Stroke technique in C1 canoe slalom: a simulation study

Asymmetries in paddle force influence choice of stroke type for canoe slalom athletes

“…The profiles for the paddle forces in this study were more skewed and triangular than rectangular, seen by the ratio of the mean pull phase force to the peak force (51.0% ± 0.01% for C1 and 52.6% ± 0.01% for K1): these ratios are similar to the profiles reported for sprint kayaking at a low cadence of 60 strokes per minute (53.3%: Gomes et al, 2015). It should be noted that the C1 paddle forces peaked at an earlier time than the K1 forces (21% vs. 28% stroke cycle; also see Wakeling et al, 2022), and such skewness in the force profile leads to faster simulated race times for a given impulse of the paddle stroke (Wakeling et al, 2022).…”

“…The male C1M canoe athletes generated paddle forces that were similar for the on-side and off-side strokes on the nondominant side (Figure 5). Again, drawing inference from the computer simulations (Wakeling et al, 2022), these results suggest that there would be little difference in race time for male athletes paddling on-side or off-side strokes on their nondominant side and this is particularly the case for the downstream sections of the course that the computer simulations most closely mimic. This is not to say that C1M paddlers should not use switch transitions because switching to achieve on-side strokes to negotiate complex features on the approach to up-stream gates may become increasingly important as modern course designs become more technical.…”

“…However, the model also predicted that a more substantial factor in race times could be an asymmetry in paddle force between the dominant and non-dominant sides. Indeed, the results from the simulations (Wakeling et al, 2022) showed that it would only take 0.5% in stroke asymmetry to reach this smallest worthwhile performance enhancement. However, the actual forces in canoe slalom are more complex due to the nature of the white water and the additional types of turning stroke (K1 forces: Macdermid et al, 2020;Macdermid and Olazabal, 2022).…”

“…A previous computer model has simulated the race times for C1 slalom paddling (Wakeling et al, 2022). The model used forces from straight paddling on flat water or an indoor ergometer and showed that using fewer C1 switch transitions, that take longer than cross-transitions, could lead to faster race times, and it only takes 3 fewer switch transitions to reach the smallest worthwhile performance enhancement (of 0.4 s) that can increase the prospects of winning a medal (Hopkins et al, 1999).…”

“…In order to transition the paddle blade across the boat for the up-stream gates, a canoe athlete will need to use at least six to eight cross-or switch transitions in a race, although at least 20 such transitions are typically made (Tilden et al, 2021). A survey of 33 international race runs between 2018 and 2020 showed that each cross transition is about 0.3 s faster than a switching transition (Tilden et al, 2021), and computer simulations predicted that if paddle strokes were of equal strength on the left and right sides of a boat, then the slower switching transition could lead to a small but significant increase in race time (Wakeling et al, 2022). Asymmetries in the strength of the strokes (in either C1 and K1 categories) can result in substantial differences in simulated race time (Wakeling et al, 2022) that are greater than the differences in simulated race time caused by cross-or switchingtechniques in C1 (Wakeling et al, 2022).…”