Proposal - clear course between runs... - Thoughts?

Munchkin · Post by **Munchkin** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:43 pm

The proposal that has been put forward is:

6.8.2

We propose to add new rule UK 31.4 (p72) to read as follows:

UK 31.4 The course should be cleared before the start of each new class and if a competitor/competitors is/are inserted into a scheduled programme in an unscheduled position the course should be clear before starting the next scheduled competitor.

Although I can see exactly where this is coming from (I was whistled off at Llandysul (I was div 2 C1W) as a Prem judge was sent after me) I think that the proposed rule goes too far.

The timing team (at Prem/1 events) will do what it can to allow for extra time between classes and if someone has a run out of turn but clearing the whole course is not realistic at any event level. If we allow this rule change then race (as a rough estimate) organizers will have to leave up to 4 mins between classes adding approx 24 mins to a run (48 mins to an event). Firstly events are long enough as it is but on a course with a dam release when tight for time means 24 less competitors. If you then add in re-runs at even only 1 per class then you extend the race by up to 90 mins or reduce the amount of boats by another 45 approximately.

I think that although the proposal has its heart int he right place I think that the consequences are too onerous...

Dee · Post by **Dee** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:58 pm

I agree with you Munchkin - though I think more care should be taken when sending prem judges chasing paddlers who are doing a ranking run. Similar thing has happen to D&F in C2 on a couple of occasions

Dave Royle · Post by **Dave Royle** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:04 pm

A competant starter should generally spot ability differences in the start pool and set a slower paddler off 10 secs early and the following paddler 10 secs late. This gives the slower paddler an extra 20 seconds without disrupting the programme and still maintains the minimum 45 second interval. You can always ask at the start or better at control beforehand. Anyway, Start giving a little extra time between runners is better than having to accomodate a re-run in the programme. With some common sense applied by the starter the requirement for clearing the course can be avoided.

New but old · Post by **New but old** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:26 pm

Agree with Dave - I have been asked frequently for extra time behind someone - it is easy to accommodate; you just adjust your "minutes" as Dave says. I would say DO NOT BE AFRAID to ask for extra time - we all want all participants to get a fair chance.

Kazz · Post by **Kazz** » Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:46 pm

you should not have to ask for extra time if you are in prem however it has been the case that an offical has been sent down the course before a prem paddler was set off, this can lead to a catch up situation which isnt fair for either paddler especially the prem paddler who has paid their entry
i agree with the motion to clear the course in between classes which stop this from happening

Dee · Post by **Dee** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 8:32 am

I think the cross-class catch ups are less common at prem/div 1, at least from what I have seen - mainly because at these events paddlers are more disciplined and there is less slotting paddlers in where it suits them.

At lower division events officials (aka high ranking paddlers) will often slot in when it suits their judging stints and a 20 second lee way is no where near enough in these circumstances - a div 2/3 c2 or C1 could easily take 200s and be caught up by the prem judge taking 90s.

Dave - yes a good starter can use judgement to get it right and most do - but some don't.

I'm still not in favour of the motion though as I think it is several sledgehammers to crack an occasional nut.

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 9:07 am

Personally I think it would be a nightmare at div 3/4 events where boat sharing is rife. We VERY rarely have catch ups, because we flex the start time for the paddlers ability, and tend to start based on position on course rather than strict time.

This will mean that if we want to fit in a shared C2, and a shared C1W into the judges, we will have to, for example, let Nicky finish his run, and clear the course before setting of a div 4 C2, let them finish before we can set of the div 3 C1W, let her finish before setting of the div 3 padddler who missed his run, then wait for the course to clear before letting the C2 round again, let then clear the course before setting of the next judge.

Currently, we would set of the C2 as soon as Nicky was clear of the first judging position (catch up chance zero!), and the others would not have to clear the course, just be so far down that a catch up is very unlikely.

Clearing the course is overkill, a sledgehammer to crack a nut. I seem to remember that one of the first HPP timing systems insisted on a clear course between categories, and that alone was enough reason to say it was not suitable for anything below prem.

If this motion is to have any relevance, it will need to be restricted to prem/1 only IM(ns)HO.

jke · Post by **jke** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:32 pm

I haven't read the reason for this proposal but it may be a good idea for P/1 but for lower divisions it's a nonsense. I agree with CP. We allow shared C1's and C2's to fit in with kayaks and we allow Officials to slot in wherever they can. This promotes the use of limited boats, and enables Officials to paddle in between officiating. It's down to the starter to leave a sensible gap.