Proposal 6.7 - Changes to Women's Points

[Munchkin]

The llandysul slalom is cited as being one where the top girl, Charlotte, would get less than 100 points under the new rules.

At that event 30 women competed which is 42.2% of the 71 ranked division 1 paddlers. At the same event 64 men, 41.3% of division 1 men competed. Should a girl who is able to win against an equal or greater percentage of their peers be prevented from getting top points because their time does not compare with the opposite sex? This seems unfair to me.

[Munchkin]

Okay, so the aim here is to make sure girls get more experience and are better prepared for the bigger water? Yes???

So how would a system that means that NOT ONE girl in Div 2 would have achieved maximum points at a Div 1/2 event (i.e. bigger water) achieve this.

I have been through the following results (which I think is all the Div 1/2 events) and divided the top girls time by 1.12 as proposed, this is what happens:

Shepperton - Naiomi wins both days, on neither day does she get max points.

Tully - Megan wins, doesn't get max points.

HPP - Sarah and Naiomi win, don't get max points.

Tully - Susannah and Ellen win, don't get max points.

Llaynysul - Elsbeth wins on both days, on neither day does she get max points.

As someone earlier suggested this proposal will actually encourrage the girls to compete at the flatter events as they have a change of getting max points there. Those running the 1/2 events will get less Div 2 girls and those girls will not get the experience you all so desperately want them to have.

Given a choice between spending the money going to an event where you can paddle as hard as you can but still not get top results (even if you beat a large number of your division) and spending that money having far more time on a river I would see which choice many would make.

I know that those who made the proposal did the calculations but did they actually check which level of events this would affect? I am just wondering how the aim is achieved if this is actually a discouragement rather than encouragement?

Help me understand! Please!!!

[Username]

I don't really think that it's a 'numbers' game that we need to play to prevent people getting promoted too quickly. (If it has any relevance at all, I was promoted from div 4 to 1 in less than a season, (2 years ago) and I'm doing OK-ish in div 1 - and in fact, I do much better on the 'bigger' courses (Bala Mill, Tully) than I do on the 'flatter' courses (Llandysul) - I don't slalom train enough to be fast, but I'm a fairly competent paddler on rivers etc. I got promoted from div 2 on the 'hard' div 2 courses, because other people couldn't deal with the water. I wouldn't have been promoted on the flatter div 2 courses, because I'm not particularly quick; so I'm the other side of the coin, that wouldn't have been promoted to div 1 under the proposed new rules, because I'm not fast on the flat, and there are more men who are fast AND competent that would have meant percentaging would have knocked me right out of it.

Anyway, all that this would do would make it take slightly longer for people to get promoted, they wouldn't actually need to be much better paddlers. There are plenty of very flat Div 2 courses. What causes the problem is the HUGE range of water that is used for Div 2 - Bala Mill and Cardington are virtually flat, whereas Grandtully and Shepperton this year were a challenge to Div 1 paddlers, let alone div 2. Unforunately given the lack of choice of places to run races, we either say Div 2 must be on 'harder' sites only, and have much fewer races, or put up with the fact that with the current system that div 2 promotees will be a mixture of 1) fast, but not good on big water paddlers; and 2) slow, but good on big water paddlers. I personally think that is a good situation to be in! Prem's the same to a certain extent - it just means different courses suit different people more. And it means that the only ones who'll do REALLY well and get to Prem are the ones that are fast AND good on big water.

Anyway, I firmly believe that div 1 SHOULD be a mix of fast but weaker, and slow but better paddlers. There's not as much motivation to keep racing if you don't feel you can ever get beyond div 2, so you should be able to race in div 1 if you're either really fast, or really good on big water. Otherwise you'll just be bored out of your mind in div 2 and give up, surely?!

This does bother me, as despite having worked fairly hard this year and having a reasonably respectable 177 points, I'll probably be demoted with the intended 'cull' of div 1, and will (most probably) then give up if I have to have my time percentaged compared to men on flat courses, because I'll never get back up, as there aren't enough tough Div 2 courses for me to go to and do well at to get promoted again; and racing flat div 2 is boring!

[80-1219672301]

I too cannot see how the proposal will stop women being promoted "too quickly" but also agree that women need earlier exposure to bigger water. Is it really the case that "there are many women being promoted from Div 4 to Premier without the time to gain experience" ? I would agree that women can make a fast track from div 4 to div 1 if they attend enough races, but I think that the div 1 to prem is a much harder ask. The fact that some female promotees find the bigger course much harder is I believe a coaching issue.

I am surprised there are relatively so few women in slalom canoe given there would appear to be funding available to get more women into sports generally - this is certainly the case in swimming and athletics. Could it be that the promotion of women athletes in slalom canoe is lacking because they are not actively recruited by coaches / clubs? Maybe it needs to be better marketed to women - Just playing devils advocate here.

Paddlemum

[katonas]

I don't really think that it's a 'numbers' game that we need to play to prevent people getting promoted too quickly. (If it has any relevance at all, I was promoted from div 4 to 1 in less than a season, (2 years ago) and I'm doing OK-ish in div 1 - and in fact, I do much better on the 'bigger' courses (Bala Mill, Tully) than I do on the 'flatter' courses (Llandysul) - I don't slalom train enough to be fast, but I'm a fairly competent paddler on rivers etc. I got promoted from div 2 on the 'hard' div 2 courses, because other people couldn't deal with the water. I wouldn't have been promoted on the flatter div 2 courses, because I'm not particularly quick; so I'm the other side of the coin, that wouldn't have been promoted to div 1 under the proposed new rules, because I'm not fast on the flat, and there are more men who are fast AND competent that would have meant percentaging would have knocked me right out of it.

Anyway, all that this would do would make it take slightly longer for people to get promoted, they wouldn't actually need to be much better paddlers. There are plenty of very flat Div 2 courses. What causes the problem is the HUGE range of water that is used for Div 2 - Bala Mill and Cardington are virtually flat, whereas Grandtully and Shepperton this year were a challenge to Div 1 paddlers, let alone div 2. Unforunately given the lack of choice of places to run races, we either say Div 2 must be on 'harder' sites only, and have much fewer races, or put up with the fact that with the current system that div 2 promotees will be a mixture of 1) fast, but not good on big water paddlers; and 2) slow, but good on big water paddlers. I personally think that is a good situation to be in! Prem's the same to a certain extent - it just means different courses suit different people more. And it means that the only ones who'll do REALLY well and get to Prem are the ones that are fast AND good on big water.

Anyway, I firmly believe that div 1 SHOULD be a mix of fast but weaker, and slow but better paddlers. There's not as much motivation to keep racing if you don't feel you can ever get beyond div 2, so you should be able to race in div 1 if you're either really fast, or really good on big water. Otherwise you'll just be bored out of your mind in div 2 and give up, surely?!

This does bother me, as despite having worked fairly hard this year and having a reasonably respectable 177 points, I'll probably be demoted with the intended 'cull' of div 1, and will (most probably) then give up if I have to have my time percentaged compared to men on flat courses, because I'll never get back up, as there aren't enough tough Div 2 courses for me to go to and do well at to get promoted again; and racing flat div 2 is boring!

A great summary. I'm in a similar position at the bottom of div 1 K1M with a much greater chance of being demoted. I'll be doing judges runs next yr for div1, and saving plenty of money. You could do the same.

[oldandslow]

The standard of the women is radically different to the standard of the men in the same division and this motion will hopefully address that. You only had to be at Shepperton div1/2 to see the difference in confidence levels. How can it feel like an achievement to get good points if you haven't got all the gates? (see HPP and Tully div 2 results). Of course this motion will slow down promotions, if you don't get high enough points then you won't get promoted!

As for blaming the coaches for allowing the paddlers to get promoted without the experience... there are many paddlers who don't have the luxury of a slalom coach.

[oldandslow]

[quote: I cannot see any results where there were only 3 Division 2 women]

HPP div 2 in May. You could have got 33 points by paddling straight down with 900 penalties!

[Munchkin]

The standard of the women is radically different to the standard of the men in the same division and this motion will hopefully address that. You only had to be at Shepperton div1/2 to see the difference in confidence levels. How can it feel like an achievement to get good points if you haven't got all the gates? (see HPP and Tully div 2 results). Of course this motion will slow down promotions, if you don't get high enough points then you won't get promoted!

As for blaming the coaches for allowing the paddlers to get promoted without the experience... there are many paddlers who don't have the luxury of a slalom coach.

But what has been pointed out above is that this motion will NOT address the problem. It is clear that it will discourage girls from competing on the bigger water as it would not be possible to get maximum points. Please explain how this will help?

True, many of us don't have coaches but it is clear from the list of promotions that ygr large number of girls that have got to Division 1 over the past couple of years have been from clubs with a strong slalom background.

[oldandslow]

But they will start to get maximum points if they stay in the lower division, as the standard improves. I don't agree that people race just to get the points, nor that women will be looking for races that they can score high points in. Many race for enjoyment and personal challenge and will choose to race on the water they enjoy, be it Sowerby Bridge or Grandtully.

[Munchkin]

Ps you seem so adamant that this should go through because of your daughter but I note that she did not attend any of the bigger water events. On that basis it would not have slowed down her promotion so why do you want to stop the rest of us from getting a chance when it does not actually achieve what you are arguing for?

On top of that you will see that the top girls at Shepperton on the sat actually did very well and were the closest to getting the ratio than at any other bigger water event.

Might go and work out how the ratio would have worked on the Olympic results. Many women there struggled and got 50s, clearly they are not good enough either...

[oldandslow]

My daughter went from div 4 to 1 three years ago, so that's not really relevant to the discussion, I only mentioned it in passing. There have been 3 girls this year and several more moved from 3 to 1.

My concerns are with improving the standard of the girls to ensure that they get experience to cope with the bigger water without injuring or scaring themselves. I have seen plenty of both over the last few years.

I think this motion will help, but if you disagree, vote against it but please consider another solution for the next ACM if this doesn't work or go through.

[djberriman]

But isn't it more about the individuals focus and that of their coaches and parents? Surely it is the coaches and parents responsibility to ensure they get the experience?

I think there is too much emphasis on getting promoted , competition is probably not the place to get experience as most paddlers revert to 'safe mode' eg. what they know rather than what they have just learnt/been practising and do not therefore progress as they might.

A couple of runs at an event and a bun fight of early morning practice does not really provide sufficient practice/training to progress it just reinforces lots of negative experiences in a stressful situation.

So coaches and parents should ensure they get experience through appropriate training on suitable water and doing perhaps doing judges runs where there is no pressure to compete rather than relying on the divisional system to do this.

If we could only encourage another 200 paddlers into the sport I think a lot of issues would be solved. I don't think the problem will be solved by tinkering with the promotion system, it will be solved by more competitors and perhaps us all concentrating on developing the paddler and less focus on promotion.

I often hear youngsters saying they are scared but mum/dad/coach wants me to get promoted.

The other problem is people (of both sexes and all ages) shy away from the bigger courses, you just need to look at the entry at big water events - again the focus is on promotion rather than experience. We should encourage all paddlers to paddle at events that challenge them and train on bigger water as often as possible with gates but without the competition.

I've often thought that promotion should require that x number of the results are from what are deemed to be the big water courses, say 2 out of 5, that way no one can get promoted from winning 5 easy events. Perhaps I should suggest it next year.

They won't get promoted until they have got 2 decent results at Tryweryn/Tully/Hpp for example.

[Munchkin]

Sorry, I thought you meant this year where only one girl made it all the way through and she did not attend any of the bigger events.

What concerns me it that myself, Username and Paddlers Mum would all be affected and have all pointed out the really OBVIOUS flaw with the suggestion ie it discourages participation in bigger water events and no one has told us how this would work. Hopefully more affected girls will join in this discussion as I have been spreading the word. If you look at promotions this year you will see that other than Anna (who has done brilliantly in Division 1) the others all avoided larger water events so would not be hindered by this. We need to encourrage them to go to these events NOT avoid them.

I agree something needs to be done and I am happy to consult with the other girls to find a solution to actually try and deal with the issue rather than a patch job that won't.

I don't think that anyone wants to lose people like Username from the sport as she has been very helpful and enthusiastic but if this goes through I am afraid that she and others like her will move on. We do compete because we enjoy the sport but also to progress. It is not a cheap activity and spending £100s getting nowhere is not viable.

I think more discussion needs to be held in public to come up with a solution rather than a proposal out forward after the end of the season where it is hard to discuss and to make our points known. This is particularly important as many girls do not have slalom registered clubs and/ or do not know they need to push their clubs to vote against the motion.

If this fails to go through then I will try and come up with an alternative, hopefully one that encourages bigger water participation...

[Munchkin]

DJ - that is the approach I would like to take or something such as a "bonus" 5 points if it is a bigger water event. As said above it needs thought but I am sure we could come up with something.

[Munchkin]

DJ - that is the approach I would like to take or something such as a "bonus" 5 points if it is a bigger water event. As said above it needs thought but I am sure we could come up with something.