Select to expand quote
foilsurfR said..Bellerophon said..
A weight limit is positive evolution but imho even better would be a max sail size of 8 m2, just like the IQ class.
I fail to understand how that is a positive evolution. I think that if large sails are faster in light winds riders should be able to use them. IQ is a one design class and can't be compared to PWA where you can choose any foil size you want. Lighter riders can just pick smaller foils and still be very competitive.
Also the 2 front wing limit is just ridiculous while they allow 3 fin boards... a front wing is the cheapest way to maximize wind range imo. They already had this rule in the 2023 season and it didn't really have a positive effect. Downsizing to 2 wings will just cause manufacturer
s to develop new sizes which means new gear, higher cost.
I understand your point, but the issue with ever-larger sails goes beyond pure performance optimization.
When sail sizes increase, riders are effectively forced[/i] to gain weight in order to remain competitive - and not necessarily in a healthy way. Some will add muscle, others fat, (or even ballast), just to reach a body mass that can handle and trim such big rigs efficiently.That evolution doesn't promote athleticism in the true sense of the word, which is about power-to-weight ratio and technical skill[/b], not absolute body mass. A sport where competitiveness requires you to weigh 100 kg - far above what is healthy or realistic for 99.9% of the population - is moving away from its athletic roots and becoming a contest of size rather than ability.Setting a maximum sail size[/b] ensures that performance is determined by fitness, technique, and efficiency rather than by body weight. It keeps the class accessible, fair, and representative of a healthy, athletic discipline instead of rewarding unnatural or unsafe weight gain.
The "two front wings" rule is not really about costs or fairness - it's part of a long pattern within the PWA of trying to artificially balance foiling and fin racing.
For years, the tour has been trying to keep both disciplines alive in one format, mostly by restricting
foils[/i] so that traditional fin setups don't disappear completely.This has very little to do with equipment expense or accessibility. It's mainly about preserving the old order. Many of the established, heavier, older riders built their careers and sponsorships around fin racing and understandably fear being outclassed by younger, lighter foilers. At the same time, several manufacturers have invested decades in fin development and want to keep monetizing that legacy gear rather than embracing a fast-moving technical evolution that would make most of it obsolete.Instead of limiting innovation, the sport should recognize that foiling represents a genuine technological step forward - faster, more efficient, and more inclusive across wind ranges. Artificially capping progress just delays the inevitable and prevents the sport from showcasing its full potential.