Prem is dead Long live Div 1P

[djberriman]

My point re naming names covertly was not about Dee you need to look back further.

Some Prem paddlers want their events subsidised, I am unsure whether the canoeing as a whole or divisions 1,2,3,4 should do this, please explain why this should be so?

There is a claim that PUP is a money making exercise, this is simply not true, most if not all events struggle to beak even, hence why enhanced entry fees are now allowed to cover costs. The only events that make money are those with a dedicated team cooking food and/or charging for camping/car parking. At those events like for instance Tees where this is not possible it is hard to generate enough 'income' to cover hosts. So we can't run some events we would like to (like a Div 2 at Tees for instance) as the loss would be huge. If anyone wanted to make money, they wouldn't run slalom events, they'd just get all the volunteers to stick £10 in a pot, the volunteers would be better off and so would the club.

Unfortunately most Prem events are now run on man made courses, this means booking water months in advance and agreeing a fee, peak times have to be avoided in many cases as they cost more, this is why there are no summer events and/or events run late in the day, the centres which have often been subsidised by BC at some point look to replace their income, rather than simply cover costs, thus they look at what they can get from rafting. When a venue is booked the organiser will do there utmost to make sure every slot is used, this is the only way to cover costs other than charge an even higher enhanced entry fee.

Volunteers have been working very hard with venues to keep costs down, at one point recently it looked like all events at one venue would be cancelled due to the massive cost increase, fortunately this was avoided. If there is a fault it is that when BC invested in the centres they did not have a some form of legacy clause which said they must offer a certain number of dates, at certain points in the calendar for free or at cost.

So the reality is PUPS are subsidising your racing! They are ensuring the event is full and covers costs. If an event regularly found itself with empty slots you would find it would be scaled back and you would still end up struggling to get an entry as the event would be full of divisional paddlers.

Some PUPS, families of PUPS, partners etc do volunteer work at the same events. If they were not racing as a PUP they would not attend the event simply to volunteer at their own expense.

Portable points has made PUP more popular as as well as gaining experience they can earn points for their own division, the time and money invested is therefore worthwhile.

So if you ban PUPS or severely restrict them you may find yourself with higher entry fees and less volunteers.

We used to have a big issue with later entries, hence the late fees where increased, it got so bad at some events, the majority of entries turned up on the day, meaning there were not for instance enough toilets, food etc etc. Fortunately this has now been discouraged and generally organisers have a better idea of who is coming. Toilets, Trophies etc etc all have to be paid for and ordered well in advance at considerable cost.

Like anything it may need some tweaking which can be done via the ACM.

The real issue appears to be the cut off date, and the order in which the waiting list/late entries are processed. PUPS need to know whether to book accommodation, organise work shifts etc etc.

The answer of course is to get your entries in early, count yourself lucky, Div 1 has a waiting list for an event in October!

I'm sure there are reasons for not being able to get an entry in but most organisers try to be helpful when there are issues.

Don't rely on email, it is not a guaranteed delivery mechanism and it may well end up in spam, or simply missed by a busy volunteer.

[boatmum]

Some Prem paddlers want their events subsidised, I am unsure whether the canoeing as a whole or divisions 1,2,3,4 should do this, please explain why this should be so?

Have to say I know quite a lot of prem paddlers and have never heard a discussion where they say this - is this a new thing? It would be very interesting to know where this comes from - not asking for names of course! but more when and where.

Many thanks!

[djberriman]

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..

[Dee]

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.

For information (though I didn't think Duncan was referring to your response to me): My name is Dee Lindesay, I've never been on the committee nor competed, but I have run Shepperton Div 1 many times, a div 4 at Windsor (once) and helped out at other slaloms over the years. I'm also responsible for developing the online entry system and as a result can see rather more entry detail than most (on the competitions using the system).

I do believe in democracy which is what our ACM provides (though strictly speaking I believe that the committee can ignore decisions taken at the ACM, but I don't think that they have ever done so). Most ACM motions come from clubs, not the committee, and the committee do not always support such motions, and, as they are individuals, I suspect they do not always agree with each other.

... and I will do it for free.

In the interests of clarity, I don't charge for my time either (the transaction fees are to cover costs). Neither do the timing team, section judges, committee, organisers, other system providers etc etc.

For my own curiosity - can we put a real name to "Arrowcraft" please. No problem if you don't want to.

[boatmum]

OK I am not going to get into Semantics but inferring that a number of prem' paddlers want their races subsidised on the basis of one person's personal views (which they are entitled to) is pushing it a bit.

[djberriman]

sorry if any offence was taken or anything implied I was just responding to the suggestion/comment on the thread

[JimW]

Arrowcraft, are you objecting to the entire notion of paddle ups at prems or only if they take places away from prem paddlers?

Bearing in mind that PUs are sometimes needed to fill events to make them viable to run would it be more sensible to organise Prem roughly as follows:

- Limit total number to the smallest event (looks like Graveyard at 150? Currently have 223 Prems so quite a lot of pruning required).
- Promotion/demotion out of season by number of paddlers rather than points (points still important for ranking) to maintain exact numbers.
- Start of season someone - maybe bib officer, maybe someone new, creates a schedule of payment dates for Prem races which is sent out with Prem bibs.
- All Prem paddlers assumed to be entering every race unless they advise the organiser in advance (as a courtesy for example when they get their exam table or make selection and get their international race calendar), or fail to pay for the race by the deadline in the schedule.
- Div 1's can apply to a waiting list to PU for each race with places allocated as Prems notify organisers that they won't be racing, or once the payment deadline has passed, or when the race lmit exceeds the total number of prems anyway.

My idea is that creating a payment schedule means that prem paddlers do not have to pay for all races right at the start of the year before they even know if they can race them all and when many probably don't have enough spare funds to do it anyway. Clearly if they have problems making a payment by the scheduled date they should be able to contact organisers and work out something amicable so they don't lose their place simply because the date didn't work with their pay day. Paying well before the date would be fine.

Worthy of proper consideration, or complete garbage?

[CeeBee]

I had said

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.

Paddler mum

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.

I wasn't implying that paddlers don't need to be asked - more that they don't have to wait to be asked. i.e. the onus should not be on the volunteers - the number of volunteers is limited and they typically have a day job on top of the time they give to help the sport.

There are many volunteers working away trying to make the sport work better - Duncan and Dee are good examples and the time they have invested is enormous. These same people help across all levels of the sport, whereas what should be happening is that those in the top Divisions of the sport should help the sport by giving their time to help run the events at Div 3/4. If prem/Div 1 paddlers did this and committed to giving up 1 weekend a year to run a club Div 3/4 or help coach, the sport would be in a healthier place. Instead, the volunteers run Prems and Div1s and also the other events too.

Where is the next generation of volunteers to keep the sport going? A comment was made by an ex volunteer who appeared at a recent Scottish event regarding the same old faces and lack of new blood . The paddlers at U23 and Senior not only should be but need to be the next volunteer generation and act as role models to the juniors. Indeed, by doing so, they would be able to discuss the future of the sport away when they have more time to do so away from their race environment.

[harratts]

What a great opportunity for me to say that we at Stafford & Stone are very fortunate to have a group of Prem. paddlers who give up so much of their time to run events, maintain equipment, attend club working days and sit on the club committee for the overall benefit of the club and its latest group of Junior's coming through.

On occasions they have even been known to run a training day / fun day for all club members to get on the water with their role models when back in their home town.

You know who you are and a big Thnk You from me and everyone else at our club for your continued input.

Steve

[Mike Mitchell]

From an Old paddler that Paddled in Div1 before they took the top 60 of us out and formed Prem. I then paddled in prem for over 20 years in K1, C1 and C2 and yes all at the same time in the early 90 s.
In my comeback I now can't get into Prem but anyway Div 1 is a better division.

I think PU is perfect, it lets up and coming paddlers experience the top Division. This can only help to develop these paddlers and the Sport.

The reason UK Slalom is so good is because we have strenth in depth and the top of Div one pushing the bottom of Prem will only help keep this going.

I don't think we ever had more than 9 Prem races. You have the top paddlers away at internationals and along with selection 9 races are plenty.

I have seen this year a Div one Paddler getting promoted at Cardiff and div3 paddlers doing really well at Div 2 events, we just need to let thing run for a year of Two and then maybe tweak it a bit.

Enter on time. You can now enter every event for the Year in Feb/March and pay 3 weeks before the Race. If you change your mind then you just pull your entry before the 4 week deadline. For any Prem paddler that can understand the results at Final/Supper Final Race that should be easy.

Anyway for a 60 year Old timer like me, I can enter the British Open as a Paddle Up and get to paddle on Lee Valley. No one ells is going to ask me on a training development weekend there. Entered in Feb.

[Dee]

What a relief to see some positive posts


Having said that

...If you change your mind then you just pull your entry before the 4 week deadline.....

The rules do not allow for a paddler to cancel and receive a refund (unless they are no long eligible to compete due to promotion), so you could still be charged! Whilst, in practice, organisers will refund paddlers who contact them early enough (particularly when they have a waiting list) policies vary wildly so don't bank on it.

(If you have entered online as a paddle up and are therefore still on the waiting list, then you will be able to cancel your own entry from the 'My Entries' option in the menu bar. This is because I have interpreted the rules to mean that a waiting list entry is not yet accepted so the paddler can still withdraw. TBH it doesn't explicitly state this in the rules, but it doesn't say otherwise as far as I know, seems reasonable, and no-one has complained... yet )

I would support a motion to formalise cancellation policies, and improve consistency but it might be hard to achieve

[Nick Penfold]

There are really two issues in this thread:

1. Paddlers should be able to get an entry at races arranged for their own division.
This one is fair, and I’d like to see a return to the two-week deadline. Setting it at four weeks was looking too sympathetically at the position of paddle-ups, and not balancing it against the point of view of host division paddlers.

2. Having lower-division paddlers at a race, or having a larger division, somehow spoils the event for the best paddlers
This doesn’t make sense to me. The important thing is that the course is set to the right standard. The presence of more paddlers doesn’t make it any less of a competition for the top competitors. It might even be making the event financially possible. Is it unfair of me to think I smell a bit of rather unattractive elitism?

[davebrads]

+1 to what Nick said

I agree with Arrowcraft however that all prem paddlers should be able to get an entry at all the events they select, and hence the size of Prem should be limited. I'm not suggesting limiting it to 150 though, as that would mean that all events would be under-subscribed, but we should be able to select a level where all prem paddlers would get an entry (provided they entered on time) in say 97% of cases. This would mean that most events would be under-subscribed, but the shortfall can then be met with paddle-ups.

I understand that the reason that the deadline was moved to four weeks before the event was to allow more time for booking accommodation. In all the years I have raced I have never had any problem booking accommodation, but that might be because I have nearly always camped, there is no way I could have afforded the sport with going away every other weekend if I didn't, and there is (nearly) always camping space available.

[DavidDickson]

I don't think anyone has disagreed with giving the host division priority so the only thing to decide is how long to make the priority/late entry deadline. I don't think it matters to the paddlers whether its 2, 4 or 6 weeks - whatever it is as long as it's well communicated and understood - paddlers will get their entries in.

However, race organisers will definitely benefit from making it earlier because from my experience of trying to organise busy Div1's - planning the start list and then having to rejig it several times it to fit in later entries can be really challenging. You have people emailing you asking for start lists and you can't produce an accurate one because its constantly changing.

An earlier deadline date also gives athletes, families and volunteers more time to plan for races which may involve taking time off work, controlling expenditure, booking accommodation, organising transport etc.

With regards Nick's comment about elitism - we need to remember that we are discussing the organisation of Premier races - we are not talking about a river festival or fun day. We are organising competitions for the elite end of domestic racing of an Olympic sport.

As mentioned earlier by others - we should be looking at what we want to achieve from these races and planning them accordingly.

We need to ask athletes what they want from races.

GB Canoeing has a Talent Pathway Manager - do they have an input into the domestic racing structure ? Surely they should ?

People are suggesting that clubs run races to make profit or they would not do them - but we would have no sport at all without these races. Unless we are going to subcontract out event management then clubs will need to carry on running races to keep the sport alive.

People are assuming that athletes will not pay higher entry fees but have not asked them.

Maybe a Premier division with smaller numbers would enable more quality events to be planned - maybe athletes and coaches would like more time before and between runs to analyse courses, do video analysis, eat, rest etc etc - and maybe they would be prepared to pay more for this type of event.

Maybe organisers would like more time during the day to give judges, timing team, event safety and control teams breaks ?

What is needed is a proper investigation with open communication to plan a structure that will satisfy all involved.

[boatmum]

100% agree with David