Course Guidelines

[RJ]

Quite often there is criticism of courses not meeting guidelines. One of ours came in for criticism last year..... actually for the blue course.... amazingly the most consistently meeting the guidelines.

The analysis (in the pdf) relates to nine recent consecutive colour coded events in the Cumbrian Galoppen. Over the last 13 years there have been 150 events on about 25 different areas. The various planners have tried to meet the guidelines..... but the data shows that there must be quite a few factors at work. Consistency certainly doesn't spring to mind!

Each course at each event is represented by a colour bar. The time bar... lapse time range for most competitors. Length bar.... course length plus climb (100m climb equivalent to 1km length). The RED bars are the guideline figures (range). [There was no length data for the first event.]

[Guest]

[quote="RJ"]lapse time range for most competitors. quote]

How are you defining this?

[Guest]

How can the (adjusted) course length at a specific event have a range of values?

Or have I misunderstood something?

[RJ]

Lapse time range: Almost all competitors are included. Just a few stragglers were removed where there was a big gap in times.

The length bar: The actual length of the bar represents the climb... and don't forget, we are in Cumbria, so quite a bit of climb!

[Godders]

The problem is that it is exceptionally difficult to plan courses correctly.

A good planner can get close from past events (as long as you can find the results, lengths, consider the time of year, any major differences in the courses - such as steeper climbs, more green) and test running the courses - if you know where you would usually finish in results, taking account of the fact you probably know the area better, but might not have been racing very hard. And then you're affected by who turns up on the day - with relatively small entries this can have a large impact.

Hardly a precise science!

[Guest]

RJ gave details of the Galoppen courses. If the one that had adverse comments was the Whinlatter Blue then this may have been due to the fact that most of the climb was in one long leg, over roughish ground (if you didn't find the path up the ridge) and after a leg where several people had had a fight with windblow = people were starting to tire in the heat. Would people have minded so much if the long uphill leg had been split? I doubt it.

I enjoyed it and just took what was on offer.

[awk]

The problem is that it is exceptionally difficult to plan courses correctly.
.....
Hardly a precise science!

I'd agree, but on the other hand there are many times when it's blazingly obvious - like Green courses being planned at almost 5k (and even over!) on hilly northern terrain, time after time after time after time after.........

Worse are the technical planning standards ,especially at Yellow/Orange/LG. Courses being dumbed down is the most frequent problem, so that when youngsters come up against a genuine Orange or whatever, they can't do it.

Not a new issue: I did a presentation to Technical Conference about this getting on for a decade ago.

[graeme]

Metriarchy gone mad.

Whether the course is pleasant to run and well planned is vastly more important than the winning time. If you hold an event on a nice area I'll mess up your winning times by doing a really long course. If its horrible I'll mess them up by running a short course. And why shouldn't I?

Two good examples:

Godders courses on Drummond Hill were too long according to the guidelines, but the long thin nature of the area, with the best bits at either end, dictates a natural length for a nice coursegetting into all the interesting bits. "Too long" = good planning.

Second, TINTO twin on Alterstone. The area is on the small side for a badge event, and we finished with a third visit to the tricky hillside above assembly. The planner could have sent us round yet again to make up distance, but it was all beginning to look a bit familiar. "Too short" = good planning.

I'm sure we can think of a few horrors which hit the winning time spot on.

If my main aim is to race for an hour, I'll just enter a ten mile road race.

Graeme

[Guest]

....like Green courses being planned at almost 5k (and even over!) on hilly northern terrain, time after time after time after time after.........

The analysis doesn't bear that out awk. The Greens are surprisingly consistent. The long tails on the lapse times are probably due to the fact that it is the first *technical* course that many will run, and that many older people run. A second *short* Green needed perhaps.

It is just so difficult to meet the demands of the entire *audience* for any one particular course. I think the analysis shows that by and large the planners got it right.

[RJ]

Worse are the technical planning standards ,especially at Yellow/Orange/LG. Courses being dumbed down is the most frequent problem, so that when youngsters come up against a genuine Orange or whatever, they can't do it.

I agree that there are problems with the easy courses not being planned consistently. Often this is because they are being planned by competent orienteers who have forgotten the early learning stages of the sport.

Rather than *dumbed down* courses I would say that too much challenge is added. Planners often say in their comments that they thought they would give the competitors a decent challenge on the Yellow or Orange, as the excuse for all those retirements! Orange is a step up from Yellow, and doesn't need to have a short compass bearing, a point feature off the line feature for every leg. Some legs, yes.

If planners produced *genuine* Orange courses I don't think competitors would have trouble on the transition from Yellow. Often the courses being offered involve too big a jump. The terrain often produces these mistakes... competent orienteers can't see the decisions to be made from the youngster's perspective.

Yellow and Orange courses should encourage running.... not standing about examining the map in detail. The intellectual element of the sport can wait a bit... get the youngsters running confidently first.

As the sport (and the membership) have become more mature we have intensified the intellectual element of course planning. The new membership that we hope to attract needs to learn to orienteer at speed first, and then learn to find the hidden controls!

[awk]

Rather than *dumbed down* courses I would say that too much challenge is added.

Not our experience as parents. All too often Yellow courses were predominantly White with the odd Yellow leg, and Orange courses predominantly Yellow (sometimes White legs!) with the occasional Orange one thrown in.

Yes, there has been the odd nightmare, and I have to say most of those have been in Cumbria. So maybe your experience RJ reflects that?