Nothing in the paper says Shepperton does not have Div 1 water. It is just that we have more div ones applied for than the papaer suggests we need. So late entires were not accepted, and some clubs were disappointed.
I would be amazed if the same clubs were disappointed next year.
Slalom Struture - The structure of doemstic competition
-
Canadian Paddler
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
-
Seedy Paddler
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 2:00 pm
So from the above:
It would seem that Shepperton is Div 1 standard and all other sites have retained Div 1 events in latest planned calendar so must also be considered Div 1 standard. Hence we may remove teh debate on having a "race on water not up to standard".
My basis is that Divi 1 is a transitional division and needs to reflect both performance level and regional aspects in spread.
From above we hear of paddlers that find the courses too tough and drop out (hence include potentially easier sites Llandysul; Shepperton; summer Tully etc.). They have an option to manage their racing programme, gain points where the water may be more forgiving, seek experience on the bigger courses. Basis of all good coaching it allows achievement; encouragement and development.
Geographical spread, ver 3 of the Calendar detailed 16 Div 1 events from March - October all events either double or tied in with contiguous compatible race (e.g. Pan Celtic etc.). So for most an ability to travel and race on a high standard over the whole weekend.
Distribution:
Ver 3 Ver 6 Ver CD
Sco : 3 3 3
Wales : 6 5 4
North East (Eng) : 3 3 3
Midlands (Eng) : 2 2 2
South (Eng) : 2 - 2
So an opportunity for most to have a local slalom at this level.
For the revised listing we remove the events in the South, skewing the geographical spread. One of the events in Wales is reduced toa single but countered with the hosting of the British Wrinklies and Squirts Champs allowing a full weekend.
We retain an event in Wales that is under doubt, with the contingency to move to HPP. There is a heavy bias towards Wales. There is also an onerous requirement to travel to Wales for 3 consecutive weekends in October (4 if you are a good performer and liable to get an invite to the British Open!).
My proposal would be to re-assert the Rgional spread with the double at Shepperton in March, remove the Serpents Tail event (no guarantee on access etc and requires a contingency) increase the number of events to 14.
Just as some leave due to the more difficult waters, others leave/manipulate results etc. due to a requirement to travel (see above). The Managed Calendar should seek to redress these issues by allowing an option to continue.
It would seem that Shepperton is Div 1 standard and all other sites have retained Div 1 events in latest planned calendar so must also be considered Div 1 standard. Hence we may remove teh debate on having a "race on water not up to standard".
My basis is that Divi 1 is a transitional division and needs to reflect both performance level and regional aspects in spread.
From above we hear of paddlers that find the courses too tough and drop out (hence include potentially easier sites Llandysul; Shepperton; summer Tully etc.). They have an option to manage their racing programme, gain points where the water may be more forgiving, seek experience on the bigger courses. Basis of all good coaching it allows achievement; encouragement and development.
Geographical spread, ver 3 of the Calendar detailed 16 Div 1 events from March - October all events either double or tied in with contiguous compatible race (e.g. Pan Celtic etc.). So for most an ability to travel and race on a high standard over the whole weekend.
Distribution:
Ver 3 Ver 6 Ver CD
Sco : 3 3 3
Wales : 6 5 4
North East (Eng) : 3 3 3
Midlands (Eng) : 2 2 2
South (Eng) : 2 - 2
So an opportunity for most to have a local slalom at this level.
For the revised listing we remove the events in the South, skewing the geographical spread. One of the events in Wales is reduced toa single but countered with the hosting of the British Wrinklies and Squirts Champs allowing a full weekend.
We retain an event in Wales that is under doubt, with the contingency to move to HPP. There is a heavy bias towards Wales. There is also an onerous requirement to travel to Wales for 3 consecutive weekends in October (4 if you are a good performer and liable to get an invite to the British Open!).
My proposal would be to re-assert the Rgional spread with the double at Shepperton in March, remove the Serpents Tail event (no guarantee on access etc and requires a contingency) increase the number of events to 14.
Just as some leave due to the more difficult waters, others leave/manipulate results etc. due to a requirement to travel (see above). The Managed Calendar should seek to redress these issues by allowing an option to continue.
Carl:
We don't have a shortage of D3 or 4 events in the SE, I can run a season-long Grand Prix series with 22 races by reaching out to Orton and Langham. No prob though it looks like we're about to lose a couple
. We are trying to run them with newbies as organisers but they are getting put off by criticisms rather than encouragement. For sure we need to maintain good standards, just need to work through this.
Our shortage is in D2 and 1. Next year it could be NONE Zilch Zero. That's our headache. NEAREST D2's will be Cardington, Nene (OK, accessible) but if they lose D2 status so then nearest becomes HPP which is 2-3 hours away. Sorry, too far for kids that have just galloped through local D3's.
Anne: FYI I am VetD2-3, but blunder around like an average D4. Just took up slalom as a way of keeping the remains of my waning river running skillset together, then spotted it was a great (& safe) way of motivating kids to develop their own skills. I never expected them to become as obsessed as they did, or for it to become the "cool" activity around here. Total surprise. But hey, why not! It's got fantastic potential as a sport as long as we don't cripple it. Just needs a bottom-up paddler-lead rebuild, that's all (!)
We don't have a shortage of D3 or 4 events in the SE, I can run a season-long Grand Prix series with 22 races by reaching out to Orton and Langham. No prob though it looks like we're about to lose a couple
. We are trying to run them with newbies as organisers but they are getting put off by criticisms rather than encouragement. For sure we need to maintain good standards, just need to work through this.Our shortage is in D2 and 1. Next year it could be NONE Zilch Zero. That's our headache. NEAREST D2's will be Cardington, Nene (OK, accessible) but if they lose D2 status so then nearest becomes HPP which is 2-3 hours away. Sorry, too far for kids that have just galloped through local D3's.
Anne: FYI I am VetD2-3, but blunder around like an average D4. Just took up slalom as a way of keeping the remains of my waning river running skillset together, then spotted it was a great (& safe) way of motivating kids to develop their own skills. I never expected them to become as obsessed as they did, or for it to become the "cool" activity around here. Total surprise. But hey, why not! It's got fantastic potential as a sport as long as we don't cripple it. Just needs a bottom-up paddler-lead rebuild, that's all (!)
-
Richard Lee
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:10 pm
- Location: Bala
Here are my thoughts – This is a personal opinion and not representative of the Canoe Wales slalom committee.
I’ve used these principles as my framework:
Divisional system is a good thing, but needs tweaking (ie reduce size of Premier) .
Value for money (organisers, participants, slalom committee) all seek this – need to retain quality of personnel running events, while also increasing number of organisers, organising team
Opportunity to compete / socialise at all levels.
Season runs from mid March to mid October
Maximise use of weekends where clubs are organising events (double events) – reduce weekends / not opportunities.
Raise quality of Premier races – ie event structures (qualification / finals, Saturday night racing, webstreaming), presentation.
Training of regional section judges / timing team members continues.
“If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem” – Martin Luther King.
Div 4 / 3
Entry level events.
Run as many as locally as possible to provide local opportunities to clubs and paddlers
Short course slaloms – pools, canals, Friday nights, be flexible, be creative – get people paddling
Div 3 – 18 – 20 gates – make courses easy to put up – training gates, reduce admin (remove levies)
Run div 3 / 4 on same courses (remove gates ie Howsham weir)
Div 2
Transitional events ( along with div ones not run alongside premiers)
Run alongside div 3’s and div 1’s
Open events alongside div 2 / 3 – non ranked and other divisional paddlers can enter – achieve result comparable with div 2 can transfer across.
Div one / Premier.
Limit weekends to average two per month (one / Premier)
Reduce event weekend infrastructure at div one level . ie reduce dependance on timing team / section judges at div one only events. ie at double div ones – section judges judge classes running back to back in morning – these classes judge in afternoon (as used to be the case in 80s with div one / premier) –then switch the next day? Reduce cost of entry of paddlers willing to judge?
Premier series (8 – 9 races) at limited (quality water sites) – full infrastructure support (section judges / timing team) – some with div ones, Grandtully - double Premier (with Pan Celtic ?). Assumes world champs in September – so 3 or so Premiers in September / October .
No n ranking Profile events – selection in May – Interclubs and an end of season in October (HPP or Llangollen, which provides profile)
Div ones – some with Premiers – others doubles or regional doubles (ie Llandysul on a Saturday, with camping and then move to Bala Mill on a late Sunday start) – double div ones to minimise travel cost.
Maintain sites to provide geographical spread.
Cluster some events to provide opportunities for Scottish schools on holiday.
Not all div ones to have full timing team / section judges – reduce costs? Or carry on with current timing team’s initiative of training regional support
Stand alone selection at London / HPP
Calendar might look like this for prem / div one – using current structure (My apologies to Yorkshire and Bala CC – but I don’t see Washburn and Bala mill as Premiers)
Month Premier Div one Comments
March Bala Bala
Shepperton (+div 2) No / reduce number of section judges or timing team?
April (Easter??) Grandtully x2 Double div one + two
Grandtully x2 Double Premier + PCC (Saturday)
Bala Bala
May Selection at HPP or London
HPP x 2
June Abbey x 2 Double div
Cardiff +PCC
July Washburn x 2 No/reduce section judges / timing team?
August Grandtully x2 Double div one / two
September Llandysul / Bala Mill No / reduce number of section judges / timing team?
Interclubs
HPP HPP
October Tees (timing of event?) Tees (timing of event?)
London? London?
HPP or Llangollen HPP or Llangollen (British open) – end season mid October (also acts as back up race for any race losses)
+PCC ?
17 weekends 8 or 9 17 div ones ? 9 weekends with full infrastructure support
8 with reduced infrastructure – ie reduced number of section judges / reduced timing team input if possible
I’ve used these principles as my framework:
Divisional system is a good thing, but needs tweaking (ie reduce size of Premier) .
Value for money (organisers, participants, slalom committee) all seek this – need to retain quality of personnel running events, while also increasing number of organisers, organising team
Opportunity to compete / socialise at all levels.
Season runs from mid March to mid October
Maximise use of weekends where clubs are organising events (double events) – reduce weekends / not opportunities.
Raise quality of Premier races – ie event structures (qualification / finals, Saturday night racing, webstreaming), presentation.
Training of regional section judges / timing team members continues.
“If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem” – Martin Luther King.
Div 4 / 3
Entry level events.
Run as many as locally as possible to provide local opportunities to clubs and paddlers
Short course slaloms – pools, canals, Friday nights, be flexible, be creative – get people paddling
Div 3 – 18 – 20 gates – make courses easy to put up – training gates, reduce admin (remove levies)
Run div 3 / 4 on same courses (remove gates ie Howsham weir)
Div 2
Transitional events ( along with div ones not run alongside premiers)
Run alongside div 3’s and div 1’s
Open events alongside div 2 / 3 – non ranked and other divisional paddlers can enter – achieve result comparable with div 2 can transfer across.
Div one / Premier.
Limit weekends to average two per month (one / Premier)
Reduce event weekend infrastructure at div one level . ie reduce dependance on timing team / section judges at div one only events. ie at double div ones – section judges judge classes running back to back in morning – these classes judge in afternoon (as used to be the case in 80s with div one / premier) –then switch the next day? Reduce cost of entry of paddlers willing to judge?
Premier series (8 – 9 races) at limited (quality water sites) – full infrastructure support (section judges / timing team) – some with div ones, Grandtully - double Premier (with Pan Celtic ?). Assumes world champs in September – so 3 or so Premiers in September / October .
No n ranking Profile events – selection in May – Interclubs and an end of season in October (HPP or Llangollen, which provides profile)
Div ones – some with Premiers – others doubles or regional doubles (ie Llandysul on a Saturday, with camping and then move to Bala Mill on a late Sunday start) – double div ones to minimise travel cost.
Maintain sites to provide geographical spread.
Cluster some events to provide opportunities for Scottish schools on holiday.
Not all div ones to have full timing team / section judges – reduce costs? Or carry on with current timing team’s initiative of training regional support
Stand alone selection at London / HPP
Calendar might look like this for prem / div one – using current structure (My apologies to Yorkshire and Bala CC – but I don’t see Washburn and Bala mill as Premiers)
Month Premier Div one Comments
March Bala Bala
Shepperton (+div 2) No / reduce number of section judges or timing team?
April (Easter??) Grandtully x2 Double div one + two
Grandtully x2 Double Premier + PCC (Saturday)
Bala Bala
May Selection at HPP or London
HPP x 2
June Abbey x 2 Double div
Cardiff +PCC
July Washburn x 2 No/reduce section judges / timing team?
August Grandtully x2 Double div one / two
September Llandysul / Bala Mill No / reduce number of section judges / timing team?
Interclubs
HPP HPP
October Tees (timing of event?) Tees (timing of event?)
London? London?
HPP or Llangollen HPP or Llangollen (British open) – end season mid October (also acts as back up race for any race losses)
+PCC ?
17 weekends 8 or 9 17 div ones ? 9 weekends with full infrastructure support
8 with reduced infrastructure – ie reduced number of section judges / reduced timing team input if possible
Nothing in the paper says Shepperton does not have Div 1 water.
and Sheppertons request for a double div 1 was in on time with alternative weekends offered
We make a profit for the club not a loss for the slalom organisations
We are the only div 1 event in the south
So why choose to ditch sheppy (even if only for one year). If we must reduce the number of events (and I don't think we should) why not remove a race from a location that has 3 races and leave the sheppy event untouched.
Is anyone prepared to answer this?
Kit Washer, Entry Clerk, Chauffeur, Reluctant Organiser, Online Entry Advocate .....
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
Washburn this weekend is turning away Div 1 paddlers who want to paddle but entries closed. Fully understand why but this suggests not that we need to reduce the number of Div 1 races but certainly maintain what we have on offer (including Shepperton - Dee) and possibly even if this becomes more commong increase them.
As another thought although I know it is possible to offer to judge and do the officials runs we had to refuse offers at Tully at Easter so perhaps paddlers should be allowed to race in one division up from where they are currently ranked, any points so obtained could be counted as ranking points. There would be an argument for doubling them and the precedent would in a sense be the C2 and C1W ranking points system which seems to work. If a Div 1 finishes in the top half of a Prem race them perhaps they should be allowed to count 1000 points towards their ranking total (I would suggest a 1000 point ceiling). This could be compensation for the loss of Div 1's if this MUST go ahead.
I accept there is a generic duty of care but it is up to parents and coaches to ensure that paddlers are not pushing themselves beyond their ability and not the responsibility of the BCU or race organisers to Police this.
As another thought although I know it is possible to offer to judge and do the officials runs we had to refuse offers at Tully at Easter so perhaps paddlers should be allowed to race in one division up from where they are currently ranked, any points so obtained could be counted as ranking points. There would be an argument for doubling them and the precedent would in a sense be the C2 and C1W ranking points system which seems to work. If a Div 1 finishes in the top half of a Prem race them perhaps they should be allowed to count 1000 points towards their ranking total (I would suggest a 1000 point ceiling). This could be compensation for the loss of Div 1's if this MUST go ahead.
I accept there is a generic duty of care but it is up to parents and coaches to ensure that paddlers are not pushing themselves beyond their ability and not the responsibility of the BCU or race organisers to Police this.
-
Nick Penfold
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm
I quite like the idea of allowing some paddlers to race "one division up" but it needs to be well thought through. Some issues:
Paddlers in a division ought to have priority entry before a race is opened up to "one uppers". We can't have paddlers turned away from their own division's events - at least not if their entry was in by the two-week deadline - in favour of "one uppers".
Giving double points could seriously damage attendance at paddlers' own division races. Do we need to give points to "one uppers" at all? If they are there for development and to compare themselves with the next division up, they don't need points - and a points opportunity will suck in paddlers to score as much as for development purposes.
I'm not happy that we just leave the competence issue to paddlers, coaches and parents. Apart from risk to themselves, paddlers who aren't competent will be a pain to everyone else, and anyway you can't just evade all responsibility like that.
Paddlers in a division ought to have priority entry before a race is opened up to "one uppers". We can't have paddlers turned away from their own division's events - at least not if their entry was in by the two-week deadline - in favour of "one uppers".
Giving double points could seriously damage attendance at paddlers' own division races. Do we need to give points to "one uppers" at all? If they are there for development and to compare themselves with the next division up, they don't need points - and a points opportunity will suck in paddlers to score as much as for development purposes.
I'm not happy that we just leave the competence issue to paddlers, coaches and parents. Apart from risk to themselves, paddlers who aren't competent will be a pain to everyone else, and anyway you can't just evade all responsibility like that.
I posted this under the 'Growth of the sport' thread and thought it may be relevant here too;
I've been reading through the various threads and the slalom committee's minutes following the recent release of the strategy document. I note Colin’s demure that the strategy document is tactical in nature and I would agree with him. My personal perception of the document is that it is symptomatic of the shrinking-pains of slalom – at least that’s what it feels like.
I don’t like the fact that we seem to be leading with tactical changes when the strategic direction of the sport seems unclear (at least to me - please correct me if I’m wrong).
‘Putting paddlers first and valuing volunteers’ is a great strap line – it isn’t however a mission statement (or particularly inspiring). We need a mission statement that challenges us (all collectively) to grow the sport (from grassroots and up) to produce the world champions that we know we can.
Is this a vision of the times of yesteryear with Richard Fox leading the international charge, a bevy of national/regional/local events, burgeoning number of participants and Paddles-Up on the TV to capture the minds of our youngsters – why not? Why not more?
First we need a mission, then a strategy, followed by the tactical actions which will grow the sport (of which there seem to be an ample number of ideas floating around on the message board [not to mention the structures and processes we already have in place today]).
…and I’m happy to put my time and efforts in to help make it happen.
In the meantime can we stop cutting races – it feels like we’re continuing to shrink.
I've been reading through the various threads and the slalom committee's minutes following the recent release of the strategy document. I note Colin’s demure that the strategy document is tactical in nature and I would agree with him. My personal perception of the document is that it is symptomatic of the shrinking-pains of slalom – at least that’s what it feels like.
I don’t like the fact that we seem to be leading with tactical changes when the strategic direction of the sport seems unclear (at least to me - please correct me if I’m wrong).
‘Putting paddlers first and valuing volunteers’ is a great strap line – it isn’t however a mission statement (or particularly inspiring). We need a mission statement that challenges us (all collectively) to grow the sport (from grassroots and up) to produce the world champions that we know we can.
Is this a vision of the times of yesteryear with Richard Fox leading the international charge, a bevy of national/regional/local events, burgeoning number of participants and Paddles-Up on the TV to capture the minds of our youngsters – why not? Why not more?
First we need a mission, then a strategy, followed by the tactical actions which will grow the sport (of which there seem to be an ample number of ideas floating around on the message board [not to mention the structures and processes we already have in place today]).
…and I’m happy to put my time and efforts in to help make it happen.
In the meantime can we stop cutting races – it feels like we’re continuing to shrink.
Nick Penfold wrote:I'm not happy that we just leave the competence issue to paddlers, coaches and parents. Apart from risk to themselves, paddlers who aren't competent will be a pain to everyone else, and anyway you can't just evade all responsibility like that.
I don't buy into this - what risks are you talking about? I had just been promoted to division 4 (from the Novice division - it was quite a long time ago) the first time I judged at the Serpents Tail. I think I swam quite a lot :laugh: . I also think back to the Mike Jones tours where university buses would be packed with freshers that they lined up and sent down the Serpents Tail, all without any major disasters.
The sooner paddlers get onto decent water the better. Slalom races are the safest places to do this, there are always loads of people around so no-one is going to capsize unnoticed. The hard part in my experience is pursuading young paddlers to get on the harder water - I think the numbers taking the opportunity to race the next division up will be very small.
davebrads wrote:Nick Penfold wrote:I also think back to the Mike Jones tours where university buses would be packed with freshers that they lined up and sent down the Serpents Tail, all without any major disasters.
Dave, If I remember correctly there was a death at the Tombstones Weir [Mile End Mill] on a Dee tour in the 1980s - wasn't that why the tombstones were removed.
I appreciate that WW canoeing is an accepted risk sport but its all about managing risk. Coaching, practice and personal responsibilities are means of doing this. Yes slalom does a provide a controlled environment for growing ability.
As div4 slalom newbies, my daughter and I (currently) have our focus on the div3/4 end of things. We have done just two events (Fairnilee and Tyne Valley) and really enjoyed them.
My feeling on div 4 is that events should not be held on "any water" but should be on easier grade moving water as a taster for other divisions. Pool slaloms could be run as club events but should not, in my view, be div 4 events qualifying for promotion. Skills are required on moving water which may not be aquired in the pool.
Promotion criteria to div 3 don't seem to be covered but I'm not sure that the current top 20% in a single event is ideal - my feeling is that some people may only do their local event and their promotion (assuming it is a div 4) prevents them from taking part in future and blocks promotion for another entrant. Also, would it benefit the sport to get younger paddlers promoted early (some handicap system?) to get them onto the ladder?
Is there generally a very low entry to div 4 women's events. Of the two events my daughter and I have entered there have been only 4 entries in one event and 2 (but only one actually eligible) in the other. Do such entries have to be quorate to get a promotion in div 4 k1w or can it be by comparison to the k1m times? I can't see anything in the current rules which covers this, but I may be missing it.
Two hours travelling is fine for div 4 races - particularly if they can be run as a double with camping nearby.
My feeling on div 4 is that events should not be held on "any water" but should be on easier grade moving water as a taster for other divisions. Pool slaloms could be run as club events but should not, in my view, be div 4 events qualifying for promotion. Skills are required on moving water which may not be aquired in the pool.
Promotion criteria to div 3 don't seem to be covered but I'm not sure that the current top 20% in a single event is ideal - my feeling is that some people may only do their local event and their promotion (assuming it is a div 4) prevents them from taking part in future and blocks promotion for another entrant. Also, would it benefit the sport to get younger paddlers promoted early (some handicap system?) to get them onto the ladder?
Is there generally a very low entry to div 4 women's events. Of the two events my daughter and I have entered there have been only 4 entries in one event and 2 (but only one actually eligible) in the other. Do such entries have to be quorate to get a promotion in div 4 k1w or can it be by comparison to the k1m times? I can't see anything in the current rules which covers this, but I may be missing it.
Two hours travelling is fine for div 4 races - particularly if they can be run as a double with camping nearby.
carealto wrote:My feeling on div 4 is that events should not be held on "any water" but should be on easier grade moving water as a taster for other divisions. Pool slaloms could be run as club events but should not, in my view, be div 4 events qualifying for promotion. Skills are required on moving water which may not be aquired in the pool.
I agree with the sentiment carealto (welcome BTW).
But if we were to apply that to the 3/4 slaloms within 2 hours+ of us there would not be any slaloms left. Loddon, Winchester, Langham, Frome, Ogmore are all pretty much flat (slight flow only).
Hence it's currently very possible to get to Div2 without ever paddling on "moving" grade 1 water at all.
Not saying its right, it's so different to the "old days". This is just how it is currently.
Andy
(D1 K1 1981, D2 C1&C2 2010)
(D1 K1 1981, D2 C1&C2 2010)