Comments for New Look PE to EL Challenge at http://www.surfski.info , comment 0 to 8 out of 8 comments http://www.surfski.info Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:35:09 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc_423 All points of view about the issue are welcome, but please don\'t get abusive or personal. (I\'ll just take such comments off the site.) - robin.mousley Sat, 22 Jul 2006 08:42:37 +0100 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc_421 TO MAKO FYI INFO THIS IS HOW WE DID THE FIRST CHALLENGES IN SPEEDO,S NO BUTT PADS LITTLE WATER NO SAFETY AND LOOK WE MADE IT AND ARE STILL COMING BACK FOR MORE.IT IS QUITE SIMPLE I COULD THINK OF NO BETTER WAY TO DYE THAN BEING PUT TO THE CHALLENGE IN THE SEA.I SUGGEST WE ALL STAY IN BED WHERE WE MIGHT ALSO DIE. - PARKSY Thu, 20 Jul 2006 11:00:59 +0100 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc_420 At the race briefing for the 2004 Cape Point Challenge, all competitors were told that they would have to go around the SW Reefs due to prevailing conditions. Two excellent jetski pilots were in place to guide competitors around the unpredictable reef break. A number of the ?Manne? chose to ignore this instruction and Hank Mc Gregor in particular nearly paid a high price for this decision to ?short cut? as he was washed from his ski on two occasions, narrowly avoiding being pounded onto the rocks at Cape Point. Nothing was said or done to these competitors in this instance. Two years later in 2006, conditions at the SW Reefs were even more extreme with swells breaking up to two km?s further out to sea than normal. A paddler in trouble here would have put his fellow competitors and rescuers at risk. For Parksy to suggest that a loss of life to ?The Challenge? would be OK is indefensible! Officials did the right thing in changing the course for 2006, protecting the ?Top Paddlers? from themselves and the temptation to take stupid risks. Lesser paddlers tend to ?check out? the conditions on the morning of the race and gracefully withdraw if conditions are beyond their capabilities. As noted on the Berg this year ?a paddlers IQ drops by 50 points as soon as the race starts?! Surfski paddling in S Africa now falls under CSA and SAMSA and therefore the ?Merchant Shipping Act of 1951? Race officials have to bear this in mind and if found negligent by all those with 20 / 20 hindsight could pay a hefty price for going ahead with a race in conditions which were obviously dangerous at the time of the scheduled start. Apart from this, the race officials have an obligation to event sponsors, and the greater paddling community to be seen to be acting responsibly and reflecting the image that we paddlers and sponsors wish to be associated with. Those that choose to push limits should get together quietly one morning at 04h00 when the conditions are challenging, or ?expensive enough? and wearing just a speedo, put their nearest and dearest through hell! - Mako Thu, 20 Jul 2006 09:23:11 +0100 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc_418 WHAT HAVE CELL PHONES AND THE WALK UP THE DUNE GOT TO DO WITH IT OSCAR YOU HAVE DONE IT 9 TIMES GRANTED YOU HAVE PUT ON WEIGHT IS THAT THE PROBLEM NOW? - PARKSY Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:59:11 +0100 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc_417 I have seen all the comments about changing the PE to EL race. Some paddlers don?t actually realize the Woody Cape stop is changed for more than just the surf. I don?t mind the big surf but I do mind the trek to the campsite and the no cell phone reception and facilities at Woody Cape. I think if we can improve the race by moving the 1st overnight stop it will make it a better race. I am all for making races more accessible to all paddlers without compromising the challenge. I would love to see many new and experienced paddlers doing the 2006 challenge but leave the organisation to the new organisation committee. Give them a chance to prove themselves. I am involved as an ambassador of the race so I will be representing the paddlers. Oscar Chalupsky - oscarchalupsky Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:47:13 +0100 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc_416 I asked Michael Zoetmulder about the decision to remove Woody Cape from the race. He said the EC Lifesaving made the decision for a number of reasons: - safety - logistics & communications Historically most skis have been broken at Woody Cape. This is a limiting factor when people are deciding whether to enter - who wants to smash their ski at the end of the first day? There\'s no cell phone coverage at Woody Cape which limits communication. There\'s no inshore safety possible at Woody Cape on a bad day - last year a rescue boat capsized. Canon Rocks is a much better location for campers, there\'s cell coverage, there\'s space for sponsors logos, there\'s place for spectators. The main reason Woody Cape was used in the past was that it was the closest point to PE. Now that the race starts at Couga, there\'s no need to use it. There is precedent for traditionalists - in 1971, the race came in at Canon Rocks. Michael pointed out that there is plenty of big surf elsewhere for those who associate challenge with waves. - robin.mousley Mon, 17 Jul 2006 09:01:59 +0100 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc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at, 15 Jul 2006 06:08:10 +0100 http://www.surfski.info/content/view/251/147/#pc_412 I think one must be careful not to confuse ?challenging? with ?dangerous?. Prior to taking up paddling I was a competitive hang-glider pilot for more than 20 years during which time I competed internationally and won the national championship several times. I was a great advocate of setting challenging courses and argued against those who believed that events should be within the capability of the average pilot. By and large the top pilot?s views carried the day and my wishes were met. To compete successfully you had to be both competent and have an aggressive approach to risk. Today hang-gliding is all but dead and the few competitions that are held attract few entrants. I think that the approach we adopted has got a lot to do with this. The simple reality is that for sports to progress they have to attract increasing numbers of participants to fund things like good organisational infrastructure through entrance fees and sponsorships. The benefits that we are enjoying right now in the form of improved skis, slick organisation of events etc. is wholly due to the fact that the growing level of participation in the sport makes it economically beneficial to invest in these things. Sports which have exclusionary approaches to participation do not generally attract large numbers of participants particularly if risk is a basis of exclusion. It is just as challenging for Dawid Mocke to beat the ?next guy? in the Cape Point Challenge as it is for me ? it is just that the ?next guy? is a different person in my case. Adding in the prospect of getting trashed rounding Cape Point does little to add to the challenge but adds a lot to the danger. Do we really want to do this? - dalemaxski Wed, 12 Jul 2006 19:21:14 +0100