we can be?

--
Melissa

Excellent post Melissa. Of course, "bombproof" is a crazy "cult" idea.
You have joined the intelligent and now reasonable Slim Jim Stuart:


TTimIngram View profile
More options Jul 16, 10:40 am

Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: TimIngram
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Thurs, Jul 16 2009 10:40 am
Subject: President Obama Safety Sponsons
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Jul 14, 12:09 pm, Oci-One Kanubi wrote:



On Jul 14, 8:32 am, riverman wrote:

On Jul 14, 1:35 am, Wilko wrote:

I think it was Yakmom in response to Burntballs, back in the fall of
1999. I'll hold off using the search function for awhile to see what
others remember. :-)


--riverman


Yakmom! Myron, did you know that two of Sheila's sons competed in the
Over the Falls Race at Great Falls of the Potomac during the Potomac
Paddlefest last weekend? Sean did fairly well; Seth (former US Rodeo
Team member in C-1) didn't. If you go to the message board page ofwww.monocacycanoe.orgyou can find some links to a couple of the runs
of the Falls, in a message thread about "the right line of the Spout".- Hide quoted text -

Yakmom responded to Slim Jim Stuart's Post below. (Yakmom essentially
believed her own kids were safer in higher buoyancy kayaks in WW,
presumably for less chance of pinning underwater.) Of course
sponsons
are a specific type of strategic buoyancy coupled with integral
water-
ballast, but I had to commend Slim Jim for recognizing his
responsibility for the welfare of others. Tim Ingram
http://www.sponsonguy.com/PresidentO...ySponsons.html

Slim Jim's Post (perhaps rec.boats.paddle's "finest hour"):


Slim Jim View profile
More options Nov 21 2000, 2:01 am


Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: Slim Jim
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 00:53:01 -0500
Local: Tues, Nov 21 2000 1:53 am
Subject: To Coach or Not To Coach (kids)
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
Need a little help sorting this out.


I have coached juniors slalom, particularly more advanced 12-16 year
olds,
with emphasis on technical technique, bigger water (i.e. Dickerson,
Potomac
Gorge), and physical development training. I haven't coached for a
few
years,
partly due to work, but more due to the issues described below.


Here's the dilemma:
- I can help kids develop elite slalom and WW skills, and fast.
- By the age of 14, some are highly skilled, if with limited "mean"
river
experience.
- Coaching develops skills which get kids competent enough to even
consider
"extreme zone" runs.
- Teen peer group pressure to push for extreme runs is enormous, and
the
definition of extreme continues to mount.
- Safety focus in whitewater is nearly non-existent these days, and
role
modeling only goes so far.
- WW slalom can be richly rewarding for developing youth - exercising
talent,
dedication to hard work, complex brainwork and experience pyramiding,
physical development, travel and intrigue, camaraderie and community,
all very
admirable and noble activities. (keeps em off the street too)
- But out in the falls, kids are now making decisions in mere seconds
to run
extreme risk WW, usually without perspective.
- If they ask me: "Do you think I should run it?" I respond: "Which
would be
more dangerous, running that drop, or having all four of your wisdom
teeth
extracted? And how much time would you want to decide about having
your teeth
pulled?"
- I've already had several kids with "off the course" very close
calls
and
serious injuries.


How do I rationalize coaching - or not coaching for that matter?
Coaching seems like something worthwhile doing, when I'm doing it.
But what would I tell the parents of a kid who dies "off course?"


Jim Stuart

Quantitative measure of "Bombproofness?"
 

Hello Timmy, you wrote:

Excellent post Melissa. Of course, "bombproof" is a crazy "cult"
idea. You have joined the intelligent and now reasonable Slim Jim
Stuart: [snip]

I may have different views than some concerning the concept of
"bombproof" rolling and the types of skills practicing we do, but
please don't take my words and use them for your own delusional
purposes. I, personally, have no use for your Sponsons (nor, as a
matter of fact, do I see Jim Stuart endorsing them).

Frankly, your constant touting of your Sponsons as the be all/end all
of kayak safety can do more damage than those who feel they can
develop a "bombproof" roll. At least they're working on versatile
skills that can be constantly improved upon, and not relying on a
mechanical device that is severly limited in its utility/usefulness.
When it comes to paddling, I'd much rather depend upon my own
judgment and skills than on any single bit of equipment.

You have freedom of speech, so go ahead and say whatever you like
about this or that, but please, as a favor to me, I'd ask you not to
use me or my words to make your points, as I do not endorse your
point of view.

--
Melissa