*


All times are UTC + 1 hour



Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2012 12:57 pm 
Offline
Rare Poster

Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 4:23 pm
Posts: 47
Location: italy
tautologies wrote:
newind wrote:

THIS IS JUST AN EXCUSE BANAL

you do not want to allow anyone to grow
athletes and builders
with my board does not become a world champion
you must sacrifice and talent
you do not want to divide the slice, that is the problem


No it is not. It EXACTLY that same argument you are putting up, you just want the ride to bear the cost and not the brand.

You say it is too expensive for you to produce x number of boards. Well, I say it is too expensive for me to buy x number of boards each season because people can develop boards through the season.

Sure it is not a perfect solution.

but don't tell me what I want to allow. You are completely wrong. I just happen to have a different perspective.



You are biased,
This is the official excuse for comfortable declared

to win you need a deep preparation and talent
attrezzaturaera was the decisive 3 years ago
Now they are all on the same plane
with a small difference
(you do not have the same opportunities for athletes and companies)

note the following

below is the final standings of the 2010 Italian race

those marked in red were used Newind board.

Image

Now compare that with 2011
you realize what's changed?
these are the consequences of a wrong law
have to be happy?
but maybe you're not going to understand

Image


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:39 pm 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:36 pm
Posts: 1269
longwhitecloud wrote:
I have put the idea out there for an open source class without the ridiculous expense of top level olympic box rule.


How does the box rule add to the expense?


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2012 6:06 pm 
Offline
Medium Poster

Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:38 am
Posts: 196
davesails7 wrote:
longwhitecloud wrote:
I have put the idea out there for an open source class without the ridiculous expense of top level olympic box rule.


How does the box rule add to the expense?


It doesn't........in fact, quite the opposite which is why it is commendable that IKA has taken this route.

I'm confused about Mr Newinds mission - he has lost some market-share it seems and he is blaming the IKA?

Why don't you just make a better product, get it registered, sell it and move on?


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 7:43 am 
Offline
Frequent Poster

Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 12:52 am
Posts: 227
Location: Australia
PeterP wrote:
I'm confused about Mr Newinds mission - he has lost some market-share it seems and he is blaming the IKA?

Why don't you just make a better product, get it registered, sell it and move on?


He actually had some good result in 2010 but it seams he is blaming the fact that he is not on the IKA board list as the reason these kiters have not chosen his product again for 2011.
It would be reasonable to assume that people buy a board on the IKA list as it then allows them to compete in IKA sanctioned events, may also offer better resale, may also be a better board.

Perhaps the other products are better and they all chose not to buy his boards for this reason!


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 8:37 am 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster

Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:39 pm
Posts: 3031
As I understand it, manufacturers have to pay to get their boards and kites registered with the IKA.
This presumably is part of the organisation of how to check all of the production equipment if it is protested. A stretched kite for example might fail the measurement.

If they had the box rule but no production rule - ie. you could enter anything that was within the box limit, the checks would be much simpler to carry out and there should be no need for a registration charge, but you would probably have to check all the equipment at each event against the rules.

So overall, it seems that the production rule would be more practical. Its maybe the best compromise to avoid a one-design.


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 9:00 am 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:15 am
Posts: 1516
i think the ISAF/IKA board registration is utterly stupid. Measuring/weighing in will still need to be carried out anyway as at top level it is well know that top sailors try and get away with underweight equipment and out of tolerance measurements regardless of a dumb sticker, and I am sure kiteboarding will be no different - other competitors will want assurance too! Measuring in and random inspections during the event are the only fair way.

I also think it is brutally unfair not to let individuals build their own boards to spec too
The 30 board minimum and 400 euro charge + engineers report charges if overseas are utterly stupid. There is no way many NZ boards will conform to this as the country is too small to afford to do this - as are many other countries - many will for sure get on and do their own thing and ignore IKA/ISAF, sanctioned event,s the olympics (?) completely due to their utter stupidity in not considering smaller, less affluent countries/riders. Selfish.


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 9:19 am 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster

Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:39 pm
Posts: 3031
I had a look at the way they will measure production equipment and its going to be a time-consuming process to carry out a check on a kite or board, so if there was a lot of protesting the production rule idea could be difficult to operate during an event.

Checking all equipment to the box rule before the event could then seem simple by comparison.

I guess they are hoping everyone will be honest.

The more the wind is light and the water flat, the more important the equipment will be and Rio could be both if they hold the races in an enclosed bay.


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 9:26 am 
Offline
Medium Poster

Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:38 am
Posts: 196
longwhitecloud wrote:
i think the ISAF/IKA board registration is utterly stupid. Measuring/weighing in will still need to be carried out anyway as at top level it is well know that top sailors try and get away with underweight equipment and out of tolerance measurements regardless of a dumb sticker, and I am sure kiteboarding will be no different - other competitors will want assurance too! Measuring in and random inspections during the event are the only fair way.

I also think it is brutally unfair not to let individuals build their own boards to spec too
The 30 board minimum and 400 euro charge + engineers report charges if overseas are utterly stupid. There is no way many NZ boards will conform to this as the country is too small to afford to do this - as are many other countries - many will for sure get on and do their own thing and ignore IKA/ISAF, sanctioned event,s the olympics (?) completely due to their utter stupidity in not considering smaller, less affluent countries/riders. Selfish.


The box rule will allow the average punter to race on the same equipment as the top guys - if you had no box rule and a free for all you have a mountain-bike scenario where a competitive bike costs USD10,000 - I don't see that as being selfish. You can still compete in non-sanctioned IKA events on whatever you like. You have to look at the bigger picture - if the brands don't get something out of it they will not support it and then you will have no sponsored riders or big events - the small custom guys cannot provide the platform to grow the sport.


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 10:03 am 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster

Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:15 am
Posts: 1516
It does not stop wealthier countries manufacturing 30 very expensive boards, there is no limit on price as far as I am aware. I don't think there is a minimum weight limit on mountain bikes (lightweight and strength = high$$) as kite raceboards and they certainly experience far greater stresses and impacts than kite raceboards and hence cost a lot more to develop/are way more complex. There is no complex FEA modeling in race kiteboards!

It sucks because nz could make some awesome boards (many great composite board shaping legends here) but the 30 minimum is simply too many. They will still make them (more affordable) but will be put off going overseas (sanctioned events) having to buy another board with the sticker on.


Top
Profile
 Post subject: Re: is equal for all?
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 11:19 am 
Offline
Very Frequent Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 5:36 am
Posts: 8756
Location: Oahu
longwhitecloud wrote:
i think the ISAF/IKA board registration is utterly stupid. Measuring/weighing in will still need to be carried out anyway as at top level it is well know that top sailors try and get away with underweight equipment and out of tolerance measurements regardless of a dumb sticker, and I am sure kiteboarding will be no different - other competitors will want assurance too! Measuring in and random inspections during the event are the only fair way.

I also think it is brutally unfair not to let individuals build their own boards to spec too
The 30 board minimum and 400 euro charge + engineers report charges if overseas are utterly stupid. There is no way many NZ boards will conform to this as the country is too small to afford to do this - as are many other countries - many will for sure get on and do their own thing and ignore IKA/ISAF, sanctioned event,s the olympics (?) completely due to their utter stupidity in not considering smaller, less affluent countries/riders. Selfish.


Having listened to my buddies that were windsurf racing *some* years ago, I am super glad that it is not completely open, and that you cannot compete with whatever. It just sounded too expensive to me.

Newind: I can sympathize with your predicament, but surely just showing two competition results makes absolutely no sense. They could have chosen other board for many reasons...you still have boards in 2011...so to me that means that the other riders also have the change to ride your boards. If you have 10 boards in 2010 it should be minor for your to produce and sell 20 more no with great results like ones from 2010?


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group