Unicon "Leagues"

This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.

Comments about this discussion:

Started 25 Jun 07:56

A new word for something we already have, that is a special case only for Unicon (I guess ?) and only affects these:

Artistic Freestyle: Expert vs. Age Group
Hockey: A vs. B Tournament
Basketball: A vs. B Tournament

In one you win world champion title, the other rewards you as winner.

The reason being:

Unicon is a great place to try out different disciplines (B Tournament, for fun)
You start in group freestyle, so you do in (age group) freestyle (since you are already at Unicon) and enjoy international participants (competitive but no championship title)

Or watch me talk about it:

- Video
- Slides

That is either of two "leagues" requires a qualification (freestyle) or in the case of team sport a very good explanation/condition on which one to enter. Even I personally could not name a good difference between A vs. B tournament in basketball, only a good feeling I should enter the B tournament. And a feeling always is a very bad indicator.

Same in Freestyle we have the case right now: Unicon is announced but freestylers are left with void on who or how many will be allowed to enter the age group competition and under what condition.

So in both cases there needs to be some rules to explain that, to fill the void and to close the loop from: you compete at national level(s) and want to know how to get to worlds.

I see it as an addition to be added to a Unicon Rulebook but was coming here to have a discussion about the name itself as I used "leagues" for explaining the concept but that doesn't make me happy.

My best attempt is:

Championship Competition
Convention Competition

Comment 25 Jun 08:13

To be honest, I have the impression that the term Expert was introduced at some point for exactly what you call “leagues”. In Expert level Competitions/Contests you can win a world champion title, the others (non Expert level Competitions/Contests) rewards you as winner.

At least in this context, the distinction between Expert and non Expert would make the most sense to me in order to differentiate between precisely these two “leagues”/levels of a Unicon. However, “leagues” seems to me to be a strange term for differentiating between these two competition levels.

Comment 25 Jun 08:24

Yep, Expert is older than me in the sport, I have no trace for that word. But today it is better to express difficulty/skill level, so we need a better one to express what it is being used for.

I'm not a fan of "leagues" either, but it was the best to explain it. For those not watching the video:

The concept of "leagues" I borrowed from soccer, where in europe each national league the best three teams can play in championship league the next season and teams 4-6 play in europa league the next season.

I'm certainly happy for a good term here :]

Comment 25 Jun 08:36

> But today it is better to express difficulty/skill level, so we need a better one to express what it is being used for.

I honestly don't know exactly what you mean by that? In my understanding, Expert / non Expert is used precisely to differentiate between the two competition levels you call “leagues”... so I also assumed that it was introduced for this differentiation.
Of course, it does not represent a generic term for the competition levels, as is the case with “leagues” - but the question is also whether we really need a generic term here?

Comment 25 Jun 11:56

This is a good topic, covering something that works but is a little wonky. The way we use Expert works, but doesn't have a good opposite word. In our usage, Expert implies not only that you're "really good" at something, but that you feel you are among the very best at a given competition/championship. That works for individual events, but not necessarily for team or group events.

How about expressing it in these two words:
- Championship (Class): Competes for world/national/event overall titles
- Competitor (Class): Competes for lower level titles/accolades

"Competitor" is not my favorite choice of word. Among other things, it looks/sounds too much like Championship (depending on the language). I'm sure we can find something better, that doesn't diminish the efforts of those athletes. For example, I love competing in Group B basketball because it's fun! I get to have a great time competing and there is still the possibility to win an award. That's very much in the spirit of our sport as I've known it over the years; we are "playing" these "games" for fun, and this method works for everyone from total beginners up to elite riders setting world records. So far, our sport still strongly encourages participation, more than just picking out the top athletes. I hope it stays that way for a long time.

The "Championhsip" label is also open for better words. "Elite" comes to mind, but I wouldn't want to scare people off either. For new riders it can be hard to know in which group to enter.

Another approach:
Title Class vs. Medal Class? In Title class you may win overall titles. In Medal class there are still awards to be won. Another option could also be Title Class vs. Award Class. We will need our linguists to help with how these will translate. :-)

Comment 25 Jun 16:08

Right now the league concept, in comparison to other sports, doesn't really work as there is not much continuation between tournaments. In the case of basketball, all teams are free to select which level they want to compete at and while we are considering adding rules to define how teams in the A tournament would be selected in practice this has not been an issue, we also can't really force teams from the B tournament to the A tournament (does hockey or freestyle force past winners to compete in the next level).

Comment 25 Jun 16:53

I agree with Joshua that "league" isn't very fitting.

I also agree with Jan that some disciplines already have a term for this:

Muni (Unicon): Beginner, Intermediate/Advanced, Elite for Unicon
Muni (most European national muni competitions): Beginner (sometimes Standard), Expert
Teams: A/B/(C)
Freestyle: Age Group, Expert
OR Freestyle by (Category): Novice, Intermediate, Expert

So the first question would be: Is it necessary to have the same unified terms for various disciplines?

I think the Muni terms work well, and I also think A/B/(C) is very clear for team sports.

Even though Freestyle defines the possibility of three levels in the IUF Rulebook, I think Unicon usually only has age group and Expert.

One advantage to not defining it at the top level, if that it allows each discipline/event to decide if there are one, two or three levels.

If we decide to define top level terms, I would be for:

Novice, Intermediate, Expert

However, Beginner and Elite have been used for Muni for the last few Unicons. And Beginner is pretty established in Muni.

I just checked the Rulebook, and Muni in fact already defines Beginner, Intermediate, Elite and Marathon, but primarily as course length.

I think my preference would be to leave it to individual events to define their own terms (so not explicitly add to the rulebook). As otherwise, the Rulebook would need to be modified in a number or places, e.g. Muni.

Comment 26 Jun 01:20

> So the first question would be: Is it necessary to have the same unified terms for various disciplines?

I think the big problem is that when different terms are used in different disciplines, it is extremely difficult to understand what the different terms actually mean and why these different levels exist. That's why I think our sport would benefit if we used a standardized concept here.

> One advantage to not defining it at the top level, if that it allows each discipline/event to decide if there are one, two or three levels.

I think that even if we define a standardized system for the competition levels, this does not automatically mean that all levels are always offered. However, it would mean that if different levels are offered, these levels would always be named uniformly and thus it would be easy to understand and directly recognizable across disciplines which level it is.

> How about expressing it in these two words:
- Championship (Class): Competes for world/national/event overall titles
- Competitor (Class): Competes for lower level titles/accolades

First of all, I would agree that it would probably be sufficient to define two competition levels in the rulebook - this would cover the fact that there is one level in which titles can be won and there can optionally be another level in which no titles can be won. From my point of view, Championship Level/Class or Expert for the one level would make sense. I don't think Competitor Class /Level is good, because all riders in a competition are competitors, so the name is somehow confusing.

> Title Class vs. Medal Class? In Title class you may win overall titles. In Medal class there are still awards to be won. Another option could also be Title Class vs. Award Class.

I also find the terms confusing, because there are also medals and awards at level where you can win titles.

If I had to suggest two terms, I would either go with the existing terms Novice/Beginner and Expert or something like Convention and Expert.

Comment 27 Jun 04:16

Discussing this with Ian yesterday, my view on Muni starts was wrong and he happily corrected me. That also means Muni falls into here as well. I would be with classes by Jon if they weren't already discussed here. I was using tiers already but didn't write it down here.

Championship Tier

Only competitions held in championship tiers are allowed to award championship titles. For Unicon the mandatory ones are mentioned in 1C.2. Competitions might be limited. Currently they fall under this tier by naming affixes, such as Expert, Elite or A tournament. However, they don't need any affix in their name at all (see next section). It goes by this (and one sample championship title)

(Individual, Pair, Group) Artistic Freestyle -> Individual Freestyle World Champion
Muni Downhill -> Downhill World Champion
Hockey -> Hockey World Champion
Basketball -> Basketball World Champion

Convention Tier(s)

In contrast are convention tiers, where competitors will not be awarded with championship titles. They will still be the winner of course and the competitions can be limited. The convention tiers (as the name suggest) support the convention aspect of an Event and in case of Unicon allow for an international competitor field.

The name must clearly indicate this is NOT a championship level of competition and in fact is some lower form of it. For example "Advanced" would make it sound more than championship level and is discouraged. Ian and me had "Intermediate" in mind, as it would indicate that intent.

An example:

- Intermediate Muni -> 1st place U17 Intermediate Muni Downhill

I'll throw in "Intermediate" and "Beginner" as terms.

---

With the addition of Muni, it would no longer be a Unicon only rule. Also with Muni it brings in the plural for convention tierS.

It is also very important to note, that this will go into the press (and in the past germany had plenty world champions but they actually only won age group). So marketing and perception of the sport comes with that to.

Signup lets you choose one of these tiers. In case this is a limited competition (freestyle), you must be nominated (this can come in later though). After choosing your tier, you can further select a difficulty level (eg in Muni)

Comment 02 Jul 01:35

I would also be fine with dropping the term Expert completely. For me, however, it would also be okay if the level at which championship titles are awarded continues to be called Expert (because that's what it was traditionally called) and we simply introduce an additional term for the “Non-Expert” level. As I said, I would be fine with the terms Novice/Beginner/Convention.
Whether these levels are called Competition Levels or Competition Tiers I don't have a strong opinion on this. I think "Level" might be easier to understand for non-nativ speakers, but I would also agree to "Tiers".

Comment 03 Jul 05:28

As the term Expert is already established in many disciplines and works well, I see no advantage to switching to something else like "tier".

I agree with Jan, that a it would be preferable to consider a minor extension to more clearly and uniformly describe the non-Expert levels, as the disciplines define this somewhat differently and inconsistently.

As preparation, I have searched the 2019 rules for uses of Beginner/Intermediate/Expert/Elite/Novice and Expert is indeed defined and clear:

1A.4: the term `World Champions' generally refers to winners of Overall, Finals or Expert class.

Winners in the Expert category of each event at Unicon are the World Champions. In
the individual events, separate titles are awarded for male and female. Winners in the
Jr. Expert category at Unicon are the Junior World Champions

1D.1 Definitions

Expert: The top category in events that don't have a system to determine Finalists.
When no other limitations are present, riders can choose to compete in this category
against the other top riders. Limitations on this may be if top riders are chosen at
previous competitions, such as national events, or if there is a limit on the number of
competitors per country. The category is called Expert, and riders entered in it can be
called Experts. The distinction of Experts over Finalists is that they are not chosen
based on competition results at the current convention.

Junior Expert: Same as Expert, but open only to riders age 0-14. Riders in this age range
may optionally enter Expert instead, to compete in the highest/hardest category.

Muni XC 4D.1.3: Beginner/Intermediate/Elite/Marathon

Muni Downhill 4D1.2: Beginner/(Expert)

Muni Uphill 4D.1.1.: Beginner/Advanced/Expert

Muni 4D.4: Elite is also used as an age category 19-29

Cyclecross 5B.2: Beginner/Intermediate/Elite

Freestyle 6B.7: Novice/Intermediate/Expert and age group (Age Group, Junior
Expert, and Expert)

X-Style 8D.5: Intermediate (top category not defined but implicitly Expert)

Flatland 9D.4: Categories
Male and female competitions should be ordered in each of the following categories: Junior
Expert (0-14), and Expert (15+). The Advanced category is optional however it is not
allowed at Unicon.

Street 10D.4: Categories
Male and female competitions should be ordered in each of the following categories: Junior
Expert (0-14), and Expert. The Advanced category is optional however it is not allowed
at Unicon.

Trails 11.D.9 11: Beginner/Expert

We could consider defining up to 3 levels Novice/Intermediate/Expert or Beginner/Intermediate/Expert. However, as Beginner is well established in Muni and Cyclocross (and beneficial as it is so labeled to encourage unicyclists from other disciplines to try muni), but I think the term Novice is generally better, I would propose keeping Beginner in addition to Novice, so these 3 levels/categories:

Lowest category: Novice/Beginner: relatively new unicyclists who compete primarily for just for fun such as younger or beginning unicyclists

Middle category: Intermediate : more experienced unicyclists that cannot or do not desire to compete at the top level

Top category: Expert: top category connected to title `World Champions'

Or we just introduce the term Novice and define as all non-Expert levels such as Beginner, Intermediate and Advanced, proposal:

Novice: Any category below the Expert category of top unicyclists such as the categories Beginner, Intermediate or Advanced that does not incur the title `World Champion' but only age group or category winners in which unicyclists can compete at a lower level of competition against unicyclists of similar skill.

I think I most favor simply adding the term Novice and then considering if the Muni rules should be updated to consistently use Expert instead of Elite (Expert is already used in many national muni events) and Elite is also an age group in muni, so I would be in favor of making that clearer in any case.

Comment 04 Jul 02:09

> I think I most favor simply adding the term Novice and then considering if the Muni rules should be updated to consistently use Expert instead of Elite (Expert is already used in many national muni events) and Elite is also an age group in muni, so I would be in favor of making that clearer in any case.

I would agree to that.

I think the term Competition Level/Tier would still be an option if we want to have a generic term for the two levels Novice and Expert.

Comment 04 Jul 16:38

Current proposal:

1D.1 Definitions

Comment 05 Jul 12:39

@John Foss "This is a good topic, covering something that works but is a little wonky" :)

I agree that it is little wonky, but it works.

I would not agree with proposed definition of Novice. "Novice" suggests that someone is new - it's basically another word to beginner. It doesn't fit to intermediate or senior competitors who cannot compete in expert category.

Comment 05 Jul 13:17

@Maksym: You're right that novice is not ideal as it does roughly mean beginner (Novice was originally suggested above in the context of 3 levels with Novice/Intermediate/Expert), but I couldn't think of a better term. What is really needed is something that means "not expert", but most of the options like beginner or intermediate specify a more specific skill level.

Amateur is another option that is pretty close, although it technically means not professional, as in not being paid. I do think that the rulebook would benefit from a term for non-expert. Other suggestions? Or what do you think about amateur/expert as the two categories?

Comment 07 Jul 01:51

Earlier in the discussion, the term “Convention Level/Tier” was also brought into the discussion, which bypasses the aspect that someone new is participating there. Leaving out the level/tier term here is of course somewhat difficult, as “Convention” does not refer as clearly to a competition level as “Novice/Beginner”. But maybe “Convention Level/Tier” would be the best way?

Comment 08 Jul 09:33

Another possible word to replace Novice or Intermediate: Normal.

Kind of boring, but it has been used to describe the "intermediate" Muni courses at past Unicons. It doesn't "judge" or imply a low level of skill, but does imply that it's not the top category.

I'm okay with being Normal. :-)

Comment 08 Jul 11:41

Tier I don't like much, mainly as it implies 3 or more.

Convention Level ist okay, although a bit long, as I think both terms would be required.

And John's suggestion for Normal actually sounds pretty good:

Normal/Expert

Comment 08 Jul 16:10

Regular?

Comment 09 Jul 08:51

Regular is also good.

Another option would be Standard. Standard is already often used in some national muni competitions in Europe where there are only two categories, e.g. the Italian Muni Turnier offers Standard and Expert courses for DH, Cross-country and Uphill. But it could be an advantage or a disadvantage to use a term already in use.

I would be fine with Normal/Expert, Regular/Expert or Standard/Expert.

Comment 09 Jul 09:50

> Another option would be Standard.

I don't think that would be a good choice because it would be in direct clash with the Standard category that exists in many races, especially road races (there are Standard and Unlimited). “Normal” and “Regular” are also quite similar to “Standard” but at least they are different words.

I started thinking again about where there are different competition levels and I think it really mainly concerns the Unicon or similar competitions, where there is also a large convention part. That's why “convention level” still doesn't seem so unthinkable to me for the non-expert level. At the same time, the “Expert Level” would actually be the normal or regular level for a large part of the competitions, which is why the term “Normal” and “Regular” seems strange to me for the non-expert level.

Comment 09 Jul 12:05

It's pretty difficult topic for me, because I don't really understand the use of those divisions (or leagues).
But my answer would be:

2 leagues:
Championship Competition (Expert)
Convention Competition (Beginners + Intermediate)

But then I am little confused: How would the 10k race be classified? Would it be announced as a Championship and Convention Competition?

In respects to performance levels:
3 levels: Beginner + Intermediate + Expert
or if it is 2 levels that it may be used: Beginners or Beginners&Intermediate or Intermediate + expert, depending on the discipline.

Would it be OK if there are always 3 performance levels listed, without respect if there are 1, 2 or 3 separate competitions?

For example
Basketball A (expert) + Basketball B (Intermediate + Beginners)
10k (expert, intermediate, beginners)
Marathon (expert+intermediate)
Muni DH Qualifications (expert+intermediate) + Muni DH Beginners
Trial (expert + intermediate) + Trial (beginners)

This would more or less suggest where the competitors should sign on based on their performance level. Perhaps this would the participants who attend the convention for the first time.

Comment 09 Jul 13:32

[Maksym] Would it be OK if there are always 3 performance levels listed, without respect if there are 1, 2 or 3 separate competitions?

Actually, I really like this suggestion with Beginner/Intermediate/Expert, and the examples from Maksym show that it is quite good (I prefer the singular case for Beginner).

I agree that this would also help in registration, for example as a newbie may not know that Hockey A is for top riders only while Hockey C (if offered, I think Unicon Grenoble) is for Beginners.

And the labels are in a sense optional in that there is no requirement to separate by performance category (although may be separated where it makes sense as in team sports, muni, etc.):

For the events without separate courses/groups like road, then the categories can be combined in the listing/description to indicate that all performance levels can participate (e.g. 10k), or as in Marathon, no Beginner category at all, as Beginners should generally not even attempt the distance.

As Expert is already defined as the "top category" in the rulebook, I would suggest keeping this terminology with category, perhaps adding performance to become performance category.

Intermediate: The performance category below Expert for experienced riders who cannot or do not desire to compete at the top level.

Beginner: The lowest performance category for relatively new riders who compete primarily for just for fun and desire a course or competition that is shorter and/or less difficult.

These terms work well with the existing sections of the IUF Rulebook:

1A.4: the term `World Champions' generally refers to winners of Overall, Finals or Expert class.

1D.1 Definitions

Junior Expert: Same as Expert, but open only to riders age 0-14. Riders in this age range
may optionally enter Expert instead, to compete in the highest/hardest category.

Comment 10 Jul 02:43

> It's pretty difficult topic for me, because I don't really understand the use of those divisions (or leagues).

I will try to explain it:
In some unicycling disciplines (especially Muni, hockey and basketball) there are often mor than one level at competitions, of which titles are only awarded at the highest level. Riders must therefore decide at the time of registration whether they want to ride at the level at which titles are awarded or not.
To ensure that it is clear to everyone which competition level they are registering for, standardized terms should be used here.

> But then I am little confused: How would the 10k race be classified? Would it be announced as a Championship and Convention Competition?

In all Track and Road Racing Events there is usually only one Level, so everyone who is signing up for an event can theoretically win a title. In this case all events would be at the level at which titles are awarded ("Championship" as you called it).
If no titels are awarded in one of the events I would classify it as the other level (Convention as you called it).

> This would more or less suggest where the competitors should sign on based on their performance level. Perhaps this would the participants who attend the convention for the first time.

This would be a new aspect, as the performance levels in this case would really only be a guide for riders as to which of the competition levels they should register for. I don't know if we really need something like this in our rules or if this is something that the organizers, who offer multiple competition levels, should explain in their communication with the riders. In other words, which performance level they recommend for which of the competition levels at their specific competition.
As I said, for the majority of competitions only one level is offered for most events anyway, which is why I would not be in favor of adding any additions here. I think that just makes start and result lists confusing.

> As Expert is already defined as the "top category" in the rulebook, I would suggest keeping this terminology with category, perhaps adding performance to become performance category.

Yes, but in Maksym's example, Expert is a performance category that helps riders to assess at which competition level they should register. I think using it as a competition level and a performance category at the same time is unfavorable - because that's exactly what happens every day and that always leads to confusion.

My proposal would be:

Championship Level: The Championship Level is the highest competition level of a competition. Only contests at Championship Level may award championship titles. Championship Level contests are usually defined without any affix in their name at all.

Convention Level: The Convention Level is a competition level where no championship titles will be awarded. The Convention Level supports the convention aspect of an competition to allow for a broader field of participants. Convention Level contests must clearly indicate their affiliation to the Convention Level by a corresponding affix in their name.

Comment 10 Jul 03:42

Thanks to Jan for explanation.

Jan> I think using it as a competition level and a performance category at the same time is unfavorable - because that's exactly what happens every day and that always leads to confusion.

Can you explain how does it lead to confusion?

Comment 14 Jul 08:44

@Maksym: You gave the example above that in different disciplines different performance levels are eligible for the top level (let's call it championship level). In track racing or road racing, there is usually only one competition level, which means that it would be the right competition level for all performance levels from beginner to expert. If the level was not called “Championship Level”, for example, but ‘Expert’, this would mean that the other performance levels would also register for the “Expert” level. In my opinion, this would make it extremely difficult for riders to understand whether “Expert” refers to the recommended performance level or to the competition level. I therefore think the two aspects should be clearly separated and also use different terms and not use “Expert” once as a performance level and once as a competition level (which may also include other skill levels).

Comment 18 Jul 06:28

Initially I thought this only applies to Unicon.

As the discussions(s) progresses (including other discussions, not only this one), it has shown, that this has more appliances and as such is a good addition. Here are other cases where it applies:

German Muni nationals
Freestyle in US

Comment 18 Jul 09:38

I think there will definitely be some competitions where there are these two levels - the level at which titles are being competed for and a level which is intended more as a convention level and at which no titles are awarded. So I think a clear and unambiguous indication of these levels would be helpful.

Comment 20 Jul 07:35

I have tried to find out which rules in section 1 would be affected by the introduction of the competition levels and to summarize all necessary adjustments in one proposal.

Please give me your feedback on whether the proposal is suitable for you.

Comment 23 Jul 11:20

Your proposal seems ok. Thank you Jan. Just two small remarks about the last definition:

Convention Level: The Convention Level is a competition level where no championship titles will be awarded. The Convention Level supports the convention aspect of an competition to allow for a broader field of participants. Convention Level contests must clearly indicate their affiliation to the Convention Level by a corresponding affix in their name.

"of an competition" should be "of a competition"
It might be good to give few examples (one team sport, one freestyle, one muni) because I'm not sure what affix you have in mind.

Comment 23 Jul 14:00

> "of an competition" should be "of a competition"

I fixed that :)

> It might be good to give few examples (one team sport, one freestyle, one muni) because I'm not sure what affix you have in mind.

I had in mind that these competitions simply have Convention in the name, e.g. “Individual Freestyle - Convention”.

Comment 23 Jul 16:08

Just a few grammar and spelling corrections as well as rewording (not intended to change the meaning):

(the phrasing "final or final-/overall-ranking" is pretty awkward, although I understand what is meant: either events with a final race like track or criterium or those without like Muni Cross Country. I suggest "final or overall ranking of contests" although maybe someone has a better wording).

"Affix" means something different in English (to stick or glue, e.g. a label on a package), so corrected to prefix.

And "designation" for a title sounds better than "defined".

Sorry Jan, please don't take my corrections personally but in the interest of clarity, the grammar and usage in the proposal should be as perfect as possible.

1A.4 World Champions

1. For each individual event~~, which~~ that is held at championship level at Unicon, World Champions are determined in the classes and gender categories of the respective event.
2. For classes other than the Adult class, the World Champion title is preceded by the corresponding class name, e.g. Junior World Champion.
3. Only ~~the~~ winners of the respective ~~final or final-/overall-ranking~~ final or overall ranking of contests of in ~~the~~ championship level events at Unicon ~~may call themselves~~ are designated as "World Champions", respectively "World Champions" preceded by the corresponding class name. Age-group winners may use the term “Age-Group Winner”, but this does not refer to a World Championship title.

Championship Level: The Championship Level is the highest competition level of a competition. Championship titles are only awarded from finals or overall rankings in contests at Championship Level ~~may award championship titles~~. Other than the exception Junior, Championship Level designations ~~contests~~ are usually defined without any preaffix in their name ~~at all~~.

Convention Level: The Convention Level is a competition level ~~where~~ in which no championship titles ~~will be~~ are awarded. The Convention Level supports the convention aspect of a competition to allow for a broader field of participants who cannot or do not desire to compete at the highest level. Convention Level contests must clearly indicate their affiliation to the Convention Level by a corresponding preaffix or suffix ~~in their name~~ to the title.

Comment 24 Jul 03:42

Thank you Nathan for the intensive review of the proposal - as a non-native speaker I'm always happy when someone who speaks English very good looks over my suggestions. I don't think my English is that good.

> the phrasing "final or final-/overall-ranking" is pretty awkward, although I understand what is meant: either events with a final race like track or criterium or those without like Muni Cross Country. I suggest "final or overall ranking of contests" although maybe someone has a better wording

Basically, I would prefer to use only the terms final or final ranking for something that is used as the basis for awarding championship titles. The reason for this is that an "overall ranking" is more general and could also be used in places where it is not about awarding championship titles. However, I am of the opinion that a special wording should be used wherever championship titles are explicitly involved, and that this wording should not be used anywhere else.
The reason why I have left the term “overall” in the proposal so far is that the term “overall” is probably still used in some sections of the rulebook and I didn't want to delete the reference completely right now. In the long term, however, I would actually like to stop using the term “overall” here in 1A.4.

Do you see any problem with the term final-ranking / final ranking at all?

> "Affix" means something different in English (to stick or glue, e.g. a label on a package), so corrected to prefix.

Thanks for pointing that out, I will correct it.

> Other than the exception Junior, Championship Level designations ~~contests~~ are usually defined without any preaffix in their name ~~at all~~.

That is no longer exactly what I wanted to say. “Junior” or “Adult” are class names that of course can be added just like age groups or gender categories when naming a contest (e.g. 100m Female Junior Final, Individual Freestyle Female U19). What I wanted to say with that sentence is that there is no need to add a suffix to the contests to indicate that it is a championship level contest - so no need to write e.g. 100m Championship Female Junior Final, Individual Freestyle Championship Female U19.

Comment 24 Jul 03:59

> Convention Level contests must clearly indicate their affiliation to the Convention Level by a corresponding preaffix or suffix ~~in their name~~ to the title.

Another question: you suggested replacing “in their name” with “to the title”. That seems a bit strange to me, because otherwise “title” always refers to a (championship) title and I therefore find it more logical to talk about "names" here.

Comment 30 Jul 06:52

Where are the native speakers here in the committee? I didn't incorporate all of Nathan's comments, as some of them didn't seem logical to me or would have changed the meaning of the rule in my opinion. It would be good if someone could comment on this again.

Comment 12 Aug 03:20

Since we have not really reached a consensus on the terms in the other discussions, I have adapted this proposal so that it makes sense without defining new terms in the rulebook, i.e., I have removed the term “contest” in particular and adapted the remaining terms to the old, existing rule. I therefore hope that this proposal will receive the necessary approval, as I have the impression that there is actually broad support for the proposed change in terms of content.