B5/G5 Passes AWSA Board...takes effect now!

JeffSurdej

Yesterday the AWSA Board passed the final stage of its migration to 2 year youth divisions by implementing B5/G5. The board also voted to make this change retroactive to the previous nationals so that it ties into the previously formed B4/G4 divisions.

So starting today B1/G1 remains U10, B2/G2 is U12, B3/G3 is U14, B4/G4 is U16, and B5/G5 is U18. The programming for this was released today so we would love more testing eyeballs to make sure everyone and their scores are correct. We still have some overall and qualification issues to work out but if anyone sees anything out of the ordinary please DM me so we have this 100% accurate before 2020 tourneys begin.

http://www.usawaterski.org/rankings/View-StandingsHQ.asp?pvar=National

sunperch

Looks like the Nationals schedule that was released earlier this week does not include B5/G5. When can we expect the revised schedule so we know when our kids ski?

JeffSurdej

@sunperch ill get on that but pretty sure the plan is to run it right after all the 4’s b/c that way the total numbers and times are not effected.

sunperch

@JeffSurdej Great, thanks!

sunperch

@JeffSurdej OK, sitting down with family and we are all confused......what is the max speed for the new B4 division? Is it 36mph like before???

JeffSurdej

@sunperch no changes in any slalom or jump, we simply took B4 (old old B3) and split it into 2 groups

JeffSurdej

@sunperch

ScarletArrow

While I think this is a great move, I would like to see the speeds changed so that B1-28mph, B2-30mph, B3-32mph, B4-34mph, B5-36mph.

I know it was probably considered and discussed; and can already be somewhat accomplished through ZBS; and I understand it would have brought about a different set of problems with past records.

I just think it makes sense because elite level juniors could always ski in a higher division if they wanted a higher max speed or more competition, but for the average skier in a tournament this feels like (subjectively) the right speed.

MattP

@ScarletArrow write a proposal.. feelings don’t make changes around here.

MrJones

This could go a bit further. What about Boys Alex, Girls Becky, etc, etc. We could just go ahead and order the trophies when dues are paid for the year.

Horton

@MrJones Funny-ish but I expect more concise objection from you. I am kicking myself for not making a bigger deal out of this rule change before it was voted on. I am pretty sure I am against it. My push back would have been that if we do not have full divisions already then more divisions means less competition. I missed my chance to push back so I really can't carp.

Bruce_Butterfield

Exhibit A
http://usawaterski.org/rankings/View-StandingsHQ.asp?pvar=Junior



With the new divisions, there are exactly 4 G2 in the entire Nation who have landed a jump in the last year. So any girl in that age group can show up at Nationals and get a placement - even if they can't ride out a jump. Oh and BTW, what is the qualification to go to Nationals for this division and event?

This is obviously the extreme example, but this change really waters down the competition. And it was implemented before any experience with the new B4/G4 divisions. Wouldn't it have been a reasonable idea to give B4/G4 a try for a year or 2 before diluting the kids events even more?

Another poorly thought out idea rammed through by a vocal minority. Sounds good on the surface, but if you give it a little thought, its really bad.

brettmainer

I am mostly with @Bruce_Butterfield on this, but not as vehemently. I get the idea of U10, U12, U14, U16 and U18, but there currently aren’t enough skiers to make local tournaments and even Regionals populated enough for such narrow divisions. However, perhaps it will encourage more participants who will now feel competitive in their divisions. I think B/G1, B/G2 and B/G3 were ok the way they were last year. Not everyone should medal every time. Those who want it enough will strive to get better, and those who do medal will feel more sense of accomplishment than just medaling for merely showing up.

MrJones

I agree. Here is my non funny (sarcastic) thought.

How does this make anything better? It is already largely this way, but this will solidify that Nationals will be the only event where there is any true competition. There will be several "divisions" at our regional JD and championship tournaments where there will be one or zero competitors.

If having fun is the goal, tournaments of any sort aren't needed. Go to the public lake or just have fun skiing against your friends and family at home. I see competition as something that should be challenging. To be worthwhile it must be difficult. You want to get better. You struggle. You persevere. You may or may not win but you grow and learn something about yourself.

Kids aren't stupid. It won't take long for them to realize standing up on a podium, by themselves, to receive their first place trophy is meaningless and will move along to the next hobby.

Bruce_Butterfield

@JeffSurdej would you mind pulling and posting the data for the number of entrants in all the 2019 Regional Championships by division and event for B/G1,2,3 and compare to what those entrants would be under the B/G1,2,3,4,5?

I suspect it will be enlightening and sure hope this was evaluated prior to the rules committee and the board voting on it.

unksskis

Same could be said for W3 and above, usually less than 5 compete in jump nationally.

Inboardfix

In our area the only tournaments where anyone gets awards are the States (other than Regionals and Nationals). My daughter started competing in 2011 and often was the only competitor in G1. In the following years a girl one year younger started being a regular so usually it was the 2 of them only all the way through G3/4. Sometimes there would be up to 4 in her division at the States. One time Mr. Jones' daughter came over to Ski Chaste to make it 3 G1 competitors at a non States but pretty sure that was the only time she competed against more than 1 other than States all the way through G3/G4.

My point is I don't see where much has changed with the new divisions and understand the hope in why the change was made. That hope is the new divisions will stimulate youth competitors to continue competing at the Regional/National level every year and not skip a couple years after moving up to the next division. During this gap in competing at the Reg/Nat level many skiers find other hobbies/alternatives to skiing. An additional hope is this will have a trickle down effect and stimulate kids to compete at local tournaments because they won't feel so overwhelmed competing against a kid 3 years older they know are out of their league (performance wise).

Will this change grow the youth divisions/sport? It will take years to know but it's worth a try. My daughter skipped at least one year participating at Regionals/Nationals every division change because she didn't really feel competitive and I didn't want to take time off work/lose money/time to have her be frustrated. We probably wouldn't have skipped those years if the divisions were as they are now.

@Sunperch I really don't understand why your surprised. I get confused every time I sit down for diner w/your family too.

JeffSurdej

@Bruce_Butterfield I have to call BS on this comment and give you a panda if I could

Another poorly thought out idea rammed through by a vocal minority.

I have to defend AWSA here, I don't know how we can be more transparent. We surveyed all members in which 77% were in favor. We then post all rules proposal publicly, including here on BOS, on December 1st, then each region has regional meetings in which members should have ample time to express concerns before it gets to national meetings, if you have a better way to make sure the skiing public knows about upcoming rules proposals please let me knows I'd be happy to implement them. You may not agree with the rule or how your region voted but the research and data that went into the reasoning behind it were well thought out and not rammed through.

Horton

I got to support @JeffSurdej on this one. As I said before I disagree with this rule change but we had the opportunity to talk about it and it was not a secret and there was not much discussion before the rules passed. We didn't talk about it the first time it came up so I don't think we have much ground to stand on bitching about it now.

MattP

Don’t forget that there will be more opportunities for skiers to ski Regionals and Nationals now through the State Championship podium LCQ.
Though I agree the divisions will be smaller and there will be an increased cost of medals.

JeffSurdej

Let me just spit out some comments to above threads. This is not about giving more awards, this is actually about INCREASING competition. Having 46 b3 skiers at nationals when the bottom half is 3 passes away from top half is NOT competition. Competition does not have to come from numbers, it comes from skiers skiing close to their age and ability. We have plenty of divisions such as W7-11 that don't warrant it by numbers but warrant it by age and physiological changes, same here for 14 year olds against 17 year olds. The facts are that the # of juniors skiers is declining year after year, data shows that skiers leave the sport or do not participate in the 1st 2 years of a new division, if we can make this change so that they are competitive maybe they stay in the sport, its worth a try, in my eyes it can not hurt. No 17 year old is going to quit the sport b/c he cant ski against a 14 year old or has to ski against 20 instead of 40 at nationals, but plenty of 14 years old might quit. yes I agree we dont have #'s and I wish we did but we don't have them locally now, I'm in m3 and I have not skied against anyone in 10 years locally. most of us ski against rankings b/c its the only way to have competition until our sport realizes we need ability based skiing or a handicap system in place to add competition but I don't want to get off track on this thread

Bruce_Butterfield

@JeffSurdej Sorry if my “poorly thought out” comment came across wrong. I know the majority of membership polled voted in favor if this idea and there was transparency. On the surface, 2 year age groups make sense - if you have a sufficiently large population. 3 event skiing does not have a very large population in the kids divisions. My speculation is that even those who voted in favor did not spend much time thinking about the negative side of only having a couple of kids in a given division/event. In that sense I stand by my opinion that this change is poorly thought out.

So to my request, how many of the new divisions will have 0-3 competitors at each regionals? And more importantly is that a good thing that will keep kids interested and grow the sport?

From being around alot of kid tournaments I think the chance of kids loosing interest is MUCH higher if there are few or no other kids to ski with/against than being at the bottom of a large group.

I hope I’m wrong.

unksskis

I would say kids are more likely to ski in a scarce division than an adult. Placing 3rd, out of 3, at my first tournament which was State, heavily influenced my interest and participation in skiing for LIFE.

Jody_Seal

This subject was discussed in depth at the southern region winter meeting. Pros and cons were discussed, many of the same discussion points from above were considered. Bottom line for the southern region the con outweighed the pros. It was pretty overwhelming a no vote from the regional counsel.
States and regions should at least have the levity to run the junior divisions in a manor that better fits their respective region and or state championships.
For the record this multi junior age division ideology has been kicked around for quite a few years now, so it is not a knee jerk policy.
Does it dilute the sport to some degree?
I think so. Having brought two juniors through the system I can recall my son as a pretty competitive 14 year old in all three events. I think having a bar set by the older boys in the division made him a better skier and competitor.
One of the ideas surrounding the age group change is that it will give younger skiers a chance to win. Like it or not there will be monsters on all these divisions that would have been competitive skiing with the older kids...Ann Gay skied open events as a 14 year old... just saying..

sunperch

My 17yo G3, scratch that, G4, scrach that, G5 skier said she wants to quit skiing because it is becoming a joke with all of the rule changes. She is choosing to swim in college instead of skiing where qualifications and results are evident and consistent.

MattP

@sunperch NCWSA/collegiate skiing is completely different. There is only 1 division and the rules don’t change that much. It’s the most fun on the water. She will more than likely be a skier the rest of her life if she does it. Don’t let a few rule changes change her outlook on the sport. The intention is good from the powers that be.

Personally I voted against this rule change.

sunperch

@MattP She has witnessed collegiate skiing since she was born at her lake and is well aware of what it looks like. All of the rules changes have undermined the integrity of the sport no matter what the intentions behind the changes are. My kids have participated in many sports and I have never seen other sports change rules based on kids' feelings.

MattP

@JeffSurdej ^^

@sunperch well that’s unfortunate. I feel like she should take a different approach to it if she wants to ski in college. Our sport is not like most where the officials and officers are actual competitors in the sport and have athletes representation at all levels of governance. Not may sports can say that. I never seen feelings change the rules in any council or board meeting.

JeffSurdej

@sunperch only time will tell if it will work, I know numbers of juniors is declining now, we have to try something, i know almost all sports have gone to 1-2 year age groups so I would assume most sports have gone through this recently, I know there has been a lot of rule changes over the recent years, I'll take the blame on that for sure. I became president to try and change the sport, and although rules is not the main way to do it I felt there was a lot of ways to make the sport better through rules changes. ZBS, mini course, L10, new age groups, team skiing, gotta try right. Maybe others sports don't change rules b/c they figured it out over the years, I feel we are way behind the evolution of sport and how to adapt to today's society. Anyways anytime you do this stuff you have hundreds that love it and hundreds that hate it, cant make them all happy

Jody_Seal

I am not sure what all the sports have gone to 2 year age groups means.
Just did a quick google.
Swimming and wrestling were the only two I found that are utilizing 2 year age divisions. Funny they just announced a age group change also.
Baseball , football and basket ball was a mish mash with 8 and under 10 and under and then any thing from 3 year age groups to 4 year age group for the older juniors 17/18 and under
Just a thought usa wrestling, aau swimming are affiliated with usoc! Hmm!!

JeffSurdej

I think the perfect situation we should have done was 3 groups of 3 years. 10-12,13-15, 16-18 maybe.