4-tier event structure defined

[AndyC]

I'm slightly concerned that level C has toilets as mandatory - which will keep events at D that might easily be a good C in every other facet (borderline B?) as they can be impractical/uneconomic out in the wilds.
Weasel word like "normally" added perhaps?

[graeme]

We seldom have traders in Scotland, so either that criterion will vanish or we'll put everything at C. I'm sure any attempt to ban EOD at Level B will quietly disappear.

All looks rather pointless really, all events will just carry on as they are and nobody will know or care what level. At least the divide between C and D is now in a sensible place, where the three-levellers wanted it all along.

[NeilC]

There was some comment before the last change that the event structure should support the competition structure. A bit odd then that this new structure has been published before the results of the ongoing competition review. Presumably the competition review will recommend that a number of competitions will have to be held at Level B events. Who within BOF will be responsible, I wonder, for assessing the suitability of a Level B event area? Fixtures? MEG? The appointed controller?

[Scott]

I think the Board have had their hands forced by the requirement in the AGM motion for the new structure to be implemented from 1st Jan 2011: they couldn't have left announcing the details of the new structure much later if they wanted to give people time to get to grips with it, but the competition review is far from finalized (my understanding is that the initial set of proposals is currently being written).

[Red Adder]

At first glance I thought what really is the difference between B and C apart from the grade of controller, waffle about traders and, as a punter, the annoying pre-entry requirement. Then I saw the bit about terrain - this one could really run and run and where do we find the assessors for terrain or do we fall back to the default setting of its down south so it must be sh*te. But there if nothing about how the entry and results should be cut - age groups or course standard.

I suppose at least if we have an extra level clubs can charge a premium price - but wasn't that really part of the reason behind the move anyway ?

[Red Adder]

[quote="AndyC"]I'm slightly concerned that level C has toilets as mandatory - [/quote]


I actually think this is a good call (and so do several lady orienteers of my acquaintance).

Even under the current 3 tiers I'm aware of several clubs who "can't afford" such facilities at L2 events with an above average fee - they certainly should forced in to line (controllers please note).

[graeme]

its down south so it must be sh*te.

Yes, I did already point out to the SOA that a better standard of area is required for level C than for B

[LostAgain]

its down south so it must be sh*te.

The two are synonymous, you did not need to repeat yourself

[Mrs H]

how rude!

I think it's quite funny that no where is mentioned the ordering of result or number of courses on offer - how long do you think it will be before someone breaks cover

[AlanB]

I'm slightly concerned that level C has toilets as mandatory - which will keep events at D that might easily be a good C in every other facet (borderline B?) as they can be impractical/uneconomic out in the wilds.
Weasel word like "normally" added perhaps?

Those events in this part of Scotland that are currently deemed 'local' but which, I think, will be in the new level 'C' - I'm thinking of South of Scotland League in particular - already do have toilet provision. One club - Roxburgh Reivers - solved the problem or remoteness/restricted access by using camping toilets and associated toilet tents. A fantastic bit of improvisation, I thought.

[rebbid]

Please can the new model be rubber stamped at the AGM to move on to something more useful, and anyone raising an opposing motion should be sent to clean out all level C toilets.

[AlanB]

We seldom have traders in Scotland, so either that criterion will vanish or we'll put everything at C. I'm sure any attempt to ban EOD at Level B will quietly disappear.

All looks rather pointless really, all events will just carry on as they are and nobody will know or care what level. At least the divide between C and D is now in a sensible place, where the three-levellers wanted it all along.

That is the key for me. At the risk of sounding obsessive, it gets many well-organised events into the ranking system.

[AndyC]

I'm slightly concerned that level C has toilets as mandatory - which will keep events at D that might easily be a good C in every other facet (borderline B?) as they can be impractical/uneconomic out in the wilds.
Weasel word like "normally" added perhaps?

Those events in this part of Scotland that are currently deemed 'local' but which, I think, will be in the new level 'C' - I'm thinking of South of Scotland League in particular - already do have toilet provision. One club - Roxburgh Reivers - solved the problem or remoteness/restricted access by using camping toilets and associated toilet tents. A fantastic bit of improvisation, I thought.

I must nip up the road and have a look sometime.
I'm still worried that the practicality of real toilets (not tents with buckets or holes in the ground -which are worse than useless) in areas with limited access roads may be an issue keeping events that are good enough for "near B" down at D -not a cost issue just practical arrrangements. In theory better facilities and terrain mean more competitors so economics should finance but when the October Oddyssey only draws 148 (pre-registered) competitors (Flyer states "limited toilets") gilding the lily might be a risk.

And if I'm organising at level C I'll get the toilets cleaned - I'm not opposing the motion just looking to refine & clarify -isn't that how democracy works?

[Big Jon]

Toilets at level C will be a bit of a sticky point for us in Deeside (Scotland) - might mean our "local" events are all level D - but don't worry they will all have a range of courses and be in some of the best terrain in Britain. We've not had complaints about toilets (or lack of) at our events so I'm not sure we'll be rushing to provide them - it would wipe out the profit from most of our local events to provide 1 or 2 portaloos at each of our 5 or 6 local events each year.

[pete.owens]

It shouldn't make any difference to which events are included in the rankings as the requirements for level C pretty much the same as those for level 2 in the existing system.

Except that a lot of events that were perfectly good enough to use for the ranking list were registered at level 3. The new structure should remove this problem.

Any event that is good enough to be registered at level C is good enough to be registered at level 2 so should already be in use for ranking purposes. The change in the event structure creates a new category of high quality events in line with the AGM motion, but makes no significant change to the threshold for ranking events.