|
Post by jmathieu on Jul 22, 2012 12:37:31 GMT -5
Can anyone from MACKRO explain the logic and sense behind the rule: "if any competitor is in trouble and receives assistance from someone else, they will be disqualified." Are you kidding me? I attended both the Sheepscot (2 weeks ago) and the Yarmouth Clam Fest (yesterday) and both races had a competitors meeting that mentioned this "rule." People should be disqualified for cheating: taking a short cut or using a boat that does not fit their class. But to disqualify for receiving help if they swamped or capsized? That is absurd! If they are in trouble, they should be offered help. Their race is already lost. But if they can recover and work their way back to the position before the mishap, more power to them! They deserve it! Under this stupid rule, a competitor may refuse help for fear of disqualification, then jeopardize their own personal safety. When I asked the race organizer at Yarmouth about this, she said a "seasoned racer" suggested this rule. Unbelievable.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Baumert on Jul 23, 2012 10:50:32 GMT -5
Good point John and I found that a curious rule as well. It could discourage someone assisting others and really could be a safety issue. Assisting a paddler in trouble who needs assistance is first priority in any race especially when you get into open water like the Yarmouth race. In the case of the Yarmouth race this was a new race director with little experience in running a race. Overall they did a good job and they are still learning. With some constructive feedback on the concerns of this rule hopefully it would be reconsidered for future races.
|
|
|
Post by Travis Wheeler on Jul 23, 2012 11:10:34 GMT -5
I agree completely, Last year at Nationals Peter Heed and I swam in Zoar Gap. Our boat was pinned for a few minutes. When it finally came free safety boats would not touch it for fear of getting us DQ'ed. I did not know this rule and that they would not touch it without our consent. I assummed they just were not helping for whatever reason, I had to swim the boat across the river. At the end of the day the boat was pretty beat up. I questioned the rule at the time and was told they did not want people who had assistance continue on the win national titles. There was some fear fast flatwater teams might show up and still win with little whitewater skill. I guess the rule makers prefer a situation like I mentioned above. We destroyed a boat, but were able to continue and"win" our class (one boat) the next boat ahead of us was like 20 minutes ahead. I would certainly trade that meaningless trophy to not have had the boat destroyed or had to put myself at risk by swimming all over the river for no reason. This rule needs rethinking, once upside down your race should be over. No need to put lives or equipment at risk over a silly trophy. Travis
|
|
|
Post by Travis Wheeler on Jul 23, 2012 11:13:46 GMT -5
"This rule needs rethinking, once upside down your race should be over." - I mean your race is effectivly over... I am not saying DQ swimmers.
|
|
|
Post by jmathieu on Jul 23, 2012 18:28:57 GMT -5
Dan, both Emma and Scott (Yarmouth and Sheepscot) do a great service by hosting the races. They have that "rule" from misguided feedback. Glad I am not the only one who had a question mark about this. Thanks. Travis: I heard your theory before about top "flatwater" paddlers and would not be surprised if you are correct. The reality is the top paddlers win, as you know, on any type of water in every type of boat. It does not matter what type of race they are in. Also, your point about safety is exactly what I would fear with the rule.
|
|
|
Post by Paula Lunt on Jul 23, 2012 19:29:22 GMT -5
Why didn't you just ask for help? It sounds like the safety people were letting you control the situation and it was your choice to let your boat get beat up. Even if you got a DNF, you still could have finished and that's what should matter.
|
|
|
Post by jmathieu on Jul 23, 2012 20:11:00 GMT -5
Paula, I think Travis' point is if someone is in a risky situation, they should not have to ask for help. My point is he should not be disqualified for receiving help because the assistance would have done nothing to improve his position; he still had to get back in and paddle hard to make up the lost time. He exposed himself to unnecessary risk that he saw in hindsight but may not have been aware of in the heat of the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Travis Wheeler on Jul 24, 2012 6:15:46 GMT -5
I did not ask for help because I was unaware I needed to. I was more concerned about Peter's safety (he was in a bad spot for a minute) and just getting to the boat. I have been paddling whitewater since I was a little kid and just assumed it was the "way of the river" to help out. It just seems like an odd rule that doesn't really have any benefit but a few major downfalls. Maybe some sort of time penalty is a better solution. Safety boats can assist but you get a 5 minute penalty on top of your swimming time. It just struck me as odd that 4 or 5 safety boats would float next a boat getting pummeled and not help out. This inaction could have major ramifications if someone was hurt. You might as well not have safety boats if they are not going to help.
|
|
|
Post by Paula Lunt on Jul 24, 2012 17:02:02 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong, I don't care one way of the other about the rule, seriously makes no difference to me. Heck, I've swam about every river I raced on and don't even give it a thought about self rescuing, though of course it would be nice to have their help. But I would never rely on the rescue people 100%. Did a race once where I was in the middle of the river and the safety guy had to run to his truck up through the woods to get the throw rope only to learn it was about 10 feet long and I was about 50 out! They volunteer their time and do the best they can but most don't have either the experience or know the rules. NEVER be afraid to yell for help.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Owen on Jul 25, 2012 11:34:28 GMT -5
This rule has a long history in whitewater races governed by the rules of the ACA whitewater committee. (I've never seen the rule before in flatwater or openwater races. And in fact, it makes no sense there at all. Take for instance a team that tips at the buoy boat a mile from shore at the start of the Clinton......)
I do understand the relevance of the rule in whitewater racing. Being able to recover from filling up with water, sinking, and tipping over are all part of the skill set necessary to being a successful whitewater racer. At regional and national ACA-sactioned events, where the full skill set of paddlers is being measured, getting assistance can be seen as being analogous to cheating. The key, though, as Travis indicates, is for (a) safety personnel to loudly and repeatedly ask swimmers if they want help, and (b) for the race director to ensure at the pre-race meeting that all paddlers know that they'll need to ask for assistance and that they'll be dq'd for getting it.
However--some race directors don't STRONGLY emphasize this point, some racers skip the pre-race meetings, and some safety personnel aren't as in tune how to operate within the policy as one may hope.
Side note--Getting assistance has always been allowed without getting dq'd for Jr/Jr and Jr/Sr boats.
Other side note--Other racers are also required by the policy to ask swimmers if they want assistance, so it is not entirely up to the safety personnel to understand the rule.
I like the rule, for regional and national whitewater events. Whether trying to win your division or the overall award, I don't think someone who finished having received assistance should ever beat someone who finished without assistance.
|
|
|
Post by CCole on Jul 27, 2012 12:57:23 GMT -5
These are relevant concerns. I concur with everything Jeff says. With all due respect to all posters and those reading, I would add:
1 This is an ACA WWOC Downriver Championship rule. In that context it is not stupid. It does not and should not apply to local/regional races. I am unaware of ANY WW race in ME that would DQ any racer for getting assistance.
2 MaCKRO policy has generally been - and should be - to support race director's decisions at races - and offer guidelines when appropriate, without dictating how every race should be run. After all - every race is unique and should have its own personality.
3 MaCKRO members and all racers should encourage safe practices at races.
4 This rule should not compromise race safety if adequate safety personnel is present. Like Jeff said - the rule is explained at pre-race meetings, and is clearly spelled out in WWOC DR rules. Ever notice how attention level can wander during these meetings?
5 It is certainly appropriate to WW championship events. It is not to make life difficult for FW paddlers or anyone else. That speculation is silly. It is intended to guarantee an even contest for every competitor. What degree of ASSISTANCE would be appropriate? A little bit? Not too much?? Who decides? At Zoar Gap nearly every canoe experiences some of difficulty. This kind of rapid is typical of a WW national championship
Given the small classes (a different problem) say you have 2-3 boats in one class - two have difficulty , one gets assistance, the other does not ..... doesn't sound fair to me.
Lastly, it is regrettable that Travis' boat was damaged. That is an inherent risk of running class II+ WW. Safety personnel are instructed to help people. Retrieving boats is a distraction from that mission and could compromise the safety of others.
|
|
|
Post by DBlease on Jul 27, 2012 15:27:45 GMT -5
I can see how the rule came to be in the context of WW regional or Nationals, however, even at those venues the emphasis and importance must be placed on paddler safety. That is, safety personnel and other paddlers must be able to ensure the safety of paddlers who have taken a swim. Whitewater rescues can be a real challenge. The ACA's rule is not necessarily correct!
Flatwater races often take place on large, open, deep bodies of water well away from the shore, such as lakes, bays, etc. where self rescue is impossible, imposing significant danger and risk of drowning!
In Flat Water races the rule with Disqualification if the paddler(s) require assistance does not make sense. The paddler(s) is already handicapping themselves, losing time by swimming. The rule only throws salt in the wound of a person who has invested a substantal amount of time, effort and money to get a result in the race.
The Rule for flatwater races should be :
1. The paddler(s) may receive only enough assistance to re-enter the boat and continue in the race. No penalty. No disqualification.
2. Other racers need to understand that the return of a racer in the water to a safe situation is the most important issue! There should not be a disincentive for other racers to offer assistance. The current rule is a disincentive. If a racer offers assistance they: a) lose time and or position in the race b) risk being capsized by the racers already in the water in their effort to help and could consequently be DQ'ed
3.There should be some incentive and no penalty to racers offering assistance to racers in trouble.
4. Possible solutions to establish time &/or place for rescuing boats: a) Mark the amount of time to resolve the incident b) Mark other competitors at or near the rescuing boat(s) at the time of the incident c) Bonus time - incentive for making the rescue I have been in races where those racers in the vicinty of the incident "hold up" until the incident is resolved then restart in the pre-incident order so no advantage is taken or obtained by other racers over a racer who swims or provides assistance.
Our numbers are already small. If there is a drowning death, the sport will dry up and blow away. We need to care for our own!
|
|
|
Post by cdalton on Jul 28, 2012 11:26:29 GMT -5
I think the Kenduskeag race gets this right with ACA WWOC rules but the modification that
It's not uncommon for sports to have rules to deal with the fact that some guys would rather risk death than admit defeat. Do you let a player run back on the field after a concussion because he feels fine?
I agree with Jeff that it would feel wrong if an assisted boat defeated an unassisted boat, but given the inevitable delay of a swim, that's not going to happen very often.
|
|
|
Post by gfatula on Aug 3, 2012 10:26:23 GMT -5
Jeff has it right. Any competitor can choose to decline assistance. Deciding for them that they are no longer in control of their situation is inappropriate. Part of the sport is skill in handling the boat. Part of that skill is recovering from difficult situations. The "Kenduskeag rule" makes good sense in that race. Safety of swimmers comes first but not necessarily dealing with their inconvenience. We all swim.
|
|
|
Post by jmathieu on Aug 4, 2012 17:40:19 GMT -5
Let me be clear the context of my complaint about the assistance rule was from two flatwater, not whitewater races, where the paddlers were exposed to salt water and were a significant distance from shore. Both races were under an hour for most participants. Not everyone can do deepwater self rescues with a canoe. In my opinion, and this is an opinion, if someone swamped in these races and lost a minute or two, with or without assistance, and they were still able to pass those who did not swamp, I would not have a problem with that. I respect that some feel this assistance would not be fair. More than anything else, I would be more impressed with these paddlers. I have witnessed as many as a dozen boats swamp in a major race (not whitewater) close to the same time, and never did I hear anything about fairness when they were helped to get back in the race.
|
|