6.5 Change to Promotion to Premier Division - End of season promtion by the back door?

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:58 pm

I really hope I am reading this rule change wrong - please correct me if I am.

"In 2007 8 K1 Men, 5 K1 Women and 5 C1’s were promoted. In 2008 14 K1 Men 6 K1Women and 4 C1’s were promoted quite a disparity from one year to the next"

The only disparity seems to be on K1 Men and there could be a number of reasons for the disparity, next year it may be way back down as the next bunch of paddlers take a year or two to get promoted. Numbers without the reasons and facts behind them don't really offer much insight.

Seems like when we don't like the results of the rules (and the demotions that will doubtless ensue) we tinker with the points system. Seems a very short term view.

"We propose Promotion for men…………following:
………. Division 1 to Premier on gaining 5000 points - In Division 1 from the best 5 events."

So that appears to mean that just 3 or 4 K1 Men can get promoted.

Given that there may be one or two demoties who manage to get back up this could mean only one or two paddlers getting promoted each year making Prem pretty much an exclusive club. Guess you are trying to follow in the footsteps of football.

In effect this is also pretty much a return to end of season promotions by the back door as it would be very unusual for one paddler to win a straight series of 5 events.

Doesn't get my vote IF I am reading it correctly! If I've read it wrong please accept my apologies and explain it more clearly.

Seedy Paddler · Post by **Seedy Paddler** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:28 pm

Looking at this and it does not make any real sense :;):

The physical numbers being promoted are only an issue if we either have too many or insufficient.

We started the year with 66 ranked Prem K1M, we finished with 67 ranked k1M. The levels of promotion are therefore correct to maintain an active healthy Premier Division.

Looking at promotees I can only find one that was promoted on the basis of 3 wins, to extend that requirement to win 5 events will be onerous. Assuming that our straight win promotee had managed to contunue his form to achieve such a criteria then Prem K1M would have dropped to 54 paddlers over the season a wastage of 18%. I know of no other sport that would accept a wastage of this magnitude at their elite level.

Either we run for in-season promotion and the current situation is fulfilling the basic requirements or we move to end-of-season promotion and it is taken over the season on best 5 results.

Agree with Duncan - this motion doesn't look fully thought out or evaluated.

Munchkin · Post by **Munchkin** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:33 pm

I think the thing that may be the problem which has resulted in this proposed change and the proposed change to the Women's promotion system is a clash between two sides of the sport:

1. Those that want to develop the best people to the top of the sport and into the International area; and

2. Those that enter the sport because they want to enjoy themselves and push themselves to the best of their ability. This group may have no intention of fighting to be on the GB team or may be far to old!

Group 1 will want only the creme de la creme and the very dedicated to get to Div 1 and Prem and slowing down promotion may achieve this.

Group 2 will want to fight to get as high as they can in the rankings/ divisions as this will give them a sense of personal achievement. Moving up divisions (even if it takes longer) is something to aim for.

My concern is that if things are weighted too heavily in favour of Group 1 desires it will put off those in Group 2 that may be stuck where they are and see no progression. You may find these people leaving the sport because they are paying a lot to compete and not getting anywhere.

A balance needs to be struck and I wonder if the current system works well enough to do this anyway?

Kazz · Post by **Kazz** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:59 pm

I don't know what the numbers are supposed to mean as it has already been pointed out that only the K1M differ greatly.
As the size of prem next year is aimed at being 60 then surely you minus the 14 promoted and therefore demote those below 46th position. is this too easy or have I got it horribly wrong Out of curiosity what happens to those paddlers who have not raced this year, Is it right that if you don't race you can freeze your ranking status, can this be done year on year or is there a limit?
This motion has been proposed and seconded by Stafford and Stone Club who have a high number of elite paddlers so this would support Munchkin's ideas ???
Personally my family would support end of season promotion but also keep the three wins gets promoted

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:12 pm

Can't help but feel that this is more about demotions than promotions.

Having just looked at people in prem I know those that have just completed a full season are doing well (mid table) and those that have been promoted late on this season have certainly not come last in the races they have done. I therefore fail to see the problem, all are clearly capable of competing at that level, are providing valuable competion, are upcoming atheletes, committed to the sport.

What more can you ask for? Why fix what ain't broke!

The real facts would be revealed if we studied how many of those promoted get demoted after their first full season. Anyone care to provide the facts and figures?

Mark Shaw · Post by **Mark Shaw** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:15 pm

Why bother doing the calcs. This is almost the same rule change as proposed last ACM, but the regulations state you can't bring the same motion two years running so someone has been forced to come up with a slightly different spin this year.

Can all clubs who believe in the addage 'don't fix it unless it is broke' please turn up on mass and vote down this proposal?

Without a certain level of movement between the divisions then Canoe Slalom will just stagnate and as already pointed out people will give up and participate in other sports instead.

mk1zetec · Post by **mk1zetec** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:17 pm

Looks to me to be a great way to stagnate the sport, and as mentioned earlier leave those who wish to progress perhaps becoming VERY disillusioned at the long wait to get up. I must add being a DV that i like Div1, have no real desire to go up and maybe following recent results (big maybe i must add) with a bit more effort that could happen. This change would mean i never would go up, but whilst it suits me i don't see it as being good for the sport.

Enough young paddlers leave as it is, success in competion and the prospect of promotion keeps many focussed during a period of their lives when there are so many other things that can grab their attention. Approve this motion and i am sure we will lose paddlers who would mature into good/great paddlers.

Non paddler · Post by **Non paddler** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:29 pm

Agree with the comments so far, the proposal just does not make sense as it stands and I struggle to see how it will benefit the sport. Please can one of the proposers explain the reasoning in more detail as the proposal may have merit but just not clear.

For example, as it is worded a Div 1 K1W would need 500 points from 5 races to be promoted. It is feasible that no-one achieves this all season. What happens then? Do we then have some arbitrary decision to promote 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 paddlers based on unpublished criteria?

Or is there a missing part of the proposal that sets out transparent criteria for end of season promotion. On this missing criteria how many K1W would have been promoted this season?

The argument about competitive racing until the end of the season does not really stand up. K1W this season was very competitive right until the final race with paddlers fighting for promotion and a good sized field for town falls. If the word competitive is being confused with standard then there is some truth that there may be slight drop in standard in Div 1 as paddlers are promoted mid season. But what is wrong with that, there should be a difference in standard between Div 1 and Prem, if the promoted paddlers are holding their own in prem what is the problem?

The real danger I see from this is that 2-3 paddlers share the first 10 or so races between them, get frustrated as they can see their performances to be of prem standard and the rest of division get frustrated as there is no room to move for them, leading to disenchantment and possibly attrition from the sport. I just do not see any benefit that outweighs this risk.

So until there is some expansion on the benefits of the proposal and clarity on what is really proposed for end of season we should all encourage our clubs to vote against this proposal.

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:53 pm

Actually this may well reduce competition.

As it stands, end of season, with say 5 or 6 races to go, lots of top paddlers will still race as they might just get that one win that completes their total and get up (as they did this year - it was very close and very competitive).

Under the new proposal if you haven't won a race by 3/4 of the way through the season there is no point going to any more events. Thus it will be easier for those who already have 3 or 4 wins to get promoted as the paddlers around them won't be there.

Result less competion, less motivation, less paddlers at end of season reaces, distorted results due to less paddlers.

oldandslow · Post by **oldandslow** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:58 pm

Is the ACM open to all or just the slalom reps of the clubs? Can us lowly mortals go along and vote on these proposals?

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:58 pm

Ah - it looks like this is indeed just badly written - in the explanation before it says

"End of season promotion (with the exceptionof 5 wins) will promote competition for top ranking position in the Division before moving up to the Premier Division. "

However I am not aware of any rule allowing this and there appears to be no new rule motioned.

HaRVey · Post by **HaRVey** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:34 am

Hi all,

I felt it important to put forward a few of the other sides of the coin, and I apologise that I, often, speak my mind and sometimes out of turn, but believe I’ve probably earned my right to speak.

Firstly, as last year the ACM was controlled by tactical voting, which should NOT be legal, let alone allowed to happen at any 'National' Organisation, especially when as everyone is quick to point out, rule changes/decisions have a knock on effect on continued participation and the encouragment of development.
I therefore feel, the rule should have been re-entered word for word, but this is against the constitution, and hence a decision was taken, post ACM 2007, that this proposal could be raised again this year.

I would urge therefore that this be carefully negotiated in future.

I have issue, with the use of 'SSCC', being involved in the discussion, about this motion.
SSCC as any club has the power to enter a proposal, the proposal itself should be discussed based on its own merits/disadvantages and should not be judged on source or previous outcome, but assessed for its benefit to the sport at the current time, in today’s climate.

The 'credit crunch' for one thing is a huge issue, which has so far gone unnoticed, in a sport mostly supported by middle class families who are faced with the main brunt of the tax/living cost issues. The out lay is around £5000 per year for a high-level junior/paddler, and we have no knowledge of how this may effect our sport over the coming years, but that’s an aside.

The issue of promotion, via in season or end of season, currently occurs, however, this was not always the case. Before 2000, it was only end of year promotion that was available, to all paddlers.
During this period there were also fewer races for Div 1, which also reduced the chances of getting promoted. Importantly, though, the attendance at races was more constant, because with only limited number of places available for promotion, those in the promotion bracket needed to remain at the races or risk being pushed out of the top ~10, and not being promoted. This meant there was no drop in standards or competition during the season, in fact in meant that the end of season races were more vigorously approached. Last ditch attempts were made to break into the promotee group, and those paddlers in the top/section had also had an additional 8months of training/development, so were also better both technicaly and more experienced on white water. Ultimately this meant that being in the Premier division at the age of 14/15 was actually a remarkable achievement, and that those paddlers had had a considerable amount of White water practice (practice runs and many more races) before reaching the Premier Division.

It is the current speed at which some paddlers can reach the top divisions, which actually reduces the competency and safety on big water. It is no coincidence that the majority of coaches see White water experience/river running, as a top priority in the majority of junior development.

There has also been an additional increase in the ease of completing a slalom course (especially helping the typically 'less strong' [which obviously includes juniors]), due to the development of boat length rules.

So, the question is, is the resistance to this proposal due to;

The feeling of a backward step,

The experiences of some whom have entered the sport since the last change in promotional rules (2000),

Is it due to the World Class identified levels for support, (which are set and adjusted on a yearly basis, to get the numbers of paddlers they can afford to support anyway) - I'm sure World Class, will adjust their targets again, as is necessary every year).

Is it due to the demoralisation of those top juniors, now awaiting promotion into Prem, (an issue I agree), but rules of new boats, single poles, shorter courses, promotion, cost of entry, have always come and gone, and all each paddler (junior or senior) wants to know is what rules they are aiming for this year - and if this proposal is beneficial to the sport, it would have to be included at some point. (Then it will affect a different set of paddlers, but still a group non-the-less).

or that controlling promotion, with end of season promotion would in fact inhibit development of the sport.

The benefits that I personally can see include:
- Consistent standards through Div1
- improved white water (and race) confidence/experience for all paddlers before they reach Prem (with twice as many races and practice)
- A realistic proportion of paddlers promoted demoted each season, creating both healthy competition in Div 1, and refreshment in Prem.
- The same number of paddlers in each Prem race through the year (noticeably the number of paddlers at Town falls Prem was greater than at any other race in the calendar)
- With increased water confidence for paddlers comes an INCREASE IN SAFETY; making the organisation of races, difficulty of courses, water levels/conditions, being less of an issue, and requiring less differentiation, for Newly promoted C1/K1W/C2, and top end C1/K1M. (It has been noticeable that the Selection races have been the hardest courses, in the racing calendar in the past few years - I would argue that to get exceptional paddlers for GB, every PREM race should be at least this standard or in some cases harder, and this is simply not the case, often due to the need to make easy options)

I’m sure there is a lot of information here to digest, but hope it invokes a variety of support or concerns, which can be discussed, based on the individual merits of each.

This chatter board is just for ideas, but the ultimate objective of the discussions is to achieve a FANTASTIC SPORT, which has rules that benefit progress/development and involvement, at all levels - for all paddlers, whilst continuing to support the production of elite, highly competitive, medal winning - athletes.

Robin
???

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:32 am

There is no actual proposed rule change for end of year promotions, as presented it would appear only those with 5 wins can get promoted, thus 3 or 4 paddlers a year.

If the prosposal is for those who get 5 wins to get promoted during the season AND for end of year promotions performed to some set of clear rules (set at the start of the season such as top 5) then I'm sure you would have less objections.

As I say perhaps I have missed something in the proposals or there is already an end of season rule I am unaware of.

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:40 am

Thanks HaRVey,if this denate is going to be useful, we need both sides.
A number of small points:
END OF SEASON PROMOTION: was never removed as an option for Prem the committee retained that (right = Rule 3.1 page 57). BTW I suspect that the change to Rule 3.1 in motion 6.1 means that it comes back for all divisions anyway, must check before the meeting
.
One effect of this change will allow the committee to manage the pyramidal shape of the divisions better, currently there seems a fixation to keep prem at the same size, so a Prem event is almost always better attended than a double division 3/4 event, and the structure is skewed to the top as an hourglass not a pyramid, is this right/good for the sport. . I am not sure and have no axe to grind on this this year (yet).

Attendance - teh ACMs are open to all. technically if you are not a club rep, you need the chairs permission to speak, but that has never been refused in teh time I have been there. If you are in a BCU registered club, and there are three ranked individuals, then it is not too late to register with Jim Croft and get a vote anyway. Or if your club is already registered, just get the committee to appoint you for the meeting, then you speak and vote.

Mark Shaw · Post by **Mark Shaw** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:33 am

The fact that the proposal is vague, and leaves the final end of season promotion decision to individuals sat in a closed room, is exactly why it was thrown out last year.

The method for achieving promotion (and avoiding demotion) needs to be transparent and visible to all paddlers at the start of the season - and not left to some whim at the end of the season.

If someone was prepared to come up with a fixed percentage for promotions and demotions each year then I would be happy to vote for it, but no one ever is!!!

As I have already highlighted, greater than 75% of the clubs at last years ACM seemed happy to leave this rule as it currently stands - a significant majority - so why is it back again this year.