British Sprint Championships

[NeilC]

Just to clarify Peter, does that mean that the British elite sprint in the current format will remain, with an additional age class event at another time? (I'm hoping the answer is yes!).

Corrrect. The event as it stands now will continue with anyone able to compete for the title of British (elite) sprint champion. In addition a separate all age class competition will run in which we can all compete to be become British Champions in our own age group. Note that unlike the classic distance championships the elite and all age-class championships will not be combined at a single event.

[RichT]

NeilC wrote:
Note that unlike the classic distance championships the elite and all age-class championships will not be combined at a single event.

Neil, I don't think this is entirely correct. My understanding from last weekends fixtures meeting is that the Elite will have a separate Championships, but may on a year on year basis choose to have their event within the British Championships event if the dates and terrain fit their needs.

[EddieH]

All in all noone seems to know exactly what the situation is.

I am not prepared to trawl through past discussions but I clearly remember assurances that a full sprint championships would be in place for 2008. When the event is published as the Britsh Sprint Championships, and the British Elite middle, the natural assumption is that this has taken place for sprint, but not for middle.

I agree with AWK not to split it up into lots of different courses, and AS IT STANDS there is an issue about different heat qualities, but I'd live with that element of luck (Orienteering always has luck - start times - weather changes....)
However there is no need whatsoever to have this element of luck. All that is needed is to seed and spread the M21s evenly, then place evereyone in each age group in a the same heat as each other. That way the best are bound to be in the A Elite final, and every age class will be won by the highewst competitor in the highest final.

The argument about the size of the class meaning we should increase the age ranges has 2 flaws.
1 If this is so what are you going to do about the British Night Champs?
2 If the British Sprint Championships offers half the number of titles, what message does that give the haverers and doubters about the value of the event?

I still think the decisions are crackpot, and if this is not meant to be a true British Championship it emphasises how opaque and beaurocratic the systems are.

[graeme]

From 2009 as per the Events Review

AFAIK, the events review supported Charlie Adams proposal that the elite sprint format
would be fine for awarding all-age-group prizes, provided the heats were seeded with both
elites and age-group (i.e. elites evenly spread across the heats, each age group
concentrated in a single heat - this produces a start list entirely consistent with current rules).
Has this been thrown out? It's a shame OD weren't able to implement it this year, but to be fair
they didn't sign up to do so.

Also, that the middle was not especially suited for combining elite with everyone else (due to
people running out of class, fast moving elites in the same area as slower folk).
Has this also been turned on its head?

But I'm especially confused because the fixtures list is the exact opposite of what you said (and
exactly what the Event Review wanted).

May 9 EM NOC R British Sprint Championships Nottingham
May 10 EM LEI R British Elite Championships - Middle Loughborough

just for Graeme there are no trick controls.

You mean everyone else gets the trick controls

Of course, by far the most annoying thing is that I can't make the races this year I ran a sprint course at Warwick Uni in about 2001 (for training on the generic campus map) - I thought it had fantastic potential then, and I've no doubt with ISSOM it will be even better.

[RichT]

Eddie, I can't say I've embraced Sprint or Urban race format so don't have any views as to how an Age Class Sprint Championship might be put together.

But if yourself and Awk (and others) have a strong viewpoint as to how you see an Age Class Sprint Champs being structured, then you ought to reach a consensus between yourselves and feed it back into the appropriate working group.
I'm not sure whether thats the new Major Events Group (Mike Forrest) or Rules Group (Barry Elkington) or Senior Competitions Group (?) or back to Events Committee (Lyn West), but lets try and be constructive & proactive in order to put what you want in place for 2009 and beyond.

Maybe graeme can advise who to contact, and find out whether new proposals are in the pipeline ?

[NeilC]

Whichever way you arrange the non-elite classes in the heats (either put a single age class in a single heat or evenly distribute by ability through the heats) there will be many cases of medals and quite likely championships determined by the qualifying round not the final. This is not just unlucky the system is flawed becuase it expects only one or two non-elite to make the final. If a single age class is put in one heat then the system expects perhaps one or two M50s (say) to reach the A final whereas it will prevent a number of younger competitors, who by most criteria are better than those M50s, from reaching the A final. Is such positive discrimination fair or should everyone have a fair chance of reaching the A final by ability? To be a credible championship using this format surely the best 10-20 runners from each age class need to do enough to qualify from the heats and then race hard in the same final to get the medals. I would consider it a joke if just one M50 qualified for the A final then walked round the final before picking up his trophy.

In terms of working groups Elite Competitions (John Palmer) are also heavily involved.

[graeme]

To be a credible championship you need the best people in a given age group at the event running the same course.

The JK sprint champions will be credible, even after a single race.

A combined middle champs is not credible, because the top M20s, M35s and M40s will not run their age group (unless its combined with elite).

The method Eddie mentions produces credible champions, because they will have beaten everyone else in their age
group on the same course. There's a case for basing the age-group awards on the first (single) race, rather than either
that or the final: note that qualifying races in all-age group champs are going to look pretty silly, so a standalone age-champs will be a single race. It also provides a big event atmosphere, with the elite champion beating hundreds of others, and a showcased elite final. Of all the championships, it is by far the best suited to combining elite and age-group.

Noone expects any M50s to get in the A final (look at the facts in Scarboro - no M40s either!). To do so they'd have to beat seeded elite runners, in which case good luck to them!

[NeilC]

Yes in Eddie's scenario the best in each age group would have beaten the rest but only in the qualifier which is why I specified that it wouldn't produce a credible champion based on the two round format. Determining an age group championship on the basis of one race is fine but there is a feeling that people would not travel any distance for a 20 minute race even if there was something on the Saturday.

A format in which age group champions are decided on the basis of the first round only has merit. The second round races would still exist for those not in the A final - and there could be additional prizes for B final winners etc etc. There is still the problem I mentioned previously that a good M18 (say) may qualify for the A final if all the M18s were spread evenly among the heats but may struggle if he were in the same heat as all the other M18s and of course M21s. One thing that elite competitions wanted to avoid was good M18/20/35/40 having to decide whether to enter their own age class or the elite. In a simple two course championship of course everyone is on the elite course, although if a given age group is allocated to a particular heat an individual may decide that they have a better chance of reaching the A final (and getting more UK cup points etc) if they enter as an M21 rather than as an M18.

[awk]

There's a case for basing the age-group awards on the first (single) race, rather than either
that or the final: note that qualifying races in all-age group champs are going to look pretty silly, so a standalone age-champs will be a single race. It also provides a big event atmosphere, with the elite champion beating hundreds of others, and a showcased elite final. Of all the championships, it is by far the best suited to combining elite and age-group.

So, age class championships within the qualifiers, and the best from qualifiers to an elite final? Sounds excellent. Still have B/C/D etc. finals, but only count for open competition not age classes which were sorted in qualifiers?

[NeilC]

Noone expects any M50s to get in the A final (look at the facts in Scarboro - no M40s either!). To do so they'd have to beat seeded elite runners, in which case good luck to them!

But at Scarborough one of yourself, Charlie, Martin Ward or Dave Peel might well have qualified had all the M18s and M20s been in their own age related heat.

[King Penguin]

But at Scarborough one of yourself, Charlie, Martin Ward or Dave Peel might well have qualified had all the M18s and M20s been in their own age related heat.

.. but then you would not have had 4 M20s in the A final, as happened at Scarborough.
M40s and above may well have run their own age class, but there's a strong possibility that some M20s may have elected to run up to get a better chance of qualifying for the A final, so then you don't have an accurate M20 champ based on the qualifier. If it's also a FCC qulifier, then you have to be very clear well in advance how the DCC points will be allocated - round 1 or final.

[JEP]

The British Elite Sprint and Middle Championship has been a great success over the last three years or so. It has helped the interest from all age groups to grow so that now there is a demand to run British Champs for all age groups for Middle and Sprint.

It is not practicable to run a two round Sprint event for both elites and all age classes on the same area on the same day without the quality being compromised. It is possible to run the British Middle Elite and British for all age classes on the same day (see Mulgrave last year). In 2009 Nottingham will stage the British Elite Sprint. Anyone can enter but there will only be Elite British Champions. Leicester will stage the British Elite Middle and the British All ages Middle Championship the following day. The British all Ages Sprint may be staged elsewhere perhaps with heats and a final - yet to be decided and obviously it requires an offer to stage it.

This is an interim arrangement for 2009 based on the bids from the clubs involved and what they felt was appropraite for them once there was the possibility of including all ages. For 2010 other solutions are being considered but the priciple is that the quality of the very successful British Elite Sprint must not be compromised.

I favour a weekend for the British Elite Sprint and Middle during the UK Cup season. Why change something that has been successful. A separate weekend for the British Sprint and Middle for all ages could be staged separately - perhaps even in the Autumn. Two events make for a good weekend of racing, and all the ages would get two opportunities for this type of racing albeit one without the British title.

[graeme]

At last someone upholding the (alleged) nopesport tradition of bald assertion in total ignorance of the facts.

Lets look at some facts...

Mulgrave Woods...
M21 winner is an M45
M35 winner is an M40
The fastest M40/M45s are on elite
The fastest M14 is on elite (unless you count the M12 who won M14)
The fastest W35/W40/W45 and (in case you forgot) W60 are on elite

W16 winner is a W14
All the best M/W14s are running M/W16
All the best M/W16s are running M/W18

I can't remember a single event, ever, when people were so reluctant to run their own age class. The notion that this somehow proves the concept of running all age groups together is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read on nopesport (including Mharky's rants).

Scarborough...
180 entrants for the Open British Champs, every one of us with the same a priori chance of winning. Two rounds,
awards for all age classes. Not one person who took part has ever previously said the event was compromised for the elites - and we all got to watch the spectacle of the elite final. Indeed, from M14 to M70 everyone seemed to enjoy being in a competition open and welcoming to all age groups .

[EddieH]

Graeme says awards for all age groups at Scarborough. No - as I remember two age sets and as the top one started at M55 I happened to get it. But it is the tite that interests me, not an award. And tell me how can any M65+ compete with me in my first year M55?

Scarborough had everything - except prestige.

I have been planning to attend this year's British Sprint Champs for some time since the word "Elite was removed, and as far as I am concerned I will consider the highest placed finalist in M55 to be the British M55 champion whomsoever it might be and whether or not they are the only M55 to make the particular final that they are in.

[andy]

the problem (?) with Sprint o is that you CAN run out of class much much more easily, and this is what leads me to believe in the 'one competition' idea.

It's not technically challenging, the idea is to navigate through simple terrain at great pace, thus any very fast runner who might not cut it among the elites on a 14km course through all sorts of tough terrain both navigationally and physically can do very well.
'upsets' can (and do) happen, you only have to look at the 6-day sprint race, where a W16 (i think) beat the best sprinter in the uk, who came 28th in the world sprint o champs a few weeks later.

It's a great format, keep it simple, keep it spectator friendly, keep it fast, keep it furious, keep it fun!
There's no need to bog down sprint o with 40 different age classes