Development of Slalom in the South East - Development of Slalom in the South East

[Nick Penfold]

Published on behalf of the signatories listed below:

An open letter to the UK Slalom Committee.

This is a personal letter from the signatories below, not the formal views of any club or region. It addresses the development of slalom within the London and Southern regions of England.

There has been much debate about the managed calendar, and the removal of ranking status of some events. One of these (Shepperton, March) would remove the last local Div1 and Div2 events accessible to competitors in the country’s southern regions. This is a symptom of a wider malaise, another ratchet notch in a long running downward spiral. This letter is a call to develop regionally based strategies to rebuild participation from the ground up.

Slalom participation has been through a slow-motion collapse from the 1990’s until now:
* Since 1989 the total number of nationally ranked K1M competitors has fallen from 2054 to 636, a two-thirds reduction.
* Fewer clubs are now active in slalom, there are far fewer experienced, active administrators and organisers. There are now NO active, slalom qualified, club coaches in London/SE who have personally competed above Div3.
* This sad, inexorable decline has come hand-in-hand with a loss of events (at least a dozen venues have been lost in L/S/SE/SW regions)

This was not inevitable, can be reversed and should be reversed. The urgency is immediate – in our regions we have clearly shown the potential of the sport to capture the imagination of youngsters.
* From a cold start in 2007, with support and encouragement from Shepperton SCC, Tandridge now runs the UK’s second largest junior squad. Recruitment is successful, coaching is delivered by enthusiastic parents without prior slalom experience.
* Winchester has seen a resurgence of interest.
* Once scratching around for trainees, Gordon Walling (the region’s one part-time BCU coach), now tries to cope with sessions attended by 25+ juniors.

2012 publicity and legacy can only help. But any further decline in the underlying structure of the sport will lead to the complete loss of these regions to the sport (and so, 30% of UK population).

Success on the international stage is a pre-occupation of the committee, an important inspiration, but not in itself enough. The sport needs strategies to support it at all levels if it is to be sustained and rebuilt. The UK Slalom committee should take a lead, giving the utmost priority to recovering grass-roots participation levels. The challenge varies greatly from region to region; only by supporting efforts at a club and regional level can any recovery be sustained. If local efforts are frustrated by ill-judged decisions taken at a national level, any progress at lower levels will prove transient and the decline continue.

As said, entry-level recruitment is NOT the problem. Access to the sport quickly becomes so. The sport has to be organised around the particular pressures on school-aged competitors. It is perfectly understandable that there are no Prem events in the southern regions. It is not acceptable that in 2011 we will have NO local Div1 events, and NO local Div2 events. Without some reasonably local events our sport cannot deliver satisfactory progression to talented youngsters. Instead;
* We have examples of enthusiastic youngsters rapidly progressing to Div2 then being withdrawn (protesting) from the sport as soon as their parents find the distances they must drive to events.
* We have several examples of talented, enthusiastic and ambitious youngsters knowingly compromising their chances of promotion. It is (rightly) impossible to argue to their parents that they should take one or two days off school to travel to a weekend of races that are 8+ hours drive away. Some withdraw from competition from March to June. Others withdraw from competition when just one more good placing would see them promoted. What sense is there in that?

This loss of potential talent is a loss to the future success of our sport. Access is fundamental, lots of other key prerequisites are in place.
* The region has venues with suitable water. Too bad that some have fallen into disuse (Old Windsor, Hambledon). Weir sites all, it’s true. Tough, chin up. Handle the water in front of you, it proved good enough to get Helen Reeves, Zach and Mallory Franklin started.
* We still have enough people around with the knowledge to run events. Just enough. With diminishing numbers they are at full stretch now and need new teams to learn the ropes – or we will lose yet more events (Loddon Div3-4 was the latest example).
* We have the green shoots of enthusiasm showing at clubs with no previous or recent slalom activity (Tandridge and Winchester).
* We have a permanently rigged training venue (Shepperton) with suitable boats available. A couple more sites would extend our catchment but at least we have something in a location accessible to huge numbers.

Good work has been done to revitalise interest in the sport in the southern regions, with very encouraging results. We urgently need to follow through with a reconstruction of the Div2 and 1 scene. The size of this task cannot be underestimated. Local coaching, organisation, training venue development, event venues, PR/recruitment, all need development in concert with a compatible competition calendar. Through this letter we are directly asking the UK Slalom Committee:
1. To acknowledge the immediate need for a Regional Re-Development Strategy with increased participation being the key goal
2. To accept this can only be successfully developed by local clubs in touch with the local participants
3. To accept that the scope of each region’s remit must include training facilities, equipment, coach development – and the local calendar of events up to and including Div 1.
4. Then to support their efforts - even if that runs counter to ideas of “re-balancing” or “streamlining” the calendar from a national perspective, or running Div1’s without the support of the national timing team.

We only get one 2012 boost per lifetime. Are we ready to capitalise on that?

Peter Bedingfield, SE Region Slalom rep
Nick & Amanda Westall, Tandridge CKC
David Lindesay, Richard Hodge, Shepperton SCC
Elaine Franklin, Windsor & District CC
Andy Avery, John Kent, Frome CC
David Waine, Shepperton SCC
Diana Fisher, Hastings & District CC
Neil Hazelwood, Justin Churcher, Andy Prout, Winchester & District CC

25 Oct 2010

[Nick Penfold]

I do sympathise with the signatories regarding the loss of the Shepperton Div 1/2 race, and I hope they will be proposing its reinstatement at the ACM.

However I think it needs to be pointed out that the Slalom Committee has only limited ability to help.
1. Financially speaking the Committee is in difficulty because, while the UK Committee is asked to govern the sport for the whole of the UK, almost all of the funding now goes to the England, Scotland and Wales organisations.
2. Ultimately it has to be the clubs that make the running. For example, Hambleden (if the re-engineered sluices are really fit for slalom) could probably be re-introduced if a club offered to run it.
3. The Calendar as a whole can only be balanced regionally as far as the flexibility of clubs allows.

[Dee]

Nick

Although I see your point re Hambledon, I think it is unlikely we would be encouraged/allowed to re-introduce the event even if someone was able to run it.

With regarding re-instatement of the race. I note that the committee minutes state

"It was confirmed that additional events will not be accepted at the ACM, the final closing date for consideration is 1st November."

Whilst this is referring to late applications, I think there is every possibility that the committee will refuse to reinstate Shepperton even if the ACM is in favour. It is afterall an ACM not AGM!

[Canadian Paddler]

As far as I am aware, every ACM decision has been acted on by teh committee as if it were binding, so do not see a departure

Unless you know better? If so please let me know

[Munchkin]

With regarding re-instatement of the race. I note that the committee minutes state

"It was confirmed that additional events will not be accepted at the ACM, the final closing date for consideration is 1st November."

This was agreed at the ACM last year and is therefore only re-stating what we agreed at the ACM and is not a unilateral decision by the committee.

[Dee]

Wasn't suggesting that it was a unilateral decision.

However, the committee have removed Shepperton from the calendar (even though the application was in on time) and I am concerned that the previous decision will prevent it from being reinstated.

[Seedy Paddler]

In the interests of transparency and fairness, I recommend that calendars are prepared for the ACM showing all applications duly received and the recommended plan from the Managed Calendar deliberation.

It should then be open to the ACM to amend the recommended plan and then adopt a Final Calendar. Any event that has been submitted for due process should be included and may be considered. Late submissions may be flagged for that reason and then organisers have a role to accept their responsibility in failing to submit within time.

The inclusion of amendments will of course restrict the utilisation of Proxy votes as it may be diffilcult to properly instruct the use of the vote. However such is life for the Proxy voter...

Regards

[Nick Penfold]

I'm not sure this thread should just focus on the calendar - there are other issues in the open letter that started it.

However, as regards the calendar: attendees at the ACM are rather inclined to vote in favour of all additions to the calendar. The Committee has to consider how timing, judging, jurying etc can be resourced. It's not an easy one to balance.

[Canadian Paddler]

The plan is to have a calendar of events applied for in time, with a list of the events applied for between the managed calendar date and 1st November. making it easy to see the changes requested.
I agree with Nick, I do not see the letter as just about the calendar for 2011, but relating to more fundamental issues relating to the sport, and the management going forward.
Just the sort of things a STRATEGY PANEL shoudl be considering - see the most recent committee minutes, we are proposing to set up such a group to look at the sport strategically, (this year focus was tactical and funding).

ANyone volunteering as Strategic plannign co-ordinator?

[FatBoy]

Personally I support Shepperton having those events, but thinking about amicable solutions for a second.

Is there anything to stop a club running a slalom similar to the winter slaloms seen at Peterborough and Stone, but in the middle of the managed calendar? I guess they are open events with no divisional events alongside (or maybe Div 4?). With the volume of support there seems to be for putting on events in the SE given the clubs signatories above, then why not run these events as a local league? Obviously the local divisional slaloms can be included. This does not change any of the above arguments for (or against) having Div 1 & 2 events in the south, just provides local paddlers with events to go to. Essentially put the events on anyway and call them opens?

While regional leagues have difficulties in that many live on borders of regions, I think with travel costs the way they are I think this is an invetiable model for all but the elite end of the sport. Maybe as such the SE could be leading the way.

On a personal note this sort of thing would benefit me. Back in Div 1 depsite no training it seems I am too good for Div 2, but unable to make enough events in Div 1. I don't live in the SE though...

[Flipper]

Open events and Regional leagues would be all well and good but the most powerfully motivating thing this sport has is the national ranking scheme and the divisions. These offer clear attainable milestones for young paddlers (& doting parents). Nick's unofficial rankings are a massively important part of keeping interest high.
That motivation is enough to pull youngsters in over large distances but they don't do the driving or meet the costs. That's down to doting dad or mum. And that's the problem for outlying regions from any point of the compass.
Surely it's simple? Prem is Prem, a nationally managed calendar is obviously what's needed. The rest is progression towards that, and D4-D1 events put on in any area should be just a function of the local enthusiasm and commitment, without artificially imposed restrictions other than acceptable standards of organisation, course setting, judging, timing.
Oh, and yes the "open letter" is intended to be about the whole piece. Coaching. Sites. PR. Water levels. Everything.

[oldschool]

Prem is Prem

i agree that prem should be left well alone, but the structure to get to prem has to be maintained.

are we going to allow people to get to prem by providing dozens of div 1's on unsuitable water? i hope not. Sadly some areas of the country do not have the facilities to host higher level events. Perhaps if lea valley is an affordable option this could change but other than the one trip a year to shepperton the south east is devoid of any useable sites suitable to test those on the fringe of getting to div 1 let alone prem.

The way i see it there are only 6 good sites/areas for prems and div 1's in the country. Tully, Teesside, Nottingham, Tryweren/Llangollen, Cardiff and Lea Valley. All these are at least 3 hours appart from each other on a friday evening.

We compete in a sport which requires a lot of traveling when you get near the higher end of it. Perhapse we should look at developing the club structures to ease the burden of traveling to events, or make it perfectly clear to parents from the start that if little Jonny gets good at canoe slalom and wants to get to prem and beyond they can expect to have to do a lot of traveling around the country in order for that to happen.

I can only speak from my own clubs point of veiw but when more than one of us is going to a race we do try to share lifts when possible, sometimes this isn't possible due to other committments but no one enjoys spending more money on travel than they have to.

I cannot make the ACM this year but i would urge anyone going not to take massive swings at changing the calendar, what we have had for the last decade seems to work for the majority of those competeing in our sport. A 600 mile round trip would not deter me from racing in cardiff for a single div 1 on decent water, but a similar trip to Llandysull even for a double does not interest me in the slightest.

If what people want is more Div 1's in more varied locations then why not tier each venue into A and B standard water for each division, with no more than half of your counting results for the year coming from B grade courses. I did a post on this earlier in the year but it seems to me a fairly simple thing to do. The only trouble would be for the ranking list compilers. I'd happily head a team which over the next season went round and graded each course for each division (i did that last list from memory in about 5 mins!). This sytem could allow for higher water levels at some courses (Abbey Rapids / Serpents Tail / Shepperton) by the event being upgraded from a Class B div 1 to a Class A div 1 should that water levels be challenging enough to warrent it.

I feel that we don't nessissarily need more Div 1/2/3 races but that if more races are given out that we should introduce a tiered sytem in the ranking of all events to maintain the appropriate standard of those paddlers gaining promotion to higher divisions. At present it is possible to get to prem without ever going over a decent drop or going in/through a stopper. Surely that can't be right??

[MarvinRounce]

Prem is Prem

what we have had for the last decade seems to work for the majority of those competeing in our sport.

how have you come to this conclusion?

[Flipper]

Tha's not an unworkable idea. Promotion to Prem based on points as now, conditional on at least 'X' results (say 3? ) coming from a selected list.
A word of warning... don't rely long term on pumped courses. £400/h for Lee Valley. Quite a chunk of that is for energy costs which aren't going down.

[Munchkin]

Thinking of the SW, when I was last on the Dart I noticed lots of slalom poles hanging towards the take-out for the Loop. There were some on the main part of the Dart and others on a lake (maybe in the Dart Country Park?). Did that used to be a venue for competitions? Could it now be a venue?

I know the water levels on the Dart go up and down like a yoyo but we all seem to like the natural rivers, so it may be worth considering? At the levels we were on there the poles were in a place that could make a challenging Div 1 course.

Thinking about it, there are lots of lovely rivers in that direction, hence why our club travels down there for club trips