"Steve Cramer" wrote in message
...
David J. Van den Branden wrote:
Sorry. Mis read the header info. It was not you that quoted Barton, It
was
Steve.

OK, so let's leave Wade out of this.

Of course.

I was the one who quoted Barton,
but NOT out of context. In the entire article, he refers to wing paddles
exactly once; they are NOT the focus of the article. Nor is high angle
paddling. If you'll read the section before the one I quoted, you'll see
that he discusses both high and low angle strokes for different purposes.

I stand corrected. But as a person that designs and commercializes wing
bladed paddles and does have a fairly distinctive style of paddling, I doubt
if he would be your go to guy if you wanted to promote traditional Aleutian
style paddles.

Then, later, he says "With good technique, it's possible to reach the
water with relatively short paddles. Longer paddles are heavier and
substantially increase the effort, with minimal increase in power."

Sure it's possible to reach the water. As far as longer paddles
substantially increasing the effort, I'm not convinced. To accelerate to
speed perhaps but not necessarily to maintain speed.

Here's my rationale:

If I want to walk 30 miles, I don't start off with a sprint as though I am
going to jog just 5 miles. When riding my road bike over distance on level
terrain, I do not use a low gear for accelerating, I shift to a higher gear
and reduce my cadence and thus, my overall energy output over the distance
ridden. An automobile does the same thing via the transmission. You don't
need as much energy to maintain your speed as you do to get up to that
speed. For long distance paddling, it makes sense that the paddler would
benefit from reducing the range of motion of his arms and torso and reducing
his cadence. A longer paddle allows him to do that. The weight of the paddle
may be negligible since there are many long paddles available that are
lighter than many short paddles that are available. To maintain a
comfortable speed over very long distances, I still believe there is a place
for longer paddles with narrow blade faces. I find that to maintain a
reasonable cruising speed, a relatively narrow blade and a very low stroke
takes very little energy.

By the way, in the rest of the article Brent Reitz says "There's no
reason to use a paddle longer than 225 cm unless you're paddling a wide
boat, such as a tandem or sit-on-top, in which case 240 should be the
maximum length."

David, feel free to paddle with any length you like (you might really
enjoy a 220), but don't accuse me of quoting out of context.

Again, I apologize.

I have a 240 that I rarely use. I agree that 240 is too long... FOR ME.
There may be others out there, however, that still prefer a more traditional
low angle style. I now mostly use a 230. If I were to buy a different, more
narrow kayak, I would definately investigate shorter paddles as I feel the
230 is good for the boat I have now. BTW: I'm 6'2" and my boat is a
relatively wide 23.5". It's a 17 foot boat with much room for gear that I
paddle mostly empty so the boat and I are not displacing as much as the
boats designed displacement. The kayak has very little rocker and when I
edge the boat to turn, on the high side, I need some length to get the blade
in the water, especially if I'm in a 1.5 foot or larger chop. I'm not trying
to convert anyone to any particular belief. I just don't think it's
particularly wise to make a blanket statement that a particular length
should "never be used". In my relatively short time paddling, I've also come
to the personal conclusion that there is no one paddle that is always right
for me. I think Nick Schade of Guillemot Kayaks put it quite nicely when he
wrote:

-- "Too many people think if it is good enough for X it must be good for
them. (For X substitute: the Inuits, Greg Barton, the Voyagers, Derek
Hutchinson, the Aleut, or me) This attitude is a poor substitute for real
knowledge and experience. If you are a subsistence hunter in the arctic, it
is good idea to see what subsistence arctic hunters do, but none of us are.
It is just laziness to accept their solution as the right one without
further investigation.

Modern paddling is still an evolving activity. As such there is a lot of
value at looking at how earlier kayakers solved their particular problems.
This does not mean that our solutions should be the same as theirs. Maybe
they will be, but it is not as obvious as you seem to suggest. By this
discussion, I hope we are investigating the issue" --



Enjoy the water, Steve. I promise I will try to test out some shorter
paddles this fall. And if I'm lucky, in the spring a narrower boat. And if
I'm really lucky, the sinus surgery I just had will work and I will be able
to put my head in the water again without getting an infection!

Cheers

Dave