senior selection - our best lady
A breath of wind cost our best lady her place in the GB team and GB its best chance of medals. Helen's paddling looked so strong and her first result so far ahead of the field. Then a 50 in the 2nd race (that notorious up right below the office) and a cruel wind in the 3rd and its all over. Not sure this is the best result for the country???
Congratulations to all the team, and comiserations to those who didn't make it. It was a fantastic weekend of competition - some spectacular racing from all classes on Sunday.
Big thanks to all who helped at the race, the atmosphere was great, lots of help and co-operation from everyone. Any comments as to how we could make it even better?
Look forward to some good results from the International season.
Big thanks to all who helped at the race, the atmosphere was great, lots of help and co-operation from everyone. Any comments as to how we could make it even better?
Look forward to some good results from the International season.
Well done indeed to all the successful paddlers – exciting racing on tough courses.
A constructive comment though on the selection process, which is surely meant to select the people most likely to win medals at International races.
Being ‘best on the day’ when an act of God knobbles the opposition does not necessarily mean you have a better chance of winning the World Championships. Helen has clearly proved herself in big races and has shown her superior speed in all her races this year. She was certainly our best chance for a women’s medal – just look at her times in all her races this year.
Severe wind and other acts of God, like broken paddles, do not happen often. But I suggest that, in selection races, the paddler should be allowed a rerun if something like that occurs. They should be able to prove themselves under reasonable conditions.
There is a precedent for wind in the HPP prem race aborted by 70 mph winds in 2004, where judges were asked not to give 50s if the paddler went through the gate line. Such a pity that was not applied on Monday.
A constructive comment though on the selection process, which is surely meant to select the people most likely to win medals at International races.
Being ‘best on the day’ when an act of God knobbles the opposition does not necessarily mean you have a better chance of winning the World Championships. Helen has clearly proved herself in big races and has shown her superior speed in all her races this year. She was certainly our best chance for a women’s medal – just look at her times in all her races this year.
Severe wind and other acts of God, like broken paddles, do not happen often. But I suggest that, in selection races, the paddler should be allowed a rerun if something like that occurs. They should be able to prove themselves under reasonable conditions.
There is a precedent for wind in the HPP prem race aborted by 70 mph winds in 2004, where judges were asked not to give 50s if the paddler went through the gate line. Such a pity that was not applied on Monday.
Interesting debate - there is the argument that there has to be a selection process whereby the world championships are a one-off event and there is the pressure that someone has to perform on a one-off basis; so therefore there should be a one-off selection race which simulates as much as possible the pressure of the situation.
Then you can look at the way the sprint and marathon teams are selected. I belive (and Im not an expert) they have a method of continuous assessment based on fitness tests and results in races; but do not necessarily exclude someone because something happens to them in a one off race - case in point was that Ian Wynne's paddle snapped on the start line of a race but he was still selected to go and race at an international regatta. I believe that the marathon team have a much more rigorous process of continuous assessment.
Then you can look at the way the sprint and marathon teams are selected. I belive (and Im not an expert) they have a method of continuous assessment based on fitness tests and results in races; but do not necessarily exclude someone because something happens to them in a one off race - case in point was that Ian Wynne's paddle snapped on the start line of a race but he was still selected to go and race at an international regatta. I believe that the marathon team have a much more rigorous process of continuous assessment.
-
david wilson
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:52 am
It is an interesting debate and there is food for thought in relation to the continuous assessment for selection procedure.
However some of our top paddlers do not always compete in all the UK ranking competitions. They would need to be encouraged to attend and race here more often.
The 2004 race should never have taken place anyway so judges would not have been compromised by the "50" penalties they were told not to give. It wasn't wind it was a GALE and the country had been suffering from high winds all week with the forecasters telling us not to travel unless absolutely necessary. It was a BAD and a DANGEROUS decision to race on that day. Those who were there were lucky not to have been badly injured.
This year's Selection race programme was exciting. The courses were tough and I believe that a lot of paddlers believed they were still in with a chance of the "third boat" position on Monday morning and this carried a high standard right through the weekend. There may be some debate about the scheduling of the "Winner takes all" race and it may be that some thought goes into how that race affected the paddlers after Sunday through to Monday morning. In the J18 Selection programme that race was delayed until the end so everyone believed they still had a chance in the last race and so raised their standard of paddling.
However some of our top paddlers do not always compete in all the UK ranking competitions. They would need to be encouraged to attend and race here more often.
The 2004 race should never have taken place anyway so judges would not have been compromised by the "50" penalties they were told not to give. It wasn't wind it was a GALE and the country had been suffering from high winds all week with the forecasters telling us not to travel unless absolutely necessary. It was a BAD and a DANGEROUS decision to race on that day. Those who were there were lucky not to have been badly injured.
This year's Selection race programme was exciting. The courses were tough and I believe that a lot of paddlers believed they were still in with a chance of the "third boat" position on Monday morning and this carried a high standard right through the weekend. There may be some debate about the scheduling of the "Winner takes all" race and it may be that some thought goes into how that race affected the paddlers after Sunday through to Monday morning. In the J18 Selection programme that race was delayed until the end so everyone believed they still had a chance in the last race and so raised their standard of paddling.
This debate has been going on for years! If we want to select the best paddlers over a season then there would be no need for selection races! Athletes need to be able to handle whatever conditions are thrown at them and adjust their paddling accordingly! I am sure Helen was not the only paddler to suffer due to the conditions! Unless we race indoors with artifical conditions then this will always be part of our sport.
There is no fairer way of selecting the GB team. How would you rather it was done? Coaches selecting athletes? They're obviously going to choose the athletes they're coaching and struggle to be fully objective. As for re-runs, how would that work? How could you prove you missed a gate because of wind or just through poor judgement? And even if you did get selected do you think the ICF would be as generous? In 2002, Elena Kaliska blew her run in the final because she had terrible wind on her run, but no-one was calling for the result to be scrapped or for her to have a re-run. Slalom is a sport that depends on the conditions, and you have to learn to adapt to them. Maybe Helen should have played it safe like Lizzie did in the same up and we might not be having this discussion?
-
Seedy Paddler
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 2:00 pm
I can see the argument for 70mph severe gale force winds but hardly on abreath of wind, should we also include an inopportune boiling of the water leading to a momentary surge as you pass the pole? Full commisserations to Helen but sorry the object is all about results and not what could or should have been! The best result is the one that copes best in the conditions a compromise in outright speed and course cleanliness. Congratulations and best wishes to all selected hope to see you on the winners rostrum.
Incidentally was the 2002 incident a result of the Trent trots ??
"In 2002, Elena Kaliska blew her run in the final because she had terrible wind on her run"
Not too sure if that reads the way you meant it Train2win?
Incidentally was the 2002 incident a result of the Trent trots ??
"In 2002, Elena Kaliska blew her run in the final because she had terrible wind on her run"
Not too sure if that reads the way you meant it Train2win?
Even though i do agree that helen would have done very well for us in the international races this year i feel that we should really be congratulating those girls who did actually get selected for the team. The issue with the wind at the gate could have happened to any of the girls and maybe helen was just unfortunate on the day. Well done to those girls who did get selected and best of luck in the races this year.
I agree, Helen was looking very strong and paddling well this season. Its a shame about the wind. Unfortunetly thats the cruel part about our sport, things like that tend to happen from time to time.
But dont neglect the the other girls, in particular Laura and Fiona, who are very fast and equally capable of performing well internationally. Just look at the fastest single run times compared to Helen from selection results over all 3 days ...
day 1: Helen 112.84+4 Laura 112.22+4 Fiona 113.46+6
day 2: Helen 124.30+52 Fiona 108.51+0
day 3: Helen 134.76+50 Laura 118.20+2
Yes, Helen is very good. But Fiona and Laura are just as fast.
But dont neglect the the other girls, in particular Laura and Fiona, who are very fast and equally capable of performing well internationally. Just look at the fastest single run times compared to Helen from selection results over all 3 days ...
day 1: Helen 112.84+4 Laura 112.22+4 Fiona 113.46+6
day 2: Helen 124.30+52 Fiona 108.51+0
day 3: Helen 134.76+50 Laura 118.20+2
Yes, Helen is very good. But Fiona and Laura are just as fast.