C2 Structure for 2018 Season

General slalom chatter...rant about the bad, rave about the good
Dee
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 8:34 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Dee » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:44 pm

Most P/1 competitions close for entries several days beforehand, so regardles what happens with C2 bibs, it is unlikely that last minute entries will suddenly be accepted whether by a scratch crew or not!
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!

cmer
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:59 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by cmer » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:07 am

Hi Dee
I appreciate that if an event is full, although I think 'new pairings' should be able to enter C2 P/1 in advance (by post if not possible online) without a bib if they are already ranked div 1 or above in another class.
My point was that the event I was at wasn't full and the organiser was actively looking for more entries. The issue was the bib. We aren't talking massive numbers with organisers suddenly being over run, an extra 2-3 boats on the startline to make a grand total of 5 would be a massive improvement to P/1 C2 competition and the enjoyment of race day and justify the expense. At this time of year spaces do also become available with promotions. Why not allow a Saturday promoted paddler (who wishes to and with a boat available) find a C2 partner and paddle on the Sunday? Space on the start list and entry fee would have been paid. Why the barrier? If the new pairing then wishes to continue then they apply for the bib as now.
The hard facts are that we can somehow fix the reality that only 7 P/1 crews have competed this season with only 3 of those crews having paddled on more than 3 occasions, resulting in a limited race day experience for all (in my opinion).
It will be great if we can find a positive outcome for next season and create an easier way of getting P/1 paddlers interested in giving C2 a go again.
Clive

Canadian Paddler
Posts: 1480
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
Location: Peterborough
Contact:

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Canadian Paddler » Sat Aug 12, 2017 12:28 pm

Those that know me know my views on C2, those that don't can guess from my name:-) I have generally kept out of teh debate as I have not competed for too many years to know what current paddlers want

I believe we run the sport for the paddlers not to suit the coputer program, and much as Nick says the admin is too much, Stuart Meakins (who does the admin) will say it is not too onerous, just that it has to be manual.

ANYONE without a bib should prove memebrship on the day, whether not applied for or left at home (or at a previous event, you know who you were!). So any scratch C2s, or self ranked shoudl do the same.

Quick rule reminder (my bold) page 71 UKC12.3.1 Entries received after the limit is reached should be rejected except that teh limit may be exceeded in order to make an event quorate.. . .
Obviously not the case if the limit is the amount of water!
All spelling errors are intentional and are there to show new and improved ways of spelling old words. Grammatical errors are due to too many English classes/teachers.
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points

Dee
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 8:34 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Dee » Sat Aug 12, 2017 12:51 pm

Canadian Paddler wrote:I believe we run the sport for the paddlers not to suit the coputer program
I don't think anyone has suggested that we run it to suit the computer programme, have they? In fact, I'd have said those of us writing the programmes are doing our best to make them work for the paddlers as best we can! I agree the sport is, and should be, run for the paddlers, but in turn this does mean keeping teh work required from volunteers within reasonable bounds otherwise we could have (in the extreme case) no one to run the sport at all! And that would definitely not be to the benefit of the paddlers.

Having said that, if Stuart has said is that it is not too onerous and is happy to continue then there shouldn't be a problem
cmer wrote:... the organiser was actively looking for more entries.
This is different. I was thinking of the vast majority of P/1s that don't allow any on the day entries regardless of class whether full or not.
Can't see any issues with C2 pairings entering by post in advance. :)
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!

Oz Roden
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 9:07 am

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Oz Roden » Wed Aug 16, 2017 12:07 am

Thanks Steve for starting the discussion on 'the future of C2'. Reading through the feed it's great to hear that there is some passion about what we do for the future of C2 and passion is enough to keep it going.

I'm glad I'm a little late to posting my (and Burt's) thoughts on Steve's post as it's nice to see the direction of travel in a positive way before commenting. As with 'Canadian paddler' I have to declare my interest with C2 as I'm obviously biased towards retaining all what's great about canoeing and C2 more specifically.

I personally love the 'buzz' from getting a C2 running right and 'putting down a good run' it's a great feeling (this isn't very regular these days but is still fun trying). This year will be our 27th year of racing premier (premier / div 1) C2, I can remember racing the year before the 1992 Olympics when there were over 15 boats racing C2 in a premier race which reduced to only 3 in the year after the 1992 Olympic cycle. This reduced number continued for a couple of years until the numbers started to pick up again. So things can revive after significant retirements if we do the right things to keep it alive.

There have been lots of ideas off the back of Steve's post and I thinks it's worth level setting what the main issues are before we agree a way forward.

Main issues and challenges

1. C2 participation has decreased since the announcement of non-inclusion in the next Olympic cycle.

2. C2 pairings changing / mix n matching in the lower divisions has increased the admin burden of the class.

Possible solutions

Event participation (Steve note 3)

I agree that making it easier for C2s to enter any division can only encourage more competitors and I agree that it's unlikely that higher ranked C2s would race lower divisions. This should open up events to a wider field. So I'm in favour of Steve's suggestion.

Percentage points calculation (Steve note 2)

I feel that the percentage calculation against the K1M should be kept relatively high as it ensures there are not a number of crews on maximum points at any one race. Maybe this needs a refresh/review due to the nature of the current course design profile (tighter and shorter).

Administration of multiple crews

It makes sense to simplify things if it's becoming unmanageable for Stuart but it seems that he is comfortable with the current process. A compromise, as suggested, is that only points count for those crews who apply for a bib. If crews wish to enter 'just for fun' then their points aren't calculated for the ranking list.

Im happy to discuss at one of the races towards the end of the year to help get this structured so we are all comfortable before submission the ACM.

I hope all the C2 crews of the future have as much of a challenging and at times frustrating but fantastically rewarding C2 experience as we have had.

Oz & Burt




Sent from Outlook

Steve Agar
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:30 am

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Steve Agar » Tue Aug 22, 2017 6:12 pm

After a few weeks of radio silence, and lots of interesting comments in the chatroom and in person, it's about time I threw my weight behind some of the ideas discussed.

Firstly, we should be clear what we want to achieve and why.
1) The structure of C2 competition must be designed primarily around the needs and desires of the paddlers themselves. Whilst we all need organisers and administrators, I think it's generally agreed that we can make the system fit the paddlers and not the other way round. If it's not the same as for K1s and C1s, so what? - I'm sure we're collectively smart enough to cope.
2) We need to build the pyramid from the bottom up, therefore concentrate on engaging and retaining C2 crews. Until we get a critical mass in the lower echelons we won't get sufficient desire to paddle at the top level.
3) Whilst C2 is not a "joke event" it is, and always ought to be, fun and fulfilling for the competitors (and spectators). We want people to think to themselves: "I fancy a go at that, and actually it's got a lot about it that other classes don't". Only once we engage paddlers will they consider taking it more "seriously" as their main, or preferred, class.
4) We cannot legislate or anticipate how things will develop, or how many crews will stick together for many years - we need to solve the initial problems first and then influence how things develop. If we don't get the class active again, there's no point in thinking about what might happen 3 or 4 years down the line, or what changes we may need to make to cope with the different set of circumstances that may arise.
5) Money! We won't get take up unless it's seen as value for money. Travelling half the length of the country and having to pay £4 per minute or more (at some events) to race against one or two other boats just will not work.
6) Progression and ambition. We must work towards ensuring that any ranking system that leads to crews being "top of the class" has the support of the national associations to encourage progression to international competition. I won't bore you with another rant about UK Sport funding at this time (although dropping C2 from elite coaching comes down to it not being worthwhile as it's not an Olympic class so there's no funding gain to be had).

Given the above, and all the comments from others, I think we should look at a competition structure for C2 that removes divisions and the distinction between quorate and non-quorate events:
1) Crews should be able to enter whichever event they feel most comfortable with and most fulfilling. For new starters this will usually be div 3 or 4, but more experienced paddlers may wish to jump straight to div 2 (or even div 1) water.
2) Crews do not need to be ranked in order to compete (at least in divs 2-4). This will encourage more people to try it, particularly on the day, and avoids unnecessary bureaucracy.
3) C2 points will be awarded at all events in comparison to the K1M scores. Points are calculated automatically, so it relieves the organiser of a chore. This means that good crews will always score high, and poor crews low, regardless of the number of boats competing. The actual points scored will always depend on the nature of the water and the course design - no change there - so some competitions will still provide more (or less) points to crews than others. (We won't change that anomaly until we start to rank our courses rather than have divisions where the course standard can vary widely - that's a whole different debate.)
4) The "multiplier" used to compare scores against kayaks needs re-examining (it's just plain wrong at the minute), but, in fact, we could probably drop it altogether. It may mean that crews no longer score maximum (standard kayak) points at any event, but a C2 doing well at a premier event will still score twice as much as doing the same (relatively) at a div 1 or four times as much at a div 2 event, so the scores within the C2 class will still represent a true ranking. Simple is best!
5) Whilst I think a single competition structure and universal points system provides the fairest way of providing rankings, we really want to find ways of getting more boats at each event. Nothing beats paddling against your peers, and helps develop a healthy and enjoyable rivalry between crews (and establishes the innate superiority of the C2 class compared to kayaks :-)). It can't be too much of a financial burden on organisers and national associations to keep 5-10 places available for C2s at events, can it?
6) Therefore we should reduce the entry fees for C2 to make it attractive (£5?) - particularly since many paddlers will already be competing in a different class and will feel it worth paying the extra for more fun and more challenge. If we start to get lots of crews paddling at prem and div 1, we can reconsider the financial contribution they should make.
7) Any crew that wants to keep its points must apply to be ranked. It puts the onus on the paddlers to go through the registration process and fill in entries correctly thereafter without adding a burden to the ranking list compiler. Anybody who wants to jump into a boat at an event to try it won't be put off, and who knows how quickly the bug will bite to motivate them to do more?
8) Will crews hang around lower division events just for the prizes, rather than move on to bigger and better challenges. I don't really think so. I'm sure organisers can be given freedom to award prizes as they see fit if it becomes an issue - nowt wrong with a bar of chocolate for first ranked crew, and a shiny trophy for unranked or newly-ranked crews at lower division events.

As usual, there are lots more details that can be discussed and argued about, but we should move now to come up with a simple, transparent and easy-to-use structure that gets people paddling C2 again, both at the bottom and the top, because more boats want to compete, and are encouraged by the system rather than discouraged. Nowt's perfect, but we need to start somewhere and give it a go.

Steve A

Nick Penfold
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Nick Penfold » Tue Aug 29, 2017 11:29 am

I'm getting pretty fed up with the implication (Canadian, Steve) that I think ease of admin is more important than paddler satisfaction. Read my input again: I don't. But it is fair to point out that keeping track of C2s is a lot of work, and we need to know that the paddlers actually want that work done. Some, it's clear, do. Some do C2 simply for fun, and aren't bothered about rankings.

What Steve is proposing sounds fair enough, but unless it, and any alternatives, are put into the form of a proposal to the ACM, things will go on as they are.

JBS
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2016 12:01 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by JBS » Tue Aug 29, 2017 6:28 pm

As someone who has just ended up applying for a C2 bib with one of my kids I have to say that both Nick and Stuart bent over backwards to accomodate me!
So, we are clear the admin for the bibs and rankings IS NOT THE ISSUE. The bigger issue appears to be that most crews (myself included) are not bothered about a bib or ranking points they just want to jump in a boat on a given race day and enjoy the thrill of the race.
I myself will be racing at Cardinghton with my 4 year old son at the w/e. Why? Because he loves it....and I do.Do we want the points? No....he would love a trophy or medal so I'll be trying really hard to get him one.
We don't want to get promoted, he's 4 and we only race at events where his older brother is racing.

Is the answer to have div 4 for proper beginners and in effect open events at 1/ 2/3 with no points. For those that are more serious you could easily have them apply for ranking to Prem based on current individual ranking or on C2 results at 1/2/3 events.
For Prem introduce a % based on K1M so that numbers are irrelevant and a race with one boat is worthwhile. Potentially you may end up with more than one crew achieving maximum points but it's unlikely to be at each race so you would still end up with a ranking. For the "open" class you can just list them like we already do with div 4's in the yearbook.
I have no idea if this is a realistic approach.????? Answers on a postcard.

Just to be clear where I'm coming from:
To be able to enter a 1/2/3 event with any of my kids or wife on account that it's a sunny day without any hassle for anyone is my ideal. If I want to get serious I can apply with my partner and give Prem a go.

harratts
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 3:51 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by harratts » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:39 pm

Thanks everyone for your varied contributions. I would like to summarise the general feeling that I have gained through comments made on this thread together with many face to face discussions.

Most people would be willing to support a single C2 class allowing any registered C2 crew to pre enter any race as a host Division entrant.

Scratch crews (unregistered) would be able to enter lower division races on the day should they wish to do so and the event was not already full.

All ranking points for C2 crews would be calculated by run time comparison against the K1 Men's run times after a 20% adjustment had been applied to the C2 run times across all race divisions.

The ranking points shown on the ranking database would only indicate points secured by registered C2 crews but ranking points could be claimed retrospectively when a bib application is made.

This is the basis on which a motion will be put forward at this years ACM to change the way the C2 class runs from next year and beyond. I hope that it gets your support as nothing will change if no changes are made.

Increased participation in the C2 class going forward perhaps needs additional motions to reduce / remove entry fees for C2 entries or the like.

Best regards,
Steve

Dee
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 8:34 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Dee » Thu Sep 07, 2017 7:08 pm

harratts wrote:Thanks everyone for your varied contributions. I would like to summarise the general feeling that I have gained through comments made on this thread together with many face to face discussions.

Most people would be willing to support a single C2 class allowing any registered C2 crew to pre enter any race as a host Division entrant.

Scratch crews (unregistered) would be able to enter lower division races (div 2 and below) on the day should they wish to do so and the event was not already full and entries are still open.

All ranking points for C2 crews would be calculated by run time comparison against the K1 Men's run times after a 20% adjustment had been applied to the C2 run times across all race divisions.

The ranking points shown on the ranking database would only indicate points secured by registered C2 crews but ranking points from the last 5 weeks could be claimed retrospectively when a bib application is made.

This is the basis on which a motion will be put forward at this years ACM to change the way the C2 class runs from next year and beyond. I hope that it gets your support as nothing will change if no changes are made.

Increased participation in the C2 class going forward perhaps needs additional motions to reduce / remove entry fees for C2 entries or the like.

Best regards,
Steve
I've suggested some minor amendments to:
- clarify what is meant by lower division
- clarify that when a competition is not taking entries on the day then C2s can't by-pass this.
- limit how far back ranking points can be claimed - I think 5 weeks is ample, I'm not sure it is fair on Stuart to allow a sudden influx of bib applications at the end of the season expecting points to reflect the whole year!

Otherwise it looks good to me!
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!

WindsorCC
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 8:22 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by WindsorCC » Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:46 pm

Thanks Steve, with Dee's clarifications I'm happy with the proposal.

Thanks again for getting everyone's input and pulling it all together.

Paul.

Steve Agar
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:30 am

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Steve Agar » Sat Sep 09, 2017 9:56 am

Looks good to me. If we don't try it, we won't know if it works, and nothing is perfect.

Thanks for your efforts, Steve et al.

JBS
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2016 12:01 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by JBS » Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:21 am

Sounds good to me but I would like to clarify something:
If I wish to enter an event.....say the Cardington 2/3/4 the week before interclubs with my clubmate to get some "practice" as we will race interclubs could we enter in advance as a scratch crew without applying for the bib?

User avatar
davebrads
Posts: 508
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 7:43 am
Location: Tamworth
Contact:

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by davebrads » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:03 am

I am also happy with the proposal with Dee's clarifications/modifications.
JBS wrote:Sounds good to me but I would like to clarify something:
If I wish to enter an event.....say the Cardington 2/3/4 the week before interclubs with my clubmate to get some "practice" as we will race interclubs could we enter in advance as a scratch crew without applying for the bib?
My personal feeling is that ranking competitors should not lose a place to a scratch C2, and this is the intention of the proposal as it is written. Excluding scratch crews from pre-entry is by far the easiest way of achieving this. With the move to online entries I suspect this could only be achieved by an additional burden of coding to cope with a situation that might only happen half a dozen times a year.

Nick Penfold
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm

Re: C2 Structure for 2018 Season

Post by Nick Penfold » Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:25 pm

You have to be ranked to use the online entry system at all, so scratch crews are excluded from online advance entry by default.

Post Reply