Nick has published a comprehensive document rregarding suggested changes to the competition structure. This review is from Div 4 to Prem so it involves the whole sport. This is an ideal opportunity for all paddlers to take part in ther discussions and have their say. Please, please be honest say what yo don't like about it and what you do like, also add any further sugestions. Either chat about it here, or email Nick or myself.
The Slalom Committee are committed to increasing paticipation at all levels and continue to support fully slalom from Division 4 to Premier and Internationally.
So come on everyone get the debate going.
Competition review - Changes in the competition structure
-
66-1146487544
Anne, is anyone planning to approach the clubs that currently organise all the slalom events in the UK directly? This proposal needs to be put to them to get their buy in to some of the proposed changes, as this will affect them more directly than the individual paddlers out there and I expect a lot of them don't use this bulletin board that frequently if at all.
The major proposal to move to 3 runs in a day from the current 2 will have a major impact on the running of events. It will put a limit on the maximum number of attendees which will in turn limit the revenue generated from running a slalom event.
It will also require central funding/sponsorship to overhaul all the slalom equipment and software to bring the whole of the sport into the 21st century and allow events to start/run to schedule (not a very common occurence at the moment).
A database of all registered paddlers, the ability to submit entries purely by making the relevent payment with no entry cards to be filled in any more, no entries on the day of the slalom, etc. are all issues that will have to be addressed if the proposals are going to work.
I support the changes proposed but they will never happen if it is just proposed in a document with no plans on how the additional investment required will be found and who will be tasked with making it happen.
The major proposal to move to 3 runs in a day from the current 2 will have a major impact on the running of events. It will put a limit on the maximum number of attendees which will in turn limit the revenue generated from running a slalom event.
It will also require central funding/sponsorship to overhaul all the slalom equipment and software to bring the whole of the sport into the 21st century and allow events to start/run to schedule (not a very common occurence at the moment).
A database of all registered paddlers, the ability to submit entries purely by making the relevent payment with no entry cards to be filled in any more, no entries on the day of the slalom, etc. are all issues that will have to be addressed if the proposals are going to work.
I support the changes proposed but they will never happen if it is just proposed in a document with no plans on how the additional investment required will be found and who will be tasked with making it happen.
The idea of three runs is not one of mine! I would prefere personally to see the reintroduction of team events at every race thus giving paddlers more competition water time.
Tutti could deal with 3 runs but neither the BBC's, HPP or Tony Arrowsmith's programme are set up to do this and it could be very costly to have the software altered. We are in the process of looking at internet entry and hopefully will be able to trial some events next year, but it all takes time! The HPP system has just been upgraded and the timing team are having to learn how it works etc very quickly. The plan then will be to cascade down to repalce the BBC's and then Tutti. Tutti is the hardest to replace - it is so simple to use and pretty foolproof! not much else out there like that!
With the next Committee meeting minutes I plan to enclose a copy of the document for any clubs that may not have seen it, but I am sure many will as the site is well visited.
Tutti could deal with 3 runs but neither the BBC's, HPP or Tony Arrowsmith's programme are set up to do this and it could be very costly to have the software altered. We are in the process of looking at internet entry and hopefully will be able to trial some events next year, but it all takes time! The HPP system has just been upgraded and the timing team are having to learn how it works etc very quickly. The plan then will be to cascade down to repalce the BBC's and then Tutti. Tutti is the hardest to replace - it is so simple to use and pretty foolproof! not much else out there like that!
With the next Committee meeting minutes I plan to enclose a copy of the document for any clubs that may not have seen it, but I am sure many will as the site is well visited.
I agree with the changes BUT it needs:
a) a realistic timescale for some of the changes
b) nominated people to organise the changes effectively
c) funding!!!
Point 1 - 3 runs at div 3/4 will depend on size of entries, but with low uptake at the moment is probably achievable
Point 2 - Div 2 promotion Div 1 to be 5 events - needs bringing in asap
Point 3 - b) will be easier to implement than a)
Point 4 - 3 runs for Div 1's will be hard to fit in time wise - aggregate is good training for promotion to Prem
The document also mentions Div 2 races on HPP, Tully, and Washburn - at least one or even two of these courses should be included in the 5 qualifying races.
a) a realistic timescale for some of the changes
b) nominated people to organise the changes effectively
c) funding!!!
Point 1 - 3 runs at div 3/4 will depend on size of entries, but with low uptake at the moment is probably achievable
Point 2 - Div 2 promotion Div 1 to be 5 events - needs bringing in asap
Point 3 - b) will be easier to implement than a)
Point 4 - 3 runs for Div 1's will be hard to fit in time wise - aggregate is good training for promotion to Prem
The document also mentions Div 2 races on HPP, Tully, and Washburn - at least one or even two of these courses should be included in the 5 qualifying races.
Keep solutions simple, and don't throw away the baby with the bath water.
I agree with Chauffeur that for promotion from div 2 to 1, one race should have been on challenging water. One race on the Tryweryn and HPP for the whole year in div 2, isn't enough at the moment to allow such a change.
If div 2 is a 'shadow of its old self', then demote those from it who make it into a shadow into div 3. This would raise standards in both div 2 and 3 (and div 3 attendance), and make it harder to gain points for promotion to div 1. Best of 5 events sound fine.
Many people on this forum have suggested that runs with a 50 penalty should not count for promotion. One paddler was promoted because her competitors all had 50s though. A way to ensure a paddler is good enough for the next division is to ensure that in one combined event eg. div2/3 the div3 paddler seeking promotion had a time that would have put them in the top 50% of times for div2 on that day.
Slalom officials seem to be under enough stress without having to judge third runs. Why not let everyone have an extra run (friends/relatives can time and judge it) at the end of a competition to wind down, and 'nail' that problem gate.
Lack of participation (Tony O'Connell) : There needs to be a frank and open discussion with paddlers and clubs that used to participate, and what puts people off. Rather than shunning playboats, perhaps there could be a way of encouraging them eg.by offering a prize for the fastest playboat on the day. Perhaps there could be some informal coaching at events to make beginners feel they are improving. More information on slalom technique and how to choose and set up a boat would be welcomed on this website.
I think treating a discarded run, as the tie breaker sounds best, perhaps followed by who had the least penalties in the event of a further tie.
Internet entry or using a database of paddlers to avoid card filling in, should only be used if it is easier for the organizers. After all its not difficult for the entrants to fill them in, and its part of the excitement waiting for individual cards to be added to the results board
I agree with Chauffeur that for promotion from div 2 to 1, one race should have been on challenging water. One race on the Tryweryn and HPP for the whole year in div 2, isn't enough at the moment to allow such a change.
If div 2 is a 'shadow of its old self', then demote those from it who make it into a shadow into div 3. This would raise standards in both div 2 and 3 (and div 3 attendance), and make it harder to gain points for promotion to div 1. Best of 5 events sound fine.
Many people on this forum have suggested that runs with a 50 penalty should not count for promotion. One paddler was promoted because her competitors all had 50s though. A way to ensure a paddler is good enough for the next division is to ensure that in one combined event eg. div2/3 the div3 paddler seeking promotion had a time that would have put them in the top 50% of times for div2 on that day.
Slalom officials seem to be under enough stress without having to judge third runs. Why not let everyone have an extra run (friends/relatives can time and judge it) at the end of a competition to wind down, and 'nail' that problem gate.
Lack of participation (Tony O'Connell) : There needs to be a frank and open discussion with paddlers and clubs that used to participate, and what puts people off. Rather than shunning playboats, perhaps there could be a way of encouraging them eg.by offering a prize for the fastest playboat on the day. Perhaps there could be some informal coaching at events to make beginners feel they are improving. More information on slalom technique and how to choose and set up a boat would be welcomed on this website.
I think treating a discarded run, as the tie breaker sounds best, perhaps followed by who had the least penalties in the event of a further tie.
Internet entry or using a database of paddlers to avoid card filling in, should only be used if it is easier for the organizers. After all its not difficult for the entrants to fill them in, and its part of the excitement waiting for individual cards to be added to the results board
I've replied more in full to Nick by email, but to add to this.
If some events won't have time for a third run how are they supposed to get team events in? OK there are 3 on the water at once, but bigger start gaps are required and two runs each. We don't want slaloms going back to a full weekend as this will reduce attendance/revenue. I think best 2 from 3 runs is a great idea - a flavour of aggregate times as per Prem/rest of the world, but doesn't write off an inconsistent beginner's result to have a swim/50 on one run. More clear water time as well - team runs are fun and skillful but can be intimidating for a beginner. Also will solve the equal points problem as ties are less likely with aggregates. Maybe aggregate of 2 runs for Div 1 though?
I really hope the software changes required for 2 out of 3 runs are not "very costly", particularly the new HPP one. If they are the software is either badly written or somebody is making lots of cash. It should just be another format of scoring the results - like the different Prem formats (don't the finalists have 3 runs in championship format?). It would be a shame if the majority thought this a good way to go for the sport but be scuppered by software costs.
If some events won't have time for a third run how are they supposed to get team events in? OK there are 3 on the water at once, but bigger start gaps are required and two runs each. We don't want slaloms going back to a full weekend as this will reduce attendance/revenue. I think best 2 from 3 runs is a great idea - a flavour of aggregate times as per Prem/rest of the world, but doesn't write off an inconsistent beginner's result to have a swim/50 on one run. More clear water time as well - team runs are fun and skillful but can be intimidating for a beginner. Also will solve the equal points problem as ties are less likely with aggregates. Maybe aggregate of 2 runs for Div 1 though?
I really hope the software changes required for 2 out of 3 runs are not "very costly", particularly the new HPP one. If they are the software is either badly written or somebody is making lots of cash. It should just be another format of scoring the results - like the different Prem formats (don't the finalists have 3 runs in championship format?). It would be a shame if the majority thought this a good way to go for the sport but be scuppered by software costs.
-
66-1146487544
We have young paddlers in Division 3 watching
their rankings, adding the total numbers in the divisions above them and identifying
themselves as (say) “the 352nd best slalom paddler in Britain”.
Personally I think this is of less interest to the average 12 year old than knowing they are "the 9th best J12 slalom paddler in Britain". Unfortunately it is almost impossible to work this figure out currently because the age categories are not currently listed.
Again, if we had a slalom database which contained the results to date then it would be simple to add a query option to the web site that would allow the young paddler to know exactly where they are in their age group.
-
66-1146487544
As I see it our biggest problem will be to provide sufficient courses in Divs 3 & 2 of
appropriate technical / WW demand for aspiring young slalomists to be able to make smooth
progression towards Div 1 without their parents being put off by the expense of travel and
accommodation - particularly in what Nick describes as 'the dry areas'.
There might be a simple answer to this question but why does Slalom in the UK run from March to October - the driest part of the year, particularly for the South East?
Has anyone ever considered the possibility of running the season from say September to April? Rivers such as the Lune at Halton - on old slalom site - might be accessible again with very few issues from anglers, etc.
If there are less events in the calendar to organise then you could even run them September to November then have a break and restart from March to May say.
The Div 3/4 events could still be held over the summer months to raise interest in the sport and provide enough new blood ready for the Prem/Div 1/2 season. The top prem paddlers are often absent from May to August each year in any case so this might work quite well.
That is a very valid point, as we have suffered from events being cancelled due to lack of water this year and I can not see the situation improving short term, it would open up more natural rivers for use.
The only problem I see is that there are quite a few paddlers that compete in polo over the winter months, we have 10 or so in our club alone mainly div 1/2 paddlers, so the dates for these events should be taken in to account when looking at dates for slalom events.
The only problem I see is that there are quite a few paddlers that compete in polo over the winter months, we have 10 or so in our club alone mainly div 1/2 paddlers, so the dates for these events should be taken in to account when looking at dates for slalom events.
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
The main problem I would see with this would be that it would mean a 12 month season for many or the officials - particularly timing and judging - they are already stretched - this would probably be the breaking point if more people didn't come forward and help. You would alse need far more judges - a commodity we are very short of - as in the depths of winter changes would have to be more often. ? the fishing season - does this encroach on that?? Another factor is winter training - the top end of the sport has a rigerous training shedule over the winter - it is also not nice for anyone to fall in during the winter - which we all know will happen and this sort of experience could put paddlers off for ever. Unfortunately water levels are a feature of this country - we fluctuate between one year too much then the next not enough!!! I am only aware of one cancellation due to too little water and there was a threat to the the Lodden because of too much!
-
66-1146487544
Anne, one of the main issues Nick raised in his proposal was the availability of 'quality' water to run Div 1/2 events on, particularly in those parts of the country that for several years now have suffered from a lack of rain. Hence my bit of lateral thinking. Only one event has been cancelled this year but how many have gone ahead where the grade of water could have been judged as not difficult enough for a Div 2 event!!
Whilst the thinking behind a proposed change in the slalom season still needs a bit of work before it is judged as unworkable, at no point did I suggest that the season would run for the whole 12 months of the year. Timing/judgeing at Div 3/4 slaloms is normally left to the devices of the local organising slalom club and therefore shouldn't require the involvement of the timing team and section judges, etc. These would only be required for Prem/Div1/Div2 slaloms which according to Nick's proposal would be fewer in number than is the case today, so life should actually get easier for the majority of officials.
The availability of judges is always an issue and probably needs to be looked at separately based on the current proposals, as 3 runs in a day/team events will place additional pressures without the worry of whether the judges will survive the conditions for more than an hour or not!!
The fishing season unfortunately is different for each river/fish being caught but most anglers would probably agree that fishing between November & April is probably the quietest period of the year. Slalom organisers who have local arrangements with the land owners/angling clubs would be able to advise better - is any slalom club having difficulties organising their slalom because of restrictions placed on them by the land owner?
The vast majority of our Prem/Div 1 races occur between March and April and then again between September and October each year. Quite a number of our top paddlers are absent between May and August because of the World Cup series, etc. in any case. Winter training could be planned around the slalom events without much difficulty.
Finally, the issue of slalom paddlers falling in. This has been debated on numerous previous occasions on this forum. Are paddlers sufficiently prepared before they are forced to tackle the bigger water as they progress through the divisions? I would say not. How many are introduced to slalom without even having been taught the basics of paddling - never mind taught how to roll? Should we enforce a minimum BCU standard of attainment before paddlers are allowed to progress from Div 3 to Div 2 (2 star test?) and Div2 to Div 1 (3 star test?)? Should all paddlers in Div 1 be expected to have passed the Canoe Safety Test?
Plenty of issues to discuss - anyone else have a view on the proposals?
Whilst the thinking behind a proposed change in the slalom season still needs a bit of work before it is judged as unworkable, at no point did I suggest that the season would run for the whole 12 months of the year. Timing/judgeing at Div 3/4 slaloms is normally left to the devices of the local organising slalom club and therefore shouldn't require the involvement of the timing team and section judges, etc. These would only be required for Prem/Div1/Div2 slaloms which according to Nick's proposal would be fewer in number than is the case today, so life should actually get easier for the majority of officials.
The availability of judges is always an issue and probably needs to be looked at separately based on the current proposals, as 3 runs in a day/team events will place additional pressures without the worry of whether the judges will survive the conditions for more than an hour or not!!
The fishing season unfortunately is different for each river/fish being caught but most anglers would probably agree that fishing between November & April is probably the quietest period of the year. Slalom organisers who have local arrangements with the land owners/angling clubs would be able to advise better - is any slalom club having difficulties organising their slalom because of restrictions placed on them by the land owner?
The vast majority of our Prem/Div 1 races occur between March and April and then again between September and October each year. Quite a number of our top paddlers are absent between May and August because of the World Cup series, etc. in any case. Winter training could be planned around the slalom events without much difficulty.
Finally, the issue of slalom paddlers falling in. This has been debated on numerous previous occasions on this forum. Are paddlers sufficiently prepared before they are forced to tackle the bigger water as they progress through the divisions? I would say not. How many are introduced to slalom without even having been taught the basics of paddling - never mind taught how to roll? Should we enforce a minimum BCU standard of attainment before paddlers are allowed to progress from Div 3 to Div 2 (2 star test?) and Div2 to Div 1 (3 star test?)? Should all paddlers in Div 1 be expected to have passed the Canoe Safety Test?
Plenty of issues to discuss - anyone else have a view on the proposals?
I agree with the idea of paddlers completing basic paddling skills and learning to roll and this could be achieved by using the BCU star test system, but as star tests level 1-3 at the moment are flat water awards a 4 star test would be the most suitable along with the CST for div 2 paddlers upwards.
I see that this will cause a problem for some clubs that are slalom only and may not have qualified coaches to deliver these courses, but this could be addressed by holding coures at venues like HPP, Tees or Tryweryn with qualified coaches and incorporating white water coaching sessions as well.
If you were taking a group of paddlers on a grade 2/3 river as a recreational trip you would not take anyone down that was not at the right star standard, but we aimlessly through young kids in at the top of a grade 2/3 river section and hope they stay upright and then wonder why they swim!
Something to consider for the summer holidays?
I see that this will cause a problem for some clubs that are slalom only and may not have qualified coaches to deliver these courses, but this could be addressed by holding coures at venues like HPP, Tees or Tryweryn with qualified coaches and incorporating white water coaching sessions as well.
If you were taking a group of paddlers on a grade 2/3 river as a recreational trip you would not take anyone down that was not at the right star standard, but we aimlessly through young kids in at the top of a grade 2/3 river section and hope they stay upright and then wonder why they swim!
Something to consider for the summer holidays?
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
The 4*/canoe safety qualification sounds reasonable in principle but I presume we're not suggesting all of our current Div 1 paddlers have to go and get the test? Personally I'm quite happy with my level of river craft for competing at Div 1 and I have a sum total of zero bits of paper to prove so.
It comes down to education about slalom sites to a certain extent (the course guide on here is a good start). If you're a nervous Div 1 then rather than competing blindly at every slalom then pick them e.g. Washburn, Llandysul, Tully in summer etc. Those that have competed out of their depth must either be willing to give it a go at the deep end (literally?) or don't know what they're letting themselves in for.
It comes down to education about slalom sites to a certain extent (the course guide on here is a good start). If you're a nervous Div 1 then rather than competing blindly at every slalom then pick them e.g. Washburn, Llandysul, Tully in summer etc. Those that have competed out of their depth must either be willing to give it a go at the deep end (literally?) or don't know what they're letting themselves in for.
3* qualification is asked for by both Tees and HPP if you go and pay as an ordinary paddler to go on the course.
4* is maybe too much, there are often stipulations by clubs/trainers that paddlers must be a certain age, this might unfairly rule out some good young paddlers. At 4* you need to plan a river trip, and one or two other bits of theory that isn't needed to slalom well.
Rolling is 3* & currently it is possible for it to be tested on flat water even for 4*.
4* is maybe too much, there are often stipulations by clubs/trainers that paddlers must be a certain age, this might unfairly rule out some good young paddlers. At 4* you need to plan a river trip, and one or two other bits of theory that isn't needed to slalom well.
Rolling is 3* & currently it is possible for it to be tested on flat water even for 4*.
Chauffeur you are right it is the same at Nene as well.
There is no official age limit for star test's it is down to the coaches what age range they are happy with, for CST there is a junior award for paddlers under 16, this still covers the same basic techniques apart for some of the more difficult rescues.
For any award over 1* you need to have done a trip which would also teach the paddler rivercraft, lets not get confused with Kayak and Placid Water star tests as there is a differance, the standard (if one is adopted) should be Kayak as this involves moving water of grade 2 for the assesment of a 4* award.
Deep water rescue, using throw bags and how to recover a boat safely are all part of the CST and star test syllabus, as two paddlers have to stay at the end of the course to provide safety cover during runs, it would be helpful if they were trained in how to do it safely without any risk to themselves.
In answer to FatBoys comments, I think it would not harm some of the younger paddlers that have just been promoted to div1?
There is no official age limit for star test's it is down to the coaches what age range they are happy with, for CST there is a junior award for paddlers under 16, this still covers the same basic techniques apart for some of the more difficult rescues.
For any award over 1* you need to have done a trip which would also teach the paddler rivercraft, lets not get confused with Kayak and Placid Water star tests as there is a differance, the standard (if one is adopted) should be Kayak as this involves moving water of grade 2 for the assesment of a 4* award.
Deep water rescue, using throw bags and how to recover a boat safely are all part of the CST and star test syllabus, as two paddlers have to stay at the end of the course to provide safety cover during runs, it would be helpful if they were trained in how to do it safely without any risk to themselves.
In answer to FatBoys comments, I think it would not harm some of the younger paddlers that have just been promoted to div1?
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching