This proposition - which keeps coming round, and will keep coming round until those responsible start doing the basic research rather than parading prejudies as facts - is based on two beliefs both of which defy both logic and statistical fact.
Belief 1: it is easier to get promoted from Div 1 to Prem at the end of the season, so (a) late season promotees are not as good as early season promotees, so are not ‘ready for Prem’ and (b) the standard at the top of Div 1 is lower at the end of the season than early season or mid-season.
Logical fallacy to belief 1: This would only be the case if the paddlers in question were not improving during the season. But we are talking to a large extent about juniors who get from Div 4 to Prem in 3 or 4 years; so the 8-month season during which they get promoted to Prem is c. 20% - 25% of their whole racing career to date. This belief depends on the position that because they were not good enough to get scores of 950+ in March, the scores of 950+ they got in October must have been easier to get. Logical Fallacy.
Statistical Fallacy to Belief 1: If this belief were true, then those promoted later would score less well at their first Prem race than those promoted earlier. But in KIM (Ladies and C1 results are insufficient for analysis) the 6 paddlers promoted up to and including Bala Mill scored on average 209 pts at their first Prem; the five paddlers promoted after that date scored on average 189 points at their first and only Prem; therefore the late promotees were roughly as good at the time of their promotion than the early promotees; and by extension the standard at the top of Div 1 was as high at Tees and Llandysul as at earlier races. Furthermore, those 11 promotees averaged 260 points in all their Prem races; whereas the bottom 11 established Prem paddlers who paddled 4 or more races only averaged 247 points. The effect is even clearer for promotions Div 2 - Div 1 KIM: 17 early promotions averaged 228 at their first Div 1 race; 10 late promotions averaged 320 at their first Div 1 race. Statistical Fallacy.
Belief 2: paddlers get promoted - and in particular get promoted to Div 1 and to Prem - before they are ready. Therefore we must adjust the ranking system so as to slow down their rate of progression.
Logical Fallacy to Belief 2: This assumes that the more races a paddler does on easy water, the readier he/she is to compete on more difficult water. Where is the evidence for this? About the only thing Alan Edge and I agreed on is that the converse is true: the longer paddlers race on easy water the less ready they are to race rough water (and LTAD says that paddlers should be racing on rough water before they start the growth spurt if they are to reach their genetic potential).
Statistical Fallacy to Belief 2: Of the 27 Div 2 paddlers promoted into Div 1 who raced, 13 did 5 or more Div 1 races. Only 1 of them finished below 75th/122 overall: their average ranking position was 53rd./122. 15 established Div 1 paddlers who did 5 or more races are ranked below 75th/122. The 64 established Div 1 paddlers who did 5 or more races had an average finishing ranking of 40th. So the new promotees were on average nearly as good as the existing Div 1 paddlers. For obvious reasons it is not possible to do the same calculation for Div 1 - Prem promotees.
It is clear from the above that we already delay promotions too much. I do not accept the need to reduce the size of Prem and Div 1. But if we are going to we must do it by increasing demotions not by decreasing promotions.
Of course the ultimate answer is to stop trying to use the ranking system to tell people what races to go to/not to go to, and leave that to their coaches/clubs.
The major Slalomnations - Germany, Slovakia, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, France (for amajority of their races) operate on an open entry basis. Why can't we?
6.5 Change to Promotion to Premier Division - End of season promtion by the back door?
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
Well said John.
As I've said a few times before you can't hark back to the glory days by putting the old rules back. By returning to end of season promotion for Div 1, you won't get what you used to get 10+ years ago, there aren't the same number of paddlers. Maybe if we went back to 5 second penalties...
I'm actually starting to form the opinion that if we stay with a divisional structure we need to lose another division. Not a proposal for this year obviously so perhaps something to bring up early for next year. It just seems to me this would stop the squabbling with what's seen as right for the elite end of div 1 as there would be a split toward the top of the division, the second level down would be like the glory days of Div 2, and then bulking up numbers all the way down (although perhaps this point isn't valid as most lower div races are multi-division anyway).
As I've said a few times before you can't hark back to the glory days by putting the old rules back. By returning to end of season promotion for Div 1, you won't get what you used to get 10+ years ago, there aren't the same number of paddlers. Maybe if we went back to 5 second penalties...
I'm actually starting to form the opinion that if we stay with a divisional structure we need to lose another division. Not a proposal for this year obviously so perhaps something to bring up early for next year. It just seems to me this would stop the squabbling with what's seen as right for the elite end of div 1 as there would be a split toward the top of the division, the second level down would be like the glory days of Div 2, and then bulking up numbers all the way down (although perhaps this point isn't valid as most lower div races are multi-division anyway).
well may be out of touch but when i raced last had 5 top ten results but did not get promted due to the inconsitent of numbers in the race ie more in some and less in the other
can we not change the results round to where we finish and not relie on people taken part to get extra points
can we not change the results round to where we finish and not relie on people taken part to get extra points
lets get it on
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
I probably speak too much but I hope I am open to discussion and persuasion. Even as a reasonable newbie I hope I can (and am entitled to) provide some useful input. I have no axe to grind either way.
but to talk through some of your points.
"ACM was controlled by tactical voting, which should NOT be legal" - not sure what actually happened so I could be commenting out of turn but surely that is democracy and those who have the vote have the right to vote in the way they see fit just as you have the right to keep bringing forward the same motion each year. Guess thats the other side of the coin?
"It is the current speed at which some paddlers can reach the top divisions, which actually reduces the competency and safety on big water"
Have you some facts and figures to back this up please.... instances (without naming obviously) of incompetence and safety issues.
"the majority of coaches see White water experience/river running, as a top priority in the majority of junior development."
Agreed, agreed, agreed but don't see the relevance in this debate. If you are saying those that got promoted to Prem this year are 'inexperienced' please could you state how so and in what way they are lacking?
I really can't agree with your benefits statements either. I fail to see how (because you have provided no proof) that it will provide a consistent Div 1 (whatever that is), a realistic proportion of paddlers promoted/demoted (what is realistic - how does a paddler know what 'realistic' is at the start of the season?), the same number of prem paddlers at each race (how so?), an INCREASE IN SAFETY, again where is the proof for this, you are saying some of the promotees had SAFETY issues this year?
I find it amazing in this day and age that a committee decides who is promoted/demoted at the end of the season behind closed doors. Some paddlers are bound to feel aggrieved one way or the other, why put committee members in that situation.
It would be great to understand the actual facts behind your posting and behind the motion however whenever the posters like me ask for facts which prove these points so we can make an informed decision we don't get an answer, we are just told it is so. You should not therefore be surprised when we form our own opinions based on what we see and discuss when competing and vote as per our opinion.
I'm all for discussion, careful thought and negotiation but this can only be done on the basis of facts based on as you say the current climate and not the past.
but to talk through some of your points.
"ACM was controlled by tactical voting, which should NOT be legal" - not sure what actually happened so I could be commenting out of turn but surely that is democracy and those who have the vote have the right to vote in the way they see fit just as you have the right to keep bringing forward the same motion each year. Guess thats the other side of the coin?
"It is the current speed at which some paddlers can reach the top divisions, which actually reduces the competency and safety on big water"
Have you some facts and figures to back this up please.... instances (without naming obviously) of incompetence and safety issues.
"the majority of coaches see White water experience/river running, as a top priority in the majority of junior development."
Agreed, agreed, agreed but don't see the relevance in this debate. If you are saying those that got promoted to Prem this year are 'inexperienced' please could you state how so and in what way they are lacking?
I really can't agree with your benefits statements either. I fail to see how (because you have provided no proof) that it will provide a consistent Div 1 (whatever that is), a realistic proportion of paddlers promoted/demoted (what is realistic - how does a paddler know what 'realistic' is at the start of the season?), the same number of prem paddlers at each race (how so?), an INCREASE IN SAFETY, again where is the proof for this, you are saying some of the promotees had SAFETY issues this year?
I find it amazing in this day and age that a committee decides who is promoted/demoted at the end of the season behind closed doors. Some paddlers are bound to feel aggrieved one way or the other, why put committee members in that situation.
It would be great to understand the actual facts behind your posting and behind the motion however whenever the posters like me ask for facts which prove these points so we can make an informed decision we don't get an answer, we are just told it is so. You should not therefore be surprised when we form our own opinions based on what we see and discuss when competing and vote as per our opinion.
I'm all for discussion, careful thought and negotiation but this can only be done on the basis of facts based on as you say the current climate and not the past.
I like this kind of banter, its much better than before...
The statistical fallacies to beliefs which you very eloquently quote john, though may emphasise a point, is as you say not a direct comparison between div1 and prem, it is in effect comparing apples with oranges, and hence the majority of the figures do not apply to premier promotion.
What i would also say, from a purely mathematical basis, that though your figures look charming enough, your averages infact do you a dis-service.
Quote :
'6 paddlers promoted up to and including Bala Mill scored on average 209 pts at their first Prem; the five paddlers promoted after that date scored on average 189 points at their first and only Prem; therefore the late promotees were roughly ....'
...10% worse than their counter parts!
I, for one, would not have said that they were that much different, but if it is these figures you would like to compare than that is the reality.
In second referal to John's article, the need for development on big water is apparent and real at all ages, especially for those, pre-growth spurt. Well last time i checked every single Premier race this season, was run in conjunction with a Division 1 (with the exception of G'Tully, where the Div1, was the previous weekend with the Pan Celtic!) With this in mind, the amount of water time, is hugely increased by RACING IN DIVISION 1, twice as many races on the same water, and practice, aswell as many Division 1 paddlers judging(hence watching and learning from their Premier counter parts) on the saturday prem, of the weekend.
Is this an inaccurate statement to make?
I obviously do no have the statistics, but it would be interesting to see just how many Prem paddlers hang around on Sunday to Judge the Div 1. However I would suggest it would be grossly skewed in favour of supporting my argument, that Premier paddlers gain less experience on the White Water. And indeed, World Class regonise that the majority of White water time for juniors, occurs during race weekends, Not during their school day.
In reference to the glory days, if it is simply an issue of numbers, i would suggest you look at the size of Div1 K1M, it is extremely popular, with Juniors and DV.
Importantly though not every paddler does every race, perhaps that is due to the frequency of them, and some of the race venues being of differing white water quality, but that is a separate topic again.
With reference to Mark's point:
I agree that the old system did have its faults, the apparent smoke filled room effect, where at some point after the season, a convoluted message eminated out of the slalom committee, and informed everyone of the number of promotees and demotees.
This i agree is not necessarily beneficial to the encouragement of paddlers, and certainly removes part of the empowerment they have currently, to control their own promotion (this is a considerable benefit of the current system)
Another side issue is demotion:
It is hard however, though i can see the benefit of larger demotions and promotions, it is with this sort of culling effect, that removes/disenchants many of the paddling stock which make our GB premier races. With out which, we may as well have just the 15 top boats that can make a GB team, and no more, aka selection (or even, as with this years selection abroad, with even fewer numbers).
I do currently support the removal of another division and the increase in numbers in PREM (as with all divisions), but feel this issue of promotion to prem, would still be an issue even then, as it would only have deffered the problem, not resolved it. It would however increase the amount of time on white water, for many of the paddlers.
Lastly, in answer to the issue of promotion to Prem, and using myself as an example for i know most about this subject. I was promoted in the final year of end of season only promotions, and i was the last of the group to be put up. However, in my First Ever Prem in March, after a further winters training, I scored over 650points (in the apparent glory days of div 1 and prem, where it should have been much harder for me to do this?). I would suggest therefore, that i came into Prem, with a far higher level of expertise/more competitive level/with more white water confidence/experience, than those who are entering during the season from Division 1 currently.
I would suggest that, is not a reflection on the current paddlers, but simply the current promotional system, or is that a misdirected observation?
It is with this in mind, that i would suggest that the standard of Premier courses, to allow the SAFETY of all paddlers during races, has been reduced; and courses are not set to challenge the top end, assuming that the bottom can cope, whatever.
The reality is this is required to provide; the current top juniors/top u23's and top seniors, time to practice, time to improve, and time to apply their performance to high class racing.
Where as those currently in Division 1, are not at that point yet, and i would argue it is not beneficial for their progress/confidence/development/or to increases the risk of injury to themselves. If they are made to attempt this at too earlier stage.
I wonder if anyone has a list of the number of shoulder/injuries to junior paddlers pre 2000, and post the 2000 (rule change), i think it would make interesting viewing.
Ramble over... but i am not sure anyone has decided which camp they sit in, and perhaps at the ACM the idea of a deinitive promotion/demotion % of paddlers, would be a beneficial support to this motion, and the development of a 'pyramidal' (if that what people want) structure.
Robin
???
The statistical fallacies to beliefs which you very eloquently quote john, though may emphasise a point, is as you say not a direct comparison between div1 and prem, it is in effect comparing apples with oranges, and hence the majority of the figures do not apply to premier promotion.
What i would also say, from a purely mathematical basis, that though your figures look charming enough, your averages infact do you a dis-service.
Quote :
'6 paddlers promoted up to and including Bala Mill scored on average 209 pts at their first Prem; the five paddlers promoted after that date scored on average 189 points at their first and only Prem; therefore the late promotees were roughly ....'
...10% worse than their counter parts!
I, for one, would not have said that they were that much different, but if it is these figures you would like to compare than that is the reality.
In second referal to John's article, the need for development on big water is apparent and real at all ages, especially for those, pre-growth spurt. Well last time i checked every single Premier race this season, was run in conjunction with a Division 1 (with the exception of G'Tully, where the Div1, was the previous weekend with the Pan Celtic!) With this in mind, the amount of water time, is hugely increased by RACING IN DIVISION 1, twice as many races on the same water, and practice, aswell as many Division 1 paddlers judging(hence watching and learning from their Premier counter parts) on the saturday prem, of the weekend.
Is this an inaccurate statement to make?
I obviously do no have the statistics, but it would be interesting to see just how many Prem paddlers hang around on Sunday to Judge the Div 1. However I would suggest it would be grossly skewed in favour of supporting my argument, that Premier paddlers gain less experience on the White Water. And indeed, World Class regonise that the majority of White water time for juniors, occurs during race weekends, Not during their school day.
In reference to the glory days, if it is simply an issue of numbers, i would suggest you look at the size of Div1 K1M, it is extremely popular, with Juniors and DV.
Importantly though not every paddler does every race, perhaps that is due to the frequency of them, and some of the race venues being of differing white water quality, but that is a separate topic again.
With reference to Mark's point:
I agree that the old system did have its faults, the apparent smoke filled room effect, where at some point after the season, a convoluted message eminated out of the slalom committee, and informed everyone of the number of promotees and demotees.
This i agree is not necessarily beneficial to the encouragement of paddlers, and certainly removes part of the empowerment they have currently, to control their own promotion (this is a considerable benefit of the current system)
Another side issue is demotion:
It is hard however, though i can see the benefit of larger demotions and promotions, it is with this sort of culling effect, that removes/disenchants many of the paddling stock which make our GB premier races. With out which, we may as well have just the 15 top boats that can make a GB team, and no more, aka selection (or even, as with this years selection abroad, with even fewer numbers).
I do currently support the removal of another division and the increase in numbers in PREM (as with all divisions), but feel this issue of promotion to prem, would still be an issue even then, as it would only have deffered the problem, not resolved it. It would however increase the amount of time on white water, for many of the paddlers.
Lastly, in answer to the issue of promotion to Prem, and using myself as an example for i know most about this subject. I was promoted in the final year of end of season only promotions, and i was the last of the group to be put up. However, in my First Ever Prem in March, after a further winters training, I scored over 650points (in the apparent glory days of div 1 and prem, where it should have been much harder for me to do this?). I would suggest therefore, that i came into Prem, with a far higher level of expertise/more competitive level/with more white water confidence/experience, than those who are entering during the season from Division 1 currently.
I would suggest that, is not a reflection on the current paddlers, but simply the current promotional system, or is that a misdirected observation?
It is with this in mind, that i would suggest that the standard of Premier courses, to allow the SAFETY of all paddlers during races, has been reduced; and courses are not set to challenge the top end, assuming that the bottom can cope, whatever.
The reality is this is required to provide; the current top juniors/top u23's and top seniors, time to practice, time to improve, and time to apply their performance to high class racing.
Where as those currently in Division 1, are not at that point yet, and i would argue it is not beneficial for their progress/confidence/development/or to increases the risk of injury to themselves. If they are made to attempt this at too earlier stage.
I wonder if anyone has a list of the number of shoulder/injuries to junior paddlers pre 2000, and post the 2000 (rule change), i think it would make interesting viewing.
Ramble over... but i am not sure anyone has decided which camp they sit in, and perhaps at the ACM the idea of a deinitive promotion/demotion % of paddlers, would be a beneficial support to this motion, and the development of a 'pyramidal' (if that what people want) structure.
Robin
???
My point about the glory days is that Div 1 can no longer be a mini-Prem as it was, there are too many paddlers of a standard that couldn't and wouldn't suport that. 10+ years ago this wasn't an issue because it was significantly tighter at the top end of Div 1 (as it sounds like you know) and even with current rules not many would get up before the very end anyway. I believe the rule was introduced the first time this started not to be the case.
Div 1 is large, but numbers as you say at an indvidual race are probably lower than the glory days, this is because as above many of the current paddling crop don't want to trawl the country to every race (different to glory days, you were committed if you got to Div 1). However Div 2/3 numbers are way down, so surely an argument for not backing up more people into Div 1? Probably also an argument for demoting more, thus allowing standard of paddling therefore course to go up in Div 2. However you couldn't do this and combine with many Div 3 races. Or perhaps losing another division thus doing all of this in one go. Yes it wouldn't solve the problem of what level, frequency etc to promote people at, but then the second level division would drop off a little in level and you therefore have to put everyone too good for it up a division. You could say that's a cop out but to me Div 1 is too much of a compromise currently.
I would disagree with your 10% figure. That's 10% different to each other, 2% different compared to 1000 points which is what we're comparing to. Lies lies and #### statistics
I haven't been to any Prems this year but I would be interested to know how many paddlers think courses were too easy. I hope it isn't the case that courses are being diluted because it is felt the standard isn't there. Of course some getting promoted will be better to cope with hard courses than others, it's never been any different.
Div 1 is large, but numbers as you say at an indvidual race are probably lower than the glory days, this is because as above many of the current paddling crop don't want to trawl the country to every race (different to glory days, you were committed if you got to Div 1). However Div 2/3 numbers are way down, so surely an argument for not backing up more people into Div 1? Probably also an argument for demoting more, thus allowing standard of paddling therefore course to go up in Div 2. However you couldn't do this and combine with many Div 3 races. Or perhaps losing another division thus doing all of this in one go. Yes it wouldn't solve the problem of what level, frequency etc to promote people at, but then the second level division would drop off a little in level and you therefore have to put everyone too good for it up a division. You could say that's a cop out but to me Div 1 is too much of a compromise currently.
I would disagree with your 10% figure. That's 10% different to each other, 2% different compared to 1000 points which is what we're comparing to. Lies lies and #### statistics
I haven't been to any Prems this year but I would be interested to know how many paddlers think courses were too easy. I hope it isn't the case that courses are being diluted because it is felt the standard isn't there. Of course some getting promoted will be better to cope with hard courses than others, it's never been any different.
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
"I was promoted in the final year of end of season only promotions, and i was the last of the group to be put up. However, in my First Ever Prem in March, after a further winters training, I scored over 650points"
Taking one example is not statistical but for the sake of argument - sorry - discussion, after a further winters training (presumably focused on Prem) you got 650 points (well done!) - looking at some of the late season paddlers who got promoted they got 300 or 400 points with no further training (other than their normal in between event training) at their first events. I'd say thats not bad. Also interesting is statistically its not the youngsters who are appear to be 'under performing' when promoted to Prem from what I can see.....
Doubt I'll ever make such dizzy heights (well done to those who have and do) but I hope to continue providing some competition in Div 1!
Taking one example is not statistical but for the sake of argument - sorry - discussion, after a further winters training (presumably focused on Prem) you got 650 points (well done!) - looking at some of the late season paddlers who got promoted they got 300 or 400 points with no further training (other than their normal in between event training) at their first events. I'd say thats not bad. Also interesting is statistically its not the youngsters who are appear to be 'under performing' when promoted to Prem from what I can see.....
Doubt I'll ever make such dizzy heights (well done to those who have and do) but I hope to continue providing some competition in Div 1!
-
djberriman
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:19 pm
Just did some investigation out of interest on last years in season promotions as we keep having the same argument every year about this and it appears some think that the quality of people promoted is not good enough and safety is being compromised as well as the future of the sport. All of these were listed as short season so appear to have been promoted as part of the 'queueing system' towards the end of the season from what I can determine. Average points are their end of season total for 5 races dived by 5 to give some idea how they performed generally.
Jake Silvester 44th now 36th J16 average 475 points
Warren Cohen (Injured) 48th now 49th J18 average 272 points
Ciaran Lee Edwards 51st now 24th J14 average 598 points
Andrew Martin 61st now 44th J16 average 373 points
Alistair Moon 62 now 43rd J18 average 376 points
David Bain 63rd now 48th J16 average 291 points
Calum Hogg 64th now 50th J18 average 261 points
Mark Ledger 65th now 45th U23 average 355 points
As you can see all have improved their ranking from the end of season last year. I doubt any will get demoted as they are all above the cut point if prem is kept the same size as last year (52nd allowing for 14 demotions) . The facts just don't appear to agree with what is being suggested by those that are putting forward the motion.
Apologies to one and all if any of my facts are wrong
Jake Silvester 44th now 36th J16 average 475 points
Warren Cohen (Injured) 48th now 49th J18 average 272 points
Ciaran Lee Edwards 51st now 24th J14 average 598 points
Andrew Martin 61st now 44th J16 average 373 points
Alistair Moon 62 now 43rd J18 average 376 points
David Bain 63rd now 48th J16 average 291 points
Calum Hogg 64th now 50th J18 average 261 points
Mark Ledger 65th now 45th U23 average 355 points
As you can see all have improved their ranking from the end of season last year. I doubt any will get demoted as they are all above the cut point if prem is kept the same size as last year (52nd allowing for 14 demotions) . The facts just don't appear to agree with what is being suggested by those that are putting forward the motion.
Apologies to one and all if any of my facts are wrong
there is another issue that hasn't been considered yet...
What about the prem paddlers who are heavily committed to racing, train really hard and are striving for success. Their results are heavily dependent upon the time of the season that they are gained. At the begining of the season (tryweryn) 25th place gained 500 points. Roll forward to town falls there was a larger entry largely due to mid season promotees (an additional 10) 25th place here gained 579 points, quite a significant rise. Non of the newly promoted paddlers acheived a result here in the top 30, so essentially the 25th place at the two races are comparable in acheivement, but not reward...
Should prem paddlers have the time of season that they gain their good results effect their end of season ranking?
I agree with the proposed rule change. Would it make that much difference to div 1 paddlers if they raced for a whole season in division 1? In the good old days, competition for places at the end of season was fantastic and lead to exciting racing at the last few races. I also don't think that not having a prescribed points total is necessary, the slalom committee don't have any reason to keep capable paddlers down, so why can't they decide? If they do get it wrong (which didn't happen too often in the good old days, but if it does) there is the 5000 points get out clause.
I don't think that the proposal has any intention of reducing the number of paddlers that can get promoted, it is merely an attempt to control the divisional system.
Next season there are also proposed more division 1 races which will lead to more points available and more promotions under the current system. Would that be sustainable?
What about the prem paddlers who are heavily committed to racing, train really hard and are striving for success. Their results are heavily dependent upon the time of the season that they are gained. At the begining of the season (tryweryn) 25th place gained 500 points. Roll forward to town falls there was a larger entry largely due to mid season promotees (an additional 10) 25th place here gained 579 points, quite a significant rise. Non of the newly promoted paddlers acheived a result here in the top 30, so essentially the 25th place at the two races are comparable in acheivement, but not reward...
Should prem paddlers have the time of season that they gain their good results effect their end of season ranking?
I agree with the proposed rule change. Would it make that much difference to div 1 paddlers if they raced for a whole season in division 1? In the good old days, competition for places at the end of season was fantastic and lead to exciting racing at the last few races. I also don't think that not having a prescribed points total is necessary, the slalom committee don't have any reason to keep capable paddlers down, so why can't they decide? If they do get it wrong (which didn't happen too often in the good old days, but if it does) there is the 5000 points get out clause.
I don't think that the proposal has any intention of reducing the number of paddlers that can get promoted, it is merely an attempt to control the divisional system.
Next season there are also proposed more division 1 races which will lead to more points available and more promotions under the current system. Would that be sustainable?
Nicky, we've been here before. This very same proposal was rejected last year because club reps weren't prepared to accept a decision behind closed doors. If I remember last year's ACM correctly, even the slalom committee were not convinced that this was the right approach either, which is why I thought the vote went the way it did - purely my recollection of course and doesn't reflect the opinion of the slalom committee.
If no one comes up with a straight percentage promotions / demotions alternative suggestion, to turn this proposal in to something more tangible then I guarantee it will get rejected again, which as you quite rightly point out might be more detrimental to the sport but what choice do clubs have?
If you look at the number of Div 1 promotions this year they are exactly 10% of those that were ranked in the division, so why can't we use this as an agreed percentage then everyone knows where they stand?
If no one comes up with a straight percentage promotions / demotions alternative suggestion, to turn this proposal in to something more tangible then I guarantee it will get rejected again, which as you quite rightly point out might be more detrimental to the sport but what choice do clubs have?
If you look at the number of Div 1 promotions this year they are exactly 10% of those that were ranked in the division, so why can't we use this as an agreed percentage then everyone knows where they stand?
The above is the personal opinion of Mark Shaw and does not reflect the views of either the BCU or England Slalom Committees.
Ok good idea we use a percentage criteria.
I say -
End of season promotion Div1/Prem: Promotion where 5% of Div1 paddlers in each category are gauranteed promotion, at the end of the season.
In the case when 5 % is not a whole number, it is rounded down.
In season, 'Automatic' Promotion Occurs, on completion of 5wins for a paddler in 1 catergory, in a single season.
The slalom committee still retain the right to demote or promote paddlers, beyond this number at the end of the ranking season, as they deem fit.
How about this... for discussion?
???
I say -
End of season promotion Div1/Prem: Promotion where 5% of Div1 paddlers in each category are gauranteed promotion, at the end of the season.
In the case when 5 % is not a whole number, it is rounded down.
In season, 'Automatic' Promotion Occurs, on completion of 5wins for a paddler in 1 catergory, in a single season.
The slalom committee still retain the right to demote or promote paddlers, beyond this number at the end of the ranking season, as they deem fit.
How about this... for discussion?
???
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
RV
I have a much better idea, which would solve the whole problem:
Allow any Div 1 paddler who aspires to Prem to race at Prem races, on a common start/result list, for the season. You will therefore end the season with, say, 50 Prem KIM paddlers who have raced in KIMP, plus 30 'aspirants'. Let us say that the target for Prem is 50 paddlers. At the end of the season the top 50 are confirmed in Prem, the bottom 30 are now in Div 1 - in both cases, irrespective of which Division they started the season in.
Position in Div 1 would be got from positions at Div 1 races: but this would be divorced from the issue of promotion. People who wanted to get into Div 1 would have to prove they were ready by beating enough Prem paddlers.
There will, of course, be objections from Prem. paddlers: because each season they will have to prove that they are good enough to stay there more rigorously than at present.
There is no reason why the same should not apply for promotion from Div 2 to Div 1.
In both cases paddlers would have to race harder, earlier: which would be very good for their development. However paddlers who do not want to get promoted - perhaps because they feel they are not ready - could avoid it by not going to higher division races.
Of course a completely open entry system would be even better ...
I have no objection to paddlers deciding who they DO want to race against. But I object strongly to paddlers being allowed to dictate who they DO NOT want to race against, and there are suggestions of that in some of the messages on this thread.
I have a much better idea, which would solve the whole problem:
Allow any Div 1 paddler who aspires to Prem to race at Prem races, on a common start/result list, for the season. You will therefore end the season with, say, 50 Prem KIM paddlers who have raced in KIMP, plus 30 'aspirants'. Let us say that the target for Prem is 50 paddlers. At the end of the season the top 50 are confirmed in Prem, the bottom 30 are now in Div 1 - in both cases, irrespective of which Division they started the season in.
Position in Div 1 would be got from positions at Div 1 races: but this would be divorced from the issue of promotion. People who wanted to get into Div 1 would have to prove they were ready by beating enough Prem paddlers.
There will, of course, be objections from Prem. paddlers: because each season they will have to prove that they are good enough to stay there more rigorously than at present.
There is no reason why the same should not apply for promotion from Div 2 to Div 1.
In both cases paddlers would have to race harder, earlier: which would be very good for their development. However paddlers who do not want to get promoted - perhaps because they feel they are not ready - could avoid it by not going to higher division races.
Of course a completely open entry system would be even better ...
I have no objection to paddlers deciding who they DO want to race against. But I object strongly to paddlers being allowed to dictate who they DO NOT want to race against, and there are suggestions of that in some of the messages on this thread.
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
John, like the idea, but I don't think it's problem free, eg:
- Every paddler would have to be ranked separately in every division they raced in so more administration.
- At multi-division events would paddlers elect for one of the divisions or ask for runs to be double counted
- Depending on how many races they were in for each division there could be some real anomalies. A paddler choosing to only attend prem races might not make the grade and therefore be relegated to div 1 (where he/she has no results). But does this mean that any div 1 paddler wanting to avoid relegation to div 2 just needs to attend one prem race.
- I'm assuming that no-one could race below their start division otherwise we'd have all sorts of pot hunting and complaints.
- The managed calendar would become more complex as we'd have to consider cross-division clashes more carefully, because of impact on competitor numbers and standard.
Not saying that a radical change isn't a good one, just that it would need work to iron out as many problems as possible before implementation and there will still be a host of unknowns.
- Every paddler would have to be ranked separately in every division they raced in so more administration.
- At multi-division events would paddlers elect for one of the divisions or ask for runs to be double counted
- Depending on how many races they were in for each division there could be some real anomalies. A paddler choosing to only attend prem races might not make the grade and therefore be relegated to div 1 (where he/she has no results). But does this mean that any div 1 paddler wanting to avoid relegation to div 2 just needs to attend one prem race.
- I'm assuming that no-one could race below their start division otherwise we'd have all sorts of pot hunting and complaints.
- The managed calendar would become more complex as we'd have to consider cross-division clashes more carefully, because of impact on competitor numbers and standard.
Not saying that a radical change isn't a good one, just that it would need work to iron out as many problems as possible before implementation and there will still be a host of unknowns.
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!
Robin, why are you so anti people being promoted to Prem if they have won the right, and those who have clearly not met the required standards to stay in Prem being demoted?
Under a 10% rule, a large majority of Prem paddlers would be unaffected by Div1 promotions and as very few Div1's would obtain in season promotion if they needed 5 wins then you couldn't claim that the Prem season had been impacted by loads of late season promotions.
Factor in that none of the end of season promotees would be protected from the following seasons demotions and I think you have a recipe for some good competition.
5% would just not be worth competing for, especially in C1M as your proposal would probably only result in a single paddler promoted each year - two at best.
Under a 10% rule, a large majority of Prem paddlers would be unaffected by Div1 promotions and as very few Div1's would obtain in season promotion if they needed 5 wins then you couldn't claim that the Prem season had been impacted by loads of late season promotions.
Factor in that none of the end of season promotees would be protected from the following seasons demotions and I think you have a recipe for some good competition.
5% would just not be worth competing for, especially in C1M as your proposal would probably only result in a single paddler promoted each year - two at best.
The above is the personal opinion of Mark Shaw and does not reflect the views of either the BCU or England Slalom Committees.