WOC Middle Quali

[graeme]

Decent results. Doing well in Long and middle was always going to be a big ask.

Some cracking good long route choice legs on those "middle" courses ...

[EddieH]

Yes, not what most people are saying is true middle distance orienteering. Relatively few legs and quite a bit of easy running on some obvious route choices. I cannot see how this is "middle" style - it seems to me like a mini classic.

[Gnitworp]

Maybe introducing the death penalty for planners who don't set 'middle' style legs would help?

[Toni]

Well done to Aislinn making it through to the final as well!

[Tatty]

Family double for the Cranes. Grace, running for Australia, qualified as did husband Matt

[Scott]

Should the IOF Rules be amended to extend the "maximum running times" for the Middle and Long qualifiers (and the Relay?)? There have been 19 athletes DSQed at WOC so far for being over time, the vast majority from "non-traditional" orienteering countries: 9 in the Long qualifiers (2 Hong Kong, 2 Serbia, 1 Netherlands, 1 South Korea, 1 Macedonia, 1 Japan, 1 China) and 10 in the Middle (3 Macedonia, 2 Hong Kong, 2 South Korea, 1 Taiwan, 1 Uruguay, 1 Serbia).

I know it's the World Champs, and a serious top-level competition etc, but if the IOF is going to invest time and money into encouraging new countries to come to WOC - which is a perfectly worthy aim - it does seem a bit silly to then disqualify many of the athletes from those countries for being over the maximum time, even though they have otherwise completed the course successfully.

I don't see why it should make much difference if confirmation of who had come 41st in a Middle qualifier was delayed by an extra hour or so. I can understand the need for a fairly strict cut-off time for the Sprint qualifier, when you need to get everything sorted for the finals on the same day, but then there's not quite the same potential for getting hopelessly lost on the Sprint in the first place.

[Gross]

That path through the middle must have been like the M25 by the time of the last starters

[Kitch]

Should the IOF Rules be amended to extend the "maximum running times" for the Middle and Long qualifiers ...etc...

Alternatively if you are that far off the pace then not being DQed provides a stepping stone by which to measure progress.
Finishing in time becomes an achievement.

[Kitch]

Yes, not what most people are saying is true middle distance orienteering. Relatively few legs and quite a bit of easy running on some obvious route choices. I cannot see how this is "middle" style - it seems to me like a mini classic.

so what ?

[Spookster]

Should the IOF Rules be amended to extend the "maximum running times" for the Middle and Long qualifiers (and the Relay?)? There have been 19 athletes DSQed at WOC so far for being over time, the vast majority from "non-traditional" orienteering countries: 9 in the Long qualifiers (2 Hong Kong, 2 Serbia, 1 Netherlands, 1 South Korea, 1 Macedonia, 1 Japan, 1 China) and 10 in the Middle (3 Macedonia, 2 Hong Kong, 2 South Korea, 1 Taiwan, 1 Uruguay, 1 Serbia).

While I agree in principle that it doesn't seem right to be disqualifying runners typically from the newer orienteering nations just because they've taken a long time, in practice the line has to be drawn somewhere. Perhaps IOF rules should be allowing a little more time, without it becoming difficult for the organisers.

With the changes proposed for WOC in the Future, the Long and Middle qualifying races would no longer be part of WOC week anyway, so I guess IOF is unlikely to modify the rules just for the next couple of years.

[Becks]

I think I agree with everyone. Maybe a new category of "over time" in the results list as opposed to DQ?

What is the limit, btw?

[andypat]

Agree with Becks - apart from anything else, it cant look good to anyone outside the sport to have so many people disqualified from the World CHamps without any obvious explanation - it makes it look like people have been caught cheating.

Kitch - just because you wont get out of bed for anything less than a 2 hour run!

[Scott]

Maybe a new category of "over time" in the results list as opposed to DQ?

I like this idea. It would be nice to recognise that they got around the course!

The current limits are 150min for Men's Long, 110min for Women's Long, 70min for Middle and 50min(!) for Sprint. 5 out of 9 overtime runners at the Long and 6 out of 10 at the Middle were less than 10min over, and I can't believe it would make much difference to the organisers to extend the limits by that much, or even by an extra to 30 min.

On the other hand, as Kitch says, those countries who just missed the cut-off this time now have a realistic goal for next year (assuming they come back!).

[EddieH]

EddieH wrote:
Yes, not what most people are saying is true middle distance orienteering. Relatively few legs and quite a bit of easy running on some obvious route choices. I cannot see how this is "middle" style - it seems to me like a mini classic.


Kith wrote
so what ?

Precisely Kitch. I was pointing out that IMO the reality of the event does not match the IOF specification. I assume that your "So what?" means that you like me Gnitworp and others think that trying to dictate 3 distinct difference of style is artificial and counter to providing the best possible competition.

I think it matters less in middle, but I detest the interpretation of long that produces course like WOC in the Ukraine where apart from some massive route choices, all the most technically interesting areas were avoided.

[NeilC]

Course closing times are useful - particularly when controls are having to be re-used on a subsequent day. I wouldn't like to hang around for an extra hour just to let a slow runner get an overtime rather than a timed out tag. Also seems reasonable that an early runner should run under the same rules as a late runner with respect to getting DSQ if they finish after the course closing time. The current overtime rules just mean that the course closing time is relative rather than absolute.