ACM Motion 6.2 Change to Short Season Status - 'Just for Fun, to see what people think'

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:37 am

Short season to only apply to those granted ranking status, or promoted, after 30 June.

Curently promotion at any stage in the season protects the paddler from end of year demotion, ranking status protects if granted after 31st July

Nick Penfold · Post by **Nick Penfold** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 5:05 pm

Um...
I proposed this, and feedback from other people has persuaded me that I was wrong. It would be tricky to administer, confusing for paddlers and although there is a case of sorts for it it's not a very strong one.

quaker · Post by **quaker** » Fri Nov 16, 2007 9:19 pm

I see where this idea is going, but you could be a Div 1 paddler who get promoted in early May... then does the one Prem in May/June, but ends up getting demoted because they don't have the SS status.

I'm using Prem as an example as they always have that big summer domestic break. In the example a the early promotee could do five races win the Div 1 award but get demoted. Others could get promoted after the break do five races but have the comfort of the SS.

I would be very difficult to administer and quite confusing for paddlers. The other thing is that you would have to find a halfway point in the year so that there was an even split of events.

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:28 pm

As with so much of these debates, this is only an issue because we try to use our Ranking System for two contradictory purposes.

On the one hand we use it to enable us to say how good paddlers are in relation to each other. Fine: that is what a ranking system is for.

On the other hand - and this is where the damage is done to the sport - we use it to dictate which races paddlers can race at. So paddlers cannot choose to race either on the water that they like best, or, for rapidly improving paddlers, on the challenging water they need.

And yes they can judge - but why should they have to? Almost all races in Germany, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovenia, the USA, Canada, etc, and a majority of the races in France are open entry. They still have divisionally-split ranking systems. No other country does it the way we do.

We will continue to have these round-and-round debates until we decide to use our ranking system only as a ranking system, and establish open entry for all races.

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:26 pm

Anyone esle bored with reading virtually teh same post in every thread??

Come on John, you have firmly held views, and make some good points, but I for one have now been turned completely off any messages you are trying to put out by sheer repetition. The fourth time round I started treating these posts as teh spam they are and ignoring them.

PLEASE keep posting your views, but only post them once!

See you tomorrow

jim croft · Post by **jim croft** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 1:56 pm

I agree well said Colin

Jim

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:24 pm

The point being that most of the debate and most of the motions at this and every other ACM relate to the same issue: trying to do two contradictory things with the same Ranking system.

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Sat Dec 01, 2007 9:31 pm

Rejected on first vote. May have had something to do with the author of the motion asking to withdraw it, or for the meeting to vote against it.