ranking list

[Scott]

there should surely be a reasonable number of ranked runners (i.e. regular adult competitors) on all the TD4/TD5 for any event that could reasonably be considered as a ranking event. So why not simply say that courses without (say) 10 ranked runners will not be ranked?

Even at reasonably sized events, it's still not uncommon for the Black course to have fewer than ten runners.

[madmike]

too true, I've been as high up as seventh on Black (or 2nd last!) and a couple of 9ths (lasts).

[greywolf]

I see that the British sprint champs (age group) has now been deleted altogether.

No, as has been pointed out more than once, the points attributed previously to the British age class sprints were actually from the TAY SOL at Auchingarrich the next day. They have now been correctly labelled, that's all

[HarryO]

Disappointed to see I can't display a ranking list for my fellow runners in my Short class. Am I missing something? (Sorry but haven't read through all 10 pages of posts!).
I will have to change my new year resolution of getting to the top ten of my 'S' class.
Can anyone explain why this seems to be the only feature of the old system which has been left out? I feel victimised!

[mappingmum]

Yes, you're right. The distinction between L/S runners is now lost with the new algorithm because you can score regardless of the course you run.

[Adventure Racer]

Yes, you're right. The distinction between L/S runners is now lost with the new algorithm because you can score regardless of the course you run.

Even if you run the XL course, M course or XS course.

[ba-ba]

A rather good description of how the new system works is from Saturday's Beeley middle race, where John Rocke picked up cds and map for brown, scoring 1319 point. This would place him ~7th on the black (which he was meant to do). Looking at who was running, he'd look to finish around the top 5, so it appears the system works!

[NickC]

Shouldn't he have been disqualified for not running the course that he had entered or is this an added consequence of the new "course level" system. Presumably, the organiser "kindly" shifted him to Course 2 when he downloded.

[NickC]

Shouldn't he have been disqualified for not running the course that he had entered or is this an added consequence of the new "course level" system. Presumably, the organiser "kindly" shifted him to Course 2 when he downloded.

[AndyC]

Without any knowledge of the incident at all he could have picked up the wrong map because one rogue map had entered the pile -or he might have aranged his change of course before he started- or he might have had to change because of no correct map being available.
However I doubt the first and last at a high profile event - local run out it might even be probable.

[Spookster]

Shouldn't he have been disqualified for not running the course that he had entered or is this an added consequence of the new "course level" system. Presumably, the organiser "kindly" shifted him to Course 2 when he downloded.

Why should he be disqualified? At colour coded Level 2 Regional Events any person is allowed to be competitive on any course. And they can score ranking points on any course. There was no age-related competition being held.

I doubt he even had to ask - I think we had the download computer set to automatically switch courses if someone ran a course they didn't enter.

And as ba-ba has said - he probably got about the same number of ranking points as he would have done on Black.

[Homer]

And as ba-ba has said - he probably got about the same number of ranking points as he would have done on Black.

But maybe if he'd run Blue he would have got a few more points?

Whether he should have been disqualified is a moot point. Luckily there were enough spare maps that we didn't run out...

[NickC]

Thanks. I have no issues with ranking points. He had an excellent run. I agree that the new system allows anyone to run any course and count for ranking points.

But I am sure that I once read in the guidelines that it was the competitor's responsibility to check that he/she has the right map. Due to my own stupidity, I have twice gone back to the start to get the right map (without "re-starting") as I picked up the wrong one. Once I was disqualified for running the wrong course as I had run the short course by picking up that map by accident. The organiser wouldn't allow me to switch from the long to the short course that I had run.

[Spookster]

Luckily there were enough spare maps that we didn't run out...

Luck? Surely that was the skill and judgement of the organiser!

[Scott]

But maybe if he'd run Blue he would have got a few more points?

Probably, and almost certainly if he had run Green.

I suggest that anyone concerned by the bonus-points-for-running-a-shorter-course-than-usual business (eg. Cat Taylor's Greythwaite megascore) emails feedback@britishorienteering.org.uk specifically to suggest that the criteria used for discarding outliers in the new ranking scheme are too strict, and may need reviewing. Correcting that probably won't solve the problem entirely, but it should make things a quite bit better and ought to be very simple to change.