6.12 Restricting Paddle Up

[Canadian Paddler]

Proposed and Seconded by Proteus Canoe Club
This proposal will be withdrawn if the Portable Points proposal stands
The original purpose of Paddle Up, was to allow accelerated promotion for those capable of competing effectively at a higher division. Indeed, the rule referring to Paddle up is called ‘Accelerated Promotion’. This original purpose has been lost, with paddlers requesting paddle up entries at Premier as soon as they are promoted into Division 1. These paddlers have no chance of achieving the paddle up standard.
With the oversubscription of Premier and Division One races this season, this has resulted in some paddlers, who could use paddle up to assist in their promotion, being unable to get entries.
In order to return to the original purpose of paddle up, it is proposed that paddling up is only available to paddlers ranked in the top 20% of a division at the priority entry date (four weeks before the race). At the start of the season, the ranking will be taken from the yearbook, but once the season is underway, the ranking will be taken from the on line ranking database at the priority entry date.
The proposal is to change double quotes to single quotes in rule B3 (the only place double quotes are used) and to amend the wording as follows Page 46 / 47

B3.3 Accelerated Promotion
B3.3.1 “Paddle Up”
A competitor ranked in the top 20% of any given division may enter competitions designated for the next division up (referred to below as the Host division). This is intended to enable paddlers to get experience of more challenging racing conditions and to allow them to compare their abilities against higher-division paddlers. Provided an event is quorate, a competitor “paddling up” achieving a result better than achieved by 40% of the ranked paddlers competing at that event at three competitions may claim promotion into the higher division.
In the case of a multi-division competition (e.g. Div 1/2 or Div 2/3) a paddler ranked in the lower division who achieves a result better than that achieved by 40% of the ranked paddlers competing in the same event in the higher division may claim the result as one of their three “paddle up” promotion results.
B3.3.2 “Paddle Up” Participation Conditions
The entry fee payable will be the same as for competitors in the host division.
Points will be calculated for the Host division as though the “paddling up” competitors were not present. They will not receive points and will be marked “NR” on the results sheets.
The ranking position for eligibility to paddle up, will be taken from the on line rankings at the priority entry deadline. Any entries received for paddlers not eligible may be destroyed with no further correspondence.
The event organiser may impose a limit on numbers, either in the published calendar or at the time of planning the event. If such a limit is applied, priority of entry shall be as follows:
a) Up to the priority entry deadline: Host division paddlers, then “paddlers up”, in order of receipt of entries.
b) After the priority entry deadline up to entry cut-off: both Host division and “paddling-up” paddlers in order of receipt of entries.
Note: the priority entry deadline is the Friday four weeks before the competition.

[JimW]

Excellent - I have had something similar going around in my head for the last few days as a possible way to reduce the paddle up issues, although I was thinking about it from another angle. I'll be interested to see if this gains support, particularly from event organisers who will need to print off a copy of the online ranking when priority deadline passes in order to check which of the paddle up entries they can accept.

Priority deadline is a Friday so all the previous weekends results ahould be accounted for by then I think? One headache I came up with was the possibility of the online ranking database not being fully up to date when an organiser snapshots it.
Presumably if a paddlers ranking is not up to date because they used a temporary bib for a race or something, that is just hard luck? A good incentive for paddlers to remember their bibs!

[Dee]

Just thinking of the administration of this.
- It does mean that paddlers could be sending in entries in the hope that they are eligible at the entry deadline.
- There also seems a potential for 'yes I was', 'no you weren't' type arguments.
- Any delays in results (however caused) could be a problem, as could rankings changing part way through the day with late updates
- it also relies on the organiser being able to download a copy of the rankings on the specific day. (Early or late could give different results)

I wonder whether it would have been more practical and possibly have achieved a similar result to have just used bib number as the means for deciding who gets an entry (for those entries received in priority period). (Would have also relieved organiser of need to record order of receipt). I.e. Continue to allow whole division to enter as paddle up but change priority of entry to

a) Up to the priority entry deadline: Host division paddlers in order of receipt, then “paddlers up” in order of Bib number
b) After the priority entry deadline up to entry cut-off: both Host division and “paddling-up” paddlers in order of receipt of entries.

[JimW]

The problem with using bib number is that it relates to last years ranking, and by mid way through the season some paddlers that ranked lowly at the end of the previous year or were promoted in the curent year will be knocking on the promotion door - those being the paddlers that paddle up is designed for.

Therefore current ranking should be a better way to ensure that the paddlers eligible to paddle up, are the ones most likely to be able to achieve it.

The motion almost needs whoever compiles the website rankings (Is it Nick or Duncan? I forget) to have already agreed to create a weekly definitive snapshot of the ranking list somewhere on the website, ideally with top 20% highlighted in a different colour, which is to be the list used, without debate or appeal, for events scheduled 4 weekends from the snapshot date....

[paddlerparent]

Proposed and Seconded by Proteus Canoe Club

Out of interest - how can one club propose & second that proposal as it states on this post - just wondering that's all......

[Dee]

Two separate people in the same club

[Dee]

The problem with using bib number is that it relates to last years ranking, and by mid way through the season some paddlers that ranked lowly at the end of the previous year or were promoted in the curent year will be knocking on the promotion door - those being the paddlers that paddle up is designed for.

Therefore current ranking should be a better way to ensure that the paddlers eligible to paddle up, are the ones most likely to be able to achieve it.

The motion almost needs whoever compiles the website rankings (Is it Nick or Duncan? I forget) to have already agreed to create a weekly definitive snapshot of the ranking list somewhere on the website, ideally with top 20% highlighted in a different colour, which is to be the list used, without debate or appeal, for events scheduled 4 weekends from the snapshot date....

Yes I realise that, but it does mean them keeping a history (which I don't believe they do at the moment) and the correct historical record being referred to. It does mean another list for the organiser to cross reference with.

I understand what you are saying about bib numbers, but I'm just suggesting priority by bib - half way through the season the higher bib numbers that are entering as paddle ups will probably have been promoted so the next level down get more of a look in. It doesn't however help those that are trying to shoot up through multiple divisions in a season.

[Dee]

Actually, how about a compromise......

Allow all paddlers to paddle up but give priority as
a) Up to the priority entry deadline: Host division paddlers in order of receipt, then “paddlers up” in order of ranking at priority entry deadline
b) After the priority entry deadline up to entry cut-off: both Host division and “paddling-up” paddlers in order of receipt of entries.

This would probably be pretty close to achieving the intended outcome, but would also mean that organisers wouldn't need to worry about order of receipt for paddle-ups in exchange for checking their ranking. Hopefully it would also discourage paddle-ups from entering eons in advance without having any idea of whether they will make the ranking cut off.

[Nick Penfold]

I have some sympathy with the intention of this proposal, but I think it's a very unfair way to go about it. At mid-season, rankings reflect the number of races paddlers have already done as much as their performance, so this favours those who've already had a good crack of the whip over those who maybe need points and haven't been able to get entries, or get to races.

At the last ACM we changed the deadline for host division priority from 2 weeks to 4 weeks. I think that was a mistake, favouring paddle uppers over host division paddlers - the people the race was organised for. A return to 2 weeks would be a better way of giving priority to host division paddlers, and a lot simpler to manage.

[Dee]

I have some sympathy with the intention of this proposal, but I think it's a very unfair way to go about it. At mid-season, rankings reflect the number of races paddlers have already done as much as their performance, so this favours those who've already had a good crack of the whip over those who maybe need points and haven't been able to get entries, or get to races.

At the last ACM we changed the deadline for host division priority from 2 weeks to 4 weeks. I think that was a mistake, favouring paddle uppers over host division paddlers - the people the race was organised for. A return to 2 weeks would be a better way of giving priority to host division paddlers, and a lot simpler to manage.

But I don't think this is about giving priority to host paddlers so much as those who have a chance of succeeding at achieving paddle up standard

[paddlerparent]

If its complicated it wont work & i haven't read anything on this thread that's simple for organizers so i feel they will veto it & my opinion is that's correct.

Having said that - portable points isn't helping this as all - its more of a driving force as its more races for say Div1 to get points in Prem & more will enter the race leaving less judges and demo's.

I get what people are trying to do - fill races, give people opportunity to progress - but this & portable points are just a hard way of getting there


Pehaps scrap teh portable points idea as it wont add value as a WHOLE and let it be 1st come 1st serve for paddle ups, those that are keen get enteries (assuming they can book travel)

[Princi]

Entries accepted from paddlers outside of the host division should be at the discretion of the race organisers; not a rule.
At the HPPCC race this year we allowed 42 paddle-ups at the Premier Race, utilising our water time to the maximum (why would you turn paddlers away?). I am not going to publish the accounts for our race here but without the paddle-ups we would not have made any profit over the weekend and the race would not be viable moving forward. Due to the restrictions placed upon us at HPP, by Serco, we are not able to subsidise our event by putting on catering so we have to rely on race fees to put something back into the club.

Above is the financial reason for not restricting paddle-ups, below is a further thought..............

There seems to be an assumption that paddlers only enter as a paddle-up to beat 40% of the competition and obtain a paddle-up voucher! Wrong, paddle-up is a brilliant opportunity to try new water, be on the start line amongst different paddlers, get a new experience and more importantly just give it a go, enjoying this fantastic sport in the process. Points & winning will come but there has to be opportunity on the journey, not restriction.

Sit down with the people that matter, the paddlers, and these are the comments you'll hear! It was interesting talking to my own son and listening to his view on doing a paddle-up versus an officials run -"Difficult to put into words but there's a different kind of anticipation being sat amongst your "boat class" on the start line rather than paddlers doing various disciplines, there's more of a competitive edge". This kind of experience is invaluable, even if you come last!

[JimW]

There seems to be an assumption that paddlers only enter as a paddle-up to beat 40% of the competition and obtain a paddle-up voucher!

On the contrary, it is quite clear that paddlers like to do paddle up for all the reasons you list, but it seems that the idea behind its introduction was for only paddlers with a chance of beating 40% to do it.

It seems that it creates different problems or opportunities for different divisions.... most discussion is based around where it creates problems, your perspective is different and valuable!

[Nick Penfold]

Just to keep the history straight: whatever the intro to this motion says, paddle up was not introduced to create points/promotion opportunities: it was to give paddlers earlier access to, and experience of, bigger water. I know because I wrote the original paddle up proposal.

The 40% achievement idea followed on, because if you can repeatedly beat 40% of the paddlers in the next division up you ought to be in it as soon as possible. No-one ever said you had to be in striking distance of a 40%-er to race, and lots of paddle-uppers who know they have no such chance have done it for experience and/or fun.

[Dee]

History has a way of rewriting itself