Restructuring the divisions

[JimW]

It seems to me as a relative newcomer to slalom that there are a number of issues that have built up presumably over some time:

- In-season promotion has caused div 1 to fill up
- In season promotion means that good paddlers don't stay in division for a whole year, which means others have less chance to learn from them
- Upshot of second point is that standard in the lower divisions might not be as high as it could be
- It may or may not happen, but paddlers could seek out easy events to get fast promotion before they are properly ready. I won 2 div 3 C1M races at Alva last year by beating moat of the div 3 K1M as the only C1 (K1M only quorate on 1 day!), but at Stone this year I was 6 and 8th out of 8 C1's. I know which results I consider more realistic, I could have accidentally got myself promoted before I was ready, so it would be possible for others to do it deliberately.
- Older competitors keep telling me stories of when they used to have division 2 and 3 races at venues now only considered suitable for div 1 and prem, so I guess there has been some easing off over the years?
- Missing out on Talent ID puts a lot of youngsters off, I have had parents and coaches explaining to me how the kids see not making a squad as a huge barrier to progress. In fact it isn't and I'm sure most of us know of a few examples of top level racers who have never been in Talent ID, but it is difficult to get a youngster who isn't part of the special club to see it that way.

I'm sure there are others, and I know Dave Bradshaw is working to get division 2 races back on better venues so its not all doom and gloom.

Then again, I was chatting with parents on Saturday to see if their kids were entering HPP (I can't remember if any had decided) and they seemed quite cautious because they thought it would be too difficult , and I had to explain that Dave's entire rationale is to set out a course where the gates are easy so the challenge comes from the water rather than the gates, giving div 2 paddlers a chance to race on more powerful water, before they get to div 1 and have to tackle the power and difficult gates all at the same time. I really hope the message is getting out there that the course will be designed for div 2, and not just a case of letting div 2 loose on a div 1 course.....

[JimW]

On the question of the divisions overall competitive quality there are obviously some serious issues. I realise this is only a snap shot and more events need to be taken into account but with just a quick look at last weeks premier event at Lee Valley it can be seen how quickly performance tails off as you look down the result sheets.

http://www.canoeslalom.co.uk/results/09 ... alleyP.pdf

The gaps between the first place and the 20th place in
C1 men was 20 seconds,
LK1 26 seconds for top 20,
MK1 15 seconds for top 20,
C1 Ladies 41 second for only the top 10.

It may well be a idea to keep this in mind as numbers in different premier or possibly Div 1 classes are established as it appears many are struggling on Premier level courses from a competitive point of view.

Jim - you got me wondering why this is the case, is it simply that we are producing rubbish ladies (I train with some and that doesn't appear to be the case to me), or are there other reasons.

With exceptions, age is a general guide to physical strength so can we learn anything from the ages of the top 20 in each class at that event?
C1M: J14 = 0, J16 = 1, J18 = 5, U23 = 9, S = 5
K1M: J14 = 0, J16 = 0, J18 = 6, U23 = 7, S = 7
C1W: J14 = 3 (3xPU), J16 = 8 (2xPU), J18 = 5, U23 = 4, S = 0
K1W: J14 = 0, J16 = 3, J18 = 7, U23 = 7, S = 3

It looks to me as though K1W are slightly younger than K1M, but C1W are quite a lot younger than all other classes.

Is this simply due to a shortage of ladies participating across the divisions, or is it failure to retain them past about 18 years old?

Re-structuring ladies prem is not going to magically produce extra 18-23 year old paddlers, however badly the mens divisions need restructuring....

What we actually have is 14 year old girls (possibly as young as 12?) in C1s taking on courses designed to challenge adult men in kayaks - in that context they are doing incredibly well!
The individual paddlers are amazing, it is the size of the class that puts it on an uneven playing field and makes the class look weak.

[Debs]

It's a difficult problem and being a non paddler I wouldn't no where to start.
As a parent I have concerns about the speed at which juniors are coming up through the division's. To me it's far too quick. Particularly from 2 to 1. To me the point of a divisional system is that paddlers work their way through the division's building up their skills and more importantly their bodies to be able to cope with the more difficult waters. I fear that some of these juniors are going to suffer bad injuries as they have not built up the strength to cope with the water power. We have seen it already! Since the introduction of the talent squads the pressure on the kids to perform has been greatly increased particularly due to the age criteria and them desperately wanting to keep their place. Don't get me wrong I think the talent programme is a good idea but I think it needs restructuring to allow the kids to develop at a safer pace.
I always remember a piece of advice given to me by a parent who's child was promoted from div 2 to div 1 after competing in only div 2/3 races. That child was severely injured when competing at div 1 level and needed surgery, and no longer competes. They advised to take the time to do some div 1/2's before getting promoted as the change in waters was a big step. I did just that and slowed my child down.
It may sound as if I've gone off topic but bear with me!
If we want to produce a sustainable stream of junior paddlers I believe that restructuring the divisional system and the talent squads would be a good idea. We need to slow down promotion and invest more time in nurturing the juniors. After all without them there will be no sport!
This would relieve the pressure on the top divisions, where there are fewer races.
Having more races is probably not going to happen, after the price increases over the last few years at Cardiff, Tees and now Hpp it seems that if anything we will see a drop in higher division races rather than an increase!
Making the races tougher from 4 up to 1 and making it harder to get promoted will mean a reduction in promtee's and also relieve the pressure on the higher divisions.
This will probably mean in the first instance that yes there will need to be some promotions and demotions from the divisions which may be upsetting to some, particularly juniors. But for the future of the sport the decision makers need to make some very tough decisions and will need our support and input to do this rather than our criticisms. We need to look at the sport as a whole rather than from what will benefit us individually.

[boatmum]

I think that is very well said Debs

One of the issues is the multitude of different assertions about what slalom wants and needs. - I think this thread admirably demonstrates the diversity.

I think a proper survey which is useful for all stakeholders (sorry to use jargon but I think we all understand stakeholders) is required to put together a meaningful survey that delivers some concrete data. Im not being funny but I had a look at the British Canoeing survey about the next 4 years and honestly the questions asked were not really about canoeing and outcomes but more about how I felt about how I had been told things - most of which I was completely unaware of - I didnt complete it . Meaningful surveys need to be put together carefully and ideally by professional survey compilers who have been given a proper brief about what information is needed.

Once the data has been properly put together that should provide a starting point for all stakeholders (there it is again) to input into a restructure. Yes this would require a bit of funding and yes there would need to be encouragement to get paddlers to respond (I doubt here would be a good communication media as I think very few paddlers read this ) but I believe it would be worth it. We don't know what resources are available to the British Canoeing Slalom Committee or whoever could be asked to lead such a project but I think we really do need hard data about what really motivates paddlers now. The old models have changed I think. - Just thoughts

[BaldockBabe]

As a parent I have concerns about the speed at which juniors are coming up through the division's. To me it's far too quick.

This has only got worse with paddle ups and will get even worse (in my opinion) with portable points.

[davebrads]

I always remember a piece of advice given to me by a parent who's child was promoted from div 2 to div 1 after competing in only div 2/3 races. That child was severely injured when competing at div 1 level and needed surgery, and no longer competes.

I am generally in agreement with what you are saying, but I think we have to be careful when attributing cause of injury to weak paddlers on bigger water. I am not so sure that this is necessarily the case. I am assuming that we are talking about a shoulder dislocation, since that is the most common debilitating injury in the sport. I have seen a strong fit male paddler get his first shoulder dislocation on a division 2/3 course, and he was already a division 1 paddler at that time. He did continue to compete but was constantly dogged by repeated dislocations which prevented him achieving all he might have done. Admittedly shoulder dislocations occur more often on bigger water, but I don't think that it only affects weaker paddlers. In fact I think that some of the dislocations that have occurred are due to the paddler being strong enough to pull their own shoulder out! At the end of the day some people are going to be more prone to shoulder problems due to differences in their physiology, and they probably need early diagnosis and physiotherapy treatment to prevent the injury occurring in the first place.

However I do think that a steady progression in the challenge provided by the water is good for the development of the paddler in that they are then able to develop good technique while paddling on water that is within their capability, so there needn't be a rush to get them racing on big water. Ideally they should begin to be introduced to that water long before they start racing on, it but in a controlled way without the pressure of racing.

[Debs]

Yes it was a shoulder injury and I know that strong paddlers get it too it can happen to any paddlers however experienced they are. But my main concern is what this pressure is doing to the bodies of still developing adolescents when they fly through the division's. That's not forgetting that they also have the pressure of choosing options, studying, exams etc... after all an athletic career is very short and they need to be reminded of this. At the end of the day each individual parent knows what's best for their own child. But I believe to have a sustainable sport we have a responsibility to ensure we nurture these children and not focus on quick results at any cost.
A survey of paddlers and there families, clubs and coaches opinions would be a good idea.
If a restructure is needed, which I think is fairly obvious, then it would be better to address all issues in one fell swoop. It needs doing as soon as so that there is time to work out solutions and put forward ideas before next season's decisions are made.

[Nick Penfold]

(As the bloke who tries to manage the divisions) I think Dave is right - Div 1 is a bit too big - but not nearly by as much as he suggests, and what we need to do is a lot less drastic. Not every paddler wants to go to every race, even if there were enough places, and if you downsize the divisions to the point that every race has a place for every paddler what you'll get is undersubscribed races that won't break even.
Yes, promote some more to Prem, where there is some space (that's the downside of the pyramid) but you do have to watch the standard.
The big problem is promotion from Div 2. The targets are not that hard to achieve, and there are a lot of races available to anyone willing to travel - some Div 2s do 20 or more races in a year. Too many get up each year, and then have short season protection, so we can't demote the weaker. My money is on increasing the promotion targets. I would certainly put the C1 promotion target up to equal the K1 target - I'm not sure why it's lower, anyway- and I think I would push the targets for both to 4600 points.
Contain the numbers promoted into Div 1 a bit and you start the next year with a bit smaller Div 1: over two years you'll get to manageable numbers without swingeing demotions that drive people out of the sport.

[Dee]

I think a lot of the issue with div 1s is down to "panic buying". Everyone expects races to fill up, so they book in asap, and hey presto, they were right. Couple of months later they realise they can't compete that weekend, demand their money back and we start to back fill from the waiting list (only to find that many of those on the waiting list have since made other arrangements).

One option, which I'm sure has already come up is to not accept entries until 3 months before, say. Although this creates other problems.

Another, is online booking. One of the things that people said they liked at Sheppy was that once entered their name was immediately added to the entry list. What didn't come up but, I think would when paddlers are used to it, is that at any time it is easy to see whether or not a race is filling up. Potentially this could reduce panic buying as if you can see that there are plenty of places still available. To achieve this we don't actually have to have online booking but we would need to display entry lists that are always up to date which is harder to achieve any other way.

[davebrads]

But my main concern is what this pressure is doing to the bodies of still developing adolescents when they fly through the division's. That's not forgetting that they also have the pressure of choosing options, studying, exams etc... after all an athletic career is very short and they need to be reminded of this. At the end of the day each individual parent knows what's best for their own child. But I believe to have a sustainable sport we have a responsibility to ensure we nurture these children and not focus on quick results at any cost.

What you are talking about is covered in the coaching syllabus, it is called Long Term Athlete Development (LTAD), but there is little evidence of it being put into practice by some of the coaches.

[harratts]

My feelings are that too rapid progression through the divisions is more of an issue in some classes than in others. I would like to suggest that the order in which this is more prominent is as follows;- C2, C1W, K1W, C1M and least of all K1M.

Could this be as a direct result of the number of entrants in these classes at most races?

The way that ranking points are awarded at the moment means that so long as 5 people enter, then someone regardless of their ability, will be awarded with 1,000 points at the end of the day. The other issue created by such an approach is that when there is more than 1 stand out entrant in any class, only one of them would be awarded with sufficient points that would be high enough to count towards their promotion into the next division.

As the K1M's class is always chorate (I stand to be corrected if this has ever not been the case), would a better approach be to award points for all other classes relative to the performance of the paddlers in those classes when compared to the K1M's division as they currently are when any other classes are not chorate?

If progression in any class was then thought to be too rapid the allowance given for these other classes could be reduced. Such a system could mean that several paddlers from any given class could achieve the full 1,000 points from their race (if they were good enough) therefore removing the need for the current Paddle Up option at the same time.

Progression through the K1M's divisions could be controlled in the at Nick has suggested by adjustment to the total number of points required to gain promotion. Why should this be different to go from 3 to 2, 2 to 1 or 1 to Prem.? Does having different levels not by default create the bottleneck we have experienced in K1M's division 1 during the past few and current season.

I would be happy to submit this as a proposal for inclusion at the next ACM if people thought it was a good idea but would need the formal backing of at least one club before it could go forward for discussion.

Any thoughts?
Steve

[Sven]

Does anone know the history as to why the fastest K1m time is used as the base point for percentages and how the percentages were arrived at?

Does anyone know what the original rationale was behind different promotion points across the divisions and the what the original thinking was behind how the treatment for incorate classes points came about?

Knowing the original rationale might be helpful to unpick how to go forward and could potentially help avoid unforeseen issues.

I suspect a lot has changed since the original rules were put together so seems sensible to have a look.

[NotNowKato!]

As the K1M's class is always chorate (I stand to be corrected if this has ever not been the case), would a better approach be to award points for all other classes relative to the performance of the paddlers in those classes when compared to the K1M's division as they currently are when any other classes are not chorate?

There might be something in this from a performance point of view.
If you look at the Div 2 C1W Races ( as there seems to be concern about the ease of promotion in the class) so far this year the majority of them have been inquorate (5 vs 3 quorate). Of the ones that were quorate, only 1 winning performance would have produced 1000 points against the adjusted K1M time.

[JimW]

As the K1M's class is always chorate (I stand to be corrected if this has ever not been the case),

I'm afraid you stand corrected

At the last Alva race last year Div 3 K1M was inquorate, my unfactored C1M time was faster than both lads, one of whom was promoted the previous day, and the other had his slalom boat on order and was still racing in a creek boat. The rules allow for this by halving the points available to other classes measured against it - so my win was only worth 500, and not counted as a win (I was the only C1M - it certainly didn't feel like a win). Most of the K1W were awarded 500 points too - remember you only have to beat the second place K1M after corrections to get max points, some were outright faster than the top K1M, some faster after correction, and some faster than 2nd place.

Had K1M been quorate, I could have got promoted completely by accident at West Tanfield last year after just 3 ranking races - if you check my results since then, you will spot that I really am not quite ready yet, although I do want to paddle some slightly harder courses in C1!

I'm sure this is not the only time it has happened, there must have been a reason for adding the half points rule originally.... (or good foresight?)

There is a huge shortage of div 3 C1Ms in Scotland (I think I count 3 of us, and one of them may not race C1 this year - his brother didn't even know he had a C1 ranking), if I stick to Scottish races they will generally be inquorate unless they attract paddlers from further away, I would guess the 2/3 races will do that, but 3/4 won't? I haven't even looked at div 3 C1W.

[Debs]

It appears that we all have similar concerns about 1) division 1and the current structure of the divisions? and 2) juniors propelling through the divisions too quickly or not as the case maybe?
Rather than us all spending however long debating this and then it being too late to get our concerns across to the slalom committee for it to be discussed and hopefully dealt with for next season, can someone bring it to the attention of someone on the slalom committee???
Maybe we could all ask our respective clubs to put this on their agenda's for their next committee meeting?
That way if the slalom committee do decide to put together a survey then each club will be prepared to put forward their suggestions on this.
I think we can all agree at least that the division 1 problem (specifically) is not going to go away by itself.