Slalom Struture - The structure of doemstic competition

[andya]

Would be good to try and get more races on at the same place again. ... Could we run a div 3/4 at HPP on the darlecs, or the chicken shoot? Or a prem/1 on the top section with a 2/3 on the lower section and have a div 4 on the winfield pool?

Have a HPP weekend, a Teesside weekend, a Tully weekend, Tryweryn, washburn etc etc, the list goes on, these would be great for clubs to travel to. remove the draw of other events avoid spliting families as the races are all in the same place.

This would also improve the affordability of venues and potentially increase sponsorship potential. 1000 people at an event rather than a couple of hundred...

We're trying to do it with Teesside next year with a prem/1 and a 3/4 if the warm up lake is improved to have some decent flow...

Now that IS a good idea.

Even though its the same site, could even be different clubs running the seperate events ...

Good luck with Teeside Nicky!

[MarvinRounce]

Mega idea Nicky! I think it should be implemented straight away.

[PeterC]

Some thoughts:
- There is a concept of regions seeing Scotland as one. We are all lulled into seeing Scotland as a bit on the top from the BBC Weather map with its Mercator effect. The reality is that Carlisle is only just over half way from Land's End to John O'Groats and for many in Scotland we are well over half way to Nottingham when we get to Carlisle. Much is made of the difficult journey to Tully, we have it every time we go south of the Border, Llandysul is a nightmare journey but we do it.
- We are already seeing some reluctance and concern at traveling in Div 1 in the current financial climate and I do not think the revenues for the BCU would be maintained with less races, indeed we have effectively seen an increased proportion taken in levies this year. Fees may have to increase and this is clearly uncomfortable at the present time and the result unpredictable.
- While the calendar is challenging for the timing team we should not see the activity limited by this but rather strive to increase the support for this essential activity- one bit missing is that some of us have to work weekends and inevitably this comes first (also applies to paddlers and limits numbers of competitions they can attend)! I for example work at least two in every five weekends - and unless you can persuade patients to be ill nicely during the week only, is not going to change! I believe that there has been a slight surplus of offers to work for the timing team over those that have been taken up, hopefully this will continue and suggests that this should not be a limiting factor.
- I do see a log jam developing particularly at the top of K1 Div 1 Men where it seems that there is a slowly increasing number of paddlers chasing the small number of results that will support promotion with the result that they are shared out such that it is getting harder to get promoted. This is hopefully not a biased view as my son is one of the three so far this year to gain promotion from Div 1 K1M.
- I do not see a need to 'protect' Prem from demotion, the current top promotee from Div 1 last year is currently ranked 5th in Prem which hardly suggests that they should not be there or will find it difficult. So far none of the demotions from Prem last year have manged to get promoted again and they have been trying!
- A reduction of the number of Div 1's will exacerbate the log jam effect as there are less promotion points available and the overlap between the top of Div 1 and the bottom of Prem will increase and for these reasons I would caution against it. Failure to achieve justifiable promotion will not have a positive effect on paddlers. From a mathematical model point of view if the number of Div 1 races is reduced then there should be a reduction in the promotion points required.
- Reducing the number of Div 1 races will in any case cause issue with the time available to race and see the probable introduction of more entry closures if numbers rise.
- There seems to be much less of an issue in the other disciplines.

There is I am sure no perfect answer but just as we need to hang on to racing in Scotland to support the sport at all levels there is indeed a similar need to do the same in the deep south. We would also perhaps do well to remember the old adage that variety is the spice of life. :rock:

[Munchkin]

- There seems to be much less of an issue in the other disciplines.

In the polo league you are expected to attend 4 tournaments out of 5 over a period of 6 months.

In sprint there is a national event around once a month during the summer.

In freestyle there are around 8 events in the year (some junior, some senior, so clearly you wouldn't attend them all).

For marathon I have no idea how to interpret their calendar so I can't comment on them!!!

For Prem paddlers they have 9 - 11 events in the year.

All of the above have more regional events which people can attend if they wish but do not form part of the national league. For all of the above we are VERY successful on the international scale.

My point?

Firstly I expect that people make an effort to attend the events because they "only" take up one weekend a month, they can plan holidays, training, weekends with family etc around those competitions.

Secondly the number of national competitons does not seem to affect our chances of success internationally.

As a paddler I think we have too many events. I think people will make more of an effort to attend events if there were fewer of them. The sport will cost less for each of us if there are fewer events. I even think that people will improve as they will have more chance to train. I hope that parents will get some of their lives back!

As a member of the timing team who works very hard week in week out with others who do likewise, many of whom do not only work the weekends that you see us working at but in the days and weeks leading up to events I seriously object to the comments that have been made above. I, and the others, will be at all the events we are needed at (no matter what is decided) even if that means spending this Saturday afternoon driving to Cardiff for a 1 day event that none of us will be competing at. If you want to put the blame on someone, try someone else.

[Spitt]

There doesnt seem to be much consideration given to the impact on clubs of these potential changes. I am thinking of clubs who may not be heavily active in slalom any more but have historically organised a specific event for a long time. Major changes may make them revisit the benefits to them of organising the event at all since it appears that only larger Div 1/ Prem events make a surplus.
I wonder if all clubs that have slalom paddlers or organise a slalom event should be specifically asked for their input. Without willing organisers any new proposal will fail.

[djberriman]

Munchkin,

Not sure how you can take offence from the posts that mentions the timing team, one suggests that we could consider they are not used at Div 1's - a point worth considering like any other, mine suggets the timing team should have more members to reduce the strain on individuals and the other is in a similar vein.

I can not see anything that blames the timing team for anything. I am sure no offence was intended by any poster.

Sadly as all too often on here offence is taken where non is intended - it makes having a discussion difficult. One reason I've been keeping off here of late.

Duncan

[Flipper]

First, I must declare my interest. Which is, with a very small bunch of mates we are doing our level best to prevent the sport of slalom from collapsing to nothing in the London/SE/S regions, and following the SW down the pan.
CW's paper is a good discussion paper, but a strategy for our sport needs to tackle the crunch issues of entry level participation, and retention of youngsters. Without feeding newcomers in at the base we lose not only the elite performers of the future, but also their mums and dads who are the future backbone of our clubs, administrators, helpers, even possibly coaches. No enthusiastic adults, loss of events. (We have just lost Loddon 3-4). No events means no way to get newcomers onto the ladder. No newcomers, clubs wither and die. So the downward spiral starts its viscous spin. But turning it round is also achievable. It can be done and it must be a priority for the sport. One committed, enthusiastic leader has made the village of Llandysul as successful at producing as many prem paddlers over the years as the whole of the London/SE/S regions which has a thousand times as many youths.

So lets see a strategic objective for slalom to be rebuilding the numbers seen in the glory days (so I'm told). For sure any examination of the numbers says we should aim to TRIPLE the participation levels in the regions that I know about. 2012 should be the catalyst to get this started, we have a rare opportunity.
But to follow that through the sport must be accessible. ACCESS IS ALL. That means accessible events - at least up to Div2 level, probably Div1 too. Accessible training sites. Access to coaches at different levels. It works. The kids and their parents easily get hooked. But if they get to Div2 and find the nearest races are two hours away, while a full season means 6 hour drives each way, it's too much too soon - I have lost too many promising paddlers with supportive mums for this single reason.
So ACCESS IS ALL. A strategy for slalom must address the different needs, capabilities and problems of each region. I don't see how this can be done by a national committee, we actually need regional strategies to underpin the aspirations of the stalwarts driving forward the development at the elite end.
Enough. Sorry to go on, but losing events at any level (Shepperton) burns a hole in my heart and pulls the rug from under our efforts.

[PaulBolton]

For financial reasons, I much prefer double events, but I do appreciate that for many reasons this is not always possible. However, would it be possible to have a non-ranking Div 1 practise event on the Saturday followed by a Div 1 ranking event on the Sunday? I'd see the clubs keeping the majority, if not all, of the revenue from the practise event and coaches (if available) being on hand to help those keen to perfect crucial moves or simply develop. I'd allow anyone (from any division) to enter the practise event (2 runs, stopwatch timing, no section judges) and I'd run the practise event as late in the afternoon as possible to allow as much controlled/coached practise as can be fitted in. Competitors would judge. Water time would increase a lot, home advantage would be diminished, those from non-slalom clubs would get coached from locals familiar with the water and I think the overall standard of competition at the ranking event would improve. Hopefully, the organising club might make a few quid too. Obviously, would only work at certain events, but could be a welcome addition - I'd certainly favour events that offered it.

[CeeBee]

The sport has a variety of different paddlers whose needs should and can be catered for e.g.
1. Those who start slalom as juniors, are hooked, have
committed parents and wish to proceed through the rankings – they will attend as many events as possible
2. Full time athletes training in Canoe Slalom – top premier paddlers
3. Those who participate for fun and usually only attend those events within reasonable travelling distance e.g. working adults and recreational paddlers
4. Those who participate but are selective which races they attend e.g. for financial, work or other sport constraints

In terms of Premier, I think it is a good idea to try to have increased participation at each race but again, there are difference groups within premier that need to be catered for e.g. British Team members who are racing abroad and those that aren’t/can’t race abroad. I would have thought it can be quite motivating for a paddler not in the British Team to win or get a prize at an event when the best are overseas.

I don’t think it matters if there are lots of Division 1 races on many types of courses so long as we cater for the different groups and locations of paddlers across the length of the UK - and we have organisers who are willing to run the events. Although some site are not perfect they are the best we have got in that region.

You need enough events at Division 1 across the UK to give paddlers (and family) choices. The paddler can choose to attend as few or as many events as he wishes.

For instance, just because there may only 40 men racing in Division 1 at a race such as Grandtully, this still makes this event worthwhile for those 40. It is instrumental in enabling Scottish paddlers who fall into groups 3 and 4 to retain an interest in slalom. It also lets paddlers in Division 2 race as without the Div 1 the Div 2 wouldn’t be run.

As a parent of a paddler in Division 1, more double ranking races are attractive from not only a cost perspective but also for experience racing on Tryweryn and Nottingham. If we are going to travel 5 hours to Nottingham, we may as well have 2 races. If paddlers are going to travel long distances to Grandtully, they may as well have 2 races.

If the concern is that more races leads to more promotions, then there must be ways to address this rather than reducing events.

If the concern is that there are fewer paddlers at some races, how much does that matter at most events? It doesn’t make much difference to the paddler as they get points based on their relative position. It isn’t making much difference to clubs either as they are still requesting to run Division 1s.

If the concern is that there are too few volunteers e.g. judges and timing team, then we need to look at whether there are other options e.g. limited/no Section Judges at Division 1s and/or no timing team. As an organiser, I appreciate having both a timing team and Section Judges – they make the event far easier to run but also accept
that they have a lot of events to cover.

If the concern is that some courses are easier than others, does this matter? To me, this lets some of the less experienced paddlers newly promoted to Division 1 to adjust slowly to harder water in this Division and stay in the sport. The best paddlers still win.

[PeterC]

Munchkin - As Duncan correctly notes no offence was intended in respect of the timing team or section judges who all do stirling work.

I am however concerned at the simple maths of the K1M Div 1 where if there is a reduction in races we will as the rules currently stand potentially create a logjam making it more difficult to gain promotion when there is not clear separation of the top paddlers in the division.

There are currently 126 (or something around this with bibs) in K1M Div 1 and on average about 50-60 will currently attend any particular Div 1 race. If you decrease the number of races the number at each race will probably rise and as average travel distance must of necessity rise (the average distance between courses must rise with less of them) the costs will actually probably go up not down and getting everyone down in good time will also become more challenging. More attendees will also challenge local accommodation and rates will potentially rise. There will also be less competitors taking part directly from home on average - yet more cost.

The sport needs to be more accessible not less and while I have no enthusiasm for trekking down to London and the South East I have great sympathy for ensuring that races are accessible at as many levels as possible locally - even there.

Course do vary and Abbey Rapids this year was but a trickle compared to the flood last year but many enjoy the 'natural' courses as part of their calendar and do not wish just concrete trough racing. You must therefore take the rough with the smooth.

I am not arguing for more Prems however I do think limiting Div 1's would be a negative move for many reasons not least for the reasons already discussed here.

What is positive is that discussion is taking place and hopefully some reflection upon the various views expressed.

[Canadian Paddler]

Ok folks, having let the discussion run without knee jerk reactions I thought it time to become less popular. These comments are a personal reaction.
If I fail in an attempt not to become defensive, please excuse me, I intend no insult to anyone.
Thank you all for the positive contributions to the discussions
Firstly, this is not intended to be the be-all and end-all of strategy papers. I took on the strategy role at the ACM, and started doing operational things, then moved to tactical (this document) with the aim of moving to proper strategic things as time permits. I do not believe in doing nothing about current issues until we have a full strategy for the next 10 years. If that is what is required, then fine, but it may take 10 years of volunteering to get a paper…
This paper is intended to deal with issues such as those vehemently discussed at the ACM, given the current divisional structures, what are we trying to do with each division, what are the constraints and so what should the requirements for a managed calendar be.
Below I repeat some of the comments raised and my reactions. (if I have not responded to a point of yours and you want my reactions pm me, it does not mean that I have ignored them, some are self evident and will be included, if I have reacted to one person more than another, perhaps its my view of the quality of their points)

Why not start by looking at what the paddlers are there for

This is vital for a strategy to support slalom, but I felt it too big, and too important to risk getting it wrong in a tactical paper. If you have not made your reasons for paddling clear PLEASE go to Nicks site and record why you do slalom.

Possibly a third category of paddlers who enjoy competing and paddling the tougher water but do not want to put in the time to progress to prem. Not necessarily ageing!

OK so I got in trouble a year or so ago by suggesting that not all div 1 paddlers are fiercely competitive trying to get to prem, remembering with affection the ‘div 2 dossers’ of yesteryear that seemed to be in div 1 at the time. So I thought I would rephrase it, to us old codgers. Sorry I realise that there are some who are young and happy where they are. Please accept my apologies if the ageist statement upset you, but there is a (IMHO) sizeable body of paddlers, in all divisions, happy where they, are competing against one another and not being bothered by promotion. OR if theyt are bothered it is to avoid it (see OLDANDSLOW postings recently.

it looks like no more Div 1 at Llandysul or Abbey Rapids

If you thing that they cannot meet “Other sites may be considered if they can provide the correct level of difficulty.” and you are willing to say so, then I know a few people that will disagree. The same applies to Sheppy. I omitted these sites only to try to avoid having a discussion of if they would match the level of difficulty and to look at the overall aims and picture. Failed again.

Finally it seems a great pity that any alternative system is simply dismissed with a one line statement. Surely if we are going to have a strategy and costs are going up, disposable income going down we should at least look at alternatives to the 'painful' pyramid system and simply have an open ranking system. That way there is no painful promotion or demotion

The line says ” There is a separate discussion over the use of the divisional system to protect paddlers from being overly challenged, and whether this holds back paddlers unduly. This open approach to entries is not considered here” It does not say that it has been dismissed, it says there IS a discussion, but that it is separate.

Would be good to try and get more races on at the same place again

I enjoyed those races, even running the div 2 on the graveyard (yes folks div 2) when there was div 1 on international and div 3/4 on the campsite. And splitting HPP for 1/2 and 3/4 was also fun. All we need is for the applications – over to the clubs /organisers

but a strategy for our sport needs to tackle the crunch issues of entry level participation, and retention of youngsters …2012 should be the catalyst to get this started, we …

Agree 100% any long term strategy MUST get people in at the bottom and keep them. Comes back to my postings at the top, this is not the final strategy, merely a tactical structure document.

OK that is enough, far too long a post, congratulations to those who got this far, PLEASE keep the discussion going. We do need to understand where we are, so that we can set the next steps going in the right direction. Not sure where the next document will go, but (hopefully) it will be longer term rather than tactical, it’s not long to 21012 and we CANNOT miss the opportunity, and must co-ordinate with SCA/CanowWales/CanoeEngland/BCU

[Flipper]

ACCESS IS ALL.
Looks like the debate is focussing on the issue of access to the sport at every division below Prem.
We are all grappling with variations on the same issue, surelythe responses can/must vary region by region.
TTTigers (Grrrr!) sure know how to deliver the sport in the NE
Gareth has an amazing track record in South Wales
CeeBee speaks wisdom from Scotland.
.... and so on......
Looks to me in my niaive innocence that if ACCESS is the challenge the best way to meet this is "region" by "region".
Not BCU "regions" (the sport is too small to divide up so much) but something bigger like "super regions", e.g. London+SouthEast+South+SouthWest.
How about each of these "Super regions" being given the authority and responsibilty for managing their own calendars up to Div1?
Then we can be tasked with building our regional "pyramids" to provide that steady stream of entrants to Prem where the real serious stuff kicks in.
I agree with Nick that it's a big ask to organise the calendar around an aim that ALL Div1 paddlers should be enabled to get to ALL Div1 events. Cycling doesn't work like that and that's a successfully run sport. The overriding consideration is ACCESS, especially for schoolkids. They rip through Divs 4-2 in 18 months and it takes time for their parents to adjust to the shock of driving 8 or 9 hours London-Tully, camping in the ice then getting back for work on Monday. So why not charge the "super regions" with putting a sensible ladder in place (all divisions 4-1), accept there may be some clashes (event organisers can talk to each other and minimise this), accept that standards need to be maintained/monitored (& at Div1, policed firmly by national committee so promotion to Prem is even handed).

[andya]

"super regions" for D4 to 1. Yep, really like that.

Freeing up the Slalom committee to a role focused on Prem and internationals, rules and collating the "super regions" inputs into the yearbook.

Works for me.

[Fup Duck]

I'd like to see it done more sensibly. Looking back at the calendar this year I saw a few events a week apart i.e. Fairnilee - Abbey Rapids, Howsham Weir - Abbey Rapids.

I'd be more inclined to make the journey if there was a sensible gap between.
I can't justify taking time out of education week in week out, to give children an equal chance of competing in a sport they are committed to. I also can't believe this is considered to be beneficial to all youngsters taking part in the sport.

[Dee]

driving 8 or 9 hours London-Tully

That's going some. I know Google thinks you can do it in 8.5 hrs, but it is almost impossible not to get caught in traffic somewhere on route and by the time you've stopped for a break (remember "driving when tired can kill").....

Seriously though, I like the idea of super regions for calendar planning. I think this would work really well for divs 4 to 2 and 50% of div 1.

Bearing in mind that it makes sense for some div 1s to be run alongside prem. My suggestion would be that the central committee organise a draft calendar for prem races and associated div 1s to the existing dead lines and then the regions take over to organise their own calendars with a maximum of two additional div 1 races per region. Regional drafts to be published by mid August, say, which enables regions to negotiate on clashes etc and finalise by ACM.