I don't think it is good making it harder to get promoted and cutting down division sizes because it is not promoting the sport as it should be. The reason being is that it upsets people(especially kids) when they do really well and not get promoted because it is so hard.
The other week at Wagon lane 3/4 I saw a lad crying his eyes out because he put in full effort and due to the lack of slaloms he was competing against about 50 people who where better than him.
The question is;
Is this the way forward.
Is it good to cut division sizes?
-
Nick Penfold
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm
Nobody competed with "about 50 people" at Wagon Lane. Here are the numbers that raced in K1M:
Saturday: Div 3 17, Div 4 12
Sunday: Div 3 19, Div 4 6
It shouldn't be easy to get up to Div 2, it should be quite hard to get up to Div 1, and it should be tough to get into Prem.
It doesn't help paddlers in Div 3 and 4 to make promotion so easy that only poor paddlers are left there to race against.
By the way, there have been 27 races in Div 3 so far this year.
Saturday: Div 3 17, Div 4 12
Sunday: Div 3 19, Div 4 6
It shouldn't be easy to get up to Div 2, it should be quite hard to get up to Div 1, and it should be tough to get into Prem.
It doesn't help paddlers in Div 3 and 4 to make promotion so easy that only poor paddlers are left there to race against.
By the way, there have been 27 races in Div 3 so far this year.
-
Big Ginger
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 7:12 pm
- Location: Doncaster
-
Nick Penfold
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm
I would love to go back to a Prem-plus-5-divisions structure, if we had the numbers racing to support it. And no, experience says that introducing a Div 5 would not increase the numbers. The past fall in numbers came before we scrapped it.
I'm certain there were paddlers at Selection who would have been crying if they allowed themselves to. Sport is tough. That's why it's worth competing. Winning has to mean something.
On the other hand, if you would like to have juniors-only races outside the ranking system, any organiser is free to do it.
I'm certain there were paddlers at Selection who would have been crying if they allowed themselves to. Sport is tough. That's why it's worth competing. Winning has to mean something.
On the other hand, if you would like to have juniors-only races outside the ranking system, any organiser is free to do it.
-
Big Ginger
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 7:12 pm
- Location: Doncaster
It was hard enough last to win season. Winning still meant just as much last season. And also its not all about winning. Its enjoyment. And you dont enjoy it if every race you go to you lose because your forcing everyone to go to every single race. I agree with the number of 3/4 but there are nearly double the number of 3/4 than there are div 2sNobody enjoys waiting for 3 hours for a run
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
As I never tire (???) of pointing out, this problem is caused by our trying to use our Ranking System for two ontradictory purposes, unlike not only the major Slalom nations, but any other Slalom nation I know of:
1) To tell paddlers how good they are relative to other paddlers (which is what a Ranking System is for)
2) In an attempt to do the impossible: to tell paddlers what races they should and shouldn't enter to aid their development (which I would argue no system can do: it is their coach's job)
This debate is going to go on and on until we decouple these two purposes
Two ways of doing that:
a) Adopt the French system whereby any racer in any race has his result compared to that of a mythical 'ideal paddler' (M. Base) and ranking points etc awarded on that basis.
We do not have the resources, either financial or technical, to run such a system.
b) Adopt the Open Entry system used in virtually every Slalom nation, whereby any paddler can enter any race (NOT as a Judge) including (whatever the Exec. says) 12-year-olds entering Internationals
In the Czech Republic and in Slovakia, ranking status is awarded to particular races; only paddlers in those Divisions get points at those races; but that is in a column on the far right of the Result Sheet: every KIM etc apears on the same results sheet
(b) would, I feel solve the problems highlighted; so let's get on and do it (a motion to that effect will, I hope get put forward at the next ACM ...
1) To tell paddlers how good they are relative to other paddlers (which is what a Ranking System is for)
2) In an attempt to do the impossible: to tell paddlers what races they should and shouldn't enter to aid their development (which I would argue no system can do: it is their coach's job)
This debate is going to go on and on until we decouple these two purposes
Two ways of doing that:
a) Adopt the French system whereby any racer in any race has his result compared to that of a mythical 'ideal paddler' (M. Base) and ranking points etc awarded on that basis.
We do not have the resources, either financial or technical, to run such a system.
b) Adopt the Open Entry system used in virtually every Slalom nation, whereby any paddler can enter any race (NOT as a Judge) including (whatever the Exec. says) 12-year-olds entering Internationals
In the Czech Republic and in Slovakia, ranking status is awarded to particular races; only paddlers in those Divisions get points at those races; but that is in a column on the far right of the Result Sheet: every KIM etc apears on the same results sheet
(b) would, I feel solve the problems highlighted; so let's get on and do it (a motion to that effect will, I hope get put forward at the next ACM ...
-
Big Ginger
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 7:12 pm
- Location: Doncaster
John has promoted the open entry system before, however I have reservations:
1) Our current system has been very successful at producing top athletes - in fact 20 years ago or so, it was almost the only system we had, and we didn't do too bad.
2) If events are all open, results don't have the same importance, so there is not the imperitive to improve.
3) The lad that was crying was learning an important lesson. He can go two ways, deal with it or give up. If he deals with it, then when he does get promoted, he will feel so much better about it. The idea of not upsetting people leads to the damaging ideas of non-competitive sports that grew out of the 60s, and destroyed school sports in the 80s and 90s.
This is not to say that I am totally against John's open slalom ideas, I just want to be careful that we are not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The Czech and Slovak idea sounds interesting, but is sounds as if they still have a divisional system, and therefore there will still be winners and losers, so it won't help Ginger's little lad.
1) Our current system has been very successful at producing top athletes - in fact 20 years ago or so, it was almost the only system we had, and we didn't do too bad.
2) If events are all open, results don't have the same importance, so there is not the imperitive to improve.
3) The lad that was crying was learning an important lesson. He can go two ways, deal with it or give up. If he deals with it, then when he does get promoted, he will feel so much better about it. The idea of not upsetting people leads to the damaging ideas of non-competitive sports that grew out of the 60s, and destroyed school sports in the 80s and 90s.
This is not to say that I am totally against John's open slalom ideas, I just want to be careful that we are not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The Czech and Slovak idea sounds interesting, but is sounds as if they still have a divisional system, and therefore there will still be winners and losers, so it won't help Ginger's little lad.
John
Would the open system stop course designers pushing paddlers to the limits of there abilities by making a course that anyone is capable of competing on?
I also agree with Dave promotion must be earned and if you are not good enough your results will find you out. Unfortunately the lower divisions are not strong enough and there are not enough paddlers at events to raise the level of competition. When I was promoted from Div2 to Div1 I did this by finishing third out of 120 K1 men on the Graveyard. That was followed up by competing on the following day against 111 K1 men in Div 1 at Bala Mill. I know we have seen a small upturn in slalom over the past couple of years but to move the sport forward we need to encourage people into the sport and strengthen the lower divisions which will push the standard higher and unfortunately see more upset kids because they were not good enough.
Also if you read this and draw the conclusion that the number of events needs cutting to strengthen the lower divisions you are wrong. These lower division events give the sport its visibility to people who may have not considered competing.
Would the open system stop course designers pushing paddlers to the limits of there abilities by making a course that anyone is capable of competing on?
I also agree with Dave promotion must be earned and if you are not good enough your results will find you out. Unfortunately the lower divisions are not strong enough and there are not enough paddlers at events to raise the level of competition. When I was promoted from Div2 to Div1 I did this by finishing third out of 120 K1 men on the Graveyard. That was followed up by competing on the following day against 111 K1 men in Div 1 at Bala Mill. I know we have seen a small upturn in slalom over the past couple of years but to move the sport forward we need to encourage people into the sport and strengthen the lower divisions which will push the standard higher and unfortunately see more upset kids because they were not good enough.
Also if you read this and draw the conclusion that the number of events needs cutting to strengthen the lower divisions you are wrong. These lower division events give the sport its visibility to people who may have not considered competing.
Firstly I would agree that making kids cry is a part of sport, and indeed growing up. A blunt way of putting it maybe - perhaps better is that it's only sense of failure that gives you sense of achievement.
In terms of open events - I as a competitor welcome it, although for a different reason. John - you sum up my point quite well by saying it's the paddler's coach who should decide what water they're ready for. The whole sport, including the division structure, is set-up around juniors and their development up to elite level (whether it works or not isn't for me to decide...). If we get more young adults in to the sport, then their children will normally follow. I think the simplest add on to the current structure is to have more open events so travelling is reduced. A fit 20 or 30 something trying slalom will get (rightly) into Div 1 within 3-4 years and probably won't want to travel the country to go to slaloms (financial and time commitment with work and probably young family). It's well documented in other sports that this age group is the one missing from sport, but also that getting young family groups into sport is the way to bring up numbers in the long term. It's a lot easier to persuade mum/dad to take children to a slalom if they're competing themselves.
On the flip side open events give their own problems - where do you get judges from? I know many events struggle as is, but open events for all will cause more struggles. Many clubs aren't big enough to provide people to judge all day as well as other duties. How do the clubs putting on winter slaloms cope? What about Scottish clubs who regularly have open events alongside ranking events? I'm sure somebody knows the answer.
In terms of open events - I as a competitor welcome it, although for a different reason. John - you sum up my point quite well by saying it's the paddler's coach who should decide what water they're ready for. The whole sport, including the division structure, is set-up around juniors and their development up to elite level (whether it works or not isn't for me to decide...). If we get more young adults in to the sport, then their children will normally follow. I think the simplest add on to the current structure is to have more open events so travelling is reduced. A fit 20 or 30 something trying slalom will get (rightly) into Div 1 within 3-4 years and probably won't want to travel the country to go to slaloms (financial and time commitment with work and probably young family). It's well documented in other sports that this age group is the one missing from sport, but also that getting young family groups into sport is the way to bring up numbers in the long term. It's a lot easier to persuade mum/dad to take children to a slalom if they're competing themselves.
On the flip side open events give their own problems - where do you get judges from? I know many events struggle as is, but open events for all will cause more struggles. Many clubs aren't big enough to provide people to judge all day as well as other duties. How do the clubs putting on winter slaloms cope? What about Scottish clubs who regularly have open events alongside ranking events? I'm sure somebody knows the answer.
-
Canadian Paddler
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
Thinking of the first question, I think that bigger events will help Gingers lad. Back in the days of dug out canoes, when I started, it was common to have 15-20 people promoted, this meant that if you were good enough you had an excellent chance of promotion. Now with 5 paddlers in Div 4, if one of them is a polo player from a local club, producing flash in the pan results then no one trying to get promoted actually makes it. So overall I am in favour of returning to a system where the numbers in a divisional go down as the division gets higher, but also so that the numbers of paddlers at an event are consistent, or even get smaller as you go up the divisions.
6 padlers in div 4 is not a very good shop window to encourage participation, makes us look even more of a minority sport.
Deja Vu, John is talking of wholesael change of the ranking system, I await a proposal that deasl with the practicalities of actually running the events, or are all paddlers going to judge as well? On a practical front, last time I looked at Slasoft (admittedly a long time ago) it coped very well with having non ranking paddlers in amongst the ranked paddlers. It is easy to do that on a spreadsheet as well, so technically no issue, just manpower, and, is it the right thing for the sport?
As for coping with Winter Slaloms and judges, I do not ask people to sit in the snow and judge gates, I try to put up a course that can be judged by a mobile judge, and get a small group of, well wrapped up, friends to walk the course judging it (helps to have a weir for this!).
6 padlers in div 4 is not a very good shop window to encourage participation, makes us look even more of a minority sport.
Deja Vu, John is talking of wholesael change of the ranking system, I await a proposal that deasl with the practicalities of actually running the events, or are all paddlers going to judge as well? On a practical front, last time I looked at Slasoft (admittedly a long time ago) it coped very well with having non ranking paddlers in amongst the ranked paddlers. It is easy to do that on a spreadsheet as well, so technically no issue, just manpower, and, is it the right thing for the sport?
As for coping with Winter Slaloms and judges, I do not ask people to sit in the snow and judge gates, I try to put up a course that can be judged by a mobile judge, and get a small group of, well wrapped up, friends to walk the course judging it (helps to have a weir for this!).
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
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points
What I've found most surprising in this thread is the lack of enthusiasm of all but a few paddlers to tackle a percieve problem. If in the good ol' days the system worked - why not return to it? If it didn't why not embrace a new proposal and try it - especially one that been tried and tested elsewhere. If it doesn't work, try something else - but for goodness sake don't argue why the current system doesn't work.
On the question of the number of races, why is there such a discrepancy between Div 3 (27 races so far) and Div 1 (only 5)? Surely by giving people more opportunity to get prompted, you are exacerbating the current decline of the lower divisions (let alone water down the upper ones). Surely the position isn't (necessarily) to reduce the number of competitiors in Prem and Div 1, but to make sure that those who are there, are in a position to compete at that level?
On the question of the number of races, why is there such a discrepancy between Div 3 (27 races so far) and Div 1 (only 5)? Surely by giving people more opportunity to get prompted, you are exacerbating the current decline of the lower divisions (let alone water down the upper ones). Surely the position isn't (necessarily) to reduce the number of competitiors in Prem and Div 1, but to make sure that those who are there, are in a position to compete at that level?
-
Dave Royle
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 11:02 pm
I think most people don't know how interpret the question, nevermind know the answer.
Is it good to cut division sizes? No. If we cut all the Division sizes, we cut down the total number of paddlers.
Better questions might be:
Should we reduce the numbers in Div 1 and Prem?
Is it too easy to get promoted?
Should more people be demoted each year?
Is it good to cut division sizes? No. If we cut all the Division sizes, we cut down the total number of paddlers.
Better questions might be:
Should we reduce the numbers in Div 1 and Prem?
Is it too easy to get promoted?
Should more people be demoted each year?
In the K1 I am pretty happy with the structure. I have recently moved to Div 2 and am happy with the speed it has taken me to get there and feel that I am at about the right level. However, I do feel that I was promoted out of Div 4 too quickly. I had never been on moving water before and was promoted at my 2nd event. The reason I was promoted was that the much better paddler had been promoted the day before leaving three of us on the second day. One did not make it down the course upright, the other missed a large number of the gates, I got them all and was promoted. I could have one with a couple more events before hitting Div 3.
On the other hand (as Canadian Paddler well knows) I am getting slightly frustrated as to how long it is taking to get out of Div 4 in the C2. On more than one occassion this season my partner and I would have been promoted if our time was compared against ALL the promoted Div 4 men, not just the top Div 4 man. We have been in a postion where several men were promoted and using the multiplier we would have been ranked second. The second, third and fourth placed K1 paddler make it up and we dont under the existing rules... That doesn't even take into account events where experienced K1 paddlers enter at Div 4 (rightly so as they have never slalomed before) and record times that are much faster than the other Div 4 paddlers. Some organisers are better than others at suggesting that these entrants apply for ranking at a higher Div.
On the other hand (as Canadian Paddler well knows) I am getting slightly frustrated as to how long it is taking to get out of Div 4 in the C2. On more than one occassion this season my partner and I would have been promoted if our time was compared against ALL the promoted Div 4 men, not just the top Div 4 man. We have been in a postion where several men were promoted and using the multiplier we would have been ranked second. The second, third and fourth placed K1 paddler make it up and we dont under the existing rules... That doesn't even take into account events where experienced K1 paddlers enter at Div 4 (rightly so as they have never slalomed before) and record times that are much faster than the other Div 4 paddlers. Some organisers are better than others at suggesting that these entrants apply for ranking at a higher Div.