No matter how good you are you're still going to capsize: even Campbell Walsh...
http://www.worldclass-canoeing.org.uk/wcp....on.aspx
What matters is how good your roll is in white water. Most paddlers have a fair idea of their ability in this regard. A star test will not replace common sense, or an individual's confidence on a particular day. Perhaps every paddler should sign a form to say that they feel confident they have a good chance of successfully rolling if they capsize. Certainly those on safety should be prewarned of those that have a good chance of swimming.
Come to think of it, even the best will swim in the worse circumstances, so I suppose ability not to panic whilst swimming should also be a consideration (something the star tests should help - looks like I just defeated my own argument)
Going back to the broader theme for this thread. Is anyone at all interested in encouraging paddlers from clubs without a strong slalom base from taking part ?
Competition review - Changes in the competition structure
I'd certainly recommend that all younger paddlers are encouraged to do the Junior Canoe Safety test. My still young, but now very experienced Div1 paddlers, benefitted from both this and the 3* tests which they had to do so as to be able to access Tees, Nene etc as independent youngsters without a coach.
They actually took advantage of making a donation to the Cancer Challenge back in 2004 and did both on the back of that event .. maybe this is something to consider again?
They actually took advantage of making a donation to the Cancer Challenge back in 2004 and did both on the back of that event .. maybe this is something to consider again?
ElaineF wrote:They actually took advantage of making a donation to the Cancer Challenge back in 2004 and did both on the back of that event .. maybe this is something to consider again?
Sorry Elaine but we have run the 2006 Cancer Challenge and the next one if we run it will not be till 2008.
If there is enough interest, I could certainly arrange some star test's and CST's over the summer months, luckily we have two qualified recreational coaches in our family who are also div1 slalom paddlers and they know enough coaches that could help out if anyone was interested.
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
-
66-1146487544
Stephen, I had an idea about encouraging paddlers from clubs without a strong slalom base.
Nick's proposal talks about Div 4 as being an introduction to basic skills and suggests that one way to achieve this is giving paddlers an extra run.
Instead of this, why not use some of the money raised by the BCU/Slalom Committee to 'hire' a coach for the day and provide some coaching to the masses on exactly what is meant by basic skills. Hopefully there could even be some more experienced paddlers on the water to help demonstrate some of these basic skills.
If this was run from 9am to 11am whilst all the cards were being entered onto the system and everyone was getting ready then I'm certain this would be of benefit to those paddlers that are totally new to slalom.
Whether this could be repeated at Div 3 and above is dependent on water time and availability of appropriate coaches, etc.
Nick's proposal talks about Div 4 as being an introduction to basic skills and suggests that one way to achieve this is giving paddlers an extra run.
Instead of this, why not use some of the money raised by the BCU/Slalom Committee to 'hire' a coach for the day and provide some coaching to the masses on exactly what is meant by basic skills. Hopefully there could even be some more experienced paddlers on the water to help demonstrate some of these basic skills.
If this was run from 9am to 11am whilst all the cards were being entered onto the system and everyone was getting ready then I'm certain this would be of benefit to those paddlers that are totally new to slalom.
Whether this could be repeated at Div 3 and above is dependent on water time and availability of appropriate coaches, etc.
Sorry to butt in.
We have done this in the past on many occasions and it works well, with the coaches on the water and others on the bank giving advice to the newbies, also acting as escorts for the less experianced paddlers, I seem to remember some of our coaches doing it at a div 2 at Tully one year! It is supprising how much more they improve.
I am not sure on the 'hire' a coach for the day is needed as there are a few of us around that give up our time all ready coaching, just depends if they would be going to the event any way, if not then some money to cover expences may be a nice jesture?
Graeme
We have done this in the past on many occasions and it works well, with the coaches on the water and others on the bank giving advice to the newbies, also acting as escorts for the less experianced paddlers, I seem to remember some of our coaches doing it at a div 2 at Tully one year! It is supprising how much more they improve.
I am not sure on the 'hire' a coach for the day is needed as there are a few of us around that give up our time all ready coaching, just depends if they would be going to the event any way, if not then some money to cover expences may be a nice jesture?
Graeme
Paddle fast,,,Paddle safe Yorkshire Canoe Coaching
Great ideas Graeme and Boat Sherpa (just assume I called you by your first name). I just realized the only slalom event that our paddlers have any enthusiam for is the llandysul festival in August when they will receive some coaching. I've not been to it before, but I assume there is plenty of water time, and coaching to improve. I've been really impressed by both of your inputs on this forum, and the wealth of knowledge amongst all the paddlers at events. As an adult sculpted by several decades, it is easy for me to ask questions without feeling intimidated. There are so many friendly helpful paddlers happy to offer tips. I've had prem paddlers quite happily take me through how I should tackle gates, and even give me easier alternatives. (I just shrivel in embarassment when it all goes horribly wrong) . I can think of one youngster who has taken an interest in slalom but still only has a playboat. When he competed in div 3 at Bala Mill, he made one unfortunate error on each run on day1. Before, in between and after runs he paddled the falls. The next day he paddled at the white water centre. What an opportunity lost ! If a coach had watched his runs, given him some tips, and he had a chance to practice, think how much he'd have improved, and been back for more... (whereas an old duffer like me can just about cope with 1 practice run + 2 runs, and needs a week to recover) :p As it was I videoed him doing a few gates but couldn't offer much more help. Multiply this individual by thousands, and you have a real potential for slalom to expand (is this a grandiose delusion?). There are a lot of youngsters fed up with their oversized playboat, that they still can't cartwheel. :;):
Any chance your ideas might become reality ?
Any chance your ideas might become reality ?
Hi all
I have only just picked up on this (having a rest from the computer for a change).
I didn't realise there were 32 division 2 events on the calendar. I would agree that this is far too many. Division 2 events should be about racing for your place, not just turning up. Reduce the number of events, and try to ensure that div 2 races are only held on decent water. We have been approached more than once at Manchester to run our early season race as a 2/3/4, but have always resisted, as we don't believe our site is suitable for a division 2 race, but other, equally unsuitable sites, are being used. The benefit from the paddler's point of view is that a number of people from the same club can go to the same event and race, which in turn leads to a higher attendance, and this can turn a borderline event into a something worthwhile putting a course up for. Ideally the races should be planned so that they don't clash with division 1/Premier events too, so that club coaches and div1/prem paddlers can go to the division 2 events, and support their paddlers.
An unhealthy part of this thread, from my point of view, is the pressure for some kind of whitewater training before paddlers get on the whitewater. One of the great things about slalom is that you don't have to go through some meaningless tests before you are allowed onto decent water, and any convergence with the recreational star schemes will be a retrograde step. Since whitewater training is almost useless unless you get onto whitewater, the star schemes do not prepare you for it at all. Everyone falls in the first time they have been on whitewater, and paddlers who thought they had solid rolls when they practice on grade 2 water suddenly find it deserts them on the Tryweryn (for instance). As a division 4 paddler, I judged the Serpent's Tail Premier/Division 1 event. As far as I can remember, I swam every run - this is what we need to encourage our lower division paddlers to do, it is the only way they can learn.
At the end of the day, we are only fiddling with the details. Slalom's problems would be solved if we could increase uptake in the lower divisions, and for this we need a much stronger club structure. The exec would do better to focus on this, rather than playing about with the calendar.
I have only just picked up on this (having a rest from the computer for a change).
I didn't realise there were 32 division 2 events on the calendar. I would agree that this is far too many. Division 2 events should be about racing for your place, not just turning up. Reduce the number of events, and try to ensure that div 2 races are only held on decent water. We have been approached more than once at Manchester to run our early season race as a 2/3/4, but have always resisted, as we don't believe our site is suitable for a division 2 race, but other, equally unsuitable sites, are being used. The benefit from the paddler's point of view is that a number of people from the same club can go to the same event and race, which in turn leads to a higher attendance, and this can turn a borderline event into a something worthwhile putting a course up for. Ideally the races should be planned so that they don't clash with division 1/Premier events too, so that club coaches and div1/prem paddlers can go to the division 2 events, and support their paddlers.
An unhealthy part of this thread, from my point of view, is the pressure for some kind of whitewater training before paddlers get on the whitewater. One of the great things about slalom is that you don't have to go through some meaningless tests before you are allowed onto decent water, and any convergence with the recreational star schemes will be a retrograde step. Since whitewater training is almost useless unless you get onto whitewater, the star schemes do not prepare you for it at all. Everyone falls in the first time they have been on whitewater, and paddlers who thought they had solid rolls when they practice on grade 2 water suddenly find it deserts them on the Tryweryn (for instance). As a division 4 paddler, I judged the Serpent's Tail Premier/Division 1 event. As far as I can remember, I swam every run - this is what we need to encourage our lower division paddlers to do, it is the only way they can learn.
At the end of the day, we are only fiddling with the details. Slalom's problems would be solved if we could increase uptake in the lower divisions, and for this we need a much stronger club structure. The exec would do better to focus on this, rather than playing about with the calendar.
Perhaps a mentor scheme for div 3/4 events might work. Young paddlers particularly from clubs without a strong slalom base, might (if they would value it) be paired with officials (if they wanted). The official could help them get in their boat, watch a practice run, give a few words of advice, look out for them during their runs, and offer some consoling words at the end of the day......Friends for life. A paddler might not be on the water, but still feels they are getting more 'water' time just by talking with someone they respect. Seeing JC (prem paddler) throw a slalom boat around at Langham Farm, I can't help thinking a few playboaters would be asking their parents for a slalom boat if they'd been mentored by someone that good. Could something like this work ?
I would value a 'participation list' (if a start list isn't put on the site) to know if friends / people I've met are going to an event. Names could be posted on the event part of this forum to save Nick some work. Perhaps its because I'm an old duffer, but the social side of an event seems more important than the competition side. I'd also know if my cards hadn't been lost in the post.
I'm still not sure why a discussion thread doesn't start off in the event section for every event. There are plenty of questions people must have, especially before they travel a long way. Of course its important that someone tries to answer their questions.
ps. I agree everyone is going to end up swimming at some stage. Accepting that this is going to happen is also a step for helping prepare people for the swim. The last thing you want is for a youngster to panic, and not come back... :;):
I would value a 'participation list' (if a start list isn't put on the site) to know if friends / people I've met are going to an event. Names could be posted on the event part of this forum to save Nick some work. Perhaps its because I'm an old duffer, but the social side of an event seems more important than the competition side. I'd also know if my cards hadn't been lost in the post.
I'm still not sure why a discussion thread doesn't start off in the event section for every event. There are plenty of questions people must have, especially before they travel a long way. Of course its important that someone tries to answer their questions.ps. I agree everyone is going to end up swimming at some stage. Accepting that this is going to happen is also a step for helping prepare people for the swim. The last thing you want is for a youngster to panic, and not come back... :;):
I pick up on some points in this thread:
Star Tests / CST
I don't think the star tests and CST are the answer to improved water skills on their own, and certainly not forcing it on slalomists. What I think is important is for clubs to provide a varied experience for their paddlers so that they have the opportunity to experience a broad range of activities be it slalom, river running, freestyle, or whatever. This also ties in with LTPD where at the early stage we should be encouraging a broad range of experience.
A number of contributions to this thread consider promoting entry to slalom: "increase uptake in the lower divisions" / "stronger club structure" etc. I have some comments:
-- Encouragement to clubs. Reaching out to clubs without a strong slalom base, or any slalom base. This would include encouragement or assistance to run their own events and encouragement for coaching (see also below). I am particularly sensitive to this issue being a member of Frome Canoe Club in SW region where we run the only event – Langham Farm. Or depending on your age, last remaining event.
Quote from my separate e-mail to Nick:
"The only Div 4 events for us this year (in sensible travelling distance for Div 4 - less committment) were Loddon (Reading 80 miles) on May 28/29, Langham Farm (Local) on June 3/4 and North Walls (Winchester 60 miles) on June 10/11. The issues for us were why only 3 events and why were these 3 events clustered together on consecutive weeks. We took 5 paddlers to Loddon. On the following weekend at our own event we had a total of 26 of our club members enter. This was an amazing achievement for us. The weekend after - too soon after the hard work of Langham Farm, no one wanted to go. End of slalom season for this year for Div 4. "
-- Encouragement for Div 4 paddlers.
Again a quote:
"... There are so few paddlers in some Div 4 events that on Double events, on the Saturday the better paddlers get promoted to Div 3. That's OK. On the Sunday it's generally the same group and a second set get promoted. In many cases they get promoted after one day's competition and are neither ready to experience the higher division nor ready to commit to the BCU. They are expected to join the BCU and paddle in Div 3, but that just puts them off and we don't see them again. Should they not be permitted to remain in Div 4 until they are ready? There would need to be some control because you don't want to encourage "pot hunters". One solution would be to do away with Doubles and have team events, possibly for Div 4 only."
-- Encouragement for coaching.
There is no apparent encouragement to bring in new coaches. Courses appear few and far between if at all, but most importantly are not advertised. It took me over a year to find a course. In the end I went to North Wales (which I must add turned out to be great) after being given the nod by someone through this forum. I had expected to find one in England.
John Kent
Star Tests / CST
I don't think the star tests and CST are the answer to improved water skills on their own, and certainly not forcing it on slalomists. What I think is important is for clubs to provide a varied experience for their paddlers so that they have the opportunity to experience a broad range of activities be it slalom, river running, freestyle, or whatever. This also ties in with LTPD where at the early stage we should be encouraging a broad range of experience.
A number of contributions to this thread consider promoting entry to slalom: "increase uptake in the lower divisions" / "stronger club structure" etc. I have some comments:
-- Encouragement to clubs. Reaching out to clubs without a strong slalom base, or any slalom base. This would include encouragement or assistance to run their own events and encouragement for coaching (see also below). I am particularly sensitive to this issue being a member of Frome Canoe Club in SW region where we run the only event – Langham Farm. Or depending on your age, last remaining event.
Quote from my separate e-mail to Nick:
"The only Div 4 events for us this year (in sensible travelling distance for Div 4 - less committment) were Loddon (Reading 80 miles) on May 28/29, Langham Farm (Local) on June 3/4 and North Walls (Winchester 60 miles) on June 10/11. The issues for us were why only 3 events and why were these 3 events clustered together on consecutive weeks. We took 5 paddlers to Loddon. On the following weekend at our own event we had a total of 26 of our club members enter. This was an amazing achievement for us. The weekend after - too soon after the hard work of Langham Farm, no one wanted to go. End of slalom season for this year for Div 4. "
-- Encouragement for Div 4 paddlers.
Again a quote:
"... There are so few paddlers in some Div 4 events that on Double events, on the Saturday the better paddlers get promoted to Div 3. That's OK. On the Sunday it's generally the same group and a second set get promoted. In many cases they get promoted after one day's competition and are neither ready to experience the higher division nor ready to commit to the BCU. They are expected to join the BCU and paddle in Div 3, but that just puts them off and we don't see them again. Should they not be permitted to remain in Div 4 until they are ready? There would need to be some control because you don't want to encourage "pot hunters". One solution would be to do away with Doubles and have team events, possibly for Div 4 only."
-- Encouragement for coaching.
There is no apparent encouragement to bring in new coaches. Courses appear few and far between if at all, but most importantly are not advertised. It took me over a year to find a course. In the end I went to North Wales (which I must add turned out to be great) after being given the nod by someone through this forum. I had expected to find one in England.
John Kent
John Kent
I don't think best of three runs is a good idea. In the lower divisions, it is not so much race practice that is needed, as time on the water. If we have three runs, there will be less time for free practice.
In fact I would say that free practice is so important, that it should be planned for as part of the program. Full practice runs are all well and good (and essential), but free practice is invaluable for those just trying to get used to the water, and for young and keen paddlers to try out different moves on a particular section of the course.
In fact I would say that free practice is so important, that it should be planned for as part of the program. Full practice runs are all well and good (and essential), but free practice is invaluable for those just trying to get used to the water, and for young and keen paddlers to try out different moves on a particular section of the course.
jke comments on the lack of events in specific area, I know this is a concern in the NE also and I totally agree the calander needs looking at, I know that many of the sites in the SE area my boys started at no longer have events run on them - it would be interesting to find out why.
Out of interest I looked at a 1992 year book at events accessable from the SW - there were many, Devon - Head Weir, Exeter CC, Holne Park, Devon, Bristol CC, Somerset - French Weir, Taunton CC, 2 at Langham Farm, Frome CC, Poultney Weir, Bath Uni CC. Dorset - Winchester x 2, Winchester CC, Canford Weir, Winchester CC, Worcestershire - Martley, Kinver CC, also Redlocks, Newbury CC and Abingdon, Kingfisher CC.
Where have they gone why not noe run - this is something we need to look at but it is all going to take time and manpower - perhaps we need a seperate working party to look at this.
Out of interest I looked at a 1992 year book at events accessable from the SW - there were many, Devon - Head Weir, Exeter CC, Holne Park, Devon, Bristol CC, Somerset - French Weir, Taunton CC, 2 at Langham Farm, Frome CC, Poultney Weir, Bath Uni CC. Dorset - Winchester x 2, Winchester CC, Canford Weir, Winchester CC, Worcestershire - Martley, Kinver CC, also Redlocks, Newbury CC and Abingdon, Kingfisher CC.
Where have they gone why not noe run - this is something we need to look at but it is all going to take time and manpower - perhaps we need a seperate working party to look at this.
-
Pingu
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 12:42 am
- Location: I'm everywhere and nowhere (baby)
- Contact:
Anne wrote:Out of interest I looked at a 1992 year book at events accessable from the SW - there were many, ...... Worcestershire - Martley, Kinver CC, ........
Where have they gone why not noe run - this is something we need to look at but it is all going to take time and manpower - perhaps we need a seperate working party to look at this.
Many successful div 3/4 or div 4/5 slaloms were run on the river Teme at Martly by Kinver (and other clubs) until we lost access to the site in 1998. Many paddlers will have happy memories of Martley slaloms.
We struggled on for a few years at a site a few miles downstream at Ankerdine but we had ongoing problems with the local angling club, getting access to the river.
Eventually the club members dwindled because we had no river access for training and the Club folded in 2001.
Another site lost.
Out of Darkness cometh Light
Anne wrote:Out of interest I looked at a 1992 year book at events accessable from the SW - there were many, Devon - Head Weir, Exeter CC, Holne Park, Devon, Bristol CC, Somerset - French Weir, Taunton CC, 2 at Langham Farm, Frome CC, Poultney Weir, Bath Uni CC. Dorset - Winchester x 2, Winchester CC, Canford Weir, Winchester CC, Worcestershire - Martley, Kinver CC, also Redlocks, Newbury CC and Abingdon, Kingfisher CC.
And moving North ... Symonds Yat, Rockfield and Pontrilas on the Monnow, Bevere (Worcester), Ludlow (Teme), Elan Valley (Rhayader). Now I feel guilty about my club no longer running the October Langham Farm.
In many cases access seems to be the problem. But I remember also (my old club) that the logistics of S Yat and Elan Valley were difficult, moving all the kit on site.
Somehow we need to reach out to clubs that are either no longer involved in slalom or have never been involved. There are a lot more clubs around these days. This is both from the point of view of numbers of events and numbers of competitors.
John Kent
I think even considering basing a ranking system on other sports such as mountain biking is a mistake. In the days before plastic boats when slalom was booming, everybody had a slalom boat. There wasn't much alternative. Nowadays everybody who starts canoeing starts in a plastic boat. Slalom boats are specialist pieces of equipment. I am not an advocate, however, of encouraging people to use plastic boats at slaloms. I am just saying we need to realise that slalom is a minority sport, always will be, and as a result of the popularity of plastic boats has become even more minor (if that makes sense), because it is less natural to have a go at slalom when you haven't got the boat already. There's nothing wrong with being a minority sport. We can still enjoy it, because it remains the sport we enjoy rather than a sport that changes continuously because it's trying to be something else all the time. Why try to force it into a position it doesn't fit?
If you really do want to follow the model of other sports, don't use mountain biking which is in a position of slalom before plastic - i.e. everyone has a mountain bike these days - but rather look at similarly minority sports such as road race cycling, say. Maybe instead of putting all paddlers in the same hierarchical ranking system, we should split them by age groups. So at a particular event, you compete in your age group rather than in a division. Divisions might be along the lines of U12, U16, U20, senior, veteran (these are guesses rather than well-considered options). There would be no such thing as promotion. Anyone could compete at any event. This would allow anyone to try some more challenging water and allow less experienced paddlers to see the good guys/gals close at hand both for inspiration and to measure themselves against. You could then compare yourself against others of your age group. If you were particularly talented, you could compete in a more senior age group.
Anyway, sorry if this rant sounds a bit naive and not-thought-through, but my main point is: slalom is a minority sport and we should be happy to live with that.
If you really do want to follow the model of other sports, don't use mountain biking which is in a position of slalom before plastic - i.e. everyone has a mountain bike these days - but rather look at similarly minority sports such as road race cycling, say. Maybe instead of putting all paddlers in the same hierarchical ranking system, we should split them by age groups. So at a particular event, you compete in your age group rather than in a division. Divisions might be along the lines of U12, U16, U20, senior, veteran (these are guesses rather than well-considered options). There would be no such thing as promotion. Anyone could compete at any event. This would allow anyone to try some more challenging water and allow less experienced paddlers to see the good guys/gals close at hand both for inspiration and to measure themselves against. You could then compare yourself against others of your age group. If you were particularly talented, you could compete in a more senior age group.
Anyway, sorry if this rant sounds a bit naive and not-thought-through, but my main point is: slalom is a minority sport and we should be happy to live with that.
-
66-1146487544
Is this a good time to re-open this thread as we approach the end of the slalom season and the issues are still fresh in our minds?
Nick originally proposed the following possible rule changes:
I believe from earlier discussion that Rule 1 was not very popular - it reduced effective water time and would be difficult to manage without significant modification to existing software programs used by clubs.
Rule 2 makes a great deal of sense and should be extended to make it mandatory that at least one of the counting events is at one of the major white water courses, e.g. Tryweryn, Tully or HPP.
Option b) of Rule 3 is the only one that makes sense with the current level of investment in slalom timing equipment available at most events.
Aggregate of 2 runs (not best two of three) is a must for Division 1 events and has been long overdue, so Rule 4 only needs minor modification, assuming Rule 1 is dismissed.
That just leaves the number of events and the sizes of the divisions to debate further. Personally if Rule 2 is applied then I think this will naturally put a break on Division 2 promotions, so I would like to see this rule change applied for a year first and then review the number of Division 2 events.
Division sizes will always be an emotive issue but personally I am in favour of change and believe that there should be more demotions as and when necessary. I believe it re-focuses those paddlers who are keen to stay at the top of the sport. New paddlers should be given the chance at the higher division and not artificially held back by imposing barriers to promotion, e.g. by reducing the number of events.
Nick originally proposed the following possible rule changes:
Motions Required at the ACM (to be drafted)
1. Rule change to allow “best run of 3” format at Division 3 and 4 events.
2. Rule change to base Division 2 points and promotion on best 5 events, and establish
points targets for promotion
3. Rule change to control “equal best times” effect. I suggest two alternative motions:
a) All events to be timed to 0.1 seconds, OR
b) Points to be based on place without regard to best times, or to put it another way, the
discarded run to be treated as a tie breaker in calculating points.
4. Rule change to allow aggregate to best two runs from 3 in Division 1
5. The management of division sizes is in the hands of the Exec, and strictly speaking it
doesn’t require a motion for a rule change. However it probably makes sense to seek
general approval from the paddlers.
I believe from earlier discussion that Rule 1 was not very popular - it reduced effective water time and would be difficult to manage without significant modification to existing software programs used by clubs.
Rule 2 makes a great deal of sense and should be extended to make it mandatory that at least one of the counting events is at one of the major white water courses, e.g. Tryweryn, Tully or HPP.
Option b) of Rule 3 is the only one that makes sense with the current level of investment in slalom timing equipment available at most events.
Aggregate of 2 runs (not best two of three) is a must for Division 1 events and has been long overdue, so Rule 4 only needs minor modification, assuming Rule 1 is dismissed.
That just leaves the number of events and the sizes of the divisions to debate further. Personally if Rule 2 is applied then I think this will naturally put a break on Division 2 promotions, so I would like to see this rule change applied for a year first and then review the number of Division 2 events.
Division sizes will always be an emotive issue but personally I am in favour of change and believe that there should be more demotions as and when necessary. I believe it re-focuses those paddlers who are keen to stay at the top of the sport. New paddlers should be given the chance at the higher division and not artificially held back by imposing barriers to promotion, e.g. by reducing the number of events.