President’s Message: Tier 1 and 2 Policy
CLIMBING IS GROWING!
This is a good problem to have, but it does present challenges. I have been a part of the competition climbing community going on 13 years now since my daughter Sydney entered her first competition and I volunteered as a judge at her second. That’s long enough that those of you who know me as Seth’s Dad don’t know I had a daughter that competed while he just ran around the gym getting into trouble while I helped run the competitions.
One of the priorities of the ACA has always been more fun climbing. This is the most valuable lesson that I received from the founders of the ACA. So far this has been manageable with all skill levels being able to participate at the same competitions. However, there was a step change 3 years ago, when we had to split the C and D Categories into their own competitions so we could properly manage the size of our events (i.e. climbing is growing). Later we added a voluntary Tier 2 to those C/D competitions so that A and B athletes that were still developing could participate in competitions that could help develop their experience.
Fast forward to today. We find ourselves in a position where we can no longer accommodate the growth of our sport, not with a Tier 1 that anyone can participate in and a voluntary Tier 2. There are two overriding reasons for this.
First, the other priority of the ACA comes to the forefront in that we are responsible for developing and qualifying athletes for Nationals. The difference in skill levels at our boulder competitions is causing issues in setting routes that challenge our top athletes and at the same time provide our developing athletes with a rewarding experience.
Secondly, the formats we need to maintain to prepare our top athletes for Nationals are causing our competitions to run too long and are providing very little rewarding climbing to our developing athletes.
Because of this, we have to introduce a more rigid 2 tier system into our bouldering competitions. This was mentioned at our AGM and has been a rumor that has been circulating for a while now. The ACA Board does have a feel for what the concerns are from our membership, and this letter is meant to clarify rumors and update everyone on the high level plan at this time.
Let’s start with what Tier 2 will NOT be: Tier 2 will not be what Tier 2 was in the 2025/26 season.
Tier 2 in the 2025/26 season was allowing Youth A and B athletes to compete at the Youth C/D competitions for experience. No dedicated Youth A and B routes, no finals, no podium, no medals. This is not the way the first Tier 2 competition pilot was held. The Tier 2 pilot had a finals for Youth A and B and a podium and medals. I was Jury President for this competition down at Coulee Climbing in Lethbridge. To date it is one of the most fun competitions I’ve ever run. The smiles on the Youth A and B competitor’s faces as they competed for a podium they couldn’t otherwise have a chance at in Tier 1 will never leave my memory.
Here’s what Tier 2 WILL be.
It will be a qualifier format that provides more climbing than what we use in Tier 1.
It will be dedicated finals routes for Youth A and B.
It will have a Youth A and B podium with medals and it will have aggregate points and a season championship trophy.
It will be the same quality competition for our Youth A and B Tier 2 athletes as the competitions we have always held. If we don’t meet this level of quality in our Tier 2 competitions, we will be failing a part of our membership, and we take that very seriously (i.e. ‘more fun climbing’).
I hope that the promise of a vastly elevated quality of competition for Tier 2 puts minds at ease, but, of course, why do we have to do this?
Competition climbing is very unique in that competition climbers cannot elevate their level without setters. Hockey players don’t rely on referees or ice makers to elevate their skill level. Competitive swimmers do not rely on timing systems or the amount of chlorine or salt in the pool to elevate their level. Gymnasts don’t rely on the brand of equipment in the gym to elevate their level. However, in climbing, a competitive climber’s skill level is directly related to the routes and boulders they routinely train and compete on, which are established by the route setters.
To illustrate this point, a number of years ago, the ACA received some feedback that the route setting in Alberta wasn’t properly preparing our athletes for Nationals. From that feedback, we instituted a program of flying in out of province National and International setters to help mentor our ACA setters. Over the course of a few years ACA athletes went from earning very few podiums at National Boulder events to earning 25% and even up to 30% of the podiums at Nationals. We also went from having no ACA setters set at Nationals to having several National qualified setters. Clear evidence that advanced setting, leads to advanced athletes.
Taking this back to where we are at now, the breadth of skill level of athletes at our Bouldering competitions forces our setters to accommodate not only athletes that are on the podium at Nationals, but also developing athletes. This results in Boulders that are too easy for our top athletes, and too hard for our developing athletes. This scenario doesn’t serve either level of athlete. We can’t push our top athletes and we can’t properly challenge our developing athletes. So aside from competitions running long because of numbers, we are not properly serving the various skill levels of athletes in our membership. Changing to a two tier system allows us to meet the specific development needs of far more athletes than we can now.
The system we are working on is being considered from all sides.
There will be athletes who get a buy to Tier 1 based on a high level of past performance.
There will be a seeding competition to determine who is eligible for Tier 1 and who competes in Tier 2.
There will be an opportunity for movement from Tier 2 to Tier 1 and an option for movement from Tier 1 to Tier 2.
If we get the selection process right on the first go, all athletes that have a legitimate chance at earning a spot to Regionals/Nationals, will be in Tier 1. Athletes in Tier 2 will have very rewarding competition experiences, podiums, medals and even Tier 2 aggregate trophies. There will also be opportunity for high achieving Tier 2 athletes to move up to compete in Tier 1 for experience, but still compete in Tier 2 for aggregate points.
If we get some of it wrong, there will be a safety net decision making process to ensure that an athlete that has a clear chance at Nationals does not somehow end up in Tier 2.
This is a big change. But our sport is growing, and that’s a good problem to have. Many, many other sports have multiple tiers. We can’t get away from it if we want to be able to best serve multiple skill levels. I have talked to other PTSOs (Provincial and Territorial Sport Organizations) across Canada who are also navigating a two tier competition system, and I truly believe the ACA will be a leader in implementing this.
There will be more details to come. We are working very hard over the summer to make this transition the best that it can be. We won’t get it perfect, but we are committed to being flexible in our approach to get it right. Climbing is an amazing sport. We want the best for every one of our members. Because of course more climbing is always better!
Thanks!
Mark Kozak
Alberta Climbing Association President
