Below are some interesting participant numbers: Obviously some decline in slalom participation since the mid 90's had to do with the Ocoee olympic bubble bursting, like the dot com stocks, inflated by the excitement generated by the backyard Olympic games in 1996, and its previous 1992 successes.
But I think some of the decline in racer participation in recent years had a lot to do with the 1997 rule of combined runs. Having raced many years under both rules, its my opinion that this took some of the hope (even if it was a false hope) from any weekend warrior, part time racer, etc , that he/she could put down a decent result during any given race. Gone are the days of out of nowhere, flash in the pan runs, or blind hopes to knock off the "top boat". The new rules probably kept some of the veterans on top for a few more years, but made slalom racers have to focus more on consistency to get results than pure speed and the quest for the “ultimate run”. Which made the sport lose a bit of its glamour. Making things feel even more out of reach to the average boater, separating the elite even more from the novice, with little hope to close the gap in reasonable time. Less hope and less opportunity means less competitors and less growth of the sport.
Combined runs made the sport no longer about "the ultimate run", but more like a "not so ultimate sum"....We all recall Lugbill’s near "ultimate run" at the 1989 savage worlds, but does anyone recall a recent "ultimate sum" that can compare? "well if you take that 103.76 by Martikan plus his 105.47, carry your five, multiply by 110.39%, times pi, and do some Jethro Clampett cypherin'….. you get......lets see.....well, I think you get my point...its not very romantic or timeless. Honestly, isnt it hard to visualize someone’s two combined runs in your head, including a lunch break.
And we've all ruined a race (result) with the other combined run, or had little reason to do the last run due to a 50 on a first run. This is terrible way to draw a beginner to the sport, especially in an ever increasingly difficult sport. Back in the day of best of 2 runs (dont forget pratice runs), one could totally blow out on the first run, but still have “hope” of winning on the second. I would bet history has passed by a few absolutely killer runs from slalom athletes in the past 10 years due to the combined rule, and the fact that taking unnecessary risk in the sheer search of unimaginable speed is no longer the quest. Would Lugbill and Hearn have been as innovative in the 80’s if they were under the combined run rule, who knows? And how often have you seen someone put down a killer first run, and unmistakably human nature raises its head, in the form of "dont ruin your first run", so then the racer ends up racing conservative or scared, instead of honestly trying to beat the first runs time. The elitist will inevitably now chime in, “yeh, but not for the top boats”….I say bull!! If you don’t believe me look at the recent 2008 olympic trials results...its all there in combined run, pressure filled black and white.
Many of us have seen some of the crazy headduck C-1 ups that are being done in practice by some of the top (young and limber) C-1's, expecially this day and age of short boats. But they are probably not taking those risk during competition, for example at say Olympic trials, and that we have to thank for the combined run rule...i think this rule is holding back the evolution and athleticism in the sport, not to mention discouraging alot of new recruits. what are spectators missing out on because of this rule, what innovation and creativity is being stiffled under the mantra of "final results".
Dont get me wrong, I’m all for the 2 sec penalty, its much more reasonable. But I think combined runs, while instituted for easier TV viewing, left little thought for the athlete, or building a sports base. I can hear it now...."remember that time when Tony Estanguet put down that killer run, then he watched some video, called his mom, paid his credit card bill online, ate some lunch, and then put down an average clean run 2 hours later to win the gold? Now that was awesome! Destined to be told around the campfire for years!
a few interesting numbers of U.S. competitors:
1994 team trials Ocoee ? C-1's, 17 C-2's
1995 team trials Ocoee 15 C-1's, 12 C-2's
1996 team trials Ocoee 20 C-1's, 10 C-2's
1997 team trials Wausau/SB 19 C-1's, 8 C-2's
1998 team trials wausau 21 C-1's, 8 C-2's
1999 team trials ocoee 19 C-1's, 7 C-2's
2000 team trials ocoee 20 C-1's, 6 C-2's (+1 C-2M)
2001 team trials ocoee 16 C-1's, 6 C-2's
2002 team trials wausau 12 C-1's, 4 C-2's
2003 team trials Southbend 15 C-1's, 6 C-2s
2004 team trials Southbend 16 C-1's 4 C-2's
2005 team trials Durango 10 C-1's, 4 C-2's
2006 team trials southbend ? C-1's, 6 C-2's
2007 team trials charlotte 9 C-1's, 6 C-2's
2008 team trials charlotte 11 C-1's (+3 C-1W), 6 C-2's
1995 Nationals opryland 42 C-1's (+3 C-1W), 12 C-2's (+5 C-2M)
1996 Nationals opryland 36 C-1's (+1 C-1W), 15 C-2's (+5 C-2M)
1997 Nationals Wausau 31 C-1's (+2 C-1W), 8 C-2's (+8 C-2M)
1998 Nationals SouthBnd 39 C-1's (+1 C-1W), 14 C-2's (+5 C-2M)
1999 Nationals wausau 39 C-1's, 7 C-2's (+5 C-2M)
2000 Nationals bakrsfld 19 C-1's (+2 C-1W), 3 C-2's (+3 C-2 M)
2001 Nationals wausau 17 C-1's (+1 C-1W), 6 C-2's (+4 C-2M/W)
2002 Nationals dickerson 18 C-1's (+1 C-1W), 4 C-2's
2003 Nationals wausau ?
2004 Nationals dickerson 26 C-1's, 7 C-2's, (+5 C-2M)
2005 Natnl/PanAm Kern 8 C-1's (+3 CAN), 7 C-2's
2006 Nationals Charlotte ?
2007 Nationals ASCI 17 C-1's, 7 C-2's
my 2 cents, but this is enough for now. my theory is if you go back to best of runs, you'll see much more participation!! even the old retirees will come back out...and thats good for the sport.
trevor
Proposed ICF rule changes
Moderators: kenneth, sbroam, TheKrikkitWars, Mike W., Sir Adam, KNeal, PAC, adamin
a few of my 2 cents, and some participation numbers.
Last edited by Trevor on Sat May 03, 2008 11:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Trevor Soileau
its obvious the decline in slalom is not just the combined run rule...
but, off hand, here are a few other reasons i think participation has declined in the U.S.
u.s. team spots were 4 per class and now 3 per class (not to mention now you have to make percentage against the fastest kayak, which equals less opportunity...(i think the junior teams have also gotten smaller, % rules, more focussed on a few, and probably discouraging others)
1992 olympic spots were guaranteed 3 per class, now 2008 its 1 per class, if your country can qualify the spots.
most top boaters these days go only to the US open, team trials, and maybe nationals, and not to smaller grassroots races that used to be a building block for slalom. for example, in the mid 90's you might have 25 c-1's at the mulberry fork (alabama cup race), and team members like jacobi, taylor, holden, giddens, to name a few would attend....this was good for grassroots slalom....but now there tends to be an ever increasing void between national team members and local (open/deck boat) races....this is sad. maybe team members funding should be based on racing a broader circuit.
our summer olympic sport is becoming more and more an isolated winter sport (in all honesty) with most training, and racing happening when other paddlers, vacationer, etc, arent out to see it. though, there have been more summer races lately, that are helping. i think chris wiegand in colorado has done more to develop new boats than anyone in the sport in the past few years.
get the sport back to a summer sport. maybe have team trials in august or september, to bring more visibilty to it, and give non team members more reason to train during the summer time, when its warm, and kids are out of school....obviously there would be some issues with this.
and its my opinion that olympic class artificial channels, if not thoughtfully designed, may not be good breeding grounds for new slalom boaters...look at what the little ole feeder canal did for slalom....it doesnt take much...but too much is sometimes too much for a 5 year old kid...or their parents. get a parent into slalom, and you can get their kids hooked.
random thoughts.
trevor
but, off hand, here are a few other reasons i think participation has declined in the U.S.
u.s. team spots were 4 per class and now 3 per class (not to mention now you have to make percentage against the fastest kayak, which equals less opportunity...(i think the junior teams have also gotten smaller, % rules, more focussed on a few, and probably discouraging others)
1992 olympic spots were guaranteed 3 per class, now 2008 its 1 per class, if your country can qualify the spots.
most top boaters these days go only to the US open, team trials, and maybe nationals, and not to smaller grassroots races that used to be a building block for slalom. for example, in the mid 90's you might have 25 c-1's at the mulberry fork (alabama cup race), and team members like jacobi, taylor, holden, giddens, to name a few would attend....this was good for grassroots slalom....but now there tends to be an ever increasing void between national team members and local (open/deck boat) races....this is sad. maybe team members funding should be based on racing a broader circuit.
our summer olympic sport is becoming more and more an isolated winter sport (in all honesty) with most training, and racing happening when other paddlers, vacationer, etc, arent out to see it. though, there have been more summer races lately, that are helping. i think chris wiegand in colorado has done more to develop new boats than anyone in the sport in the past few years.
get the sport back to a summer sport. maybe have team trials in august or september, to bring more visibilty to it, and give non team members more reason to train during the summer time, when its warm, and kids are out of school....obviously there would be some issues with this.
and its my opinion that olympic class artificial channels, if not thoughtfully designed, may not be good breeding grounds for new slalom boaters...look at what the little ole feeder canal did for slalom....it doesnt take much...but too much is sometimes too much for a 5 year old kid...or their parents. get a parent into slalom, and you can get their kids hooked.
random thoughts.
trevor
Last edited by Trevor on Sat May 03, 2008 11:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Trevor Soileau
i imagine from looking at the number of racers that show up at say the slovakian team trials...its probably growing much more than in the U.S. usually each european countries team trials have as many participants from other countries, as their own. this may also be due to the plethora of competition sites, and smaller driving distances between these.
i think the euro's have had the benefit of having 95% of all the world cup races, world championships, etc in europe over the last 10-20 years. which give the sport great exposure, especially during the summer time, when people are more apt to attend, during vacation, etc. plus the euro's seem to have alot of other major races that are more open to non country team members.
i think the canoe world series (canoeworldseries.com) is one of the best ideas in a while. allowing major races, that anyone can attend. obviously the asci and charlotte course will be good venues to make the sport more ligit in the U.S., more visibility, etc. but i still dont see the charlotte course as ever really being a breeding ground for new slalom racers. the site is just not designed to accomodate the needs of beginner to intermediate paddlers. but who knows.
maybe the euro's will once again be drawn to the U.S. to race for prize money, like in the 80's and 90's champion international series.
i think the euro's have had the benefit of having 95% of all the world cup races, world championships, etc in europe over the last 10-20 years. which give the sport great exposure, especially during the summer time, when people are more apt to attend, during vacation, etc. plus the euro's seem to have alot of other major races that are more open to non country team members.
i think the canoe world series (canoeworldseries.com) is one of the best ideas in a while. allowing major races, that anyone can attend. obviously the asci and charlotte course will be good venues to make the sport more ligit in the U.S., more visibility, etc. but i still dont see the charlotte course as ever really being a breeding ground for new slalom racers. the site is just not designed to accomodate the needs of beginner to intermediate paddlers. but who knows.
maybe the euro's will once again be drawn to the U.S. to race for prize money, like in the 80's and 90's champion international series.
Trevor Soileau
boatin
Trevor,
I'm not sure if I mentioned this before, but I'll mention it again. So I had lunch with Joe Jacobi this spring at NOC and he said something I found very interesting. He said that for America to win more medals in slalom we don't necessarily need to get more people into the sport -- we just need to cultivate the top few athletes. Again, I'm not sure I agree with this (where do we get these new athletes?) but it's interesting in light of some of the things you were saying.
I think there's definitely some truth to the notion that the combined run rule takes away the "Albert Kerr" syndrome (now there's a throwback reference!) where an unknown can step in and torch everyone for a run.
That's also interesting about the sport becoming a "winter sport."
Sometimes I think about participation in terms of C-1ers. I just got back from the Cheat Race. There were supposedly 155 racers there. And only two of us were C-1s. There were no open boats. I guess my question would be: where are the C-1ers? They ain't doing rodeo. They ain't doing boatercross. They ain't doing extreme races (have there ever been more than four C-1s at the Green Race?)
Thinking back on it, the most C-1s I've ever seen in one place, other than a big slalom race, was at Westfest in the fall of 2003 in Vermont. They were everywhere, guys I'd never met before. All these guys in Atoms. Kind of weird to think about.
Alden
I'm not sure if I mentioned this before, but I'll mention it again. So I had lunch with Joe Jacobi this spring at NOC and he said something I found very interesting. He said that for America to win more medals in slalom we don't necessarily need to get more people into the sport -- we just need to cultivate the top few athletes. Again, I'm not sure I agree with this (where do we get these new athletes?) but it's interesting in light of some of the things you were saying.
I think there's definitely some truth to the notion that the combined run rule takes away the "Albert Kerr" syndrome (now there's a throwback reference!) where an unknown can step in and torch everyone for a run.
That's also interesting about the sport becoming a "winter sport."
Sometimes I think about participation in terms of C-1ers. I just got back from the Cheat Race. There were supposedly 155 racers there. And only two of us were C-1s. There were no open boats. I guess my question would be: where are the C-1ers? They ain't doing rodeo. They ain't doing boatercross. They ain't doing extreme races (have there ever been more than four C-1s at the Green Race?)
Thinking back on it, the most C-1s I've ever seen in one place, other than a big slalom race, was at Westfest in the fall of 2003 in Vermont. They were everywhere, guys I'd never met before. All these guys in Atoms. Kind of weird to think about.
Alden
Last edited by Alden on Mon May 05, 2008 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
proposed rule change
Alden's post brings up a thought I've had- It seems that the "official" direction of slalom, whether intentionally or by effect, has been to remove the sport from any recreational participation or development and to move it in a "professional" direction. I'm thinking of two winter sports analogues- Thousands of people ski recreationally, often very seriously, but who's ever seen a recreational ski jumper? That creature doesn't exist, outside a few development sites for the chosen olympic hopefuls. Same with biathlon. While I can certainly understand the logic, it leaves me as a geriatric, wanna-be racer out in the cold. I've always thought that Shipley's book in its introduction lays out a pretty good outline of a more inclusive prpgram. A summer series of major races across the country, attended by the big guns, with training camps in between....Ed
more 2 cents
alden, i agree with you. i just wrote a whole page, then got logged out and lost it all....dohhhh!! so ill try again.
i think the decline in C-1 is hit harder by the combined rule. and we all know that slalom c-1 and c-2 technique takes much longer to develop, as opposed to kayak. the learning curve, just to make all the gates, its much longer then k-1. on a side note, it will be interesting to see the development of womens c-1, and how the USACK deals with it. plus the art of c-1 is spread from c-1 to c-1...one soul at a time... so less racers means less future racers, bottom line!
i think its great to try to produce more medals. but my question is, what is the ultimate goal for the sport....and do gold medals = building a large base of support for a sport? we all know tiger woods is a multimillionaire for hitting a plastic ball around, but he's a millionaire in a very successful sport because for every ONE tiger woods, there are 10 million (or more) hack golfers...these hacks can relate to tiger woods, because they have done or can do the exact same thing (obviously with lesser levels of skill and consistency)...the point is they can relate to what he is doing on the "almighty" TV because they've made the hole in one at the putt putt golf course, or they've hit a golf ball at the range, or played 18 holes.
the more slalom gets out of reach to the "hacks", "weekend warriors", etc...then the less participation, less interest, etc. Stewart Cink (PGA pro), and former high school classmate of mine, isnt making millions of dollars in a successful sport because only 10 people in the U.S. can do what he's doing. Golf's success, is because its available, physically possible to the average person, therefore there are 100's of millions of hacks who can relate to it. Not to mention every golfer hack, buys the equipment, greens fees, range balls, buys more equipment....etc... the further slalom gets to be seperated from the recreational kayaker, novice boater, the less base there is to support it. its simple math...get 1 million USACK memberships per year, and whats that? about 40 Million dollars per year....you have to build a sport, develop its rules, infrastructure that creates a base to support the few who can make it to the olympic podium.
i dont think the olympic podium is the answer to a more popular or more attended sport. it helps for sure, look at what jacobi and straubaugh's gold medal, lugbill and hearn's C-1 domination did for slalom in the U.S....but ask yourself this question? how many current team members were introduced to the sport by former slalom racers? probably all of them. slalom racers spread the "gospel" of slalom, one boater at a time...with only a few slalom boaters (especially c-1'ers) coming out of nowhere, only introduced through TV or media. the more slalom participation by young, old, retired, then the more future slalom boaters, and a stronger base for the sport.
i think if the focus of slalom gets to be all about the medals, financially, etc, the sport is going to collapse upon itself. to become as specialized as luge, or bobsled...sure is cool to watch once every 4 years, but how does one even get involved in luge? its inaccessible...thats why luge doesnt appear on tv every weekend like golf. make slalom more relatable, to the rec boater, rafter, etc...make if more accessible, and more attainable (to what ever degree one wants to commit to it), and you will build a popular, successful sport.
my 2 cents...
i think the decline in C-1 is hit harder by the combined rule. and we all know that slalom c-1 and c-2 technique takes much longer to develop, as opposed to kayak. the learning curve, just to make all the gates, its much longer then k-1. on a side note, it will be interesting to see the development of womens c-1, and how the USACK deals with it. plus the art of c-1 is spread from c-1 to c-1...one soul at a time... so less racers means less future racers, bottom line!
i think its great to try to produce more medals. but my question is, what is the ultimate goal for the sport....and do gold medals = building a large base of support for a sport? we all know tiger woods is a multimillionaire for hitting a plastic ball around, but he's a millionaire in a very successful sport because for every ONE tiger woods, there are 10 million (or more) hack golfers...these hacks can relate to tiger woods, because they have done or can do the exact same thing (obviously with lesser levels of skill and consistency)...the point is they can relate to what he is doing on the "almighty" TV because they've made the hole in one at the putt putt golf course, or they've hit a golf ball at the range, or played 18 holes.
the more slalom gets out of reach to the "hacks", "weekend warriors", etc...then the less participation, less interest, etc. Stewart Cink (PGA pro), and former high school classmate of mine, isnt making millions of dollars in a successful sport because only 10 people in the U.S. can do what he's doing. Golf's success, is because its available, physically possible to the average person, therefore there are 100's of millions of hacks who can relate to it. Not to mention every golfer hack, buys the equipment, greens fees, range balls, buys more equipment....etc... the further slalom gets to be seperated from the recreational kayaker, novice boater, the less base there is to support it. its simple math...get 1 million USACK memberships per year, and whats that? about 40 Million dollars per year....you have to build a sport, develop its rules, infrastructure that creates a base to support the few who can make it to the olympic podium.
i dont think the olympic podium is the answer to a more popular or more attended sport. it helps for sure, look at what jacobi and straubaugh's gold medal, lugbill and hearn's C-1 domination did for slalom in the U.S....but ask yourself this question? how many current team members were introduced to the sport by former slalom racers? probably all of them. slalom racers spread the "gospel" of slalom, one boater at a time...with only a few slalom boaters (especially c-1'ers) coming out of nowhere, only introduced through TV or media. the more slalom participation by young, old, retired, then the more future slalom boaters, and a stronger base for the sport.
i think if the focus of slalom gets to be all about the medals, financially, etc, the sport is going to collapse upon itself. to become as specialized as luge, or bobsled...sure is cool to watch once every 4 years, but how does one even get involved in luge? its inaccessible...thats why luge doesnt appear on tv every weekend like golf. make slalom more relatable, to the rec boater, rafter, etc...make if more accessible, and more attainable (to what ever degree one wants to commit to it), and you will build a popular, successful sport.
my 2 cents...
Last edited by Trevor on Mon May 05, 2008 9:15 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Trevor Soileau
-
John Coraor
- CBoats Addict
- Posts: 545
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:38 pm
- Location: Long Island, NY
I think that Ed has hit the nail on the head with his analogy comparing elite WW slalom to ski jumping. All of the points made by Trevor and others are factors that have helped lead to elite WW slalom being divorced from other aspects of paddlesport.
It started around the early 70s when slalom and recreational WW boat design and construction became increasingly separated from each other. Before that time, anyone cruising rivers was likely to be using a boat and techniques that had been developed a year or two before by slalom racers pushing the boundaries of both racing and recreational WW. Combined run times and the move toward elite competition increasingly on artifical courses are only the latest chapters in this trend.
One result of this separation is the decline in number of intermediate and even advanced races, as well as the decline in elite athletes who participate in those smaller local and regional races that are still left. To make a point, let me mention just a few of the annual intermediate or advanced races in which my wife and I competed in the early 80s: Tohickon, Slippery Rock, Loyalsock, S-Turn, Tariffville, Ocoee (Doubleheader), West River, and Yough Slaloms. None of those has survived. We also raced on the Nantahala, at Wausau, and at the Esopus Slalom, which have survived in some form or other, although as the current chairman of the Esopus Slalom I can honestly say it is a mere shadow of its former incarnation. The survival percentages for races we attended north of the border is a bit higher, including both the Gull River and Jonquiere. Beyond these, there are few races that we regularly participated in that are still around.
Elite slalom has become professional, albeit without the compensation, and, as a result, the lower levels of slalom appear to be heading toward becoming about as prevalent as intermediate ski-jumping. I suspect that what Jim, I, and perhaps others are grumbling about is more about the gradual and continuing loss of these intermediate levels of the sport than whether or not the rules changes are good for the elite racer.
John
It started around the early 70s when slalom and recreational WW boat design and construction became increasingly separated from each other. Before that time, anyone cruising rivers was likely to be using a boat and techniques that had been developed a year or two before by slalom racers pushing the boundaries of both racing and recreational WW. Combined run times and the move toward elite competition increasingly on artifical courses are only the latest chapters in this trend.
One result of this separation is the decline in number of intermediate and even advanced races, as well as the decline in elite athletes who participate in those smaller local and regional races that are still left. To make a point, let me mention just a few of the annual intermediate or advanced races in which my wife and I competed in the early 80s: Tohickon, Slippery Rock, Loyalsock, S-Turn, Tariffville, Ocoee (Doubleheader), West River, and Yough Slaloms. None of those has survived. We also raced on the Nantahala, at Wausau, and at the Esopus Slalom, which have survived in some form or other, although as the current chairman of the Esopus Slalom I can honestly say it is a mere shadow of its former incarnation. The survival percentages for races we attended north of the border is a bit higher, including both the Gull River and Jonquiere. Beyond these, there are few races that we regularly participated in that are still around.
Elite slalom has become professional, albeit without the compensation, and, as a result, the lower levels of slalom appear to be heading toward becoming about as prevalent as intermediate ski-jumping. I suspect that what Jim, I, and perhaps others are grumbling about is more about the gradual and continuing loss of these intermediate levels of the sport than whether or not the rules changes are good for the elite racer.
John
its a wonderful life
Slaloms, "It's a wonderful life" (christmas movie with jimmy stewart)
set the scene: george bailey (jimmy stewart) is being shown what the world of slalom would be like, if it didnt get more boaters into racing, and only focussed on medals. (feel free to use your jimmy stewart voice below)
George bailey: "but, my best friends son, won the C-1 Olympic gold medal in Japan in 2052!"
clarence the guardian angel: "but, george your best friend was never introduced to slalom because you never started the Bedford Falls cup race.
George: "that's a lie, i won my first slalom race at the podunk series, in podunk mississippi, and i got hooked!"
clarence: "the podunk series never got started, so you never won, and didnt get hooked on slalom.
George: "thats a lie!! i used to talk my friend's ears off about slalom....i even taught him how to roll, and he taught his son"
clarence: "but george you never got interested in slalom because, slalom never came to you. the governing body became so obsessed with just winning medals they stop growing the sport at grassroots levels....so, the Bedford falls slalom series never got started"
Clarence: "so you see george, building a large base of slalom racers at local courses is actually good for the sport."
George: (praying) "God, please dont let slalom racing get so caught up in winning medals, and become so small it never reaches this little town of Bedford falls....please!!!"...."i wanna race again!!"
that was fun...later, trevor
set the scene: george bailey (jimmy stewart) is being shown what the world of slalom would be like, if it didnt get more boaters into racing, and only focussed on medals. (feel free to use your jimmy stewart voice below)
George bailey: "but, my best friends son, won the C-1 Olympic gold medal in Japan in 2052!"
clarence the guardian angel: "but, george your best friend was never introduced to slalom because you never started the Bedford Falls cup race.
George: "that's a lie, i won my first slalom race at the podunk series, in podunk mississippi, and i got hooked!"
clarence: "the podunk series never got started, so you never won, and didnt get hooked on slalom.
George: "thats a lie!! i used to talk my friend's ears off about slalom....i even taught him how to roll, and he taught his son"
clarence: "but george you never got interested in slalom because, slalom never came to you. the governing body became so obsessed with just winning medals they stop growing the sport at grassroots levels....so, the Bedford falls slalom series never got started"
Clarence: "so you see george, building a large base of slalom racers at local courses is actually good for the sport."
George: (praying) "God, please dont let slalom racing get so caught up in winning medals, and become so small it never reaches this little town of Bedford falls....please!!!"...."i wanna race again!!"
that was fun...later, trevor
Last edited by Trevor on Mon May 05, 2008 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Trevor Soileau
I wish we had a laughing emoticon with tears "c"quirting out of its eyes. I'd use it here. 
Thanks for that, Trevor. I could actually here Jimmy Stewart's voice and the voice of Clarence, the angel--trying to get his wings.
This post is a very good read and I thank all y'all racerhead-types for giving your points-of-view. Now I wanna race.
Where do I sign up? 
KNeal
BTW, Trevor, Ellen and I still have the Deadline and I'll be bringing it to the Friday paddle before the Armada on the Lower Yough. C-eems I got a Canadian to take the bow.
Thanks for that, Trevor. I could actually here Jimmy Stewart's voice and the voice of Clarence, the angel--trying to get his wings.This post is a very good read and I thank all y'all racerhead-types for giving your points-of-view. Now I wanna race.
Where do I sign up? KNeal
BTW, Trevor, Ellen and I still have the Deadline and I'll be bringing it to the Friday paddle before the Armada on the Lower Yough. C-eems I got a Canadian to take the bow.
C-boats Moderator
"Believe me, my young friend, there is nothing-absolutely nothing-half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats."
"Believe me, my young friend, there is nothing-absolutely nothing-half so much worth doing as simply messing about in boats."
-
bearboater
- CBoats Addict
- Posts: 743
- Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 4:22 am
- Location: Phoenix, AZ
-
insolence
- CBoats Addict
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:06 pm
- Location: Augsburg (Bavaria)/ Southern Germany
- Contact:
Re: boatin
[quote="Alden
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. :D
.[/quote]
hm, I pretty like the shorter canoes: a lot more fun to ride and it seems to me that the courses (at least the minor league races I do in Bavaria/Germany) are made in a way so you don't have a chance with a old 4m canoe.
and there are good rule changes too: allowing women officialy in the C1-races!!!!!
but otherwise I agree with most of you: one pole gates are no good idea, but the worst would be eliminating time penalties when hitting a gate. This would destroy what's actually the essence of slalom racing: a fine technique and riding a course as clean as possible
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. :D
.[/quote]
hm, I pretty like the shorter canoes: a lot more fun to ride and it seems to me that the courses (at least the minor league races I do in Bavaria/Germany) are made in a way so you don't have a chance with a old 4m canoe.
and there are good rule changes too: allowing women officialy in the C1-races!!!!!
but otherwise I agree with most of you: one pole gates are no good idea, but the worst would be eliminating time penalties when hitting a gate. This would destroy what's actually the essence of slalom racing: a fine technique and riding a course as clean as possible
it's gettin hot
I MAKE THE WATER BURN
purple orange flames
blaze where I put my paddle
I MAKE THE WATER BURN
purple orange flames
blaze where I put my paddle