A huge problem appears to currently exist with calculating BARTS seed points by mixing indoor snow race results and outdoor results. Huge inconsistencies appear to have been introduced as a result of changes introduced, and of which few are aware.
In plastic races you can only earn points if you finish both runs in a two run race or as appropriate in a Club National.
In indoor snow races two systems are being used to calculate BARTS points.
Club National indoor races are seeded using each run as a separate calculation for all age categories.
GP and Nationals calculate seed points only for those finishing both runs, as on plastic.
Furthermore, the average of two runs, on the same day, on the same slope, using a different running order, is being used to produce BARTS points for those racers taking part in indoor races. Consequently, different systems are being used on different surfaces, to produce one set of points that grade all the skiers whether or not they contest races on only one type of surface or both. Examination of start lists show that the majority of top racers taking part on plastic do not regularly contest indoor snow races and vice versa.
To further complicate the issue, in plastic races, a racer has to officially finish the race to earn points, whereas this is not the case on Club National indoor races. So, why should a racer who cannot officially finish a two run race, qualify for BARTS seed points that could qualify them for, potentially, a top ten UK ranking? Surely this is grossly unfair.
The two slope rule, previously used on plastic, has been modified to allow more than one result to be used from one slope providing the races were graded as 5 or 10 minimum point races. However if both, or more than two are a mixture of 0 or 5 minimum point graded races then only one point from that slope can be used. This means that if someone won a 5 and 10 point race at the same slope, then another won a 0 and 5 point race at the same slope, the person winning the lower graded races could emerge with 7.5 BARTS points, whereas the person winning a 0 and 5 point race would generate a 10 BARTS points.
Please note it is not the actual race penalty point that is being used for the above purpose, but the designated minimum penalty that can be applied
The separate run seeding was introduced, I believe, to assist those in the Children categories have a better opportunity to improve start positions in outdoor snow races under very variable conditions. Why is it being used for all age category racers to seed indoor snow races and where, within the current published rules is this allowed?
It appears that a two year trial period has been introduced during which the results will be studied. However, quite incorrectly, the new system is being used to produce the actual results whereas it should have been run in parallel with the existing system to prove its suitability.
These facts have been brought to the notice of those in control but the priority appears to be to protect the authority of those who make the rules and not the avoidance of anomalies and unfairness towards the racers. Concerns have been raised and a request to delay the end of season points calculation until a study of the published results has been made to see if the correct written down rules have been applied, or that the rules breach expected ways in which data should be analysed to calculate fair and consistent results. I fear this will fall upon deaf years if there is insufficient support in requesting an immediate review, prior to finally calculating and publishing the end of season BARTS list.
Anyone with suggestions, opinions or concerns is welcome to respond to this blog. You may want to amalgamate the plastic and indoor race seeding systems, keep them separate or use the alternative BISS system which has fundamental differences. We must remember this is about the athletes and put politics to one side and collectively act for the good of the sport.
The current BARTS system is obviously flawed as it has the known potential to produce anomalies, which is currently happening, and should have been avoided.
