Prem is dead Long live Div 1P

[Dee]

.....So We reword UKB3.3, 4 weeks prior to the race Organisers may accept Paddle Up entries that are ranked within the top 10% of their home divisional class, at the start of season it will be based on Bib #, but once races have commenced it is by the Ranking List published at the time. Organiser is then obliged to continue to accept competent Entries from Host division paddlers up to the point Entry Quota is full or Entry Date as defined in UK C11.2. At Entry Closing Date, Organiser then has the discretion to fill the Race to Entry Quota with incompetent entries or Paddle Ups that wish to enter. Thereby only Late Entrants may not receive a race entry to their own division, if you cannot enter in time you can hardly be classed as Elite. Suitable candidates are permitted to progress for enhanced promotion, thus swelling the upper division with competitors of similar or equal standing to many already ranked. Organisers are able to ensure that they can open entries and run events that more than cover costs and effort involved.
.........

I think something similar has been suggested before. One concern is that this does add quite a bit of complexity. You've pointed out that there are some underpaid Entries accepted in McConkey which possibly shouldn't be there, but these tend to arise from paddlers and/or organisers being unclear as to the rules. Not only that, but 11.4.6 would appear to allow organisers to accept underpaid entries in any case!

The potential issue is that the more complex something becomes the more opportunities arise for "interpretation". At what time of day should the ranking lists be used? What happens if the ranking system is down at the time. Is it 10% of the original numbers or the "current" numbers. All of these can, of course, be defined but they are going to be too complex to operate smoothly and consistently

One of the issues that has caught some prems out this year is the added complexity of two dates, perhaps reverting to a single date could be simpler. The same date acting as both the end of priority period and for triggering late fees.

If the Entries received and waiting list was published 4 weeks before the competition then pups could get a feel for whether or not they are likely to get an entry even though confirmation would be two weeks before.

[Sven]

As said before

No one is listening

The perception is if you're a paddler and have a view that is contrary to or questions what the official system wants then you are a nuisance who doesn't appreciate the effort put in by volunteers - I've heard it said time and time again by officials. So the net effect is paddlers stop saying anything and just try and make the best of what increasingly looks like a bad (from a racing paddler perspective) job.

So just to put the record straight - every single paddler I know really really appreciates what the volunteers do and many express that in their personal blogs and social media posts. Perhaps officials dont read them in the same way the majority of paddlers dont read chatter because they rightly or wrongly dont feel ownership.

Paddlers just want to race and the current systems appear to be preventing that at the top end.

[BaldockBabe]

"Dee. It's not enough to say that we need to follow the democratic process and overturn this nonsense...That's just committee bullshoot, used by committees the world over to justify their poor decisions. This was pushed through. It was a dumb idea and it is now proving to be a dumb practice. The committee should recognise this and sort it out....Not in October. call and EGM and resolve it in May. "

This is rude and unnecessary and suggests that this was a committee proposal that was pushed through by the committee which demonstrates either a lack of understanding of what actually happened or a desire to misplace blame.

In advance of the ACM this proposal was dropped by the committee (even after a lot of work to try and canvas opinion at events around the country and seminars on how it was expected to work). It was ressurected by a series of clubs (Yorkshire region) and a new proposal was brought to the ACM. This was voted on by representatives from the eligible clubs.

The representatives from both the proposing clubs and the voting clubs should have canvassed opinion from their club members (i.e paddlers and volunteers) prior to voting. If they did not or your opinion was not the majority for your club then this is not the fault of the committee.

If you want a change to happen get on the river bank, start gaining support, put in a proposal and make it happen. That's what the persons who got this proposal through in the first place did!

[DavidDickson]

Yep agree - no point in going over things and apportioning blame. I'm sure decisions were made with the best intentions. Lets try and move forward constructively and come up with a better system. Andy N's idea of some sort of survey would be useful to determine what peoples opinions are on how to move things forward.

If we just look at Premier and Div 1 just now - I guess the sort of information we are looking for would be answers to :-

1. Should division sizes be limited and how big should they be ?

2. Should there be an intermediate division created between Div 1 and Prem ?

3. Should we have any practice runs at Div 1's or should their be an intermediate division created with no practice runs ?

4. Should we allow paddle Ups ?

5. If we have paddle Ups should they be restricted to those nearest achieving promotion or should all Div 1's get a chance to enter ?

6. How may races would you like to see on the calendar ?

7. Would you prefer double or single races ?

8. Would you pay enhanced fees for certain venues ?

9. Should there be in season promotion or just end of season ?

10. How many should be promoted if only end of season promotion ?

11. How many should be demoted ?

This is just a starter - if you have any more to add please do and we can get the ball rolling.

Thanks

David

[Steve Agar]

Absolutely agree that a comprehensive review of the divisional system is required, and structure of slalom as a whole, but a chatroom isn't where it should happen. The governing body should be taking action as there are enough voices being raised, with plenty of different points of view - I know I've got the odd opinion to add - , or is it already happening without us knowing? Answers on a postcard, please.

[CeeBee]

The problem isn't Paddle Ups per se, it is demand exceeding supply as Div 1 paddlers learnt in previous seasons. Paddles Up applies at all Divisions - what problems are being experienced at lower divisions?

Some of the premier paddlers, if they had realised there was a 4 week deadline after which Paddle Ups filled up remaining spaces, would have entered earlier. Yes, there are exceptions to this such as new promotions and people who become available to go close to an event.

At the AGM, w can change the cut off date to 2 weeks before if that is the majority view. However, as an organiser, whose event is not full, I am keen to encourage Paddles Up to come and race and get a chance to organise accommodation and travel with 4 weeks notice. We pay £1000 for water at Pinkston and need to have sufficient entries to make the event viable.

Is this the only event affected or have there been other events were Paddles Up have resulted in host paddlers not getting to race?

I am in favour of Paddles Up but would prefer that when the results are displayed, they are shown as a separate class so you can see where you finish in your own Division. Paddles Up does not affect the quality of the Host Division. Once they have an entry, there is no impact on the racing for the Host Division - they get the same race and the same points.

There are other factors arising i.e. having a combined Div 1/prem in the same weekend is the key contributor to why the event is so oversubscribed this weekend so I would support a motion that events are run as double Div 1s or Double Prems both from an entry perspective but also from the paddlers perspective of getting 2 races with the same travel and accommodation costs as a single race.

I would support motions as follows -

1. that once you are in the 4 week period before a race, that priority goes to Host Division entries before Paddles Up.

2. that decided what reasonable numbers are for the elite Division i.e. Prem so we have a hard limit

3. for only end of season promotion from Div 1 to Prem but this would need to state how many would be promoted so that all paddlers knew the cut off during the year and could work towards this e.g. top 10 promoted in K1M.

4. that actively encouraged all Slalom paddlers to run events. Slalom relies entirely on volunteers and those racing need to contribute to running events. So what incentives/disincentives financial or otherwise could we have? Do other sports do anything we could copy? A lot of our paddlers are now coming through TID squads and these groups need to take their fair share of running events. Our club do not run events because we want to - we run events so that the sport can continue.

It should also be noted that most of the committee are also actively involved in running the events at competitions and are happy for paddlers to chat to them on the riverbank. Paddlers don't need to be asked to express their views and can discuss any concerns or issue with committee members to feed back.

[Arrowcraft]

Look, it's pretty simple. There are only 9 prem races at which prem paddlers can get points. They MUST have priority over everyone else because of the lack of opportunity. If organisers want to accept PUPS, then PUPS must accept that they can be displaced by prems... even if they enter later...even if they enter late. This is prem, our elite division. Personally, I would ban paddle up unless you were ranked in the top 5 in div 1. Otherwise, it looks like what it is, a money making scheme and no, prem paddlers should not pay enhanced entry fees. Our sport should be subsidising the expensive venues and getting races done in a day rather than 2 days to keep the costs down.

The divisional system is a mess. Unless you demote as many that go up, everyone will eventually end up in Prem. You need to reset the divisions based on promotees. if 30 get up to div 1, then you need to take the bottom 30 down. Prem could be at the end of the season only. 10 up, 10 down for example. If you want to get to prem you have to work hard and earn it, not just wait till everyone else gets up and then go up as it's your turn...That's just nonsense and why we are in this position.

Div 1 is bulging and needs to be broken into 2 divisions. Then fix the numbers for the start of each season. At the moment it is pretty hard too get demoted and pretty easy to get promoted from 2 to 1. This is where the problem is, this is where it needs to be fixed. Div 1 is too big. Portable points and paddle ups only makes it worse, because it is easier to get promotion points.

[djberriman]

It's a sad day when someone has to personalise posts at one individual, especially one who has contributed so much to the sport and been recognised for it.

Any changes to the sport are voted in by the reps of the clubs, the reps have votes based on membership and the number of events they run. ACM motions are advertised in advance. If you don't like the motions contact your club rep to ensure they vote against them. The committee has no say in what passes or is rejected, your club does, perhaps ask them why they voted PUPS through.

I'm sorry there are pups who are beating half of prem which is what they have to do to achieve anything. If you think that makes them unworthy then I'm confused what they have to do to prove they are worthy.

The majority don't and you feel that degrades the prestige of prem, rather than throwing out the good with the bad why not simple bring a motion to the acm saying for instance you have to be in the top 10% of div 1 to be allowed to pup, or changing the deadline for Prem pups back to 2 weeks, that's right your club rep can put forward a motion!

Also you have to bear in mind some paddle as pups as it means they don't have to travel from one end of the country to the other, or a sibling is paddling, or a parent is volunteering.

You can of course enter any event, there is no restriction to paddling at the many Div 1's, in fact its free!

As for points, you are simply the wrong, pups ONLY carry forward points earned in Prem races, thus if they are ranked in the top 40% of prem on promotion from pups thats because they have raced at Prems and achieved those results, their Div 1 points do not count, that was a suggestion at the ACM 2 years ago but was never passed, the motion was amended and only points achieved at the higher level events are carried forward.

From experience it is often hard to get feedback from prems and when extra events are arranged to fill gaps in the calendar they are not well received, thus they are not repeated, perhaps the paddlers need to be more positive and help the many VOLUNTEERS in this sport who commit untold hours to run it to achieve what they would like. Why should the bib officer email you? Why not organise yourselves and express your opinion? It is not the bib officers job or anyone else for that matter!

All in my very humble opinion as a mere Div 1 paddler (never a pup nor ever likely to be prem), organiser, volunteer, ranking database designer/maintainer/hosting, sometimes coach, acm attender etc etc. Cost charged to the sport £0.00.

[JimW]

I've been paddling WW recreationally and aware of the divisional system in slalom for going on 30 years, I only started slalom 2 years ago.

From outside slalom, the divisional system looks good.
In fact, from inside the lower divisions, the system still looks pretty good.

I can appreciate the arguments being put forward for making Prem properly elite, but I advise you to be careful what you wish for.
Slalom probably is big enough to support a small elite division but be wary of separating the top paddlers so that lower divisions never get to paddle with/against them. Even if you have end of year promotion/demotion to keep things fresh and maintain optimum numbers, the demotees will not be the very best paddlers so div 1s will only get exposure to the best after they gain promotion, at which point they only have 9 races to do well enough to avoid going back down the next season. Maybe this is something desirable, I can't see why it would be though.
Also be aware that people going into the elite division are even more likely than now to lose interest in lower division competition, and thus more likely to quit if demoted - again perhaps this is a desirable way to control numbers, but it would reduce the exposure of div 1s to paddlers who have prem experience/ability.

One thing is for certain though, if you want to maintain integrity each division and each race needs to continue to be self supporting in terms of covering costs from entry fees, sponsorship or grants - it will not be acceptable to subsidise the elite division from fees paid by lower divisions or by other disciplines or recreational paddlers. It is bad enough that most recreational paddlers already believe their NGB membership is being used to fund slalom without that actually becoming the case. If you want a small elite division to exist without requiring enhanced entry fees, you are going to need to find external funding from a sponsor or grant body that will make up the shortfall between entry fees and costs.

I started to write a load more about another sport I was heavily involved in where numbers never actually became a problem, but there was talk about making the top class more elite, and guess what, the arguments ran very similarly to those here even though the sport is completely different. That's the summary, the rest wasn't worth reading.

[boatmum]

One of the things I have always thought over the years, (and this is not unique to canoe slalom) is, (to be fair because of a lot of constraints and external pressures) systems suffer from the "bolt-on" effect. That is to say existing structures are taken and new initiatives are massaged so they can be slotted in.

For some things this may work, for others not so well. Maybe now is the time to standback and rather than dive into detailed questions about what specifics people want, maybe better to ask the more strategic questions about the aims, (what do we want from our sport), rationales (why do we do it) and visions for the sport (where do I want it to take me, if any where) etc. These ARE difficult questions because there is no initial "to do list" attached and we are all more comfortable with "doing". However people involved and particularly paddlers (here I have to disagree with CeeBee, paddlers DO need to be asked and talked to outside the race environment, because at races paddlers are concentrating on racing and nothing else particularly at Div 1 and Prem races and if we dont ask paddlers how they see things in their sport, then who is it being organised for?) do need an input.

Depending on the group the questionees represent, there will be different priorities. However answers to these fundemenal questions should help those who are charged with organising the structure of the divisional system in the UK either create a new system or redevelop the existing system. This may or may not include intermediate divisions, it may or may not include promotion/demotion at the end of the season and so on. However I strongly suggest until it is known what people want the sport to deliver overall then any amount of changes made are unlikely to solve issues or satisfy participants.

This would not be an easy project and would take time. It requires careful formulation and precise interpretation of responses. The results of which I would suggest should be made public to show open communication.

If it was felt this was a route worth exploring I am happy to be pm'd and while I couldnt administer it (I live outside the UK now) I would be happy to give support. This is an area I have some professional experience in.

[Steve Agar]

I couldn't agree more with what boatmum has written - put into words what I have failed to do. We need to bear in mind that making change without first carrying out that time-consuming and often tedious groundwork can lead to ill-(or at least under-) informed decisions. (I would have thought we might have learned something from our Brexit experience.) Most paddlers today will also not have experienced different structures to the current system so we need to look what we can learn from how things are done elsewhere, and what was good and bad from the past, and try and fit those into an appropriate model that suits today's requirements, skills and age profile of the slalom consumers.

Who knows, we might end up with new and different disciplines to suit different needs? Whether we have the desire, energy and resources to make fundamental change is a big question, but one I'm up for trying to help with if there is a real will.

[Arrowcraft]

DJ it's not sad, it IS a recognition of Dee and their views...I have no idea who Dee is...it's not an insult. What is insulting, is when something is so obviously wrong and damaging and people have a pop at the person that simply states the obvious. Dee is clearly concerned about this, as we all are. But this is not a time for bland put off's. This is killing our sport for the elite athletes in the elite division.

[Arrowcraft]

Paddler mum makes valid points. It does need thinking about once you have engaged with the competitors. Find out what they want and expect. Then build a divisional system to deliver a competitive Prem. Make promotions actually mean something and let people move around the divisions based on their results. It is a competitive sport and whilst we might want to be inclusive...competitive sport is selective. When I was a paddler in div 4, I was not interested ion what was happening in Prem or on the international circuit, at least not close up. My fun was beating my mate or that bloke from Liverpool...when I was in Prem I was not interested in what was happening in div 4 or div 1 for that matter. I was too busy training and trying to beat the guy in front of me. At International level, Prem were just domestic races. It's pretty much the same now.

But the system took me from Novice to International and seemed to work. The divisions were balanced every year. If you got demoted then you tried harder and got promoted again. If you got fed up with it then you jacked it in and took up wake boarding, bog trotting or spinning your paddles above your head in stoppers all day. But the sport remained competitive and developed through natural selection. The best competitors ended up at the top of the sport, the good paddlers reached div 1 and stayed there and made it bloody difficult to beat them to get through to Prem. Div 2 was a graveyard for those that could not handle the very big water or people on the way down from the top...but was a very hard division to get out of and div 3 was full of recreational paddlers and kids on the way up.

Prem is our elite division. Unless prem's can get onto the start line...then I ask you all again...What is the point of it? Anything that we do that prevents or restricts our elite paddlers competing at our elite races is detrimental to our sport.

My lad never raced up. He did not want to pretend to be in prem. He wanted to be in prem. He trained hard, he raced hard and he made it to prem. Well done. This weekend he played on his computer because he entered the race on time but was blocked out by pups and was 50th on a waiting list and the div 1's had a lovely time pretending to be in prem. Apparently there were over 20 other prems just like him. Where is the sense in that?

[Arrowcraft]

I am happy to help put this right. I can poll the paddlers and interpret their responses and I will do it for free.

[boatmum]

Hi again

To ensure 100% clarity - any support I gave if solicited would be free of charge Just lending some credentials