First - full credit to Eric Herstens for this:
http://www.cabareteairforce.com/news/173/ARTICLE/1193/2006-03-27.html
Image below is from the web page (inverted to show the board from rider's perspective).

Anyone tried this outline yet? (or ridden one of the customs?)

Seems like it could be really good for larger boards, where you need to bias the straps heelside to get decent edging - the rounder toeside would compensate for that (at the expense of maybe sacrificing some toeside performance, like pop and/or upwind).

I'm going to try it on a big plyboard, hopefully Eric will accept a beer or two if it works as good as I hope it might.

1998 Its been done . Its not new.

1998 - just how many actually touched water? And were they built like other 1998 boards?

Still would like to hear from guys who have tried it...

Have a look in the early mags . The problem with the design was to obtain the rail shape you had to go very wide . Around 20 touched water. The only difference today would be the build . If you want to claim it to be the first ,what ever turns your button on go ahead. The catman ,Sebastian Cattalan, Simon Catling were just a few who tried these . Give them a call they can tell you. Early RRD, Bic had them etc etc ?

Claiming to be the first? How is that even possible after seeing the picture of Eric H's design on that web link?

What I'm wondering is, given the evolutions in rocker, concave, width, and so on in the past 6-8 years, isn't it possible the results could be different?

Rocker ,no,concave,no,width,no, however ,materials ,yes ,and flex yes,So its back to building old boards with flex and new materials .Better get my old dimension book out .

I posted this on the Kiteforum about a year ago:

"I just got back in from trying my newest shape.

I made it to use in low wind with my 20M LEI or 26M foil,
with the goal of being able to use the flat side to get upwind
in the really light early wind , then when the wind picked
up, I wanted to be able to flip it around and put my feet
in the straps in the other side to be able to stay out kiting
in the stronger wind.

It really worked well. I stayed out for an hour more on my
big kite under control, until there were white caps everywhere.
I was having fun doing turns and riding downwind using the
curved side of the board. I then safely got back to the beach
without risking getting caught in a "speed spiral" and setting
a new world speed record for slamming into a beach.

When I decided to switch sides, it took me about 3 seconds
to put the kite ovehead and spin the board around to put my
feet in the other side of the straps. I like the centered straps
rather than "Ducked" better for plywood anyways, but centered
straps allow you to use 2 different shapes in the same board.

My next shape will be a "side-cut" rather than a straight
edge like the "Flydoor" from Flysurfer. The board will have
a "Quarter moon" look to it.

I would like to hear from someone who rides toeside a lot
about advantages or disadvantages of having a different
shape for toeside. I don't ride toeside because I am
getting older and want to keep my knees for walking. I
just like to go out in low wind and "mow the lawn" and
come back home safely.

My thanks to Chris and Allen for the "Plywood Inspiration".

Dimensions: 152cm x 42cm x 1.5cm rocker."

Here is a picture of another board I made. It didn't work so good.

Thanks man! Interesting approach, I hadn't thought about flipping the board around when the wind picked up, I was thinking of moving the straps a bit closer to the heelside edge for more leverage. I agree about the duck stance, it's easy to overdo it and have your back foot always pointing the wrong way...

Crabman - you sound bitter... It's going to cost me like $40 max to try this out and it'll give me something to do when it's raining - not expecting much more than that, so don't worry.

Bitter ,get outa here .Thats warm.I like me beer ice cold .Kitezilla ,we done something simular in 98 .If you want some dimensions and pictures email me .The size we done was 150/125,worked a treat .The transition sizes worked due to the tail end sizes .You have to get that right if that makes sense .