5.11 Making results official on the day; and makin - 2011 ACM Motions

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Mon Nov 14, 2011 9:33 pm

5.11 Making results official on the day; and making the ‘unofficial’ web rankings official.

Proposed by Ribble Canoe Club Seconded By Kingston Kayak Club
Subject to a resolution of confirmation at the 2012 Annual Consultative Meeting, as from the beginning of the 2013 season the results published at the end of each Slalom race, in every Division, will be official, and will be approved as such by the Jury Chair. Those results will be sent within one working day to the Slalom web-site; and the rankings shown there will also be official.
There will be an appeals procedure (to be agreed and included in the 2012 ACM resolution); but the results of such appeals will only affect the result of the appellant: no other paddler will have results changed after the end of the day.
The Jury Chair will be responsible not only for approving the results, but also for ensuring that competitors compete in the correct divisions, particularly on the second day of double events.

Requirements:

1) All organisers will have to use software which calculates the points/promotions in all classes, rather than it having to be done manually. There is software currently available which does this: but it is not the intention to prevent the use of alternative software: but it must produce the outcomes as above.

2) That software will also need to be able to upload results to the web ranking lists in a suitable format.

3) The terms of reference for Chairs of Jury will need to be amended (by resolution at the 2012 ACM if necessary) (a) to establish the above as his/her duty and (b) to include some delegation of powers currently exercised by the Ranking Status Officer, so that where there is doubt paddlers can be allocated to suitable divisions.

4) In view of the changes above there will need to be clarity about the procedures for appointing Chairs of Jury; such appointments will need to be made from people prepared to exercise the functions listed; in view of the increased need for Organiser and Chair of Jury to work closely together it would be desirable for the Organiser to take the lead in the appointment, perhaps from an approved list at higher division events.

5) The Jury Chair will in any case need to be appointed sufficiently far in advance to enable him/her to arrive with all the necessary documentation to carry out this function.

2012 Season:

a) During this season at least six events, across the whole range of divisions, using standard software will volunteer to act as pilots, and will report back on any difficulties.

b) In addition Organisers who wish to use other software will use this season to ensure that it can deliver the required outcomes, and indicate success before confirmation of the 2013 Calendar at the 2012 ACM.

c) The Ranking Officer will indicate before the 2012 ACM whether pilot and ‘other software’ results are coming in suitably formatted for transfer to the web ranking lists.

Nick Penfold · Post by **Nick Penfold** » Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:01 pm

I'd love to see results uploaded directly to the ranking lists, but at the moment the idea is not practical. I keep the (currently unofficial) lists in the form of quite simple Excel spreadsheets, which are not suitable for the job.

This proposal calls for a database - probably MySQL, simply because that's the database software commonly available on webspace.

canoeslalom.co.uk supports MySql, but I don't have the skills to build the database or the upload and report functions needed.

Any volunteers? Be warned, the requirement is not simple. A pretty professional level of skill is needed.

Mark Shaw · Post by **Mark Shaw** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 3:54 pm

Sorry Nick, whilst it is the ultimate aim to have the results uploaded directly to the ranking lists, this was just poor wording on my part as the focus of the rule change for 2012 is to get event organisers using appropriate software so that the results are official on the day and are submitted in an acceptable format for easy publication and updating of the ranking lists.

From the perspective of compiling the C1 Women's results, it would make my job significantly easier if I didn't have to check every result on the assumption that it had been calculated incorrectly (current assumption unless a specific slalom software package has been used). The fact that some of the results are still being sent as scans of a hardcopy isn't good for the sport.

Of course, if there are any volunteers who have the required programming skills then I would love to hear from them.

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:53 pm

Hi Nick and Mark,

The upload feature would as Nick says not be simple but it is not impossible. It may even be possible for it to vet results as part of the upload. It would however be much easier if we could agree a standard upload format/layout at some point or at least could define how each results system in use would provide its results.

I certainly have the skills to do something like this and I know there are others willing to help as well.

oldschool · Post by **oldschool** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 7:39 am

I cant see how this can come into effect until we have a database in place to verify who is eligable to race in which division. otherwise the same problems as we experienced this year at abbey would reoccur with no chance for rectification by the ranking officer after the event.

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 9:50 am

Oldschool

One of the key points of this motion is that the Chair of Jury becomes responsible for this - with the authority to make the necessary decisions which will be binding

So - far less hassle for the organiser

Where there is no web access the Chair turns up with the latest results and rankings printed off, and goes from there

oldschool · Post by **oldschool** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 10:20 am

who provides this info?? the website which is unofficial, or the ranking officers via email.

But why not give this info to the organiser who can then refuse entries of anyone not on the divisional lists. This info could also come via the bib officer as if you haven't applied for your bib your result shouldn't count.

This screams database to me, but i don't have the technical knowledge to do one.

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:37 pm

The aim is to make things easier for paddlers as well as organisers.

Routing via bib officers, etc does not work: it is most usually information from the weekend before that is needed, after the on-time entries have been received; and also the changes between days at double events.

Once the entries are official on the day, it is the intention that the web-rankings will also be official.

2012 is slated as a pilot year; but I tried it out at Sowerby x 2, Washburn x 2, and West Tanfield this year: it works, and is a great help to the paddlers. Only problem came when results not out on time: mainly Rhug.

Whereas for the converse, look at the problems Muchkin had at the Daleks Div 3/4.

Munchkin · Post by **Munchkin** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:46 pm

This would involve the chairman needing to know in advance that they would be chair which I doubt happens often at any event.

I also am not convinced that when a genuine mistake is made that the amended and checked results shouldnt reflect this for all paddlers, not just the one that the mistake is found on. The results are the results whether the mistake is spotted on the day or when the cards are checked with the judges forms later eg Serpents Tail.

Mark Shaw · Post by **Mark Shaw** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 7:13 pm

So what are our real concerns with this motion?

That we haven't got the ability to appoint jury chairs with more than a few seconds notice, i.e. oh ####, the event is about to start, so you over there, you're now the jury chair?

That paddlers are going to get promoted unfairly just because one paddler shouldn't have paddled in that division or maybe held back for an extra race because they didn't quite get enough points (should be covered by the appeal process for the individual concerned)?

That ranking compilers are going to be upset because they don't have to check cards any more or check to see whether a particular paddler should have raced in that division?

That jury chairs are going to be rushed off their feet with all this extra checking they now have to do, or not prepared to do the job because of the added responsibility?

I know I'm biased because I proposed this motion but why are we so adversed to the sort of change that all other sports expect as standard? If someone can name one other sport where results aren't official on the day and available within 24 hours on the web then I will be surprised.

This is only a pilot with the opportunity to back out the rule change at the 2012 ACM if evidence suggests it isn't workable so what do we have to lose?

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 10:21 pm

Munchkin . I think you'll find historically that their are no published official results and that paddlers have appealed to ranking officers some times and got their points amended. At the moment any such changes are not publicised and generally only affect those that appeal - to be honest its only worth appealing if it would affect promotion and thats usually the top 2 - 5 or so paddlers at an event. The only time its possible to get an official ranking without querying with the ranking officer is when the rankings are published at the end of the year at which point you may find you haven't got the points you thought.

John as he says has piloted the extra work that the jury chair would have to do and the only thing that makes it difficult is any results which are published late. Currently there is an assumption they are correct.

Every paddler relies on the unofficial results and points (as there are to my knowledge no published official fully checked fully amended ones) and uses them to calculate their points and if and when they get promoted. All John has been doing is working out who is near promotion using the same data and ensuring that they paddle in the correct division at any events where he is Jury Chair.

As for database - yes this needs a database but I doubt we will ever have a database that is up to date overnight for doubles and we should not soley rely on it being up to date between events - nor is there any need to as John has proved. If it breaks or is unavailable the world of canoeing should not stop.

For those who are interested I'm currently talking to Nick about such a database.

ukkayaker · Post by **ukkayaker** » Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:31 am

Nick Penfold wrote:canoeslalom.co.uk supports MySql, but I don't have the skills to build the database or the upload and report functions needed.

Any volunteers? Be warned, the requirement is not simple. A pretty professional level of skill is needed.

Hello

In regards to the request, I work with MySQL databases and PHP on a daily basis at work.

What are the requirements for the database, just rankings for now? I'm guessing a web interface is also required, would this need to upload excel forms (CSV would be fairly easy to implement for event organisers). Form would be locked down to event organisers.

The structure in it's most simple, reasonably normalised form (this is off the top of my head) could be something like:

Generic tables:
- event (eventid (PK), event name, date, location, etc...)
- class (class, name)
- division (division (PK), name)
- bib (bib, division) - not strictly needed in normal form, but would be a good reference.

Paddler tables:
- paddler (paddlerid (PK), name, club, dob, email) - for email notification in the future?
- paddler_bib (paddlerid, bib, class, division) - required as paddlers can compete in multi discipline's and in the case of C2 with two paddlers. E.g. paddlerid 1 and 2 could then both paddle bib 23 in C2.
- paddler_record (paddlerid, eventid, practise, time1, time2, position, points) - technically points could be calculated, but for now inputed to keep simple!

In it's most simple form this would suffice. Primary keys not needed for upload have not been mentioned above (such as paddler record)!

Naturally this would mean current race print outs could be uploaded and providing a standard format, no work by the event organiser would be required!

Happy to help where I can!

Cheers
Matt

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:23 pm

Thanks for that, Duncan

I have been doing some research over the past couple of days - as far as I am aware we are the only sport which ACTIVELY prevents competitors EVER getting to see official results of the races they compete in.

Orienteers now get their own result on what looks like till-roll as they cross the finishing line - overall time and splits.

Imagine the row if someone wrote to say that the result he thought was United 3 City 2 was actually the other way round!

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Tue Nov 29, 2011 3:16 pm

ukKayaker - I'm going to do some work on a database along the lines you suggest over the winter and hopefully pilot it next year, running it alongside the current systems - I'll be in touch!

John - Clearly last weekend was a figment of my imagination and we did not lose 3-2, I've asked for a transmission check and if not amended I'll be putting in a protest as the first goal was clearly offside, that lead to the oppostion upping their game and getting the next two. Clearly the correct result was 2-0.

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:15 pm

Or you could just throw a hairdryer at someone