Is dipping your hand in the water on foreward strokes poor form?

[Jyak]

I’m not a fan of the Greenland. I end up working harder, and it doesn’t come close to approaching the same speeds. I currently use the Kallliste (99.7 sq in) in either 240 or prefer 250 cm. I like wider grip mentioned in the video because it improves the fulcrum leverage.

The most common issue I notice with the technique of most paddlers I’ve traveled with is excessive flourishes in the stroke, mostly from overpowering. The angle of attack for the blades changes, the track floats up and down through the stroke. They also have no consistent cadence. Most paddle hard then stop, hard then stop. I believe they’re exceeding the aerobic threshold. That uses energy like stop and go traffic in city driving. The most efficient method is to decide on a practical, manageable cadence and stick with it. Start slow and build to it, rather than start hard and keep falling off. Energy lost can never be recovered. It’s far better to reserve the power in your arms and shoulders for the return trip. If you burn out in the first 10 miles the last 10 miles could be a disaster.

I went out yesterday with my grand daughter. She’s now 13 years old with less than 20 trips, and can manage 8 miles without being tired. Her chart shows 2.7 mph avg. She can hit spurts of 4.7 mph and cruise at 3.5 mph. Her paddling form is better than any adult I’ve paddled with, but she hasn’t developed consistency or found a properly sized paddle. The Little Dipper (85 sq in) Werner that’s 210 cm is too short. None of the kids will use it. The extreme spikes show the inconsistency compared to a set cadence.

Of course I don’t expect high speeds, but rather look for her to finding a rythem. Avid adult kayakers have the same tendency. This is a typical track. Much of the time is spent correcting the previous improper or ineffective stroke. I get tired watching. I often have to slow to one stroke for ever three or four strokes of the person paddling with me, adult or child.

The difference is like having a heavy foot driving a car or putting it on cruise control. Speed can come from physical power, but it is more practical if it comes from a controlled stroke. The GPS is much maligned, but control is hard to manage without it. A heart rate monitor works as well, but it needs to be interpreted and there tends to be a lag as the rate climbs from overworking. By then its too late because the energy is already lost.

The benefit of a Greenland is the low square inch surface area and the gradual catch. It’s not more efficient, just hard to overwork. There’s a lot of slippage, but not a lot of effort, so it’s easy to stay in an aerobic zone. Trying to match the speed of a Euro is another matter. That becomes exhausting, unless the paddler knows how to build speed gradually and maintains a consistent rythem. The salvation of a Greenland is that it’s hard to hurt yourself. Rather than learn to use a Euro properly, its easier to learn the Greenland technique and save your joints. The same thing can happen with a smaller bladed Euro. The irony is how most paddlers gravitate to high angle Euro paddles with large surface area rather than touring paddles with smaller blades. Yet they go to an even smaller Greenland Blade and rave about how great it is, while overlooking the benefit of a Euro touring blade. Seems ironic to me.

[willowleaf]

Back to your earlier comment on canoe efficiency with a double blade: that can depend on the canoe. My solo Curtis Lady Bug beam is only 29" and has a canted seat. I find a 230 cm kayak paddle (a vintage Bending Branches with long thin blades) works well with it if I am sitting rather than kneeling and often switch off between that and the 52cm ottertail canoe paddle.

[Jyak]

Then you’re good to go.

[rstevens15]

@Jyak

I wonder how much that lift actually contributes to speed (3%, or .1 to .3 mph) maybe?!

In the world of competitive kayaking, winning times are often decided in hundredths of a second. That’s why most of these people use wing paddles, in spite of the expense and the fact that they are primarily designed just for the forward stroke.

[Jyak]

@rstevens15, as usual, you are correct. I’m suspect about the paddle creating lift, but can’t dismiss it either. @kanoniem offered some good background information to suggest it provides lift, but I’m not sure it provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate the paddle creates lift. The angle of attack works the same as a blade held perpendicular to the water. It seems more like drag to me. I won’t go so far as to say it doesn’t create lift, but would rather say I’m not convinced.

The notion that the wing paddle evolved from experimentation with the Euro blade makes sense. Last year, I independently began experimenting with the Wing Stroke using the Euro paddle and believe it’s paying off. The wing paddle has proven itself in racing, and there is no doubt it provides an advantage. A gain of even just .1 to .3 mph is still a gain. My guess is that the shape of the blade more efficiently channels the water at the angle of attack. Anyone looking to improve paddling efficiency with the Euro should try the wing technique. If you find it beneficial, you might want to try a wing. The cost of a paddle is a non-issue. Look at the miles of service you get out of it. It’s understandable to balk at $500 if you live paycheck to paycheck, but not if you have disposable income.

Although I’m not a fan of the Greenland paddle, the level of performance that can be extracted from a skinny stick illustrates that any paddle properly used can move the boat fast. It simply requires an understanding of the paddle and how to exploit the characteristics. My point is that the Greenland paddle doesn’t move a boat though shear muscle power. It comes close to accomplishes what a large square inch Euro can do, but through finesse. Think about that. There isn’t enough blade area to muscle the boat forward, so how can an experienced paddler keep up with Euro paddles. I think through smooth technique

[PaddleDog52]

GP is no match for euro paddle in speed.

[Jyak]

Agree, but it comes suprisingly close in the hands of someone who has a sound paddling technique. I’ve not seen extensive comparison testing, but the tests I followed have results that appear to be in tenths of an mph difference. For me, the difference between the Greenland and the Kalliste is about one mph difference, but I’m neither a fan of the paddle, nor do I have a competent paddling form with the Greenland. My limited testing was with my homemade paddle and the Gearlab carbon paddle @Craig_S loane to me. To my surprise, both paddles were mearly identical in overlay comparison, as well as thickness taper.

@szihn did comparative tests over measured distances. He acknowledges that the Euro is superior for reaching and maintaining speed, but he believes the Greenland doesn’t sacrifice much in terms of speed. However, his homemade paddles are far from stubby, narrow sticks, and he has both strength and very good paddling form. I trust his assessment.

So to be clear, I think the Greenland paddle can offer good performance in competent hands. Where the wing paddle may be superior is in the way the pitch of the blade (angle of attack) can be adjusted by the user, the way the pitch of a modern propeller can be adjusted to help maintain constant speed or rpm while climbing or decending.

[szihn]

@szihn did comparative tests over measured distances. He acknowledges that the Euro is superior for reaching and maintaining speed, but he believes the Greenland doesn’t sacrifice much in terms of speed.

Yes it’s a closer race than many would expect, but using my largest GL and Aleut paddles and comparing them to 2 very good Euro paddles in time over known distances, I found the fastest times were always with the euro bladed paddles. The measured distances are from one place on a shore to another, measured as closely as I can with dividers and a 7.5 Minute USGS map and a clock, so I’ll admit the times could not pass muster in a court of law, but I refuse to believe they are more then about 5 seconds off or more then about 10 yards off.

My GL and Aleut paddles are all of my own making, and the best times I have done so far are with the 240 CM Warner Kalliste and a a 250 Cm Aqua Bound Eagle Ray. My Oversize GL is 8 feet long and 4-5/8 wide, and my best performing Aleut is 9 feet 1" long and has non tapered blades of 3- 9/16" wide and ribbed on the power face. The times lacked seconds behind the euro types on all my measured courses. My shortest line is 1.16 miles and the longest I have used is 2.4 miles. Not exactly NASA grade science and accuracy, but close enough to get averages. On the short leg the best time I ever got with my oversize GL was 11 seconds behind the Kalliste. On the 2.4 mile leg, the best time I have used my GL was 37 seconds behind (I think…may have been 33 seconds, but I no longer have the paper so I an trying to remember) and my fastest time was using the Aqua Bound Eagle Ray. For some reason I can’t put as much power to the Kalliste as I can the Eagle Ray because when I do the Warner flutters and hisses in the water and the Eagle Ray doesn’t, but that is only true when I paddle my fastest kayak which is my Chatham 17. When in my Eddyline Fathom or my Sea Lion Shadow I can go full power with the Kalliste and not get that flutter. Why? I don’t know!

I only report facts here but I am at a loss to explain the exact reasons for those facts occurring.

But all that said, I am a somewhat new paddlers with only a bit more then 4 years of experience in kayaks, so all my conclusions are based on experience, but that well of experience is not as deep as many other paddlers, some of which post here.

The best overview I could give to someone just thinking about buying or making a paddle is general not specific. I think paddles are very much like many things in the world from cars to aircraft to hammers to guns. The more a tool or machine is made to favor one task exclusively the more utility it will give up to other tasks.

In cars, dragsters are the fastest class. If someone was getting their 1st car I doubt I’d recommend a dragster. In aircraft the fastest is the SR71. In Alaska aircraft are used more then any other type of machine to access the back country yet the SR 71 is a poor choice of a bush plane, for a whole lot of reasons. In rifles we see a lot of “long range” high accuracy types being pushed by the industry and for shooting open ranges and transporting those rifle by wheeled vehicles they truly are the best option for shooting good small groups at 600 to 1,500 yards, But take one elk hunting on foot out here, and I’ll bet you won’t bring it back next year after having to go through thick timber or over rock slides at 7,500 to 10,000 feet.
And I am skilled at the use of 12 pound sledge hammers and wedges for splitting wood because I have been doing it since I was 9 years old and I also do a pretty nice job of engraving using my 2 Oz hammer. I doubt I need to point out that the 2 tools do not overlap in their jobs. So the title “best” is something that has to be defined in any discussion of hardware. Best for what?

I have a tendency to think of “best” as the tool that covers the most bases and does everything well but maybe not everything perfectly. On a scale of 1-10 if any tool does #1 and #10 ok and does numbers 2-9 super well I will usually think it’s the best as compared to a tool that does only #10 perfectly, but gets worse and worse from #9 all the way down to #1.
But if the goal is to win a race it’s obvious the specialty tool made only for racing is the best. Look at what the racers on the collage teams and Olympic competitors use and see what they wear, what type of boat they sit on (not in) what type of PFD they use (none) and what the course of the race is, and what the water conditions are. Yes they are the fastest. So what?

If I am into paddling rough waters that run from 36 to 75 degrees, and a normal day is 16 to 27 miles and several times a year I will go out for 3-7 days, who would win the race if I got to pick the time, place and equipment? (I use my daily gear and load, and the college champion has to use his or hers as they do on race day.
So here is the race I know I can win;

Boysen lake, 2nd week of April. 4 days, round trips 3 different camps. All food and water, shelter and clothing must go with you at all times, and no resupplies allowed in the coarse of the race. Measured point to point, not measures in miles, because of the difference in navigating around ice. Very unfair? Yes!! But it does illustrate the difference in “best” when a context is applied to it.

I can and do that type of thing, and I have a kayak and set of clothing that allow me to do it and a full set of winter gear I have used for decades on high country elk hunts, so camping out in wind and low temps is just another day for me. But the contest is rigged? Yes it is!!! My competitor must use what he or she used in their racing and nothign more and we’ll race but I get to pick the time, conditions and equipment of all parties in that race. It’s unrealistic! But that is my whole point. All specialty contests are “rigged” to conform to a set of rules and conditions.

No one ever sets of a drag race or NASCAR in a blizzard over 8" of snow. The rules and by-laws exist for good reasons.

So if “best” is the issue in gear, but for some no compromise is considered because only 1 thing counts. For most others however having gear and tools that cover the most ground the easiest and do nearly everything well (but nothign perfectly) is probably still “best”.

See, “best” is a slippery term.

So coming full circle, what paddles do I think are “best”? Well I still find myself going back to GL and Aleut types. I also do not follow the drawings of paddles used 100 years ago in Greenland for one reason. Copying them is to copy a paddle made for a man of my height (5" 6") but probably lighter in weight and with smaller hands. I make my paddles using a formula my Nephew in Alaska sent to me. I don’t know if it’s right, but it does seem to giver very good results.

It’s the paddlers overall arm-span + one of their cubits (Tip of bent elbow to tip of longest finger) and one span. A span is the tip of the thumb to the tip of the little finger when the hand is spread. The blades of a broadness is that which can be grasped by the hand of the paddler. Using this formula I find most commercial GL paddles made today are actually tool short and too narrow. I may be wrong here, but for now that’s how I make my paddles.

Nephew Liam tells me that the old man instructing him said a “long distance paddle” was arm span + another arm. That makes for a very long paddle compared to those we see offered today. The cool thing about using the old formula is that if the paddle seems to long or too wide once its made (and not oiled yet) it can always be cut down. So making a paddle that really feels good to the owner is quite easy if we do it that way. When they say OK that’s waht I want" I then do the oil finish. According to the old man, the addition of better food and larger amounts of food in the last 100 years for Aleuts and Inuits makes for larger people and in many cases the paddles are being made to conform to the measurements of paddles used my hunters 3 generations ago when they were lighter, shorter and smaller people.

Is that true?

I can’t say with certainty myself, but I believe it probably is.

I am short but have thick hands and a large upper body. My chest is 46" around and I use an 8 foot GL and a 9 foot, 1 inch Aleut paddle with no problems at all (other then shallow water).

A 250 CM paddle is a big euro. And once the blade is fully immersed all the grab it can give you is accomplished. So wide shorter bladed paddle do well with shorter shafts. But with GL and Aleut paddles you want the hand to touch water so to use the entire blade. That in addition to the fact that a longer arc in the water makes for a section of a larger “wheel” so swinging a 9 foot paddle is giving an arm of 4.5 feet to grab water. A wide bladed high angle euro paddle with lets say a 220 CL length give an arc of 3.5 feet. If the cadence is the same the larger “wheel” covers more distance. Candace is the key here. A shorter paddle is easier to keep a faster cadence up because of the power bring applied closer to the resistance. But that is more a comparison of paddlers, not paddles.

So what’s “best”?

Well I don’t know.
Until John sent me the Kalliste and I bought the Eagle Ray I was about 99% convinced the old timers new best and the GL was “best”. Now I lean toward the GL but I am less convinced now than I was 1.5 years ago. Speaking only for myself, I find I do like the control a GL gives me better then the Eagle Ray or the Kalliste for most turns and ruddering moves and for rolling. But the speed overall and the acceleration of the Euro types beat the GL. Also for a hanging draw and ease of doing a cross bow rudder the Kalliste is the best I have used so far. For bracing in big chop and waves (those I can’t see over the top of) and for stern ruddering and high brace moves, the GL is it, hands down (not even a competition for these movements)

So----------- is the better class of Euro best --------- or is the Greenland type best?

Yes!

[Jyak]

@szihn I “believe” the Eagle Ray is working better for you because it has more weight and dihedral that damps the vibration and balances the flow of water as you push the paddle. The 250 cm Eagle Ray is spec’d at 32 oz with a 98 sq in blade. The 240 cm Kalliste is 23 oz with 99.7 sq in blades (closer to 27 oz).

When paddling low angle, I start my catch which establishes where my power phase will end and when the blade exits. There is no decision where to exit and where to begin my catch - only the catch matter. An efficient power stroke depends on a clean catch and follows through. At a high cadence, there is no time to focus on both the exit and a catch. There is less than a quarter of a second of separation. The properly set up catch ensures an automatic, clean exit because my blades have zero feather angle. A perpendicular catch ensures a perpendicular exit. When my torso rotation reaches it’s limit is where the forward blade will drop for the catch and the end of that power stroke results in the exit. The rapid transition between the end and next catch prevents the boat falling off the glide. Overall paddle length doesn’t matter as long as you can swing the length without slowing your cadence. Going to a larger surface area blade would impact cadence, if you don’t have the strength to swing the long arc. Everybody can’t swing a long paddle. Its similar to long crank arms on a bicycle. Not everyone can push long crank arms without getting choppy at a high cadence. It requires consentration on form. The higher degree of focus shows up as a flatter graph if you use an app with that feature. Craig has that superimposed over the heart rate. By him sharing his data with me, I’ve been able to see similarities in the speed graph. His output is more gesred to sprinting. I think you are probably a better sprinter than me, but we are possibly a closer matched for endurance. Both of you are more physically conditioned than me.

Steve, I can replicate the problems you have with the Kalliste. Both you and Craig have ample power to waste, but I don’t. My stroke has to be more efficient. You will improve with the Kalliste, only if you focus on matching the speed of the boat to the paddle speed. When the paddle begins to flutter, it’s moving faster than the boat can accelerate. Flutter is energy wasted.

Watch the power stroke of another paddler who is slower than you. Notice movement especially in the off side blade that’s in the air. It’s far easier to see the error telegraphed to that blade because there’s no resistance to stabilize it. That blade should be as true and straight through the arc as the blade under power. If it’s gyrating, the power face in the water is doing the same thing. One advantage of a longer paddle is the wider grip ensure that you have greater leverage to control the paddle (try paddling with your hands six inches apart near the center of the shaft. It doesn’t have to be about paddling harder. It should be about powering smoothly. Focus on the blade out of the water.

That doesn’t mean that paddling harder isn’t faster, because it is faster, but how much energy are you willing to waste, especially if you have a long distance to travel.

[Jyak]

Heres an example of a graph showing consistency. It might not be faster than powering harder, but it’s more efficient. That saved energy will be avalable elsewhere. Ignore some of the arrows. Thise are notations that I made to key my attention to certain paddling actions, conditions, stopping to adjust equipment or to deploy the rudder, etc. Look at the tighter sections of the graphs. Thats where the glide is more efficien. You may actually notice greater speed spikes before or after those periods.

[Craig_S]

@szihn This resonates with me better than I could explain it, I have a hard time putting the physical do, into the words of how…

I’ve found my optimal length to be between 220 and 230 depending… Ive been using a 225 with a 612 sqcm for racing, my best speeds were produced with that over a 3-4 mile course at around 5.8 mph. however for longer runs I nominally use a 230 cm paddle with 650 cmsq blades. this keeps me at around 5 mph over a 15 mile run.

Beyond that blade area I just am not strong enough to pull it for any distance, (anyone want to buy a lightly used Ikleos.) Both blades I’ll use a 60 deg feather, It’s mostly based on muscle memory from my white water days. I cant paddle worth a damn without one.

I also never use my GP, mainly because I’m high angle, and even when I get tired and get a bit sloppy I never really get into a full low angle stroke. so 230 is max length for me (220 is my ideal high angle but I set a compromise at 225.) Unfortunately no one seems to make a carbon blade that is compression molded at 650 cmsq, so my accent is my best long distance paddle though it has the highest swing weight, Carbon fiber shaft but Poly-Pro blades, so it can be tiring in a way that my smaller paddle with compression fiberglass blades isnt.

I’ve spent years figuring out what is right “for me” which doesn’t play for anyone else. I think my optimum would be a high angle blade somewhere between 612 and 650 cmSq (compression molded.) at about 225-230 shaft length.

[szihn]

(anyone want to buy a lightly used Ikleos.)

How much?

[szihn]

@Jyak

At a high cadence, there is no time to focus on both the exit and a catch. There is less than a quarter of a second of separation. The properly set up catch ensures an automatic, clean exit because my blades have zero feather angle.

John this is somethign I REALLY have to concentraton one when using the Warner. If the catch angle at entry is not perfect the shaft twists back anbd forth in my hand and the only thing I can do to stop it is to stop the stroke and let the water scull it back up to the surface. When your coached me on that my strokes with the Kalliste became a LOT better. I k and forth twist with it, but only in my Chatham. The other kayaks do not give that flutter and I can see only one thing different which is that in the Chatham I sit lower in the water because it has a seat that is about 1/2" off the hull’s bottom or slightly less, where the fathom and the Sea Lion are higher. The sea lion is a lot higher, maybe 1-3/4" up and the Fathom is about 1-3/8" up. But I can try to break the shaft in wither of those 2 kayaks and I get no twisting flutter. The Fathom is 22" wide and the Sea Lion is 24" wide. The Chatham is 21" wide. (could that have anything to do with it?)
And the last times I took out the Chatham and used the Kalliste I did my stokes in a semi-Greenland style and that made the flutter got away. Letting the top edge forward about 1-1/2 inches moves all the flow off the top[ edge and so the flutter goes away. And yes, doing it that way REALLY moves the Chatham along. Enough to get the bow to rise up.
I need to go do my measured legs and see the times with the Chatham and the Kalliste using it in that way. So far my best time’s with that paddle have been in the Fathom, but I see I am still faster in the Chatham with the big GL paddles when I made comparisons between the GL and the Warner but only because I have not been able to get a perpendicular stroke with the Warner and not have it fight my grip and hiss like a simmering tea pot. Once I started canting it the bad symptoms went away, but as of this writing I have not clocked it.
Getting the bow to rise up is a lot of work. Too much in fact to go much distance. So I don’t enjoy it much and there for only do it when I have a reason to. Getting off the water when there was lightning hitting very close by, getting gout of the way of a coming motor boat or recording times just to stratify my curiosity. But one I know I know…and I have not been motivated to keep doing it

[Craig_S]

@szihn Never thought about how much say maybe 250, I suspect I’m probably undervaluing it. I’d give you specs but I loaned it to John, and I’ll be damned if I can remember the shaft length but it’s probably 220 or 225. cant remember if I did a “split the difference” when I bought it. (220 for racing, 230 for touring.)

[szihn]

Hummmm

I don’t need it, but it may be fun to try it out and see if some of my theory’s hold water.

For a broad bladed euro type I think I’d prefer a shorter shaft because I am short too, and having that much leverage work against me with a 250 CM length may be counter productive. But again, I am guessing here.
Is it a straight or bent shaft?

[Jyak]

Your Ikelos is about 230 cm.

[Jyak]

Straight shaft Ikelos. I can switch between 240 and 250 without impact on the avg speed. I just like the 250 because it allows me to open my grip as demonstrated on that video posted by @kanoniem. I also follow the wing stroke with very good results.

[szihn]

How do I go to that video John?

[Jyak]

Its back a few posts.

[Jyak]

Look for this about the wing.