Allowing running down in the Compass Sport Cup/Trophy?

[SeanC]

Running up classes is commonplace in the compass sport cup/trophy. My suggestion is that we should also allow competitors to run down. *

Competitors would be given a time penalty, eg.

running down 1 class (increase time by 30%)
running down 2 classes (increase time by 60%)
running down 3 classes (increase time by 100%).

You can look at the entries for the trophy clubs on fabian4 for the SEOA heat to see what I mean. Most of the trophy clubs have made a really good effort getting a team out.

Advantages?
- Competitors who aren't fit/experienced enough to run their age class get to be part of the competition.
- More clubs can have a full team = better competition. For example MV have 15 runners, but because they have 6 "green" veterans and only 1 "short green" veteran they can only have 12 scorers so have less chance of making the final.
- Expanding and new clubs with lots of new people in the 20-55 age group wont be disadvantaged for not having the typical demographic of established/ageing clubs (I can't think of a good example, maybe SLOW?).
- Club captain strategy more important. Do you get your good runners to run up or down? = better competition.
- Rule changes favour different clubs than now = different winners = more interesting competition.

What do you think?

* adult courses only

[sketchweppers]

No.
Despite often struggling to make a viable team I don't think this will help. The whole ethos of CST is for the winning club to have a wide range of age/experience. This suggestion favours clubs with more younger adult members. How does a W60 run down? Does she run against the juniors?
I think that a fit W21 can run 60% faster than an average W65 on short green, which would be 2 classes down.
We have just had a rule revision for which all clubs were consulted. (They may not have included all my suggestions, but I am still happy to follow until the next revision)

[andypat]

Agreed
If you dont have anyone to run a course - go out and recruit someone...

[andy]

Nope.

It's already complicated enough, let's not start adjusting certain competitors times by percentages.

[graeme]

We might be friendly and welcoming, but we don't half go out of our way to exclude people from our competitions.

To make it simpler, easier to raise a team and more inclusive, get rid of the "maximum counters" rules and dont exclude the club's fifth/sixth/seventh best person in a class.
It should be for all club members, not a demographics contest.

I can see the case for "running down", but not some complicated rescaling. Better to have "runners down" placed behind others in their age class/proper course: that way it would only help the genuinely unfit/inexperienced to be a part of CSC.

[Shropshire born]

I like to run run down as a M35. And because I would not score for the club
I don't take part. It's one of many none inclusive events in the orienteering fixture
List.

[Red Adder]

NO

But you could help by some tighter controlling though. One of this years events the organisers glory in setting courses "at the top end" of what is required for the colour. For my blue this is 7.5 km plus 145 metres climb. Its reasonable to equate the climb to an extra .7 km so the total adjusted distance is 8.2km. This is some way above the guideline for the maximum length for a Blue. Surely this is not the way to open the event up to non-star club members.

[The Loofa]

Another definite NO to Sean's idea from me. Newbies should be aspiring to be part of their club's scoring team.
And also no to the max counters rule. Its pointless and counter-productive. I like that line "not a demographics contest". Just work out the scores in a contest between one club with the 25 best M21s in the world and another with 25 competent club orienteers spread evenly across the classes.

[NeilC]

Just work out the scores in a contest between one club with the 25 best M21s in the world and another with 25 competent club orienteers spread evenly across the classes.

SLOW lose to SO again

The CompassSport cup is a demographics contest, that's fine, there are other competitions / leagues that aren't (Harvester, JK Trophy, SE League, Jukola etc).

[SeanC]

I'm enjoying your responses, keep it up.

I agree that competitors running down a class or more should be at a relative disadvantage compared with those in the correct age group. I should have made that clear in the first post. You could do that through the weighting, or Graeme's suggestion which is probably better.

Here's a supplementary but related question for those who think that Compass Sport Cup/Trophy should be a demographics competition. If running down a class shouldn't be allowed, why should competitors be allowed to run up a class (or more)?

[Gnitworp]

why should competitors be allowed to run up a class (or more)?

Because they are legitimately competitive and do not have an unfair age advantage.

[SeanC]

Jim, you may not be one of the demographics types. For example

The whole ethos of CST is for the winning club to have a wide range of age/experience.

.

Quite clearly many of the trophy clubs in the SEOA round don't have a particularly wide range of either, hence 8 out of 18 on brown are running up. But to follow sketchweppers philosophy, running up is unfair to clubs like CHIG with a wider age distribution.

But that's one interpretation of the ethos. I checked with the rules for some clues and it came up with:

The CompassSport Cup and CompassSport Trophy events are the premier inter-club competitions for British clubs. The organising clubs should aim to make a real occasion out of it. It is intended to foster club spirit and be attractive both to competitors and to the club hosting it, for which it should be financially viable.

I think this is closer to most people's view. To rephrase the question. How does it foster club spirit to exclude club members who never want to, or are able to, run the course that make them part of the team?

[NeilC]

To rephrase the question. How does it foster club spirit to exclude club members who never want to, or are able to, run the course that make them part of the team?

Firstly compared to most leagues/regional championships etc most CSC/T competitors are already running down (eg M21 on Brown not Black, M50 Blue not Short Brown, W14 Orange not Light Green etc etc).

Secondly a line has to be drawn somewhere ("why doesn't my son's string course run count?")

As club captain I'm taking a team of almost 70 members to our heat, only one person has expressed concern that the course is too long for his ability but he was willing to give it a go for the sake of the club. OK over half the club are still not going (or are off on half term jaunts) but many of them only orienteer locally anyway and wouldn't be interested in a long journey, and others know that they wouldn't trouble the scorers (whatever course they run) so decided not to go. At least for my club I honestly don't think that allowing people to run down would encourage more to attend. Perhaps you have done the market research and the situation is different with yours.

[graeme]

Perhaps you have done the market research and the situation is different with yours.

Yes, it is.
For most trophy (and Scottish Cup) clubs the problem is getting enough counters. This is exacerbated by having to travel so far to the final. People will travel in hope that your slower runners will pull out a blinder, but will no travel not to be on an incomplete team.

INT were trophy runners up three years in a row, with a team of only 15-16 possible scorers and 5-6 unable to score by the "maximum counters" rule. Last year, with the final further away, we could only get 16 total interested. No team, no entry - the whole club's enjoyable weekend away nixed by one pointless and counter-productive rule. In fact, I would argue the entire competition was wrecked: after three years of close and exciting competition with FVO where every point counted, in 2013 FVO cruised to a large, boring and inevitable win where nobody's individual run really mattered.

One stupid rule - serving only to exclude newbies and slower runners from collecting small number of points - has the side effect of killing the whole club team, and with it the whole competition.

[sketchweppers]

Another definite NO to Sean's idea from me. Newbies should be aspiring to be part of their club's scoring team.

When I first started orienteering I was asked to join in with the Compass Sport event, and as a W40 had to run a blue course. Prior to that I had just about managed to complete a couple of green courses in par. This gave me some incentive to improve, so a few weeks before the qualifier I entered a blue course, and had some difficulty - being out for about 2 and a half hours. On the day of the event I managed the Blue Women course reasonably and managed to be one of the club's scorers. This really boosted my morale, made me feel part of the club and was probably one of the key factors in me pursuing the sport. Maybe I wouldn't be here now if I had decided not to bother, or not been asked.

And also no to the max counters rule. Its pointless and counter-productive. I like that line "not a demographics contest". Just work out the scores in a contest between one club with the 25 best M21s in the world and another with 25 competent club orienteers spread evenly across the classes.

I'm in two minds about the max counters rule. I agree with NeilC;

The CompassSport cup is a demographics contest, that's fine, there are other competitions / leagues that aren't (Harvester, JK Trophy, SE League, Jukola etc).

However a trophy club with 13 M21's would still be at a slight disadvantage - such a club's maximum score would be 1222, if they took the top 13 scores on the brown course. Another club who won all 4 of the small junior classes, and had top places in all 7 of the adult classes, and two second places would score 1298. Perhaps that makes it okay. The Compass Sport trophy event is good that all ages can compete - it is not just a case of being young, fit and competent.