Restructuring the divisions

[Canadian Paddler]

Debs

The slalom committee do read this forum and are not unaware of the issue.

We have been thinking through the options being promulgated (except perhasp JimW's latest) for the past few years. Coming up with the same arguments for and against. You have not seen any posts from the committee as there may be something that is proposed, or some arguments that we did not pick up on. After all we are but a small group of volunteers who are trying to do our best so welcome any ideas / thoughts from others.

Remember folks you do not have to convince the slalom committee to propose your ideas, you can get your club to propose a motion to the ACM. The secretary will accept motions and (in my opinion) is friendly. But I would say that.

(for the avoidance of doubt CP is Colin Woodgate, secretary of the slalom committee )

[Debs]

That's great. I shall ask for it to be put on our clubs agenda for the next committee meeting. Hope other people will do the same!

[Nick Penfold]

Remember, Debs, that a proposal has to specify some sort of action rather than just state the problem. You might want to consider motions:
* To raise the points targets for promotion from Div 2 to Div 1. Currently they are: kayaks 4500, Canadian singles 4250, C2s 3350. Perhaps we should raise the C1 targets to match the K1 targets? The reason for the difference isn't clear. Perhaps we should push them all up to 4600. If we make C1 promotion targets the same as K1 for promotion to Div 1, perhaps that should apply to promotion from Div 3 and from Div 1 as well.
* To ask the Committee to consider further end-of-year promotions to Prem (so as to reduce numbers in Div 1 and use race places in Prem).
* (Other ideas go here!)

[747boy]

Silversurfer say's
Unfortunately, there is now a culture of getting to the Premier Division ASAP, driven by acceptance onto talent programmes and hitting artificial targets. I don't think this is healthy for the sport, and whilst the number of paddlers are higher in both Division 1 and Premier Division, I don't think this is reflected in the depth of quality in those divisions.

Have a look at the Prem / Div1 Rankings and look how many kids are from HPP/LV
If we are going to have a pop at TID then lets add the Scottish programs and Welsh programs into the mix?
The rankings look like they have a proportionate mix of clubs from across the home nations.

I would agree the strength and depth of the paddlers needs looking at, but that is a issue of the system not the paddler. Put a bar in front of someone they will jump it

[jjayes]

It's a difficult problem and being a non paddler I wouldn't no where to start.
As a parent I have concerns about the speed at which juniors are coming up through the division's. To me it's far too quick. Particularly from 2 to 1. To me the point of a divisional system is that paddlers work their way through the division's building up their skills and more importantly their bodies to be able to cope with the more difficult waters. I fear that some of these juniors are going to suffer bad injuries as they have not built up the strength to cope with the water power. We have seen it already! Since the introduction of the talent squads the pressure on the kids to perform has been greatly increased particularly due to the age criteria and them desperately wanting to keep their place. Don't get me wrong I think the talent programme is a good idea but I think it needs restructuring to allow the kids to develop at a safer pace.
I always remember a piece of advice given to me by a parent who's child was promoted from div 2 to div 1 after competing in only div 2/3 races. That child was severely injured when competing at div 1 level and needed surgery, and no longer competes. They advised to take the time to do some div 1/2's before getting promoted as the change in waters was a big step. I did just that and slowed my child down.
It may sound as if I've gone off topic but bear with me!
If we want to produce a sustainable stream of junior paddlers I believe that restructuring the divisional system and the talent squads would be a good idea. We need to slow down promotion and invest more time in nurturing the juniors. After all without them there will be no sport!
This would relieve the pressure on the top divisions, where there are fewer races.
Having more races is probably not going to happen, after the price increases over the last few years at Cardiff, Tees and now Hpp it seems that if anything we will see a drop in higher division races rather than an increase!
Making the races tougher from 4 up to 1 and making it harder to get promoted will mean a reduction in promtee's and also relieve the pressure on the higher divisions.
This will probably mean in the first instance that yes there will need to be some promotions and demotions from the divisions which may be upsetting to some, particularly juniors. But for the future of the sport the decision makers need to make some very tough decisions and will need our support and input to do this rather than our criticisms. We need to look at the sport as a whole rather than from what will benefit us individually.

There was quite a debate back in 2010 on injuries and progression in the sport that may be of interest those with concerns.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1060&hilit=kendal+chew

[SilverSurfer]

747boy in response to my post you said:

"If we are going to have a pop at TID then lets add the Scottish programs and Welsh programs into the mix? The rankings look like they have a proportionate mix of clubs from across the home nations"

"I would agree the strength and depth of the paddlers needs looking at, but that is a issue of the system not the paddler. Put a bar in front of someone they will jump it."

Please don't take my post out of context. I neither had a "pop" at the English TID program or blamed the paddler.

In my post I said that any consideration to changing the structure of the division is meaningless unless you consider the bigger picture, and all contributing factors which includes talent programmes, and what is driving them. This is in reference to all talent programs, 747boy you interpreted that as the English program.

[SilverSurfer]

I think Debs make some very good points on injury.

Without doubt the English talent program has a mentality of churning paddlers through the system, too many and too quickly. As noted in the post referenced by JJayes, strength and conditioning is vital for the prevention of injuries and development of paddlers.

The majority of English junior paddlers on TID programs do not get the strength and conditioning support they need, yet are expected to meet performance targets. I don't believe this is developing the sport long term. There is a culture of a quick fix in British Canoeing, based on a 4 year Olympic cycle and funding, but it's the elite paddlers who benefit the most. It's a separate topic on would the sport be better without the Olympics.

Specifically for K1W juniors, only 1 paddler in 2014, 2015 and 2016 made the GB world junior K1W team at junior selection. That factor alone questions if the current system is right and we are developing our juniors. It's a separate topic on the merit of junior selection at LV over a single weekend.

Debs I totally agree with your comment:

"If we want to produce a sustainable stream of junior paddlers I believe that restructuring the divisional system and the talent squads would be a good idea. We need to slow down promotion and invest more time in nurturing the juniors. After all without them there will be no sport."

So going back to my original post, the suggestions to change the points, promote/demote paddlers etc is only tweaking the divisional system, all influencing factors need to be considered and I believe it's the talent programs which are the biggest influence.

[John Sturgess]

This thread was launched a week ago with the title 'restructuring the divisions'. However it is rapidly being taken over by contributors who feel that the problem is young paddlers getting onto rough water too fast, going up the divisions too fast, etc: not the same thing at all. And now there is the question of injuries ...

I propose now to submit two separate sets of thoughts: one on the divisional structure, one on junior development; and to indicate which is which. I hope other contributors will do the same.

[John Sturgess]

The Divisional Structure

When people write about things being wrong with the Divisional structure, they mean, by and large, that there are too many entrants for Div 1 races; and conclude that that must be a result of there being too many paddlers in Div 1, as a result of excessive promotion (usually specified as in KIM), without considering the other possibilities:

That there are not enough paddlers in Prem
That there are not enough Div 1 races - and specifically, that there is only a maximum of one each weekend
That there are too many of the wrong paddlers in Div 1, because the evidence is that c. 100 Div 1 paddlers are not as good as the top 100 paddlers in Div 2.
That paddlers should not be allowed to do so many races
That the way we run races limits the number who can paddle at them (I once raced in a Div 3 at the Tryweryn where there were 250 KIM paddling)
That judging ought to be done by parents etc, and therefore not take up slots on the start list
and even ... that we let too many paddlers start in slalom (joke?)

Overcrowding of Div 1 seems to be the problem because unlike every other slalom nation we use our divisional system to ration access to race-slots on rough water; which means that we do not have to increase the number of those race-slots. If, however, we were to act like any self-respecting business - or like most sports - we would be saying that we would expand provision to meet demand. Then we would have to find ways to meet it, without using shortage of section judges/pressure on the timing team/difficulty getting other volunteers to be an alibi: more races, more slots, for Div 2, Div 1 and Prem.

It is this rationing aspect that creates much of the ill-feeling that is caused. I would suggest that any paddler in Prem or Div 1 who did not get at least 400 points at least 3 times last season should be declaring an interest when demanding that promotion from Div 2 to Div 1 or from Div 1 to Prem be made more difficult.

There is also an issue raised about age which parallels the widespread lack of understanding within slalom coaching of the principles of Long Term Athlete Development. It concerns the question of whether paddlers get promoted too early, and whether, therefore, delaying promotion would be of benefit apart from keeping Div 1 smaller. We need to look at Paddling Age/Racing Age, which is a far more important factor than Chronological Age. A 12-year old who starts slalom, paddles on Holme Pierrepont approx. 3 sessions a week, most of them coached, and races at 29 races in that first year, has already done more paddling and training than most 16/17-year-olds (and most adult starters) do in their entire slalom careers: why should his promotion be delayed?

[davebrads]

On the whole I like the divisional structure, it means that you get to race against people of similar standard to yourself and therefore the racing is more rewarding. But I guess you could argue that I would like it, as it works for me. If I had other priorities in my life I might find it difficult to stay in division 1, and would I then be happy racing div 2? I think I would, but it would depend upon there being sufficient decent quality div 2 races, and that is barely the case.

Taking John's other points one at a time:

I agree that there aren't enough paddlers in prem.
I think that there are more than enough division 1 races - but that is because I favour the divisional system.
I agree that the wrong paddlers are in div 1. I would be ruthless with demotion.
Controlling the number of races a paddler can enter is a solution, but I don't think it is the right one. Races in the middle of the country will remain oversubscribed, while those at the ends of the country may find themselves short of entries. This problem already exists, but this proposal would magnify the problem. Furthermore I think it would be a nightmare to administer.
Why can't we reduce the gap between paddlers? The first big race I attended was a Serpents Tail Prem/1 in the days when Prem was a special sub-set of division 1, and the entry was huge. We ran it at 45 second intervals using an old fashioned tutti and cards, and I guess the average run time would have been around 200 seconds, and on the whole it worked.
Judging by parents is a good idea, I'll get mine to come along . Jesting aside, I personally wouldn't mind judging as long as the stint was reasonably short, and it could be if you had c160 judges. I guess you could argue that this would favour those paddlers who had someone along to do their judging for them. There might be a problem with paddlers who are doing more than one class, but in that case the rules should make it clear that they should do two stints and any problems should be thrown back at the paddler to sort out, not left to the organiser.

Do those other nations really have more rough water slaloms than us? If they do I think that it is down to more availability, and that is a political question as much as one of geography. What other nation would use public money to build a slalom course and then allow it to be turned into a privately run commercial rafting centre? I suspect that actually a lot of races are held on easier (div 2 standard) water and paddlers race on them anyway.

[HPPaddle]

HPP is a large successful club. It has an active network of coaches and runs coaching sessions on the white water throughout the week. A child starting out as a young HPP paddler has the potential (as John has suggested) to gain a lot of experience quickly if they choose to devote the time to training, and they will naturally climb the divisional system quite quickly (this is motivating for them, encouraging them to train and race even more). These are club paddlers, who are encouraged and nurtured by the club, including many, many hours of coaching by volunteers.

Please, when you scan the list of HPP paddlers, don't see a problem caused by any TID programme, see a vibrant club that is keeping the sport growing through volunteer coaches working with fantastic children and young adults, who have been encouraged to start paddling through many channels - visits to local schools, word of mouth and having a great local venue. It would be so sad if the hard work that HPP and its coaches put into nurturing young paddlers is seen by others as the problem. I would have thought that HPP is doing what any large club should be doing for the sport.

There is much, much more to HPP than a few paddlers on a TID programme (I'd be interested to now what the percentage is, I'm guessing it is very low). It seems crazy that encouraging children to take up a sport, work at it and succeed is frowned upon by the wider slalom community and seen as a problem that needs solving.

As an aside, if you suggest that these young (in some cases very young) paddlers are kept on div 2/3 water for longer than necessary, when they train on the HPP white water each week, you will simply lose them to the sport. Then there will be lots of space in the divisions. Problem solved?

[Dee]

...If, however, we were to act like any self-respecting business - or like most sports - we would be saying that we would expand provision to meet demand. Then we would have to find ways to meet it, without using shortage of section judges/pressure on the timing team/difficulty getting other volunteers to be an alibi: more races, more slots, for Div 2, Div 1 and Prem...

You seem to be implying here that we need to increase the number of races, but are using lack of volunteers as the excuse not to do so. The use of the word alibi says to me that you believe that we could if we could get around this problem if we wanted to. So, let's assume for now that everyone is in favour of expanding the number of races to meet demand, do we:

• coerce existing volunteers to donate more of their time to the sport?
• find and train new volunteers for all roles?
• employ people to run and staff the events?
• something else?

And how do we do this. It's all very well to imply that the lack of people is merely an excuse, but if we can't resolve it then we're still stuck!

[John Sturgess]

When a parent takes little Johnny along to Nottingham Athletics Club at Harvey Hadden Stadium they are given two A4 sheets to fill in. One is for all little Johnny's details.
On the other, the top third is for the parents, contact details.
The middle third has lots of boxes: 'tick here if you are prepared to train as a coach'; 'tick here if you are prepared to hold a stopwatch'; 'tick here if you are prepared to help with making teas'.
The bottom third just has one box: tick here if you are not prepared to do anything. Nobody has ever ticked that box: presumably they are scared that they will be told to take little Johnny to Mansfield Harriers.
However that is not enough on its own. The Club needs a really nasty person called a Volunteer Co-Ordinator, who two or three weeks later taps little Johnny's parent on the shoulder, and says 'do you remember you said you would help with teas? Come with me and I will show where the urn is.' Clubs tend to accuse parents of just wanting to use the club as a childcare facility; but when they look into it further they usually find that parents find standing watching rather boring, and welcome having something to do on training nights in particular.
I could name clubs in Gedling who follow this approach and find that their big problem is finding enough for the volunteers to do! After all, your junior members have on average roughly 1.5 parents of whom every time they canoe one has to be present.

[Dee]

I think there is a world of difference between asking a parent to "operate a tea urn" and run an event/travel across the country as section judge or timing/train and act as safety officer etc etc. Yes, our parents are, on average, much more supportive than they were a few years ago but that does not mean they are willing or able to dedicate multiple weekends or even days to helping the sport.

I do realise we have to start somewhere, but the issue with relying on parents is that a large number of juniors only hang around for a couple of years. When the juniors move on then more often than not so do the parents.

I can't help feeling that those we should maybe target are the older paddlers who have a personal connection with the sport, perhaps those who race purely for fun rather than to fight for the top spot, perhaps those whose kids have left home or even those recently retired/semi-retired. These are the ones who understand the sport from the inside, may feel it's time to give something back and are more likely to commit for a longer period.

[Mike Mitchell]

I wish we had a HPP in the South west but we don't, so I will continue spending hours slinging gates across any river I can find. Perhaps HPP is getting a lot of criticism hear because they have a fantastic successful facility which we would all like.

As for juniors starting to early, thats just an excuse by adults that just keep on getting beaten.

Yes the coach has a responsibility for not over training a junior paddler and causing injury,but we are all different and you will get injured sports people in every sport, thats sport. I started paddling at 13 and got most of my injures in my late 20s. So there in no real pattern hear. Ok they train harder at a young age and more often nowadays, but they have lightweight equipment designed for there weight.

As Jhon stated this post has got well of track.

So hear goes.
1.Prem was originally formed with the top 60 paddlers from div1 as an elite Div. It worked really well and there was promotions and demotions at the end of the season. So shouldn't be increased in size, if its increased then the standards needs to stay high.

2. Div1 is large but if you demote a large number of paddlers they are going to give up. So not the answer.

3. Div2. Having just returned from 3 consecutive weekend of Div2 races, it seems perfect. With a high standard of junior paddlers dominating every race. Possibly could be increased in size.

4. Div 3. A good fun division which needs every paddler we can get. Leave it the same just encourage more paddlers.

5. Div 4. You have to start somewhere and any bit of flat water is good enough. Need more clubs to run these and get more paddlers into Div3.

So the problem is Div1. Hear are some suggestions that could be tested or proposed. Its also not acceptable for a paddler that gets promoted from div 2 in April and can't get entries to Div 1 races in July.

1. Increase the size of the division. Have K1 men on the Saturday with teams for other classes. Have Ladies and C1/2 on Sunday with teams for K1 men. You have to judge on your team day.
So this would reduce a double race to a single. Less points gained in one weekend on the same water. Main problem Div 1 men would go home Sat night.

2. Run races as existing but at 45 sec intervals, to get all paddlers fitted in.

3. If you enter in 2 classes you are only guaranteed one practice run in the boat you choose and One run in each boat.
Don't think this would make enough space at some events but would help.
In return there is an Eleat class formed, where the times from the best or one run are added together to make a total.
So there is a wining total for K1 and C1 accumulated time.[ need to think about that bit]

4. Practice on Sat with team events, Individual only racing on the Sunday. This gives for much more practice on the course.