FS is simply an extension of FW
paddling.
Up to a point there is no difference in the inttroductory courses for touring or river running.
Then they fork off, actually pretty early in the hierarchy of courses.
One minus or plus is that a paddler can pretty well jump in anywhere with no prerequisites. Ie., the paddler may have had instruction from clubs or other outside parties. Ergo they might have missed something when they finally do jump into an ACA course.
So thats a minus. The plus is that if there were prerequisites the population interested in any course would go down precipitously.
Here is the ACA page
http://www.americancanoe.org/site/c.lvIZIkNZJuE/b.4511261/k.C572/Canoeing.htm
FS paddling is
as Kim has said, an extension of basic flatwater skills taken to the limit of what can be done on flatwater with strokes combined into maneuvers and maneuvers linked together to provide continuous, playful movement.
Originally FS was taught as a totally seperate skill set with NO relation to moving water. Recently everyone seems to want to relate it to that. Sure, the strokes are similar, but for my classes I teach only flatwater use as some of the maneuvers are contraindicated in certain moving water situations and it’s not the place of a FS class to make those distinctions. Besides, I think it smacks of an inferiority complex to constantly compare yourself to another discipline. This comes from FS taking a lot of ribbing in the beginning from WW paddlers saying that the moves were nothing new and took no skill to do on flatwater.
The primary difference is that on flatwater the paddler has no benefit of current helping to give the boat movement. All momentum must be provided on flatwater, thus the seeming obsession with efficiency for practical FS.
Pag is right as always, most students coming to FS classes do not have sufficient basic skill to get the most from the class. Originally there were prerequisites to the FS classes and there really should be again. Yeah, it might cut down on attendance but it would be beneficial to the paddlers. In all the courses for reverse maneuvers I have taught over many years I could count on one hand the number of students who came in with the basic ability to travel backwards in a straight line.
ACA curricula, more or less
– Last Updated: Dec-10-10 1:57 PM EST –
This may not pertain to the thread, but the ACA Q has been asked, so...
I chaired the ACA Instruction Council when the framework for the current course outlines were developed. Pagayeur chaired the subcommittee. I was ACA Board president, John a Board Director, when the framework for current practice was adopted. We were there at the flood and are guilty.
The ACA has two introductory courses, L1, where butts go into boats, Intro Canoe and Intro Kayak. Both courses are ~ half day affairs taught by Instructor types who have survived a 16 hour certification with skill and knowledge exams. The intent is to provide the student the means to reach a destination and return. This is the ACA's Summer Camp Staff Cert.
The next ACA level, L2, is Essentials, which splits into four directions. Touring Canoe and River Canoe, Touring Kayak and River Kayak. Courses run a full day for students, Certification for Instructors starts at 24 hours and standards are significantly higher than for Intro level Certification. It would be virtually impossible for a non-skilled paddler to pass L2 Instructor certification. The L2 goal is to produce competent paddlers.
Above that level, L3, the various Discipline Cmtes, Coastal Kayak, FreeStyle, WW Canoe, WW Kayak, control their own course and certification standards. Both FreeStyle and Whitewater Canoe have developed their own Flatwater summary courses because Essentials students often arrive without prerequisite skills. [As per SteveT above, how can one expect to initiate a maneuver reliably without the ability to drive the hull straight forward, then initiate a yaw couple?] FreeStyle's L1 is their flatwater segment, Levels 2-5 logically but dysfunctionally divide maneuvers up by boat quadant, Onside Forward, Onside Reverse, Cross Forward and Cross Reverse. These are followed by as of yet un-numbered courses detailing Interpretive skills.
Instructor standards at L3 are quite stiff. Instructor Certifications are three to five days, standards are high. The goal is for all L3 courses to produce significantly skilled paddlers.
Some disciplines, Coastal Kayak and the Whitewater folks have added L4 layers.
The ACA has about 3000 Instructors, 300 Instructor Trainers, who certify Instructors, and 30 Instructor Trainer Educators, who certify Instructor Trainers. Roughly half of each grouping is, shamefully, kayakers, devotees of the double blade, so Canoeing numbers are 1500, 150, 15, FreeStyle's numbers are ~60, 7, 2. It's a Ponzi scheme built on skill, knowledge, and experience, basically time on target, with the understanding the IT and ITE are teaching degrees, reflecting teaching skills, not necessarily stick skills.
John, Steve, did I leave anything except the political stuff out? [They're the FS ITs contributing to this thread.]
Glenn…
the subjects you broach are large and way off-topic, so I’ll try to generalize just a bit and then maybe we can get back on point. The relationship of the curricula mentioned is much more complex and transcends just strokes. It involves teaching and learning theories, mechanical vs. cognitive skills, paddling environments and hazards, hull design and performance, etc. Additionally although mechanically the same, the cognitive application of strokes in different waters can be very different.
No one was ever refused a class in FS because they lacked a prerequisite in FW, but a lot of strokes such as sideslips, sculls, forward and reverse, et. al. were already being taught in FW. That said however, the depth of understanding, the precision called for, the expanded applications of those strokes were developed in FS. In short I was blessed to be on scene to observe this evolution. I can easily see how it could be confusing without this chronology.
BTW, the team which Charlie assembled for the ACA Curricula Committee was an incredibly talented and knowledgeable group of instructors and scholars of paddling. I was hugely fortunate to be there and learned a great deal. Without mentioning all who participated they were paddlers whose names were recognizable to most paddlers of the day.
Pag
Everything is relative…
but I do agree that these moves are much more difficult in flatwater. WW boaters not only have the benefit of the current, but also short rockered boats which are much easier to turn. I can do an axle or cross axle in my WW boat and come around 180 degrees without to much trouble even without current. In my flatwater boat I’m not even close.
I agree
I personally do not think that the “Winter’s window” applies to sculls in the same way as it does to forward or reverse power strokes, or at least to the same degree, because the blade is kept at such a closed angle.
But it the paddle excursion it too great, and the blade gets too far ahead of or behind the balance point (or buoyancy center, sweet spot, whatever), it tends to yaw the boat.
I find the shorter sculling stroke work better when beginning the scull. At least for me, it seems that once the scull has gotten both ends of the canoe moving laterally through the water, the excursion of the stroke can be made more generous.
Umm…not sure
My interest is which technique can reasonably aggressively move the boat most efficiently. Efficiency, in my mind, would constitute the least amount of energy expended. Not aware of a practical way to measure burned calories on the Florida pond! I also can envision that my hull carrying my body weight of 210 lbs is going to be riding a little deeper (and slower)in the water than your hull with your 165 lbs. I can also see where that aspect might have been overlooked when you saw Tom Foster and Mike Galt. If I recall correctly, they were also quite different in weight and stature.
I would like to do an on-water comparison of the differences in technique, and if your way works better, then I want to learn and utilize that one!
The topic, Pagayeur, …
… was thus stated in the OP:
“I thought it might be fun to introduce an instructional thread. Periodically I’ll present a FREESTYLE MANEUVER. I’ll describe it’s components, how it’s done and what it’s used for (in the real world). Those with interest will hopefully post comments, and questions.” [Upper case mine.]
I also make the assumption that an ancillary purpose of the topic is to interest readers in attending a freestyle instructional clinic.
Given that the primary technical instructional purpose of the thread seems to be complete, I am simply asking why any of the general canoe maneuvers so far discussed are some how exclusive to, or intrinsic to, or better taught in the branch of canoeing only recently named “freestyle”. Stated differently, I’m questioning – questions having been invited by the OP – whether, why, how, and to what extent these same paddling maneuvers are replicated and taught in other ACA courses that bear different names.
This is a practical question, especially for those readers here who may be interested in learning these maneuvers but who have limited time and money to spend on formal instruction. For example, assume a paddler who has successfully completed a Level 1 course (which I just learned about from the helpful ACA posts by Kayamedic and CW). Why should that paddler expend his or her limited time and resources on a freestyle course rather than taking a Level 2 flatwater course or a Level 2 moving water river course?
If another ancillary purpose of this topic is to market freestyle instruction, then the seller must offer some sort of product differentiation to prospective buyers. What “selling points” favor the core freestyle curriculum vs. the core of these other two ACA curricula for newer paddlers who are motivated to learn, but whose time and budgets are limited?
More simply: You’ve succeeded in whetting my appetite for a sideslip hamburger, but why should I go to the Freestyle Restaurant to buy it?
I don’t
really think a race would help anyone either. It all about time on target, in this case focusing the blade to push or pull the hull laterally or abeam. The wider the scull, the greater the paddler’s exertion in diagonal directions, which, thankfully cancel themselves out, but still waste energy.
It’s kinda like the uncorrected, inside circle forward stroke. Short, high cadence and powerful compared to the Controlled forward with J correction, the C stroke.
The first is energetic and the boat flies! The second is more restful; the boat slips along.
Hull and body weight are key factors
It was stated above that a 180 degree turn is a metric of boat control. I agree. But other factors affect the success of that maneuver.
As eckilson notes, anyone can do a 360 in a highly rockered boat. It was interesting for me to see the boat differences used by the sport canoeing performers in the period I was absent from it from 1988 to 2009. The hulls had clearly evolved to favor heeled turns. They are shallow, they can be railed by fairly modest angles of lean, and they easily break their stems free when laid on their chines.
Given the same hull, a key factor in turning success is simply body weight. I could spin the same touring hull probably 30-40 degrees further 25 years ago simply because I weighed 35 pounds less.
Therefore, given equal technique expertise, freestyle turning routines will probably always favor the lighter paddler in the shorter boat. Come to think of it, beginning with Nessmuk, many of the great paddlers of the 20th century were Lilliputians.
I promise all that this is the last
responce and is here only because Glenn raises a legitimate question.
First, the OP included a pledge to present and discuss specific FS maneuvers in depth. I believe we left off on the Reverse Axle and should continue there.
Second, at the risk of repeating myself ad infinitum, paddlers should learn to walk before they try to run. In this context one should look on FS canoe as the advanced level of Quietwater paddling. In fact there was a move to change the name from FS to Advanced Quietwater Canoe. It really is the highest in a succession of learning curves for Quietwater paddling. I and many others had the benefit of this progression simply due to logistics. We were already into the learning curves about the time that FS symposia started. We were into the strokes but FS took them to a much deeper level of understanding and application. It is where things all came together. Again repeating, here is a previous post in this thread:
Notwithstanding the specific maneuvers learned in FS what I gained in tangible terms was a huge increase in balance, an in-depth understanding of how trim affects performance, a more complete understanding of hull dynamics, and a feeling for blade positioning that was there-to-fore not known. My confidence level went up and the enjoyment of paddling went to higher plateaus.(portions deleted) To sum up, FS has a psychological as-well-as tangible impact on paddling in a macrocosmic way that goes beyond specific maneuvers. It changed me fundamentally and I became a different paddler. I guess a Tai Chi master might say it helps one find his inner Chi, the Buddahist, his Zen, or the NBA’er his Zone, choose your own. So, now when I take to the water, be it a simple calm water straight ahead paddle or big WW, the experience is different and better. This is a hard concept to sell to paddlers but it is the significant difference between FS and other approaches.
Glenn FS canoe (if one sticks with it) will fundamentally change you as a paddler. It brings one to a different zone, where things do not have to be analyzed but are felt in the blade, body, and knees which lead to higher levels of efficiency. We realize this is a difficult concept to grasp because after all paddling is a tactile and not verbal skill. We can only hope that people will take the word of the many great paddlers who have experienced these benefits.
Pag
Perhaps we really are not that far apart
in our techniques; maybe mine can benefit by some tweaking. I am looking forward to trying them both out. The boat flying idea is neat, and I thought my way accomplished that. If I can get the boat to fly faster, then I want to do that!
Thanks. I’ll also answer my question.
– Last Updated: Dec-10-10 12:58 PM EST –
My personal view is that all these individual manuevers long preceded the political organization of a "freestyle" committee within the ACA. Frankly, I think they were all developed in the Bronze Age.
However, what I see developed by the organized freestyle community over the past 20 years since I last saw Mike Galt in the Woodstock Pizzeria in 1988, after my own High Performance Canoe Symposium featuring Mike on flatwater and John Berry on whitewater, is this:
-- Great improvements in organizing and categorizing the strokes, which then (as now) are really just done by feel by experienced paddlers.
-- The training of an excellent cadre of teachers.
-- And, as to the pre-existent maneuvers themselves, the sophisticated linkings of a series of maneuvers.
These move linkings take you practically nowhere, except around in arcs and circles. So, I might ask, of what practical use are these things other than as performance vehicles of boat control. Well, that question from me is almost always rhetorical and didactic. My actual answer is easy: Even if this stuff is not particularly practical, it's fun. And I've been canoeing for almost 60 years almost purely for aesthetic reasons, not functional or practical.
I'm going to assume that one can learn the basics of all these maneuvers in a good flatwater touring or river touring course. Given that, I want to answer to my own question as to why I would buy the sideslip hamburger at the Freestyle Restaurant:
1. It's a better cooked hamburger with higher quality meat.
2. Our service is better. Our waiters and cooks are not only freestyle certified, but many are also flatwater touring, river touring and even kayak certified at I, IT and ITE levels.
3. We serve our freestyle hamburgers with a more sophisticated and tasty variety of relishes, hot sauces and ... French pastries.
I’ll give ya one more Glenn
Perhaps its a new relish?
FreeStyle is for lazy paddlers who want the boat to do all the work.
With all those paddling years behind us its about time that the boat took care of where we want it to go. All we really have to work on is getting a little momentum straight ahead. And learn where to put the paddle to control the boats turns.
The next step in evolutionary FreeStyle however ought to be designing float tanks that can be filled with helium. Ergo portaging up a hill can be done with control lines like a Macy’s Thanksgiving balloon.
Nicely put Glenn
One goal of modern FS was to present the flatwater canoe in a new light to the general public. We wanted to change the perception of a canoe from a vehicle primarily for travel, to one of a vehicle that could be use for play. No shuttles, relatively no danger, and something you could do on the local pond for an hour without taking up your entire day. We thought it would fit today’s lifestyles perfectly and still introduce lots of new folks to the sport and make them see it in a different way. WW always had the “wow, look at that” factor, but until the FS gang began proselytizing, flatwater did not.
It’s been said that for decades Canadian guides entertained their clients after dinner with an exhibition of what they could make their canoe do. So, yes, the strokes have been around since paddling began with the first guy who rode a log across a pond. Your assessment is accurate.
As a student you can get as deep into the verbage as you want, or ignore it altogether and just feel your way into it. People learn in many different ways and ACA training for instructors takes that into consideration.
Some folks just like to paddle, some like to learn why things work the way they do…that’s a requirement for instructors. Old saying: the best way to understand something is to try to teach it.
As the OP
I don’t find any of this discussion to be off topic. It has wandered a bit from what I anticipated, but that’s fine. I or Charlie, or any one else can rein it back in, at any time by simply introducing another maneuver.
A few posts back, the evolution of boats, optimized for FS was discussed. Three points made were that boats have become shorter, shallower, and more rockered all of which contribute to faster turns and greater rotation. Also mentioned was that these “higher” performance boats favored smaller paddlers.
To every advantage, there is a disadvantage. Part of showing good boat control is the ability to paddle straight, without discernible yaw. This is a useful function in the practical application of FS as well as in judged comppetition. A longer, less rockered boat typically would have an advantage here. For exhibition purposes, it may be easier to heel to the rail in a shallow boat, but the effect is much more dramatic when done in a deeper boat where the heel angle must be more extreme in order to kiss the water with the rail. Typically the deeper (and generally wider) boat will spin faster as well, when fully heeled due to the shortened water line. When paddled by a lightweight, the effect is enhanced. I find this to be a practical advantage when axleing into a tight micro-eddy on a fast moving stream. Conversely, the larger boat presents a greater wind target and makes cross maneuvers more difficult. For functional paddling, the larger boat allows for more carrying capacity and freeboard which may be necessary for safely crossing open and or rough water.
So, have boat designs evolved? Absolutely. How those evolutions are used to advantage or peril is up to the individual paddler.
Marc Ornstein
Raising the side of opposition
For me, the most practical maneuvers that FS has spiffed up in my technique are wedges and sideslips – both extremely useful in flatwater and moving water.
Re sideslips and sculls, there has been mention of raising the side of opposition. I first came across this term while reading the very informative book, “Freestyle Canoeing” by Lou Glaros & Charlie Wilson, which I don’t think has been mentioned in this thread. Is has a great opening chapter about Isaac Newton.
Perhaps someone could talk further about the mechanics of this move. For example, have any tests been done to verify its effect, might the effect vary depending upon hull shape, and what exactly causes the effect.
And should I feel guilty if I prefer to lean into a drawing sideslip for aesthetic reasons? If I do it the “right” way, raising the side of opposition, I have to heel away from my paddle while holding it right next to my hip. It makes me feel all scrunched up and twisted like an old prune. If I lower the side of opposition (geez, what a phrase), and lean out on my paddle, I feel more liberated, sexy and swoopy – like a jet pilot or a WW paddler or THE GUY IN THAT BOOK … but a guilty one.
Finally, what the heck does that phrase mean? What is its etymology? Who’s responsible?
I Stole the word[s]
from Tom Foster, who used them a lot. Tom MacKenzie prefers “Fart your boat”. I dunno about that one.
The concept is to heel away from the side your boat is moving towards, whether laterally abeam or diagonally abeam, to allow water to flow under the hull more easily.
It works fine with most boats, but as previously discussed complicates shifts/sideslips because if the angle of heel is not repeated, the paddle placement varies. Easier, at least at first, to keep the thing flat to the world.
It is also very boat situational. Most V bottomed hulls present a flat to the water when the side of opposition is lifted which increases resistance. Not a good thing at all. V bottomed hulls prefer a heel into the scull - that’s why they Post up better with the outside heel than they respond to inside heeled Axles.
No need to feel all scrunched up
"like an old prune". I won’t comment on the old prune analogy. I’ll be there soon enough. As illustrated it can be done gracefully, more so by some than others. There should be ample time to work on this in Florida. You are joining us aren’t you?
Marc Ornstein
boat shape
I haven’t paddled half as many boats as Charlie but I will throw one cent in. Square shaped boats like the Mohawk Solos series and the Dagger Legend won’t move sideways toward the paddle unless crossheeled a little. That package corner just digs in. It would be horrid to heel toward the direction of sideslip.
As far as heel on one side and moving laterally both ways…my tandem boats move OK toward the paddle and super quick with skulling pries when the heel is held toward the paddling side. Not sure why. I know that the drawing scull when heeled to the onside encouters a curve and has a flatter surface to work on when the heel goes the other way.
It might be fun for those of you who still have water that is colorless and not white to go out in a boat. Heel to the onside and do some sculling draws and pries.