Is a 50 second penalty enough for missing a gate?

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:58 pm

Its very hard to look at results and say someone was quicker or not when they got a 50 and derive some useful metrics from that. The fact that they got the 50 (half head or non attempt) means that their time will generally be quicker than the paddler who completed the gate correctly.

People will soon learn the risk of missing a gate for whatever reason if the rule is changed to rank by number of 50's and I doubt anyone would really leave the sport for it. At the end of the day if you get a 50 your result isn't much use anyway, all we are talking about is a few paddlers who do manage all the gates and are perhaps rightly annoyed when beaten by someone who didn't try to complete the course and even worse gets promoted.

The problem with the current rule is that it is a judgement call as to whether they attempted the gate or not. How do you apply it consistently especially as the judges change every hour or so. Its bad enough having to judge a half head never mind whether someone made an attempt at a gate, and how much of an an attempt is enough. The fact I've never heard of the rule being implemented shows that it does not work.

I don't see any issue with the ranking system and paddlers missing gates or not attempting them. If they get promoted from the lower division then at some point they have to learn to handle the new division's challenges, that may take a week, a month or a year or more - each person is an individual. In learning to cope with the tougher courses they will inevitably have to face new fears, improve their technique - especially youngsters as they can not rely on brute force, so for a while they might decide to miss a gate, the fact is they are still paddling on the water and gaining experience. Don't forget that for many the main time they get to paddle on white water is at an event - try training on a 35m x 25m pool every week and you'll soon know how hard it is! Not everyone has access to moving water. More experienced paddlers sometimes forget how intimidating white water can be to newer lesser experienced paddlers.

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:26 pm

Now I am worried and will have to read the entire rule book again.

The problem with the current rule is that it is a judgement call

What is the rule, I do not remember it! PLEASE save what is left of my sanity, tell me what the rule is or stop quoting it!

My worry would be that this would have ranked a C1 paddler that took seven minutes to get round Orton Mere above someone who went round in five minutes but did not try the top gate as they had fallen in on every attempt over the weekend. They were not trying to win byunfair means, they were not 'cheating' they were trying to salvage someting from the weekend, and having beaten an adult who held teh entire event up the junior went home happy - and came back next year. Ok does not happen that ofetn, but nor does winning with a fifty.
I am also confused about the number of people that get promoted with 50s. Is it really that high?

Username · Post by **Username** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:40 pm

So my Arachnid friend, Cat moves from being 18/26 to 16/16, points gained change from 35 (less than some beastly people who had the temerity to miss a gate) to 6. 40% of your starters go home with a wasted weekend, many of which resolve not to return or to take up an alternative post. The winners are....

Having a look at the ranking lists we can see that Cat ended last season and remains this season nicely inbetween bibs 28 & 31. Results to date are similar so it becomes apparent that her rescue plans on the Tryweryn added some 70 secs to expected race time circa +50%. Way off the pace it was a bad run! Somehow we should reward that over someone who paddled at race pace but perhaps was unlucky with the swing of a pole (collision or wind assisted or both) and the view of a judge (was the head in or out of the gate?) which even when contested results in a 50.

Ah, I must have misundestood the idea of a 'discussion' board; I thought I could make a general suggestion without being dragged in personally. As I have no wish to have my every result examined and criticised, I will remember not to make any suggestions for discussion about things that actually, several people have agreed with, in future.
I'm not going to post any more regarding this, but, as a final comment:

- It's not my personal results that I care about, as you have so politely pointed out, I'm totally useless anyway, and should give up slalom to avoid getting in anyone's way; it is just my personal opinion that the ability to get gates should be prioritised above speed, and on certain courses, missing out a break out can save quite a lot of the 50 seconds you'll get as a penalty. I did quite well (for me, and as you'll no doubt point out, that's still rubbish by anyone else's standard) at Shepperton, but I know plenty of people there were frsutrated to have tried to cross the flow, get knocked to the bottom, paddle back up to get all the gates, only to lose out to people who just didn't bother (see Munchkin's post way back). I've heard people complain about this at HPP and Tully as well. Incidentally, I have never suggested disqualification, and neither do I think it is a good idea.

I had no problem at all with my actual result at Graveyard - I know I was slow, I stuffed up the bottom breakout and lost loads of time there (I lost even more because the person behind me didn't do gate 10 or 11, caught me up, and I was whistled off - but that's another issue altogether, which I have no interest in pursuing). It was merely that I noticed that people finished above me who had 50s, which was frustrating for me because I thought 'perhaps I shouldn't have bothered going back round' and it reminded me again of something I have heard lots of people say.

Much love,
Cat

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 5:59 pm

Hey Cat, don't you dare stop posting! This place is too thin on the ground with the few who post here as it is! And you are right this is a discussion zone. As the resident and very outspoken arachnid here (loving that twist on my name lol) I regularly chunter on about what I think...and why not? Its just a view. Some will agree and some will not. No major decisions will result from a chat Forum as those result from committees in the real world anyway. This is just a place to have your say. I allow others their opinion and all I ask is that I am allowed mine. If someone has overstepped the mark on a personal note maybe respectfully ask for an apology. Im sure nobody in this wonderful community really wants to upset anyone

On topic, the question here was what do people think. So I put my thoughts down. Yes Dee, I accept its different for lower divisions and this season i will be attending many I hope with the L&SER Series Slalom

You have a good point about ensuring we do not deter newbies. maybe Im just a hard nosed coach (I used to train firefighters so I make no apology for the background to the manner in which I get the very best out of people as peoples lives actually depended on my training then!). I do not agree with mollycoddling or wrapping kids up in cotton wool. The world is a tough place and if they only realise this when they are 18 they might not make 19!

Whilst harsh (as disqualification is being considered as this here), I think the true competitors thrive on being challenged and going back again a second time to show people what they are really made of. Slalom is not for everyone of course, most parents would NEVER dream of allowing their beloved and precious tiny ones on white water. Thankfully my fantastic parents did - although my dear old Mum worried no end I know! So, for these reasons, I arrive at a method to sort the wheat from the chaff. Either complete the course as required or train some more or compete in a division you are more suited to. I personally think there is more to courses than making them so difficult that people struggle to get the gates. Just watch the Premsters on a a low division course. They try just as hard and the results are just as interesting as the speed and skill still comes into play - simply without the pointlessness of a move only some can actually do.

All my opinion folks so please dont go bonkers at me ok

Oh, and if the above described Tully experience happened to me, I would take it on the chin. As I said, a 50 is equivilent to no result in my book. We are never going to make any changes here but its great to hear all the views

PP

Dee · Post by **Dee** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:03 pm

moves from being 18/26 to 16/16, points gained
change from 35 ... to 6.

I don't think this is correct, when someone gets DSQ-R then they still count as a starter; just like someone who swims. I believe this applies even if it happens on both runs. It's only if they are disqualified from the whole competition that points are recalculated but 2xDSQ-R <> DSQ-C. So 18/26 becomes 16/26 and points go up for that individual (those with DSQ-R for both runs would get null points though). I'm still against disqualification for this though.

The problem with the current rule is that it is a judgement call as to whether they attempted the gate or not. ............ The fact I've never heard of the rule being implemented shows that it does not work.

.....or possibly that it doesn't exist!!

Munchkin · Post by **Munchkin** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:53 pm

I think Dee might be right, I am reading the rule book (as I was the one that said I thought it did exist, but I was not sure)

I was interested to read that rule 31.2 only allows for a competitor to be whistled off if the overetaking competitor has correctly negotiated the course ie not missed gates, I have seen this rule breached a number of times as I guess Cat has given her account of her last competition...

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:36 pm

There is a rule that all gates must be done in the correct sequence (20.something?) and another rule in the disqualification section that says if a paddler attempts to win by unfair means they can be disqualified. I haven't a rule book with me at the mo and can't remember the exact rule text and numbers. There is however no specific rule in the current rule book that I can find as regards attempting a gate but I would think that the 20.x rule covers that. If you don't attempt it you haven't done it in the correct order and if you deliberately miss it to 'win' then you have gained an unfair advantage.

Also as Munchkin says if a paddler misses a gate it is that paddlers repsonsibility to ensure they do not impeed the paddler in front of them who is completing the course correctly. If and when it happens to me I sit in an eddy and let the correct gap open up like I did on my official practice on Sunday.

Seedy Paddler · Post by **Seedy Paddler** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:11 pm

Hey Cat - apologies if I offended but I was trying to understand where you were coming from and your question was is 50 sufficient - to which I have responded yes!

Please don't get down over the result consider the ranking you are currently 17 places higher than you started off and you are sitting ahead of several people who were previously ranked above you. Hence you are improving and can continue to improve.

Unfortunately the rule book doesn't really help:

Rule 28.1 requires gates to be negotiated in numerical order
Rule 28.5 concludes negotiation when any subsequent gate/finish begins

So touch a pole/break a gate line and all previously numbered gates have been negotiated - penalty determined in 29.4.5

If the competitor missing gates catches you then it is they that should be whistled off - Rule 31.2, unfortunately (IMO) the remedy is a re-run.

So in my opinion with guidelines for 100 second courses the 50 second penalty is sufficient. It does require the application of Rule 31.2 as if you are working the course the catching paddler having missed gates must back off and leave you unhindered to continue. Perhaps that is the case when we should raise the DISQ-R as a more appropriate Penalty.

Chin up Cat and keep coming back for more

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:12 pm

Just had a thought. I retract the suggestion of disqualification on the basis of the word itself being quite harsh and the general consensus of opinion being it is not a good idea. I think that instead of a 50 second penalty, a paddler should have that run "discounted". It is similar to being disqualified but I must admit that being disqualified sounds like the entire competition is over when, in truth, it is just half of it. Ipsofacto, you are not actually disqualified as only your messed up run has been discounted from the eventual results.

As a novice, having a run or a few runs "discounted", can you imagine how thrilled they would be to firstly obtain any actual result and then have the driving force behind them to avoid ever having any runs discounted and get on with trying to run cleaner and faster! No reason to think this would deter anyone from continuing with slalom - on the contrary, they would be doubly determined to get on that scoreboard!

Munchkin · Post by **Munchkin** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:19 am

What is the obsession with discounting or disqualifying runs? Before the ACM there was a long chat about how to encourage people to compete in harder events because they are getting prompted too quickly, all this talk of disqualifying or discounting runs with 50s would have the exact opposite affect.Slaloms are very expensive to attend and knowing that you are going for what would be effectively no purpose makes it even less value for money.

Peter, I know your aim is to get around the course as quickly and cleanly as you can. This year that is my aim too as I really want promotion. However, last year my main aim was to conqueor the water at the bigger water events. At those events my aim was to get as many gates as I could and not swim! People such as Kate Kent have done a fabulous job of helping me with that but I am very lucky to have had that help. I was also very lucky last year to have had the finances to travel to the harder events and give them a try. If your idea was implemented I don't think others will have the same opportunities as I did and standards may drop rather than improve.

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:55 pm

Maybe then there should be slightly different rules for different levels of ability (divisions)? It has been quite a while since I was moving up the divisions and so maybe my views are related to slalom at a reasonably competitive and competent level. My point is that, at say Division 2 or possibly Division 1 and above, if you pick up a 50, your result, in the grand scheme of things, is pants and you effectively need not have bothered to turn up. In 2005 or thereabouts I did the Prem Graveyard event and fiftied the very first gate. Both runs were totalled in then and so that was it. Game over. But I knew the score, took it on the chin, worked on the reason it went pear shaped, learned from it and improved. The rules have recently changed to one run counts and therefore that disaster is hopefully avoided anyway now

I am quite a technically "able" competitor. My age prevents me doing the rubbermen athletic moves that our superstars pull off but generally I consider I have the ability to certainly not 50 a course and generally clear it. I would consider that if I did not have that ability one of two things would be apparent to me. Either I am not good enough to compete on that course or the design of the course is unecessarily difficult by comparison to others in the same Division. If its the first, then I need to compete on easier courses to suit my ability (this will pan out as not being an option because I will be demoted due to a plethera of 50's). If its the latter, then the course designer needs a slap. As mentioned earlier, I think it is possible for a course to become too difficult and that disturbs the flow of it. A reasonably difficult course is plenty difficult enough as it is still a true test of ability. The curves on a racetrack are not difficult at low speed but increase in difficulty as the speed increases. This is the same with a slalom course (with the added complexity of the track itself moving as well!) as you have a choice to pass through the centre of all the gatelines steadily or zip through it necking poles just 150mm above the surface. Added difficulty above this is not really necessary in my view. Maybe Premsters welcome something nigh on impossible so maybe those very difficult moves should be placed only on those courses and they should have their run discounted if they mess up. Maybe in lower divisions those who struggle with what a competent paddler would say was easy should only get a time penalty for messing up by missing a gate or similar.

I think that given the vary large difference between the abilities of a novice and an international paddler, it maybe is a sensible suggestion to vary the rules accordingly. They do vary in places already such as no practice for prems so more differences could be introduced. It is only at the top level that the rules seem to need to accord with the ICF so why not have domestic, national differences if this matter is seen to be a problem?

I am about to get into lower division paddling for the first time in decades as I begin to introduce new VKC paddlers to slalom in the L&SER series starting this weekend at Yalding Weir. Maybe after this I will find I am more sympathetic to such competitors - but I doubt it lol. "String em up I say!" lol.

So what do we here think about certain rules for certain divisions then? Am I being less harsh with this view maybe? (exits stage left fluttering eyelashes and looking as demure as possible)....

PP

Dee · Post by **Dee** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:45 pm

Different rules for different divisions would be difficult for multi-division events. We had a couple of hiccups a Shepperton where div 2 paddlers were give 50s on the two gates that were not part of their course. Easily remedied of course, but different penalties/discounting/ranking methods could easily cause issues. Not insurmountable ones I but I'm not convinced that rules should change between divisions in this way.

Munchkin · Post by **Munchkin** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 8:21 pm

I am just giggling to myself about the idea of Spiderman fluttering his eyelashes and walking away demurely!

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:07 am

Munchkin wrote:I am just giggling to myself about the idea of Spiderman fluttering his eyelashes and walking away demurely!

...but obviously you would not be able to see that through the mask

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:28 pm

"Slaloms are very expensive to attend and knowing that you are going for what would be effectively no purpose makes it even less value for money."

which is exactly why I can understand some people getting very annoyed when they are beaten by someone who deliberately misses a gate and even more when that results in promotion for the offender or lack of promotion for said person.