Kayak Flat Water Technique - Stroke Phases

It has been some time since I presented anything relating to one of my passions ... coaching kayak technique. So here goes ...

There are four phases to each paddle stroke. This is not anything radical and is consistent with the approach that I have seen quite a few people advocate with one change of emphasis.

I will discuss each of the four phases in more detail in later posts. To start, the four phases are:

- Start Position
This correlates with what is often spoken of as the recovery or airwork and is commonly expressed as the last of the four phases. I very consciously place this as the first phase because I believe it is vital in establishing the effectiveness of the stroke. As such I want paddlers to be conscious of starting the stroke well and that is why I speak of it as the "Start Position". I relate the Start Position to the backswing in golf. If you have a lousy backswing you're going to have a lousy swing. If you have a lousy Start Position you're going to have a lousy stroke. A good Start Position does not guarantee a good stroke but a lousy Start Position pretty much ensures a lousy stroke.

- Catch
They key here is getting the paddle in the water to take best advantage of what the paddle is designed to do. It is vital is to get the paddle "locked" in the water to set up an optimal Power phase.

- Power
Here is where the paddler takes advantage of the biomechanical set up established in the Start Position together with the optimal "paddle lock" established by the Catch to project the boat forward.

- Exit
This phase is undervalued by most paddlers. The value of a good Exit is not in propulsion but is in conserving energy, retaining momentum and not interfering with the paddler's balance. A good Exit is key in lifting stroke rate without losing stroke effectiveness and efficiency.

Puh ... leeeeeaaaaase !!!!!

One of the items on the news this morning was about the security arrrangements around the State of the Nation address. How many police officers and soldiers would be deployed in Cape Town, in the and around the parliamentary precinct and even in the suburbs.

For what?

In my view it is simply to feed Jake's puffed up self importance; if there is such a security presence he must be a really important guy. From long before he was president he was renowned for his coterie of 'protectors' and this has become a common practice with so many of our puffed up politicians. Get real and get down to some real work for the good of the country instead of feeding your egos.

I would love to see the threat assessment for this evening and whether it bears any correlation with the security deployment.

What If ....

What if the moon is made of green cheese? What if Jacob Zuma is really being unjustly pursued over the arms deal? What if Helen Zille is really a white supremacist?

What If allows us to explore possibilities and help us make choices between those possibilities. What If gives us freedom to explore. Exploring through What If can somesometimes help us better understand What Is. So I choose to ask What If in some different contexts to explore various things and maybe identify some ways we can make positive differences in our beloved South Africa.

So I will start exploring a What If right now ...

What if our government leadership were to fall under a different remunuration model? What if a significant portion of their total salary package was payable only on achievement of all of a set certain objectives, measurements, KPAs?

I know there is discussion on the effectiveness or otherwise of using KPAs. Let's for the purposes of this What If assume that KPAs are viable and take this What If further.

What if everyone holding a significant position in government was to receive a significant portion, say at least half their total salary package only on achieving all of their KPAs? Let them receive half their total salary package for continuing business as normal, simply for pitching up at work. Now I am sure there are some that would find even that challenging. We need only think of Winnie's woeful parliamentary attendance record.

I am suggesting that from the president down through cabinet ministers, members of parliament, through directors general, provincial premieres, mayors, city managers, heads of departments, and so on be assigned no more than five measurableKPAs.

Let us start witht he president. As the head of government what could be measured that would have a positive impact on the state of our nation.

 Hmmmmm ....

I would start with holding the president responsible for ensuring that every government department and every province obtains a clean audit every year. This means that if just one department fails to get a clean audit Jake loses half of his total remuneration package. Hands up anyone who thinks that won't have a positive impact on South Africa.

That's a totally objective, measurable and non-political objective. I can't imagine anyone in their right mind not wanting financial accountability in government.

Take a moment and imagine in your mind's eye Jake hassling and harrassing his cabinet ministers to ensure that every cent is accounted for. What a pleasure .... Then he'd be an action man.

For Whom the Toll Tolls?

So much said about tolling. With COSATU about to launch more anti toll action today I express some of my thoughts on the GFIP project and the associated tolling.

I need to start by saying that I am not inherently opposed to the concept of tolling. It embodies the principle of "user pays" thus providing a direct connection between the provision of a service or facility with the payment for that service or facility. The principle fits neatly into homogeneous societies where the capacity to pay and the need to use are similar for the entire population.

Things get more complicated in a hugely unequal society like South Africa where there are huge gaps between the haves, the barely haves and the have nots. The haves and the rest can claim equal need of the tolled roads. Their capacity to pay is hugely different and so their relative costs are vastly different. This difference supports that arguments of people like COSATU who say tolling is hugely discrimatory against the poor. I have to agree.

Before I look at other objections to tolling I want to explore things from a different persepctive. For this purpose let's start by assuming that tolling is an appropriate and equitable model for providing necessary infrastructure. Let's also assume that all the work that was done should have been done and the roads that are tolled should be tolled.

First question I want asked: Are we paying a fair price for the work that was done? In other words were the costs for the work appropriate and not inflated through industry collusion or to cover kickbacks and other perverse transactions.

The government and its agencies is, or should be, responsible to provide citizens of South Africa the best quality infrastructure at the best possible price.

This leads to the second question: Will the money to pay for the improvements be collected as efficiently as possible? In other words is the absolute minumum overhead cost incurred in collecting the money to pay for the roads.

In a nutshell:

- Did the responsible authorities exercise the necessary diligence to ensure that the appropriate infrastructure of the necessary quality was provided at the best possible cost?
- Did the responsible authorities exercise the necessary diligence to ensure that the most effective and efficient method was selected in order to recover the costs with the minimum impact on the citizens of South Africa?