Qualification
Comments about this discussion:
Started
In the main committee there has been a lot of talk about standardizing language around "Expert" and "Finals." We would like to see a more consistent approach to this. Right now, Freestyle is somewhat unique in that riders select their category when they register. They decide whether to compete in Age Group, Junior Expert, or Expert. However, I would be curious about changing this approach to a qualifications and a final round. It sounds like Germany already does this with success. I will copy Jan's words from the main committee.
Yes. In the freestyle events in Germany, all participants start in their respective age group in a preliminary round (currently age group competitions U11, U13 and U15 in the junior sector and U17, U19, U21, U23, U25 and 25+ in the senior sector are offered in Germany). There will then be a ranking within the age group to determine the age group winners. In addition to the ranking per age group, there will be a joint ranking across all three junior age groups, from which the best 5 participants qualify for the junior final. The senior age groups are currently divided into two preliminary groups (U17, U19 and U21 is one group and U23, U25 and 25+ the other), where the best 4 of each preliminary group qualify for a joint final, in which the champions are then determined.
I think the big advantage of this system is that really the best riders of a event actually make it to the final and that still all riders have the chance to compete against athletes of the same age in their age group at the same time, so there is not as much of a break as with the system where you have to choose between either Expert or the age group.
The system with the age groups and the subsequent qualification for the (junior) final has been used in Germany for at least 15 years now and at that time, I think Ryan Woessner was IUF President at the time, it was also approved by the IUF for using at events according to IUF rules.
What do others think about doing something like this at Unicon? I would be curious to know some more of the specifics (particularly around routine time limit and how the joint ranking system works). Is there support in moving towards this format?
Comment
Let me clarify this: It started (or should have) as an experiment in around ~2010 or so (I think it was accepted as an experiment by the IUF). The problem germany needed some sort of qualification from lowest to highest national level, since the IUF didn't have (and still has no) qualification system. Its a hack to cope with the fact IUF rules provide no qualification mechanism. I never heard about any proper report back to the IUF about this experiment.
I filed Scalable Competitions: From Newcomer to Unicon already (which contains my thought around this). For Freestyle the next higher competition is the final to those before, and Unicon is the final in freestyle amongst all country nationals.
In germany this weird system is now established as I think history around this has been lost. I wouldn't even expect germans to understand why its here. It is taken established, and many not knowing it differently (they never experienced sth different). In defense it is very hard to work out a good functioning solution, and why bother if there is something (or keen to even try). It's not even working good, but it is doing its job - the sport suffered from its introduction (even though necessary).
Also there is many reasons against this:
- Freestyle is no tournament (in comparison to eg. flatland), there is no need for finals.
- The system exists because of expert vs age group weirdness.
- Finals are the necessary bridge to Unicon (and nominate riders for unicon expert).
- Freestyle (among many other technical-compositorical sports) remains the element of surprise in routines. That factor is gone if a routine is done a second time. The beauty is lost, charme is gone.
- It's like when a magician explains a trick to you, then performs it.
- In terms of sport motorical tests, this is test (qualifier) and retention-test (final), and a selected group of people is put up for a retention test (aka: please do the magic trick, that you now explained to everybody, again).
- You no longer sign up for either age group or expert, it is only expert (and every routine is 4minutes rsp 3minutes for junior), which stretches the whole event.
I'm 1000% against this, as this will make freestyle boring and this is certainly not what we want.
Instead there are many other problems, that are much more worth adressing:
- how to qualify from one competition to the next higher?
- have rules separated for unicon, that contain qualification rules?
- how to make groups work within classes to have a transition possible from lowest level up to the highest?
- Unicon championship competitions vs. "community" competitions (I need to file that one)
These are all more pressing topics. All this will make this discussion a no-op :)
Comment
I would also like to share some thoughts about that. Years ago, every association in Germany had their own competitions in freestyle. There were two German Championships and so on. The associations did not work together. About five years ago this changed. The associations wanted to work out a concept to do competitions together. It was clear, that we needed a qualification system because of the amount of riders. We started with a system, that worked out in the end but had some problems in the beginning. Every year from that on the concept was revised (also according to the responses and feedback we received from the riders, coaches, judges and so on), to improve small aspects of it. In the end now I would say, that it works pretty well and I don't agree, that it makes our sport boring. Many riders see it as a big honor to be able to show their routine again in a final. In my case, I can watch an extraordinary routine many times and I still enjoy it.
The routine time is still 3min for Junior and 4min for Expert, but in my opinion, this can be discussed. We are able to fit this event with all categories (prelimimiaries and finals) in one weekend but it is very stressful. Time is still a problem in this concept. We found some small solutions to save some time but I am not sure, if they would work for Unicon.
To sum up, I would be very happy to have some kind of preliminary/final system at Unicon. It doesn't have to be the German System but maybe we can take aspects of it, as it is tested in practice for the last 5 years.
Comment
> Let me clarify this: It started (or should have) as an experiment in around ~2010 or so (I think it was accepted as an experiment by the IUF). The problem germany needed some sort of qualification from lowest to highest national level, since the IUF didn't have (and still has no) qualification system. Its a hack to cope with the fact IUF rules provide no qualification mechanism. I never heard about any proper report back to the IUF about this experiment.
I wouldn't say that the system was introduced because a qualification system was needed at national level - at the time it was introduced there was no qualification from the lowest to the highest level in Germany.
Instead, the system was introduced because athletes and organizers found it absolutely unsatisfactory that everyone could decide for themselves whether they wanted to start in the Expert or in Age Groups, because this meant that the best athletes did not always start in the Expert. However, if good athletes sign up for Age Groups because it is easier to win something here, then this reduces the level of the Expert class, which is unsatisfactory. After all, the best riders should compete for titles and not just those who have registered for this. And I believe that this problem was solved very effectively with the system of preliminaries and a finals and has proven itself to this day, which is why it is still used in Germany after 15 years.
> In germany this weird system is now established as I think history around this has been lost. I wouldn't even expect germans to understand why its here. It is taken established, and many not knowing it differently (they never experienced sth different).
I have already mentioned the reasons above why this system is still used: It is absolutely unsatisfactory to award championship titles in a group for which you register or not. Championship titles should be awarded among the best (of a class) at a championship and this only works if all starters at a championship have the opportunity to be among the best. And that is exactly for what the system used in Germany works very well.
> In defense it is very hard to work out a good functioning solution, and why bother if there is something (or keen to even try). It's not even working good, but it is doing its job - the sport suffered from its introduction (even though necessary).
The system may by no means be perfect - I don't think anyone is saying that - but I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of athletes and coaches in Germany are of the opinion that the system is much better than the system prescribed in the rulebook, where athletes have to choose between Age Group and Expert when registering to a competition. I would also say that the vast majority of athletes and coaches in Germany are of the opinion that this system works very well and that is why they are sticking to it. Because if it wouldn't work well, then people would think about exactly how the system could be changed and improved.
Comment
I generally agree with Gossi.
Unicycling freestyle is ARTISTIC freestyle. we need to protecct "artistic" part.
If age groups are to be treated as qualifiers, the most important issue is the judging system.
UNICON attracts competitors of different styles from all over the world. You have to consider that it is different from national competitions where riders compete in similar styles.
(I have judged both Japanese competitions and Unicon, and you know that only Japanese riders' competitions are much easier to judge than Unicon!)
At present, judges are collected on a volunteer basis, and with the level of judges varying from country to country and category to category, it is dangerous to treat age groups as qualifiers.
At the flat land, the same judges judge the qualifiers and the final tounament, right?
If the correct level of judges are selected from each country and the judges do not change throughout the competition, then I can agree that age groups should be treated as qualifiers.
Then we can finally discuss Gossi's opinion and consider other issues such as time issues.