Hello MTB, You can’t put a theoretical limit on surfing speed by reporting what happened in someone’s wave pool. Nor can you assume that the wave pool people are ‘getting it right’ because they have ‘financial incentive’. Nor can statistics from 1974 change what is happening now. Roy
Hello John,
Speed through the water was what we originally wanted to measure, and we were going to adapt a unit used by competitive rowers and built by Neilsen Kellerman. They make units which use transducers or impellers, and they would do the job but they have a rather bulky control unit. Talking about taking steep drops, one would accelerate pretty fast in a free fall drop on a big wave, but going down vertically would not register on a gps, and with no board in the water, there could be no ‘through the water’ speed either. Perhaps an altimeter would do the trick 
or there’s always the time honoured method of wild guessing!
Regards, Roy
How about this:
The fastest surfer in the water is a mammal.
The fastest surfer in the air just above the wave, but not touching the water is a bird.
The fastest surfer on the surface of the water is man.
with the exception of the “Project Beluga Tow-in” at the Cortes Bank that I have a video of - if anyone cares to see it. I think his preference was “mat” cause he kept slipping off the 20’ strap-on hard board I had Gerry Lopez shape him.
When I first started surfing many years ago - it was all about the feeling of being in the waves, getting a big snotty load of sinus wash and sometimes going to bed with that dried on salt on your shoulders. Being in the sun, wind and water was the symphony in my life that I hoped would never end.
What ruined it was the in-fighting among the clans. When Nuuiwha’s fish was hung on the pier with a knife in it - THAT put surfing back how many years? I know he always showed up at the beach in Newport with a walkie talkie (Is Steve Lis out there? Ten-Four. No good buddy - it’s just a bunch a kids with salt on their shoulders. Breaker-breaker) We’re just now getting into that shape again. Retro-Shmetro - stop your bickering and we’re all winners.
Or not - I hate to kill every thread that I post to.
I actually wouldn’t mind seeing Roy pull it off…
daddio
way to go Daddio!!!
think that about sums it up for me too!!!
Woops. I was going to respond to Roy’s timed honored tradition of wild guessing. I prefer the time honored tradition of wild lieing. I tell my two girls there are two things they can lie about( other that lieing to prevent mental or physical harm). They can lie about the size of the fish they catch and the waves they surf(neither surf,yet). Therefore, I steadfastly stand by my assertion of 76 mph on my double over ankle wave at Coach Madden’s spot three weeks ago on my home made fish. I’m not kidding. It’s the truth. I don’t care if you believe me or not. Mike
OK Rooster, that makes you second with 76mph, after Ambrose who did 186,000 miles per second at Waikiki. I am running third wih 25mph and James is currently fourth with 23mph. Congratulations!
Here is a clip of me doing approximately 18mph.
http://www.woodensurfboardbuilder.com/swayclip4.mpg
Regards, Roy
PS I hope Ambrose didn’t get stuck out there in that upper speed zone due to a relativity time trap, but if he has then at least he is in Waikiki where it is nice and warm.
Quote:
Hello MTB, You can’t put a theoretical limit on surfing speed by reporting what happened in someone’s wave pool. Nor can you assume that the wave pool people are ‘getting it right’ because they have ‘financial incentive’. Nor can statistics from 1974 change what is happening now. Roy
If you look back through my posts, you will see that the only speed that I said was difficult to believe was the infamous “3X”. What I have subsequently posted was that the body of data obtained a variety of sources and using various methods, including anecdotal comments and impressions, GPS observations, direct observations of the path angles of surfers combined with the speed of progression of waves all yield speed numbers are generally in agreement with each other and yield speeds around 20-25 mph on waves of about 8’, or less.
As you say, that doesn’t mean that higher speeds can’t be reached…and from watching “Laird”, “Tu”, “Step Into Liquid”, “Black Wednesday”, etc. I’m sure that they have–even significantly greater. It is true, however, that I am skeptical of your reported 27+ – given the apparent quality of the waves in your video – and am looking forward to your report when you get a GPS (and appropriately process any outliers in the data of the type sometimes observed by windsurfers measuring their speeds with GPS).
With regard to your comments above:
- The path/peel angle measurements were made at surfbreaks in the ocean, not in a wave pool. They were carried out to provide the pool designers with guidelines for the desired characteristics for the breaking wave in wave pools so that they wouldn’t be breaking too fast, or too slow, to interest the riders, and thus potentially jeopardizing a million dollar (+) investment (if I understand the press releases). If that were my money that I was risking, I’d certainly want to get a good handle on these numbers.
As you noted, that doesn’t mean that a different board couldn’t go faster–and I don’t think I claimed that. The data only says that during their studies with current surfboards and surfers of various skill levels, they have not observed/measured a peel/path angle of less than 33 degrees–which would mean a speed (over the bottom) of 1.84 times the speed of progression of the wave toward shore.
- I doubt if the range of wave conditions existing in 1974 was very different from the range of present wave conditions (although that’s obviously not always true at a single location). Boards certainly have changed since then, but frankly the rocker and bottom/rail edges (certainly two important factors in the speed of a board) in the pictures at your web site, combined with your drawings and building instructions remind me more of pre-1974 board designs than current designs.
So…again, I’m looking forward to your speed measurements with a GPS–and then we can all compare “apples with apples” speeds measured among varying types of wave-riding equipment in various size waves and types of surf breaks.
MTB
Hello MTB, thankyou for you reply.
I wish to make the point that so far on this thread I have been the only person to offer any evidence which can be independently analysed on the forum. Therefore I think that you would be acting fairly if you applied your academic ability to analysis of the video clip before expressing scepticism. I notice that your scepticism is based on the idea that (in your opinion) my boards look like pre 70’s boards. This is a spurious observation, particularly from one who spends so much effort appearing to be thorough in his investigations. To put it bluntly, your post is yet another ‘dressed up’ version of the same circular argument which you have been offering in previous posts.
Having said that, I should add that I am always interested in what you have to say, and have learnt quite a bit from your writing, it’s just that there are a couple of sub par assumptions in there which ought to be weeded out!
Yours Faithfully, Roy Stewart.
Hi Roy,
No worries…
Bob Simmons was a historically significant surfer, an eccentric pragmatist. Because of that, I remembered his comment about surfing speed and thought it might be fun to share. Note that I began with, “For [historical] perspective…”
As for your video analysis, you are welcome to post anything you want. I only put forth a suggestion (to which you readily agreed), “…it might be more interesting (and relevant) to wait until you can quantify…”
Most importantly… even though Bob Simmons offered no hard data to prove his statement about the common velocity of wave riding, his lack of criteria does not necessarily disprove the crux of his argument.
What Simmons’ statement does clearly reveal is that surfers from 60 years ago were discussing the same things as we are today.
By the way, was Sydney J. Harris a surfer?
“We are not going fast, you just think we are… maybe we might hit 30 mph in a big drop. If you don’t believe me, get on a hood of a car and find out!”
Bob Simmons - Legendary Surfers - “1947 & Radical Changes”
No, as far as I know Sydney J Harris was not a surfer. Is a car bonnet a surfboard? (Even if ridden by Mr Simmons?)
Best wishes, Roy
PS I wish that we could see more home video of Swaylockees surfing. It would be much more interesting to see than the endless procession of artificially speeded up commercial videos of competition heroes shot in perfect waves which are currently offered. (to me anyway) I wonder if anyone else feels the same way?
On Camera, I can go 25mph on a 15mph wave if a side rip is travelling at 10mph.
Happens frequently here.
I can also go 25mph on a slower wave, if the camera is panning slightly backwards
during the clip, but without a distant immobile reference marker, its just
suspicious evidence.
Its especially suspicious if the spectator/camera operator can’t tell you whether or not
a particular clip was panning a little bit backwards because their not aware of
the issues and the clip being used for speed calculations.
I dont know much about video equiptment, but does cheap video equiptment
mechanically crank out x Frames persecond or does it do processing and adjustment
along the way and consequently there are interrupts to aperature speeds.
I have the pictures.
Roy in a compromising position with Prince Charles.
– Dont Believe it!
Basically film can be just as spurious as pictures.
But if Roy had a GPS on a non riptide day and posted his speeds I’d berieve him.
Them ‘Outliers’ are statistically suspicious data. So if you had a day of
speed readings of 20-22mph on the fastest waves, yet one was 27 but it didnt
seem that wave was faster or bigger than any of the rest, then the 27 would be thrown out
as being suspicious…
Throwing out ‘Outliers’ is common in statistical analysis,
and it is assumed that these could represent errors from faulty equiptment ,
faulty measurement, etc.
Halsose,
If you do your homework you will discover that panning has got nothing to do with the accuracy of video analysis. Pull out a pencil and paper and work it out for yourself. I have explained this before. You are repeating yourself.
If you have a side rip of ten knots (running in the same direction as the surfer) then it will not increase your speed on a video which uses the wave as a reference point. It will, however, give you a higher reading on gps (which gives a speed over the ground reading), so your argument actually supports the opposite of what you are asserting. Video analysis gives a more accurate reading of surfing speed than does gps in the case which you describe.
The ‘outliers’ theory really is nonsense. You and I both know that sometimes you will go significantly faster (or slower) on a wave which looks similar to all the rest. Throwing out the fastest moment because it has not been repeated on every wave in the session is silly. The outliers theory is an attempt to make an average speed. I am not talking about average speed.
Realise also that gps units (as used by ‘Soul’) record the peak speed over a very short period of time, and are thus showing an ‘outlier’ more than the video which uses at least several frames and thus a longer time period for measurement.
Roy Stewart
PS the ‘outliers’ theory reminds me of the ‘tall poppy lopping’ which is one of the tactics used by the herd to drag people down. It is not something I have much sympathy with. I make war on ‘tall poppy loppers’ at all times.
>Halsose,
If you do your homework you will discover that panning has got nothing to do with the accuracy of video >analysis.
It has everything to do with it.
As to other ideas that you so readily dismiss.
Your just unconquerable.
Halsose,
Panning refers to the position of the picture frame in relation to the subject. Provided that the subject is in the frame, panning inaccuracies have no effect on the analysis. I notice that you offer no support for your assertion. Once again you have not done your homework and are repeating yourself. R.S.
Roy,
your speaking gobbleygook.
everything is relative to a frame of reference.
–Einstein.
As to panning , you cant have a moving frame of reference.
Nice Puns going on here!
Panning can make a stationary object appear as if its moving.
If the camera is panning backwards in the dirction towards your tail it will appear you are going faster. The calculated speed is relative to something moving in a negative direction and will make the surfboard appear to
go faster.
If its stationary, then you will have some accuracy.
If the camera is not on a tripod and the camera operator
is unable to distinguish when panning was occuring , then
you have a Wash.
If you have a link explaining otherwise I think we
would all appreciate it.
Do the filming over with your wife being given explicit instructions.!
Look up the specs on your camera, make absolutely sure that
the FPS are not variable under any circumstances.
Look over the rip, either its negligible or subtract it speed from
your calculations.
If you havent done any of these things trying to eliminate
erro , how can you not expect disbelief.
Or as you would have it lets throw out the Scientific Method.
Afterall you’ve already proven your no Einstein.
Roy,
Have you ever watched any other surf videos (particularly big wave stuff or the pros on 6-10ft stuff)??Do you HONESTLY look at your videos and think that you are going quicker than the surfers in other vids???
You have said that you think that we might all be going faster than we realise and that could be the case, but you keep inferring that you are going quicker than most surfers, this is what is annoying everyone (especially after viewing the video).
I reckon that during 3/4 of the surfing in Endless Summer they are easily going faster than you!!! Can someone do a quick analysis on some of that footage?
I agree with Halsose, that unless the camcorder is stationary on a tripod, you cannot reliable determine the speed. If you had other fixed objects in the frame then you could do it. Panning has everything to do with it. If you keep the surfer in the centre of frame by panning, then you cannot estimate the speed because all of your reference points are moving. If the camera is stationary, the only moving object is surfer and then you can accurately estimate the speed.
Unless you can calculate the rate of panning, then it is affecting the results.
Regards,
Matt.
Hello Halsose,
You are mistaken. The position of the rider relative to the wave is not changed by panning. If we had perfect panning, the surfer would appear to be stationary, but we can still calculate the speed in that case. The position of the frame relative to the surfer does not change anything because it does not change the position of the surfer relative to the wave. You can’t get away from this fact no matter how hard you try.
Furthermore, the ‘rip’ effect will make no difference to the position of the rider relative to the wave. Surely this is obvious.
Go and do a course in basic geometry, because I cannot discuss this subject with you if you cannot understand the very simple points mentioned above.
Roy Stewart
Hello Matt,
-
I did not say that I was going faster than anyone other than those at my local beach.
-
I did say that I had posted the fastest (supported by evidence) speed so far on this thread.
-
If you want to know how fast the guys on endless summer are going, then why not do a ‘quick analysis’ yourself?
-
Analysing the ‘Endless Summer’ footage might help you to understand the way the video analysis system works.
-
You presently do not understand that the wave is being used as the point of reference in the video analysis.
-
You cannot make something true or untrue by chanting it together with someone else.
PS You say that I am annoying ‘everybody’. That’s a lot of people, are you quite sure? Let me know when you have counted them all.
Roy ,
You are just a Silly and Argumentative Troll.