For discussion: Motion 5.12 - Separate water and course grading

[John Sturgess]

5.12 The establishment of separate water- and course-grading systems:
Proposed by Green Star .............................................................................Seconded By Green Star
Aim of the Motion: To provide assistance to paddlers, clubs, coaches and parents to make informed choices of suitable events to race at; and thus to carry out the sport’s Duty of Care to its paddlers

Part 1: Grading the difficulty of water at slalom courses
In order to enable paddlers to make informed choices of suitable events to race at, and to
fulfil the sport’s duty of care, there should be a published system for ranking stretches of
water to be used for slalom races according to the difficulty of water that will be experienced
- showing the range of possibilities where different water levels might be experienced.
These rankings should be published in the Slalom Yearbook, and the relevant ranking or
range printed with each event in the Calendar.

Part 2: Grading the difficulty of courses set on slalom courses
Separate from the above, Yearbook Calendar entries for multi-division slalom events should
use a scale to indicate the difficulty of the courses that will be set.
The ACM strongly requests the Slalom Committee to ensure that both of these grading
systems are published in the 2011 Yearbook.

[John Sturgess]

Nick Penfold says -

5.12 Water and Course Grading
A good idea in principal, but there are practical problems. Difficulty varies with water levels, but also with course design. Conventional grading takes account of how easy it is to find a way down the river, but we change that when we hang slalom gates.
And is there a legal risk here? Could we be at fault because we had said a course was relatively safe and on the day it was not?
I don’t see how these issues could be resolved in time for the 2011 Yearbook, let alone the actual gradings.

[Nicky]

i like the idea of this, but who is going to set the grading?

organisors as they know what they are going to set, or someone central so there is an unbiased view?

All this before we need to get the yearbook issued...

I think if it goes through it will need to be for next year.

Nicky

[Dee]

Is this actually proposing that the course set has to be graded in the year book. This would I think mean that the course design would need to be submitted with the event application and I can't see that happening especially on sites where changes to water levels mean that the course needs to be designed late on.

[Andy Vet]

Why not post videos on Youtube as a guide to the river at each slalom. Something similar to the BCU training videos, so that people can draw there own conclusions on whether to compete there or not. It will limit litigation issues if subjectivity is removed and will also serve to promote the sport and events.

[oldandslow]

It could indeed be very subjective, unless done by one person. I know for a fact that Dave Brads idea of a div 2 course is considerably different to mine! : 0