Agree on the complicated mess. I was writing up all the different aspects of why but work got in the way. Then I found Larry Cain explaining all that complicated mess far more thoroughly. Interesting it’s 4 years old and still perfectly up to date.

http://larrycain.blogspot.com/2013/03/i-thought-i-would-take-break-from.html

Fact is that for me I was able to move from 96 to 86 blade and load it better. I feel no need to go smaller as I have no aches or pains anywhere in my body. I imagine 76 would be too small, unable to get the monster pulls one sometimes needs in downwinding. I don’t have much incentive to try as I feel I’m in a good sweetspot and I’m not seeing guys better than me doing this. But maybe I should try. Just to see.

The connection aspect is a big one to me.  Drop the blade down deep and you can feel the power of a loaded blade.  Then it really depends on the individual how much force can be applied.  Low strength to weight -> low force low speed.  High strength to weight -> high force high speed.

Just measure with a GPS and look at the speeds you generate.  I posted a number of my results and was stuck at 6.9 - until I was able to get the 2016 AS23 up to 7.2 mph after a couple of weeks.  Would expect now with much better balance on that board to go even faster sprinting.  TJ did 7.0 on the 2016 and his bud did 6.3.  So just do a few tests yourself to figure out if "faster is slower and slower is faster" -> for you.  5 mile distances are better for race testing though.  Keep it simple.   

DW go big blade cause the wind is helping you go with vs against the ocean waves.  A small blade does nothing as you are moving so fast already.

Yes, it all depends on the conditions. In stop-start DWing a fast cadence short stroke way out front can get you into bumps better and easier than slower big pulls. The machine-gun tap tap-tap method lends itself to a smaller blade. Moreover, you can find yourself stroking in some strange positions when downwinding (no laughing at the back now, children) and so you risk getting back ache pulling hard with a big blade.

Travis won the 32-mile M2O in poor DW conditions on an UL board using an 86 blade.

UK, other than efficiency, a bigger blade does not apply a greater force. Whatever force you apply to the shaft is the total force applied--the ONLY force applied. You were apparently sleeping in physics class.

I think you misunderstand me (or I didn't explain it well enough). This is all about power generation (which I said)..... and this is calculated via applied forces and cadences. If the lever length remains the same but the blade size changes, the applied forces would have to change and (likely) would be then compensated with a higher/lower cadence to maintain the same overall power. The only assumption I made was about difference in efficiencies (but I said as much at the time) but I've gone into that further below. Bear with me.

No, just changing the blade size alone can increase the force at that point but this will then directly impact the power..... and that's what we need to be talking about. This is no different to bike crank length discussions. e.g. longer cranks do increase the force when isolated but then this is then compensated elsewhere to ensure the net power will be the same (otherwise we'd all be using the longest shaft, biggest blades we could).

On this subject, with bikes, crank length has been shown to make no difference but it has also been shown how you generate that power will have bias to the musculoskelatal or v02 max systems. That's why many paddlers should not replicate what the pro's are doing and dropping their blade sizes down as they may not just be fit enough to get the best from it. Likewise many people may well be 'over bladed' and under the impression that bigger blades create more force (whehn they should instead be talking about power). I have found that when using the biggest blade on the market, I had my highest stroke index (and therefore a combination of greater force, lower inefficiency but a much lower cadence). Going by Luc's excellent post, this may well be a case of greater efficiency (rather than force). The fact is I haven't got the data to be sure but I do see his point.

Quote from: Area 10 on December 06, 2016, 11:17:10 PM

Travis won the 32-mile M2O in poor DW conditions on an UL board using an 86 blade.

.....which is interesting as he typically bucks the trend and opts for the larger 96 for most of his races.

Well, he does change paddles during that race sometimes, apparently. But the fact that he uses an 86 at all was enough to make my point. He'll be able to pull harder than two of us mere mortals out together. So I think we have to deconvolve the power of the paddler and size of blade.

Quote from: Eagle on December 06, 2016, 10:17:22 PM

DW go big blade cause the wind is helping you go with vs against the ocean waves.  A small blade does nothing as you are moving so fast already.

I was nodding my head reading your post about individual testing and keeping it simple...then you went and said this   In my humble opinion there is no definitive best size blade for downwind just like there is no definitive best size for flatwater. 

When it's good DW seems like all glides and fast speeds, but even on the best runs there are a lot of starts and stops, moments where you need to begin paddling while your nose it still pointed uphill on the bump in front of you, and sprints to get into or connect glides.  For me, a Maliko run with a big blade is exhausting!

Is Devin still using a monster size blade? I can’t do that.

It’s clearly different strokes for different folks. That areal view of the men’s SUP segment at the Worlds team relay showcased that so clearly. And those are top elite racers. The spectrum gets wider as one moves into amateur ranks.

I use my littlest blade for DWs. However I have learned to set it efficiently enough that I can get [my] max power out of it when I want. I think if I took a big blade I’d break the paddle shaft or I’d bust something in my body. Whichever gives first. I’m guessing that’d be a body part.

I tend to do long DW’s. I’d be dead about a quarter way through with a huge blade. Which is probably why Travis took a smaller blade for a long haul like M2O.

It’s that mix of soft catch and yet ability to load the blade enough that I can give my max power that I love with my smaller blade. I can modulate. I got some pics of me at the start of a race this summer from the side and I had no idea the shaft could bend that much. I certainly don’t need a bigger blade. I’m more careful to do a shorter high cadence stroke for starts now.

I still have my C4 Waterman paddle from 2008. Occasionally use it. It’s huuuge by todays standards. I’ve really changed how I load a blade since I used to use that thing.

No doubt each person has their own blade size preference for sure.  But oddly enough my 116 used to stress my traps and make them sore - but no more.  We only have like 9 mile runs - so not too long.

But so much talk about cadence and stroke index and such - I had to get outside and do something quite a bit more enjoyable.  This was from a small 40 cm powder day yesterday.

Ok - enough of a distraction - back to regular programming ..... 

Quote from: Luc Benac on December 07, 2016, 07:47:52 AM

Quote from: ukgm on December 07, 2016, 01:56:31 AM

My technique isn't as good with single dihedral designs but one of the test paddles I'm about to get might address that.

Sounds like you will be testing a KeNalu Mana then :-)

I had never even heard of it until you mentioned it. I looked it up though. Looks really interesting !!

Great paddles and you can switch fairly easily shaft, handle and blade. So no need to buy an entire new paddle. Super useful when testing paddles or upgrading.
Also fairly easy to adjust yourself the height.