Video evidence is changing the face of sport, leading to more accurate and less biased decisions.
Unfortunately Canoe Slalom is lagging behind. Currently the system relies on the kindness of volunteers, often badly placed, possibly unaware of the full rules, and sometimes not even paying full attention. This needs to change. We propose that several video cameras are set up, filming the river over the course of the day so that any protests can be clearly justified, and it is not just the paddler's word against the section judges'. Of course, there would still be discrepancies, but this system would be much fairer than the current one.
It would also eliminate the need for both gate and section judges, there would only need to be 2 or 3 people sitting in control, watching the video play back on screens.
This is a much more efficient and people friendly way to monitor penalties, and would move Canoe Slalom on as a sport, keeping it up to date with current day technologies.
Improving Canoe Slalom
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
This has actually been up before:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=956&hilit=video
But maybe it's time we took a new look at it a few years on?
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=956&hilit=video
But maybe it's time we took a new look at it a few years on?
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
Yes it is. Technology has moved on and this is now possible. it would take a little longer to set up but it would prove to be a lot easier during the actual race. The cameras could be linked to a few main monitors in control which would be a lot easier to manage than 5 or 6 judges.
The system would only be worth implementing at DIV1 PREM and selection races !
The system would only be worth implementing at DIV1 PREM and selection races !
-
BaldockBabe
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:55 am
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
Video is used at an international level but NOT as a replacement for the judges on the bank but as an extra set of eyes, usually with a different viewpoint from the judges. It is the viewpoint rather than the existence of a camera that is the most important thing.
This is why there is more than one judge at P/1 level and why judges dont always agree. I have bern guven a 50 at HPP which the judge from the side of the bank gave me. This was protested snd the protest upheld because the judge on the bridge looking straight down the gate gave it as clear. If we had had a camera on the bank not the bridge the camera may have supported the view that I should have had a 50.
One protest I heard about the paddler was convinced that they were clear and they gad camera evidence to "prove it". After the protest was rejected the footage was viewed for interest sake and actually showed that the judge was right and the paddler had hit the pole!
At international level penalities can be added as well as removed by the video judge so it wirks both ways...
If you think judging by video is easier try doing the ICF judges exam where you are required to do a video judging exam. It is far HARDER than real time judging...
This is why there is more than one judge at P/1 level and why judges dont always agree. I have bern guven a 50 at HPP which the judge from the side of the bank gave me. This was protested snd the protest upheld because the judge on the bridge looking straight down the gate gave it as clear. If we had had a camera on the bank not the bridge the camera may have supported the view that I should have had a 50.
One protest I heard about the paddler was convinced that they were clear and they gad camera evidence to "prove it". After the protest was rejected the footage was viewed for interest sake and actually showed that the judge was right and the paddler had hit the pole!
At international level penalities can be added as well as removed by the video judge so it wirks both ways...
If you think judging by video is easier try doing the ICF judges exam where you are required to do a video judging exam. It is far HARDER than real time judging...
-
BaldockBabe
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:55 am
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
Ps. I rarely judge as I am usually timing but I strongly OBJECT to the comnent refering to bias judging. I think comments like that are damaging to the sport. IF there is a genuine, backed up exampke, this should be referred to the slalom committee for investigation, not a snide remark made on a website. I and many others give up far more time for the sport that you could ever imagine and the last thing I want is my integrity, or the integrity of those I work with, damaged by inconsidered posts.
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
In my opinion, it is time for a change, and maybe having cameras will assist the judging. However, i think that an age limit is required for being a gate judge, or if you are young and want to help you need to have passed the exam. In some cases i have seen very young children judging at prem/1 events, credit to them, wanting to try bigger water and tougher courses, but do they really understand the rules? And in other cases there are large groups off people chatting whilst someone is judging, possilby affecting the outcome of a section.
nother thing is the positioning of judges, make sure that they can clearly see all gates, at all times even when there is a paddler going through, for example, last weekend, at the sunday prem event in Grandtully, i was judging down near the bottom section, position c i think, and my view of some gates was obstructed whilst the paddler was going through, so when there was a slight touch that the section judge, who could see every gate clearly.
nother thing is the positioning of judges, make sure that they can clearly see all gates, at all times even when there is a paddler going through, for example, last weekend, at the sunday prem event in Grandtully, i was judging down near the bottom section, position c i think, and my view of some gates was obstructed whilst the paddler was going through, so when there was a slight touch that the section judge, who could see every gate clearly.
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
BaldockBabe, I would like to just confirm that we are NOT trying to launch a personal attack on those who give so much of their time to the running of events. My apologies if the original comment seemed that way.
We are all here united under one common interest: to improve our sport, Canoe Slalom. This is why those reading this have clicked on the link.
Starting with your second posting:
"Ps. I rarely judge as I am usually timing but I strongly OBJECT to the comnent refering to bias judging."
No accusation was made about biased judging. I originally wrote:
"Video evidence is changing the face of sport, leading to more accurate and less biased decisions. " Simply describing the role of video evidence in sport.
"IF there is a genuine, backed up exampke, this should be referred to the slalom committee for investigation, not a snide remark made on a website."
The remark is not snide, it is a statement about video evidence. All I am trying to do is work with people, sharing my thoughts and time in order to improve the sport.
Evidently I will have overlooked some parts of this idea, so your comments and advice would be most appreciated, but please, as you say, consider what you post.
The video reviewing system would allow the judges to back up their opinions, thus reinforcing their integrity, not damaging it.
"If you think judging by video is easier try doing the ICF judges exam where you are required to do a video judging exam. It is far HARDER than real time judging..."
I am not looking for an easy option here, I am just trying to find a way of enhancing the sport to reduce tension between paddlers and section judges, and help prevent organisers of events wasting their time. Far less protests would be made if people knew there was video evidence backing up the real occurrence.
"I and many others give up far more time for the sport that you could ever imagine"
When you say than "you" could ever imagine, do you realise that you are addressing a multitude of paddlers who give up 10, 20, 30+ hours of their week training hard in the pursuit of a dream which can be made or broken by the ruling of a judge? This is why we are calling for better methods. We all really appreciate what you, and many others do. We have seen first-hand, almost all of us will have spent time (admittedly not as much as yourself) sitting on a river bank, judging, as we are entering a higher division race as a judge to gain experience on the water. I think it is fair to say that events would not run without the kindness of you, and many other, volunteers.
Clearly from the content of this forum, we can already see that there is some hard feelings between paddlers and judges. We can't tell who threw the first punch; a paddler may have been outright rude in a blur of emotions, or a judge may have snapped under the heavy burden of organising a race. Either one is equally justifiable. This is in no way an attempt to ridicule gate or section judges, or even members of the time team, as they do an astounding job of running the race. It is an attempt to reduce the disputes between paddler and judge, as protests can be backed up with solid evidence which both the judge and paddler can agree on. In the end, one of us must hold our hands up to say "okay, I made a mistake. Everyone does, let's change this." And with this new level of understanding, I am sure events would run smoother and there would be more appreciation and respect between all volunteers and competitors.
We are all here united under one common interest: to improve our sport, Canoe Slalom. This is why those reading this have clicked on the link.
Starting with your second posting:
"Ps. I rarely judge as I am usually timing but I strongly OBJECT to the comnent refering to bias judging."
No accusation was made about biased judging. I originally wrote:
"Video evidence is changing the face of sport, leading to more accurate and less biased decisions. " Simply describing the role of video evidence in sport.
"IF there is a genuine, backed up exampke, this should be referred to the slalom committee for investigation, not a snide remark made on a website."
The remark is not snide, it is a statement about video evidence. All I am trying to do is work with people, sharing my thoughts and time in order to improve the sport.
Evidently I will have overlooked some parts of this idea, so your comments and advice would be most appreciated, but please, as you say, consider what you post.
The video reviewing system would allow the judges to back up their opinions, thus reinforcing their integrity, not damaging it.
"If you think judging by video is easier try doing the ICF judges exam where you are required to do a video judging exam. It is far HARDER than real time judging..."
I am not looking for an easy option here, I am just trying to find a way of enhancing the sport to reduce tension between paddlers and section judges, and help prevent organisers of events wasting their time. Far less protests would be made if people knew there was video evidence backing up the real occurrence.
"I and many others give up far more time for the sport that you could ever imagine"
When you say than "you" could ever imagine, do you realise that you are addressing a multitude of paddlers who give up 10, 20, 30+ hours of their week training hard in the pursuit of a dream which can be made or broken by the ruling of a judge? This is why we are calling for better methods. We all really appreciate what you, and many others do. We have seen first-hand, almost all of us will have spent time (admittedly not as much as yourself) sitting on a river bank, judging, as we are entering a higher division race as a judge to gain experience on the water. I think it is fair to say that events would not run without the kindness of you, and many other, volunteers.
Clearly from the content of this forum, we can already see that there is some hard feelings between paddlers and judges. We can't tell who threw the first punch; a paddler may have been outright rude in a blur of emotions, or a judge may have snapped under the heavy burden of organising a race. Either one is equally justifiable. This is in no way an attempt to ridicule gate or section judges, or even members of the time team, as they do an astounding job of running the race. It is an attempt to reduce the disputes between paddler and judge, as protests can be backed up with solid evidence which both the judge and paddler can agree on. In the end, one of us must hold our hands up to say "okay, I made a mistake. Everyone does, let's change this." And with this new level of understanding, I am sure events would run smoother and there would be more appreciation and respect between all volunteers and competitors.
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
Guys, there's some slightly sarcastic finger pointing, keep it cool, and keep it on the constructive please? 
I think having a set of screens (and computers) in control along with the cameras, transmission equipment etc, is probably both prohibitively expensive and time consuming both to acquire and set-up at each race. Besides, do we need a constant video stream with someone inspecting it at all times in control?
My idea would be to have a set of cheap, waterproof, digital cameras, with sturdy tripods and some form of lock (bike lock, and lanyard lock for the camera to this). Then upon a protest, the SD card can be swapped out of the relevant camera, and checked on someone's laptop in control.
I think having a set of screens (and computers) in control along with the cameras, transmission equipment etc, is probably both prohibitively expensive and time consuming both to acquire and set-up at each race. Besides, do we need a constant video stream with someone inspecting it at all times in control?
My idea would be to have a set of cheap, waterproof, digital cameras, with sturdy tripods and some form of lock (bike lock, and lanyard lock for the camera to this). Then upon a protest, the SD card can be swapped out of the relevant camera, and checked on someone's laptop in control.
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
Firstly the comment re positioning of judges - it is totally impossible, to put a judge in a position where he/she could see all the gate all of the time, hence why we have a gate judge and an experienced section judge at prems and ones, and why they are carefully positioned by VERY experienced judges to ensure all of the gate can be seen by one of those judges all of the time. That is why in the event of a protest it is not a case of both judges agreeing but assessing which had the better view for that particular penalty being protested on that gate!
This is not really the best place to come up with ideas for changing the sport - as far as I am aware most of the slalom committee, and actually when you look closely very few athletes read this forum as in the past much destructive not constructive criticism has been thrown about.
If you are really committed to sensible suggestions on how the sport could move forward contact David Spencer (details in year book) and join the the strategy panel, or at least put forward your suggestion and how it could work to him. All too often ideas are bandies about but those coming up with them are not actually prepared to put any effort or work in to look closer at the logistics and practicalities of whether it would work. You must remember the majority of the Committee also have full time jobs and cannot do everything themselves and actually may not necessarily have the expertise for some development suggestions.
Try going along to the ACM in November - much discussion and debate takes place there on how the sport can practically move forward and develop. Your club can put motions forward that can be debated and adopted if the clubs vote in favour. All of the development of the sport is decided on by the clubs at the ACM.
Also the committee meetings are open meetings, anyone can request to attend - go along, listen, observe and understand how the fundamental management of the sport works and the basic day to day issues that have to be dealt with before going in with 2 feet!
If you also read the committee minutes you might realise that it works on a shoe string financially - there is no slack at present for the purchase expensive technical equipment. Before any major capital expense could happen funds would need to be secured
This is not really the best place to come up with ideas for changing the sport - as far as I am aware most of the slalom committee, and actually when you look closely very few athletes read this forum as in the past much destructive not constructive criticism has been thrown about.
If you are really committed to sensible suggestions on how the sport could move forward contact David Spencer (details in year book) and join the the strategy panel, or at least put forward your suggestion and how it could work to him. All too often ideas are bandies about but those coming up with them are not actually prepared to put any effort or work in to look closer at the logistics and practicalities of whether it would work. You must remember the majority of the Committee also have full time jobs and cannot do everything themselves and actually may not necessarily have the expertise for some development suggestions.
Try going along to the ACM in November - much discussion and debate takes place there on how the sport can practically move forward and develop. Your club can put motions forward that can be debated and adopted if the clubs vote in favour. All of the development of the sport is decided on by the clubs at the ACM.
Also the committee meetings are open meetings, anyone can request to attend - go along, listen, observe and understand how the fundamental management of the sport works and the basic day to day issues that have to be dealt with before going in with 2 feet!
If you also read the committee minutes you might realise that it works on a shoe string financially - there is no slack at present for the purchase expensive technical equipment. Before any major capital expense could happen funds would need to be secured
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
It is a clear impossibility, but, as an example of where the system of multiple judges (or video) come in handy, I've been given two successive touches in a Washburn Prem race, protested, and seen that the Section Judge, (who was in line with the gate) gave me two touches, and the gate judge gave me clear, and commented that I had water touches on both, and consequently I had my protest upheld. But there was clearly no bias, lack of concentration, misjudgement or anything there, just a wrong angle. And that's where the system worked fine, and why it is in place. All the video does is allow for another angle, and for things like split second half heads to be rewatched.Mummsie wrote:Firstly the comment re positioning of judges - it is totally impossible, to put a judge in a position where he/she could see all the gate all of the time, hence why we have a gate judge and an experienced section judge at prems and ones, and why they are carefully positioned by VERY experienced judges to ensure all of the gate can be seen by one of those judges all of the time. That is why in the event of a protest it is not a case of both judges agreeing but assessing which had the better view for that particular penalty being protested on that gate!
There is still money around, not for anything spectacularly expensive; but as long as there is time and a will, it should be possible to find a cheap enough solution.Mummsie wrote: If you also read the committee minutes you might realise that it works on a shoe string financially - there is no slack at present for the purchase expensive technical equipment. Before any major capital expense could happen funds would need to be secured
Finally, while making suggestions on this forum may not be the greatest place to get your voice heard, people on the committees do read the forum, and take ideas from it!
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
To use video for judging will require very good quality video and in poor light / weather conditions would need a significant number of cameras to cover all the gates. You need to be able to see a pole spinning. You are not even today going to be able to do this on a shoestring. Unless we are going to be really expensive you would also be working in 2D rather than the 3D that human judges use and movement of paddlers and boats is definitely a 3D affair!
Thought also needs to be given to the skills of video judges which is very challenging and numbers etc. this would presumably need to be in addition to human judges. We struggle already to get enough volunteers to judge without this!
Video judging would need to ideally be in real time and would need stop frame facilities and I would suggest an increase in the time between paddlers to work. For the sites where there are water costs per unit of time this would increase the cost per run for paddlers which is already seriously challenging and I would suggest something we need to resolve before going down the video route.
I accept that human judging will never be perfect but full automation with Hawkeye type technology will not be practicable unless we become a mainstream sport. While there will always be protests about penalties that have been awarded that are contested I have yet to see a paddler putting in a protest about the fifty they should have got for not going through a gate and yes I have seen these as well!
As I understand the rules at the moment there is nothing to stop an organiser setting up a full video judging solution to show how well and cheaply it works! I am not rushing to be that person but would be happy to be proved wrong.
Thought also needs to be given to the skills of video judges which is very challenging and numbers etc. this would presumably need to be in addition to human judges. We struggle already to get enough volunteers to judge without this!
Video judging would need to ideally be in real time and would need stop frame facilities and I would suggest an increase in the time between paddlers to work. For the sites where there are water costs per unit of time this would increase the cost per run for paddlers which is already seriously challenging and I would suggest something we need to resolve before going down the video route.
I accept that human judging will never be perfect but full automation with Hawkeye type technology will not be practicable unless we become a mainstream sport. While there will always be protests about penalties that have been awarded that are contested I have yet to see a paddler putting in a protest about the fifty they should have got for not going through a gate and yes I have seen these as well!
As I understand the rules at the moment there is nothing to stop an organiser setting up a full video judging solution to show how well and cheaply it works! I am not rushing to be that person but would be happy to be proved wrong.
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
Does it need to be good quality? It depends what you're attempting to ascertain I guess, but there's been many times that I've spotted touches I didn't notice in my run, or have clearly seen that I didn't touch it, on my coach's video camera, which when it's gate 2 at Tully, and he's standing on the bridge, I can assure you isn't good quality!PeterC wrote:To use video for judging will require very good quality video and in poor light / weather conditions would need a significant number of cameras to cover all the gates. You need to be able to see a pole spinning. You are not even today going to be able to do this on a shoestring. Unless we are going to be really expensive you would also be working in 2D rather than the 3D that human judges use and movement of paddlers and boats is definitely a 3D affair!
Surely we'd just want to have it as an extra, repeatable, slow-down-able, viewpoint, in the event of a protest? That's all it works out as for international races, and is what coaches attempt to do, but isn't allowed due to it being unfair on those who aren't videoed. Or is there some benefit to having a real time set up?PeterC wrote: Thought also needs to be given to the skills of video judges which is very challenging and numbers etc. this would presumably need to be in addition to human judges. We struggle already to get enough volunteers to judge without this!
Video judging would need to ideally be in real time and would need stop frame facilities and I would suggest an increase in the time between paddlers to work. For the sites where there are water costs per unit of time this would increase the cost per run for paddlers which is already seriously challenging and I would suggest something we need to resolve before going down the video route.
As I understand the rules at the moment there is nothing to stop an organiser setting up a full video judging solution to show how well and cheaply it works! I am not rushing to be that person but would be happy to be proved wrong.
I hadn't thought about the hawkeye technology, but maybe for the future!
I'm tempted to have a go at modelling my cheap alternative, maybe at one of my club's races. I'm sure I can cobble a few old digital cameras cameras together, it's just getting other people's approval, and working out how to power them!
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
I would have concerns about pixel resolution up the length of the Tully course. To be fair to everyone video would have to be fixed and could not follow paddlers as coach videos do with varying zoom. I have quite a lot of high resolution HD quality video of slalom and even on a large hi definition screen cannot with certainty say there has been no touch unless straight on to the gate face and even then it can miss a touch as someone rounds a pole. Spinning poles would be easier to see with vertical black stripes.
Perhaps we should charge the poles up to a high voltage and then measure charge drop when a pole is touched. The sparks might help give the touches away! It could probably be done without electrocuting the paddlers but couldn't detect a missed gate or a half head etc.
Perhaps we should charge the poles up to a high voltage and then measure charge drop when a pole is touched. The sparks might help give the touches away! It could probably be done without electrocuting the paddlers but couldn't detect a missed gate or a half head etc.
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
I forgot to add you should not underestimate the power of 3D vision with the Mark 1 human eyeball.
Re: Improving Canoe Slalom
I personally have my doubts whether video evidence will solve the problem. I am old enough to remember the '81 Worlds at Bala, which were filmed by the BBC. Our top woman paddler at the time, Liz Sharman, was given a touch which cost her 10 (yes 10! seconds) penalty. The television re-showed her doing the gate several times, and she was clear.
However, somebody else from Leeds Uni was also filming the competition, and their film clearly showed Liz's tail popping up and touch the bottom of the pole.
Now you could argue that this actually demonstrates the need for more viewpoints, but I think it can easily get out of hand, and we would be better off getting on with running the races rather than trying to ensure fairness to the nth degree. The football people have good reasons for not wanting video evidence, some of which will apply to our sport.
However I might be wrong, I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be trialled by someone who is enthusiastic about it.
Finally, I think that this forum is exactly the place to discuss this kind of thing. The most important people in the sport are the young paddlers, and they are also the most likely to come up with new ideas and ways of doing things. The committee has its very important place in the structure of the sport, but on the whole committees are not very effective at introducing change in any walk of life. And generally young people do not get involved in committees.
It may be that some things are aired on the forum that some people would prefer to be kept out of the public gaze, but there is rarely a good reason for this. However contributors to the forum do have to consider that this is a public forum when writing their post.
This is an excellent thread by the way.
However, somebody else from Leeds Uni was also filming the competition, and their film clearly showed Liz's tail popping up and touch the bottom of the pole.
Now you could argue that this actually demonstrates the need for more viewpoints, but I think it can easily get out of hand, and we would be better off getting on with running the races rather than trying to ensure fairness to the nth degree. The football people have good reasons for not wanting video evidence, some of which will apply to our sport.
However I might be wrong, I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be trialled by someone who is enthusiastic about it.
Finally, I think that this forum is exactly the place to discuss this kind of thing. The most important people in the sport are the young paddlers, and they are also the most likely to come up with new ideas and ways of doing things. The committee has its very important place in the structure of the sport, but on the whole committees are not very effective at introducing change in any walk of life. And generally young people do not get involved in committees.
It may be that some things are aired on the forum that some people would prefer to be kept out of the public gaze, but there is rarely a good reason for this. However contributors to the forum do have to consider that this is a public forum when writing their post.
This is an excellent thread by the way.