Pre-lim points in Masters

Tom Dunlap

Tom Dunlap

Here from the beginning
Administrator
Location
Retired in Minneapolis
The pre-lim events show that a climber can perform the individual components. The Masters shows that they can put it all together in one complete job.

For years I've wanted to see the points from the pre-lims be carried forward to the Masters. There are many points to be made pro and con.

Whenever I'm confused about how to relate a station or score to the competition I try and find a parallel to the workday. There is a good reason to bring the points from the pre-lims to the Masters if a workday example is considered.

Here we go...

Climber A is a good climber. A can work a job and bring it in under cost most of the time. Clmber B is a good climber too. But, all of B's jobs are more profitable than A. Which is the best climber? A would be my choice if profit [read higher pre-lim points] are counted.

Then, on one particular day B brings in a real showy job under cost. A breaks even on another showy job later. Who is the 'better' climber...overall?

Too often a lower scoring climber has gone to the Masters and had a bit of luck and sometimes shown a bit more skill, and won the Masters. Take a look at chapter comps too.

It's so unfair not to consider how a climber scored in the pre-lims. After all, in almost every other sport there is a seeding process to give better players a chance to continue in the playoffs.
 
" You never change existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete." ~ R . Buckminster Fuller - "Critical Path"

If you look closely at the reason the events are what they are you'll soon understand originally it was designed to satisfy the insurance companies that as an employer you were making an attempt at training your employees in safe work practices in and around high power lines.

A good many of the climbers who compete in the TCC competition have never had to work with their life so close to death. Consideration should be given to the idea that change is in order to bring the competition back in line with the majority of the competitors. STOP trying to change the existing format and work to bring back the original intention of advocating safe work practices. Forget the spectator show frenzy and get real with the education of workers.

The times are a changing so should the competition to meet the demands of the modern work place setting. Doing something the same way and expecting a different result is insanity....
 
He who excells under the prelim pressure may not be he that excells under the masters pressure. And its those pressures that bring out the winner.

Bringing profit and loss scenarios into the comp scene is dodgy ground, comps are to improve climber knowledge and safety not business profit and loss.

A good climber brings profit often to the boss that deserves it, a bad boss and the best climber will not create good profit.

The comps are void of that boss/worker psychology and that is how competition should be. Lets not allow market forces to engulf what we enjoy in our spare time!
 
[ QUOTE ]
Bringing profit and loss scenarios into the comp scene is dodgy ground, comps are to improve climber knowledge and safety not business profit and loss.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course the TCC is about innovation, safety and skills. The basis is about converting work to a scored competition. Not unlike lots of other sports.

Whenever I've had someone ask how a point score is derived I have come up with some dollar/production metaphor.

The most common is the limb toss. How many times has anyone found pre-cut stubs in the tree? Not often... Lots of times people think that a limb toss that bounces outside then tumbles in should be scored. Why? The branch is cut, dropped, bounces, hits a window, precious shrubbery or groundie and then lands in a 'safe' spot. Was that a good toss? No one thinks so.

Getting to the top of the tree as fast as possible? Setting the line as quick as possible? Doing an AR quickly? All directly related to production/safety efficiency.

There are people who have good eye/hand coordination who could get a 20 point throwline in seconds that can't climb a rope to save their lives.

At the end of the day, at work, the quickest, most efficient and safest climber will 'win' The same climber will win at the comps on the weekend too.

How do you feel about bringing the prelim points along into the Masters?

Do you prefer New Life where everyone starts with zero points?
 
I think the masters should continue to stand alone as the ultimate test of overall skill and ability.

If someone has a really good climb in the masters then they deserve to win it, regardless of what happened in the prelims.
 
Sure you could bring prelim points into the masters, maybe on a scale, so if climber A scored 180 in prelims he gets 18 bonus points on the masters, Climber B has 175 points so he gets 17.5 bonus points towards the masters.

That in itself is a good idea Tom. I'm still uneasy about the profit/loss scenario being used to score. In a work situation the climber is part of a team that has been put together by the company boss or manager, to get the work done in the most efficient (profitable) way.

Maybe one of the groundies is a whiz at throwline but couldn't climb a rope to save his life. He could set the lines, rigging lines also, and someone else climbs. All the people on the crew determine whether there is profit or loss all them, not just the climber.

TCC are demonstration of good working practice but a good competition climb should show efficiency in terms of what is good for that climber, safety, good positioning lack of struggle etc all mean that the climber goes home able to climb another day. Relating that directly to the profit of his or her company is IMO not right.

I do notice however, that in US chapter comps the company name is often listed after each climber so maybe you guys have a different view on things. Over here most comp climbers (not all) are freelance climbers and don't represent a company. They climb for themselves to make a living and of course if they earn each company higher profit they can get paid more.

From my experience TCC's are a way of getting away from the work environment. The first time I climbed in a comp was an enlightening moment. I was climbing a tree without having to think about the next job, timescales, profit, customer satisfaction, groundies personal problems, if the chipper was going to work properly today etc etc. Just me in a tree doing what I had done for ten years, at that point, purely for the fun of it. You land from the tree and thats it, no brush to worry about.

Of course its based on work stuff (the limb toss example you gave is spot on) but its more about the purity of climbing a tree. We can go back to profit and loss on monday morning.
 
To me it would make more sense to include the pre-lim points. I never cared for the new life concept because it seems to favor the "luck" factor more. The potential judge favoritism factor is minimized by including the pre-lim points as well.

Wouldn't there be more alot buckles in NJ with pre-lim points included?
 
I like the way they have it presently set up with everyone at the same level coming into the finals. Here are my pros with the way they have it.
It is a huge crowd around the masters, many have not seen the finalist giving it there all the day before. Everyone judges the climbs in there own way and ranks them in there own mind or as a group, then awaits the judge’s decision. It would take some of the accuracy and some of the fun out of it if we had to figure in carry over points from the day before.
The master’s climb really is a great way for a skilled climber to showcase climbing skills and proper planning, which carries over into the work world well.
I don’t know many people who are great with the throwball but can’t climb a rope to save there lives but I do know people who can footlock fast but get lost in challenging tree.
I think people want to see a master’s climber that can properly plan a climb and moves through the tree like it’s their natural habitat.
If the prelim points carried over there is the potential of someone who is super fast but not great in a big tree beating someone who is a better climber. That would not go over very well with the crowd I think.
There’s my two cents.
Cheers
 
I agree totally with Dan.Ive been in 2 masters at the local level and didnt fair to well.I did pretty good in the prelims even placed in a few events, but The masters is what really proves how good you are as a climber and not just and athelete.For the most part to win a masters you must climb everyday at work and then those skills,planning and endurance will come into play at the masters.I think both m/c that I made it to was due to me rec climbing in my spare time while doing sales-so i was overwhelmed in the masters.On a side note its strange how you start a company because your a good climber but before you know it you dont really get to climb any more.So yes im in favor of new life.
 
[ QUOTE ]
To me it would make more sense to include the pre-lim points. I never cared for the new life concept because it seems to favor the "luck" factor more. The potential judge favoritism factor is minimized by including the pre-lim points as well.

Wouldn't there be more alot buckles in NJ with pre-lim points included?

[/ QUOTE ]

Having judged many chapter, european and world masters there is no favoritism when it comes to my scores, statments like that could be easly taken the wrong way
wink.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom