Can we improve any part of Canoe Slalom?

[marcus]

I thought this post might be quite useful for people in touch with Canoe Slalom. Can we improve any part of it?

Some ideas that I thought of:

1. Several Open races for all divisions to take part in and gain points (this would help to increase the number of premier races)
2. Lower divisions need to be more fun - help increase participation. For example, Team runs - great way of socializing. I think double events can be too serious. Any thing else we could do? (new event instead of the team event) (Saturday evening - youth club for the young ones).
3. Coaching weekends (Days)(Small fee)- open to all paddlers from around the country - At various venues.
4. Equipment can be prohibitively expensive - could unwanted equipment be passed on to others or sold at a reduced rate?

These are only ideas! Have you got any ideas? Please discuss and keep calm! We need to look at any problems and try to solve them.

Thanks, Marcus

[djberriman]

Support in terms of equipment from the bcu to clubs (or at least help us get it).

Support for coaches (courses cost quite a lot)

Super slalom (limited gates all out sprint) with free beer at the end as per Grotsky senior cup!

[TobyLerone]

Now we've the legacy of the Olympics behind us, I was just wondering what the plans for these venues were. It's not a rant, just a thought....

From looking at the provisional calendar I presume the reason that Cardiff/Lee Valley are used infrequently is due to the shear cost of running events there? It seems ironic at times that these courses were built for canoe slalom and now the majority of paddlers are not able to race on them during the calendar. Understandably rafting brings vital money to fund the running costs of these venues (and this I accept, as without they'd end up perhaps like Greece), but could they be spared a little more frequent? I understand the water levels/speed are much different from the other artificial courses we have, but for example a division 1 event at Cardiff or the legacy course at Lee Valley?

[marcus]

Yes, Super Slalom sounds good. Maybe only negotiate the down stream gates as quickly as possible (beer at the end if needed).

Or a 'paddles up' competition set at the ability of the division - with various tasks to do on the river against the clock. Nothing to scary! Sounds great fun!

It is a shame that Lee Valley can't be used by slalomist's much because of the costs involved. Maybe hold a Premier, Div 1 and Div 2 event twice a year. Increase the participant numbers and hopefully it can be done. I'm not sure how much Lee Valley costs for a weekend? Or how many race entries would be involved to make it viable?

[Nick Penfold]

I'm not sure how much Lee Valley costs for a weekend? Or how many race entries would be involved to make it viable?

More paddlers = more pumping time, and that's the core cost at Lee Valley. I think the Olympic course costs so much that, at present entry fees, the greater the number of paddlers the greater the loss - you'd never break even. Never viable unless either (a) we charge quite a lot extra or (b) the fairies chip in.

[Simon W]

I don't think the artificial courses are the answer long term. The pumps cost an absolutely absurd amount of money per hour.

In Pershore in Worcestershire they have the planning permission and the finances in place to create an artificial rapid below a new hydro project. It was supposed to be started this year although I haven't hear much about it recently. Such places, if done right, would make good venues for lower division slaloms.

[oldschool]

I quite enjoy;

the 4 at a time slalom sprint (but maybe use faceguards!)

the old Grand Prix style race, 1 run all gates any direction, no penalties but a 50 and your out.

and teamruns.

i wouldn't be too fussed about all division events as I can go and judge at those and have a social weekend anyway.

[jjayes]

The running cost of pumped artificial courses was always going to be a issue not only for races but even more so for training. These running cost will only increase in the future as energy cost also increase to a point where they will not become feasible to operate even for rafting. Rafting in the current economic climate is a shrinking market with most operators experiencing a down turn and the current economic forecast antisipates this to continue.

We already see most artificial courses being very tight on pumping times for both canoeing and rafting and given the fact that slalom training does not mix well with either rafting or recreational paddling, slalom release times are the first to suffer due to the lack of numbers and the minimal income they create. This leaves slalom in a very precarious position for the future where the use of pumped courses will become imposable to finance.

Over the past few years slalom in the UK has given up many natural venues in favour of the artificial courses. This is understandable from a organisers point of view as it is much easier to run a event where most things are already on site and there is not as much to do to run the event. But if we continue to ignore the rising costs and do not concentrate on holding on to the natural and cheaper venues we will have a major problem in the very near future and this needs to be tackled sooner rather than later. Once a slalom training or race venue is given up they become a lot more difficult if not imposable to re-establish.

Without financially viable venues we will not have a sport in the future. This is some what ironic as pumped artificial courses were seen as the saviour of the sport a few years ago. The idea that they will always be viable because of rafting is also proving to be vastly over estimated and it is unlikely they will continue to receive the level of government funding they currently receive to operate in the future.

The answer is to use and improve existing and old venues for racing and training and also develop artificial courses that do not need pumping or use pumps that can also generate power when not being used for recreational purposes. This approach will also have a more positive environmental as well as a sporting legacy for all.

[oldschool]

perhapse these things should have been considered before building artificial courses in the middle of nowhere with no river next to it, or even so far down a river that they are so badly affected by the tide they have to install pumps.

HPP is not perfect but is usually flowing whether any paddlers are on or not. Prime example would be Augsburg, the Carlsberg of training venues. Some water is nearly always avaliable even in particularly dry summers (this one).

[jjayes]

perhapse these things should have been considered before building artificial courses in the middle of nowhere with no river next to it, or even so far down a river that they are so badly affected by the tide they have to install pumps.

Yes these should have been thought of, but often these projects take on a momentum where it is hard to stop and consider all the options and future consequences, nobody planing these venues wants to show any doubts or weakness as the funding bodies would get cold feet. People often have the best of intentions in the planning stages and some amazing places have been built for the sport, but because usually it is public money, nobody seems to really ask the hard questions as nobody personally looses when it does not work out so well.

I think this cost issue was glaring us in the face all along. Funding is no major problem for the a Euro s, Worlds or Olympics racing and training ect, but has the running cost of these so called legacy's really been considered when it comes to the sport that got the places built in the first place? Slalom seems to get sidelined in the end at most of these courses because as a whole we can not afford to pay to use them to the extent we want and need to use them. We need to find a better model for the sport and not make the same mistakes again. Pumping water is very expensive!

[Dee]

Over the past few years slalom in the UK has given up many natural venues in favour of the artificial courses.

This is often stated, but I'm not aware of any decent water locations in the SE. I know that in the distant past there were more slaloms at lower levels and may have been a couple at other Thames weirs, but I'm not aware of significant losses of P/1/2 venues in the last few years and these are the divisions that use the pumped courses. Would be interested to know which sites people are referring to?

[HaRVey]

JJayes has a good point about artificial courses. There is a major issue with these venues and their original use. The major issue being, why haven't they been thought through by those contributing, to write a list of requirements, to the Rafting/Outdoor Company, that is allowed to run the centre.

It pains me to think the BCU have not thought more about this. Very simply, rafting makes money, it makes big bucks!
So why when course are built, are the contracts issued to rafting companies not given terms: e.g.

The Rafting company 'name stated above', is entitled to use the venue in any way that it see's fit and which conforms to Health and Safety requirements, to run their business.
All costs and up keep are taken upon themselves.
As part of this contract, the Rafting company 'name stated above' must also provide the following:

Release/pump 'X' number of slalom session hours per week. (Suggestion average of 5 hours, this can be 3 hours regularly, and 2hrs saved up, which can be allocated in block form in weeks/weekends before a race, similar to how it is for internationals) -

Release/pump 'X' number of hours at a weekend per year. (Suggestion 40 hours) (Equivalent to 4 race days)

At Lee Valley, this actually equates on a ~£400 per hour rate, to £100,000 for the Slalom Sessions, and £16,000 in race day fees.

This seems like a massive amount of money, but is it?
Lets look at the basic business model used for rafting at Lee Valley.

They charge £49 per rafter. The rafter gets 1 hour on the WW course, 1hour before this is spent on the flat/preparation.
They have 8-10 people in a raft. = ~£450 per raft. They can happily run 6 rafts in an hour, have a new set of people every hour, from 9-8pm on a weekend.

In one weekend, they can take. 450*6 = £2700 per hour x 11 hours, = £29,700 on a day, £59,400 on a weekend.

They run rafting for corporate days throughout the week, and have pubic rafting throughout the week day afternoons. If they make only a half day figure in the week. that's £15,000 x 5. =£75,000
So in one average week of rafting they can take £135,000 off punters. In this time they have spent a maximum of 11hours per day, 77 hours pumping water = £30,800 of water pumping.

That's a year long, conservative 5 million pound gross profit business model. If they make half this amount, the business model would be more than attractive enough to require any company tendering to run such activities. Would they think it was worth conceeding 5% of their budget, in before tax concessions to run slalom sessions/races, in an open market they would. And they would also use realise that time can be theirs to run other activities along side, whilst slalom sessions were going on. CPD, First Aid courses, Team building activities, lunch, recreational boat coaching, climbing walls, top ropes, go ape style courses, cross country segwe courses, an outdoor shop, selling slalom/rafting kit etc, etc.

It doesn't take much to work out, that the centre provides a focal point and any good outdoor business would use its facilities to run a variety of activities from it. And slalom, sessions could be incorporated as part of that multi-activity centre.

It just requires the BCU to hold out and say, this is our requirements for our funds/for our sports backing which ultimately brings the Olympic qudos.

That's my view, simplistic it maybe, but it is feasable.

[HaRVey]

I worry that my comments are all negative, and that is not my point, I am on here to move our sport forward.
So I'll stick my neck out, here is my next positive suggestion:

My suggested race calendar for next year 2013

2/3 March -
Tryweryn Prem Qualification
Tryweryn Prem Semi Finals/Finals + Div 1

16/17 March
SheppertonDouble Div 1


30/31 March
Grandtully - Prem 2
Prem 3

6/7 April
Grantully Double Div 1 + Pan celtic


3/4 May
HPP - Prem 4 Qualification
Prem Semi Finals/Finals + Div 1

17/18May
HPP Double Div 1 + Inter Regionals/Panceltic


1/2 June
Tryweryn Prem 5
Div 1

15/16 June
Washburn Div 1 Double


6/7 July
Cardiff Prem 6
Cardiff Div 1


24/25 August
Grandtully Double Div 1

31Aug/ 1 Sept
Hpp McConkey Prem 7 Qualifcation
Prem SemiFinals /Finals + Div 1


28/29 Sept
Teeside - Prem Qualification 8
Prem Semi Finals /Finals + Div 1

5/6 Oct
Llandysul Double Div 1


26/27 Oct
Serpents Tail Double Div 1

3/4 Nov
Lee Valley - British Open/Prem 9 Qualification
Semi Finals/Finals


Total Number of Prems - 9
Total Number of Premier Finals - 5
Total Number of Div 1s - 19



At this point, I would say the slalom committee, DOES need to do more to address this issue. So I have come with a suggestion for people to discuss/criticise.

Clubs/WCA/SCA/ECA all work under the guidance of the Slalom committee. If the ACM/Slalom Committee say we need to put on 5 Championship Prem races, and aim for a Prem each month (lets aim for the first weekend of each month, with a Div 1 on the sunday, (similar to the Stafford and Stone - McConkey Race), but in addition we should also have an A and B finals, so semi finalists get two runs on Sunday.
(Div 1 paddlers can judge on the Saturday hence getting more practice/paddling - Prems who fail to qualify can judge on the sunday, or go home, their choice (I am aware I am not in the best position to speak for these people, but I believe this would be appropriate opportunity and race experience for all, to compare themselves)

This type of race calendar would create a structure for all, and would do more to retain people in the sport.
We would have Prems to inspire div 1's, coach and share their knowledge and experience of an evening/day. at all the championship races and Prems may get into the habit of doing this at traditional PRem/1's

We would have Prem's to demonstrate the best way to do the courses.
We would have more water time for all.
We we would have a saturday evening when most would expect to be close to the race venue, and hence create more opportunity for socialising.
We would not need open divisions, everyone in Div1/Prem could see their level, and their progression, and could easily see the comparable levels of skill.

The events would be more comparable to international format. This prepares our elite who aim to do well abroad. This also provides more obvious racing time for Prem paddlers.

This is better for Div 1 paddlers, they still come and race, but they have an expectation to come to learn something, and that the courses may be tougher, than double div1's (MAY not WILL), this improves ability again.
There is a consistent number of race weekends for Div'1's,
There is a consistent number of races for Prems, not all bunched together.

This framework also provides a structure to put all the DIv 2's, 3's and 4's into as well, giving every other weekend, as a likely time when these races could occur, as well as the odd few being run against div1's/prems as they are already.

So what are the objections?
What do we need to do, to be able to do this?

[kendall chew]

I'm not sure how much Lee Valley costs for a weekend? Or how many race entries would be involved to make it viable?

More paddlers = more pumping time, and that's the core cost at Lee Valley. I think the Olympic course costs so much that, at present entry fees, the greater the number of paddlers the greater the loss - you'd never break even. Never viable unless either (a) we charge quite a lot extra or (b) the fairies chip in.

Nick, what would happen if the faries did chip in? How about a £1.00 levy on all fees, in all divisions to cover the costs incurred. Or perhaps we managed to find ourselves a sponsor for the pumped water events.

[marcus]

1. Maybe we could have a membership fee for Canoe Slalom which could be used towards the cost of water fees in our sport.

2. Also,Is there any way of raising money for water fees. For example, holding a other sporting event at the same time as Slalom - Triathlon. Or any other event that attracts people to part with their money. Craft Fairs??? Canoe Slalom Music Festival 2013??? Something like this. That kind of idea.


Any ideas of raising money?