Is it time for some outside the box thinking?

[Steve Holmes]

Disclaimer here - nothing I type is intended to criticise anyone. I know that everyone is a volunteer trying to keep this sport going.

We're a few weeks into the season and to my (albeit untrained) eyes cracks are appearing. Div 1 entries are well down on 2 years ago (Llandysul had 36 K1M at the weekend vs 64 two years ago) and already 3 div 2 races have gone. When you take into account the fact these div 2s were relatively accessible for paddlers in the North of England (Fairnilee and Matlock) coupled with the fact that last season there were no div 2 races in the North and the only races in the Midlands were at the Southern end (Nene and Cardington) it probably isn't a surprise that the sport is really struggling in the North.

So can anything be done to keep things moving? Can the calendar cope with quick adaptations if events are cancelled. A shout out on the Slalom Site saying "xxxx div Y race on this date is cancelled - can anyone else run a div Y race on that date instead?"
Can we double up divisions more? As Matlock was cancelled why would it not have been possible to make Llandysul a Div 1/2? We could still charge the higher entry fee and say that the "paddle up" division is waiving prizes, but it would at least get them some proper points and keep some motivation going.
Could we say that if a paddle up is quorate then it becomes a proper race for that class? Some stipulations needed - such as this is not allowed if there is an alternative race for them that weekend, and again with higher entry fees and no prizes (unless they would have won them in the higher division). There were 15 div 2 K1W paddling up at Llandysul on Sunday, almost as many as the 20 div 1s, and more than the 12 K1W currently entered for Shepperton div 2 this weekend)
I'm not sure how numbers will pick up in div 3 and 4 after the initial optimism from Stone and Symonds Yat, but entries for Marple are currently low with less than 2 weeks to go.

I know that the right time for all of these ideas is the ACM but it just strikes me that maybe something needs doing sooner rather than later.

[JimW]

I think all those div 2 cancellations were situations out of the organisers control and quite unavoidable.

Believe me you are not alone in spotting the holes these leave in the calendar, and even without an official system in place people are already considering what they might be able to do to restore things. My past experience, and admittedly it was mainly last year when everyone was trying to scrape races together in the wake of covid issues, is that BC slalom do look favourably on offers to replace events that have had to be cancelled.

There have already been discussions within Scotland about possible alternatives for Fairnilee - I haven't heard anything more for a week or 2 and have no idea if plans have been presented to the slalom committees for consideration yet, but when I was asked my view I considered them completely feasible especially with the backing that had already been offered. So keep watching that space!

If anyone is thinking about trying to replace a cancelled race my advice would be:

• try to stick to the same weekend because it has already been approved for that division, in some cases you may also need to be in the same region
• have a quick discussion within your own club as soon as possible to find out if your main helpers are interested/available/supportive
• contact BC slalom with an outline of your proposal, citing which race you are offering to replace etc. If you are in Scotland or Wales don't forget to also contact your own slalom committee, technically you will need the go ahead from both (BC for ranking status, own nation for liability)
• follow up with a risk assessment as soon as you can if the response is positive, which I'm sure it will be
• make a provisional booking/enquiry with landowners etc. as soon as you can - if you have to pay for your site, make sure you know the last date to cancel for free

The problem with making div1/2 events is that it explicitly forbidden in the rules at present and would probably need an ACM motion to change - the fact that the circumstances that lead to it have changed may be a mitigation. Similarly adjusting the paddle up to full status is a rule change, and possibly a challenge for the scoring and results systems, which I have already put under pressure last week in preparation for Pinkston! Dave and Dee have done a marvellous job in altering things so that our already sanctioned race can score properly since a particular anomoly was revealed (it's always us damn vets!). But apart from the basic issue of lack of sites, I think it is possible under the current way of working to replace lost events like for like so I'm not sure we need to think too far out of the box? Or maybe I'm wrong and we do.

Div 3 and 4 are always very late entering and I know that around the country clubs have had different success in bringing people in over the last 2 yerars, but I have to say they are looking fairly strong in Scotland too. I think Alva had about half a dozen entries a few days before the race (including me as an official), but ended up with 50 (lots doubling up in C1). Pinkston is currently looking low in div 3 (div 2 is exceeding my expectations at this date) but again, there will be a flurry closer to the date, but also some div 3 paddlers find Pinkston a bit scary so we don't expect to maximise potential there, and some of our own still need to get promoted to div 3 at Aberfeldy! So I'm not yet concerned about numbers, ask me in 3 weeks time if I'm still as relaxed!

[djberriman]

The problem with 1/2's is it inevitably meant the course was made easier to accommodate the div 2's, Div 1 races in comparison were harder.

I don't personally see the need for 1/2's.

PU paddlers can enter if there are spaces - better for ranked div 1 paddlers as it stops div 2's blocking div 1 entries with limited chances to race.
PU paddlers get points - the only thing they miss out on is prizes
The race is set to a div 1 standard
Entries are prioritised to those at the top of Div 2.

Other than prizes I don't see what a div 1/2 offers other than an easier course.

[djberriman]

Of course there is probably no reason you can't run a div 2 at the same venue on the same day. Just don't call it a 1/2, adjust the course for div 2's. This is what happens at Pinkston for instance. May have to check the rules on that but I can't see any reason why not, that way the course can be set for each level appropriately.

Replacing events at short notice is pretty impossible, too many things to organise, access is often limited, releases confirmed, other events booked, volunteers at other events or coaching at other events, doing something else, camp sites and accommodation already full. Can't say it can't be done but it's nigh on impossible unless the team organising the original event are willing to do it with a little local help at a place that can organise access/camping and all the rest very quickly.

[harratts]

Sorry Duncan but I disagree and think that there is much to be gained from the reintroduction of Div. 1/2 events.

There is no requirement to make the course easier than it would be for just a Div. 1 event. The recent Symonds Yat races were testament to that! Thanks Mike Mitchell.

Top end Div. 2 paddlers could previously challenge themselves on the harder combined Div. 1/2 events before being fully promoted into Div. 1 so that the step up in course difficulty could be better understood and managed.

This I was able to do with my eldest son but not with my youngest who had to make use of Judging runs to gain such experience instead. Not everyone wishes to Judge.

Combined Div. 1/2 events were only removed from being possible due to the very high number of active Div. 1 paddlers who wanted to compete at that time.

If active Div. 1 Paddler numbers have now dropped, then surely this previous decision COULD be reconsidered if any club wanted to put it forward as a motion at a future ACM.

Just my thoughts.
Steve

[Steve Holmes]

So my thought was not to offer div 1/2s as standard (though they would almost always get quorate paddle ups at least in K1 so this would happen under one of my other thoughts...)
Duncan - yes, paddle ups do get points, but taking this past weekend at Llandysul as an example. Helena Nabili (who has to travel miles to get to races and will have been hit hard by the cancellation of both Fairnilee races) scored 190 and 150 points as a paddle up as opposed to 500 and 500 against the other div 2 K1W. Chloe scored 100 and 95 compared with 467 and 433. We have discussed Chloe judging at the next div 1 she goes to as opposed to doing a paddle up, as the points will be meaningless. This would help with the running of the event side of an organiser's nightmare but not with the breaking even financially bit.

I understand the argument about div 1 paddlers losing out on places to div 2 paddlers, but surely there must be some way round this? Entries could open for div 1s a month before div 2s? Even if Llandysul had had the same number of div 2 paddlers that went to Symonds Yat it still wouldn't have been full.

In terms of course difficulty then the strict div 1 standard (if possible given the water) should be followed, and there could be a "no div 3 paddle up" constraint.

[JBS]

This is how it works for Juniors in Germany. This may or may not give a little food for thought:
Schule A,B and C (J14, J12, J10) all race at the same venue on the same weekend. The format is usually:
Friday open parcatice on random gates ie: not the race course.
Saturday course is set and approved:

Schule A (J14) do the whole course. Schule B will do the same course but are told which gates (usually 2 or 3) they can miss. Usually on a tricky feature move .Sometimes the quicker line is to actually do one of the gates they can miss, in this instance they are in fact being offered a slower chicken line without a 50 or for the better paddlers a more challenging option.
Schule C will race the same course and miss upto 6 gates. Anything that is a bit tricky like a hard cross or an up on a stopper etc.
The competitors and parents/coaches are all informed in good time before the race starts which gates are not included for B and C. Two runs, best one counts.
Sunday is team event. Yes, they do teams here!! The course is the same and all gates count. There is a team gate and the beauty of it is, it gives the Schule B and if they want the Schule C kids an opportunity to have a go on the whole course.
Last year at the regular season races that we went to there were over 60 K1's and a lot double up and race C1 too. (The German champs last year had 50 K1M in Schule B alone)
It's not perfect but I could it work at a Div1/2 event or a Div2/3 Thus ensuring the right level of difficulty is applied and allowing a more linear progression?

[CeeBee]

Paddle up races are a 'bonus' for ranking paddlers racing in their own division , not a replacement. They give the paddlers experience at the next level and often enable siblings to compete when their older siblings are racing in that Division.

In the past few years, Div 1 events have been full and so combined ranking events were not possible. This year, combined Div 1/2 races would be possible at all Div 1 races as there are so few Div 1 paddlers. I asked the Slalom committee to consider this last year as I could see it was an issue. Don't know why it wasn't permitted but we need to be far more responsive to changing circumstances to enable the sport to survive.

For paddlers to stay in the sport, they need to first of all enjoy racing but they also need to have regular spaced out events to compete in which are within a reasonable distance from both a time and affordability perspective. Those who are ambitious and have time and money will look at these challenges and work out how to get to races further afield to give their children opportunities. However, there are all the other paddlers for whom this is not possible and they will drift away with lack of events.

Helena travelled to Llandysul because her siblings were both racing in Div 1 at the same time. The lost of 2 double Div 2 races in Scotland could be catastrophic for the sport in Scotland. Adding a Div 2 to the Tully Div 1 will not entirely solve this as only the better Div 2 paddlers will race at Tully but it would be a good start.

This year there is no Pinkston Div 1 as it was clear that entries for Div 1 would be too low making it hard to book pumped water time. This could have been mitigated by running a combined Div 1,2 and 3 with Div 2 on 2 pumps and Div 3 on 3 pumps and actually would have killed 3 birds with 1 stone/organiser as well as having all the paddlers racing together, an important social aspect of sport.

Running several of races like this on either single days or as a double could really help the sport in Scotland. Whether there would be any organisers to run the races would need to be looked at as there are now so few clubs taking part in Slaloms and some of the previous people who made the sport viable in Scotland have retired or are no longer involved.

[Sven]

I think there needs to be acceptance that for quite a few paddlers the cost of travelling long distances to events (fuel etc) together with the overall rise in cost of living will make event attendance lower than in previous years. Doubling up on events feels like a good way to reduce the impact.

[Dee]

This year, combined Div 1/2 races would be possible at all Div 1 races as there are so few Div 1 paddlers. I asked the Slalom committee to consider this last year as I could see it was an issue. Don't know why it wasn't permitted but we need to be far more responsive to changing circumstances to enable the sport to survive.

This was discussed at committee as you can see from the minutes. The upshot was that I emailed the div 1 calendar applicants to see whether they would be interested in converting to a div 1/2 if that became an option. There was very limited interest so this was one of the items that did not go to the ACM.

The reason Div 1/2s are currently not on the calendar is that a previous ACM ruling was against Div 1/2s and rule 5.1 therefore reflects the current status.



In my personal opinion, the removal of Div 1/2s followed on from a year where we had particularly heavy div 1 entries and div 1s wanted to protect their access - understandable, but I think that this was driven by an exceptional blip in div 1 entries. It's probably no secret that I have always been in favour of 1/2s, since I've argued that way at more than one ACM, however it probably needs a club to put forward proposed amendments to 5.1 for the ACM.

You know what to do

[JimW]

What I have learned about paddle up over the last few years is that

• Even the people who came up with it don't seem to agree on the exact purpose
• Every paddler (guided by their own coaches and parents) has their own reason for doing them

It would not surprise me to learn, particularly after the Covid break, that there are paddlers who have out-grown the water for their own division and are now paddling up because they don't want to do the easier courses, which would be completely out of the box thinking to most, but might also be in line with why some of us are vets...

Steve and others are completely correct that entry numbers this year are so low that a combined div 1/2 probably will not fill up, and it might be a way to make some events more viable as well as creating more opportuniites for paddlers, but that would require a rule change (could an extraordinary meeting do this?).

Everything about this is complicated, and despite what I have been suggesting when people ask why numbers are so low, we don't really know for sure. To convert existing div 1 or div 2 events to div 1/2 (or div 1 & 2 with different courses), even if we could changle rule 20.1.5 mid-season, would require careful checking of the calendar to ensure there are no clashes, and discussion and agreement with other race organisers at a similar time or at the same venue. For a few years there were 3 Fairnilee div 2/3 or 2/3/4 races, there were 2 established weekends and trying to find a suitable time for the other when there wasn't another div 2 already scheduled that wasn't so close to one of the established races that it was likely to be detrimental to entry levels of both races if paddlers choose 1 but not both. One of the proposals for replacing a Fairnilee race is going to require a discussion on similar lines.

A couple of other things that probably haven't been taken into account: div 2 is run on Tutti by the organising club, div 1 is run by 'the timing team' on a completely different system and using photocells for start and finish; div 2 is judged by whoever is available, div 1 needs section judges in addition to ordinary judges. From conversations I have had over last weekend, it seems as though both the timing team and section judge pools have reduced and some of the people in each have reduced the number of events they are able to help at. There are already shortages for the div 1 and prem events already on the calendar, so adding a div 1 to a div 2 is much less viable than adding div 2 to a div 1.

As for the idea that has been presented to me to add division 1 to our div 2/3 (which should really be div 2 & 3 in future if the calendar application system can cope with it) - I will not even look into the feasibility for this year and will not be making an application to the committee for it for a number of reasons including but not limited to:

• It is far too short notice to arrange timing team
• It is far too short notice to arrange section judges
• I will be picking up Tutti etc. from Tully next weekend and will not be dismantling the start & finish gates so I can collect the photocells and finish gate on the off-chance that eveything else could fall into place in time
• The centre moved all the slalom kit during lockdown and the items I didn't manage to locate yet (although I am sure they are on site somewhere) is the cable for the photocells, and the brackets for installing them for the start line
• We start div 2 and 3 from a different place to div 1 so I would either need to also collect the start gate, or actually forget that, there is no alternative because we would have no backup times for div 2 and 3 if we use a manual start instead of the beam, short of installing a complete Tutti setup in addition to the timing team setup becasue I would have to have both start and finish in the same system for each race. We probably have spare lines for this but the wiring will be a nightmare to trace if there is a problem.
• Since there are only myself and Ken that know how to set this up at Pinkston just now I would be needing to take another day out of my annual leave for setting up, just throwing more manpower at it doesn't work
• Div 1 paddlers are far more likely to judge and do a free judges race, than they are to pay for an entry and risk spoiling their preparation for their points race by judging
• Our sunday clashes with the practise sessions for Cardiff Prem - the bank holiday weekend gets us our best entry levels, but we always take a hit on volunteers for the Sunday as prem and PU div 1 paddlers and parents head down to Cardiff, I don't see why this wouldn't also affect the div 1 race entries on the Sunday, especially since Cardiff is also Pan Celtic and I've already had to find another welfare officer (thanks Emma!) because that means both the ones I had are unable to attend on the Sunday, 1 having a div 1 who is eligible to PU for the team.

So in fact, I won't be applying for div 1/2/3 for Pinkston ever, there are practicalities beyond the possibility of regulating the flow for 3 different standards of race.

Sorry Steve - I keep coming up against the sides of the box whichever way I try tro escape it! I wonder if it has lid?

[JBS]

An alternative thought for consideration:
A point based race system rather than divisions allowing paddlers to enter any race (within reason).
So you would have 2000 point races (nominally a prem race), 1000 point races, etc etc. Works for C2 and Vets. Yes, you would have the potential for paddlers to take on somethng that is too hard but you could mitigate with some regulation such as: you must have competed at X amnunt of 500 point races before you take on a 1000 point race etc.
Coukld also reduce the burden on the timing and section judges by reducing their requirement to 2000 point races only??
I haven't given it a huge amount of thought but it might be worth discussing the pro's and cons.

[Mike Mitchell]

Rule as it is.
5.1 COMPETITION FORMAT (UK)
5.1.1 Competition will take one of the forms below:
All Premier Competitions - Single division events, open to Premier athletes and Division 1’s paddling up.
All Division 1 Competitions - Single division events, open to Division 1 athletes and Division 2’s paddling up.
Division 2 Competitions - Single division events, open to Division 2 athletes and Division 3’s paddling up.
Division 3 Competitions - Single division events, open to Division 3 athletes, which may be combined with Division 4 competitions.
Division 2/3 Competitions - Two-division events, open equally to Division 2 and Division 3 ranked athletes, which may be combined with Division 4 competitions.
• In each event there is a separate race for each division and separate points are awarded.
• Prizes are offered for both Division 2 and Division 3 athletes.
• The course is to be designed to Division 2 standard but may incorporate changes to
accommodate Division 3 and Division 4 athletes (e.g. reduction in the number of pumps at
Pinkston or a different start point at sites such as Bala Mill).
• There is no paddle up option for Division 3 at a Division 2/3 competition. A Division 3
athlete beating athletes in Division 2 will be awarded only the points earned against other Division 3 athletes and a Division 3 cannot enter the Division 2 event as a paddle up athlete.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So the rules at present state we can't Run a Div P/1 or 1/2 Event on the same course.
To change this it would need to go to the ACM and we are going to have to look closely at options this year.

But as I see it if the course has changes then it would be possible to run 2 events on the same Day.
Probably the easiest way to do this would be just to move say 4 gates to make some moves a bit easier.
It could be move the Start or Finish, change the water levels at a pumped course or lift all the poles.
There are ways round it if the organiser really wants to.
Being on the Slalom committee I will probably get in to trouble for saying that, but if it saves events from being cancelled, or running at a loss then we need to look at options.

Joel has some good ideas, I like the idea of Team events, even Boater X could fill space at some events.

Other options to consider for the ACM
1. Include Paddle Up competitors in the main list of competitors, so they get the points from the position they finish and any host division paddler below them gets reduced point. This would make a big difference to the 2nd and 3rd position paddlers point and could make all the difference between promotion points or not. Also at something like Shepperton Div 1 with 4 paddlers and 2 paddle Ups it would make the class quorate.

2. What if we did away with Div 3 and moved everyone up a bit. Bit extreme but possibly a consideration.

I am not proposing any of the above but if numbers keep dropping we are probably going to need to make some changes.

[WindsorCC]

Further radical thought - why not move to the model, which I understand is common across Europe, where entry to races isn't restricted by the paddler's division (so basically vets....).

I get the need for limiting entry when events were oversubscribed (and we could still prioritise by 'host' division should we get back to that point) but currently that's not an issue.

Realistically I don't see many Div 2/3 paddlers going and entering prem level races, and likewise don't see many prems entering Div 2's. We already have a points system that works for anyone entering any event, so there's not much change required to give it a try.

Might encourage those who wouldn't consider paddling-up to give more challenging races a try, and let those div 1 paddlers who fancy a local Div 2 have a race. There might be some impact on judging for races at HPP Div 1's and similar, but I'm sure we can find a solution....

[CeeBee]

Further radical thought - why not move to the model, which I understand is common across Europe, where entry to races isn't restricted by the paddler's division (so basically vets....).

I am coming to the same conclusion as this would allow people to compete more locally and give them more options to race. I think we used to have this as an open category but paddlers are keen to earn points so we could call this say a "Paddle Down" option. Allowing multiple division races would also help. We need to do something and quickly. We can pilot options for a year and review rather than looking for all the downside.

We will need some limitations such as you can only Paddle Up one division as per current arrangements.

For Paddle Down, you could paddle down 1 Division initially to see how this goes. I would treat these as a category in their own right. I would give them points as though they were in their ranking division and multiply by say a factor of 0.8 to 0.9 to make it worth racing but not distort points from their usual host races. e.g. Paddlers in Div 2 can paddle at Div 3/4 races. (They should largely be better than the Div 3 paddlers so cannot use the Paddle Up point system).

We need to come up with something to enable paddlers to stay in the sport and enjoy racing. Yes, we need progression for those who aspire to be the best but the sport has become only that now and has lost its wider appeal.