Portable points next season

[Sven]

I was a bit confused too Dee

Chris - Dee is talking about venues where the water volume cant be altered - HPP / Treweryn - as far as I know.

Maybe the event organisers havent decided which divisional race to run yet?

[Dee]

Chris. Not sure you could do that under new system as the div 3s could then enter both the div 2 and the div 3 and get points from both as they would officially be two different events!

In any case, I don't think this could be the case for a P/1 at HPP unless they are planning on running an exceedingly long day or having ridiculously low entry limits?

[Chris Baillie]

I agree, that Pinkston is a unique venue in this respect.

[BaldockBabe]

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?

V
Ye, it is a "Very draft" calendar and as the text says HPP events are currently provisional. One of the events you mention is an HPP one, it is not confirmed if if wil be a double 1 or a 1 on one day or a 2 on another day, or, in fact, if it will be on that weekend. The other is TBC as to the format of the event too. Neither will have a 1/2 or P1/ on the same day if PP goes through.

[BaldockBabe]

Maybe the event organisers havent decided which divisional race to run yet?

Spot on!

[djberriman]

I do not beleive Pinkston would be able to run a div 2 and 3 the same day as the proposed rules say that no part of the course may be the same. By just changing the pump number and the heights the course remains the same. The gates are in the same place and you are using the same stretch of water.

It also appears to say you can not run a div 4 or a short course div4 with anything but a 3.

In addition it appears there will be a venue review, thus some places will not get a div 2, which may be 'right' given the venue but this will probably mean no div 3 or short course div 4 either as the economics will be such that it is not viable to run the event.

I forsee a lot of interesting consequences of the rule change.

[djberriman]

D1.1 Planning

Division 3 and 4 events may be combined otherwise every event must be for a single
division only.

Only a single event may be scheduled at the same venue in a day. Where a course can be
erected without reusing any part of the competition course, it is considered a different venue

[djberriman]

UK C6.1.2
A competitor may not enter two ranking events on the same day in a single class.

[BaldockBabe]

D1.1 Planning

Division 3 and 4 events may be combined otherwise every event must be for a single
division only.

Only a single event may be scheduled at the same venue in a day. Where a course can be
erected without reusing any part of the competition course, it is considered a different venue

The calendar does have some 2/4 events and a P/2 event but that is because there are multiple "venues" at these sites so can be held as seperate events. I would foresee that other sites like HPP/ Lee Valley will be used in a similar way.

[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?

V
Ye, it is a "Very draft" calendar and as the text says HPP events are currently provisional. One of the events you mention is an HPP one, it is not confirmed if if wil be a double 1 or a 1 on one day or a 2 on another day, or, in fact, if it will be on that weekend. The other is TBC as to the format of the event too. Neither will have a 1/2 or P1/ on the same day if PP goes through.

Thanks for clarification, I thought it would be something like this but just wanted to check my understanding

[Steve Agar]

Am I right in interpreting rule D1.1 as meaning no more double events at div 1?? So now we get two runs plus a practice for our money and the long drive up and down the country (or countries). Don't forget that many sites have limited water time available, plus limited daylight in Spring and Autumn so free practice isn't a realistic prospect.

I like the principle of being able to paddle-up and get points for your efforts, but if the nominated division has priority, it's not going to either reduce numbers at oversubscribed events or give either aspiring improvers or old swimmers much chance to paddle the water they prefer. Not sure if it'll do anything to reduce the number of inquorate events either, particularly C2 which appears to struggle particularly over the summer.

[djberriman]

I don't think it says that, its says you can't have a div 1 and a div 2 on the same course on the same day. Nothing to stop you having a 1 one day and a 2 the next, or a double div 1 or if you can find another location for a 2nd course a 1 and a 2 on the same day at the same place.

[djberriman]

I've been doing some research with/for Ken re results for next year and the ranking database and realised after some thought I don't need 4 digit bib numbers after all in Simply Slalom results to identify paddlers correctly.

The existing format should be fine as long as PU is flagged for paddlers who are paddling up - which already happens. That alone tells me they are from the lower division and I can link everything together and ensure the points are assigned to the correct paddler and division.

So apologies to anyone who may be working on that one!

There are changes to make to ensure the 5 best results are picked up as points aren't lost on promotion so for a while your points from the old division will count until you finally get 5 better results in your new division.

Promotion code needs modifying to cope with over x points rather than wins but that's not major.

Overall it doesn't look too bad for the ranking database code.

At least it keeps things pretty much as they are and simple.

[djberriman]

I beleive there is an issue with points being retained.

On promotion a Div 2 paddle who acheives 3 results will have a minimum of 1500 points and if done on points somewhere between 2325 and 2800 odd.

This would a) mean the better paddle is ranked lower than the paddler who takes 5 events to get promoted.

It would also b) mean they were ranked higger in the first case than someone doing 3 races at Div 1 leveland coming half way, and in the case of b someone pretty much winning 3 races at div 1 level.

That's based on the just paddling at Div 2 events.

Perhaps I misunderstand the rule, perhaps it means that they keep there paddle up points which makes more sense.

There doesn't seem to be any real incentive to paddle up either, someone who can win at div 2 level has to come half way or above to acheive the same thing in Div 1, rather than 40% which was a hard enough target.

If the rule was you keep your paddle up points then I can see there is more/some incentive

[CeeBee]

I think there will be some interesting scenarios which arise next year depending on how many paddles up compete. For example at Fairnilee, this is currently a Division 2/3. Next year, it will be a Division 2 but I would hope that most of those who would have raced this venue in Division 3 to race this as a paddles up. Whether they do remains to be seen. But they need to do this to get experience of better water as otherwise they are paddling largely on the simpler Div 3/4 courses. This event is rarely full and so paddlers can enter paddles up and plan to attend this event knowing they will get an entry.

I looked at the results from last year for Fairnilee and merged the Div 2 and 3s and calculated their points on the old v the new system. Those at the Top of Div 2 get more points as instead of say finishing 2 out of 20 and getting 950 points, you would finish 2 out of about 40 and get 975 points. It will be important to get the points right for promotion and I think this will be hard.

I think we should let portable points run for a year and assess it after 6 months.

Slalom is all about being able to compete at the right level and progress to the level you aspire to through practice. Like all systems, there will be advantages and disadvantages. It remains to be proven whether the new system is better than the current one.