ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

General slalom chatter...rant about the bad, rave about the good
Post Reply
Canadian Paddler
Posts: 1480
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
Location: Peterborough
Contact:

ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by Canadian Paddler » Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:03 pm

Proposed and seconded by Stafford and Stone Canoe Club.
In an attempt to make races fairer for travelling competitors in Premier and Division 1, and to reduce the temptation for parents to remove children from school early, gates will not be positioned until Friday afternoon before the race. Recognising that manpower and location may make this difficult, lines may be positioned, and gates prepared on the bank in advance.
C20.4 The course must consist of a minimum of 18 gates and a maximum of 25 gates, of which 6 must be upstream gates.
UK Where appropriate, for example at weirs where some of the course may flow in an upstream direction, the maximum number of upstream gates may be exceeded, provided that the spirit of the rule is adhered to.
UK At Premier and Division 1 competitions gates will not be positioned until Friday afternoon before the race, lines may be positioned, and gates prepared on the bank in advance

CeeBee
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:12 pm
Location: Falkirk

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by CeeBee » Wed Nov 07, 2018 1:09 pm

I would prefer this motion to differentiate between Prems and Div 1s.

Paddlers will often travel on the Friday for a Prem race to get some water time before the course is set as each course is so different so it is beneficial if paddlers know what time the course is set and that this is not before 4 p.m. on the Friday.

For a Division 1 race, paddlers are looking to improve their skills through free practice of the course as this gives them more experience on different water, improves their result and makes them feel better racing and so more likely to continue. I think Div 1 courses can be set on Friday morning to allow practice in the afternoon.

It would be useful for each organiser to publish the course construction time to help paddlers and parents plan the races. May be this could be included on the application to run a slalom form and published on the Canoeslalom website.

WindsorCC
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 8:22 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by WindsorCC » Wed Nov 07, 2018 5:08 pm

Firstly it strikes me that the reference to Prem could be removed, as there's no free practice anyway so as soon as the course is erected there should be no competing paddlers on the water?

I'm then in two minds re Div1. I support the motivation to discourage parents taking children out of school for practice, but equally for those who can take time off, and for races during holidays, it's helpful to be able to do a session on the Friday given the amount of time spent traveling, and on potentially unfamiliar water.

The issue will be that you can't expect organisers to leave practice gates up in the morning take those down, then set the course Friday afternoon, so it's likely there will be no gates up beforehand.

I'm also aware that it puts extra pressure on organisers as they have a small window, at a time when many volunteers will be at work, to get the course set. So I'd be interested to hear organisers thoughts.

Dee
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 8:34 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by Dee » Wed Nov 07, 2018 6:46 pm

I agree that this puts extra pressure on organisers. Setting courses on a Friday afternoon may not always be practical.

Perhaps restrict such that six, say, gates cannot be placed until Friday afternoon rather than the whole course
Kit Washer, Entry Clerk, Chauffeur, Reluctant Organiser, Online Entry Advocate .....
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!

lesf
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 5:15 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by lesf » Sat Nov 10, 2018 9:51 pm

Friday afternoon is a little vague and will be interpreted differently by different organisers. Some may have everything set up and ready to slide out at 12noon, so the course is still available relatively early, while others will start later.

I suspect the length of your journey is more of a consideration when thinking about taking children out of school than anything else. If they have a long journey it's still likely that parents will take children out of school early to travel and get there mid to late afternoon in the hope of getting some practice or even just a chance to see the course in daylight (or just to avoid the worst of the traffic!).

Patrick O'Hara
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 1:07 pm
Location: Bedford

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by Patrick O'Hara » Tue Nov 20, 2018 8:03 am

As a Div 2/3/4 organiser this proposal doesn’t impact me directly but I do have concerns that it limits an organiser flexibility. With an often very limited resource pool the organiser should be given as much flexibility as possible. Organisers should not be forced to take time off work to build a course on Friday that could have been done on Thursday evening. In addition I don’t see how this proposal would be policed or what sanctions would be applied if it was breached.

djberriman
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by djberriman » Tue Nov 20, 2018 11:53 am

As others have said Friday morning would seem a reasonable compromise for Div 1.

This motion seeks to make things fairer but may actually have the exact opposite affect as there is less opportunity to paddle and the likelihood is there will be more paddlers on the water when the gates are available.

WindsorCC
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 8:22 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by WindsorCC » Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:05 pm

My other thought is that it potentially gives local paddlers even more of a home advantage on some courses.

Given a short time window for course erection it's unlikely practice gates will be left up until the last minute then swapped for race gates, they are most likely going to be taken down several days beforehand, making it quicker to get the course up.

Therefore those arriving on the Friday morning (not all races are in term time, not all of us are in school and many juniors at Div 1 level get authorised absence to get to races) have no gates at all until the course goes up in the afternoon.

Locals are likely to have practiced gates in the final positions, just by the nature of them training there regularly and doing every possible combination.

Perhaps Thursday evening is sensible for the final course setting?

Jasper
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 12:44 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by Jasper » Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:22 pm

If this suggested 'New Rule' cannot be policed or enforced / the penalties for any breach of it are not included within the motion then is there really any point in it being introduced?

Dee
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 8:34 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by Dee » Tue Nov 20, 2018 3:33 pm

It's not unheard of for clubs to to the bulk of the course set up on whatever night happens to be a club/training/coaching night as this is when the most help is available. Those people available on a Friday afternoon are already busy with setting up comms etc, so where do we find the manpower?

I'd be more supportive if it was a minimum of 6, say, gates cannot be placed until Friday allowing at least 12 gates to be put up earlier in the week.
Kit Washer, Entry Clerk, Chauffeur, Reluctant Organiser, Online Entry Advocate .....
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!

JimW
Posts: 570
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 2:17 pm
Location: Pinkston

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by JimW » Tue Nov 20, 2018 3:38 pm

Of course it is difficult for people to arrange time off to set the course, but they generally have to anyway. Courses without permanent gates take longer to erect than those with them etc. etc.

But a lot of the opposition to this seems pretty petty to me. When I first read it I had similar thoughts, and then considered it more throughly and realised that most of my concerns were irrelevant.

For Scottish champs my course designer arrived at 2pm on the Friday and with a small team of volunteers we pulled in the training gates that people had been using in the morning, changed to race poles on the bearers to be used for the race, set up independantly adjusted poles on baler twine (admittedly in some cases shortcuts were taken requiring the raising or lowering of the bearer for the height of one of the poles), adjusted the heights of many bearers and even untied and untangled 2 bearers (these took longer than the entire rest of the course setup) before we could re-attach and set the gates on them. All on what is possibly the widest course curretly in use in the UK (i.e. takes a long time to pull gates out and in). The race is run in line with prem rules so there was no practise. The course was ready long before dark for paddlers to have a look at.

Thinking about other div 1 and prem courses, most have permanent bearers, quite a lot are on artificial courses where the gates have to be left clear to the side the day prior to the race because other groups will be using the course. And the proposal says that the gates can be hung to the side in advance ready to pull out into place on friday afternoon so this does not prevent largely erecting a course from scratch (Washburn?) in the evenings with a minimum to do on Friday to position the gates. Of course, with no water until Saturday there is no real reason not to fully erect Washburn courses anyway - no-one is going to get any free practise time no matter how early they arrive, but the proposal would not allow that.

As far as local knowledge goes, this is always going to be a factor and is why paddlers should race as many different venues as they can to build a skillset that works everywhere so they are not too disadvantaged when it isn't their regular venue. The bigger issue is suspicion that in some cases course designers leave gate combinations that want to use up as practise gates in the weeks leading up to a competition to see how they work, and inadvertently giving local paddlers extra practise on those sequences, but at the end of the day it is always going to be hard to dream up a sequence that no-one has ever practised before (well done Chris Kevane, I'm sure no-one had ever practised gate 6 on the Tees Prem or Div 1 courses this year!).

djberriman
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by djberriman » Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:22 pm

I'm just not sure what this motion is trying to acheive.

As others have said local paddlers will enivatably practice sequences that will be all or part of the course. It would therefore seem to put travelling paddlers at even more of a disadvantage.

There is nothing to say training gates can not be positioned in exactly the same place until the race gates are put out. Indeed what is to stop a paddler pulling the gates out once the course is erected?

It doesn't take into account holidays and paddlers who are not at school, I also don't think we are here to decide what parents do.

There will always be someone advantaged at a race and those disadvantaged that is the nature of the sport and why we race a many venues both man made and artifical.

Nick Penfold
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by Nick Penfold » Fri Nov 23, 2018 12:50 pm

I'm just not sure what this motion is trying to achieve.
There are clubs that put up the course several days ahead to give their own members lots of practice time. This can bite them in the bum if the water changes, but usually it increases existing home advantage.

I think that for Div 1 "the course must not be available for practice before midday on the Friday" would be specific (as rules should be) and allow a sensible practice period for those who can get to the site the day before the race.

Canadian Paddler
Posts: 1480
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
Location: Peterborough
Contact:

Re: ACM Motion 6.4 Course Erection

Post by Canadian Paddler » Mon Nov 26, 2018 9:09 am

Amended to read
C20.4 The course must consist of a minimum of 18 gates and a maximum of 25 gates, of which 6 must be upstream gates.
UK Where appropriate, for example at weirs where some of the course may flow in an upstream direction, the maximum number of upstream gates may be exceeded, provided that the spirit of the rule is adhered to.
UK At Premier and Division 1 races the competition course will not be available before midday the day before the race.
The amended motion was adopted with 56 votes for, 13 votes against and 9 abstentions.
All spelling errors are intentional and are there to show new and improved ways of spelling old words. Grammatical errors are due to too many English classes/teachers.
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points

Post Reply