I once saw a tutorial on the forward stroke with
pictures of Paul Ratcliffe, which was good.  I think
it was on www.slalomsite.org or .com which no longer
exists.  Does anyone know if this is still on the web
somewhere or where there is any slalom forward stroke
instructional information.

I am not looking for sprint or sea kayak technique,
there is plenty of that around.

Thanks!

=====
Do, or do not.  There is no "Try".
      -Yoda

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster
http://search.yahoo.com

US Olympic Team Trials Qualifier
Dickerson Whitewater Course, Maryland
Sunday, March 7, 2004

Please visit http://www.bce-racing.com/ to complete 1. Entry form, 2.
BCE waiver, 3. Mirant waiver, and 4. Entry Fee payable by check to
the "BCE".

Registration deadline is Saturday, February 28.  Sorry, there is no
late registration or registration at the Dickerson Whitewater Course.

Please note that if the Potomac River level is forecast to be 5.5
feet or higher on the Little Falls gauge then the Team
Trials Qualifier will be moved to the Feeder Canal as the Dickerson
course will be inundated.

Spectators and for those who do not hold current BCE membership cards
must mail a Mirant spectator waiver to the BCE to be admitted into
the course.

Saturday, March 6, 2004
9:00 AM - 1:00 PM Open Practice for Registered Racers Only
1:00 PM - Course Closed for Race Course Design
4:00 PM - Demonstration Runs

Sunday, March 7, 2004
8:00 AM - Pickup Race Bibs
8:30 AM - Competitor's meeting
9:15 AM - Forerunners
10:00 AM - 11:00 AM - First runs
11:01 AM - 11:29 AM - break
11:30 AM - 12:30 PM - Second runs

Subj: It's Official, Slalom Team Trials will be at South Bend
Date: 11/21/03 5:11:41 PM Eastern Standard Time

To The Slalom Community

We have just completed discussions with the TVA concerning the
potential to hold the Slalom Olympic Team Trials on the Ocoee.  The
Tennessee state and regional authorities that the TVA was expecting
to fund a significant amount of the trials have decided due to budget
constraints that funding for the race would not be available.  As a
result, we will be holding slalom team trials at South Bend.

TVA remains interested in working with the USACK to hold events on
the Ocoee, and we expect to hold ongoing discussions about future
opportunities.

Thankyou for your patience,

Mike Sloan
Chair, USA Whitewater Slalom

Summary of Annual Business and Annual Planning Meetings
of the USA Whitewater Slalom Committee
November 14-16, 2003 (Charlotte, NC)

Prepared by John Seeley, Secretary, and Mike Sloan, Chair

This summary is provided to inform the slalom community of the
principal actions taken at recent meetings of the USAWS Committee
(sometime loosely referred to as the "Slalom Board").  While efforts
have been made to make this summary accurate, the summary is not an
official record of these meetings.  The official record of the
meetings resides in the meeting minutes, which will be publicly
available after the meeting minutes are approved at a future Board
Meeting.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR 2004

Mike Sloan -
Chair
(present) **

Richard Perlmutter – Vice Chair – Reelected to a two year term
(present)

John Seeley – Secretary – Reelected to a two year
term
(present)

Bill Constable –
Treasurer
(present)

Jason Beakes – Athlete
Representative
not present)

Amy Dingle – Athlete
Representative
(present) **

Brett Heyl – Athlete
Representative
(present)

(Vacant) – Athlete Representative
*
(not present)

Bert Hinkley – Northeast Regional Representative
*
(not present)

David Hearn – Mid-Atlantic Regional
Representative
(present) **

Lee Leibfarth – South-Atlantic Regional
Representative
(present)

Bill Parsons – Mid-Continent Regional
Representative
(present)

John Brennan – Southwest Regional
Representative                        (
present)

Marian Davidson – Northwest Regional Representative
*
(not present)

Dave Kurtz – At Large
Representative
(present)

Angela Lokken – At Large
Representative
(present) **

*   A USACK election will be held to fill the vacant position of
Athlete Representative on both the USACK Board and the USAWS
Committee.  Also, in USAWS elections this fall to fill the six
expiring positions of Regional Representative, no ballots were cast
by the membership for Northeast or Northwest Representative.  USAWS
elections for these two positions will be held again.  The current
representatives continue to serve until replaced or reelected.

** These four members also are members of USACK Board, which met
concurrently in Charlotte.  They were present for most of the USAWS
Committee meeting, including all critical discussion and votes.

USACK Office / STAFF

The Office moved from Lake Placid to Charlotte in July 2003.
Charlotte-based Staff:  David Yarborough, Executive Director; Jenny
Hardman, Office Manager (including membership, events, insurance,
sanctioning, book-keeping, etc.); Mary Beth Chambers, Director of
Marketing (including advertising, public relations, branding, media
liaison, Office information systems, recruitment of volunteer talent
for Office, etc.); and six half-time volunteer interns.  Information
on contacting the office can be found on the USACK website:
www.usack.org.

The USAWS Board, and everyone else at the meeting was very impressed
with David Yarborough, and the rest of the staff, and is very
confident about the future, if we can get through this year.

2004/2005 TEAM UNIFORM SPONSOR

David Yarborough announced a major sponsorship agreement with Adidas
to provide National "A" Teams and internationally competing Junior
Teams for the Olympic Sports (Slalom and Sprint) with uniforms for
2004 and 2005.  The total value of the sponsorship is set at
$100,000, meaning that the uniform packages will be complete, and
very high quality.  This sponsorship agreement was arranged with the
assistance of the USOC.

2004 Budget

The 2004 USACK budget discussion was very difficult. Total USOC cash
funding to USACK for 2004 has decreased by $125,000 from 2003, from
$638,000 down to $513,000.  In addition, costs for insurance have
gone up dramatically, and other revenues from sources such as
membership have declined over the last couple of years.  These
problems have been made worse by a revenue shortfall in 2003, which
has substantially reduced our operating reserves.

USACK's most significant source of funding is the USOC, and funding
from this source has been cut dramatically over the past few years.
There are three main components of USOC funding:

Base funding – an annual amount which is paid to, and is the same
for, each National Governing Body (NGB)
Performance funding – funding to NGBs which is directed to specific
athletes and specific projects (e.g., Silvan's Salary is paid from
Performance funding), which cannot be used for other purposes
Direct funding – funding made directly to athletes and for programs
such as Olympic Training Center funding that does not pass through
the NGBs

Base funding has declined from $371,000 to $250,000.  The Performance
funding has stayed about the same as last year, but is earmarked by
the USOC specifically for a small number of named athletes and for a
few narrowly focused projects.

As recently as 2000, of the total amount of the USOC's funding
support to all NGBs (Base plus Performance), about 80% was Base
funding and 20% was Performance funding.  Since then the USOC has
been shifting more and more of its funding each year from Base to
Performance, with the result that sports which are not realizing very
strong performances internationally are seeing decreased funding
overall.  For 2004, only about 20% of the USOC's overall combined
funding to NGBs will be Base and 80% will be Performance.  Base
funding can be spent by the NGB's with much more flexibility than can
Performance funding.

The USACK National Office has committed to increasing sponsorship
revenues for the organization by a significant amount to offset part
of the lost revenue, but even with moderately aggressive revenue
projections, USACK needs to reduce expenditures by about $170,000
relative to what had been considered to be the lowest budget at which
USACK could maintain current operations.

PERSONNEL REDUCTIONS
The USACK Board determined that the reduction in expected revenues
could not be addressed without significant reductions in expenses,
including staffing.   Both the Slalom Director's and Sprint
Director's positions have been eliminated effective December 31,
2003.  A new position of "High Performance Director", to handle those
duties of the terminated positions which are essential to be carried
out at the USACK level, has been established effective January 1,
2004.  USACK will seek a qualified candidate to fill the new
position.  Both the Slalom Director (Brian Parsons) and the Sprint
Director have been invited to apply.

However, this was not sufficient to close the budget gap, and an
additional $100,000 in budget savings was required.  The Sprint
development coach, Paul Podgorski, was let go in order to reduce
costs, and to ensure that critical Sprint projects leading up to the
Olympics could be funded.  Slalom was able to avoid laying off our
Canoe Coach by drastically reducing expenditures on all other
projects, and by agreeing to implement an aggressive fundraising
campaign to fund the position for the remainder of the year.

EMERGENCY FUNDRAISING EFFORT
The USAWS Committee expressed the strong desire to be able to
continue funding the Canoe Coach position through the end of the year
and beyond, as necessary for the training and performance of our
canoe athletes.  This objective is independent of our ability to
qualify a canoe for the 2004 Olympics.  Chair Mike Sloan announced a
special emergency fundraising appeal to all individuals in the slalom
community to raise $44,000 (the amount of the shortfall for funding
the National Slalom Canoe Coach position and the other necessary
Slalom programs under threat of termination.  A significant portion
of this fundraising goal must be met by December 31, 2003.

If USACK is to carry out its mission, substantial funding from the
private sector (corporate, foundation, and individual) must also be
secured, and a substantial portion of the new Executive Director's
and Director of Marketing's efforts have been, and will continue to
be, directed to this task.  However, the slalom community must also
step forward very quickly.

US NATIONAL WHITEWATER CENTER
Executive Director David Yarborough reported that this project, being
developed on 25 acres by interests in the Charlotte community as part
of an overall 300 acre outdoor activity center (camping, biking, rock
climbing, ropes, etc), is on schedule.  The financing is scheduled to
be in place this winter, with ground breaking in the 2nd quarter of
2004.    There will be three independent whitewater channels,
producing a first-class international competition site larger than
Penrith.  Scheduled use will provide for elite slalom training and
competitions.  Cash flow from commercial use (primarily rafting) and
from a for-profit swift water rescue training center is projected to
provide the necessary operating cash flow. The completed project is
expected to open to the public in the spring of 2006.

2004 US OLYMPIC TRIALS VENUE
The 2004 Olympic Team Trials are scheduled to be held Friday-Sunday,
April 2‑4, 2004.  The strongly preferred venue for this race
continues to be the Olympic course on the Ocoee River, while South
Bend continues to be the second preference and only other practical
alternative, all factors considered.

Agreement appears close with TVA for holding the race on the Ocoee.
If this agreement is reached, TVA will provide a cash sponsorship,
roughly equivalent to the cost of the water on the Ocoee.  TVA will
also arrange for cash sponsorships from a selection of regional
funding agencies.  However, TVA has also insisted that the USACK
provide a significant amount of sponsorship cash for the event.
Executive Director David Yarborough believes that we are likely to be
able to meet this requirement, and also to generate a significant
amount of income from the race above and beyond the costs of holding
the race.  However, he is unlikely to receive any binding commitments
prior to the middle of January.

Based on our current understanding of the TVA position, TVA and the
regional funding agencies will be unwilling to commit their
sponsorship until the USACK sponsorship is secured, or at a minimum,
the USACK agrees to accept a significant financial risk associated
with signing such a sponsor.   However, our budget situation
precludes taking any significant avoidable financial risks at this
time.  The USAWS Committee understands and shares the strong
preference for the Ocoee, but it also understands that a venue
decision must be made at this time -- athletes need to plan and
schedule training most appropriate to the Trials site, and organizers
need to get started.

Accordingly, the USAWS Committee asked David Yarborough to contact
the TVA to see if a satisfactory arrangement can be made with the TVA
by Friday, November 21, which permits the 2004 Olympic Trials to be
held on the Ocoee with no significant financial risk to the USACK.
Unless this agreement can be reached by that date, the Olympic Trials
will be held in South Bend.  In either event, the USAWS Committee is
confident of a first-class 2004 Olympic Trials event and competition.

OLYMPIC TEAM SELECTION CRITERIA
The USOC earlier this year had approved our US Olympic Team Selection
Criteria, and they were then posted on the USACK website.  The USOC
now has requested that the Criteria be changed in one respect,
relating to the amount of points toward selection to be awarded to
athletes for their performance in 2004 Olympic Trials.  The USAWS
Team Selection Subcommittee is reviewing this, along with questions
raised by the USOC concerning how the overall top boat, second boat,
third boat, etc. is determined at 2004 Olympic Trials.

SELECTION OF US ATHLETES FOR FEBRUARY TRAINING IN ATHENS

The Olympic slalom course in Athens will be opened the last week of
February 2004 for Nation training for a limited number of athletes
(probably a maximum of two boats per boat class per country).  The
Olympic "Test" event originally scheduled in Athens (and limited to
one boat per boat class per country) will not be held.  The USAWS
Committee approved the Team Support Subcommittee's recommendation
that the same system as already approved for the selection of US
boats to fill the single slot in each class for the Test event be
used instead to select US boats to fill the multiple (probably two)
slots per class for Nation training in February.

2004 EVENTS
The USAWS Committee approved the following schedule of principal
slalom races for 2004:

October 12 (2003)
Northwest Olympic Trials Qualifier
Nooksack, WA

January 31
Md-Continent Olympic Trials Qualifier
New Braunfels, TX

February 21-22
Glacier Breaker
NOC

March 6
Mid-Atlantic Olympic Trials Qualifier
Dickerson, MD

March 20-21
South-Atlantic Olympic Trials Qualifier
NOC

April 2-4
US Olympic Team Trials
Ocoee, TN or South Bend, IN

April 18
JO Qualifier
Kern Valley, CA

April 25
JO Qualifier
Kish, PA

May 8-9
US Junior Team Trials
NOC

TBD
JO Qualifier
Boulder, CO

May 30
JO Qualifier
Rochester, NY

May 30
JO Qualifier
Washington, DC

June 5
JO Qualifier (Animas River Days)
Durango, CO

June 19
JO Qualifier
NOC

July 10
US Junior Olympics
South Bend, IN

July 11
US Cup #1
South Bend, IN

July 17
US Age Group Nationals
Wausau, WI (to be confirmed)

July 18
US Cup #2
Wausau, WI (to be confirmed)

July 24-25
US Cup #3 and #4
Carlton, MN

September 18-19
US Nationals
Dickerson, MD

The selection of Dickerson for Nationals was strongly supported by
the athlete representatives at the meeting, and is conditioned upon
the pre-arrangement of an appropriate backup venue in the greater
Washington, DC area in the event of lack of access to the site and
upon the prompt satisfaction of certain additional conditions.

AMENDMENTS TO USACK SLALOM RACING RULES
The USAWS Committee adopted the following substantive amendments to
the USACK Slalom Racing Rules:

changes to conform to the USAWS Rules Subcommittee's understanding of
international (ICF) rules:
·         reduced the minimum course length to 250 meters (was 300
meters) and the recommended maximum course length to 400 meters (was
500 meters) – Art. 19.A

·         reduced the minimum number of gates to 18 (was 20) – Art.
19.A

·         amended Art. 22.B.4 to read:

"Repeated negotiations of a gate are not penalized provided
renegotiations are in the correct direction, the complete head of the
paddler passes between the gate poles, and no poles are touched."
[underscored phrase added]

·         change to address the public use of profanity at slalom
events:

·         amended Art. 34.A to read:

"Which course of action to choose is at the discretion of the Chief
Judge in the following cases:  Any competitor attempting to win a
competition by irregular means, who breaks the present rules, fails
to follow an Official's order, fails to observe the safety rules
(Article 16), who conducts themselves in a manner unbecoming of the
sport during the competition (including the use of profanity in the
presence of spectators or officials), or starts in a boat which does
not conform to the requirements (Article 5) shall be disqualified."
[underscored phrase added]

In addition to the Committee's desire to maintain an appropriate
environment within our sport, it was also noted that the type of
misbehavior observed at our races would lead to instant
disqualification at major international races.

DISCUSSION OF PROPOSALS TO REVISE USACK POLICIES CONCERNING JUNIORS
The USAWS Board reviewed and debated several proposals put forward by
Mike Hickey and a proposal by David Kurtz to revise the USAWS
Committee structure concerning Junior paddlers, and to implement a
number of programs intended to improve training and racing
opportunities for Juniors.  It was agreed that these proposals needed
additional refinement before full consideration, and the proposals
were referred to the Development Subcommittee for additional
consideration.

KEY MESSAGE FROM THIS MEETING

We need your financial assistance if our athletes are to perform at
the best of their abilities at the 2004 Olympic Games.  We need your
financial assistance to maintain our development programs for the
future of our sport.

Please contact Mike Sloan at (703) 528-1900 (Day), or (703) 438-3342
(Eve), or at MsloanC1@... to discuss how you can help.

Or, contributions can be sent directly to the
USACK Slalom Fund At:

USA Canoe Kayak
230 South Tryon Street, Suite 220
Charlotte, NC 28202
(704) 348-4418
info@...

for folks who may be interested - jh

Subj: USA Whitewater Slalom -- Notice of Annual Meetings
Date: 10/13/03 5:03:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time
To: slalom@...

To:    USA Whitewater Slalom Membership
From:    John Seeley, USAWS Secretary
Re:    Notice of Annual Business Meeting and of Annual Planning
Meeting of the USA Whitewater Slalom Committee

The ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING of the USA Whitewater Slalom (USAWS)
Committee will be held Friday, November 14, 2003, in Charlotte, NC at
the offices of USA Canoe/Kayak (USACK), 230 S. Tryon, Suite 230,
Charlotte, NC 28202.  The Meeting is scheduled to start at 1:00 pm.
(See Business Meeting Agenda below.)  Members of the Current USAWS
Committee are expected to attend.

The ANNUAL PLANNING MEETING of the USAWS Committee will be held
Friday-Sunday, November 14-16, 2003, in Charlotte, NC at the offices
of USACK, address above.  The Meeting is scheduled to start
immediately following the conclusion of the Annual Business Meeting.
(See Planning Meeting Agenda below.)  Members of the then-Newly
Elected USAWS Committee are expected to attend.

USAWS Members not on the USAWS Committee are welcome to attend either
or both Meetings.

ANNUAL USAWS BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA

1.  Call to Order and Roll Call
2.  Approval of Agenda
3.  Approval of Minutes of previous Meetings
4.  Ratify Election of Regional Representatives and Athlete
Representative to the Committee
5.  Chair's Report on the Status of USAWS
6.  Adjournment

ANNUAL USAWS PLANNING MEETING AGENDA

1.  Call to Order and Roll Call
2.  Approval of Agenda
3.  Election of Officers
4.  Election of Executive Committee
5.  Election of Subcommittee Chairs
6.  Subcommittee Appointments
7.  Committee Reports
   a.  Consider Amendments to USACK Slalom Racing Rules Proposed by
Rules/Officials Committee (posted on website, www.usack.org , (Feature
Archive))
8.  2004 Events
9.  2004 Budget
10. 2004 Olympic Team Trials
11. 2004 Junior Team Selection Criteria
12. Old Business
13. New Business
14. Date and time of Next Meeting
15. Adjournment

from Jennifer Hearn

I understand where Bill Endicott is coming from.  The USA Whitewater
Slalom Team is currently looking for volunteers to accompany the 2004
World Cup Team to Europe this spring and summer to help support our
National Team athletes.

It is however, a lot to ask people to volunteer their time and energy
for weeks, months at a time, for no pay, for minimal or no expense
monies, year after year.  This has been the American system since I
have accompanied and helped the US Whitewater Team from 1987 through
2001.

It is also a tough financial burden to place on a club (who may not
have any local National Team members) to ask them to raise scarce
funds to send a volunteer (maybe one they also need at home during
the summer months) to support something that does not immediately
benefit their whitewater racing program.

What often happens, is that the US Team takes the volunteers they can
get, and in the process lose good volunteer helpers over the years,
because to be honest the "job" can be thankless at times.  There are
also moments when you feel you have done your very best to help
athletes (and their families) and these moments can be very rewarding
as a volunteer.

But, what can the sport do to keep the good volunteers coming back?

Over the years, we have lost many slalom team helpers like; Caroline
Klam, Gordon Bare, Ken Stone, Ron Lugbill, Dave Mitchell, Scott
Strausbaugh, Fritz Haller, Mike Sastre, Mike Larimer, Lisa Riblet
Jacobi, Bob Campbell, even Bill Endicott for about a decade following
the 1992 Olympics, just to name a few.

Some of these volunteers stay involved supporting the sport in other
ways while others seem to be lost to the sport for good.  I don't see
this as a good thing.

In these hard economic times, I am not suggesting taking monies away
from our already struggling National Team athletes -- who can easily
spend $20,000 or more out of their own pockets racing internationally
each year.

I do think the sport can make an effort to nurture its volunteers,
coaches, split takers, video folks, etc., by recognizing their
dedication to our sport and its athletes by perhaps using the
following ideas:

-Send a personal invitation (or phone call from National Team staff)
asking these volunteers to accompany the team to specific events,
training camps, and activities in the USA and abroad months in
advance.

-Offer some token amount of expense money towards their travel or at
least let the volunteers know that they are included in any team
housing offers, or group rental car arrangements, etc.

-Make the volunteers also feel part of the Team by giving them part
of the current year's team uniform: a shirt, ball cap, or perhaps a
jacket.

-When everything is finished send them a thank you note with "we hope
to see you again next year", if things worked out well.

These are the kinds of things that make people feel good and just may
keep our team volunteers actively involved and perhaps encourage
others to volunteer their time and energy also.

Jennifer Hearn
301 229 4304
Maximum Whitewater Performance
American Slalom Excellence Program

Adrian makes a good point here.


"And I think you would need a lot of PR effort (additional
burden on organizers) to get enough spectators to make it worth the
effort to set up a scoreboard."

This has a lot to do with venue selection, significance of the event and, as he
says, the advertising and PR prior to the event.  The advertising and PR is one
area the sport in general does not address very effectively.  However, Adrian
also touches on another important point.... It is a lot of work to run a good
race.  Expanding the work load beyond the "must have" items adds significantly
to the time commitment and management complexity for local volunteers. 
Practicality and smart cost management indicate that scoreboards and the like
should be targeted for big events at accessible venues that are attractive/near
to spectators.  Many of our favorite race sites require folks to come from long
distances for a specific reason.

The advertising and PR does seem to be something that professional staff could
provide invaluable knowledge and materials to support.  USACK is in a position
to build libraries, bios on athletes, media contact lists etc.  It is also
something that can be run from a remote location by phone.  Doing the PR has the
added advantage of putting the staff in touch with sponsors and the media which,
IMHO, improves the profile of the sport.

My observations working with the worlds and past involvement with the slalom
board indicate that there is a tendency to go for the home run/quick fix/easy
answer rather than a consistent string of base hits.  As an Atlantan, I know how
well that has worked for the Braves in the playoffs.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I built some displays with 4" high digits, that work with my timing
system.  The idea is to put one at the finish so that athletes can at
least see their raw time when they finish, and maybe put one where
spectators can see it.  I haven't used them at any races yet but
maybe at next year's qualifier.

As far as very big displays for spectators, just setting up and
operating it would be beyond what I would want to handle as a race
organizer, even though I have the technical ability to figure out how
to do it.  And I think you would need a lot of PR effort (additional
burden on organizers) to get enough spectators to make it worth the
effort to set up a scoreboard.

Allen Mayers and I talked about building an integrated timing and
judging system based on a standard Wi-Fi wireless network.  Start and
finish and all judging stations would be done with wireless PDAs, and
results on a laptop.  A system like that, which could be loaned or
rented, would be a lot more useful to local organizers than a big
scoreboard.   Also a lot cheaper and a lot easier to ship.

The idea of having equipment available for loan or rent to race
organizers is a good one - I would just put the scoreboard way down
the priority list.

From: EndicottWT@... [mailto:EndicottWT@...

Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2003 9:23 AM
To: amayers@...
Subject: Re: Recognition / development of smaller programs / exposure /
support



Allen --

I think this is a good idea.  But it's even more important that
something besides the mere designation of COD status happens.

I have often thought that some of these smaller clubs might benefit by
having a coach accompany the U.S. Team to a training camp or even to a
World Cup race.  The club coach could potentially do a lot of scut work
for the Team personnel, in exchange for just being around the top
athletes and seeing how the whole thing works.

Now, obviously, these people would have to be vetted so that we knew
they would work out well.  But maybe that could happen by having them
come to training camps in the States first, and see how they do there
before inviting them to come to Europe with the Team.

I'm not suggesting that USACK pay any expenses for these people.  They
would have to raise that money on their own -- hopefully in a
fundraising drive organized by their club.

And you'd have to have buy-off from our national team folks before this
would fly.

But if it worked, it could be a great way help more people get the
benefits of international racing and then run around the US preaching
the gospel!

-- Bill Endicott





--- Original Message ----





Brian & David,



Is there something (non financial) that USACK can do to recognize and
support the smaller slalom startup (and other small) programs like
Wiegand, Kvanli, Toby R, Kurtz, Miller, (and those I may have forgotten
or don't know of), etc. ?



Obviously, they may never grow into a COE status, but perhaps some
recognition, as USACK affiliate 'farm' clubs, could help them.  A
'Center of Development' or some similar status.   To acquire the
designation, they would have to adopt a common (insert your designation
here) mission statement (Durango's below is a good example), abide by
certain standards, etc., QED.



This status might also eventually entitle them participate in an
'athlete exchange' program. A COD could select a promising athlete or 2
(criteria to be estab.), to participate in this program to be developed
in the future. Something like, a COE can send a good athlete with
coaching ability to a COD, for travel expenses and a stipend, put up in
a good home stay, to work with the local kids during summer. The COD can
send their 'star' to the COE for coaching with the COEs kid 'stars'.
This can have a very low total cost, and has potential benefits for
everyone.



If we really want to get great athletes, isn't it useful to get them in
front of the top coaches early and often?  Even the kids that might not
have the $$$ to afford top private coaches deserve this opportunity,
right?  The next Richard Fox, Rebecca Giddens or Martikan, might not
come from a family with means.



Any thoughts on this or something like it?  If you think this thought
train is a dead end, or not something that USACK would be interested in,
let me know, I'll move on to another more productive thread.



Regards,

Allen Mayers





P.S.  For reference:



Durango Whitewater's mission statement:

Durango Whitewater's mission is to create, develop and promote all
levels of whitewater slalom and wildwater racing. We aspire to provide
training opportunities for all levels of competitive paddlers, and to
provide an environment which will enhance positive character
development.









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

From: msloan_c1 [mailto:msloan_c1@...
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 5:41 PM
To: Allen
Subject: Re: [Slalom] Olympic Trials Split/Score Board

I looked into scoreboard and splits pricing a couple of years ago,
and found what I thought would be a decent scoreboard for about
$25,000.

Splits clocks are much more affordable, and are available from a
couple of ski racing equipment providers, as well as from scoreboard
component manufacturers.  My recollection is that a split clock
system would run about $1,500 - $2,000.  I believe that both Silvan
and Eric Lokken have also priced out different split clock systems.

Way back when, in the Champion Series era, the USACK spent some
significant time looking into a scoreboard option, and decided that
with initial cost as well as maintenance issues, it made more sense
to rent.  However, with the cost of LED technologies coming down, the
equation may be different today.  Regardless, a split clock system is
doable, and I think could be plugged into the major existing timing
systems.

Mike Sloan

--- In wwslalom@yahoogroups.com, "Allen" <am1@t...> wrote:
> Getting a sponsor to donate the cost (purchase or lease) of a sign
in
> exchange for advertising space would be a great way to go.
>
>
>
> There are many, many vendors in electronic sign business, and the
cost
> of the signs is probably highly variable. My point about sign
shopping
> was that Wausau spent $3500 to RENT a sign board. We might get a
sponsor
> to cover a traveling sign board, but the odds of getting a sign
> manufacturer to be the sponsor are very slim.
>
>
>
> I think the price quoted for the sign ($140K) is about an order of
> magnitude greater than a similar one could be acquired for.  And it
> might be that a smaller version would be adequate.  We (US Slalom /
> USACK) could probably lease/purchase/have donated a similar sign
for the
> cost of 3 rentals, to be used at the elite races, or any race that
> wanted to rent the sign.
>
>
>
> Pricing info is scarce without calling a rep, but for reference the
> following tri color indoor sign 1.5‘Η x 6‘Η
> (http://www.grandwell.com/xl_spec.htm, much smaller than Wausau‘Ηs)
> retails for $1900 and can be had for about $1400.  The price
increase
> for larger signs should be roughly linear.   Anyone have the specs
on
> the sign rented at Wausau?   My best guess from memory would be
> something like maybe 5 or 6 lines of 1‘Η high text, x 40 characters
> wide.
>
>
>
>
>
> Allen
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ironring@b... [mailto:ironring@b...]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:38 PM
> To: wwslalom@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: RE: [Slalom] Olympic Trials Split/Score Board
>
>
>
> It is much easier to get donations and gifts in kind than it is to
get
> cash.    It is just plain hard to raise that kind of cash.  First
hand
> experience here.
>
> This leads to another discussion.  I have found interest from major
> corporations in supporting slalom in the past.  The interest cools
> because they do not get enough exposure from being associated with
the
> sport.  It may be possible to get a large company to sponsor the
> scoreboards if the organizers do more to promote the event, spread
the
> PR around and get the word out.  Running a good race is a LOT of
hard
> work.  Adding the scoreboard and more PR is just extra weight on the
> camel, if the camel can take it.  The PR and promo stuff often get
> pushed aside in favor of the "must have" items to keep the effort
> managable.  This is an area where it seems the USACK could possibly
help
> more.
>
> In the past, I have been a proponent of awarding sites a year in
advance
> for the major races to allow for better teaming between the
> professionals at USACK and the volunteers with the LOC's.
> Unfortunately, the USACK has been in varying states of turmoil for
the
> last six or more years and short handed/funded and this opportunity
has
> never been developed.
>
> But focusing scarce resources better might be one way to get results
> without requiring an LOC to come up with big cash for a score board.
> Cash spends anywhere and it is hard to allocate it for a score board
> when permits, insurance, and other items must be considered.  Also,
when
> there is more cash around, folks are not as inclined to work for
free or
> work as hard as they might otherwise.  Its still mostly non-racing
> volunteers organizing and running the races with limited time,
energy
> and motivation.  They want rewards for their clubs and
organizations and
> appreciation/respect for their dedication, but even more, they want
to
> go paddling too.
>
>

Getting a sponsor to donate the cost (purchase or lease) of a sign in
exchange for advertising space would be a great way to go.



There are many, many vendors in electronic sign business, and the cost
of the signs is probably highly variable. My point about sign shopping
was that Wausau spent $3500 to RENT a sign board. We might get a sponsor
to cover a traveling sign board, but the odds of getting a sign
manufacturer to be the sponsor are very slim.



I think the price quoted for the sign ($140K) is about an order of
magnitude greater than a similar one could be acquired for.  And it
might be that a smaller version would be adequate.  We (US Slalom /
USACK) could probably lease/purchase/have donated a similar sign for the
cost of 3 rentals, to be used at the elite races, or any race that
wanted to rent the sign.



Pricing info is scarce without calling a rep, but for reference the
following tri color indoor sign 1.5‘Η x 6‘Η
(http://www.grandwell.com/xl_spec.htm, much smaller than Wausau‘Ηs)
retails for $1900 and can be had for about $1400.  The price increase
for larger signs should be roughly linear.   Anyone have the specs on
the sign rented at Wausau?   My best guess from memory would be
something like maybe 5 or 6 lines of 1‘Η high text, x 40 characters
wide.





Allen





-----Original Message-----
From: ironring@... [mailto:ironring@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 5:38 PM
To: wwslalom@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: RE: [Slalom] Olympic Trials Split/Score Board



It is much easier to get donations and gifts in kind than it is to get
cash.    It is just plain hard to raise that kind of cash.  First hand
experience here.

This leads to another discussion.  I have found interest from major
corporations in supporting slalom in the past.  The interest cools
because they do not get enough exposure from being associated with the
sport.  It may be possible to get a large company to sponsor the
scoreboards if the organizers do more to promote the event, spread the
PR around and get the word out.  Running a good race is a LOT of hard
work.  Adding the scoreboard and more PR is just extra weight on the
camel, if the camel can take it.  The PR and promo stuff often get
pushed aside in favor of the "must have" items to keep the effort
managable.  This is an area where it seems the USACK could possibly help
more.

In the past, I have been a proponent of awarding sites a year in advance
for the major races to allow for better teaming between the
professionals at USACK and the volunteers with the LOC's.
Unfortunately, the USACK has been in varying states of turmoil for the
last six or more years and short handed/funded and this opportunity has
never been developed.

But focusing scarce resources better might be one way to get results
without requiring an LOC to come up with big cash for a score board.
Cash spends anywhere and it is hard to allocate it for a score board
when permits, insurance, and other items must be considered.  Also, when
there is more cash around, folks are not as inclined to work for free or
work as hard as they might otherwise.  Its still mostly non-racing
volunteers organizing and running the races with limited time, energy
and motivation.  They want rewards for their clubs and organizations and
appreciation/respect for their dedication, but even more, they want to
go paddling too.


>
> From: "Allen" <am1@...>
> Date: 2003/10/14 Tue PM 04:02:57 EDT
> To: <wwslalom@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: RE: [Slalom] Olympic Trials Split/Score Board
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=259395.3614674.4902533.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705
066486:HM/A=1524963/R=0/SIG=12o885gmo/*http:/hits.411web.com/cgi-bin/aut
oredir?camp=556&lineid=3614674’η=egroupweb&pos=HM>



<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=259395.3614674.4902533.1261774/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1524963/rand=171992553>


To unsubscribe, email to:
wwslalom-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Potentially, one of these corporate slalom sponsors
from the past might be enticed with the concept of
having their logo/info permanently displayed on the
'traveling board' as a means of multi year marketing.

Just a thought,
-Chris



--- ironring@... wrote:
> It is much easier to get donations and gifts in kind
> than it is to get cash.    It is just plain hard to
> raise that kind of cash.  First hand experience
> here.
>
> This leads to another discussion.  I have found
> interest from major corporations in supporting
> slalom in the past.  The interest cools because they
> do not get enough exposure from being associated
> with the sport.  It may be possible to get a large
> company to sponsor the scoreboards if the organizers
> do more to promote the event, spread the PR around
> and get the word out.  Running a good race is a LOT
> of hard work.  Adding the scoreboard and more PR is
> just extra weight on the camel, if the camel can
> take it.  The PR and promo stuff often get pushed
> aside in favor of the "must have" items to keep the
> effort managable.  This is an area where it seems
> the USACK could possibly help more.
>
> In the past, I have been a proponent of awarding
> sites a year in advance for the major races to allow
> for better teaming between the professionals at
> USACK and the volunteers with the LOC's.
> Unfortunately, the USACK has been in varying states
> of turmoil for the last six or more years and short
> handed/funded and this opportunity has never been
> developed.
>
> But focusing scarce resources better might be one
> way to get results without requiring an LOC to come
> up with big cash for a score board.  Cash spends
> anywhere and it is hard to allocate it for a score
> board when permits, insurance, and other items must
> be considered.  Also, when there is more cash
> around, folks are not as inclined to work for free
> or work as hard as they might otherwise.  Its still
> mostly non-racing volunteers organizing and running
> the races with limited time, energy and motivation.
> They want rewards for their clubs and organizations
> and appreciation/respect for their dedication, but
> even more, they want to go paddling too.
>
>
> >
> > From: "Allen" <am1@...>
> > Date: 2003/10/14 Tue PM 04:02:57 EDT
> > To: <wwslalom@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: RE: RE: [Slalom] Olympic Trials
> Split/Score Board
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> To unsubscribe, email to:
> wwslalom-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


=====
Christopher D. Stec
Whitewater/Flatwater Canoe Instructor Trainer
Chairman, Dixie Division-American Canoe Association
Assistant Director, Falling Creek Camp
P.O. Box 98 Tuxedo, NC 28784
(828)692-0262[w] (828)696-3404[h] (828)696-1616[fax]
chstec@... or chris@...


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com

It is much easier to get donations and gifts in kind than it is to get cash.   
It is just plain hard to raise that kind of cash.  First hand experience here.

This leads to another discussion.  I have found interest from major corporations
in supporting slalom in the past.  The interest cools because they do not get
enough exposure from being associated with the sport.  It may be possible to get
a large company to sponsor the scoreboards if the organizers do more to promote
the event, spread the PR around and get the word out.  Running a good race is a
LOT of hard work.  Adding the scoreboard and more PR is just extra weight on the
camel, if the camel can take it.  The PR and promo stuff often get pushed aside
in favor of the "must have" items to keep the effort managable.  This is an area
where it seems the USACK could possibly help more.

In the past, I have been a proponent of awarding sites a year in advance for the
major races to allow for better teaming between the professionals at USACK and
the volunteers with the LOC's.  Unfortunately, the USACK has been in varying
states of turmoil for the last six or more years and short handed/funded and
this opportunity has never been developed.

But focusing scarce resources better might be one way to get results without
requiring an LOC to come up with big cash for a score board.  Cash spends
anywhere and it is hard to allocate it for a score board when permits,
insurance, and other items must be considered.  Also, when there is more cash
around, folks are not as inclined to work for free or work as hard as they might
otherwise.  Its still mostly non-racing volunteers organizing and running the
races with limited time, energy and motivation.  They want rewards for their
clubs and organizations and appreciation/respect for their dedication, but even
more, they want to go paddling too.


>
> From: "Allen" <am1@...>
> Date: 2003/10/14 Tue PM 04:02:57 EDT
> To: <wwslalom@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: RE: [Slalom] Olympic Trials Split/Score Board
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Adrian Nye has built several operational, designed for slalom timing
systems and has an interest in this area.   Adrian, are you on this
forum ?



I think the $200 signs are too much of a distraction, as you have to
watch them for a period of time to get the info.  There certainly must
be a good compromise for a reasonable cost.   If there was a way to get
a budget for what might be able to be purchased, so as not to be doing
unused research, someone might volunteer to research.  Apparently we
rented a scoreboard for $3500.00 in Wausau, and some amount might be
spent for rental again.



I found programmable signs that are visible from 300 / 600 and 1200
feet, with up to 2' high characters, no pricing yet since it will
require phone time to get quotes.  Company name was EDI, if I recall
correctly.



Allen







-----Original Message-----
From: ironring@... [mailto:ironring@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 12:56 PM
To: wwslalom@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: RE: [Slalom] Olympic Trials Split/Score Board




When my daughter was in gymnastics, there was a company that traveled to
sites to manage the scoring for the events.  They used lap top
computers, eventually wireless networks and electronic signs.  The signs
scrolled to show the name, number, event and score for each competitor
as it was entered.  I asked about the signs and was told they were
around $150 to 200$ apiece.  Now the catches.

They are too small to read from long distances.  But they are cheap
enough to use more of them to over come the problem.

They are not weather proof for outdoor use.  But, there must be someway
to protect them

With one or two scrolling signs per section for splits/standings plus
addtional ones that are static for a leader board is still around 10 to
12 signs plus computers, software etc.  But, it is possible to get folks
to donate a sign or two..... ie. divide and conquer.  And, there are
certainly folks in slalom that know how to set up and help fine tune the
system.  In fact, I would probably start this conversation with Eric
Lokken and some folks in DC who already have been working hard on
scoring and computer software systems.

Who knows what can happen if someone will bit this off and fight with it
until it works.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

When my daughter was in gymnastics, there was a company that traveled to sites
to manage the scoring for the events.  They used lap top computers, eventually
wireless networks and electronic signs.  The signs scrolled to show the name,
number, event and score for each competitor as it was entered.  I asked about
the signs and was told they were around $150 to 200$ apiece.  Now the catches.

They are too small to read from long distances.  But they are cheap enough to
use more of them to over come the problem.

They are not weather proof for outdoor use.  But, there must be someway to
protect them

With one or two scrolling signs per section for splits/standings plus addtional
ones that are static for a leader board is still around 10 to 12 signs plus
computers, software etc.  But, it is possible to get folks to donate a sign or
two..... ie. divide and conquer.  And, there are certainly folks in slalom that
know how to set up and help fine tune the system.  In fact, I would probably
start this conversation with Eric Lokken and some folks in DC who already have
been working hard on scoring and computer software systems.

Who knows what can happen if someone will bit this off and fight with it until
it works.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The price seemed very high for the display rental at Wausau.  The quoted
price for purchase seemed more like a giant full color hi-res graphics
capable display (Las Vegas Electronic Billboard style) . not the
monochrome yellow text display with misfiring pixels that was rented.  I
looked around the web briefly on this, I found several vendors that make
programmable electronic signs, but none were an exact match.  Colorado
Display Systems was one I remember.  I would volunteer to do some
footwork on this, but will be out of the country from Dec 1 until March,
hence it would be a bad plan.



Allen





-----Original Message-----
From: hearn6211 [mailto:DHearnC1@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 8:59 AM
To: wwslalom@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Slalom] Olympic Trials Split/Score Board



from Jennifer Hearn.  IMHO a split/results board should be featured
at the 2004 Olympic Team Trials, Friday-Sunday, April 2-4.  As the
event is only 6 months away, I was wondering if someone is willing to
take on this project to work in concert with the yet to be determined
local organizing committee (Ocoee Olympic Course or South Bend's East
Race Waterway)?  As cost seems to be significant, the alternative is
to consult with Wausau and create a workable plan to rent the
split/scoreboard.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

from Jennifer Hearn.  IMHO a split/results board should be featured
at the 2004 Olympic Team Trials, Friday-Sunday, April 2-4.  As the
event is only 6 months away, I was wondering if someone is willing to
take on this project to work in concert with the yet to be determined
local organizing committee (Ocoee Olympic Course or South Bend's East
Race Waterway)?  As cost seems to be significant, the alternative is
to consult with Wausau and create a workable plan to rent the
split/scoreboard.

I contacted Tom Vollstedt (Wausau) regarding scoreboard rental fees.
According to Tom, the 2 day event rental, in Wausau, is $3500 and the
purchase price of a scoreboard (Like the one used in Wausau) is
$140,000.

Vicki

Joe, I like the traveling scoreboard idea. (Should have split clock,
though!) Would be willing to provide some "seed" money. Jamie

--- In wwslalom@yahoogroups.com, "gojoec2" <gojoec2@y...>
wrote:
> I'm liking this thread too, Jamie!  Jennifer brings up a great
point
> about the announcing at events - one of my favorite parts of
racing
> at the early events at the Ocoee Whitewater Center was riding
the
> shuttle bus back to Ducktown and just take in the
conversations among
> spectators - people ALWAYS raved about Kent and Lamar.
>
> I've always thought a that a vehicle that could pull a
"scoreboard"
> trailer along to a pre-determined event circuit each year would
be a
> valuable, and sellable, asset for the sport.  The vehicle could
carry
> a sound system in it too and be operated by a couple of
college
> students looking for a fantastic summer internship.  Sponsors
who
> make such a program possible would receive exposure not
just at
> national and regional races but possibly at other fairs,
festivals,
> clinics, kids camps where it would be beneficial to promote the
> sport.
>
> No idea what the cost on leasing such equipment would be
but
> certainly with a well-organized "Tour Schedule," the potential
value
> to the sport - sponsors, event organizers, athletes, etc. - would
be
> great.
>
> -Joe

I'm liking this thread too, Jamie!  Jennifer brings up a great point
about the announcing at events - one of my favorite parts of racing
at the early events at the Ocoee Whitewater Center was riding the
shuttle bus back to Ducktown and just take in the conversations among
spectators - people ALWAYS raved about Kent and Lamar.

I've always thought a that a vehicle that could pull a "scoreboard"
trailer along to a pre-determined event circuit each year would be a
valuable, and sellable, asset for the sport.  The vehicle could carry
a sound system in it too and be operated by a couple of college
students looking for a fantastic summer internship.  Sponsors who
make such a program possible would receive exposure not just at
national and regional races but possibly at other fairs, festivals,
clinics, kids camps where it would be beneficial to promote the
sport.

No idea what the cost on leasing such equipment would be but
certainly with a well-organized "Tour Schedule," the potential value
to the sport - sponsors, event organizers, athletes, etc. - would be
great.

-Joe

Okay, I'm getting sucked into this...

I just want to agree with ironring, about split boards. Strangely, in
my experience, a split board adds more excitement to a race
than a leader board.  Final times can be given over a
loudspeaker fairly readily and effectively, but there is something
really thrilling about watching the running time while a competitor
on the course. (Sophisticated leader boards include this
feature--though sometimes they are used in such a way as to be
confusing for spectators to follow, i.e. too many splits are shown,
no one can keep track.) I have seen one race (Lofer) in which the
running time was there for all to see, and even though the board
did not even stop to give a split, it was very easy to keep track of
who was winning at a given point (when racer clears upstream
18, he  has to be under 85 seconds to be in contention, kind of
thing).

Just a random observation. Might be cheaper to have one big
running time clock than a necessarily much larger leader board.
Of course synching with timing is still quite a challenge.

Jamie

I think the large display's are a great feature.  Transportation (read $
or inconvenience) of a large traveling display, extra wear and tear and
associated with moving it, might make this a challenge.  The elite sites
should have an onsite (at least in storage) outdoor display.  It would
be advantageous if the same technical protocol could be used to talk to
the displays at different venues (read:same vendor, or compatibility
layer through software). This would lead to a cost savings over time,
and to being able to upgrade ALL the venues capability, with
modification to a single application.  There are folks in this group, or
in slalom that know how to do this, and might enjoy the challenge of
working on it.



I smaller portable system might be more practical for all but the really
big races. By system, I mean, rugged weatherized display, simple to set
up and use timing system, and judging communication system.  This could
actually be put together for a reasonable cost, including WIFI (wireless
handheld PDA's) for instant, automatic propagation of section judging,
straight through to the scoreboard. A system could be put together, with
a small group (3) of techies, and the prototype could be quickly
tweaked.  Easily integrated into this scenario would be a 'kiosk'
display, scrolling a screen of full results, with touchscreen or
touchpad input device for choosing display page/format.  All this can
theoretically be done without any running wires!  With the exception of
the kiosk display, all the hardware (including the medium size
weatherized results display) could be easily packed in a small
lightweight custom shipping box, with equipment cutouts.



This system could be incredibly slick, and if done right, would take a
bunch of hassle out of running a race.  Costs for the system could be
recouped by renting out to races, to cover initial costs + maintenance.



Good announcing is also an important area.  It would be great to get a
couple more folks good at this.  Maybe next time we get these guys
(Lamar or Kent) at a race, we can have them 'coach' some other potential
announcers while having them as announcer sidekicks?  On the (volunteer)
job training.



..ajm





-----Original Message-----
From: hearn6211 [mailto:DHearnC1@...]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 6:13 PM
To: wwslalom@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Slalom] What makes a race an event?



from Jennifer Hearn

Often the goal is to host a race with excellent timing and judging
(we need good volunteers for this), follow a posted schedule, and
hope the water is consistent flow (if this can be controlled) for all
the competitors, everything else is extra credit.

Having said this, I was wondering if it would be economically
feasible for the USA to have a traveling score board for use at
the "big races" like Olympic Team Trials, Team Trials, Junior Team
Trials, National Championships, Junior Olympics, and US Cup races for
example?  Having not researched this option, I realize there may be a
programming compatibility issues moving from race site to race site?
Someone would likely be needed to oversee the care, maintenance,
storage, travel logistics and function of a traveling score board
also?  Is this a realistic goal for Whitewater Slalom?

A big score board (leader board) is KEY for athletes, volunteers, and
spectators.  It should feature instantaneous posting of at least raw
times (combine times if second runs) plus any penalties (if possible)
for at least top 3 boats, and better yet the top 10 boats in each
class.  We have had big score board at "World" events in the USA
(Wausau and others) from time to time.  Most races in Europe (and
elsewhere) have big score boards so that anyone can follow the race
without necessarily understanding the announcer.

Good announcing also adds a lot to an event.  The USA is fortunate to
have a couple seasoned professionals in Kent Ford and Lamar Sims, who
are both polished and engaging with Olympic, World Cup, and World
Championship experience.  Other knowledgeable announcers, who are
also paddlers, have added a lot to the races over the years by
keeping the action entertaining for spectators, giving info to racers
and volunteers, and servicing event sponsors with their advertising
plugs.

I believe the USA needs to host "events" to gain sponsor dollars to
help fund all of our worthwhile whitewater racing programs.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

from Jennifer Hearn

Often the goal is to host a race with excellent timing and judging
(we need good volunteers for this), follow a posted schedule, and
hope the water is consistent flow (if this can be controlled) for all
the competitors, everything else is extra credit.  

Having said this, I was wondering if it would be economically
feasible for the USA to have a traveling score board for use at
the "big races" like Olympic Team Trials, Team Trials, Junior Team
Trials, National Championships, Junior Olympics, and US Cup races for
example?  Having not researched this option, I realize there may be a
programming compatibility issues moving from race site to race site?
Someone would likely be needed to oversee the care, maintenance,
storage, travel logistics and function of a traveling score board
also?  Is this a realistic goal for Whitewater Slalom?

A big score board (leader board) is KEY for athletes, volunteers, and
spectators.  It should feature instantaneous posting of at least raw
times (combine times if second runs) plus any penalties (if possible)
for at least top 3 boats, and better yet the top 10 boats in each
class.  We have had big score board at "World" events in the USA
(Wausau and others) from time to time.  Most races in Europe (and
elsewhere) have big score boards so that anyone can follow the race
without necessarily understanding the announcer.

Good announcing also adds a lot to an event.  The USA is fortunate to
have a couple seasoned professionals in Kent Ford and Lamar Sims, who
are both polished and engaging with Olympic, World Cup, and World
Championship experience.  Other knowledgeable announcers, who are
also paddlers, have added a lot to the races over the years by
keeping the action entertaining for spectators, giving info to racers
and volunteers, and servicing event sponsors with their advertising
plugs.

I believe the USA needs to host "events" to gain sponsor dollars to
help fund all of our worthwhile whitewater racing programs.

My contention from the beginning has been that you have to have a
strong citizens race program as a prerequisite. I think you
(ironring) are correct, few people can appreciate how very difficult
it is to quickly negotiate a challenging slalom course, and make it
look like easy.

From citizen racers can come many benefits. Potential spectators at
higher level races (citizen racers know how hard the moves are, they
will watch).  Get a bunch of spectators and you have sponsors
approaching YOU.  Citizen racers become judges and other volunteers,
for clubs, for races, for USACK.  A few citizen racers will be
lawyers, doctors and other highly compensated individuals, and might
want to support an athlete, or a program that they feel some
affinity for. Citizen races are the place to get new cadets and
juniors 'buzzed' about slalom or DR.  Where do we get new kids
from ... frequently one of the parents has paddled whitewater, and
probably slalom.  The more 'old hack' citizen racers we have, the
more kids we can 'harvest' from them.

The reason that there is a golf cable channel, and money in pro
golf, is that lots of hacks own a set of clubs, they know something
about what they are watching on the tube (personally I'd rather
watch paint dry) and how hard it is.

I have heard that slalom is boring to watch, well maybe, but I think
it's a lot more interesting than baseball.  Maybe more munch
potential moves at the higher level races would help?

In summary, I think that new efforts and energies are best directed
at cadet/junior programs, and entry / mid level racing. The rest of
our program seems to be working now, and will be able to benefit
from increased numbers. Sponsors and media coverage, IMO, need to
wait until we have our act together, and have bigger numbers. We
still have to promote the new races and programs, but I believe this
can be done on the cheap, with local newspapers, networking with
organizations & outfitters, posters (big ones), web, hype, etc.

So, wwslalom, tell me why I'm wrong.  Is there a better place to
start?

Allen

--- In wwslalom@yahoogroups.com, <ironring@b...> wrote:
> There are some things about slalom that make media coverage tough,
make spectating tough and make crowds look small.
>
> 1) races are long.  A lot of folks wander through and spend an
houror two and leave.  A Crowd spread over a whole day or two or
three does not look like a crowd.
> 2) Slalom is hard to watch and appreciate.  To an inexperience
spectator (and many judges all racers look the same. The speed,
moves and subtleties are lost on folks that have never raced.  There
is no head to head competition.  The only way to really appreciate
the sport is to have a leader board and post splits so a real sense
of the competition is alive with each run.
> 3) It takes a long time sitting in the sun to see who wins and not
too many folks care that much.
> 4) The stars of the sport are relatively unknown and
unappreciated.  In a world of playboats, even most boaters are also
disassociated from slalom these days.
>
> These are issues, not barriers.  But any event that does not
address these issues in some meaningful way will not reach its full
potential or market. It can really be helpful for a few in the sport
to sit down and really think creatively about how to best broadcast
a slalom event.  How to really show the skills and technique being
applied and condense the finals down to a period of time that is
within the meaningful attention span of spectators.  The leaderboard
and timing issues are a matter of money it seems.  There are
inexpensive systems that can be used indoors, but outdoor systems
must be larger and weather proof.  So add $$$ or more creativity.
>
> Those of us close to the sport care, but how do you get folks that
think whitewater slalom is rafting to care?

There are some things about slalom that make media coverage tough, make
spectating tough and make crowds look small.

1) races are long.  A lot of folks wander through and spend an houror two and
leave.  A Crowd spread over a whole day or two or three does not look like a
crowd.
2) Slalom is hard to watch and appreciate.  To an inexperience spectator (and
many judges all racers look the same. The speed, moves and subtleties are lost
on folks that have never raced.  There is no head to head competition.  The only
way to really appreciate the sport is to have a leader board and post splits so
a real sense of the competition is alive with each run.
3) It takes a long time sitting in the sun to see who wins and not too many
folks care that much.
4) The stars of the sport are relatively unknown and unappreciated.  In a world
of playboats, even most boaters are also disassociated from slalom these days.

These are issues, not barriers.  But any event that does not address these
issues in some meaningful way will not reach its full potential or market. It
can really be helpful for a few in the sport to sit down and really think
creatively about how to best broadcast a slalom event.  How to really show the
skills and technique being applied and condense the finals down to a period of
time that is within the meaningful attention span of spectators.  The
leaderboard and timing issues are a matter of money it seems.  There are
inexpensive systems that can be used indoors, but outdoor systems must be larger
and weather proof.  So add $$$ or more creativity.

Those of us close to the sport care, but how do you get folks that think
whitewater slalom is rafting to care?

Hi, guys.

Leck, we sure did have some fun up here in NW Ct. More fun,
perhaps, than any of the Europeans....

There are many random thoughts that I have about development,
and one of these days I'll try to make sense of them, but today let
me tell you about one ball that I have been fumbling, in case
someone with better "hands" than I can scoop it up...

In our general region, the biggest opportunity is NYC; they have a
bid for 2012 which includes a slalom course in Flushing
Meadow, and the rumor is that they may build the facility whether
or not NYC gets the bid. In my opinion that would be huge; you
would not believe the media coverage that anything that happens
in NYC can generate, and it would be a permanent whitewater
facility within easy commute of 12 million. I am in the NYC "Circle
of Olympians," and have twice been to Flushing Meadow (site of
the 1964 World's Fair, right next to the big tennis stadium), for
promotional events the NYC Olympic Group have invited me
down to (also wrote a little piece for their newsletter).  But I have
not pursued the question, what will happen if the bid fails? The
NYC people have already been through permissions, zoning,
environmental impact, design, etc.--they're a third of the way
there!

The people on this list are probably maxed out in their own
areas, but perhaps someone knows of someone else in NYC
who could follow up on this very exciting possibiltiy...

Jamie McEwan

Its great to do winter training as a cross-training activity. Its
also possible to train through the winter on the water. The year I
lived in France I was able to ski and paddle(without pogies!) the
same day. It was fantastic! I think I logged 40 days of crosscountry
skiing that winter. I spent many years going to South America in the
winter but I also spent six years in Connecticut in the winter
training outside everyday, on the water, and in below zero
conditions some. It was pretty brutal at times but we accomplished a
lot and achieved very high goals. One year we had to borrow an ice
saw and hand cut a channel to paddle in! Talk about cross-training.
We wanted to do it. It wasn't something we had to do. If it was, we
may not have done it. It all takes planning and dedication and sure
some sacrifice but its still fun in the end to see what you can
accomplish,...........no matter what.
      Its really amazing what the US slalom paddlers have done over
the past 30 years or so considering our hindrances and what options
other contries have had, mainly full funding and not just at the
highest levels. Most years you were lucky to get a uniform that was
red, white , and blue. It was all on your own. We found a way to
break down the door and used positive thinking and bullish pride.
And you know what...it worked and it still can. Sitting around and
waiting for the organization to help you doesn't work. You have to
think locally and help yourselves. Good luck. I can tell you it is
hard and can be brutally personal and sad at times but if you want
to get to your goal, you can. And you can still have fun doing it.
This note is not meant to be a "this is what I did" thing but a
reminder that you have to be creative sometimes to reach your goals.

Leck,

I agree with you about the media coverage issue.  I wrote a note to
Wayner last week about the feasibility of multi discipline events
like you mention.  There is great potential for synergy if we
mobilize and integrate to some degree, different whitewater
disciplines.

A few thousand folks showed up at the Upper Ocoee for the
recent 'Ocoee River Days',  I missed the hoopla as these things are
not my personal cup of tea.  I did paddle there and witness the
numbers.  It proved that you can get lots of people who know little
about slalom/downriver/freestyle to travel to the Upper Ocoee ...
it's important to recognize that if WE were to get them to show up,
we would need to have a multifaceted plan to get them back again.
Food, music, variety of 'things', maybe even something as goofy as a
raffle, where you get a competitor's bib number ... they win, you
win (newbies might pay closer attention).  Maybe at EOD after the
big events, do a short downriver, head to head raft race with
(guided) spectators as the racers (involvement & appreciation of big
water)!  OK, OK, so I'm not the greatest idea guy ... but that's
what the group is here for!

Promotion of citizen level races, possibly multi discipline events,
could be leveraged by teaming up with a deserving charity (and it's
associated marketing team), can you spell 'volunteers galore'?  This
would potentially be a winner for everyone.  I personally have run
in 5K races, ONLY because they had a worthy charity benefiting from
some of the proceeds ... and I've shamed others into doing it also.
I have done about 5 5K running races, it's kind of fun, but 4 of
them were charity races!

I know many, if not all serious racers will pooh pooh this multi
discipline idea and a 'circus' atmosphere.  How do the Euros bring
people out to races?  I've seen video with impressive numbers of
spectators in Europe and in Brazil.

I think as a group we can do many great things for slalom.  I also
think much of it will to need to be somewhat planned and sequential,
hence the particular polls recently created on wwslalom.  My
personal opinion is that one of (if not the) first steps is to
achieve 'critical mass'.  I don't think we are there now.

Anyone else on wwslalom have thoughts about this?

..ajm




--- In wwslalom@yahoogroups.com, "leckyh" <leckyh@y...> wrote:
> Hey,
>      Big kudos to Larry Mashburn who has been a big factor for
> years! A true friend of slalom and also a true friend of the
river.
>      I agree with Joe to some extent about making a big media
effort
> to draw a crowd and sponsorship and TV for the races. My question
> however is, How do we get more athletes to have a bigger race than
> say, 60 competitors? How many are we going to have for the Olympic
> trials next year? Probably less than 100.
>      Maybe we should also have a downriver challenge and a rodeo
> like we did a few years ago. That brings more paddlers into the
> scene and may make it more of a "family of boaters" affair than
just
> a "snooty" slalom racerhead deal. With shortened slalom races like
> they are today, there is also plenty of river there to share with
> the DR racers and rodeo afficionados, as well as for the cruisers
> and rafters.
>      If we want to draw media and have a bunch of athletes we
might
> want to try this instead of ending up with 10 women, 14 C-1's, 4 C-
> 2's and 30 kayaks for a slalom race. (oops! that's less than 60!).
>      Just throwing in my buck fifty!
> Oh, and Sam, Congrats on your second National Championship Gold
> Medal in C-1 Slalom (just a few more to go to  catch Davey :-)
>
> Lecky

Hey,
      Big kudos to Larry Mashburn who has been a big factor for
years! A true friend of slalom and also a true friend of the river.
      I agree with Joe to some extent about making a big media effort
to draw a crowd and sponsorship and TV for the races. My question
however is, How do we get more athletes to have a bigger race than
say, 60 competitors? How many are we going to have for the Olympic
trials next year? Probably less than 100.
      Maybe we should also have a downriver challenge and a rodeo
like we did a few years ago. That brings more paddlers into the
scene and may make it more of a "family of boaters" affair than just
a "snooty" slalom racerhead deal. With shortened slalom races like
they are today, there is also plenty of river there to share with
the DR racers and rodeo afficionados, as well as for the cruisers
and rafters.
      If we want to draw media and have a bunch of athletes we might
want to try this instead of ending up with 10 women, 14 C-1's, 4 C-
2's and 30 kayaks for a slalom race. (oops! that's less than 60!).
      Just throwing in my buck fifty!
Oh, and Sam, Congrats on your second National Championship Gold
Medal in C-1 Slalom (just a few more to go to  catch Davey :-)

Lecky

FYI, Polling results are confidential, no one can see your vote.  If
change or improvement is desirable, then consensus is an important
first step.  Help us to succeed collectively by letting your opinion
be known.  Cheers to  those who have already visited

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wwslalom/polls

and spoken.


It's also important that the right questions are being asked.  Have
a suggestion?  Go ahead and post it, or if you prefer, contact me
directly via the from: address above with your suggestion.