British Open in November

[BaldockBabe]

BB I need you helping run the open in theory! You could apply for a late Div 2 I suppose but this would disenfranchise the Div 1's not competing in the Open on the main course.

Ha, ha - I was not volunteering. After the agony of running the HPP event I have resigned from event running - or at least for a VERY LONG time!

Though helping at Orton Mere this weekend was nice

[PeterC]

British Open is going ahead at Lee Valley in November.

We have got tangible financial support from GB Canoeing and the BCU Slalom Committee and hoping for a little more from elsewhere. While we have as a result managed to contain the costs somewhat to the paddlers we still cannot run at standard entry fees.

The full open will be over the two days and all paddlers will get four timed runs and the entry fee will be £40.

I do appreciate that the cost is significant to many and that times are particularly hard at the moment. We are therefore going to allow entry for the Saturday only which will be two runs and attract Prem points but not get classification in the Open for a reduced fee of £29.

Fuller information will be posted on the web site as soon as possible.

I can hear the howls of protest at the costs already however I can assure you that we really have pared everything to the bone to get it down to this. I do think the opportunity to race on an Olympic standard course needs to be taken in spite of the cost.

I do hope that many of you will come.

[bankside]

Looking forward to seeing you there.
Happy to help in any way we can.

[Kendall]

Would it not be an idea, if this is the future of high level paddling, to factor into BCU membership an extra pound, or two, every year, to provide for the running of such events. As a former Div two paddler, who is never going to race at LV, I have no problem with an extra couple of quid on the annual fee. If this is too hard to manage, create a requirement for all slalom clubs to increase membership fees by two pounds. When I last counted ( four years ago), I believe there was a four figure number of paddlers competing in slalom. By Levying a small charge on all paddlers, those who train hard enough get the benefit, those who don't can be happy in the knowledge that they have contributed to maintaining a great sport. Anyone who complains about a £2.00 surcharge has got to be barking. If you can afford to paddle, you can afford three Mars bars, a bottle of Old Speckled Hen, one cup of Costa coffee....... As I see it, it is simple. Don't put it to committee, just do it.

[BaldockBabe]

As a former Div two paddler, who is never going to race at LV, I have no problem with an extra couple of quid on the annual fee... By Levying a small charge on all paddlers, those who train hard enough get the benefit, those who don't can be happy in the knowledge that they have contributed to maintaining a great sport. Anyone who complains about a £2.00 surcharge has got to be barking. If you can afford to paddle,

Actually, I think we can complain. Too much of the money from this sport goes towards the top end i.e. "those who train hard enough get the benefit".

[PeterC]

I have to agree with Baldockbabe that we need to continue to realign the costs of the sport such that you enjoy what you pay for. We also need to increase participation and doing more to make the lower division races more attractive rather than funding the elite through levies may increase entry and retention.

[Sven]

I may be missing something but I dont think the elite see any of the levy monies?

My understanding is funds raised from levies go towards the operation of the England Slalom Committee and implementing slalom rules as defined and agreed at the ACM? ie the slalom community? ?

[PeterC]

The costs of judging and timing are not met by the £1 levies to cover this for Prem and Div 1. Consequently they are met by funding from general levies e.g. Div 2/3. Since prem numbers are lower than Div 1 and the judging and timing costs remain the same they require more subsidy. Hence my comment. While the slalom committee is managing overall to balance the books at the moment the increased costs of running races at the elite end of the ranking is not met by the levies. Should we be expecting new entrants to the sport to fund the elite end or perhaps should we be concentrating a little more on making the sport attractive at the entry level?

[Sven]

I dont think the 2 things are mutually exclusive are they? ie support ALL slalom - elite and entry level and those in between and those who race for fun too! Lets not forget the fun

Maybe what needs to happen is a revisit of how levies are charged and what the actual situation is rather than trying to make a system that is perhaps now outdated ?

I'm not sure I would class Div 1 as elite either. Elite in progress maybe but...

So here's a suggestion:

Look at the finances over the last 3 years - analyse out the cost of sending the timing team and section judges to div 1 and prem races. You'll have the claim sheets so you can look at what the mileage is etc. Translate that mileage into real cost (expenses are paid on a pence per mile - so no problem with fluctuating fuel prices etc). Then split that cost over all the Div1 and prem races to give you a mean cost per race - that is the extra that needs to be charged to the organiser of those races - they can then pass that cost on to the participants now that the organiser can vary the entry fee.

You are then not touching the "normal" levies so you can "concentrate " on using that money to support entry level slalomists - I and I am sure many others would love to hear the committees suggestions for doing just that.

I dont mind paying to cover actual costs - and I am pretty sure others, if asked would say the same.

[PeterC]

Sven thanks. We are indeed looking at these issues.

It is not just judging and timing which in effect we already average out. There are also water, site, safety costs which vary considerably and have to be met. Also unless clubs make some profit they will not step up to the mark and organise. Catering often makes the most profit but is not always possible.

Where we can keep costs down surely we should? I am not keen to average out the costs of everything.

[Kendall]

If you apply the levy, I suggested, to all club members, regardless of individual ability, the specific levy is put in the " Managed water" pot and is used for competitions on LV, Cardiff and anywhere else where water usage fees exceed the norm. The debate regarding whether or not we should encourage more people into the sport is nonsensical, of course we should. The levy is a pragmatic, practical solution to the problem. If in five years time slalom has several hundred extra paddlers, then we can consider whether we need to cease applying the "Managed water" levy. In that time I will have given my £10.00 to improving the chances of Brit paddlers podium places ( although they do seem to be doing pretty well at the moment - well done guys. Perhaps we don't need to support them!) and drunk a little less coffee.

[BaldockBabe]

If you apply the levy, I suggested, to all club members, regardless of individual ability, the specific levy is put in the " Managed water" pot and is used for competitions on LV, Cardiff and anywhere else where water usage fees exceed the norm. .

1. What about independants?

2. Why should some people pay for competitions that they are unlikely to be able to compete in?

3. Shouldn't events at those venues just charge a higher entry fee so if you use it you pay for it?

[Kendall]

Can you suggest an inexpensive, cost efficient, workable alternative?

[BaldockBabe]

How about point 3 in my email above?

[Kendall]

I disagree, this is unlikely to be either cost effective or sustainable.