As it looks like the cost of fuel is going to remain high I think this topic should be re-visited before next year's calender is finalised.
The last poll on the singles v doubles was in favour of more doubles and this was before the major increase in fuel prices.
The high cost of fuel and downturn in the economy will naturally discourage participation. Therefore I think it would be prudent to increase the amount of doubles next year to off-set this effect.
What do YOU think?
Cost of Fuel - Singles v Doubles
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
I agree. I am heading up to Washburn for the Div 2 next weekend but did have a re-think having seen how much we spent on fuel going to Hull for the Canoe Polo last weekend. I am lucky to have a reasonably well paid job and usually share lifts with a friend of mine but I know that not everyone is that lucky.
Generally Div 2's are doubles so it is not so much of a problem for me yet but I hope one day to get to the dizzy heights of Div 1 which appear to be more singles and would therefore be more of a problem.
Generally Div 2's are doubles so it is not so much of a problem for me yet but I hope one day to get to the dizzy heights of Div 1 which appear to be more singles and would therefore be more of a problem.
There are loads of double Div 2/3 events so I assume we are talking about Div 1 events. As far as I know the same clubs have applied for exactly the same Div 1 events as last year, and so there aren't any more doubles planned.
On the basis that clubs had to have their entries in for next year by the end of May or June then we are too late again to change anything for next year.
If people believe this is a major issue, and I for one certainly do in the current economic climate, then the slalom clubs need to raise this as an issue formally with the Slalom Committee in writing, and not by posting on here.
On the basis that clubs had to have their entries in for next year by the end of May or June then we are too late again to change anything for next year.
If people believe this is a major issue, and I for one certainly do in the current economic climate, then the slalom clubs need to raise this as an issue formally with the Slalom Committee in writing, and not by posting on here.
The above is the personal opinion of Mark Shaw and does not reflect the views of either the BCU or England Slalom Committees.
-
Phil Stevo
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:14 pm
Dee at the Shepperton 1/2 at the start of the season had a 'poll' going on the day asking peoples opinion whether the Div 1 should be a 2 day affair or not. From memory of the list, the overwhelming response seemed to be for a double div1 - it was actually staged, I believe as a double div 2, single div 1, with most of the Div 1's doing judges runs on the Saturday to compete on the Sunday. The only problem was on the Sunday there was a lack of judges - hence parents & supporters were drafted in.
It would certainly make economical sense to make the 1/2's double days with perhaps (and standing by to get abused for the next comment :p !!) the courses 'favouring' 1 division over another each day - although this doesn't always work.
Anyway hoping for more double days next year.
DT
It would certainly make economical sense to make the 1/2's double days with perhaps (and standing by to get abused for the next comment :p !!) the courses 'favouring' 1 division over another each day - although this doesn't always work.
Anyway hoping for more double days next year.
DT
Ok to run more div 1 doubles we would have to reduce the number of venues, we can't expect the timing team and section judges to go to even more races and adding races would just dilute the numbers at each, so which events do you suggest we drop, I kmow there will be some very ####ed off clubs if we drop them!
-
Phil Stevo
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:14 pm
I know that slaloms will not run without the timing team and section judges and their efforts are valued by all.
The issue here though is about the cost of getting to races and the above mentioned do receive expences.
Do we want participation to grow or decrease? Maybe we just need to put a bit more thought into this before next year's calendar is put out.
As an example this year's Washburns are:
1st weekend: single div2 and Yorkshire champs.
2nd weekend: single div2, single div1
3rd weekend: single div1, single prem
If this is re-configured for next year to:
1st weekend: double div2
2nd weekend: double div1
3rd weekend: Prem and Yorkshire champs.
This means the div2's and div1's still get their 2 races but with only one trip. Also if Opens are added to the weekends those that would like more time on the lovely Washburn and can afford it, can race all 3 weekends.
This way the timing team and section judges just have the 2 trips to make the same as this year.
As John said - what's the problem?
The issue here though is about the cost of getting to races and the above mentioned do receive expences.
Do we want participation to grow or decrease? Maybe we just need to put a bit more thought into this before next year's calendar is put out.
As an example this year's Washburns are:
1st weekend: single div2 and Yorkshire champs.
2nd weekend: single div2, single div1
3rd weekend: single div1, single prem
If this is re-configured for next year to:
1st weekend: double div2
2nd weekend: double div1
3rd weekend: Prem and Yorkshire champs.
This means the div2's and div1's still get their 2 races but with only one trip. Also if Opens are added to the weekends those that would like more time on the lovely Washburn and can afford it, can race all 3 weekends.
This way the timing team and section judges just have the 2 trips to make the same as this year.
As John said - what's the problem?
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
Not sure how adding more races would dilute the numbers at each. By making them doubles it is more likely people will attend as they get more value for their money. The major cost of an entry for most people is travel. Thus entering a race as a double costs approximately half as much as a race at a single. Given most people will make a weekend of it and turn up on a Friday they will often get some free practice too.
Leaving it as is will dilute entries as as Phil states (and I have thought this myself) we won't go to distant single races as the cost is too much. Paying say £70 in fuel to attend a race plus other costs just isn't worth it - the real cost of running the car is much greater - fuel is only one component. The other problem is time travelling why would anyone want to spend 8-10 hours driving at the weekend (which on your own is tiring/dangerous) just for a single race? If I can get 2 or 3 days paddling for the same investment in travelling time and money then which one am I more likely to attend? A single or a double. I've already not attended single events this year for this very reason and I am lucky enough to earn a fair bit. I'm not sure how some manage.
If the timing team and section judges are over stretched (and may I take this opportunity to thank them for the effort they put in) then should we not look at solving this problem rather than restricting slalom because of it.
Perhaps we can use less complicated more modern timing kit which is easier to run by clubs (such as we saw at the Vet champs in Czech) which can be passed around events just as the Tutty is. We manage to run lower ranking events so I don't see why with the right kit we can't run basic timing gear. That would take some of the strain off the Timing team who could concentrate on Prems and those Div 1's where the club could not run timing for any reason.
Again if sector judges are an issue perhaps we have to look at whether they are needed for Div 1's and leave them to concentrate on Prems.
I realise planning the diary is an awful task and am glad that Anne is willing to do it. I am sure she gets loads of grief (as all organisers do as competitors don't understand the full picture) but I wish the Slalom Committee would listen to majority of paddlers who appear to keep asking for doubles rather than singles.
Leaving it as is will dilute entries as as Phil states (and I have thought this myself) we won't go to distant single races as the cost is too much. Paying say £70 in fuel to attend a race plus other costs just isn't worth it - the real cost of running the car is much greater - fuel is only one component. The other problem is time travelling why would anyone want to spend 8-10 hours driving at the weekend (which on your own is tiring/dangerous) just for a single race? If I can get 2 or 3 days paddling for the same investment in travelling time and money then which one am I more likely to attend? A single or a double. I've already not attended single events this year for this very reason and I am lucky enough to earn a fair bit. I'm not sure how some manage.
If the timing team and section judges are over stretched (and may I take this opportunity to thank them for the effort they put in) then should we not look at solving this problem rather than restricting slalom because of it.
Perhaps we can use less complicated more modern timing kit which is easier to run by clubs (such as we saw at the Vet champs in Czech) which can be passed around events just as the Tutty is. We manage to run lower ranking events so I don't see why with the right kit we can't run basic timing gear. That would take some of the strain off the Timing team who could concentrate on Prems and those Div 1's where the club could not run timing for any reason.
Again if sector judges are an issue perhaps we have to look at whether they are needed for Div 1's and leave them to concentrate on Prems.
I realise planning the diary is an awful task and am glad that Anne is willing to do it. I am sure she gets loads of grief (as all organisers do as competitors don't understand the full picture) but I wish the Slalom Committee would listen to majority of paddlers who appear to keep asking for doubles rather than singles.
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
From the other angle it also makes much more 'economic' sense for the organisers too. Setting up a course can take 2 or 3 days in some cases, doing that for a single event is soul destroying. In addition there is the lost revenue from camping, food etc. Given that the BCU take a large slice of entry fees this is where clubs cover their costs and if they are lucky make a little profit to plough back in to paddler development.
Thus from a club 'investment' point of view in time and effort to run an event doubles make much more sense than singles. Its easier at places with the kit is in place (such as HPP) but please remember to consider those who have to turn up at a river with numerous van loads of gear and have a river and a few trees as the starting point.
Thus from a club 'investment' point of view in time and effort to run an event doubles make much more sense than singles. Its easier at places with the kit is in place (such as HPP) but please remember to consider those who have to turn up at a river with numerous van loads of gear and have a river and a few trees as the starting point.
Dadstaxi is right that I had a poll going at Shepperton. The premise was that, IF we made it a double div 1/2, then entries would be closed a few days before the event (for both divisions) whereas with a double div 2 and single div 1 we closed entries at 10am on Saturday.
The majority of those that signed the poll were in div 1 and wanted a double div 1. There were a few div 1s and div 2s that wanted to revert to single div2, single div1 and be allowed to enter on Sunday mornings. The remaining div 2s that signed went for double div 2/single div 1.
My own preference is a double div 1/2 and closing entries the Wednesday before the event, BUT getting people to volunteer to judge is difficult. On the Saturday we had lots of div 1 paddlers who were happy to judge but come Sunday it really was a case of press-ganging friends and supporters. Press-ganging two days running is bound to be harder
The Shepperton committee, understandably is concerned that we just couldn't get enough judges to man a double div 1 and we have therefore stuck with last years format.
So, perhaps my poll for next year will be:
Would you, as a div 1 paddler, prefer a double div 1 event (as opposed to a single) if this meant that
a) you were required to do at least one judging stint over the course of the weekend.
b) entries closed on the Wednesday prior to the event.
If people still vote for the double then maybe we will change the application for 2010
The majority of those that signed the poll were in div 1 and wanted a double div 1. There were a few div 1s and div 2s that wanted to revert to single div2, single div1 and be allowed to enter on Sunday mornings. The remaining div 2s that signed went for double div 2/single div 1.
My own preference is a double div 1/2 and closing entries the Wednesday before the event, BUT getting people to volunteer to judge is difficult. On the Saturday we had lots of div 1 paddlers who were happy to judge but come Sunday it really was a case of press-ganging friends and supporters. Press-ganging two days running is bound to be harder
The Shepperton committee, understandably is concerned that we just couldn't get enough judges to man a double div 1 and we have therefore stuck with last years format.
So, perhaps my poll for next year will be:
Would you, as a div 1 paddler, prefer a double div 1 event (as opposed to a single) if this meant that
a) you were required to do at least one judging stint over the course of the weekend.
b) entries closed on the Wednesday prior to the event.
If people still vote for the double then maybe we will change the application for 2010
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!
Personally I dont bother with events anymore unless they are doubles. As im a student I work most weekends, so if i want to compete it means taking a weekend off work. so i dont want to travel to singles as this means less money and annoying my employers. also living in london it seems crazy for me to travel up to somewhere like washburn on a 10 hour trip for only one days raceing. i just cant afford that. the only races ive done this year have both been doubles, and any others i do this year will also be doubles.
when i was younger and keener i did go all over for single events as this meant i could practice on the other days and gave me valuble water experience. so i guess it all depends on what you want out of racing. if you want the points or purely just to have fun on the water.
when i was younger and keener i did go all over for single events as this meant i could practice on the other days and gave me valuble water experience. so i guess it all depends on what you want out of racing. if you want the points or purely just to have fun on the water.
The Committee will look at this issue. However it will probably be necessary for competitors to judge if the events are doubles.
I also feel double div 1's should only be at events where Div 1 standard water is pretty much guaranteed.
Also just to clarify the issue about about section judges & timing team expenses. They get SOME expenses, for travel, not for accomodation. But that is not necessarily the issue increased races would mean they would be expected to attend even more reces that concerns me - they are a small bunch of dedicated and committed people who are already expected to cover 16 div 1's, 9 prems, the British Open, 2 Pan Celtics, the Junior Champs.
However we will consider the suggestion carefully.
I also feel double div 1's should only be at events where Div 1 standard water is pretty much guaranteed.
Also just to clarify the issue about about section judges & timing team expenses. They get SOME expenses, for travel, not for accomodation. But that is not necessarily the issue increased races would mean they would be expected to attend even more reces that concerns me - they are a small bunch of dedicated and committed people who are already expected to cover 16 div 1's, 9 prems, the British Open, 2 Pan Celtics, the Junior Champs.
However we will consider the suggestion carefully.
-
Phil Stevo
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:14 pm
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
"I also feel double div 1's should only be at events where Div 1 standard water is pretty much guaranteed."
IMHO once we start on that route then we will only race on release courses where the exact flow can be guaranteed. Whatever the venue everyone has the same conditions and the opportunity to race. If its a double its more likely paddlers will race so competition should be greater.
As for judging although I'm not in favour of judging when I am racing I would be prepared to do it if needs be but the organisers should ensure the load is equally and fairly spread (and only used if there are not enough Judges). For instance not judging your own division and perhaps restricting the length to say 30 mins so we have time to change/eat/prepare/observe/get feedback etc. Personally I dislike being asked to do so as I have paid a considerable entry fee to race - how do we square that one?
IMHO once we start on that route then we will only race on release courses where the exact flow can be guaranteed. Whatever the venue everyone has the same conditions and the opportunity to race. If its a double its more likely paddlers will race so competition should be greater.
As for judging although I'm not in favour of judging when I am racing I would be prepared to do it if needs be but the organisers should ensure the load is equally and fairly spread (and only used if there are not enough Judges). For instance not judging your own division and perhaps restricting the length to say 30 mins so we have time to change/eat/prepare/observe/get feedback etc. Personally I dislike being asked to do so as I have paid a considerable entry fee to race - how do we square that one?