I repeat what I said last night: without official results there cannot be an official ranking list: and there are no official results
And we need something that addresses the questions raised at double events
Rolling Rankings
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
Re: Rolling Rankings
I'm with Boatmum and John Sturgess:
We need official in season rankings (surely by default the official rankings must become the official rankings). Not sure how many other sports only have only unofficial in-season rankings)
The rankings need to be in year as the sport has a season? (rolling rankings should be an add on). Not sure how many other sports are measured on rolling rankings!
We need official in season rankings (surely by default the official rankings must become the official rankings). Not sure how many other sports only have only unofficial in-season rankings)
The rankings need to be in year as the sport has a season? (rolling rankings should be an add on). Not sure how many other sports are measured on rolling rankings!
-
Seedy Paddler
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 2:00 pm
Re: Rolling Rankings
With current slalom rules and requirements in season Rankings can only ever be unnofficial. It is mandatory that competitors are full members of the NGB, with rolling membership it is possible for someone to start the season as a member but fail to renew- in which case they would be removed from the Final Rankings. Similalrly it is a requirements to register and apply for a Bib. Ranking officers are very good at providing leeway to those who are tardy in Bib Application, however if you do not follow the rules (whether administratively or on course) you may be de-ranked before the official Ranking Lists are published.
The Yearbook and the guidance is there if you have queries contact the relevent Ranking List compiler they will confirm or clarify the situation.
The Yearbook and the guidance is there if you have queries contact the relevent Ranking List compiler they will confirm or clarify the situation.
Re: Rolling Rankings
Unfortunately results are not always accurate posted on line e.g. as has been noted when there has been no bib application or they mistakenly were competing in the wrong division. Contrary to what it might seem to some, the Slalom Committee does want to see progress on this and wants results to be both accurate and timely and indeed supports the concept of cardless entry. However you get from A to B in one piece one step at a time not generally in one explosive leap.
I am pleased at the progress that is getting made however we have to see that it all works and is going to be reliable before we entrust it with all the details.
As to rolling rankings we have made a small step this year with Paddle up which some have used and provides an alternative of sorts. This needs to be reviewed and discussed at the ACM.
We are also looking at developing and hopefully improving the Pan Celtics and if we can increase participation this will offer opportunity to compete across the divisions for some.
I am pleased at the progress that is getting made however we have to see that it all works and is going to be reliable before we entrust it with all the details.
As to rolling rankings we have made a small step this year with Paddle up which some have used and provides an alternative of sorts. This needs to be reviewed and discussed at the ACM.
We are also looking at developing and hopefully improving the Pan Celtics and if we can increase participation this will offer opportunity to compete across the divisions for some.
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
Re: Rolling Rankings
Peter says that the Committee want official results to be 'both accurate and timely'. Well, we are a long way from that, given that at present no official results are ever published: certainly not timely, and who knows if they are accurate?
Problem is, 'both accurate and timely' obscures the question. All proposals for producing official results, and for producing them when they are needed (i.e. after Saturday's race for a double), are met, as they are in Peter's post, with a clear indication that for the Slalom Committee accuracy is more important than timeliness.
However the paddlers have never been asked - my strong suspicion is that if they were, they would overwhelmingly, particularly in the lower divisions, rank timeliness as more important than absolute accuracy. So is it not time we asked them (and they are not represented at the ACM, other than indirectly). There is a precedent: when the ICF brought in aggregation, paddlers in Britain were asked whether they wanted it - c. 90% said no - and it was only brought in for Prem and Div 1.
Try this scenario:
Press Release from UEFA: the provisional result of the England-Sweden match was an England victory by 3-2. However this result cannot be confirmed until UEFA have checked all the footage to make sure that the referee's decisions were correct, that all players were eligible to compete,etc. We will let you know the official result of the match by the end of June ...
Problem is, 'both accurate and timely' obscures the question. All proposals for producing official results, and for producing them when they are needed (i.e. after Saturday's race for a double), are met, as they are in Peter's post, with a clear indication that for the Slalom Committee accuracy is more important than timeliness.
However the paddlers have never been asked - my strong suspicion is that if they were, they would overwhelmingly, particularly in the lower divisions, rank timeliness as more important than absolute accuracy. So is it not time we asked them (and they are not represented at the ACM, other than indirectly). There is a precedent: when the ICF brought in aggregation, paddlers in Britain were asked whether they wanted it - c. 90% said no - and it was only brought in for Prem and Div 1.
Try this scenario:
Press Release from UEFA: the provisional result of the England-Sweden match was an England victory by 3-2. However this result cannot be confirmed until UEFA have checked all the footage to make sure that the referee's decisions were correct, that all players were eligible to compete,etc. We will let you know the official result of the match by the end of June ...
Re: Rolling Rankings
If that were the case then Alex Furguson would still be trying to claim the Premier Leage Title!
Re: Rolling Rankings
Thanks John.
I was very careful to say results and not official results. I maintain what I said that the results should be both accurate and timely. I don't believe that they need to be mutually exclusive or indeed improving one needs to lead inexorably to degradation of the other. There are different needs in different circumstances and value in both.
I was very careful to say results and not official results. I maintain what I said that the results should be both accurate and timely. I don't believe that they need to be mutually exclusive or indeed improving one needs to lead inexorably to degradation of the other. There are different needs in different circumstances and value in both.
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
Re: Rolling Rankings
Well, it didn't take long for the timeliness/accuracy conflict to crop up (and I am sure that it is not the first time this year)
On Saturday 14th a KIM2 paddler at the Washburn saw he had 811 points, and calculated that he needed to come 2nd on Sunday to get promoted. He did so, and assumed that he had been promoted. But when the rankings went up today his points had been downgraded to 806; which meant that instead of getting promoted by 3 pts he missed it by 2 pts.
If he had known he needed to win his coach would have given him different advice about how to paddle the race. Would it have worked? Would he have won? We will never know (he missed by 2.2 secs, and had 6 penalties).
It happened because a paddle-up competitor was mistakenly included in the total. Had the Official Results motion passed at the ACM it would have been the responsibility of the Chairman of Jury to check and sign off the results. Had he not found the error, the 811 points would have become official. Had he found the error the paddler would have known that evening that he needed to win the next day, and been able to plan for that.
So: a clear timeliness/accuracy conflict. And what benefit is there to paddlers in general to compensate for what happened to that paddler?
On Saturday 14th a KIM2 paddler at the Washburn saw he had 811 points, and calculated that he needed to come 2nd on Sunday to get promoted. He did so, and assumed that he had been promoted. But when the rankings went up today his points had been downgraded to 806; which meant that instead of getting promoted by 3 pts he missed it by 2 pts.
If he had known he needed to win his coach would have given him different advice about how to paddle the race. Would it have worked? Would he have won? We will never know (he missed by 2.2 secs, and had 6 penalties).
It happened because a paddle-up competitor was mistakenly included in the total. Had the Official Results motion passed at the ACM it would have been the responsibility of the Chairman of Jury to check and sign off the results. Had he not found the error, the 811 points would have become official. Had he found the error the paddler would have known that evening that he needed to win the next day, and been able to plan for that.
So: a clear timeliness/accuracy conflict. And what benefit is there to paddlers in general to compensate for what happened to that paddler?
-
Nick Penfold
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 8:21 pm
Re: Rolling Rankings
However, John, there are circumstances where, as well as vetting of results, discretion is applied, and this is one of them. We have awarded the promotion.
But let's suppose there had been another paddler with a similar result to this paddler, but whose time+penalties was understated because in adding up the penalties a 2 was overlooked - the commonest error, I think. And suppose that error had put him ahead of this paddler, who therefore got fewer points and missed promotion. Do you still think it would be a good idea not to correct the error? Because that is what "official on the day" would mean.
Frankly I think the jury chair has enough on his/her plate without having to check the results against the cards, and in many cases I don't think the job would get done. If we can get to a cardless system, where gate by gate penalties go into the computer, there will be little to audit and the published points can be official. Until then...
But let's suppose there had been another paddler with a similar result to this paddler, but whose time+penalties was understated because in adding up the penalties a 2 was overlooked - the commonest error, I think. And suppose that error had put him ahead of this paddler, who therefore got fewer points and missed promotion. Do you still think it would be a good idea not to correct the error? Because that is what "official on the day" would mean.
Frankly I think the jury chair has enough on his/her plate without having to check the results against the cards, and in many cases I don't think the job would get done. If we can get to a cardless system, where gate by gate penalties go into the computer, there will be little to audit and the published points can be official. Until then...
-
Silver C1er
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:03 pm
Re: Rolling Rankings
This is a step in the right direction, I think.
The handbook rankings are, (as mentioned), a round-up of the final position from the previous season and as such it becomes less and less meaningful as a season progresses. What it does do is give some certainty to bib numbers and starting place, (unless you get promoted in season); this is a helpful side of the 'ranking' list.
So what about it if we call the ranking list the 'Start List for 2013...2014...2015 etc' or somthing similar.
As we are now all able to access the excellent and well appreciated Slalom UK web site on our computers and (more often nowadays) mobile, iPad, tablets and googness knows what else, then getting hold of the most up-to-date ranking positions is no real hastle and does reflect the current situation.
So the early rankings will of course be based on the Start List but from then on the picture will evolve as competitions are run.
On a separate but loosly connected note; I was thinking about a way to have a 'Bib for Life', or at least a 'Bib number for life'; not quite got all the answers yet but if it were possible it would save a lot of to-ing and fro-ing and cost and admin. If I make any progress I'll post it... don't hold your breath though... unless a Div 2 C1M!
PS Merry Christmas - Anyone paddling on Christmas Day - training starts now!
The handbook rankings are, (as mentioned), a round-up of the final position from the previous season and as such it becomes less and less meaningful as a season progresses. What it does do is give some certainty to bib numbers and starting place, (unless you get promoted in season); this is a helpful side of the 'ranking' list.
So what about it if we call the ranking list the 'Start List for 2013...2014...2015 etc' or somthing similar.
As we are now all able to access the excellent and well appreciated Slalom UK web site on our computers and (more often nowadays) mobile, iPad, tablets and googness knows what else, then getting hold of the most up-to-date ranking positions is no real hastle and does reflect the current situation.
So the early rankings will of course be based on the Start List but from then on the picture will evolve as competitions are run.
On a separate but loosly connected note; I was thinking about a way to have a 'Bib for Life', or at least a 'Bib number for life'; not quite got all the answers yet but if it were possible it would save a lot of to-ing and fro-ing and cost and admin. If I make any progress I'll post it... don't hold your breath though... unless a Div 2 C1M!
PS Merry Christmas - Anyone paddling on Christmas Day - training starts now!