Simondo said...

You're the man Lacey!

i degraded myself back there, there's no need to rub it in

I analysed the data from PT Woody and Co's 12-6 race board trial (and Robert Stehlik's similar one).

I am a scientist who spends much of his professional life looking at datasets. There are tell-tale signs if a "fix" is in. It is EXTREMELY difficult to "fix" a trial where you are using multivariate statistics (i.e. where you are considering effects, of things like age, weight etc all at the same time). To do so effectively would take great skill and cunning, and quite a bit of statistical know-how.

I saw nothing at all in the data of either PT Woody's or Robert Stehlik's results to suggest anything except that they had furnished me with the best and most honest data set that they could gather.

It takes a great deal of time and effort to carry out a trial like theirs, and I for one am extremely grateful for their efforts.

The fact that the organisers of these trials willingly made available to a complete outsider (i.e. me), who has no connection whatsover to any brand, or the SUP business in any form, should tell you all you need to know about how strightforward they are being.

It is of course possible that there is a consistent placebo-effect type bias going on in any trial (if for instance all testers believe a certain board to be fastest than the others, it may well end up being). But, I reiterate, this will usually lead to an oddity in the data which might raise suspicions. I saw nothing of that kind in either dataset, and it would be unlikely where some people are paddling their own boards in any case. So my conclusion is that these race-board trials were conducted as honestly and truthfully as any realistically could be - and far more so than one might expect.

If we want to actually know what designs and features work in SUPs, these kind of trials are really the only way for us to know, since the results of any such investigation carried out by SUP board designers/manufacturers are unlikely to be made public.

So, as I say, I am extremely grateful to PT Woody (and Robert) for taking the time to do this, and would caution anyone against unmoderated criticism in case it demotivates them for future trials. In fact, if you read the results of the trials and found it useful, it might be nice if you let the organisers know, because it is a lot of work and effort.

There were some pretty straightforward conclusions from these trials, and some ran counter to what was expected. If you look back, you will find that I asked on the Zone people to write in and predict the rank order of the baords, in terms of speed, before PT Woody made them public.

If you then compare these predictions (made by some pretty knowledgeable people) with the actual results, you can see that we really did not understand a lot before these trials were conducted. We do now know a lot more.

It is always hard to look back and imagine a time when one did not know something. This is why I asked for the forum readers to make these predictions, and several brave souls did dare to put their money where their mouth was. If you are in doubt as to the value of the trials, I suggest you go back to these predictions and see how much we learned from them:

www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=13823.msg123018;topicseen#msg123018

i was thinking this morning the only truly unbiased way to do these tests is some kind of paddling machine.

but there is some many variations to fast board

fastest in glassy, fastest downwind, fastest upwind, fastest downwind in the flats, fastest upwind in the flats, fastest in chop, fastest on a boat wake, fastest and most stable etc.

example. i had 15'3 and dale's got his 15'6. we swapped around a fair bit. they were pretty evenly matched with dale's just on top. but up wind in the flats mine had a slight edge where dales had it downwind in the flats.

but even then with the same dc brand, dale wanted to prove his new board was faster than mine and visa versa.

cheers

PonoBill said "Did this test ever get done?"

If you are referring to PT Woody's 12-6 race board comparison you can find the full results here:

www.supvic.com/sup-vic-rps-126-race-board-speed-test-results/

The prediction you (PonoBill) made on the Zone, in terms of overall rank order of these boards in total time across all paddlers was:

1. Starboard New AST 25” – 16 kg
2. Fanatic Fly Race Carbon 27” – 12 kg
3. Starboard Race Carbon 27” – 12 kg
4. Naish Javelin Carbon 28” – 13 kg
5. Coreban Alpha Race 29” – 10 kg
6. Fanatic Fly Race Carbon 30” – 13 kg
7. Naish Glide Carbon 30” – 14 kg
8. Starboard Race AST 31” – 17 kg

The ACTUAL results were:

1. Fanatic 27
2. Naish 28
3. SB Race 27
4. Fanatic 30
5. Naish 30
6. SB New 25
7. SB Race 31
8. Coreban Alpha 29

BUT anyone who thinks that this is meaningful MUST look at the whole results, and also bear in mind that, as many have stated here already, different boards are designed for different conditions. I don't believe that there can be such a thing as "the fastest board", only the fastest board in certain conditions (and sometimes with certain riders only). This comparison was conducted in very specific conditions, which might not match your intended use at all.

Two things seem particularly obvious. The first is that is you want to be fast in flat water, you want to be on a displacement-type hull board, in its various guises. Second, there isn't a lot of difference between the top boards under these conditions. But beyond that, the results were much more surprising (to me, at least) when it came to considering things like the weight of the board, board width, rider weight etc. Take a look for yourself.

And before anyone looks at PonoBill's predictions and thinks they could have done better, well unless you ACTUALLY DID put your money where your mouth is and play the game, then the answer is probably NO, you couldn't have. Many didn't. Hindsight is 20/20. Personally, I greatly admire PB for making a prediction, and being THE FIRST to do so. There was a great big silence before he was brave enough to get the ball rolling.

Hats off to you, PB.

It's a great test, done thoroughly.

As said above it really only proves the fastest boards given a certain set of paddlers in a certain set of conditions.

So many examples of boards that prefer certain conditions.

My only criticism and it's not really a big one is familiarization of equipment. Ie, some boards like to paddled more to the front, some more to the back depending upon foil etc. The other would be that the first time you make a kick turn on any board it's kind of sketchy until you feel the grip, tail width, tail thickness etc. Some you go back further for, some you don't. That turn in this test could make or break the result.

As a 12'6 it makes sense as to why to have a turn but I can't help thinking it may have affected the results a little.

Great work.

CMC said...


As a 12'6 it makes sense as to why to have a turn but I can't help thinking it may have affected the results a little.

I agree, it definitely had an impact but I think only on one board. For the 14' tests, I'd be inclined not to include a turn but to split each run into 2 legs (with the wnd and against the wind) just as the American test was done.

husq2100 said...

Ptwoody, could you list the paddlers and the boards they owned when the 12.6 test was done.

Most of the boards were demo boards or borrowed boards, do you really want to know every board owned by every one of the paddlers? Personally at the time I owned 12'6 SB Surf Race, 14' Open Ocean, 17' Glide, 14' Ace, F16 V2, 7'4 SB POD and a home made 9' - does that change the validity of the results.... absolutely not. We all pushed as hard as we could on every run and picked which order we paddled the boards by drawing out of a hat. Everyone there did it for fun and because we love the sport and actually wanted to know how each board performed. To suggest it was 'rigged' is just insulting and just so typical of the mindless crap that comes out on Sea Breeze.

So obviously I'm a Starboard guy, never tried to hide it, but you know what, after that test, the boards I was really impressed with were the Glide Carbon 30 (nice all rounder and a bargain), the Coreban 12'6 (did a downwinder and loved how surfy it was and found it was fast enough on the flat and very light) and the Starboard Race Carbon (faster and more stable than my 12'6 Surf Race, fantastic fast rough water boards), I'm not into flat water racing and my shoulder was stuffed when we did the test so I tried to push as hard as I could without doing too much more damage to it.

I have people asking me all the time what board they should buy and I ALWAYS suggest the board that I believe would make this great sport the most fun possible for that person regardless of brand.

Sven had his spy cam running up in the blimp at the time, what else could PT and I do but take the fall.

Lighten up guys, we just do this stuff because it's fun

mikeman said...

When your opining statement is "....we aim to put the 14' Starboard, Naish and Fanatics and a couple others through their paces." it says a lot. There are a whole lot of really good boards left out of this list (as was the case with the 12'6" tests). If you want a fair and unbiased test then start out with testing a whole lot more boards in different dw conditions.

There are so many variables involved in downwinding that would make such a test really hard to do properly. These biggest variables would probably be wind/swell conditions and paddler experience/ability.

I don't know how many times we have to say it was a flat water test, not a downwind test. I thought it was clearly spelt out. Apparently not.

As for availability of boards, take that up with the distributors who see fit not to deal with Victorian retailers if your preferred brand has no access to the market down here. The funny thing is, these same distributors (or at least one of them anyway) have made rather insulting comments about the SUP scene in Victoria and how it's not worth the effort, only to have them complain when left out of a comparison like this. The simple fact is we could do this test in QLD and there would still be a number of valid designs that don't get a look in. We can only test what we have access to.

We did this, and continue to do this for fun as Jonathan said. Most of the people involved have no stake in the business end of SUP. A couple of us might have links to a particular brand, but that's irrelevant when you're trying to beat the other guy in a match race on a particular board. Also, I want to know if the other boards are faster than mine and the only way to be sure is to push those boards as hard as I push my own in the same conditions. Out of the test, I was most impressed with how Naish had improved to make a really competitive 12'6" board. I already knew the Fanatic was good.

As for downwind speed tests, I think that's only really relevant to downwind racing, the opportunities for which are really quite rare IMHO. Unless you're on a certain island in the Pacific, it's too hard to organise a race and have guaranteed wind speed and direction. Most (all) downwind activity that we do is for fun, and I believe there is a difference between the downwind board which is fastest as opposed to the downwind board which is the most fun.

I think there are far too many variables in downwind to be able to test the fastest board - a gust of wind, a bump in the right place at the right time - these things can substantially skew the results far more so than they would in a flat water test. If someone wants to attempt such a test, I would be the first to appreciate their efforts and pore all over the results.

surfershaneA said...

So where can you find the 12'6" results???

Thanks, Shane

You could:

1) look at the previous page of this thread, or
2) use the search function or
3) go here :www.seabreeze.com.au/

miami said...

I'm Just impressed there is a scientist that reads this forum.

How do you know we're all not rocket scientists?

HumanCartoon said...

surfershaneA said...

So where can you find the 12'6" results???

Thanks, Shane

You could:

1) look at the previous page of this thread, or
2) use the search function or
3) go here :www.seabreeze.com.au/

Bugger; I need to get my glasses checked or stop being so tired. Maybe I should give up surfing so I don't get all that glare and fatigue?

Outta here, Shane! [}:)]

mikeman said...

PTWoody said...

mikeman said...

When your opining statement is "....we aim to put the 14' Starboard, Naish and Fanatics and a couple others through their paces." it says a lot. There are a whole lot of really good boards left out of this list (as was the case with the 12'6" tests). If you want a fair and unbiased test then start out with testing a whole lot more boards in different dw conditions.

There are so many variables involved in downwinding that would make such a test really hard to do properly. These biggest variables would probably be wind/swell conditions and paddler experience/ability.

I don't know how many times we have to say it was a flat water test, not a downwind test. I thought it was clearly spelt out. Apparently not.

As for availability of boards, take that up with the distributors who see fit not to deal with Victorian retailers if your preferred brand has no access to the market down here. The funny thing is, these same distributors (or at least one of them anyway) have made rather insulting comments about the SUP scene in Victoria and how it's not worth the effort, only to have them complain when left out of a comparison like this. The simple fact is we could do this test in QLD and there would still be a number of valid designs that don't get a look in. We can only test what we have access to.

We did this, and continue to do this for fun as Jonathan said. Most of the people involved have no stake in the business end of SUP. A couple of us might have links to a particular brand, but that's irrelevant when you're trying to beat the other guy in a match race on a particular board. Also, I want to know if the other boards are faster than mine and the only way to be sure is to push those boards as hard as I push my own in the same conditions. Out of the test, I was most impressed with how Naish had improved to make a really competitive 12'6" board. I already knew the Fanatic was good.

As for downwind speed tests, I think that's only really relevant to downwind racing, the opportunities for which are really quite rare IMHO. Unless you're on a certain island in the Pacific, it's too hard to organise a race and have guaranteed wind speed and direction. Most (all) downwind activity that we do is for fun, and I believe there is a difference between the downwind board which is fastest as opposed to the downwind board which is the most fun.

I think there are far too many variables in downwind to be able to test the fastest board - a gust of wind, a bump in the right place at the right time - these things can substantially skew the results far more so than they would in a flat water test. If someone wants to attempt such a test, I would be the first to appreciate their efforts and pore all over the results.

The thread topic is "fastest production 14foot dw racer" and this is particularly what I was interested in reading about when I opened this thread. What you guys in VIC are testing is not the same thing. Maybe open up a new thread, with a topic something like "flat water speed tests between the 14' Starboard, Naish, Fanatic and a couple others..."

Still no need to be so dismissive. I get that you are way more experienced than us, but ffs dude... at least Lacey is funny when he's being condescending.

PTWoody said...

mikeman said...

PTWoody said...

mikeman said...

When your opining statement is "....we aim to put the 14' Starboard, Naish and Fanatics and a couple others through their paces." it says a lot. There are a whole lot of really good boards left out of this list (as was the case with the 12'6" tests). If you want a fair and unbiased test then start out with testing a whole lot more boards in different dw conditions.

There are so many variables involved in downwinding that would make such a test really hard to do properly. These biggest variables would probably be wind/swell conditions and paddler experience/ability.

I don't know how many times we have to say it was a flat water test, not a downwind test. I thought it was clearly spelt out. Apparently not.

As for availability of boards, take that up with the distributors who see fit not to deal with Victorian retailers if your preferred brand has no access to the market down here. The funny thing is, these same distributors (or at least one of them anyway) have made rather insulting comments about the SUP scene in Victoria and how it's not worth the effort, only to have them complain when left out of a comparison like this. The simple fact is we could do this test in QLD and there would still be a number of valid designs that don't get a look in. We can only test what we have access to.

We did this, and continue to do this for fun as Jonathan said. Most of the people involved have no stake in the business end of SUP. A couple of us might have links to a particular brand, but that's irrelevant when you're trying to beat the other guy in a match race on a particular board. Also, I want to know if the other boards are faster than mine and the only way to be sure is to push those boards as hard as I push my own in the same conditions. Out of the test, I was most impressed with how Naish had improved to make a really competitive 12'6" board. I already knew the Fanatic was good.

As for downwind speed tests, I think that's only really relevant to downwind racing, the opportunities for which are really quite rare IMHO. Unless you're on a certain island in the Pacific, it's too hard to organise a race and have guaranteed wind speed and direction. Most (all) downwind activity that we do is for fun, and I believe there is a difference between the downwind board which is fastest as opposed to the downwind board which is the most fun.

I think there are far too many variables in downwind to be able to test the fastest board - a gust of wind, a bump in the right place at the right time - these things can substantially skew the results far more so than they would in a flat water test. If someone wants to attempt such a test, I would be the first to appreciate their efforts and pore all over the results.

The thread topic is "fastest production 14foot dw racer" and this is particularly what I was interested in reading about when I opened this thread. What you guys in VIC are testing is not the same thing. Maybe open up a new thread, with a topic something like "flat water speed tests between the 14' Starboard, Naish, Fanatic and a couple others..."

Still no need to be so dismissive. I get that you are way more experienced than us, but ffs dude... at least Lacey is funny when he's being condescending.

i wasn't trying to con, condesda, a smart arse.


i reckon if the testers can keep ptwoody and jonathon off the aces the results are legit.

and that wouldn't be easy.

cheers and good luck and peace and well don't get a lacey doll and stick pins in it

JonothanC, I was asking, not with brand bias in mind, but board familiarity in mind...just like CMC wrote. Seems some in this test are a bit defensive when asked questions regarding it (thats science mate)...or is it that seabreeze has become a jungle of nut swingers where only "pro" (pro vs con) comments can be made, rather than the open forum its ment to be??? doesnt really help Joe public that way if they cant get an overall view to base judgement on.... So if there was one board that was owned by 2 or more of the test paddlers, it would stand to reason this board would have an advantage simply due to feel. Not to many can jump on a board and get the most out of it (within their own limits).

PeterP do you have any affiliations with Naish, or are you just the DJ of Sth Africa?

thanks Pete.