Is a 50 second penalty enough for missing a gate?

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:44 pm

Good point

JamesH · Post by **JamesH** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:58 pm

Ultimately is it not the divisional ranking system that underlies this problem, with paddlers getting promoted too early into divisions in which they are not yet ready to handle the water?

Proposed solution:
Scrap the divisional system
Give courses (by this I mean sites, eg. Matlock, Tully etc.) a degree of difficulty around a notional 'mean' (for example, the Washburn) - thus Tully might get a degree of difficulty of 1.25, whereas Matlock might be 0.75
Thus at a slalom with a difficulty rating of 1, if you win you get 1,000/100 points as per normal, but if you win say at Tully you get 1,000/100 x 1.25 = 1,250/125
Leave the competition rules as they are
Everyone gets a national ranking dependent on best five results with no need for divisions.

This would allow competitors progress much more naturally from easy to harder courses and move up the 'difficulty rating' scale as and when ready and thus up the national ranking table. It would also allow the likes of me, who is old and slow but used to heavy white water and thus a denizen of Div 2 to do ranking races on more demanding white water courses.

The one problem I can spot with this is that some courses change radically with water levels. I'm thinking in particular of Shepperton, but allowance could be made for this, with the beginning of season race having a much higher difficulty rating than one held in July, for example.

Any thoughts?

davebrads · Post by **davebrads** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:12 pm

I'm surprised John Sturgess hasn't jumped into this debate yet, he has been pushing the idea of scrapping the divisional system for years. Here is an alternative view:

I would on the whole disagree that paddlers get promoted before they can handle the water. A newbie div 1 paddler in whatever class is far more capable of paddling the Graveyard than the average boater that gets on the Tryweryn. The problem lies with the fear of the unknown, and with many people they will rather try to avoid facing up to their fear than deal with it. On that basis, the divisional system performs a useful function of forcing paddlers onto the better water. Most do deal with it, and the sport remains healthy as a result.

Of course, the paddler has the option of giving up, and some do. But at the end of the day those people don't matter, the sport is exciting because of what it is, and shouldn't be diluted because some paddlers don't like it.

Carlr · Post by **Carlr** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 4:00 pm

Well said Dave couldnt have put it better myself.

oldschool · Post by **oldschool** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:10 pm

davebrads wrote:I would on the whole disagree that paddlers get promoted before they can handle the water. A newbie div 1 paddler in whatever class is far more capable of paddling the Graveyard than the average boater that gets on the Tryweryn.

I'm sorry to disagree but when 30% of the men and 70% of the women get at least one 50 over their two runs it seems that a large proportion of the division do not have the skills required to compete at this level on a straight forward course with no real challenges other than the water itself.

As i have said before i believe the skill level in div 1 has plummeted in recent years, and i think that there will be little choice soon but to increase the size of prem to include the top 40 in div one and loose another division. This will, as i'm sure many will point out, only make the difference between the divisions greater but how long can we go on when 1/3rd of the field cant do the course that was set?

JamesH · Post by **JamesH** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 1:09 pm

I don't think a non-divisional system would dilute slalom ability - it may well strengthen it! But it would allow people to progress in a much more natural way, with confident (and good) paddlers rising more quickly through the difficulty ratings than more timid ones. There is still competition because there is a national ranking system - but instead of being, say, ranked 35 in Div 1, you could be ranked at 105 in the national rankings.

I would agree with you Dave that a newbie to Div 1 may paddle better than a lot of 'white water' paddlers on the Tryweryn, but I don't think you are comparing like with like and I suspect that you know it. The Tryweryn, being dam release, thus guaranteed water, attracts a lot of novice paddlers sticking their toes into grade 3/3+ water for the first time. I paddled the Tryweryn as my fourth river trip back in the mists of time, and while I got down it, I certainly wouldn't claim to have been in control!

But herein lies a certain amount of my point about the divisional system. I've been white water boating for 15 years now and have run the Tryweryn more times than I care to remember. However, as a Div 2 paddler I get no opportunity to race on say, the Graveyard, as it is considered 'too hard' for Div 2 paddlers, despite the fact I would be perfectly capable of negotiating a course down it.

I can hear the 'well why don't you go and do judges runs at Div1/prem slaloms then' chorus. Put in a nutshell, because I live in London and while I'm prepared to travel that distance to race if its a ranking race for me, I sure as #### am not just for a judge's run. The 'judges run' argument only works for young guns looking to rise to the top and/or courses that are relatively close by.

davebrads · Post by **davebrads** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:18 pm

oldschool wrote:
davebrads wrote:I would on the whole disagree that paddlers get promoted before they can handle the water. A newbie div 1 paddler in whatever class is far more capable of paddling the Graveyard than the average boater that gets on the Tryweryn.

I'm sorry to disagree but when 30% of the men and 70% of the women get at least one 50 over their two runs it seems that a large proportion of the division do not have the skills required to compete at this level on a straight forward course with no real challenges other than the water itself.

As i have said before i believe the skill level in div 1 has plummeted in recent years, and i think that there will be little choice soon but to increase the size of prem to include the top 40 in div one and loose another division. This will, as i'm sure many will point out, only make the difference between the divisions greater but how long can we go on when 1/3rd of the field cant do the course that was set?

The move that was causing the 50s was not straightforward, it was surprisingly technical, and I thought the course designer was particularly vicious in not putting any guiding gates to help newbies to racing on the Tryweryn.

I would suggest that 99% of the paddlers on the water that day had the technical paddling skills to make the move, but the gate was missed because either they didn't have the ability to read the water to understand what they had to do, or else they were just too cautious to paddle properly. Either way, more time racing on that kind of water is the the only way they are going to learn how to do that kind of move. Coaching will accelerate the learning process, but cannot substitute for experience.

It is no different now than it was 20+ years ago. The difference was that you had to start learning about racing on white water when you were in division 2, but it didn't mean that paddlers didn't go through the same learning process, and 50s were just as commonplace. It is just that by the time they were in division 1 most paddlers had already gone through their whitewater apprenticeship. I agree that the standard of paddling has changed, but whatever you do with the divisions, the first time most paddlers race on the Trweryn they are going to struggle.

davebrads · Post by **davebrads** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:26 pm

JamesH wrote:But herein lies a certain amount of my point about the divisional system. I've been white water boating for 15 years now and have run the Tryweryn more times than I care to remember. However, as a Div 2 paddler I get no opportunity to race on say, the Graveyard, as it is considered 'too hard' for Div 2 paddlers, despite the fact I would be perfectly capable of negotiating a course down it.

And this is the real downside of the divsional system - it stands in the way of paddlers that want to race on whitewater. This is a much more pertinent argument than saying paddlers are being forced onto whitewater before they are ready.

80-1219672301 · Post by **80-1219672301** » Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:31 pm

Just playing devil's advocate here - as I'd be interested in what others think - but if you remove the divisional system do you not then run a more dangerous risk whereby we have a situation where there are paddlers racing on courses that they are really not ready for and thereby putting a heavier strain on the safety measures for a race? And if you start imposing entry criteria in a non-divisional system then I don't see the point of the non-divisional system (if you see what I mean).

I was undecided at the start of this thread about the 50 point ruling on missed gates. Having read all the arguments I think the current system works but if racers are deliberately missing out gates then they should have additional penalties added on and as has been pointed out there is already provision for this in the rules.

Could it be that the issue is less about what penalties are but more about making sure everyone knows the rules and getting them applied?

Unlike many other spoorts we do get the rules issued to us on an annual basis - not the greatest bedtime read - agreed - but its really important that they are known by competitors. I get the impression sometimes that the rules are only looked up when there is an issue. In swimming (sorry only example I can dredge up) knowing the rules is part of the coaching. Swim coaches have to make sure that their athletes know the rules inside out otherwise (as said before) they're disqualified.

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:09 pm

"I'm sorry to disagree but when 30% of the men and 70% of the women get at least one 50 over their two runs it seems that a large proportion of the division do not have the skills required to compete at this level on a straight forward course with no real challenges other than the water itself."

I don't think thats a very fair statistic, we race on the best run, there are many reasons why a paddler may get a 50 and it does not mean they do not have the skills.

My official practice at Tryweryn was pants but I didn't miss a gate on either race run. I'd just not prepared properly.

Similarly at the weekend I witnessed a youngster go from paddling straight down a course on his practice runs to missing one gate on run one, and none on run two, it was not down to lack of skill but a mixture of lack of moving water experience and some fear especially as he swam there on his last visit but he faced his demons, learnt from each run and ended up a very happy paddler at the end of the day.

As I keep saying don't forget many paddlers do not have regular access to moving water let alone white water, they do the best they can given what tools, time and money they have. If anyone doubts how hard it is go and find a pond or pool and train on that all year. You'll soon find its hard to swop from one to the other in an instant. Even our youngest paddlers have commented its like paddling in glue when they get back in the pool after an event and spend the whole evening belting gates because the water doesn't turn the boat for them.

I for one wish people would stop knocking paddlers who are making the effort and instead spend their time trying to help encourage them.

Carlr · Post by **Carlr** » Fri Apr 03, 2009 4:49 pm

Surely one of the answers is to make Div 2 courses harder by racing on bigger water, it is to easy to pick flat water Div 2 slaloms to gain promotion and then struggle when on big water. my personel view is that some slalom courses are just to easy at Div 2 level.

RussJohnson · Post by **RussJohnson** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:06 pm

Paddlemum wrote:Just playing devil's advocate here - as I'd be interested in what others think - but if you remove the divisional system do you not then run a more dangerous risk whereby we have a situation where there are paddlers racing on courses that they are really not ready for and thereby putting a heavier strain on the safety measures for a race? And if you start imposing entry criteria in a non-divisional system then I don't see the point of the non-divisional system (if you see what I mean).

just to go with this point, there might even be the opposite effect.

instead of weaker paddlers going onto water that is too big for them, we could have people paddling on water that is far too easy for them, this means that they are more likely to win an get the points?

i wouldn't call that development in any sense. ???

the solution is like that one above, make some div2 races on harder courses. by doing this you develop skills.

Russ Johnson

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Thu May 07, 2009 11:27 pm

Time to reply on this, I think (sorry about the delay, Dave)

1) Could we put to bed the idea that there is, or ever has been, a rule allowing disqualification for deliberately missing a gate. There is a rule allowing disqualification for trying to win by unfair means; there was a time quite a few years ago when a group of Section Judges (names withheld) decided, with no official sanction, to interpret the rule to include deliberate missing of a gate. They were told in no uncertain terms (in the late Barry Peake's term of office, I think) that the rule referred to things like drilling holes in an opponent's boat, not to missing gates deliberately.

2) Yes there are occasions (see C1W results at Selection Race 1) when results are inverted because some paddlers do not go for particular gates. But those who made no attempt to reach the Plug-hole, and therefore beat the one who did, were not doin it in order to win: survive, maybe?

3) On the more general points raised by Dave and others: yes, I firmly believe that the only solution is to have open entry for all races, as the Germans, Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, Slovenes, etc, do, and as the French do for most of their races.
There is a suggestion that it is down to the ranking system to tell paddlers which races are appropriate for them (i.e. if they want to paddle harder water they have to judge). For all the reasons mentioned in the posts above, this does not work: and I do not see how any system can assess the needs of individual paddlers.
The answer, of course, is that this is not the responsibility of a system, but of a paddler's Club, and specifically of his/her Club Coach.
To which the reply will come 'but my club doesn't have a Coach - it isn't big enough - nobody is interested'. All I can say is: what do you pay your Club subscription for, then? In sport as a whole the provision of coaching is seen as the basic function of a club. In Rugby League a junior team that turns up for a League match without a qualified Coach is fined £50 the first time, and thereafter sent away without being allowed to play.

I will be returning to the Club question as the ACM approaches. But a thought for all of you here:
Those of you who regularly attend ACM's will know how much time has been spent over the years talking about Slalom's recruitment problem - the use of TV being the usual (but impossible) solution.
So try this one for size. Slalom does not have a recruitment problem, it has a retention problem. If the sport as a whole was as good at year-on-year retention as the ten Clubs in GB with the largest Junior Slalom memberships (three of which did not exist three years ago) the sport would double in size in the next four years.

80-1219672301 · Post by **80-1219672301** » Fri May 08, 2009 1:11 pm

Hmm - wasn't going to contribute to this thread any further, but the last post left me disappointed and puzzled

Why bother having gates then if you're not going to even attempt them?

Survival ? at a GB selection race? Makes a strong case for keeping the divisional system I think!

It wasn't just the C1W who had inverted results on this score!

So the question is - if by not trying for a gate you gain an advantage over those who do - particularly on challenging water - is that not unfair?

Simple really - a paddler who has tried to traverse the course as set by the organisers or one who has made up their own course - because I think at the end of the day that is what it boils (no pun intended) down to

John Sturgess · Post by **John Sturgess** » Fri May 08, 2009 3:40 pm

Paddlemum
I am sorry I have surprised and disappointed you!

On the point ref the divisional system - I don't follow - this has happened despite the divisional system - I think that the anking system is in this context part of the problem not part of the solution (and incidentally eveyone paddling C1W in that race is a Prem KIL - but also, all 'righties' paddling a very 'lefty' move). Surely again this justifies the suggestion that Club Coaches, rather than 'the system', should decide what races paddlers do?

Ref the gates - yes, but they are there as a challenge - and if they are to be a challenge some people will fail that challenge.

I only see this as a serious problem where trying and failing to get a gate causes 2 (or more) 50's rather than one. It tends to happen I believe at Shepperton; and it applied to that Plughole sequence. Which let me say was a very good sequence: I am certainly not saying that course designers should never set sequences like that (hard to avoid at Shepperton with the multiple crosses)