C-Forum

Well, the continued dumbing down of society reaches further into whitewater slalom. Has anyone seen the proposed rule change to go to 1 second penalties, with an ultimate goal of eliminating all penalties and having one pole gates?

All so it is easier for judges and TV. What a crock! Why have gates at all? Part of the beauty and challenge of slalom is to make the moves efficiently and cleanly. Our I want it now, short attention span TV culture is eviscerating a once proud sport. Are people really too stupid to decipher what happens in a whitewater slalom race?

Anyone remember 600 meter courses? Winning times well in excess of 200 seconds? Heck, remember 4 meter boats? Yes, I admit I am a dinosaur stuck in the glory days of the early-mid 1980's, but come on! One pole gates? No penalties for blowing a move? This proposal would make slalom into a wildwater run with a couple of eddy turns.

I retired once from my pitiful slalom career, it may be time for a second retirement. Sorry folks, if this rule goes through, I no longer see the sport in it.

At the risk of sounding biased... it is slalom, and (in the UK at least) slowly on the way out. Ro-dee-oh has probably had its day too, Extreme racing is the way forwards now.

It's all a question of how they want to "drive" the sport....and most sports seem driven by advertising now, vs. the other way around. Kids don't join a team to be part of the team (or like some one on the team) they do it to be like X on TV or the interweb.

In the end, I paddle because I enjoy being on the water. I try and race once or more a year too.

If anyone wants an "old school" race, come check out the Hudson Derby. Usually at lease one former US champion kayaker appears, and her winning time in the slalom is usuallly around 9 or 10 MINUTES. The downriver course the next day is 7 miles long, and winning times when the river is up are just shy of an hour....

I think in 20 years there will be a backlash against all this shortening and TV emulation, but perhaps that's just wishful thinking on my part. I hope that some day folks will paddle "because they want to".

Jim:

I hear ya; I'm still getting used to there being no reverse gates!

Although I've already seen experimentation with single pole gates (most recently by Brian Kerrigan in setting the course at the Salmon Slalom), I think that the complete elimination of penalties for touches is further away. As the proposed rule change notes, elimination of touch penalties would be predicated on development of gate technology that ensures racers don't get an advantage out of touching the gate (i.e. a rigid gate that doesn't allow racers to push it aside with their bodies when they touch it). I frankly think it will be some time before someone solves all of the various inherent problems.

BTW: There are good and bad applications of the concept of single pole gates. Using a single pole for the inside pole on a series of offsets makes a certain amount of sense as the inside pole is typically the only critical marker on offsets. However, IMO in other situations a single pole gate works less well.

John

I don't support these proposed changes to the penalty rules either. For one, the old rules provided a way to somewhat equalize the playing field between those paddlers who were slower but used finesse to negotiate the slalom course and those who rely on power and speed to offset their penalty accumulation.
One of the problems facing slalom over the past few years, at least at the international level, is the pressure to reduce the number of officials required to attend each event, particularly judges. I understand that at least one overseeing body has alleged that slalom is the most "official" demanding of the Olympic sports and something needs to be done for it (slalom) to remain a viable event.
Unfortunately, reductions that have occurred have in some cases caused unintended knock on effects at these races, which in turn have created additional headaches. It seems the powers-that-be have chosen these proposals to address these issues.

Honestly, I think slalom started downhill when it got back into the Olympics. For years I remember discussions of how cool it would be to be back in that venue. After that all the rule changes started coming about.

Be careful what you wish for.

Yeah, John, I remember reverse gates. There's no rule prohibiting them, IIRC, so maybe the reverse gate fairies will wave their magic wands over the Riversport-SPWT slalom later this year...

will Boatercross be far behind....
I hope not.

Okay, here's my take on things.

One gate poles and no penalties are a terrible idea. I see the wisdom in eliminating reverse gates; you don't have to make the tough decision about whether or not the boat went backwards. But why reduce the penalties further? It will become faster to hit a gate than to clean it. Besides, remember that slalom was originally created to emulate river running. If you run smack into a huge rock right before a twenty foot drop, there will most likely penalties you will have to pay. Why not reflect those consequences in slalom?


Nate

Old and In the Way wrote:

Honestly, I think slalom started downhill when it got back into the Olympics. For years I remember discussions of how cool it would be to be back in that venue. After that all the rule changes started coming about.

I disagree completely, and that last part is obviously wrong.

(Note: I am Craig Smerda and I approve that emoticon.)

Sir Adam wrote:
I think in 20 years there will be a backlash against all this shortening and TV emulation, but perhaps that's just wishful thinking on my part. I hope that some day folks will paddle "because they want to".

Adam, I can only assume you're chastising people paddling for fame. But I can't think of anyone who fits your "because they want to" ideal more than our top US medal threat for this summer, Scott Parsons.

Kids don't join a team to be part of the team (or like some one on the team) they do it to be like X on TV or the interweb.

That's pretty cynical. Plus, there's nothing wrong with taking up a sport to be like a great athlete you see on TV.

Alden wrote: and that last part is obviously wrong.

Ok, that's when all the "TV" rule changes came about. Sheesh

You mean like cutting penalties from ten to five seconds? Or ditching reverse gates?

I'll defer to John on this, but I think both of those were 1985-87 range, right?

Hey, I'm with you though. I think that the ends of a canoe should still have to be higher than the center. I was pretty bummed when they made that change back in the 1970s. All those radical new designs that those Americans came up with in response. Terrible! It's almost like how shorter slalom boats today are allowing for moves that are more exciting for the racers.

If we're talking about "dumbing down" the sport, I guess the aspect I would most like to conserve is the difficulty of the whitewater raced on. And that is something that has arguably climbed since the Olympic movement, with the advent of hard artificial courses becoming the benchmark and shorter boats and shorter courses calling for what are arguably harder individual moves.

Still I agree with people in spirit here. I hate to see our sport being messed with by officials or television companies.

Okay, I'll throw in my 2 cents here. Keep things in perspective when talking about the demise of ANY whitewater-style racing, whether it's slalom, wildwater, rodeo, boatercross, and others. Whitewater racing is a FRINGE sport and ONLY those attracted to that kind of fun will join--unlike us cboaters. Growth in the racing part is based on where the fun is. For a couple of decades, the interest was in slalom. Rolling from the 90's into the new millennium, the interest grew in rodeo. Recently, it's been on boatercross. Personally, I like to race, except for rodeo--just can't make my body cooperate with those moves.

What is the motive behind the rules changes. These rules have changed over many decades, mainly for boat design changes (if memory serves me). Have rules changed to promote slalom racing for the Olympic games. I see that it has. Is that a good thing? I don't see how it has helped slalom racing AT ALL! Will these rules changes help the sport grow in participation? I don't see where it will. Could I be wrong? Certainly NOT!

Okay so here is my $.01 since even though I’m not much of a racer….

The media will always play its part in the continuing evolution of any sport. Advertisers pay to get promotion and events survive because folks tune in and watch (thus seeing the ads and hopefully meeting promoter and advertiser expectations)! As for growth of participation – well folks kids now have a lot more options to chose from so that dilutes the talent pool. I’m not saying the talent is not there just that the pool of competitors will continue to be smaller over time. A good example of this is what “soccer” has done to “American football”. Football is still number one in the USofA but soccer is growing and pulling excellent athletes into the fold. I also think TV and the Olympics are good for the sport. It use to be that the only thing anyone knew about white water canoe / kayak was via media coverage during the Olympic venues. When asked “..is that what you do?” you could talk to the image non-boater had in their minds based on the Olympic coverage. Playboat and the “X-treme” sport images have taken over but that is media advertising’s effect for “rad” and the 4 year cycle of the Olympics. With the Olympics on stage again now is the time to get others involved in paddling as a whole and racing in particular!

Personally take my kids to slalom events now to participate because I view it as quality family time (paddling, camping, being silly), a change for them to learn about themselves and others and an excellent training tool (learning how to make must make moves without class IV consequences).

Things I think are important in relation to the changes in sports (life)…
Change is part of life – I believe that law in physics states something to the effect that items progress from order to disorder (what we “know” and are comfortable with is order – what is new and unknown is disorder).
Boats are now relatively cheaper to build (less material, less volume, etc.) and are using new lighter and stronger materials. However, it might seem that way at time...
Boats are easier to ship and maintain (structurally less fragile in relation to the material content verse older boats).
Designs have improved in relation to fluid dynamics (this is also the case for NASCAR, Formula One, Swimming, Triathlons, etc.)
Paddling skills have improved over time (or at least I like to think so – I’m a better boater now at 50 than I was at 30, etc.).

On Slalom - in Slalom skiing at the Olympic level most of the course set up is a two gate affair but in local race it’s mostly a one gate deal. Mostly due to the design of the courses – being more difficult! Now granted in skiing the object is to get as close the gate / straight line as possible where in boating it’s a no touch line. However, if (as suggested) break away river gates are developed I see paddling migrating to that as well. In slalom skiing it’s not about how many gates you shin it’s about how efficiently you get down the course. The same is really the case in paddling as well – the technology has just not caught up ...yet! To address this penalty times were assessed for touching. If breakaway gates are developed that safe but drastically embedded travel down the course when you try to run over them the penalty times will become inherently built into the course design.

On reverse gates – as long as they are in the rule book as allowed they will continue to pop up. They might not be as frequent and they will confuse the heck out of some folks (Jim did that to me at the Riversport this year J ) but if the course dictates the use of a reverse then those pesky buggers will be there. Just another “problem” a course designed can use to make things more challenging.

That all said - skier (boater) cross is here to stay, but Slalom, Giant Slalom and Downhill skiing are not going away. Perhaps instead of one type of venue for paddling – Slalom - we will see 3 or 4. I for one can only hope since just thinking about the possibilities brings a smile to me face.

"For a couple of decades, the interest was in slalom. Rolling from the 90's into the new millennium, the interest grew in rodeo."

That's true, but I think it's a myth that slalom in the US peaked in the 1980s. If anything, I think it grew slightly in the 1990s. For instance, Jamie McEwan sent me the 1985 Team Trials results, and the ones from 1995 are online. Look at the following:

1985: 32 k-1s raced
1995: 38

1985: 12 C-1s raced
1995: 15
2000: 20

I think that the simplistic view that some share of slalom peaking in the 1980s is nostalgia.

"Recently, it's been on boatercross."

That's not true.

"Have rules changed to promote slalom racing for the Olympic games. I see that it has. Is that a good thing? I don't see how it has helped slalom racing AT ALL!"

I guess my question would be, how has it hurt it?

"Will these rules changes help the sport grow in participation? I don't see where it will."

Which rule changes are you talking about?

Again, I agree with people in spirit here -- nobody likes being told they need to be more palatable. But I'm not sure I see a lot of concrete opposition other than, as one parent says in the movie Hoosiers, "This town doesn't like change much."

Well, this is still the United States of America, and one of the wonderful things about that is that we are all still entitled to our own opinions, whether others agree with them or not.

As to the rule changes of 20-30 years ago, I guess I view many of those as innovations and betterments of the sport (although I still think it would be cool to have reverse gates). No doubt that eliminating the ends higher than the middle dealie was appropriate, as was shortening the boats. There was just no good reason for a slalom boat to be 4 meters long. I prefer natural rivers to artificial courses, but natural water flow cannot be relied upon 100%. And, at my advanced age and diminished skill level, I would never think of competing in water as difficult as is seen today.

But I do dislike knocking penalties down to 2 seconds (or 1 second), shortening the courses, and I do not believe I would wish to see one pole gates. I view changes such as those as being made to simplify television viewing and to accomdate short attention spans.

Am I wrong? Maybe I am. But so what? Wouldn't be the first time and sure won't be the last.

I think my user name about sums it up...