Actually, FatBoy (and I don't mean to be rude - but I can't address you as 'the slim handsome paddler who wishes to be addrssed as FatBoy', can 1?):
What you are asking for is a system used by all the major Slalom Nations except (to some extent) France.
We are the only slalom nation that actively and comprehensively uses its Ranking System to stop people paddling particular races - or at least, forces them to judge if they want to do a race outside their Division.
In Germany (where it is just done by age-groups), the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, you just go to whichever races you want to. If the race isn't ranking for your age group that column is left blank on the result sheet. But everyone goes anyway. The Czech Republic and Slovakia have ranking systems, but only to tell you how good/bad you are: they don't have races for specific Divisions. In Germany that sort of system only exists at the top, to control who can go to Senior Selection events: very few Juniors on it.
In France there is a Ranking system, with Divisions N1, N2, N3. But on average ranked French paddlers go to as many Regional races as they do Divisional races. At Regional races Fabien Lefevre races against lowly unranked Juniors; and they have an incredibly complicated system which means that everyone gets ranking points at every race they enter, Regional or Divisional (no I can't explain it: ask Dave Royle).
That would be a major upheaval: my feeling is that we ought to look at alternatives to our present system before getting to the stage of ACM proposals.
But in the meantime, if we continue to use the Ranking System to stop up-and-coming paddlers racing at particular races, we must make sure that we do so in line with their developmental needs ('Putting Paddlers First'). And that means we must stop pretending that a paddler can be capable of handling a Judges' run at a Div 1 or Prem, but not good enough to handle 'a race on Div 1 water'.
A Ranking System is not capable of making judgements about whether an individual paddler is capable of handling Div 1 water. An experienced adult can do it for himself/herself; but ideally it is a coaching call; and almost all the coaches I know encourage their paddlers to race Div 1's and Prems while they are still in Div 2.
If I can work out how to do it I hope to be opening a thread on this subject shortly.
Practice Runs Div 1 - Should there be free practice?
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
One answer would be to have open events at as many races as possible. This would enable anyone to race at the event but not have to judge. Thr slalom committee at their last meeting agreed to remove levys from open events to encourage clubs to run them. Judging however could be comromised but judging is free and some would people will still choose this whereas an open event would have to be paid for.
-
canoecrazy
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:21 am
- Location: Next to the PC durrrrrrgh!
Over the course of the weekend I came to the same conclusion Anne - open events are the first logical step in a direction that would suit me (and I hope others). I have neither lots of time, money or and I do have other commitments, and this is exactly why open's are a good idea. If an open was available at every slalom it would reduce the amount of travelling for the same amount of racing, and depending on the format adopted for the open at the race in question (see below for ideas), more water time. I think the dropping of the levy for opens is a great step - clubs get the cash they need to make up for loss of 2/3/4 etc. However I hate to sound cynical but if they become very popular and hence loss of ranking competitors I suspect a levy will have to return to make income back up.
Judging is a concern, but as you say Anne judging is the "free" option. As I said also I do feel I should put back into this, and I do - actually I judged instead of paddling open at the two races which featured opens this year. This wouldn't always be the case if I paddled less Div 1's though. Many Div 3/4's I've visited over the last few years almost entirely judge with club members. How do Stone/Peterborough manage at the winter slaloms? I think Stone do it purely from club members but they are quite a large club!
A quick scan of the calendar for 2006 shows only a handful of open races, about 1/2 of which were in Scotland. This seems to me that Scotland have already reached their own conclusion that we need more non-ranking races to fit the calendar, because of their limited calendar (or large travelling distances depending which way you look at it). I would commit to putting on an open at our club's slalom - but we already do! I hope other clubs will consider this for 2007 and beyond.
I think if opens are left to develop through organising club's inginuity and preference of their "customers" then it will lead to greater choice. I hope that the exact format of the day will be published in advance. E.g. Open alongside Prem - no free practice, one offical practice, aggregate runs. I might chose to go to this one instead of e.g. Open alongside Div 2 - free practice, no official practice, best 1 from 2. One offers exactly the sort of racing I'm after personally, the other may attract others - perhaps to Mick h's liking?
Another thing that may develop out of Open's are leagues. Perhaps a club will designate a number of local races on the calendar to form their own league. Regional leagues could develop, although these are always difficult because many people live on boundaries of regions (like me - an hour's drive gets me to slalom venues in 4 different regions). I don't think regional leagues should be the total answer as has been suggested, but they can act as a stimulus to paddlers like myself to get out and do that extra race. I realise this could be done now, but it isn't done because we're all in a national league.
Judging is a concern, but as you say Anne judging is the "free" option. As I said also I do feel I should put back into this, and I do - actually I judged instead of paddling open at the two races which featured opens this year. This wouldn't always be the case if I paddled less Div 1's though. Many Div 3/4's I've visited over the last few years almost entirely judge with club members. How do Stone/Peterborough manage at the winter slaloms? I think Stone do it purely from club members but they are quite a large club!
A quick scan of the calendar for 2006 shows only a handful of open races, about 1/2 of which were in Scotland. This seems to me that Scotland have already reached their own conclusion that we need more non-ranking races to fit the calendar, because of their limited calendar (or large travelling distances depending which way you look at it). I would commit to putting on an open at our club's slalom - but we already do! I hope other clubs will consider this for 2007 and beyond.
I think if opens are left to develop through organising club's inginuity and preference of their "customers" then it will lead to greater choice. I hope that the exact format of the day will be published in advance. E.g. Open alongside Prem - no free practice, one offical practice, aggregate runs. I might chose to go to this one instead of e.g. Open alongside Div 2 - free practice, no official practice, best 1 from 2. One offers exactly the sort of racing I'm after personally, the other may attract others - perhaps to Mick h's liking?
Another thing that may develop out of Open's are leagues. Perhaps a club will designate a number of local races on the calendar to form their own league. Regional leagues could develop, although these are always difficult because many people live on boundaries of regions (like me - an hour's drive gets me to slalom venues in 4 different regions). I don't think regional leagues should be the total answer as has been suggested, but they can act as a stimulus to paddlers like myself to get out and do that extra race. I realise this could be done now, but it isn't done because we're all in a national league.