5.14 Promotion and Points - 2011 ACM Motions

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:41 pm

The committee has reviewed the rules relating to promotion and ranking and propose changing section B.4 and B.5 to simplify

B.4. The Divisional System
B.4.1. Promotion
Promotion is achieved as follows:
B.4.1.1. All Kayak Classes:
Division 4 to Division 3: 1 in 5 Competitors (or part thereof, if quorate)
- In the case of Division 4 K1W, when a Competitor’s score would have gained promotion in the corresponding Men’s K1 event.
- Where two, or more, paddlers are tied on best run scores for the last promotion place from Division 4 then all such Competitors are promoted.
Division 3 to Division 2: on gaining 3300 points from the best four events or maximum points from three events.
Division 2 to Division 1: on gaining 3600 points from the best four events or maximum points from three events.
Division 1 to Premier: on gaining 4750 points from the best five events or maximum points from three events.
B.4.1.2. Canadian Men’s Single
Division 4 to Division 3: 1 in 5 Competitors (or part thereof, if quorate)
- In the case of Division 4, when a Competitor’s score would have gained promotion in the corresponding Men’s K1 event
- Where two, or more, paddlers are tied on best run scores for the last promotion place from Division 4 then all such Competitors are promoted.
Division 3 to Division 2: on gaining 3200 points from the best four events or maximum points from three events.
Division 2 to Division 1: on gaining 3400 points from the best four events or maximum points from three events.
Division 1 to Premier: on gaining 4650 points from the best five events or maximum points from three events.
B.4.1.3. Canadian Women Single
Division 4 to Division 3: on achieving a best run score within 120% of the last promoted Division 4 Men's K1 score at the same event.
Division 3 to Division 2: on gaining 3200 points from the best four events or maximum points from three events.
Division 2 to Premier/1: on gaining 3100 points from the best four events or maximum points from three events.
B.4.1.4. Canadian Double
Division 4 to Division 2/3: on achieving a best run score within 120% of the last promoted Division 4 Men's K1 score at the same event.
Division 2/3 to Premier/1: on gaining 2650 points from the best four events or 2650 points from three events.
B.4.2. Calculating points: Quorate classes
For all Divisions (except Division 4) a class is deemed to be quorate if 5 or more competitors start the race. For Division 4 a class is deemed to be quorate if 3 or more competitors start the race. (See Rule UKC5.1)
B.4.2.1. All Classes and Divisions (except Division 4)
Points are calculated in accordance with the formula:
Points = 1000 - ((position-1) x (1000/No of Competitors))
e.g. in a competition with 32 boats, the eighth placed Competitor would receive:
1000 - ((8-1) x 1000/32) = 1000 - (7x31.25) = 781.25 points,
rounded to 781
All scores are rounded to the nearest whole number. Rounding, at the final calculation only, is as follows:
a) when the unrounded figure is less than .5, round down,
b) when the figure is .5 or greater round up,
e.g. 123.5 = 124; 133.6 = 134; 270.1 = 270.
A paddler who does not finish at least one run gets 0 points. Points are awarded based on the number of starters not the number of Competitors.
Note: Where there is a dead heat (Rule C35.1), equal points are given, calculated for the highest placed such Competitor.
At Division 1 events, the points obtained as above will be divided by two before allocation for both Canadian Women’s Single and Canadian Men’s Double classes.
At Division 3 events, the points obtained as above will be divided by two before allocation for the Canadian Men’s Double class.
Multiple division events will be ranked against the highest corresponding Men’s K1 results.
B.4.3. Calculating points: Inquorate classes
For all Divisions (except Division 4) a class is deemed to be inquorate if less than 5 competitors start the race. For Division 4 a class is deemed to be inquorate if less than 3 competitors start the race. (See Rule UKC5.1)
B.4.3.1. In the event that a Men’s Kayak race is inquorate, the points obtained using the quorate calculation will be divided by two before allocation.
B.4.3.2. In the event that a Women’s Kayak or Canadian class is inquorate, points awarded will be those given to the competitor in the corresponding Men’s K1 event whose score matches the Competitors modified score; which is calculated by dividing by the following factor and rounding down to the accuracy of the event.
Women’s Kayak 1.12
Canadian Men’s Single 1.08
Canadian Women’s Single 1.20
Canadian Men’s Double (Prem/1) 1.10
Canadian Men’s Double (2/3) 1.20
Note: Where the Competitor’s modified score does not correspond exactly with a competitor in the corresponding Men’s K1 event, then the points awarded to the next highest place Men’s K1 competitor will be used. In the event that the modified score matches the score of more than one competitor in the Men’s K1 competition then the points awarded to the higher placed Men’s K1 competitor will be used.
At Division 1 events, the points obtained as above will be divided by two before allocation for both Canadian Women’s Single and Canadian Men’s Double classes.
At Division 3 events, the points obtained as above will be divided by two before allocation for the Canadian Men’s Double class.
Multiple division events will be ranked against the highest corresponding Men’s K1 results.
B.4.3.3. Exceptions for “Super Final” and “Championship” events are outlined as follows:-
“Super Final” events:
Points are calculated against the Men’s K1 qualification result unless the modified score of the Competitor in the qualification round is equal to or less than the score of the last placed K1 Man qualifying from the heats.
“Championship” events:
Points are calculated in the following order:
a) against the Men’s K1 qualification result unless the modified score of the Competitor in the qualification round is equal to or less than the score of the last placed K1 Man qualifying from the heats;
b) against the Men’s K1 semi-final result unless the modified score of the Competitor in the semi-final is equal to or less than the score of the last placed K1 Man qualifying from the semi-finals;
c) against the Men’s K1 final result.

B.4.4. End of season results
B.4.4.1. Kayak Classes and Canadian Men’s Single
Ranking positions at the end of the season are calculated on the best five results obtained in Premier or Division One or the best four results obtained in Divisions 2 or 3 as appropriate.
B.4.4.2. Canadian Women’s Single
Ranking positions at the end of the season are calculated on the best five results, of which no more than three results can be from Division 1 events, in Premier/Division 1, or on the best four results in Division 2 and Division 3 as appropriate.
B.4.4.3. Canadian Men’s Double
Ranking positions at the end of the season are calculated on the best five results in Premier/Division 1 or on the best four results in Division 2/3 as appropriate.
B.4.4.4. Division 4 (all classes)
Division 4 Competitors are not ranked and, therefore, are not promoted at the end of the season, but only at Ranking Competitions during the season.

Mark Shaw · Post by **Mark Shaw** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 6:20 pm

I was concerned initially of the impact this rule change would have on promotion of C1 women from the lower divisions but having re-calculated this years rankings as though this rule change had been in force I can confirm that the impact would have been minimal. This is mainly due to most lower division races not being quorate due to the limited numbers competing so this will have to be reviewed in future years.

Here are the revised rankings for those interested -

Name 2011 Rankings Proposed Rule
Points Rank Points Rank
C1 Women Premier/Division 1
Kimberley Woods 2623 1 4528 3
Jacquelyn Shaw 2553 2 4625 2
Mallory Franklin 2465 3 4889 1
Alice Spencer 2441 4 3656 4
Kate Kent 1623 5 2448 6
Anna Tremayne 1558 6 2652 5
Callie Halliday 1438 7 2319 7
Rachel Houston 1327 8 1629 11
Eilidh Gibson 1001 9 1760 9
Aisling Conlan 526 10 1033 13
Jasmine Royle 491 11 2153 8
Fiona Pennie 470 12 1695 10
Eloise Meakins 385 13 1615 12
Anna-Louise Glendenning 259 14 359 14
Catherine Roberts 187 15 187 15
Leone Glackin NR 16

C1 Women Division 2
Leone Glackin 2927 1 - -
Hana Oliphant 2766 2 2743 1
Bethan Kelly 2640 3 2640 2
Chloe Ellerton 2369 4 2369 3
Kosi Atkinson 2147 5 2129 4
Megan Bate 1877 6 1526 10
Poppy Croal 1694 7 1692 9
Laura Milne 1637 8 1779 8
Victoria Murray 1589 9 1800 7
Chloe Glendenning 1417 10 1927 6
Roisin Lee-Edwards 1106 11 600 14
Isla Kelly 1091 12 1929 5
Georgia Rogers 1000 13 1000 11
Jessica Harding 927 14 927 12
Jade Hollick 806 15 806 13
Stephanie Crowley 528 16 528 15

C1 Women Division 3
Jessica Acheson 3054 1 3054 1
Polly Cook 2101 2 2101 2
Gill Arnett 1524 3 1524 3
Hannah Matchett 1384 4 1431 4
Anne Roberts 1219 5 1219 5
Rebecca Ogilvie 1000 6 1000 6
Frances Watkins 1000 7 1000 7
Mhairi Callingham 695 8 695 8
Amy Howarth 552 9 552 10
Donna Hawkins 409 10 611 9
Carole McGranachan 92 11 367 11
Maeve Woodhouse 77 12 77 12

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:27 pm

Is this right?

Division 4 to Division 3: 1 in 5 Competitors (or part thereof, if quorate)
- In the case of Division 4 K1W, when a Competitor’s score would have gained promotion in the corresponding Men’s K1 event.

Should it not read if inquorate and should there be a time multiplier (by dividing the Competitors score by 1.12) as per C1W in Div 4.

I'd also like to see C2 be based on 1 in 5 promoted in Div 4 and only rely on K1M when not quorate.

Mark Shaw · Post by **Mark Shaw** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:49 pm

Well spotted Duncan. Whoever did the rule tidy up didn't go back far enough and took this year's rules as gospel. The last time a factor is mentioned for inquorate Div 4 K1W promotions was 2010. I assume this has meant quite a few K1W might have missed out on promotion from Div 4 this year if the ruling in this year's yearbook has been followed explicitly.

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:37 pm

actually b.4.3.2 covers it but contradicts the B.4.1.1, B.4.1.2 and B.4.1.3 from what I can see.

I believe they all need to say if inquorate and have the multiplier applier on womens classes.

Should C1W be 1 in 5?

C1W and C2 should also probably say "- Where two, or more, paddlers are tied on best run scores for the last promotion place from Division 4 then all such Competitors are promoted."

Rules mention C2 Mens Doubles, what about Women Doubles and Mixed? B.4.3.2 should probably have gender removed. B.4.4.3 also?

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:47 pm

and if I'm being pedantic I'd say B.4.4.4 is contradictory too...

"Division 4 Competitors are not ranked and, therefore, are not promoted at the end of the season, but only at Ranking Competitions during the season."

Div4's are not ranking competitions!

Ken Trollope · Post by **Ken Trollope** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:05 am

Mark Shaw wrote:Whoever did the rule tidy up didn't go back far enough and took this year's rules as gospel. The last time a factor is mentioned for inquorate Div 4 K1W promotions was 2010. I assume this has meant quite a few K1W might have missed out on promotion from Div 4 this year if the ruling in this year's yearbook has been followed explicitly.

Mark, every 2010 yearbook came with an errata slip which removed the 120% such that it read as the 2009 and hence the 2011 yearbook. It was also published on the website.

This rule applies whether quorate or inquorate.

Rule 4.3 is for inquorate classes EXCEPT Div 4 because it is for points calulations.

B 4.4.4 yes we should remove the word Ranking.

Ken Trollope · Post by **Ken Trollope** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:07 am

I have already noted that the C2 class should have no reference to gender.

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:18 am

As points are not relevant to Div4 4.3 should not mention Division 4, nor should 4.2, Should be made clear not relevant.

Perhaps it would be much clearer if Division 4 was listed totally on their own.

I think the word 'score' in 4.2.1 should be replaced by points (the use of score in other places is I think correct).

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:18 am

<Secretary hat ON>
There will be a statement at the ACM that we want to tidy up all references to class/catogry to be consistent, where this does not affect the sense of the rule, e.g.
Womens C1, C1 men. WHY??

We want to move to ICF designations, except C2 will be non gender specific, so K1Men, K1 Women, C1 Men, C1 Women, C2. This is rife throughout the rule book, as is a mix oc 'class' and 'category'. So if it does not affect meaning of the rule we will do a consistency exercise.
<Secretary hat OFF> :p

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:29 am

Ken - just to be clear you are saying in Div4 that even when K1W or C1W is quorate they are not promoted using the 1 in 5 rule but based on their time compared to K1M, with no factor applied for K1W and 120% for C1W.

Is that how people have been applying the rule? It may not happen often but I wonder if the 1 in 5 rules has been used by mistake.

In Div 4 it seems a little odd that C1W applies a timing factor, as does C2 but C1M and K1W does not.

Some clarification required I think to make it obvious exactly what the rule is

Ken Trollope · Post by **Ken Trollope** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:01 am

Div 4 K1W and C1M

1 in 5 (or part thereof, if quorate ie 3 or more) will be promoted PLUS any competitors whose score would have gained promotion in the corresponding K1M event

If Inquorate (ie 1 or 2) then only promoted if their score would have gained promotion in the corresponding K1M event

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:23 pm

PLUS! That needs to be made clearer.

Still think its very odd timings are applied in some classes and not others. Still this is about clarification rather than changing.

PS. Thanks everyone! Sorry to be a pain!

lesf · Post by **lesf** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:57 pm

re C2 points calculations:

Isn't this changing back to calculating points on positions rather than based on percentages? which is more than just a tidy up?

les