Fair point on the lack of motivational promotions, but don't you think that the current situation at entry level (div 4) is quite demotivating as well?
At best, only around 40% of div 4's will get promoted in any one season, for the rest you end the season with no points and no ranking. I wonder how many do a couple of races, don't get promoted and then drop out? I suspect quite a lot, although it's impossible to tell as they don't even get the courtesy of being listed on the web site.
The non-divisional system would at the very least give these paddlers the chance to win points and get a ranking. Or at least let's turn division 4 into a proper ranking division.
Only One Division? - Ideas for a single slalom division.
Actually I think sometimes Div 4 (girls maybe more than boys) get promoted too easily.. My daughter having done some paddling with us in her early years, did one div 4 race, got promoted to Div 3 ...which then required BCU membership plus, £9 bib fee...before she had really decided if she really wanted to take it up or felt she had the experience (she was able, but felt she wasnn't and for girls that counts more).....did one Div 3 race....then dropped out.
so making Div 4 a proper division, yes...
so making Div 4 a proper division, yes...
Hi Oldschool.
You responded:
"Not sure that would work flipper. am i going to go to a div 1/2 to get 900 points or a p/1 to get 900 plus say 200? i think the sums speak for themselves, and anyone who can beat even a single boat from the division above is not going to bother racing if they are the top division at a race. especially if its not going to be a counting race if you need 5000 points to get up".
My thoughts: If you are a D1 junior, under pressure from parents and school to get some coursework done for a change, you may choose to go to a local D1/2 for 900 points rather than risk the wrath of your dad by asking him to drive you 9 hours to the other end of the country for a D1/P in the hope of 900 plus maybe an extra 200 points. Oh, and I didn't intend that the higher dive race would not be counting. It would. The point is, there would be a choice of events.
You responded:
"Not sure that would work flipper. am i going to go to a div 1/2 to get 900 points or a p/1 to get 900 plus say 200? i think the sums speak for themselves, and anyone who can beat even a single boat from the division above is not going to bother racing if they are the top division at a race. especially if its not going to be a counting race if you need 5000 points to get up".
My thoughts: If you are a D1 junior, under pressure from parents and school to get some coursework done for a change, you may choose to go to a local D1/2 for 900 points rather than risk the wrath of your dad by asking him to drive you 9 hours to the other end of the country for a D1/P in the hope of 900 plus maybe an extra 200 points. Oh, and I didn't intend that the higher dive race would not be counting. It would. The point is, there would be a choice of events.
No sorry my point about races not counting was that if you up points needed to get promoted to 5000 that a 900 point result will not be of any use to you so you would need to only race at the prem /1 events, or we'll be down to only a possible 4 promotees now were down to 14 races in a season.(on the 3 wins and up rule)
-
alldaypaddler
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 1:24 pm
- Location: Durham
I think I'd agree that we need more flexible divisions, but how about when you go to a say Div 2/3/4 event you can enter in any of those divisions. Or we could just have less divisions, with more people in them. say, 3 divisions. Prem would stay how it is but div 1/2 would be one division and div 3/4 would be another division. That might work better.
And I'd agree with Flyhigh3, it is very easy for girls to get promoted, but its because there are so few girls in the sport , most Div 3/4 events have only a handful of girls, meaning that if you can make it round the course without capsizing or missing any gates, you're likely to win.... and get instantly promoted. So maybe that's an issue of trying to attract more girls into the sport, rather than changing the system...?
And I'd agree with Flyhigh3, it is very easy for girls to get promoted, but its because there are so few girls in the sport , most Div 3/4 events have only a handful of girls, meaning that if you can make it round the course without capsizing or missing any gates, you're likely to win.... and get instantly promoted. So maybe that's an issue of trying to attract more girls into the sport, rather than changing the system...?
alldaypaddler wrote:I think I'd agree that we need more flexible divisions, but how about when you go to a say Div 2/3/4 event you can enter in any of those divisions. Or we could just have less divisions, with more people in them. say, 3 divisions. Prem would stay how it is but div 1/2 would be one division and div 3/4 would be another division. That might work better.
And I'd agree with Flyhigh3, it is very easy for girls to get promoted, but its because there are so few girls in the sport , most Div 3/4 events have only a handful of girls, meaning that if you can make it round the course without capsizing or missing any gates, you're likely to win.... and get instantly promoted. So maybe that's an issue of trying to attract more girls into the sport, rather than changing the system...?
I got shot down last year for suggesting such a thing! apparently the divisions already have too big a spread of ability at present (which on reflection is probably true!).
If there were to be a split i'd hope that prem was made bigger (100 boats) which would (without looking at a ranking list) represent a fair ish split in ability then the rest of div 1 added to the top 100 boats of div 2, with every other ranked paddler in what would be a new div 2. And then just have novice events, which folk turn up to and race if you are in the top 20% your get to be ranked, job done.
And not all girls get promoted too easily, at our race the only div 4 girl soundly beat all the div 4 men without multiplyers and did ok for her first ranking slalom on the sunday!
-
Nick Penfold
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm
(JamesH) At best, only around 40% of div 4's will get promoted in any one season, for the rest you end the season with no points and no ranking. I wonder how many do a couple of races, don't get promoted and then drop out? I suspect quite a lot, although it's impossible to tell as they don't even get the courtesy of being listed on the web site.
The non-divisional system would at the very least give these paddlers the chance to win points and get a ranking. Or at least let's turn division 4 into a proper ranking division.
I like the idea, James, but it's very difficult to manage. Hundreds of people do just one or two Div 4 slaloms and are never seen again - sometimes even when they have won promotion to Div 3. In some cases maybe we put them off - we should think about that - but I think very often they are just having a go at slalom and will move on to try other sports. Access to Div 4 races is very open, and so it should be, but in practice that leaves us with no more information about them than an entry card, sometimes barely legible. The ranking compilers list them all in the Yearbook, and I don't have a problem with including that list on the website if you think it's useful. I do publish all the results I get on the website, including Div 4s.
We tried to run an informal Div 4 points and ranking system on the website about four years ago. It was very difficult: hundreds of competitors, few attending more than 3 races (some due to promotion) and no bib numbers to help putting the data in. And it was none too clear if anyone was actually interested.
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
At the risk of repeating myself (Wot? Me repeat myself?) the complications on this and other threads that we are all wrestling with, arises out of one salient point.
We are assuming that we have to use a Divisional system to do four/five contradictory things:
1) Provide motivation for paddlers to progress (promotion, enabling them to compare themselves with other paddlers over a season, etc)
2) Ensure that there is a correct balance, spread, and quantity of races so that participants can race as often as they can/want to on the sort of water they want to race on.
3) Ensure that paddlers advance through the water-grades at a speed that means they are neither under-challenged nor over-challenged - and therefore do not give up as a result either of boredom or of fright
4) Execute our duty of care in terms of Health and Safety
5) Oh yes, and ensure a supply of judges at races.
I have news for you - there is NO SUCH SYSTEM
No other country even attempts this. And certainly those foreigners who I have heard express admiration for our system - it is because they assume that we have achieved some sort of magic trick.
So we need to turn the whole thing on its head, and ask ourselves how we would meet each of the individual needs listed if that was`the only need for us to look at. Then, provided with our five ideal models, see how they could be combined.
5) Judges.
(a) We could expect the last entries to judge - or expect all paddlers to judge - as we sometimes do/threaten to do now
(b) We could follow the French system - make each Club provide judges in proportion to their number of entries - and before someone raises the dreaded I-word, in France you cannot race if you are not a member of a Club: that is how you get yours FFCK card. Wouldn't work in England? Ask the Sprint paddlers ...
© We could follow the system used in most of Europe and the rest of the world, and make the provision of judges the organisers' responsibility
Whatever the system we choose, the same people would end up doing most of the judging as do now: largely paddlers' parents/significant others who have have had their arms twisted ...
4) If we were serious about Health and Safety we would hardly let Div 1 and Div 2 paddlers take Judges' runs at Prem races, while regarding them as not safe to race in the main event.
This one has the simplest answer: we have a slalom guide-book in the same way that river runners have river-guides, and climbers have climbing guides; and we grade the courses, with a suitable table of descriptors (Sowerby Bridge: Hard V Diff?)
3) No system can do this: but a slalom grading system would help parents and coaches to provide suitable guidance (you were OK at Sowerby Bridge - Matlock is also Hard V Diff - so Matlock would be OK)
2) This where the programme needs to be built up from the bottom, not imposed from the top - groupings of Clubs however constituted try to predict how many events on given standards of water their members need, and where. If nothing else, this would avoid nonsnse like those currently proposed for Shepperton and the Washburn.
1) Despite what has been suggested I am not an advocate of a single-division system: open entry is by no means the same thing.
But once we have liberated this point from its connection with a race programme, issues like a pyramid structure of divisions become non-controversial
We need to look at how other countries do their divisional numbers, and decide which one we prefer. In some case Divisional status governs entry to a few end-of-season races; in most countries divisional ranking has no effect on what races paddlers can do. But even where there are those 'confined' races, they are based on performance this year, not in previous years.
A suggestion: try the exercise outlined above, i.e. looking for separate solutions for each problem, and see where you get.
We are assuming that we have to use a Divisional system to do four/five contradictory things:
1) Provide motivation for paddlers to progress (promotion, enabling them to compare themselves with other paddlers over a season, etc)
2) Ensure that there is a correct balance, spread, and quantity of races so that participants can race as often as they can/want to on the sort of water they want to race on.
3) Ensure that paddlers advance through the water-grades at a speed that means they are neither under-challenged nor over-challenged - and therefore do not give up as a result either of boredom or of fright
4) Execute our duty of care in terms of Health and Safety
5) Oh yes, and ensure a supply of judges at races.
I have news for you - there is NO SUCH SYSTEM
No other country even attempts this. And certainly those foreigners who I have heard express admiration for our system - it is because they assume that we have achieved some sort of magic trick.
So we need to turn the whole thing on its head, and ask ourselves how we would meet each of the individual needs listed if that was`the only need for us to look at. Then, provided with our five ideal models, see how they could be combined.
5) Judges.
(a) We could expect the last entries to judge - or expect all paddlers to judge - as we sometimes do/threaten to do now
(b) We could follow the French system - make each Club provide judges in proportion to their number of entries - and before someone raises the dreaded I-word, in France you cannot race if you are not a member of a Club: that is how you get yours FFCK card. Wouldn't work in England? Ask the Sprint paddlers ...
© We could follow the system used in most of Europe and the rest of the world, and make the provision of judges the organisers' responsibility
Whatever the system we choose, the same people would end up doing most of the judging as do now: largely paddlers' parents/significant others who have have had their arms twisted ...
4) If we were serious about Health and Safety we would hardly let Div 1 and Div 2 paddlers take Judges' runs at Prem races, while regarding them as not safe to race in the main event.
This one has the simplest answer: we have a slalom guide-book in the same way that river runners have river-guides, and climbers have climbing guides; and we grade the courses, with a suitable table of descriptors (Sowerby Bridge: Hard V Diff?)
3) No system can do this: but a slalom grading system would help parents and coaches to provide suitable guidance (you were OK at Sowerby Bridge - Matlock is also Hard V Diff - so Matlock would be OK)
2) This where the programme needs to be built up from the bottom, not imposed from the top - groupings of Clubs however constituted try to predict how many events on given standards of water their members need, and where. If nothing else, this would avoid nonsnse like those currently proposed for Shepperton and the Washburn.
1) Despite what has been suggested I am not an advocate of a single-division system: open entry is by no means the same thing.
But once we have liberated this point from its connection with a race programme, issues like a pyramid structure of divisions become non-controversial
We need to look at how other countries do their divisional numbers, and decide which one we prefer. In some case Divisional status governs entry to a few end-of-season races; in most countries divisional ranking has no effect on what races paddlers can do. But even where there are those 'confined' races, they are based on performance this year, not in previous years.
A suggestion: try the exercise outlined above, i.e. looking for separate solutions for each problem, and see where you get.
Hi Nick,
I absolutely agree that it would be a nightmare to produce a ranking for div 4 as it is currently run, thus totally understand why you don't do it. I'm just wondering whether bringing div 4 into the ranking system would provide more motivation for paddlers in it, given that most of them will remain in div 4 during the course of a season.
This would obviously mean providing a ranking number and a set of bibs as per other divisions. Up to about a decade ago, there were five ranking divisions, thus there should be a spare set of bibs knocking about somewhere, unless they were disposed of when the number of divisions was cut.
I also think that the current promotion ratio to div 3 - one paddler in every five or part of - is a bit too easy. Thus you can have two promotees in a six paddler race at present. However, promotion shouldn't be too stringent. Maybe something along the lines of a win gains automatic promotion, otherwise 2,100/2,400 points out of best three races?
As the division is supposed to be entry level, the most difficult thing administratively is not closing off the division for those that haven't got a ranking and want to come along and have a go. Thus there would need to be a set of race bibs available for new entrants to use at each div 4 race. Once a paddler has raced in an 'on the day' bib, s/he can then make the decision about whether s/he wants their points recorded - if yes, then s/he applies to the bib officer for a divisional bib in the usual way. A bit complicated, I accept, but not impossible to administer.
However, backto the basis point, would a more structured entry division provide better motivation to paddlers in it to compete? I don't know - is it worth testing out in some way?
I absolutely agree that it would be a nightmare to produce a ranking for div 4 as it is currently run, thus totally understand why you don't do it. I'm just wondering whether bringing div 4 into the ranking system would provide more motivation for paddlers in it, given that most of them will remain in div 4 during the course of a season.
This would obviously mean providing a ranking number and a set of bibs as per other divisions. Up to about a decade ago, there were five ranking divisions, thus there should be a spare set of bibs knocking about somewhere, unless they were disposed of when the number of divisions was cut.
I also think that the current promotion ratio to div 3 - one paddler in every five or part of - is a bit too easy. Thus you can have two promotees in a six paddler race at present. However, promotion shouldn't be too stringent. Maybe something along the lines of a win gains automatic promotion, otherwise 2,100/2,400 points out of best three races?
As the division is supposed to be entry level, the most difficult thing administratively is not closing off the division for those that haven't got a ranking and want to come along and have a go. Thus there would need to be a set of race bibs available for new entrants to use at each div 4 race. Once a paddler has raced in an 'on the day' bib, s/he can then make the decision about whether s/he wants their points recorded - if yes, then s/he applies to the bib officer for a divisional bib in the usual way. A bit complicated, I accept, but not impossible to administer.
However, backto the basis point, would a more structured entry division provide better motivation to paddlers in it to compete? I don't know - is it worth testing out in some way?
-
oldandslow
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:11 pm
- Location: Peak District
James if you want to run a Div 4 ranking list - go for it! I offered to do the Officials Ranking List! Silly me! As Nick says, it is very hard to manage! They would love it though, if you have the time. My kids were going through the system when there was a div 4 ranking on the website and it really spurred them on. But I am most definately not offering to do it!:laugh:
Life is what happens when you're making other plans.
Hi oldandslow,
I think you're misunderstanding my post. I'm agreeing with Nick that it's a bit of nightmare producing a ranking list for div 4s at present 'cos they are not within the ranking system, and was musing about whether bringing the division within said system would provide more motivation for paddlers. The effect on your kids when there was an unofficial ranking suggests that perhaps it would be a motivator.
However, having opened this can of worms, I'll give it a go. It'll probably take me a few weeks, but I'll see what I can do.
Meanwhile, is the idea of bringing div 4 officially within the ranking system one worth pursuing?
I think you're misunderstanding my post. I'm agreeing with Nick that it's a bit of nightmare producing a ranking list for div 4s at present 'cos they are not within the ranking system, and was musing about whether bringing the division within said system would provide more motivation for paddlers. The effect on your kids when there was an unofficial ranking suggests that perhaps it would be a motivator.
However, having opened this can of worms, I'll give it a go. It'll probably take me a few weeks, but I'll see what I can do.
Meanwhile, is the idea of bringing div 4 officially within the ranking system one worth pursuing?
We tried to run an informal Div 4 points and ranking system on the website about four years ago. It was very difficult: hundreds of competitors, few attending more than 3 races (some due to promotion) and no bib numbers to help putting the data in. And it was none too clear if anyone was actually interested.
I was the muggins that did this - I started because at the time Forbes was in div 4 (David volunteered, but I ended up doing the work ??? ). I stopped primarily because I was asked to do the prem rankings and didn't have time for both.
Before I stopped I did ask on the boards if anyone found it useful but only got a couple of responses so concluded that not many people were really bothered one way or another.
If anyone felt the need to resurect the div 4 bootlegs......
It wasn't exactly easy but I did automate points calculation and part of the comparison process which helped significantly. Thed latter primarily collated data by comparing names and ages from the results (ages added because, if I remember correctly, there were two people with the same name competing in the division). Of course sometimes James would be Jamie etc and some would change age category during the season :p , So running an eye over the list was necessary.
The hardest part was that half the organisers only sent paper copies of the results so I had to retype all the names etc (this has probably moved on by now).
On the plus side, because they were bootleg and not official, I didn't need to check results lists against cards or worry about those that hadn't sent off for bibs, or been reranked etc. If someone was in the list twice then occasionally I would get an email but it really wasn't the end all.
Kit Washer, Entry Clerk, Chauffeur, Reluctant Organiser, Online Entry Advocate .....
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
-
Canadian Paddler
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
I am not in a position where I feel able to propose a motion on this subject, I am still undecided. Does anyone out there feel that they have a good enough vision that they want to put a motion to the ACM? ??? If so please speak up and get busy. I am happy to help with drafting, but do not have the critical view of how it will all work.
If that produces the normal tumbleweed moment, anyone feel like leading a discussion on this after the ACM? ??? (Not a committee suggestion, or approved, but I will propose this if there are takers). OR just leading one side of the discussion?
If no one will come forward, this will be left and we will continue with the status quo for at least another year. If you want to discuss get drafting help PM me, or post here, or email – my address is in the year book (For those who do not know CP = Colin Woodgate – Proteus/Slalom Committee
).
After Johns Multiple posts on multiple threads, I will be putting similar please on several threads, apologies to those, who this irritates (like me)
If that produces the normal tumbleweed moment, anyone feel like leading a discussion on this after the ACM? ??? (Not a committee suggestion, or approved, but I will propose this if there are takers). OR just leading one side of the discussion?
If no one will come forward, this will be left and we will continue with the status quo for at least another year. If you want to discuss get drafting help PM me, or post here, or email – my address is in the year book (For those who do not know CP = Colin Woodgate – Proteus/Slalom Committee
).After Johns Multiple posts on multiple threads, I will be putting similar please on several threads, apologies to those, who this irritates (like me)
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
-
Nick Penfold
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm
I try to avoid putting the same thing on two threads but responses have been quite thin on the other one so please excuse this duplication. Does it hit the spot for anybody?
My own view is that the ranking system serves us well, but that some flexibility is called for. Here is a compromise proposal that goes some way towards meeting the aim of allowing earlier access to big water without wiping out the advantages of the ranking system.
“One-Up” Racing
A paddler ranked in any of divisions 1, 2 or 3 may enter a race designed for paddlers one division higher - that is, a Div 1 may enter a Prem event, a Div 2 may enter a Div 1, etc. This is to allow paddlers early access to experience at bigger water, more formal events, taking their present ranking as evidence that they should be able to cope with the water.
Paddlers ranked in the higher division will have priority entry until the closing date, two weeks before the event, and then entries from lower division paddlers will be accepted, in order of receipt, up to the limit of numbers published for the event. Paddlers ranked in the higher division and who enter on time should not be pushed out of their own events to accommodate lower-division paddlers seeking experience.
The entry fee will be the same as normally applies to the higher division.
Lower division paddlers in any class will race in the same event as that class for the higher division, paddling before the higher-division paddlers and in reverse bib number order. The whole class will be timed and judged to the same standard. Paddlers can enter events at any level, free, as judges, but sometimes get poorer judging, a bad spot in the programme or have to fit in runs back-to-back. This is to ensure they get a fair deal.
Paddlers racing “one up” will not earn points. The assumption is that they are there for experience. Points taken back to their own divisions would be difficult to compare and would give them unfair advantage.
“One-Up” entry is not allowed at events where the paddler’s own division is racing on the same day and the same course. However (for example) “one-up” entry would be allowed at a Prem/1 event where the divisions are racing on different days.
My own view is that the ranking system serves us well, but that some flexibility is called for. Here is a compromise proposal that goes some way towards meeting the aim of allowing earlier access to big water without wiping out the advantages of the ranking system.
“One-Up” Racing
A paddler ranked in any of divisions 1, 2 or 3 may enter a race designed for paddlers one division higher - that is, a Div 1 may enter a Prem event, a Div 2 may enter a Div 1, etc. This is to allow paddlers early access to experience at bigger water, more formal events, taking their present ranking as evidence that they should be able to cope with the water.
Paddlers ranked in the higher division will have priority entry until the closing date, two weeks before the event, and then entries from lower division paddlers will be accepted, in order of receipt, up to the limit of numbers published for the event. Paddlers ranked in the higher division and who enter on time should not be pushed out of their own events to accommodate lower-division paddlers seeking experience.
The entry fee will be the same as normally applies to the higher division.
Lower division paddlers in any class will race in the same event as that class for the higher division, paddling before the higher-division paddlers and in reverse bib number order. The whole class will be timed and judged to the same standard. Paddlers can enter events at any level, free, as judges, but sometimes get poorer judging, a bad spot in the programme or have to fit in runs back-to-back. This is to ensure they get a fair deal.
Paddlers racing “one up” will not earn points. The assumption is that they are there for experience. Points taken back to their own divisions would be difficult to compare and would give them unfair advantage.
“One-Up” entry is not allowed at events where the paddler’s own division is racing on the same day and the same course. However (for example) “one-up” entry would be allowed at a Prem/1 event where the divisions are racing on different days.