Page 70
UK C11.2 The deadline for entries to Ranking Competitions shall be 15 days prior to the first day of the competition (the Friday two weeks prior to the competition).
The priority entry deadline (before which host paddlers get priority of entry) is the Friday four weeks prior to the competition
The competition organiser may impose a limit on the overall numbers of divisional and open entries, either in the published calendar or at the time of planning the start list. If such a limit is applied, priority of entry shall be as follows:…
ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
-
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
The slalom rules allow a race organiser to set an entry limit but does not define which types of entry are included in this limit. Organisers are applying this limit in different ways, with the introduction of online entries there is a clear visibility of race entry numbers and having different interpretations of “entry limit” is confusing.
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
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
I thought the issue was usually whether or not officials entries are included in the limit?
Events with restricted water time (artificial courses and dam releases) often have to include officials within the published limit because the limit is defined by the time they have water available and cannot be exceeded.
Previously there has been a reccommendation to allow up 60 officials entries in addition to the divisional and open entries and where there are no restrictions on the running time of the event (possible daylight for early and late season events) most organisers allow these on top of the limit (although few ever get 60)
Surely this is one of the issues that should be clarified by this motion, but doesn't actually seem to be adressed?
Events with restricted water time (artificial courses and dam releases) often have to include officials within the published limit because the limit is defined by the time they have water available and cannot be exceeded.
Previously there has been a reccommendation to allow up 60 officials entries in addition to the divisional and open entries and where there are no restrictions on the running time of the event (possible daylight for early and late season events) most organisers allow these on top of the limit (although few ever get 60)
Surely this is one of the issues that should be clarified by this motion, but doesn't actually seem to be adressed?
-
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
Part of the issue is that some organisers took the limit as overall including officials and some excluded officials and then Ope races were a whole new ballgame. This is setting a standardised way of counting.
So if I was running a competition where there only time to get 200 starts, I would set an internal limit of (say) 20 Officials and publish 180 as the limit. Anyone looking on line can then see how much leeway there is for further entries, without guessing if the limit includes (or excludes) officials,or open entries.
I think the suggestion of 60 in the officials event was taken out of the rules / organisers pack a few years ago as we so rarely have that number of officials needed.
So if I was running a competition where there only time to get 200 starts, I would set an internal limit of (say) 20 Officials and publish 180 as the limit. Anyone looking on line can then see how much leeway there is for further entries, without guessing if the limit includes (or excludes) officials,or open entries.
I think the suggestion of 60 in the officials event was taken out of the rules / organisers pack a few years ago as we so rarely have that number of officials needed.
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
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
I think we are in agreement, but I still don't see how the proposed wording makes that clear?
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:30 am
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
Without reading the full wording of the motion, are we happy that we can successfully cope with the following circumstances without needing any further clarification?
a) If the organiser has only 200 slots and sets a limit of 180, what happens when there are 30 or 40 officials entries before the deadline, and in advance of divisional paddlers? Not a common circumstance, except where there are two separate divisional events on the same weekend at the site (often Prem/Div 1)?
b) If we keep only a few slots for officials outside the limit, is it fair to expect some competitors (selected by some fairly arbitrary method) to then have to judge, or to have very long sessions for those officials that have the few "reserved" slots?
I agree that it makes sense that the published limit applies to divisional (and open) paddlers, so it may be case that organisers also need to publish a limit on officials entries if they think it may avoid problems. We also need to ensure that divisional paddlers don't feel squeezed out by officials where time is limited, and there are more officials entered than actually needed to run the event. Maybe organiser's discretion needs to be expanded within the wording of the rule?
a) If the organiser has only 200 slots and sets a limit of 180, what happens when there are 30 or 40 officials entries before the deadline, and in advance of divisional paddlers? Not a common circumstance, except where there are two separate divisional events on the same weekend at the site (often Prem/Div 1)?
b) If we keep only a few slots for officials outside the limit, is it fair to expect some competitors (selected by some fairly arbitrary method) to then have to judge, or to have very long sessions for those officials that have the few "reserved" slots?
I agree that it makes sense that the published limit applies to divisional (and open) paddlers, so it may be case that organisers also need to publish a limit on officials entries if they think it may avoid problems. We also need to ensure that divisional paddlers don't feel squeezed out by officials where time is limited, and there are more officials entered than actually needed to run the event. Maybe organiser's discretion needs to be expanded within the wording of the rule?
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
It looks like we need 2 limits -
1. Limit for the paddlers competing in the ranking/open race
2. Limit for officials
I also wondered whether for some sites where water time is scarce whether officials could get water time rather than officials runs - this would largely apply at Div1 and Prems were there is not free practice e.g. Lee Valley Prem - there is water time between demos and first runs and also water time usually between first and second runs. This could be used by the officials , particularly useful to those who have travelled along way and don't usually get much water time. So, if you have 30 officials, this is 30 x 2 runs = 60 minutes which could just be an hour of practice. I appreciate that this would not suit everyone. They would still get an official bib so they can be identified on the water.
1. Limit for the paddlers competing in the ranking/open race
2. Limit for officials
I also wondered whether for some sites where water time is scarce whether officials could get water time rather than officials runs - this would largely apply at Div1 and Prems were there is not free practice e.g. Lee Valley Prem - there is water time between demos and first runs and also water time usually between first and second runs. This could be used by the officials , particularly useful to those who have travelled along way and don't usually get much water time. So, if you have 30 officials, this is 30 x 2 runs = 60 minutes which could just be an hour of practice. I appreciate that this would not suit everyone. They would still get an official bib so they can be identified on the water.
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
Perhaps a further sentence should be added that. “A separate limit may be given for officials entries”
In practice a lot, if not most, comps do set a separate officials limit already, but a few currently include officials in overall limit
In practice a lot, if not most, comps do set a separate officials limit already, but a few currently include officials in overall limit
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!
Anything I post under this user is my personal opinion; I am not posting as a member of the Slalom Committee!
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
The proposed wording only helps in that it make it clear that the limit is for overall number of Ranking and Open entries, so does not include officials. And by not mentioning a limit on officials this could be taken to mean there is no limit on officials, or even that you can't limit the number of officials.
-
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: Peterborough
- Contact:
Re: ACM Motion 6.3 Entry Limits
This was handled under article 5.9 and voted on immediately. The original motion was adopted nem con.
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
Old. Fat. Slow. Bad tempered. And those are my good points