Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
-
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 11:05 am
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
Hexham gone, another Northern div 2 bites the dust…
-
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:52 pm
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
Arrowcraft wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 8:14 pmLOL. Some say that he only eats Walnuts and Californian raisins and likes playing with life size lego. But we call him the Stig.
Others know who he is
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
-
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:44 pm
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
NickNick Penfold wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 6:27 pmTaking the Llandysul Saturday K1W race and calculating the points for all paddlers as if all were Div 1s has the effect of increasing the points of every paddler but one (the last-placed paddle up).Some will get more points, some fewer. Adding more paddlers to the calculation changes the step size for the points difference between places so at the top end paddlers (host and PU) except 1st will make a gain, and the lower end they will lose. If you only concentrate on the promotion end it is easy to ignore lower end points as not mattering, but to paddlers possibly hovering on the demotion limit they might be important.
Applying the same to the other classes, only a handful of paddlers at the very bottom of the results lists lose points, and most gain. I haven't tried the same exercise with enough other races but it looks as if almost everyone would benefit.
It would be good to run this calculation for Div 1 and Prem, before the ACM. over the season.
Then we could look at if including PU results directly into the divisions, makes much difference.
My calculations are the points will improve for promotion and for the top half, only a few will get less points and these will probably just be PU paddlers anyway. It could improve the quality of racing, especially with the low numbers we are seeing.
-
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:44 pm
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
This is not actually correct Jim.JimW wrote: ↑Tue Apr 26, 2022 12:09 pmSome will get more points, some fewer. Adding more paddlers to the calculation changes the step size for the points difference between places so at the top end paddlers (host and PU) except 1st will make a gain, and the lower end they will lose. If you only concentrate on the promotion end it is easy to ignore lower end points as not mattering, but to paddlers possibly hovering on the demotion limit they might be important.
If you have 20 division paddlers and say 10 PU entry's. So the points get split between 30 paddlers.
Yes the positions 2 and 3 get more promotion point.
But say the last 4 boats are PUs then the last host division paddler also gets more points.
For a host division paddler you will get more points providing ever PU douse not come above you.
Needs someone to look at results from this year and work out the differences.
-
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 11:05 am
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
Matlock is back, but given reservoir levels, even if the outflow is fixed by then, Washburn is looking unlikely.
Other musings:
I now know of 2 div 1 paddlers that aren’t racing this season because they may get demoted and applying for reranking would secure them in div 1. Can we scrap demotion for the next few years?
Looking at next year’s calendar proposals, the only div 1 at HPP has gone, so there are no races below Prem level at HPP now. There is a Prem/1 at Tully in Autumn followed by a Prem/1 at Tees the next weekend. Given the cost of fuel it’s expensive for a lot of paddlers to travel for just one race. Could they not be a double prem and a double 1 and alternate venues each year from then on? I understand the increased costs at Tees could be problematic. (I’m also concerned about the div 2/3/4 on Manvers Lake!)
Pan Celtic at Bala was great, well done to all involved.
Other musings:
I now know of 2 div 1 paddlers that aren’t racing this season because they may get demoted and applying for reranking would secure them in div 1. Can we scrap demotion for the next few years?
Looking at next year’s calendar proposals, the only div 1 at HPP has gone, so there are no races below Prem level at HPP now. There is a Prem/1 at Tully in Autumn followed by a Prem/1 at Tees the next weekend. Given the cost of fuel it’s expensive for a lot of paddlers to travel for just one race. Could they not be a double prem and a double 1 and alternate venues each year from then on? I understand the increased costs at Tees could be problematic. (I’m also concerned about the div 2/3/4 on Manvers Lake!)
Pan Celtic at Bala was great, well done to all involved.
-
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
This is nothing new and happens every year, those who do one race get demoted despite clearly being 'good enough', one prem paddler got demoted to div 2 because of this a few years back. The way to solve it is to divide points/races and work out an average then multiply by the races that count. This would encourage paddlers to race even if they can only manage one event. Preventing demotion by not racing does the sport and the paddler no good and must be frustrating for those who just get demoted by a few points.Steve Holmes wrote: ↑Tue Jul 12, 2022 10:09 amI now know of 2 div 1 paddlers that aren’t racing this season because they may get demoted and applying for reranking would secure them in div 1. Can we scrap demotion for the next few years?
If you want to get either of these solutions implemented they need to be put to the ACM
-
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 11:05 am
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
I agree that things need to go to the ACM, but surely this forum is a place to gauge whether ideas have traction? Otherwise they go to ACM, get half an hour spent discussing them and then nothing changes.
-
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 10:44 pm
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
Demotion and the way I see it.
If you don't paddle then you need to apply for ranking, otherwise you get taken of the system, this did not happen last year, because of Covid.
You then gat another year to paddle in your division.
If you enter 1 or so races and don't have enough points to stay in the Division, then you can also apply for ranking and with a good excuse you will probably stay in your division, the same as above.
If you race 5 races and don't have enough points, then maybe it's time to be demoted and race the division below.
I like Promotions and Demotions, they keep everyone at the bottom and top of a division working hard.
What I would like to see, is GB team paddlers that don't compete at home races, demoted and not qualify for selection.
Making the standard in Prem should be for all paddlers and No wild cards.
We need are top paddlers competing at home for lots of reasons. Most do, but they all should race enough to stay in Prem.
If you don't paddle then you need to apply for ranking, otherwise you get taken of the system, this did not happen last year, because of Covid.
You then gat another year to paddle in your division.
If you enter 1 or so races and don't have enough points to stay in the Division, then you can also apply for ranking and with a good excuse you will probably stay in your division, the same as above.
If you race 5 races and don't have enough points, then maybe it's time to be demoted and race the division below.
I like Promotions and Demotions, they keep everyone at the bottom and top of a division working hard.
What I would like to see, is GB team paddlers that don't compete at home races, demoted and not qualify for selection.
Making the standard in Prem should be for all paddlers and No wild cards.
We need are top paddlers competing at home for lots of reasons. Most do, but they all should race enough to stay in Prem.
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
Couldn’t agree more. A good motion to put to the AGM.What I would like to see, is GB team paddlers that don't compete at home races, demoted and not qualify for selection.
Making the standard in Prem should be for all paddlers and No wild cards.
We need are top paddlers competing at home for lots of reasons. Most do, but they all should race enough to stay in Prem.
There’s a lot of money invested in these athletes and they all need to contribute to the success of their sport by volunteering and racing. This needs to cascade down from the management and coaches.
-
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
Re: Is it time for some outside the box thinking?
Posting as me privately and VERY cynically
The problem with selection conditions is that selection is (notionally) a World Class event. Selection conditions are set up by the International Panel not by the ACM. So the ACM can say what it wants, but there are more people on the selection panel whose jobs depend on the program athletes doing well than are mandated by the ACM. So ACM says 'you must be in Prem to go to selection', and the great hope for International medals is not in prem, guess what? Yep that rule is waived for ‘special conditions’.
This suggestion has been put for many years, but is outside our sphere of influence. The only way to change this is by motion to the BC AGM, that is then accepted by the board and the IP is instructed on this. Good luck!
So yes it would be good if the team athletes followed Fiona Pennie and were proud to be team and Bib 1 (see it can be done), but that is not the ethos in the Program, which is focussed, by funding, on World/Euro medals and ICF ranking.
Ok, climbing off the high horse, returning the discussion about better ranking for those only doing 1 race.
As Mike says, if there is a reason you can only do 1 or 2 races, then you can apply for frozen status, but it is apply and hope.
Back in the days of end cockpit C2s when I started, we worked on percentages, not points, and no one knew how the national rankings were doing till someone sat down with a calculator to work it out. BUT there was the concept that less than maximum races were multiplied up, then made slightly worse (so it was worth doing more races even if you got a good result).
So how about shooting at:
NOTE Only end of season points suggested, unless someone thinks differently?
OK donning flak jacket, and waiting for comments/suggested changes. Remeber if you like this, or a variant, you must get it to the ACM as a motion. If enough support is there for any idea, we need to be nice to the ranking database man and see if he can produce a shadow set of rankings.
The problem with selection conditions is that selection is (notionally) a World Class event. Selection conditions are set up by the International Panel not by the ACM. So the ACM can say what it wants, but there are more people on the selection panel whose jobs depend on the program athletes doing well than are mandated by the ACM. So ACM says 'you must be in Prem to go to selection', and the great hope for International medals is not in prem, guess what? Yep that rule is waived for ‘special conditions’.
This suggestion has been put for many years, but is outside our sphere of influence. The only way to change this is by motion to the BC AGM, that is then accepted by the board and the IP is instructed on this. Good luck!
So yes it would be good if the team athletes followed Fiona Pennie and were proud to be team and Bib 1 (see it can be done), but that is not the ethos in the Program, which is focussed, by funding, on World/Euro medals and ICF ranking.
Ok, climbing off the high horse, returning the discussion about better ranking for those only doing 1 race.
As Mike says, if there is a reason you can only do 1 or 2 races, then you can apply for frozen status, but it is apply and hope.
Back in the days of end cockpit C2s when I started, we worked on percentages, not points, and no one knew how the national rankings were doing till someone sat down with a calculator to work it out. BUT there was the concept that less than maximum races were multiplied up, then made slightly worse (so it was worth doing more races even if you got a good result).
So how about shooting at:
Example:6.8.3 End of season results Ranking positions are calculated using the best five results. In the event of a tie, refer to Rules 2.7 (championship tie break) or 10.18 (ranking tie break). Division 4 athletes are not ranked.
Where an athlete does not have 5 results, their sore is multiplied as below to get the comparison total:
4 results, multiply by 1.1
3 results, multiply by 1.4
2 results multiply by 2.0
3 results multiply by 3.0
- Someone goes to a prem race, gets 900 points and goes nowhere else, they have 2700 points.
- If they go to another and get 900 points that, they have 3,000 points at end of season, easily enough to stay up.
- They go to another and get 900 points again, they have 3,600 points at end of season
- They get 900 points at a third and have 3,780 points at end of season.
- Get 900 points at a fourth they have 3,960 end of season points.
- Another 900 points at a fifth and they 4,500 end of season points.
NOTE Only end of season points suggested, unless someone thinks differently?
OK donning flak jacket, and waiting for comments/suggested changes. Remeber if you like this, or a variant, you must get it to the ACM as a motion. If enough support is there for any idea, we need to be nice to the ranking database man and see if he can produce a shadow set of rankings.
All spelling errors are intentional and are there to show new and improved ways of spelling old words. Grammatical errors are due to too many English classes/teachers.
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points