ARA Competition Review (UK)

28 Apr 2008 10:01:14

The Hub

Hi all,

Does anyone know what the latest proposals are for the competition
review?

I think the last proposals were voted out in November or December last
year?

I've heard a rumour that new proposals are being put forward in May/
June to Council but can't find any mention of what the new proposals
are and wondered how they would affect club rowing & regattas?

Anyone know?

Ta,

Hub.

29 Apr 2008 00:01:51

Christopher Anton

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

"The Hub" <nh@amsystem.co.uk > wrote in message
news:92ea1855-61de-4ea6-81e6-dcc327d7fae0@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know what the latest proposals are for the competition
> review?
>
> I think the last proposals were voted out in November or December last
> year?
>

It never got to a vote as the proposals were IMHO deemed to be unworkable by
a large number of Council members

> I've heard a rumour that new proposals are being put forward in May/
> June to Council but can't find any mention of what the new proposals
> are and wondered how they would affect club rowing & regattas?

Well we did ask for them to be ready for the June Council - I haven't heard
anything about them yet. The NCC are keeping their cards very close to their
chests.
>
> Anyone know?

29 Apr 2008 06:05:37

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

Rumoured that one proposal would be that all finals are qualifying for
points, so all those straight finals at the more provincial regattas
would be qualifying..... the last nail for those regattas? The
effective removal of large numbers of useful nearly-vets who still row
and pass knowledge/experience on to newer members but haven't got the
time to train to be competitive at S1/S2 and prefer the "beer and
tent" provincial regattas to clone multi-lane regattas at Dorney 1, 2
and 3?

The counterpoint has to be points for making the final at the multi-
lane regattas? And/or kindly asking Henley to not demand S1-level by
points as most pot-hunting generated by those seeking to be qualifying
to enter various events at Henley - why else would "top-end" races be
interested in competing at "Small Town" Regattas?

Underlying principle is that the points system is meant to generate
competitive races, rather than processions, to match competitors of
similar skill and training - this is clearly not the case at the
moment and does not recognise the disparity between the beginners and
the been-round-the-blocks and between those aspiring to "have some
fun, maybe some beer, win-a-few, lose-a-few" to those seeking glory at
the top level.

Do I have the answer? No :0( and you could probably guess which
category I fall into nowadays but I have also previously been in the
other camp

29 Apr 2008 06:55:19

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 29 Apr, 14:05, JK <ja...@familyknight.co.uk > wrote:
> Rumoured that one proposal would be that all finals are qualifying for
> points, so all those straight finals at the more provincial regattas
> would be qualifying..... the last nail for those regattas? The
> effective removal of large numbers of useful nearly-vets who still row
> and pass knowledge/experience on to newer members but haven't got the
> time to train to be competitive at S1/S2 and prefer the "beer and
> tent" provincial regattas to clone multi-lane regattas at Dorney 1, 2
> and 3?
>
> The counterpoint has to be points for making the final at the multi-
> lane regattas? And/or kindly asking Henley to not demand S1-level by
> points as most pot-hunting generated by those seeking to be qualifying
> to enter various events at Henley - why else would "top-end" races be
> interested in competing at "Small Town" Regattas?
>
> Underlying principle is that the points system is meant to generate
> competitive races, rather than processions, to match competitors of
> similar skill and training - this is clearly not the case at the
> moment and does not recognise the disparity between the beginners and
> the been-round-the-blocks and between those aspiring to "have some
> fun, maybe some beer, win-a-few, lose-a-few" to those seeking glory at
> the top level.
>
> Do I have the answer? No :0( and you could probably guess which
> category I fall into nowadays but I have also previously been in the
> other camp

I think the problem is rather like 'squaring the circle'. If crews do
not get points for winning a straight final they remain on the same
points for ever so those whom they beat do not get the chance to win
next time.

I am sure we all agree that we need to stimulate competition,
especially amongst those 'nearly veterans' who, you quite rightly say
have a lot to offer despite lack of time to train as seriously as
before. They can 'regress' their points and compete at a much lower
level than before in S2 or S3 with promising newcomers.

However, let's wait to see the proposal and then the June ARA Council
can decide the future.

29 Apr 2008 07:13:27

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 29 Apr, 14:05, JK <ja...@familyknight.co.uk > wrote:
> Rumoured that one proposal would be that all finals are qualifying for
> points, so all those straight finals at the more provincial regattas
> would be qualifying..... the last nail for those regattas? The
> effective removal of large numbers of useful nearly-vets who still row
> and pass knowledge/experience on to newer members but haven't got the
> time to train to be competitive at S1/S2 and prefer the "beer and
> tent" provincial regattas to clone multi-lane regattas at Dorney 1, 2
> and 3?
>
> The counterpoint has to be points for making the final at the multi-
> lane regattas? And/or kindly asking Henley to not demand S1-level by
> points as most pot-hunting generated by those seeking to be qualifying
> to enter various events at Henley - why else would "top-end" races be
> interested in competing at "Small Town" Regattas?
>
> Underlying principle is that the points system is meant to generate
> competitive races, rather than processions, to match competitors of
> similar skill and training - this is clearly not the case at the
> moment and does not recognise the disparity between the beginners and
> the been-round-the-blocks and between those aspiring to "have some
> fun, maybe some beer, win-a-few, lose-a-few" to those seeking glory at
> the top level.
>
> Do I have the answer? No :0( and you could probably guess which
> category I fall into nowadays but I have also previously been in the
> other camp

I think it may be time (again) for a rowing league. A series of, say,
10 regattas, incl all the 2k Dorney clones, but also some smaller
venues and distances including some with bends.
Clubs enter at start of season. Events for open & women, a small
number of boat types (say 8, 4+, 4x, 2x). Points awarded per finish
position in each event.
Sell the TV rights. Everybody wins a bit. The winners win a lot.
Should make things more competitive.
Fire at will...
Kit

29 Apr 2008 08:42:10

donal.casey@gmail.com

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

Still waiting for someone to say why following idea cant work

Increase number of point by factor or 10 or 20...lets say 20 so elite
is now 240 points.
Win at Elite at Marlow and beat 36 opponents entered then get 36
points.
Win at Elite at Evesham in a straight final and get 1 point.

This will revitalise not kill provincial regattas.

Donal

On 29 Apr, 15:13, kdav...@kidare.com wrote:
> On 29 Apr, 14:05, JK <ja...@familyknight.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Rumoured that one proposal would be that all finals are qualifying for
> > points, so all those straight finals at the more provincial regattas
> > would be qualifying..... the last nail for those regattas? The
> > effective removal of large numbers of useful nearly-vets who still row
> > and pass knowledge/experience on to newer members but haven't got the
> > time to train to be competitive at S1/S2 and prefer the "beer and
> > tent" provincial regattas to clone multi-lane regattas at Dorney 1, 2
> > and 3?
>
> > The counterpoint has to be points for making the final at the multi-
> > lane regattas? And/or kindly asking Henley to not demand S1-level by
> > points as most pot-hunting generated by those seeking to be qualifying
> > to enter various events at Henley - why else would "top-end" races be
> > interested in competing at "Small Town" Regattas?
>
> > Underlying principle is that the points system is meant to generate
> > competitive races, rather than processions, to match competitors of
> > similar skill and training - this is clearly not the case at the
> > moment and does not recognise the disparity between the beginners and
> > the been-round-the-blocks and between those aspiring to "have some
> > fun, maybe some beer, win-a-few, lose-a-few" to those seeking glory at
> > the top level.
>
> > Do I have the answer? No :0( and you could probably guess which
> > category I fall into nowadays but I have also previously been in the
> > other camp
>
> I think it may be time (again) for a rowing league. A series of, say,
> 10 regattas, incl all the 2k Dorney clones, but also some smaller
> venues and distances including some with bends.
> Clubs enter at start of season. Events for open & women, a small
> number of boat types (say 8, 4+, 4x, 2x). Points awarded per finish
> position in each event.
> Sell the TV rights. Everybody wins a bit. The winners win a lot.
> Should make things more competitive.
> Fire at will...
> Kit- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

29 Apr 2008 09:00:11

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

29 Apr 2008 09:16:42

donal.casey@gmail.com

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

>
> I'm sure someone will use the excuse that fitting 240 punchable holes
> down each side of your membership card would make fitting it in your
> wallet/pocket etc rather more tricky than at present ;-)
>
> Nick

With an online database such as OARA you would think that the regattas
could be given the info on a data file before an event and have the
responsibility of sending it back to OARA updated after the event.
Potentially an easier task than collecting cards and punching holes
for regattas?

Donal

29 Apr 2008 09:37:44

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 29 Apr, 17:16, "donal.ca...@gmail.com" <donal.ca...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> > I'm sure someone will use the excuse that fitting 240 punchable holes
> > down each side of your membership card would make fitting it in your
> > wallet/pocket etc rather more tricky than at present ;-)
>
> > Nick
>
> With an online database such as OARA you would think that the regattas
> could be given the info on a data file before an event and have the
> responsibility of sending it back to OARA updated after the event.
> Potentially an easier task than collecting cards and punching holes
> for regattas?
>
> Donal

Absolutely - it should be pretty simple for regatta organisers to be
given access to enter which crews won each event onto the OARA system,
and to have it update the points for those crew members automatically
(after making note of substitutions of course).

Nick

29 Apr 2008 19:57:29

Carl Douglas

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

donal.casey@gmail.com wrote:
> Still waiting for someone to say why following idea cant work
>
> Increase number of point by factor or 10 or 20...lets say 20 so elite
> is now 240 points.
> Win at Elite at Marlow and beat 36 opponents entered then get 36
> points.
> Win at Elite at Evesham in a straight final and get 1 point.
>
> This will revitalise not kill provincial regattas.
>

So it'll be rather like playing conkers - your niner knocks out a
tenner, so you become a ninteener? Are you allowed to pickle your
blades in vinegar too?

Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: http://tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

29 Apr 2008 21:41:17

Christopher Anton

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

<nick.c.morrell@googlemail.com > wrote in message
news:70b8c059-39ce-4c49-a027-9fc5e40ad01d@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> On 29 Apr, 17:16, "donal.ca...@gmail.com" <donal.ca...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> > I'm sure someone will use the excuse that fitting 240 punchable holes
>> > down each side of your membership card would make fitting it in your
>> > wallet/pocket etc rather more tricky than at present ;-)
>>
>> > Nick
>>
>> With an online database such as OARA you would think that the regattas
>> could be given the info on a data file before an event and have the
>> responsibility of sending it back to OARA updated after the event.
>> Potentially an easier task than collecting cards and punching holes
>> for regattas?
>>
> Absolutely - it should be pretty simple for regatta organisers to be
> given access to enter which crews won each event onto the OARA system,
> and to have it update the points for those crew members automatically
> (after making note of substitutions of course).
>

OARA already does this.

30 Apr 2008 02:04:16

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 29 Apr, 16:42, "donal.ca...@gmail.com" <donal.ca...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> Still waiting for someone to say why following idea cant work
>
> Increase number of point by factor or 10 or 20...lets say 20 so elite
> is now 240 points.
> Win at Elite at Marlow and beat 36 opponents entered then get 36
> points.
> Win at Elite at Evesham in a straight final and get 1 point.
>
> This will revitalise not kill provincial regattas.
>
> Donal
>
> On 29 Apr, 15:13, kdav...@kidare.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 29 Apr, 14:05, JK <ja...@familyknight.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > Rumoured that one proposal would be that all finals are qualifying for
> > > points, so all those straight finals at the more provincial regattas
> > > would be qualifying..... the last nail for those regattas? The
> > > effective removal of large numbers of useful nearly-vets who still row
> > > and pass knowledge/experience on to newer members but haven't got the
> > > time to train to be competitive at S1/S2 and prefer the "beer and
> > > tent" provincial regattas to clone multi-lane regattas at Dorney 1, 2
> > > and 3?
>
> > > The counterpoint has to be points for making the final at the multi-
> > > lane regattas? And/or kindly asking Henley to not demand S1-level by
> > > points as most pot-hunting generated by those seeking to be qualifying
> > > to enter various events at Henley - why else would "top-end" races be
> > > interested in competing at "Small Town" Regattas?
>
> > > Underlying principle is that the points system is meant to generate
> > > competitive races, rather than processions, to match competitors of
> > > similar skill and training - this is clearly not the case at the
> > > moment and does not recognise the disparity between the beginners and
> > > the been-round-the-blocks and between those aspiring to "have some
> > > fun, maybe some beer, win-a-few, lose-a-few" to those seeking glory at
> > > the top level.
>
> > > Do I have the answer? No :0( and you could probably guess which
> > > category I fall into nowadays but I have also previously been in the
> > > other camp
>
> > I think it may be time (again) for a rowing league. A series of, say,
> > 10 regattas, incl all the 2k Dorney clones, but also some smaller
> > venues and distances including some with bends.
> > Clubs enter at start of season. Events for open & women, a small
> > number of boat types (say 8, 4+, 4x, 2x). Points awarded per finish
> > position in each event.
> > Sell the TV rights. Everybody wins a bit. The winners win a lot.
> > Should make things more competitive.
> > Fire at will...
> > Kit- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

How about having a maximum of 60 points with points awarded on the
basis of three tiers of regattas. The regions should classify their
regattas, subject to National Competition Committee confirmation.
Winners of Tier 1 events would be awarded 3 points and Tier 2 events 2
points and Tier 3 1 point.

Winners of multi-lane events should be awarded 6 points if there are
more than 2 heats and each finalist gain points on a sliding scale.

BUSA wins should also be counted as above, depending upon the level of
the event.

The event point classifications would need to be multiplied by a
factor of 5.

Sculling wins should count to the overall point score but sculling
race eligibility would only be based on sculling points.

Junior wins to count for senior points on a %age basis, depending upon
the age group.

Therefore, every winner would be awarded a minimum of 1 point and
there could be a National Ranking database available via OARA. Points
then become a measure of distinction rather than a penalty.

Clipping cards should not be the reason for perpetuating a failing
system.

30 Apr 2008 02:48:32

donal.casey@gmail.com

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 29 Apr, 21:41, "Christopher Anton"
<c.an...@NOSPAM.blueyonder.co.uk > wrote:
> <nick.c.morr...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:70b8c059-39ce-4c49-a027-9fc5e40ad01d@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 29 Apr, 17:16, "donal.ca...@gmail.com" <donal.ca...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> > I'm sure someone will use the excuse that fitting 240 punchable holes
> >> > down each side of your membership card would make fitting it in your
> >> > wallet/pocket etc rather more tricky than at present ;-)
>
> >> > Nick
>
> >> With an online database such as OARA you would think that the regattas
> >> could be given the info on a data file before an event and have the
> >> responsibility of sending it back to OARA updated after the event.
> >> Potentially an easier task than collecting cards and punching holes
> >> for regattas?
>
> > Absolutely - it should be pretty simple for regatta organisers to be
> > given access to enter which crews won each event onto the OARA system,
> > and to have it update the points for those crew members automatically
> > (after making note of substitutions of course).
>
> OARA already does this.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

so why does anyone bother punching cards??????

30 Apr 2008 04:39:19

Emily

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On Apr 30, 10:04=A0am, pdblas...@btinternet.com wrote:
> How about having a maximum of 60 points with points awarded on the
> basis of three tiers of regattas. The regions should classify their
> regattas, subject to National Competition Committee confirmation.
> Winners of Tier 1 events would be awarded 3 points and Tier 2 events 2
> points and Tier 3 1 point.
>
> Winners of multi-lane events should be awarded 6 points if there are
> more than 2 heats and each finalist gain points on a sliding scale.
>
> BUSA wins should also be counted as above, depending upon the level of
> the event.
>
> The event point classifications would need to be multiplied by a
> factor of 5.
>
> Sculling wins should count to the overall point score but sculling
> race eligibility would only be based on sculling points.
>
> Junior wins to count for senior points on a %age basis, depending upon
> the age group.
>
> Therefore, every winner would be awarded a minimum of 1 point and
> there could be a National Ranking database available via OARA. Points
> then become a measure of distinction rather than a penalty.
>
> Clipping cards should not be the reason for perpetuating a failing
> system.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm sure there's some logic in this proposed system, but it also
sounds fiendishly complicated. I prefer Donal's 1 point per competitor
beaten (however many points that competitor has - so not like
conkers). Easy to understand and to calculate, and would encourage
people to enter the smaller regattas where they wouldn't pick up too
many points (but would still move up in points gradually).

30 Apr 2008 05:25:38

donal.casey@gmail.com

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

Thanks Emily...I was a little surprised at Carls point as I really
believe that this would get some sort of levelling between numbers
attending multilane and river regattas and its totally fair - it would
be a shot in the arm for river rowing which is the lifeblood for many
provincial clubs.

Incidentally in fencing (which my kids also do) that really is akin
to conkers as you have a pool stage which establishes a pecking order
of the top, say, 64 and then you have a knockout competition with the
best against the worst...if number 64 beats number 1 then they swop
positions and the next round is top 32 etc. This seems to work well
but I wouldnt suggest it for rowing.

> I'm sure there's some logic in this proposed system, but it also
> sounds fiendishly complicated. I prefer Donal's 1 point per competitor
> beaten (however many points that competitor has - so not like
> conkers). Easy to understand and to calculate, and would encourage
> people to enter the smaller regattas where they wouldn't pick up too
> many points (but would still move up in points gradually).- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

30 Apr 2008 14:14:37

Carl Douglas

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

donal.casey@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks Emily...I was a little surprised at Carls point

'twas in jest, Donal! Well almost but not entirely in jest. I find a
lot of sense in your proposal, but still worry about over-rigid status
structures.

Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: http://tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)

30 Apr 2008 06:52:51

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 30 Apr, 12:39, Emily <emily_bald...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Apr 30, 10:04=A0am, pdblas...@btinternet.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > How about having a maximum of 60 points with points awarded on the
> > basis of three tiers of regattas. The regions should classify their
> > regattas, subject to National Competition Committee confirmation.
> > Winners of Tier 1 events would be awarded 3 points and Tier 2 events 2
> > points and Tier 3 1 point.
>
> > Winners of multi-lane events should be awarded 6 points if there are
> > more than 2 heats and each finalist gain points on a sliding scale.
>
> > BUSA wins should also be counted as above, depending upon the level of
> > the event.
>
> > The event point classifications would need to be multiplied by a
> > factor of 5.
>
> > Sculling wins should count to the overall point score but sculling
> > race eligibility would only be based on sculling points.
>
> > Junior wins to count for senior points on a %age basis, depending upon
> > the age group.
>
> > Therefore, every winner would be awarded a minimum of 1 point and
> > there could be a National Ranking database available via OARA. Points
> > then become a measure of distinction rather than a penalty.
>
> > Clipping cards should not be the reason for perpetuating a failing
> > system.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I'm sure there's some logic in this proposed system, but it also
> sounds fiendishly complicated. I prefer Donal's 1 point per competitor
> beaten (however many points that competitor has - so not like
> conkers). Easy to understand and to calculate, and would encourage
> people to enter the smaller regattas where they wouldn't pick up too
> many points (but would still move up in points gradually).- Hide quoted te=
xt -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The logic is quite simple:

1. If you got a point for the number of entries in the event you would
get 42 for winning S2 8o at Marlow compared with 18 at Wallingford -
that would be unfair, especially if you also won S2 4- thus gaining
another 42.
2. So, award more points for winning at a prestige regatta, defined by
the Reg Council, but get more if there you win at multi-lane where
there are likely to be heats and 6 finalists. Hence the idea of
'awarding points' for performance at regattas.
3. There has been some debate about BUSA and club vs student crews. At
present, if crews just race at BUSA they get wins & prestige but no
points so go to an open regatta and race at a lower standard than
their capability.
4. At the moment you can win a prestige event, somewhere, but because
of too few entries you are awarded 'nil pointes' so go off the next
week and race again etc.
5. Some very good juniors spend their time in sculling boats and then
become seniors with no points, hence race at Sen 4 against crews which
have just won novices - no contest.

Perhaps I have spent too much time over the years trying to find
answer to this, almost, insoluble question but I am sure someone with
get there...but when?

30 Apr 2008 07:17:21

donal.casey@gmail.com

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

> The logic is quite simple:
>
> 1. If you got a point for the number of entries in the event you would
> get 42 for winning S2 8o at Marlow compared with 18 at Wallingford -
> that would be unfair, especially if you also won S2 4- thus gaining
> another 42.

Sorry but I dont see why thats unfair. You dont know how many will
turn up to an event. If you get a straight final at Marlow you will
get half a dozen points. If you are good enough to beat 42 people then
of course you should be moving up the statuses. At end of day under
the proposed scenario there are 240 points to play with. If you win 6
such events you will be and should be elite. If you turn up at a
"Prestige" regatta and win in a straight final against dubious
opposition you will feel pretty aggrieved.

> 2. So, award more points for winning at a prestige regatta, defined by
> the Reg Council, but get more if there you win at multi-lane where
> there are likely to be heats and 6 finalists. Hence the idea of
> 'awarding points' for performance at regattas.

I really dont see that - prestige is down to the level you perform at/
the competition you beat not the regatta(perhaps the only exceptions
being non ARA regattas HRR Worlds etc).

> 3. There has been some debate about BUSA and club vs student crews. At present, if crews just race at BUSA they get wins & prestige but no
> points so go to an open regatta and race at a lower standard than
> their capability.

BUSA should simply award comparable points to the ARA - ARA should
simply look at BUSA results and count these.

> 4. At the moment you can win a prestige event, somewhere, but because
> of too few entries you are awarded 'nil pointes' so go off the next
> week and race again etc.

This just vindicates my earlier suggestion.

> 5. Some very good juniors spend their time in sculling boats and then
> become seniors with no points, hence race at Sen 4 against crews which have just won novices - no contest.

Really in such circumstance the coach should be sensible enough to put
them against tougher opponents. Im sure we have all pot hunted at some
point but its probably more memorable and worthwhile to have lost or
won by a foot than to totally outclass the opposition which tends to
just leave a sour taste in everyones mouth. Rowing and sculling are
however different and not every good sculler performs to a similar
level rowing though clearly the watermanship experience gives them an
advantage. S4 rower should supplement his rowing with sculling.
Appreciate though that most clubs dont have enough decent singles for
club use so there is financial barrier.

Donal

> Perhaps I have spent too much time over the years trying to find
> answer to this, almost, insoluble question but I am sure someone with
> get there...but when?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

30 Apr 2008 07:29:06

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

> How about having a maximum of 60 points with points awarded on the
> basis of three tiers of regattas. The regions should classify their
> regattas, subject to National Competition Committee confirmation.
> Winners of Tier 1 events would be awarded 3 points and Tier 2 events 2
> points and Tier 3 1 point.
>
> Winners of multi-lane events should be awarded 6 points if there are
> more than 2 heats and each finalist gain points on a sliding scale.

I've always thought that the reason this sort of (otherwise sensible)
proposal failed to take off was you'd end up with another set of
arguments over what counted as Tier 1, 2 etc. Plus all the issues of
changing points limits and translating those of existing people to a
new system.

I generally think the existing system isn't too bad at all, outside of
the anomaly of beating 41 crews in S3 at Marlow not getting you a
point or two just because there were 42 crews racing. With that in
mind I've long thought that you could extend the current principle of
points award being dependent on the number of crews that you race/beat
(qualifying vs. non-qualifying). So:

<4 crews race - no points (as now)
4-16 crews race - 1 point for winner (as now)
17-32 crews race - 2 points for winner, 1 point for 2nd place
>32 crews race - 3 points for winner, 2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd.

Would mean it is possible to skip entire status levels at the lower
end with one win but I think most people would agree that if you can
win S3/S4 eights at Marlow (which usually have huge entries) then you
are likely to be competitive at S2 anyway. And certainly shouldn't be
able to race a couple of weeks later at S3 at (say) Molesey.

Once you start to stick a few more points into the system at lower
levels I think you'll find that you steadily move the bottle neck up
from S4/S3 to S2/S1 which in turn adds a few more crews to E. Should
even itself out nicely over time.

p.s. I've deliberately based the number cut-offs at sensible ones for
river regattas rather than multi-lane because if you have three full
heats at a multilane (so 18-21 crews) I think you should get 2 points
for winning.

30 Apr 2008 07:39:16

donal.casey@gmail.com

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 30 Apr, 15:29, grahamred...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > How about having a maximum of 60 points with points awarded on the
> > basis of three tiers of regattas. The regions should classify their
> > regattas, subject to National Competition Committee confirmation.
> > Winners of Tier 1 events would be awarded 3 points and Tier 2 events 2
> > points and Tier 3 1 point.
>
> > Winners of multi-lane events should be awarded 6 points if there are
> > more than 2 heats and each finalist gain points on a sliding scale.
>
> I've always thought that the reason this sort of (otherwise sensible)
> proposal failed to take off was you'd end up with another set of
> arguments over what counted as Tier 1, 2 etc. =A0Plus all the issues of
> changing points limits and translating those of existing people to a
> new system.
>
> I generally think the existing system isn't too bad at all, outside of
> the anomaly of beating 41 crews in S3 at Marlow not getting you a
> point or two just because there were 42 crews racing. =A0With that in
> mind I've long thought that you could extend the current principle of
> points award being dependent on the number of crews that you race/beat
> (qualifying vs. non-qualifying). =A0So:
>
> <4 crews race - no points (as now)
> 4-16 crews race - 1 point for winner (as now)
> 17-32 crews race - 2 points for winner, 1 point for 2nd place
>
> >32 crews race - 3 points for winner, 2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd.
>
> Would mean it is possible to skip entire status levels at the lower
> end with one win but I think most people would agree that if you can
> win S3/S4 eights at Marlow (which usually have huge entries) then you
> are likely to be competitive at S2 anyway. =A0And certainly shouldn't be
> able to race a couple of weeks later at S3 at (say) Molesey.
>
> Once you start to stick a few more points into the system at lower
> levels I think you'll find that you steadily move the bottle neck up
> from S4/S3 to S2/S1 which in turn adds a few more crews to E. =A0Should
> even itself out nicely over time.
>
> p.s. I've deliberately based the number cut-offs at sensible ones for
> river regattas rather than multi-lane because if you have three full
> heats at a multilane (so 18-21 crews) I think you should get 2 points
> for winning.

I wouldnt have any problem with this suggestion.

What are the competition review likely to suggest though?!

Donal

30 Apr 2008 08:43:52

Rob Collings

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 30 Apr, 15:29, grahamred...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> <4 crews race - no points (as now)
> 4-16 crews race - 1 point for winner (as now)
> 17-32 crews race - 2 points for winner, 1 point for 2nd place
>
> >32 crews race - 3 points for winner, 2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd.

I'd go further - beyond 8 entries, give 2 points a win, 1 for 2nd,
then at 12 give 3/2/1, at 16 - 4/3/2/1, perhaps then jumping to 24 and
32. But something based on number of entries is definately the best
way to set about things.

The problem with this is who comes 3rd in a 2 lane river regatta? You
almost need one set of rules for a ML race and another for the
traditional (and more interesting) racing. ML races can sort of give a
clear finishing order, but for river races you'd need to make it 3/2
for finalists and 1 for losing semi-finalists. That makes it tough to
arrange fairly - especially when the losing finalist may well be
slower than the other losing semifinalist.

I'd remove the points cap totally, so people can go as high as they
like. Anyone who has been invited to any closed GB event gets limited
to Elite competition for that year. I don't know what you'd do with
regression - perhaps it could be made fractional? 25% reduction in
points per year or similar.

Events should also be free to specify their own points categories to
suit their general crop of entries..

I'd also really like to see a completely unified structure across
Scotland, England and Wales. Oh look - airborne pigs!

Rob.

30 Apr 2008 17:57:59

Ted van de Weteringe

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

Rob Collings wrote:
> I'd go further - beyond 8 entries, give 2 points a win, 1 for 2nd,

Yeah yeah. Everybody is bending backwards to come up with a fair scheme.
More points, dependent on number and strength of competitors, etc etc.
But the goal should not necessarily be a fair points scheme but the one
that gives optimally distributed fields.

Any scheme should be tested by applying it to all results from the past
3 or 4 years (average years a non-squad rower is serious about being
competitive), then optimised. Nice Math/CS research topic.

30 Apr 2008 10:06:48

donal.casey@gmail.com

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 30 Apr, 16:43, Rob Collings <robin.colli...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On 30 Apr, 15:29, grahamred...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
> > <4 crews race - no points (as now)
> > 4-16 crews race - 1 point for winner (as now)
> > 17-32 crews race - 2 points for winner, 1 point for 2nd place
>
> > >32 crews race - 3 points for winner, 2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd.
>
> I'd go further - beyond 8 entries, give 2 points a win, 1 for 2nd,
> then at 12 give 3/2/1, at 16 - 4/3/2/1, perhaps then jumping to 24 and
> 32. But something based on number of entries is definately the best
> way to set about things.
>
> The problem with this is who comes 3rd in a 2 lane river regatta? You
> almost need one set of rules for a ML race and another for the
> traditional (and more interesting) racing. ML races can sort of give a
> clear finishing order, but for river races you'd need to make it 3/2
> for finalists and 1 for losing semi-finalists. That makes it tough to
> arrange fairly - especially when the losing finalist may well be
> slower than the other losing semifinalist.
>
> I'd remove the points cap totally, so people can go as high as they
> like. Anyone who has been invited to any closed GB event gets limited
> to Elite competition for that year. I don't know what you'd do with
> regression - perhaps it could be made fractional? 25% reduction in
> points per year or similar.
>
> Events should also be free to specify their own points categories to
> suit their general crop of entries..
>
> I'd also really like to see a completely unified structure across
> Scotland, England and Wales. Oh look - airborne pigs!
>
> Rob.

I agree with points for the winner but am not convinced about points
for second and third.
The delight of river racing 20 years ago was winner takes all. Maybe 3
or 4 races and then at the end of the day one person goes home the
winner the other goes home with nothing. Silver and bronze is OK at
Olympics or World Champs but for the rest of the sport Im not sure.
Particularly if its a straight final.

Donal

30 Apr 2008 10:34:42

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 30 Apr, 16:43, Rob Collings <robin.colli...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On 30 Apr, 15:29, grahamred...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
> > <4 crews race - no points (as now)
> > 4-16 crews race - 1 point for winner (as now)
> > 17-32 crews race - 2 points for winner, 1 point for 2nd place
>
> > >32 crews race - 3 points for winner, 2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd.
>
> I'd go further - beyond 8 entries, give 2 points a win, 1 for 2nd,
> then at 12 give 3/2/1, at 16 - 4/3/2/1, perhaps then jumping to 24 and
> 32. But something based on number of entries is definately the best
> way to set about things.
>
> The problem with this is who comes 3rd in a 2 lane river regatta? You
> almost need one set of rules for a ML race and another for the
> traditional (and more interesting) racing. ML races can sort of give a
> clear finishing order, but for river races you'd need to make it 3/2
> for finalists and 1 for losing semi-finalists. That makes it tough to
> arrange fairly - especially when the losing finalist may well be
> slower than the other losing semifinalist.

Which is why I would stick to changes only for events with more than
16 entries; river regattas almost never go above that simply because
of the number of races required. And they are perfectly free to
advertise that they'll limit to 16 in an event if they think the
possibility of winning more than 1 point (or winning a point for just
making the final) would put people off entering. A point for 3rd
place would only come into it if you run an event for over 32 people,
which on a river race I don't think ever happens, hence avoiding the
problem of the need for an extra race to decide it.

So you really only add points at the big multilanes anyway, and the
number of points you add is not so much that you need to change the
overall structure of the system.

But then I come from the 'tweak what we have' group, rather than the
'what would be the best given a blank sheet of paper' one.

30 Apr 2008 11:54:29

Rob Collings

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 30 Apr, 16:57, Ted van de Weteringe <myfulln...@xs4all.nl.invalid >
wrote:

> But the goal should not necessarily be a fair points scheme but the one
> that gives optimally distributed fields.

Define optimal :)

> Any scheme should be tested by applying it to all results from the past
> 3 or 4 years (average years a non-squad rower is serious about being
> competitive), then optimised. Nice Math/CS research topic.

Probably quite an interesting project, but I can't see it being done
nor the data being made available to anyone who wanted to do it for
interest. I suppose you could restrict yourself to published results
and still get a fair sample. But then you need to define the
optimisation goals.

Rob.

30 Apr 2008 21:19:11

Ted van de Weteringe

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

Rob Collings wrote:
> Ted van de Weteringe wrote:
>> But the goal should not necessarily be a fair points scheme but the one
>> that gives optimally distributed fields.
>
> Define optimal :)

Sorry, meant equal size. Even hurdles so no reservoir of rowers will
build up in any field.

01 May 2008 01:52:06

Dan

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On Apr 29, 12:01=A0am, "Christopher Anton"
<c.an...@NOSPAM.blueyonder.co.uk > wrote:
> "The Hub" <n...@amsystem.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:92ea1855-61de-4ea6-81e6-dcc327d7fae0@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Hi all,
>
> > Does anyone know what the latest proposals are for the competition
> > review?
>
> > I think the last proposals were voted out in November or December last
> > year?
>
> It never got to a vote as the proposals were IMHO deemed to be unworkable =
by
> a large number of Council members
>
> > I've heard a rumour that new proposals are being put forward in May/
> > June to Council but can't find any mention of what the new proposals
> > are and wondered how they would affect club rowing & regattas?
>
> Well we did ask for them to be ready for the June Council - I haven't hear=
d
> anything about them yet. The NCC are keeping their cards very close to the=
ir
> chests.
>
>
>
>
> > Anyone know?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Chris,

When do you think you'll find out what you're voting on? How do other
members find out about them and how long do we get for commenting to
our reps?

Dan

01 May 2008 03:24:50

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On 1 May, 09:52, Dan <wdsm...@btopenworld.com > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 12:01=A0am, "Christopher Anton"
>
>
>
>
>
> <c.an...@NOSPAM.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > "The Hub" <n...@amsystem.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> >news:92ea1855-61de-4ea6-81e6-dcc327d7fae0@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...=

>
> > > Hi all,
>
> > > Does anyone know what the latest proposals are for the competition
> > > review?
>
> > > I think the last proposals were voted out in November or December last=

> > > year?
>
> > It never got to a vote as the proposals were IMHO deemed to be unworkabl=
e by
> > a large number of Council members
>
> > > I've heard a rumour that new proposals are being put forward in May/
> > > June to Council but can't find any mention of what the new proposals
> > > are and wondered how they would affect club rowing & regattas?
>
> > Well we did ask for them to be ready for the June Council - I haven't he=
ard
> > anything about them yet. The NCC are keeping their cards very close to t=
heir
> > chests.
>
> > > Anyone know?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Chris,
>
> When do you think you'll find out what you're voting on? How do other
> members find out about them and how long do we get for commenting to
> our reps?
>
> Dan- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Despite everything that has been posted to date, it is Council which
makes the decision. We all need to make sure that our reps understand
the need to change something which is no longer satisfactory for good
and fair competition. I am sure my Div Rep will let me have a chance
to comment, lets hope that the rest do the same.

There are, of course, many non-div reps on council who represent other
interests, I just hope they do not form a majority which swamps the
votes of the domestic rowing representatives.

01 May 2008 04:21:07

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

On May 1, 11:24 am, pdblas...@btinternet.com wrote:
> On 1 May, 09:52, Dan <wdsm...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 29, 12:01 am, "Christopher Anton"
>
> > <c.an...@NOSPAM.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > > "The Hub" <n...@amsystem.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> > >news:92ea1855-61de-4ea6-81e6-dcc327d7fae0@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > Hi all,
>
> > > > Does anyone know what the latest proposals are for the competition
> > > > review?
>
> > > > I think the last proposals were voted out in November or December last
> > > > year?
>
> > > It never got to a vote as the proposals were IMHO deemed to be unworkable by
> > > a large number of Council members
>
> > > > I've heard a rumour that new proposals are being put forward in May/
> > > > June to Council but can't find any mention of what the new proposals
> > > > are and wondered how they would affect club rowing & regattas?
>
> > > Well we did ask for them to be ready for the June Council - I haven't heard
> > > anything about them yet. The NCC are keeping their cards very close to their
> > > chests.
>
> > > > Anyone know?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Chris,
>
> > When do you think you'll find out what you're voting on? How do other
> > members find out about them and how long do we get for commenting to
> > our reps?
>
> > Dan- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Despite everything that has been posted to date, it is Council which
> makes the decision. We all need to make sure that our reps understand
> the need to change something which is no longer satisfactory for good
> and fair competition. I am sure my Div Rep will let me have a chance
> to comment, lets hope that the rest do the same.
>
> There are, of course, many non-div reps on council who represent other
> interests, I just hope they do not form a majority which swamps the
> votes of the domestic rowing representatives.

Peter, amen to that.
If new proposals are published with good time for consultation .....
and if they earn the informed support of a good majority of clubs and
competitions ..... the proposers will have done well ..... VERY well!

I've a feeling, that there may be some club oarsmen instinctively
opposed to anything which seems likely to give them more points. It
may be necessary to do a more thorough job of explanation and
justification, this time and for the new proposals, than was achieved
last year.

If the informed consent of a decent majority of div reps should become
apparent, surely the will of clubs and competitions won't be
frustrated by anyone else?
If it is, please sign me up for a barricade somewhere.

Richard

04 May 2008 13:22:24

John Mulholland

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

<donal.casey@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:8d82adb9-ff08-49c6-96c1-5dae156aed0f@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
<snip >
> I agree with points for the winner but am not convinced about points
> for second and third.
> The delight of river racing 20 years ago was winner takes all. Maybe 3
> or 4 races and then at the end of the day one person goes home the
> winner the other goes home with nothing. Silver and bronze is OK at
> Olympics or World Champs but for the rest of the sport Im not sure.
> Particularly if its a straight final.
>
> Donal

A further point to support points for the winner only at two-lane regattas.
Last weekend the semi-final brought the top scullers in their category
together for a fabulous race. The final was a bit of an anti-climax, as we
all knew it would be. Who should get the point for second? The second
fastest, or the beaten finalist?

--
John Mulholland

05 May 2008 23:11:01

Christopher Anton

Re: ARA Competition Review (UK)

"Dan" <wdsmith@btopenworld.com > wrote in message
news:b33108af-af6b-4b44-a70b-

Chris,

When do you think you'll find out what you're voting on? How do other
members find out about them and how long do we get for commenting to
our reps?

Paperwork usually comes out about 2 weekd beforehand so we're talking end
May, beginning of June here. I'll let you know.