Paris 2024 has seen the introduction of Kayak Cross into the mix, and it’s stirred debate within the white water community. Is it good for the sport, or is it just another way to ruin it?
I haven’t seen an aspect of white water boating split opinion in the boating community quite as much as the introduction of Kayak Cross into the 2024 Summer Olympics. Now, full cards on the table, in the past I have criticised the sport and not fully understood what the point of it was. I also have to admit that I found it mildly amusing that slalom athletes were being forced to paddle plastic kayaks; something that most of them avoid like the plague in any other circumstances. But, with my logical hat on, Kayak Cross makes perfect sense. However, what are the main criticisms being drawn?
The criticism of Kayak Cross varies wildly. Some are annoyed that a rough and tumble bit of fun otherwise known as Boater Cross, has now been turned into a ‘serious’ sport. They feel like the ICF has hijacked something that has been part of recreational kayaking events for years before the international sports governing body got its hands on it. Another criticism is that some people have expressed their feeling that it doesn’t show white water kayaking at its best or even in a good light. They think that the competition should be taking place on much more impressive big white water, or that it’s boring for audiences. Yet another criticism is that the athletes are risking injury in a sport that can involve hard contact during battles to be the first to get around upstream gates.
Okay, so let’s look at why Kayak Cross is now part of the Olympics. Put simply, it’s about adapting or dying. The International Olympic Committee (IOC), gave an ultimatum to the ICF, reducing the number of athlete places for its sports. In a previous statement the ICF said the following,
“The IOC is determined to introduce new, innovative sports as it strives to attract younger audiences. It has been made clear to international federations that they need to embrace change, and to come up with new ways to attract fans.
“To put it plainly, stagnate and you will die. There will be no future on the Olympic program for sports that can’t and won’t evolve. We have lost quotas for 2024, and we want to do what we can to make sure we are not targeted for future Games.
“Our plan was to put extreme slalom forward to the IOC and Paris 2024 organisers as an extra event requiring no extra athlete quotas. Every canoe slalom athlete would be eligible to compete in the extreme competition.
“Unfortunately this plan suffered a setback this month when we were informed no extra medals would be made available at Paris 2024. This left us with the decision that confronted us this week – abandon the push for extreme slalom, or transfer two medals from sprint to the new sport.”
The IOC was also stressing that it wanted to increase the value it was getting out of the different venues. Furthermore, the IOC wants to increase the appeal of different sports to new audiences, which is why it has introduced sports like surfing, skateboarding, breaking, BMX and mountain biking.
When faced with this criteria, putting in something like mixed C2 won’t cut it. White water courses are expensive to build, and slalom has always been at risk of being dropped from the Olympics, with pressure from the USA on the IOC a constant spectre hanging over it, due mainly to the US knowing that it never medals in the sport. Luckily, white water slalom has always been one of the most popular Olympic sports with audiences on the schedule. During London 2012, slalom was in fact the most watched sport outside of the track & field events.
The ICF needed a sport that would make more use of the whitewater course, would appeal to a younger audience, and wouldn’t need any more athlete places. Kayak Cross makes perfect sense in this regard because the existing slalom athletes can take part, and it adds some extra days use of the whitewater venue, giving better value to the organisers.
Some in the whitewater community have posted online that they think Kayak Cross puts off audiences, and that it’s dull. I disagree totally, and the viewing figures and media reporting on the sport objectively shows this take to be an unfounded one. Watching four kayakers barrelling down a course, with some of the battles that go on around the upstream gates is anything but dull. Someone who is right at the back of the field and who looks like they’ll lose can often cut in and regain their position if someone is having trouble getting around the gate, meaning that you can never totally predict the finishing positions.
Mid-course, there’s a ‘roll gate’, which I originally thought was a bit twee. In fact I’ve been known to joke that paddlers should be expected to pick up a basket ball and deposit it in a net further down the course, in a nod to the classic BBC series “Paddles Up”. But in actuality, the roll gate has caused some great carnage in some races. It’s there to add in another pinch point during the race, not to show off a trick to the crowd. Something else to bear in mind if you are tempted to accuse the sport of being dull, is that we have to look at this from the point of view of someone who doesn’t take part in kayaking. When I’m out on the water, if I get chatting to a member of the public who is passing by, what’s the number one thing they want to see and are fascinated by? The roll of course!
People who take part in the sport underestimate how fascinating non-participants find a basic kayak roll. Including it into the Kayak Cross course is thus a good thing.
Another criticism I see levelled at Kayak Cross is one that I see as being pessimistic for the sake of being pessimistic, and that’s the idea that Olympics inclusion won’t increase participation in the kayaking and canoeing. Is it going to cause a mass influx of new people to clubs? No, but it will still inspire some people. I remember back when London 2012 was running, the local clubs did in fact have people turning up to have a go after watching the slalom on TV.
The real point though, is visibility. The more sports like Kayak Cross and slalom are visible during an event like the Olympics, the less ‘fringe’ they become. Visibility and acceptance is a good thing. I know some people like their sport to stay on the fringe, but that doesn’t help with advancing new products or keeping participation at healthy levels. People who have a fear of water or of being upside down in a kayak are never going to want to take part. But, there will be people out there who see Kayak Cross and think it looks like fun.
It seems that some people have a very weird idea of what Kayak Cross will do for the image of whitewater kayaking. They think that because it isn’t taking place on big water like the North Fork Payette or something, that audiences will think it’s pathetic. Such people live in a reality distortion bubble. Viewed through the eyes of the public who don’t take part in whitewater sports, the water on the Olympic course appears anything but benign! Hell, I come across tourists all the time who think that my local class 2 rapids at Jackfield look big and powerful!
Aside from that, and the fact that I wish such people the best of luck in finding huge reliable whitewater runs that are practical for audience participation at all Summer Olympics events, remember that the entire reason Kayak Cross exists is to make more use of the existing venue and to introduce something new. Naysayers from the kayaking community need to understand how normal members of the public view the sport rather than how experienced boaters see it. Furthermore, nobody is forcing anyone to watch it. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it. But please understand that there are no negatives to having more publicity for the sport.
There are lots of people out there who don’t like sports like skateboarding, surfing and breaking being introduced. But, if you disagree that those sports should have a place in the Olympics, how about town planning, painting, architecture, music and sculpture? Yes, these were all events held in the modern Olympics from 1912 until 1948!
It is true that the desire for Olympic participation does have a skewing effect on funding for athletes and the different disciplines that fall under each country’s individual governing bodies. But, it isn’t the fact that these sports are in the Olympics that is the problem, it’s that each country’s governing body is failing the recreational side of the activity. With that said, when it comes to recreational whitewater, having more visibility for whitewater related sports on a world stage is still a good thing. Whilst artificial whitewater courses have their issues, venues like Lee Valley opened up more opportunity for people in the south east of the UK to try the sport. In fact CIWW wouldn’t exist without the Olympics, either, because it was built with the intention of becoming the Olympic venue until it had to be scaled back.
It’s time we looked at the positives of the inclusion of events like Kayak Cross instead of looking for something to complain about constantly. I’ve had messages from friends and people I know who don’t kayak, but they’ve been watching the Kayak Cross and have been really engaging with it. The negativity needs to stop.
The Kayaking Journal 
Recent comments