djberriman
I sympathise with the "I've paid to race why should I judge as well" feeling and it is largely because of that sentiment that we've stuck with a single div 1 at Shepperton. The idea being that parents of junior competitors (from other clubs) can generally be persuaded once in the weekend but twice is asking a lot.
We aren't a particularly big club and at any one time we need 3 people in the canteen, 1 on the jury, 1 on start, 1 on finish, 3 in control, 5 judges, a couple of runners for the section judges, and a couple of people on safety etc. It can be cold for the Shepperton slalom so everyone needs relieving regularly + the div 1 competitors need to do their runs so we just don't have enough people to cover all the slots.
We are always really grateful to all the volunteers but to run a double div 1 we would have to use divisional paddlers. My aim would be to keep the stints fairly short and only ask for
one stint per paddler but I know it will meet with opposition, so either way we can't win.
If you can think of a way round this then you would be a star indeed!
Cost of Fuel - Singles v Doubles
-
dizzylemon
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:53 pm
- Location: south yorkshire
HI EVERYONE
theres is one other point with this years calender which other people and my self have made comments about is that there is to many events clashing as we and others do multi divs ie we do prem /1 in one class and div 2 in another.so one of are races have to be missed .i know you cant make a perfect calender to suit everyone but this years has been the worst year ever for races clashing and one day events.
due to the fuel prices people and myself included will be very selective with which races we will be doing next year as in only doing the ones we need to do .we will not be doing any one day events unless it is on are door step.
one last thing where was the sunshine at washburn for gods sake we are in july...............
theres is one other point with this years calender which other people and my self have made comments about is that there is to many events clashing as we and others do multi divs ie we do prem /1 in one class and div 2 in another.so one of are races have to be missed .i know you cant make a perfect calender to suit everyone but this years has been the worst year ever for races clashing and one day events.
due to the fuel prices people and myself included will be very selective with which races we will be doing next year as in only doing the ones we need to do .we will not be doing any one day events unless it is on are door step.
one last thing where was the sunshine at washburn for gods sake we are in july...............
-
PaulBolton
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 10:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
I'm really pleased that the committee will be examining this issue. I feel that some change will be needed or participation will inevitably fall. I'd certainly welcome some more doubles, but I recognise there are many factors to consider. Obviously, if there are some double 2/1s the judging problem is solved as one division can judge the other. I'm certainly happy to judge if it helps support our sport and I think most paddlers would too if it was a necessity to bring in popular change. I also don't see any need for section judges at Div 1s and by removing this requirement less support is needed. I had planned to do most of the Div 1s in October, however, currently I don't think I can justify doing any of them solely due to fuel costs.
Perhaps the committee could consider dropping section judges for div 1 competitions (unless they are combined with prems), but continuing to provide a jury chair and possibly a second jury member.
This would reduce the overall workload for section judges but still ensure that an experience "eye" was involved in the race overall.
It could also potentially increase the number of ordinary judges as local section judges might choose to come and help anyway.
This would reduce the overall workload for section judges but still ensure that an experience "eye" was involved in the race overall.
It could also potentially increase the number of ordinary judges as local section judges might choose to come and help anyway.
Kit Washer, Entry Clerk, Chauffeur, Reluctant Organiser, Online Entry Advocate .....
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
[QUOTE if there are some double 2/1s the judging problem is solved as one division can judge the other. I'm certainly happy to judge if it helps support our sport and I think most paddlers would too ]
Unfortunately Paul I don't think this is true. Many competitors feel that if they've paid for their run then why should they need to judge as well!
Unfortunately Paul I don't think this is true. Many competitors feel that if they've paid for their run then why should they need to judge as well!
Kit Washer, Entry Clerk, Chauffeur, Reluctant Organiser, Online Entry Advocate .....
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
You can see why its an issue - why should one paddler race for free as a Judge and another pay £17.50 and still end up paying and getting asked to judge.
As I mentioned earlier I don't see a major issue as long as paying paddlers are only expected to do say one 30 min stint if sufficient judges have not entered but a judge may well be expected to do 2 x 1 hours/1.5 hour stints.
I'd also suggest if you go down this route 'local' paddlers should be asked to do this first, my reasons for this is is that they already have the advantage of knowing the water, living locally etc and will be known to the organiser and the travelling paddler can therefore get more time to prepare, watch other paddlers etc. So for instance I would consider Washburn to be my local event.
Clearly if there are still not enough judges you can call on the paddlers from further afield.
The issues with all this is planning judging times so that there is still time to get ready and warm up without rushing and time to get some food and drink, get warm and get changed after a run.
I don't mind judging at or running other events to help our sport but I do like to concentrate on my racing when I am paying where possible.
If you know you are short on help/assistance with an event can I suggest (where its possible) to try and get other 'local' clubs to help out and work together. Many hands make light work!
KKC and Lower Wharf worked together to reinstate Howsham Weir as neither of us had enough resources or skills to run the event on our own.
Similarly KKC, Lower Wharf, Greenstar, Halifax CC (and I'm sure others I have fogotten - apologies) often assist each other with their events. Its a great way to put something back.
As I mentioned earlier I don't see a major issue as long as paying paddlers are only expected to do say one 30 min stint if sufficient judges have not entered but a judge may well be expected to do 2 x 1 hours/1.5 hour stints.
I'd also suggest if you go down this route 'local' paddlers should be asked to do this first, my reasons for this is is that they already have the advantage of knowing the water, living locally etc and will be known to the organiser and the travelling paddler can therefore get more time to prepare, watch other paddlers etc. So for instance I would consider Washburn to be my local event.
Clearly if there are still not enough judges you can call on the paddlers from further afield.
The issues with all this is planning judging times so that there is still time to get ready and warm up without rushing and time to get some food and drink, get warm and get changed after a run.
I don't mind judging at or running other events to help our sport but I do like to concentrate on my racing when I am paying where possible.
If you know you are short on help/assistance with an event can I suggest (where its possible) to try and get other 'local' clubs to help out and work together. Many hands make light work!
KKC and Lower Wharf worked together to reinstate Howsham Weir as neither of us had enough resources or skills to run the event on our own.
Similarly KKC, Lower Wharf, Greenstar, Halifax CC (and I'm sure others I have fogotten - apologies) often assist each other with their events. Its a great way to put something back.
Yes, I can see why it's an issue, and local paddlers always first on the list when we are short of judges. I had both my son and husband helping at the div 1 (and they are both in div 1). I'm also more than happy to accomodate preferences as to judging times (eg "I'd rather judge late - after my ranking runs", "I'd rather judge early so that I can get away".)
We are a bit short of local slalom clubs down our way, so this isn't always an option!
So my question remains
Would div 1 paddlers be willing to do a judging stint in return for turning a single event into a double?
We are a bit short of local slalom clubs down our way, so this isn't always an option!
So my question remains
Would div 1 paddlers be willing to do a judging stint in return for turning a single event into a double?
Kit Washer, Entry Clerk, Chauffeur, Reluctant Organiser, Online Entry Advocate .....
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
I am not sure dropping section judges from Div 1's is a good idea. Particularly if there are more double events and judging is a problem - at least you are getting good quality judging and consisitency.
There has to be some compromise - more doble events will mean judging stints for paddler, or repesentative. (I think that is how it works in many European contries). Personally if it is to work i think all paddlers should do a short spell. I did this at Llangollen once and it worked really well, the most anyone had was half an hour.
We could then possibly do away with judging runs at these events and have an open event for non ranking paddlers.
Just a few ideas!
If there is to be a pecking order then late entries should be at the top of the list!!!!!!!!!!
There has to be some compromise - more doble events will mean judging stints for paddler, or repesentative. (I think that is how it works in many European contries). Personally if it is to work i think all paddlers should do a short spell. I did this at Llangollen once and it worked really well, the most anyone had was half an hour.
We could then possibly do away with judging runs at these events and have an open event for non ranking paddlers.
Just a few ideas!
If there is to be a pecking order then late entries should be at the top of the list!!!!!!!!!!
My solution, which hasn't proved popular in the past, is to reduce the overall number of events. Promotion rules would have to be amended to compensate. The logic goes along these lines:
When slalom was in its heyday, I think there were about 8 or 9 division 1 events in a season, which is just about 1 per month. Doubles were introduced at Grandtully to encourage paddlers to make the journey north, but soon we had doubles everywhere, so the overall number of competitive events increased considerably. This devalued each event, so the attraction of going to Scotland for a double no longer had the attraction it was intended to have. Recently there seems to have been a move to reduce the number of doubles, but not reduce the overall number of events. Consequently we seem to have to attend more weekends than ever.
I feel that the overcrowded calendar spoils our sport in two ways:
It is more difficult to find free weekends to train, making development of the sport harder.
It is more difficult for paddlers to attend events from another division, making it difficult to find sufficient judges at many events.
I personally don't like doubles at division 1, they make no sense from a sport development perspective. At this level paddlers should be learning about race preparation and how to peak for events. This is impossible with a crowded calendar of doubles. I know race experience counts for a lot, and is one of the reasons that GB is relatively successful internationally, but I do think we overdo it a bit.
When slalom was in its heyday, I think there were about 8 or 9 division 1 events in a season, which is just about 1 per month. Doubles were introduced at Grandtully to encourage paddlers to make the journey north, but soon we had doubles everywhere, so the overall number of competitive events increased considerably. This devalued each event, so the attraction of going to Scotland for a double no longer had the attraction it was intended to have. Recently there seems to have been a move to reduce the number of doubles, but not reduce the overall number of events. Consequently we seem to have to attend more weekends than ever.
I feel that the overcrowded calendar spoils our sport in two ways:
It is more difficult to find free weekends to train, making development of the sport harder.
It is more difficult for paddlers to attend events from another division, making it difficult to find sufficient judges at many events.
I personally don't like doubles at division 1, they make no sense from a sport development perspective. At this level paddlers should be learning about race preparation and how to peak for events. This is impossible with a crowded calendar of doubles. I know race experience counts for a lot, and is one of the reasons that GB is relatively successful internationally, but I do think we overdo it a bit.
No Dave I do not agree--certainly juniors should not be aiming to 'peak' at certain events, they should be aiming to continue their development across all seasons.
Nor do I think that paddlers should have to judge at events, if they have entered and paid their fees this should make them exempt, I think it is good if paddlers want to gain judging expereince but do not think that it is compulsary.
On the question of double events, I feel that they can only make sense, it is costing ever incresing ammounts to travel to events, whilst those in the upper divisions will bear this cost the lower divisions will simply not travel, I'm not sure what the solution is but feel that more should be done from a regional perspective
Nor do I think that paddlers should have to judge at events, if they have entered and paid their fees this should make them exempt, I think it is good if paddlers want to gain judging expereince but do not think that it is compulsary.
On the question of double events, I feel that they can only make sense, it is costing ever incresing ammounts to travel to events, whilst those in the upper divisions will bear this cost the lower divisions will simply not travel, I'm not sure what the solution is but feel that more should be done from a regional perspective
davebrads wrote:Doubles were introduced at Grandtully to encourage paddlers to make the journey north, but soon we had doubles everywhere, so the overall number of competitive events increased considerably. This devalued each event, so the attraction of going to Scotland for a double no longer had the attraction it was intended to have.
Why was it that doubles became prevalent everywhere? ???
Interesting historical point which cuts both ways now - I did travel South to Howsham Weir as a double, but won't be at any Washburns this season, though went to the double there a couple of years back; the same year I went to the double at Bala.
It's simply not viable for me, in all sorts of ways - finance, family, work - to travel to single events throughout a season. I'll look for doubles which will allow me to a) get a couple of races in; b) paddle new and different water; c) visit and stay in parts of the country I wouldn't otherwise; d) meet new people I'd never meet otherwise; e) feel I've been somewhere and done something, rather than been just constantly on the road.
I would tend to agree with Dave on the numbers of Div 1's. As he states when slalom was in it's hayday there were only 9 and the only double was in Tully. The other races were weekend events having teams (very competative) on the Sat which acted as practice runs, as well as an official practice run.
Promotion was end of season so the competition for points was huge! before anyone claims it leaves paddlers in Div 1 that should be in prem -one of my boys missed promotion one year by a hairs bredth, ther following year went on to win the first 5 races and knew he was Div 1 champion, he gained a huge amount of confidence and was selected for the junior worlds (aga 16) - end of season promotion doesn't hold anyone back!
They were also very social weekends, we made many good friends over a BBQ and bottle of wine, all around the country, most of which we are still in touch with. OK it meant staying for the weekend - but so do double events - so cost of accomodation V cost of fuel has to be taken into account here as well.
However times have moved on and over the years the format of the races have been allowed to change. The question is what do the majority of people want? The comments on this forum are from only a small group of people - interesting, does this mean everyone else is happy as things are, or not really bothered?
It has been the Slalom committees intention to reduce gradually the number of Div 1's but this is not easy - always some reason to keep all races!
Can we have comments please both ways - if you like the arrangement of races as they are please say so - are the requests for more doubles just from the minority writing on this forum??????
Perhaps we should sent out a questionnaire - but that probably won't be returned by many, or do a survey at a race - worth considering.
I'm playing devils advocate here to hopefully stir up both sides of the argument before our next Committee meeting.
Anne
Promotion was end of season so the competition for points was huge! before anyone claims it leaves paddlers in Div 1 that should be in prem -one of my boys missed promotion one year by a hairs bredth, ther following year went on to win the first 5 races and knew he was Div 1 champion, he gained a huge amount of confidence and was selected for the junior worlds (aga 16) - end of season promotion doesn't hold anyone back!
They were also very social weekends, we made many good friends over a BBQ and bottle of wine, all around the country, most of which we are still in touch with. OK it meant staying for the weekend - but so do double events - so cost of accomodation V cost of fuel has to be taken into account here as well.
However times have moved on and over the years the format of the races have been allowed to change. The question is what do the majority of people want? The comments on this forum are from only a small group of people - interesting, does this mean everyone else is happy as things are, or not really bothered?
It has been the Slalom committees intention to reduce gradually the number of Div 1's but this is not easy - always some reason to keep all races!
Can we have comments please both ways - if you like the arrangement of races as they are please say so - are the requests for more doubles just from the minority writing on this forum??????
Perhaps we should sent out a questionnaire - but that probably won't be returned by many, or do a survey at a race - worth considering.
I'm playing devils advocate here to hopefully stir up both sides of the argument before our next Committee meeting.
Anne
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
Just my opinion.... comments.... not designed to upset anyone.... as I don't know the full picture please bear with me if I am ill informed.
"It has been the Slalom committees intention to reduce gradually the number of Div 1's but this is not easy"
Why is this policy? I guess the idea behind this is that the committee think it means more competitors at races and slower promotions. Is there any evidence for this?
I really don't understand either point of view if thats the case.
If its because of timing team issues and sector judge issues then I think we have to find solutions to those problems not restrict compeitive racing because of them. As mentioned before allowing organisers to run their own timing and not using sector judges at some events. Yes I'll be fed up if I get given a 50 in error but its not the end of the world (but don't quote me on that!).
As you say these are only the comments of a few.
I do think you should undertake some sort of survey of paddlers as otherwise the sport heads off in a direction paddlers possiblly disagree with and then you might wonder why entries drop.
At the moment the slalom committee appear to be making judgements like the above possibly without regard to what the paddlers want, based on the thoughts of a few, eg. the committee and those they consult. If you haven't surveyed the majority of paddlers how do you know what we want? How can policy therefore meet the expecations of the paddlers?
Times change, as do costs, the variety and accessibility of other sports etc and perhaps we have to change with them and not try and hold on to the past too much.
If you do send out such a questionnaire please ensure it is not unintentionally weighted. I've had many over the years which unintentionally or otherwise do not actually allow you to specify you want and I've not returned them as to do so would be to 'vote' for things which I do not agree with and do not reflect my opinion.
For instance an option might be:-
Do you want a) More Doubles (thus less events) or b) More events (thus more singles) when what I would vote for is the same or more events and making as many as possible doubles. So I guess what I am saying is don't restrict what the answers can be such that it skews the results.
The correct questions might be something like :-
Do you want a) More Doubles b) The same c) Less Doubles
Do you want a) More Events b) The same c) Less Events
Just a simplistic example but I hope you see what I mean.
In my personal opinion long gaps between races is disappointing. I personally feel regular races means more chance of competitors turning up and better competition. You will get those who will race most races and those who only have limited dates they can make who get more choice and thus are likely to stay racing rather than realise its pointless and give up.
From the general chat I have with Div 1 paddlers I know I would expect most to say they would prefer more racing on a regular basis and with as many doubles as possible (Doubles div1s, Double div1/2s or 1/Ps). Perhaps I'm wrong but like the committe I probably don't know as my sample is not large enough.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds regular training on suitable water an issue - being able to practice at events and race regularly helps a lot. Those with easier regular access to suitable water might disagree.
If suitability of the water levels is an issue then my suggestion is that some of the results have to come from certain races/venues. Thus you might say that at least 2 results have to come from say HPP/Wasburn/Tees/Tully for instance. That way paddlers can't simply cherry pick the courses that suit them best simply to get promoted. Thus you might get two good results from an 'easy' Double but only be able to use one towards your final promotion.
Personally I don't see the issue. Once promoted you'll soon learn to paddle the bigger stuff (or not as the case may be). Whats the issue with sitting at the bottom of a division for a while or getting demoted?
"It has been the Slalom committees intention to reduce gradually the number of Div 1's but this is not easy"
Why is this policy? I guess the idea behind this is that the committee think it means more competitors at races and slower promotions. Is there any evidence for this?
I really don't understand either point of view if thats the case.
If its because of timing team issues and sector judge issues then I think we have to find solutions to those problems not restrict compeitive racing because of them. As mentioned before allowing organisers to run their own timing and not using sector judges at some events. Yes I'll be fed up if I get given a 50 in error but its not the end of the world (but don't quote me on that!).
As you say these are only the comments of a few.
I do think you should undertake some sort of survey of paddlers as otherwise the sport heads off in a direction paddlers possiblly disagree with and then you might wonder why entries drop.
At the moment the slalom committee appear to be making judgements like the above possibly without regard to what the paddlers want, based on the thoughts of a few, eg. the committee and those they consult. If you haven't surveyed the majority of paddlers how do you know what we want? How can policy therefore meet the expecations of the paddlers?
Times change, as do costs, the variety and accessibility of other sports etc and perhaps we have to change with them and not try and hold on to the past too much.
If you do send out such a questionnaire please ensure it is not unintentionally weighted. I've had many over the years which unintentionally or otherwise do not actually allow you to specify you want and I've not returned them as to do so would be to 'vote' for things which I do not agree with and do not reflect my opinion.
For instance an option might be:-
Do you want a) More Doubles (thus less events) or b) More events (thus more singles) when what I would vote for is the same or more events and making as many as possible doubles. So I guess what I am saying is don't restrict what the answers can be such that it skews the results.
The correct questions might be something like :-
Do you want a) More Doubles b) The same c) Less Doubles
Do you want a) More Events b) The same c) Less Events
Just a simplistic example but I hope you see what I mean.
In my personal opinion long gaps between races is disappointing. I personally feel regular races means more chance of competitors turning up and better competition. You will get those who will race most races and those who only have limited dates they can make who get more choice and thus are likely to stay racing rather than realise its pointless and give up.
From the general chat I have with Div 1 paddlers I know I would expect most to say they would prefer more racing on a regular basis and with as many doubles as possible (Doubles div1s, Double div1/2s or 1/Ps). Perhaps I'm wrong but like the committe I probably don't know as my sample is not large enough.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds regular training on suitable water an issue - being able to practice at events and race regularly helps a lot. Those with easier regular access to suitable water might disagree.
If suitability of the water levels is an issue then my suggestion is that some of the results have to come from certain races/venues. Thus you might say that at least 2 results have to come from say HPP/Wasburn/Tees/Tully for instance. That way paddlers can't simply cherry pick the courses that suit them best simply to get promoted. Thus you might get two good results from an 'easy' Double but only be able to use one towards your final promotion.
Personally I don't see the issue. Once promoted you'll soon learn to paddle the bigger stuff (or not as the case may be). Whats the issue with sitting at the bottom of a division for a while or getting demoted?
-
PaulBolton
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 10:30 pm
- Location: Lincoln
With new pumped, olympic grade, slalom courses coming in Cardiff and London will there not be new venues where everyone will want to race? If so, and if the Slalom Committee wants to cut the number of events regardless, can we expect several current Div 1 venues to be disestablished circa 2010/11? Is it potentially goodbye Llandysul, Washburn, Shepperton etc etc (these are random choices, I don't know anything!) or is there a plan to incorporate the new and keep the traditional venues?