Theory of Pitch / Balance : Redux

Here are two different articles written by Greg Loehr on Swaylocks relating to this:…orum.cgi?post=118169…tail_page.cgi?ID=546

I’ve summarized and created an organized list.

However, side fins were not covered sufficiently so item #7 may be in

error as may some other points #9 . Looking for some feedback.

Tail Down / Nose Up----------------------- Nose Down/Tail Up

  1. wider nose than tail ------------------- - 1) wider tail than nose

  2. softer edges in tail -------------------- - 2) harder edges in tail

  3. less concave or flat or V bottom--------- 3) bottom concave

  4. thinner nose and/or thinner tail: weight --4) thicker nose and/or thicker tail :weight/bouyancy

5)more tail/board rocker -------------------5) less tail/board rocker

  1. fin cluster placement farther back------- 6) fin cluster placement farther forward

  2. side fins : smaller -----------------------7) side fins: larger

  3. center fin : bigger ----------------------8) center fin : smaller

  4. shift widepoint back? ------------------- 9) shift widepoint forward ?

I’m trying to categorize these as an aid to me when designing smaller and larger boards.

I wanted to add ‘shifting max thickeness forward or back’ but that seemed to be a bit bedevilling of a feature that

seems more covered by items #4.

…I tell ya that there are more than that in the fin theories

that #7 say nuthin at all

the size of the fins depends on the wave and the rider (biotype, skills, technique) and for what are/is intended for

–happens with all those point marked there

Actually nice redux. Maybe make understanding this easier. Thanks

I was waiting for ya’.