Proposed ICF Changes - Ski Slalom here we come. . .

Yester Years Kayak · Post by **Yester Years Kayak** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:36 pm

Mmmm, thinking more about this it does pose a few questions

My suspicion is that the next step would be miss a gate and you are disqualified - Ok at the top level this is in effect the situation now, but think of those beginners, (or even div 1 paddlers) who make a mistake and mis a gate - writting off their entire run.

If we were to assume that a 50 sec penalty would equate to a disqualification (for illustrative purposes only), what would the impact be in various scenarios....

How many events in recent times would have ended up with all paddlers being disqualified?

Would events become a joke for the second runs due to paddlers being disqualified in the first run?

(and for Sheppy etc) What could the impact be on weir slaloms?

If i get time i may just take a look at the last years results (or a sample) just to see what results could have looked like in terms of entries vs finishers

Dutch Geezer · Post by **Dutch Geezer** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:34 pm

Maybe we should look at organising a mini event at HPP, where we could try exactly the same course in both formats.

All those people who want to have a say could come and try and decide from their how they feel about it.

Dave Royle · Post by **Dave Royle** » Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:44 pm

I think there is an argument for retaining penalties which hasn't been discussed yet.

With a penalty for a touch, the paddler races with the intent of not hitting poles. This results in there being relatively few fifties and not too many difficult judging decisions to be taken. Remove the penalty and the outside pole and the judge will have to decide whether the head was inside or not which will be very difficult if the paddler is hitting it at the time.

Skiing is a bit different. It is the skis that go inside or outside the poles and it is obvious, by the explanation of pain, if one of the skis is the wrong side, at least in the men's event.

Combining single poles with no penalties would probably result in another rule change to lower the pole as close to the water as possible to remove as much doubt as possible which would be a change in the opposite direction to currently.

mwilk · Post by **mwilk** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:09 am

It is the skis that go inside or outside the poles and it is obvious, by the explanation of pain,

Funny you saying that - I'd been thinking that if we went to one pole and no penalties, we could wire up the pole to give an electric shock .......

Yester Years Kayak · Post by **Yester Years Kayak** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:39 pm

Looking at the wording from the ICF "gates consist of 1 or 2 suspended poles", puts a different slant on this as it suggests only a minor change in the way we construct a slalom course.

As for the development of technology to determine if a penalty has been incurred - why do this when your ultimate goal is to have no penalties?? Sorry but in my opinion you either develop the technology or you do away with penalties, there is no point spending good money on something that will be thrown away!

Also, if you develop the technology to detect a touch etc you will still need a means to back up the decision should someone protest. So will they start to accept video recordings now;)

Oh, and how about the proposal for "extreme slalom" - a course of 6 to 10 gates (no restrictions on the length of the course or distribution of up or down stream gates)?? I'm sure the boat manufacturers & distributors will spy an opportunity here to come up with new specialist boats......

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:38 pm

1 second, with a gradual phasing out of touch penalties altogether with the appropriate gate technology

So the technology will be to detect passage, not touches, although as pointed out, where is teh gate line for a single pole, and what happens about measuring double passage? What about (risks annoying David W) deliberate displacement? or will that be allowed? So judges might have two jobs - did they get through the gate, with/without DD?

John · Post by **John** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:19 pm

I think it's going to be very difficult to set decent rules for single pole gates. David Wilson has already pointed out some of the difficulties of not having a gate line.

Even in slalom skiing they have two poles for each gate. Their gates are 4-6m wide though, so on tv you don't realise there is an outside pole.
There doesn't need to be a rule change to achieve what they want; just set really wide gates. It's been done before, see gate 17:

<OBJECT CLASSID="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=210><PARAM NAME=MOVIE VALUE=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.sw ... -GB><PARAM NAME=PLAY VALUE=TRUE><PARAM NAME=LOOP VALUE=TRUE><PARAM NAME=QUALITY VALUE=HIGH><EMBED SRC=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.sw ... 6&hl=en-GB WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=210 PLAY=TRUE LOOP=TRUE QUALITY=HIGH></EMBED></OBJECT>

katonas · Post by **katonas** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:16 am

Would single poles on an upstream see a final end to the Merano option? If you went the wrong side of a pole would you still get a 50 if you were 3 metres away from the pole? (no definite width to the gate). I presume an imaginary gateline would be used (eg. shortest line to the bank). Canoe slalom is a minority sport as it is, which people are just about beginning to understand. Do the ICF really think making a course confusing even to paddlers will help the general public get involved ? I think 1 second as a penalty will be good for Prem/Internationals where margins are so tight, but wouldn't provide much of an incentive for a beginner to learn to avoid them. Personally I'd probably try more difficult techniques in a race if I had less time to lose, so I can see how it might help people improve.

Yester Years Kayak · Post by **Yester Years Kayak** » Sun Jan 27, 2008 6:11 pm

The WWR crowd are having a discussion about footwear.....the ICF are introducing a rule which states they must wear shoes in the boat from 2009. Basically they have to have a thick enough sole to protect the feet and not fall off if you swim (no mention of what is thick enough etc)

The main concern is from the Canadian paddlers as you would expect, on safety of exiting the boat.

So what next, an inspection to make sure your shoes are shiney enough (ala the Army)??????

davebrads · Post by **davebrads** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:17 pm

We have a few single pole gates at Marple at the moment, thanks to the recent high water running off with some of our poles. Last night I experimented a little - single poles on staggers weren't a problem, but I was having a lot of difficulty judging when to turn for a single pole upstream, turning too close to the pole most of the time. I guess that I have always judged my position by looking at the far pole - probably not good practice anyway.

To me the single pole makes a lot of sense. Having to control the front end of the boat to avoid hitting the outside pole on a turn is an artificial constraint on achieving the fastest time down the course. There remains the problem of the gate line though - going to very wide gates as per ski slalom might be the way forward here. Besides, as far as I can see there is nothing in the proposals that says that two poles are going to be scrapped altogether, which means weir slaloms can still be run according to the rules.

Like some others I can only see problems with scrapping the touch penalty. It will become extremely difficult to judge, and the only way out of it that I can see is to lower the poles, which will spoil the sport.

Finally, I don't agree that the rule changes will lead to a reduction in the skill required. This is an argument that I have heard many times over the years as the rules have developed. To win you have to be the fastest down the course. Removing the constraints to that speed has allowed the boats and paddling techniques to develop, with the result that the skill level has consistently increased to cope with the demands required to harness the performance of the boats.

Train2Win · Post by **Train2Win** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:08 pm

Hmm, I think it will make the sport even more dynamic and exciting... As for 1 sec penelties not encouraging clean runs, I'd argue that with fewer poles to hit clean runs would become even more important. One of the biggest changes I suspect would be more people risking 50s to take direct lines which would make it perhaps a more dynamic sport to watch? Still time will tell and maybe a part of the old sport will be lost, the skill of avoiding 2 poles, but then the sport will move on, just as it did when poles heights were raised and penelties simplified from the old system of inside+outside touches etc.

TOG · Post by **TOG** » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:32 pm

Interesting to watch this one develop: is possible increased dynamism and a sport which will be supposedly better viewing , thus attracting the Holy Grail of TV attention,(all points suggested previously) what we're after?
It seems that this follows down the path of much modern sport: an emphasis on power and strength rather than skill or even guile.
I got into slalom as a relatively inexperienced river paddler when a pal dragged a couple of us along to a Novice event (yes, I do recall these) and I was hooked by the idea of putting my boat exactly THERE, rather than slopping vaguely somewhere into the eddy as before. Slalom sharpened my overall paddling skills enormously and made me try things I hadn't before - because the gates made me - and even if this involved ensuring (or trying to ensure) contact with either pole, that was/is part of the skill. Gradual ranking progress was based on getting better at this.
Recent penalty reduction has meant that my clean but slower (age, infirmity, bank balance) runs are relatively less well rewarded these days than those of yore, unless on bigger water where I can exploit the skill/craft aspect to get everything and not blow the run by trying to go (too) fast.

If proposals are implemented, it looks like getting down the river as fast as possible - fair enough, since that's what we're trying to do - but at the expense of the skill of micronavigation. Will it attract - spectators,TV coverage, participants? Fast'n'dirty anyone? ???