Kids Classes

[Joey Costello]

Kids classes are an on going problem.
In an attempt to solve it I would like it if everyone with kids could post thier kids age and weight.
If you don't want to post it PM me.

Linda, Joe, Rick H, Mike G, Eric F, Joanne L, Tanya M, Jeff K, Eric R,
and anyone else please send me some mail


I have 2 kids
7 yrs and 68lbs
9 yrs and 66lbs

my neighbour has 1 kid
9 yrs and 75lbs

another family has 2 kids
9 yrs 76 lbs
6 yrs 60 lbs

[Eric Roussin]

At this point, we will almost certainly be adopting the following kids classes for a three-year trial period. We've been working on coming up with the fairest option, and there appears to be wide support for them:

12 and under:

Mixed - 0-60 lbs
Mixed - 61-85 lbs
Mixed - 86-110 lbs
Mixed - 111+ lbs

13+:

Boys - 0-130 lbs
Boys - 131-160lbs
Boys - 161+ lbs
Girls – 0-130 lbs
Girls - 131+ lbs

Max age would be 18, to match what is done at Nationals. Right and left will be offered for all classes. It may seem like a lot of classes, but these should be conducive to growing kids armwrestling in Ontario.

Kids grow, so while they may be at the bottom end of a weight class one year, a year or two later they will likely be near the top of a class.

I'm just waiting to hear back from all members of the Executive, at which point an official announcement will be made.

Once again, these classes would be mandatory at Provincials -- all other events would still be free to have kids classes at the promoter's discretion.

[Joe Gould]

I have already indicated that I support the decision to implement these classes for the OAA Provincials.

In addition to the points that Eric mentioned, I would also like to add...

The minimum required prizes for Youth Provincials are Medallions. Medallions can be purchased for approximately $3/medallion, which makes the minimum cost of the youth awards, as low as $162. The last two years the youth classes have averaged 35 entries per year, at $5/arm entry fee that generates $175. IMO, the cost to run these classes should not be an issue.

As well as these classes being fair, they create opportunity to further grow the sport in general.

[Jeff Kaye]

i really like Erics idea, under 12 and 13-18 idea, i had a problem with this a my tourny where my son is 8, but hes a hefty 99lbs, and he was pullin 14 yr olds , and it really discouraged him to where he quit,i think having the age limit and the weight class would work well.

[Tony Brooks]

I support a three year trial of the classes posted above. I have two girls who compete whenever possible, 11yr at 96lbs and 7yr at 61lbs. A three year trial will be a great indicator and we could tweak it from there if needed.

[Joey Costello]

I don't support a three year trial of 18 classes.
Joe mentioned that there was an average of 35 kids entered in the last couple of years, with 18 classes there would be less than 2 kids per class.
With Rogers cable and all the parents of the kids in attendance we don't want to show them that we have alot of classes that are empty. Kids don't want to win without armwrestling and parents don't want to sit there all day and not see thier kids armwrestle.
Does anyone know what it's like to win first and be the only one in your class.
I would rather have 10-12 classes with 5 in the class and everyone get a medal. The money is not the issue, I would rather give away medals to 5th than thro 2nds and 3rds in the garbage.

We have an armwrestling school every week here for kids and my biggest concern is that the classes will be empty, it looks like a poor turnout.

Install a 3 year trial but build to it, don't do it all at once.

[Eric Roussin]

If I show up to a tournament and I'm alone in a class or there are only one or two other pullers, I have the option to pull up a class. I don't see why the kids classes need to be any different. If an 80 lb boy sees that there is only one other kid in the 85 lb class, he can then decide (along with his parents) if he wants to pull the 110 lb class instead.

The main point is that this type of class structure is the fairest we've come up with to address gender, weight, and age differences. Fewer initial classes will means these issues will not all be addressed.

Traditionally, the kids who compete at Provincials are the kids of armwrestlers, so most know what to expect. If there are additional kids competing, then entries should go up and classes will have more pullers.

I think most parents would understand and accept a poor class turnout if the classes are balanced and fair, than they would understand why a heavy-set 9 year old is competing with 15 year olds.

[Joey Costello]

Here's one of the problems with your idea, you have more classes for kids than you do for adults. Before you throw 18 classes into an event you should offer them at your circuit events so you can build classes. Otherwise your going to have 18 provincial champions and no 2nd best in the province.
The second problem with your idea is that you only have an average of 35 kids and you hope to spread them out into 18 classes.
I understand 130 adults for 16 classes but l don't understand 18 classes for 35 kids.

End result is that your going to have alot of kids showing up expecting to pull in the classes offered and have no one to pull or they will show up and have to pull up anyway.

I think you should offer 10 classes and not change them.
If 10 kids end up in the same class it can be divided into 2 classes.
Its easier to add classes and still keep people happy than it is to subtract classes.

[Eric Roussin]

Kids classes were included at Provincials in 2011 and 2012. Both times, 10 classes were offered. The classes were divided by weight with boys and girls mixed together. At the OAA Annual General Meetings at both of these events, the topic of kids classes generated the most discussion. Some parents felt it was unfair to divide classes by weight. Other parents felt it was unfair to divide classes by age. There was interest in finding a solution. The 18 classes described above try to address these issues, which is why you are seeing many parents agree with the trial.

We've been offering Masters classes at Provincials for the past four years. Almost every year a few classes only have a couple of entries. It's not a big deal. I think most would not want to cut back on the number of masters classes because of this, and in fact I believe you are planning on offering more of them at the 2013 Provincials.

Offering kids classes at more events is a good idea, but is unlikely to become mandatory.

[Rob Hancock]

I support the three year trial of 18 classes. These classes should run as posted, (empty or full) no arranging classes the day of the event! I'm not a big fan of dividing the classes by age, I think the difference between older boys and girls is much more justified. I don't think these classes should be force anywhere else, just like the masters classes. Provincial championships should offer classes not available anywhere else. Offering more classes will bring more entries and crowning more youth provincial champions will get more kids interested in the sport. I would rather throw away a few medalions than send a kid home empty handed. I would even go a step further and give EVERY kid under 12 a participation medal for pulling. Children are the future of our sport and the OAA can make no better investment.

[Rick Heidebrecht]

I think Eric has put forward the fairest division of classes for the kids so far. However, it makes the problem obvious: as Joey said, there's too many classes for too few competitors. Going by the posted results for the last two provincials, there have been approximately 20 kids competing, at best. That's pretty lean, divided over 9 classes (per arm). The worst case scenario isn't having empty classes, but having classes with just one kid that has nobody to compete with. Given these numbers, chances are high that it will happen regularly. Yes, kids could pull up, but they would be at a serious disadvantage.

That said, running fewer classes opens the classes up too much and we could end up with some heavily one-sided matches, which isn't fun for anybody. Even with Eric's proposed classes, for example, a 65 lb girl against an 85 lb boy just isn't fair. Reducing the number of classes would just make it worse.

There's a much greater range in armwrestling ability in the kids classes than in the adults, and at the same time far fewer competitors, which is why I'm still in favour of the promoter setting classes at the tournament, based on participation, and using their judgement to make everything as fair as possible. Even better, if parents were willing to help out by emailing the promoter ahead of time if their kids are coming, along with their age and weight, classes could still be arranged based on participation but posted in advance, and parents would know if their kids will have someone to compete with.

I agree with Rob and Joey about medals though. As a parent, I have no problem paying whatever increase in entry fee that would be necessary to cover enough medals for every kid. It's been my experience that even though he didn't win, Simon was thrilled to take home a medal that he earned himself by competing in the tournament.

[Eric Roussin]

There’s no perfect solution, and it is true there is a risk that some classes could have very few competitors. However I am also aware that some kids have ambitions of winning a provincial title. Set classes that don’t change from year to year would make this more achievable. If a child weighs 65 lbs now, it may be difficult to win the 85 lb class, but maybe in two years it would be a real possibility. If the classes change from year to year based on participation, this same child may be stuck in a 61-85 lb class when he weighs 65 lbs and then in an 81-110 lb class when he weighs 85 lbs. It could be possible that the same kids are often at the top of the class or often at the bottom of the class.

I like the idea of medals for all kids. Perhaps generic medals, with stickers that could be applied to the backs to identify the positions, could make this easier to offer.

[Deleted]

Heres a thought based on most of what I have read. If a medal was chosen for the kids classes so cost was a known factor, could the OAA sponsor the medals for the kids classes, lets say $200, which takes all the oweness off the promoter altogether. If a class has only one or two kids in it, they are given the option at that time, (along with there parents of course), to integrate or combine or pull up a class. If its a base medal all kids could get one and the ones left over transfered to the next year. If kids are truly the future of Ontario armwrestling, and the OAA can afford it, why not just sponsor the youth? Easy peasy?

[Eric Roussin]

Options could be explored should the need arise, but I don't think the the costs of running kids classes is the issue.

Using the same medals from year to year, perhaps with just the sticker changing, could be a good idea.

[Joey Costello]

The budget is always an issue especially when you are planning the awards that I am, but the big issue is attendance.

I have medals for 1st thru 3rd and generic medals for all other kids competing. Every kid will go home with a medal.

The problem of having a little kid pulling a big kid will always be there, that is why you need set classes so the kids can grow into their classes and then the next year they will grow out of their class and the cycle continues.

I have kids that will be competing and I hope that they have someone to pull against.. I worry more about that then them getting beat. Think about it if there are two many classes there will be no one to pull against.

At my provincials I will do my best for the kids, not for the parents. The kids want to armwrestle and the parents want them to take first.
I have 12 categories budgeted, and I am prepared to add classes if I run into problems such as little kids pulling big kids. I know this will happen.