Portable points next season

[suse]

Now the portable points bit I really don't have a problem with, it's just Paddle Up with benefits, but with competitors now having to make 5 races count, and the possibility of single day events, it is increasing the number of slaloms we will have to do to get the points for promotion. It has already had an effect with some families saying they will stop the higher ranked child competing for a year until the lower one catches up, and one family who are giving up next year as they have only ever managed four slaloms a year. I did vote against this, by the way. I've been involved in slalom since 1984, so I've seen a lot of change, but this is the first time I've disliked something enough to veto it. I really don't think it encourages div 3's and I certainly, like most people, don't see that there was a problem there for this to solve.

[suse]

And I do agree that this should all have been finalised before the entries for next years calendar close! How are clubs meant to book a slalom if they have no idea which system they will be running it under? I wonder how many clubs will take a year off to see what they will have to contend with?

[harratts]

If I recall correctly from the ACM I attended towards the end of last season the motion that was passed only gave the Slalom Committee the jurisdiction to look into what the implications would be if Portable Points were introduced and how the existing rules would need to be changed to allow it to happen.

The initial impact would be that all races in the 2016 season would need to be aimed at a single division so it is on this basis that clubs have been asked to make their race applications.

At this stage it is not guaranteed that the Portable Points system will be introduced as every current rule that such a system would affect would be subject to further motions to change them being made at this years ACM.

If the secondary motions are not approved then Portable Points cannot be introduced so I would suggest that everyone who is opposed to the new system being introduced makes representations to their own club committee and / or attends the ACM later this year to have their voice represented.

If these motions are defeated then the 2016 slalom race calandar can continue to have double division events as is possible this year.

I may be wrong in this understanding but if I am then I'm sure that someone more in favour of the revised points system will point it out on future posts.

Why are we trying to fix something that to me does not appear to be broken?
Steve

[BaldockBabe]

Steve, your analysis is spot on.

[Canadian Paddler]

Well . . . . not quite...The motion was:

The ranking system will be amended for the 2016 season to reflect the following principles:
• All slaloms will be run for a single division, except Division 3 / 4 events which will remain to encourage new participants into Canoe Slalom
• Paddlers can compete and earn points in their current division, and the division above
• Points will be allocated on the basis of a maximum of 2,000 in Premier, 1,000 in Division 1, 500 in division 2 and 250 in division 3.
• Points allocation will be based on all ranking paddlers, whether host division or paddle up.
• Points are not lost on promotion, but retained until the end of the year.
• Veterans ranking will not be affected.
The slalom committee is tasked with providing appropriate 2016 rule changes and publishing them before the 2015 ACM.

So the portable points system HAS been approved. It WILL come in next season. The slalom committee is tasked to publish the changes before the ACM, it does not need to take them to the ACM for approval.

So the calendar for next year is being prepared based on portable points.

The only way that Portable points will not come in is if someone puts a motion to:
- Reverse the previous motion, only possible if
- you convince the secratary that there was not an overwhelming vote for teh motion (22 for 18 against and 13 abstentions)
- new evidence has come to light
- That the calendar should be accepted in principal, but kept open for x days to allow some events to become double division events (or triple division events if you think that is importatmt) and then egreed and finalised by ( ) fill in the blank

No motions at the next ACM = 2015 motion quoted above stands and Portable points come in based on the rule changes that the committee will publish before the November ACM. And this has started on teh Canoeslalom.co.uk site. Look there and you can see desriptive text, rule changes and a feedback link

[harratts]

Thanks Colin. I got the sense that this was the approach that was being taken by the Slalom Committee.

However as the debate last year was raging I distinctly remember you making comment to the effect that this motion before the room was not the Yes / No debate it now appears to have been but more of an initial vote on the concept of Portable Points. This would give the committee the opportunity to look at the detail of such a system being introduced and having done so they would put a final decision back to the same group at this years ACM.

Can you please clarify what you said to everyone at last years meeting?

Ta.
Steve

[Canadian Paddler]

Sorry Steve I have no recollection of saying that sort of thing.
So as Secretary I have to go with the words of the motion that was passed. The ones quoted above and the implications above.

[Dee]

So the portable points system HAS been approved. It WILL come in next season. The slalom committee is tasked to publish the changes before the ACM, it does not need to take them to the ACM for approval.

So the calendar for next year is being prepared based on portable points.

The only way that Portable points will not come in is if someone puts a motion to:
- Reverse the previous motion, only possible if
- you convince the secratary that there was not an overwhelming vote for teh motion (22 for 18 against and 13 abstentions)
- new evidence has come to light .......

I happen to think the proposed system could work well and be useful for those wanting more challenging water; it is certainly something we would have jumped at when paddling slalom. It might even reduce drop out rates on demotion. I think it works well from an organiser standpoint too plus it makes it very clear which level the course should be aimed at. (Yes I know double events should be aimed at the higher division, but ......)

Having said that, for those against the above shouldn't be difficult to achieve:
22:18 with 13 abstentions is hardly overwhelming support
The detail of the new rules could be classed as "new evidence" as I think could the issues with race over-subscription this year. Also, some people didn't understand what they were voting for could be conceived as new evidence, though this might be harder to argue.

[Sven]

25% abstention would suggest that the scheme wasnt clear enough for people to be prepared to commit to a yes or no vote

[djberriman]

There is of course a subtle change, under paddle up divisional paddlers points were not affected, with 'paddle up plus' your points are affected by the paddle ups in a number of ways.

Those near the top of the results will get more points (as there are more entries), those near the bottom will get less (as there are more entries) and every paddle up paddler who beats you will effectively take points from you.

Given that paddle ups are filling spaces at the last minute would it not be possible and perhaps encourage them if they were charged the rate in their division instead of the paddle up division? It's always hard to see the effects of a change and the one highlighted by an earlier poster is certainly one, with children in different divisions, one can apply as soon as the calendar is out and the other has to wait to find out if they can get an entry. That makes it very hard for families to plan.

[djberriman]

PS. From what I've read of the new rules you can have a div 2 and a div 3 on the same day at the same place but both courses must be entirely seperate so it's unlikely although not impossible.

[Dee]

Those near the top of the results will get more points (as there are more entries), those near the bottom will get less (as there are more entries) and every paddle up paddler who beats you will effectively take points from you.

This seems sensible to me!

Given that paddle ups are filling spaces at the last minute would it not be possible and perhaps encourage them if they were charged the rate in their division instead of the paddle up division? It's always hard to see the effects of a change and the one highlighted by an earlier poster is certainly one, with children in different divisions, one can apply as soon as the calendar is out and the other has to wait to find out if they can get an entry. That makes it very hard for families to plan.

At the moment paddle-ups can not be accepted until 2 weeks before the race; with the new rules it will be 4 weeks. Until a couple of years ago entries didn't start coming in until about that time so I don't think planning will be that badly affected for most. I think the rates should be those for the host division. Higher rates in higher divisions often reflect the cost of the venues and I honestly don't believe that entry fees have a significant impact on most peoples decision to enter a race (travel and accomodation costs are far more significant).

[pcm]

I do like the idea mentioned by djberriqman. It would help even out the overlaps present between divisions.

[Dee]

I'm somewhat confused as the 'very draft' calendar for next year appears to include a div P/1 and a div 1/2, so not exactly single division. Can anyone enlighten me?

[Chris Baillie]

At Pinkston we run div 3 on 1 pump and div 2 on 2 pumps with gate height adjustment. So the course is the same but the water significantly different. Ask paddlers promoted on saturday from div 3 to div 2 if it is a different.

Last year and this we did not run each division back to back but that would be possible one divison in the morning and one in the afternoon. I would say this could be a div 2/3.

Chris