Post by PinArm on Nov 18, 2013 13:02:45 GMT -5
If I were to make an armwrestling league in North America, I’d mirror the weight classes of the UFC. Those classes seem to make sense and have the added benefit of being marketed by a giant. However, who cares what I would do IF …? Also, who cares about what individual pullers think about a class change from the perspective of a particular puller being able to make weight? Let’s do what makes sense and not what someone wants for their own reasons. I don;t think that those proposing changes are doing so to help out someone in particular; however, why does everyone feel compelled to comment on how it would impact them? Leave it out and focus the debate.
One thing that I am proud of in armwrestling is that is has weight classes that are every 5 or 10 kilograms. There are no oddball 63kg or 87kg classes at the National or World level. This gives an appearance of organization and fairness. They do not beg the question of how a weight limit was decided, e.g. was it to accommodate a particular person?
I also think that it makes sense for CAWF to mirror the WAF classes. This makes it very easy to decide who qualifies for Worlds and helps Canada to send the best team that it can. Clearly, Canada NEVER sends its BEST team to Worlds, and this has nothing to do with weight classes (and will need to the subject of another post so as not to pull focus from the issue of weight classes).
For the reasons in the above two paragprahs, I start from a position of not wanting to alter the weight classes at Nationals. Why change the weight classes (predominantly by reducing their number)? I’ll take a stab at answering this question with the following basic answers and then refute those possible answers.
1) Save costs;
2) Have more competitors and competitive matches in each class;
3) Lead the way globally and ultimately get into the Olympics; and,
4) Speed-up Nationals and make it more fun for fans to watch.
Save Costs
If anyone is serious about saving costs then cut the price of prizes. Inexpensive medals could be used. Full stop, but I digress because I will continue. Perhaps even ribbons or certificates could be used. Even nothing could be used! There are competitions in the world where the results are simply recorded. Another alternative is have a prize for only first place (or a nice prize for first place and a certificate for second and third).
I’d even say that a promoter can offer different prizes for different classes. For example, certificates could be used for classes that have averaged few than 4 entries in the last 4 years, and medals could be used for other classes (with an additional trophy for first place, in my humble opinion).
The entry fee is $60. One entry can cover the cost for the prizes in several classes. If the weight classes are cut then there will be fewer competitors (see the next heading for a discussion of this and then have at me). Fewer total competitiors means less overall revenue. Cutting the classes will cut COSTS with all other things being equal, e.g. given a static price level, among the alternatives, for prizes. However, cutting costs in this way will reduce overall revenue more than it will save costs. In the end, cutting the classes will cost the promoter of Nationals, especially for future Nationals.
In 2012, the CAWF executive voted to allow promoters the option of putting on inexpensive Nationals with CAWF administering it by collecting the entry fees and paying the refs etc. Perhaps this plan could be fleshed out with CAWF buying a huge supply of medals or ribbons to use every year such that the unused ones simply have the backer recycled for the date etc.).
More competitors and competitive matches in each class
The last two Nationals had very poor turnouts. One was in BC and one was in Ontario. There were very few competitors from Ontario at either of these events. I don’t believe that competitors have stayed away because they think that there are too few classes at Nationals.
I think that competitors have stayed away for two reasons combined with the obvious costs associated with competing at Nationals: Firstly, they don’t like armwrestling very much. Secondly, they have alternatives for good competition.
I would like to see the sport address those two concerns. For purposes of this post, let’s focus on the second point. One could argue that there would be better competition if there are few classes. Sadly, I disagree. Armwrestlers want a shot to win. If there is a right-arm only competition, for example, and there is big money or prestige for the winner (only), e.g. a National title, and many competitors get ready to attend, many of them will back out when they learn that George or Vern is healthy and will be competing (depending on the weight class, of course). Armwerstlers routinely pull heavier or cut weight to avoid certain pullers. Do not give armwrestlers too much credit!!!! There are some who will compete for third, but not many. In any given class in North America, there are a handful of competitors who think that they may win or want to try themselves against the top pullers, and they will enter. Others will simply not enter. There is a set number of competitors who will enter any given class base don this. By cutting the number of classes you will cut the number of competitors at Nationals. I feel very strongly about this. I have seen this. I know that this will be the case.
Clearly, certain classes could be cut without really impacting anything, but even if a class that has averaged one competitor per year is cut, will that help anything? It won’t save money because the cost of the class should be less than the $60 entry fee. It will cause CAWF to be off the WAF classes without much benefit. I know that it would look better if there were no paper champions, but it is hard to make the decision as to which class to cut in advance given that it is impossible to predict who will attend a Nationals.
Let’s imagine only the men’s senior classes (no age criteria). If there were to be only one class, how many competitors would we have? It would be less than we have now. The trophy could cost about $300 though and the promoter would not lose money on the class. That is, the promoter’s marginal cost of the class would be covered by the entry fees. However, what about the cost of the table, refs, scorers, advertising, venue?
What if we have two classes? This would be better, maybe we get ten competitors. Three classes? Seven? Eleven? Ninety-nine? Clearly there are points at which there are too few classes and too many classes.
If we want great competition, is is tempting to have just a men's 70, 80, 90kg class and over. No masters. No women, No light classes. No heavy classes. However, then we would have 20 competitors and there would be no tournaments for those in the cut classes. Nationals is the only even in Canada that offers this breadth of classes and has something for almost everyone.
Lead the way globally and ultimately get into the Olympics
The Olympics may never happen for armwrestling. We should not concern ourselves with this. Some other sports don’t worry about it and they are doing fine. If ever, armwrestling is in the Olympics with some internationally agreed upon weight classes then Canada should have a qualifying tournament with those classes. Until then, the Olympics is a red herring.
Pin lines are much better than pin pads in my opinion, and no other country or WAF wanted to follow our lead with pin lines after Fred lost control of this issue at WAF. No one will follow Canada’s classes for the sake of following what we are doing.
Speed-up Nationals and make it more fun for fans to watch
Cutting weight classes is not the way to do this. This is a laudable goal but is much better met by other changes to the sport (I’ll make another post in this regard coupled with unpopularity of armwrestling).
In conclusion, why not just mirror the WAF classes and manage to costs of the prizes? If classes are cut, simply cut them and leave all the CAWF classes based on WAF classes, that is, don’t invent new classes at least. I’d be in favour of mirroring all WAF classes (including the disabled classes that CAWF does not offer).
I not only feel that cutting the classes is a bandaid solution to a bigger problem but also feel that with fewer classes, our numbers of competitors attending Nationals will drop even further, especially over time.
One thing that I am proud of in armwrestling is that is has weight classes that are every 5 or 10 kilograms. There are no oddball 63kg or 87kg classes at the National or World level. This gives an appearance of organization and fairness. They do not beg the question of how a weight limit was decided, e.g. was it to accommodate a particular person?
I also think that it makes sense for CAWF to mirror the WAF classes. This makes it very easy to decide who qualifies for Worlds and helps Canada to send the best team that it can. Clearly, Canada NEVER sends its BEST team to Worlds, and this has nothing to do with weight classes (and will need to the subject of another post so as not to pull focus from the issue of weight classes).
For the reasons in the above two paragprahs, I start from a position of not wanting to alter the weight classes at Nationals. Why change the weight classes (predominantly by reducing their number)? I’ll take a stab at answering this question with the following basic answers and then refute those possible answers.
1) Save costs;
2) Have more competitors and competitive matches in each class;
3) Lead the way globally and ultimately get into the Olympics; and,
4) Speed-up Nationals and make it more fun for fans to watch.
Save Costs
If anyone is serious about saving costs then cut the price of prizes. Inexpensive medals could be used. Full stop, but I digress because I will continue. Perhaps even ribbons or certificates could be used. Even nothing could be used! There are competitions in the world where the results are simply recorded. Another alternative is have a prize for only first place (or a nice prize for first place and a certificate for second and third).
I’d even say that a promoter can offer different prizes for different classes. For example, certificates could be used for classes that have averaged few than 4 entries in the last 4 years, and medals could be used for other classes (with an additional trophy for first place, in my humble opinion).
The entry fee is $60. One entry can cover the cost for the prizes in several classes. If the weight classes are cut then there will be fewer competitors (see the next heading for a discussion of this and then have at me). Fewer total competitiors means less overall revenue. Cutting the classes will cut COSTS with all other things being equal, e.g. given a static price level, among the alternatives, for prizes. However, cutting costs in this way will reduce overall revenue more than it will save costs. In the end, cutting the classes will cost the promoter of Nationals, especially for future Nationals.
In 2012, the CAWF executive voted to allow promoters the option of putting on inexpensive Nationals with CAWF administering it by collecting the entry fees and paying the refs etc. Perhaps this plan could be fleshed out with CAWF buying a huge supply of medals or ribbons to use every year such that the unused ones simply have the backer recycled for the date etc.).
More competitors and competitive matches in each class
The last two Nationals had very poor turnouts. One was in BC and one was in Ontario. There were very few competitors from Ontario at either of these events. I don’t believe that competitors have stayed away because they think that there are too few classes at Nationals.
I think that competitors have stayed away for two reasons combined with the obvious costs associated with competing at Nationals: Firstly, they don’t like armwrestling very much. Secondly, they have alternatives for good competition.
I would like to see the sport address those two concerns. For purposes of this post, let’s focus on the second point. One could argue that there would be better competition if there are few classes. Sadly, I disagree. Armwrestlers want a shot to win. If there is a right-arm only competition, for example, and there is big money or prestige for the winner (only), e.g. a National title, and many competitors get ready to attend, many of them will back out when they learn that George or Vern is healthy and will be competing (depending on the weight class, of course). Armwerstlers routinely pull heavier or cut weight to avoid certain pullers. Do not give armwrestlers too much credit!!!! There are some who will compete for third, but not many. In any given class in North America, there are a handful of competitors who think that they may win or want to try themselves against the top pullers, and they will enter. Others will simply not enter. There is a set number of competitors who will enter any given class base don this. By cutting the number of classes you will cut the number of competitors at Nationals. I feel very strongly about this. I have seen this. I know that this will be the case.
Clearly, certain classes could be cut without really impacting anything, but even if a class that has averaged one competitor per year is cut, will that help anything? It won’t save money because the cost of the class should be less than the $60 entry fee. It will cause CAWF to be off the WAF classes without much benefit. I know that it would look better if there were no paper champions, but it is hard to make the decision as to which class to cut in advance given that it is impossible to predict who will attend a Nationals.
Let’s imagine only the men’s senior classes (no age criteria). If there were to be only one class, how many competitors would we have? It would be less than we have now. The trophy could cost about $300 though and the promoter would not lose money on the class. That is, the promoter’s marginal cost of the class would be covered by the entry fees. However, what about the cost of the table, refs, scorers, advertising, venue?
What if we have two classes? This would be better, maybe we get ten competitors. Three classes? Seven? Eleven? Ninety-nine? Clearly there are points at which there are too few classes and too many classes.
If we want great competition, is is tempting to have just a men's 70, 80, 90kg class and over. No masters. No women, No light classes. No heavy classes. However, then we would have 20 competitors and there would be no tournaments for those in the cut classes. Nationals is the only even in Canada that offers this breadth of classes and has something for almost everyone.
Lead the way globally and ultimately get into the Olympics
The Olympics may never happen for armwrestling. We should not concern ourselves with this. Some other sports don’t worry about it and they are doing fine. If ever, armwrestling is in the Olympics with some internationally agreed upon weight classes then Canada should have a qualifying tournament with those classes. Until then, the Olympics is a red herring.
Pin lines are much better than pin pads in my opinion, and no other country or WAF wanted to follow our lead with pin lines after Fred lost control of this issue at WAF. No one will follow Canada’s classes for the sake of following what we are doing.
Speed-up Nationals and make it more fun for fans to watch
Cutting weight classes is not the way to do this. This is a laudable goal but is much better met by other changes to the sport (I’ll make another post in this regard coupled with unpopularity of armwrestling).
In conclusion, why not just mirror the WAF classes and manage to costs of the prizes? If classes are cut, simply cut them and leave all the CAWF classes based on WAF classes, that is, don’t invent new classes at least. I’d be in favour of mirroring all WAF classes (including the disabled classes that CAWF does not offer).
I not only feel that cutting the classes is a bandaid solution to a bigger problem but also feel that with fewer classes, our numbers of competitors attending Nationals will drop even further, especially over time.
