Compass Sport Cup

[Blonde bombshell]

Graeme - I understand that the Brown & Blue Men were designated large courses at CSC because of the number of runners for those courses. Every Blue mens course I have seen has had a large number of runners and 'deserves' to have a difference in the scoring. In the qualifying rounds the brown course has had roughly the same number of entrants as Green etc. So why does it get the same scoring as Blue men?
This weighting of scores in the qualifiers results in the Brown at the final having a large number of runners for that one race (teams able to use 6 scores on Brown in qualifying rounds more likely to reach the final).
I don't believe It has anything to do with the age range.

[NeilC]

This weighting of scores in the qualifiers results in the Brown at the final having a large number of runners for that one race (teams able to use 6 scores on Brown in qualifying rounds more likely to reach the final).

Can you actually back that up with good data and appropriate analysis?

In the SEOA round the order of the teams and the number of Brown course scorers was

1 SO (2)
2 SN (3)
3 SLOW (6)
4 HH (5)
5 SAX (6)

which doesn't seem to support the hypothesis that those clubs with strong Brown course runners do better.

[IanD]

Every year there are moans about the format but I've yet to see a solid proposal that would be an improvement.

OK, I'll bite! Although nothing new and not affecting the final, or who runs which courses, or the scoring.

One of the benefits of the competition is supposed to be improving club spirit, getting people together to take on rival clubs. Once upon a time, there used to be three qualifying rounds before the final, and in each round there was a 'cup-tie' between just one pair of clubs. This was great for promoting club spirit, and sometimes produced shock results.

Now with just one multi-club regional heat before the final, there are only two or three clubs likely to win each cup or trophy heat, with a similar number just there to make up the numbers.

The problem with the old system was that the clubs had to agree the (existing) fixtures at which to stage their match. To fit the scoring system, these had to be colour-coded events, but most serious orienteers wanted to run a Badge (age-class) event most weekends. This made finding suitable neutral colour-coded fixtures a nightmare for club captains, especially if, as always seemed to happen, some clubs delayed their first and second rounds excessively; the third round always seemed forced into some bracken-infested forest in mid-summer.

As a club captain at the time, I reluctantly supported the CompassSport changing to a single multi-club heat. It made my life much easier, but I feel the competition has attracted less interest within the club ever since.

Now however, Badge events are no more, having been replaced by events with colour-coded courses. Thus the moderately-major events which CompassSport ties used to have to avoid would now be suitable. It would now be much easier for club captains to arrange ties between pairs of clubs. Maybe we should go back to the old system?

[awk]

Every year there are moans about the format but I've yet to see a solid proposal that would be an improvement.

Well, whether things are an improvement is a matter of opinion, but I've certainly seen some - not least (surprise, surprise), one that I have long believed in and iterated.

Like others, I believe that the CSCup encourages nobody other than those clubs at the forefront of the respective competitions. In the old format, there was at least some variety and some incentive to progress, but little of that now.

There needs to be something for all clubs to aim at, and I believe a more league based structure would help. Bearing in mind that we don't want to overload the fixtures list or stretch commitment, I believe the format could still be based over 2 weekends.

Basically, the country is split up into 'areas' - 3 in England (incl Wales??, eg North, East and West, and one in Scotland. Based on their record, clubs are divided into divisions of 4-5 clubs. In the first round, each division has a match involving the whole division. The top club is then promoted for next year, the bottom club relegated. The top clubs also then go forward for a match against the winners of their corresponding divisions in the other areas (runners up could compete as well possibly). Thus the winner of East Division 3 would go forward to compete for the National Division 3 title. The winners of the top division would win the CSCup, Div 2 the Trophy, and others divisional titles/cups etc.
Given the differing size/strength of Scottish clubs, it would be fairly straightforward to put in a mechanism to ensure that they competed at an appropriate level at 'National' level, with the opportunity to move up/down national divisions. The Welsh could go down the same route if wanted. Or, of course, they could simply hold separate competitions, and leave English clubs to an English competition, depending on what the Scots and Welsh wanted to do.

To my mind, that would give clubs far more interest and incentive, and lead to much more interesting competitions.

[andypat]

I'm not sure AWK - what you are describing sounds worryingly similar to the Davis cup in tennis - and that must surely be the least eagerly awaited competition on that circuit.

Orienteering is inherently an individual sport (and most orienteers are inherently individual in their approach - OK a generalisation but it comes up on here a lot).

We get some form of team competition with the big relay events and the 11 person relay in Scotland which is great but has its critics and recently did have to change its spots.

I cant see the attraction of a more league based structure for interclub competition, not least because the CST as it stands requires me to run Brown when my preferred (M40short) course is blue. I do this for the club in the knowledge that i probably wont count towards the result but want to support it. My support might wane if this was a more regular requirement. And I suspect theres a few M45s who feel the same but from the oppposite perspective!

[awk]

If you go back and take another look andypat, you will see that I'm not asking you to run for your club more often: there is one area match in divisions (equivalent to the current qualifier) and, for those clubs who progress to the national finals, one final (equivalent to the current final). That's it.

It's not like the Davis Cup at all, in that there are just these 2 matches (and the second one not for all clubs).

The main attraction to me in splitting into divisions with relegation/promotion is that there is much more interest for clubs outside the top very few, with something for all clubs to aim for, as well as making matches more competitive as clubs of a roughly similar standard compete together.

This also, of course, doesn't say anything about the scoring system. I'd take another look at that too, but I've not got sufficiently developed ideas to comment at present, other than that I'd broaden the way the classes are scored to give more flexiblity in what course one can run. But with a divisional system, you could have different numbers in each division scoring (e.g. 25 in Division 1, but just, say, 22 in Division 2, and so on).

[Blonde bombshell]

I truly am sad with nothing better to do
NeilC - 'Can you actually back that up with good data and appropriate analysis?'

If only all results were available in the same format & easily found. However, I have come up with the following Brown results:-

SE EA WM NW Y&H SC
1 SO (2) WAOC (5) OD (3) DEE (6) SYO (6) BOK (3)
2 SN (3) NOC (4) HOC (6) MDOC (4) AIRE (5) SOC (4)
3 SLOW (6) NOR (6) WCH (6) SROC (6) ? ?
4 HH (5) LEI (4) LOC (2)
5 SAX (6) WCOC (2)

Analysis?
5 qualyfying teams used 5+ scorers, 4 used 4-
From the 21 clubs shown 11 used 5+ scorers, 10 used 4-
Numbers on senior courses:-

BR BL M BL W GR M GR W
SE 73 116 37 58 60
EA 39 66 22 40 42
WM 46 75 25 55 29
NW 48 89 34 76 54
YH 40 76 32 62 42
SC 48 104 41 77 48

I will leave you to draw your own conclusions, but bear on mind that Brown & Blue M arge designated large classes (6 score can count, 100,99,98) while for the rest 4 can count 100,98,96
This brings me back to my first question - why is Brown a 'large' class?

[andypat]

If you go back and take another look andypat, you will see that I'm not asking you to run for your club more often: there is one area match in divisions (equivalent to the current qualifier) and, for those clubs who progress to the national finals, one final (equivalent to the current final). That's it.

It's not like the Davis Cup at all, in that there are just these 2 matches (and the second one not for all clubs).

Point well made AWK (and taken). I see you are trying to be inclusive to smaller clubs.

[NeilC]

Analysis?
5 qualyfying teams used 5+ scorers, 4 used 4-
From the 21 clubs shown 11 used 5+ scorers, 10 used 4-

Thus showing no correlation between clubs with lots of Brown scorers and those qualifying. The null hypothesis wins again.

Brown and Blue Men are a large classes because this mirrored membership numbers. Technically of course 100% of the membership can enter Brown. Perhaps those attending the final don't represent the distribution of the membership.

[PKJ]

I will leave you to draw your own conclusions,

We really are very short of orienteers in the 20-45 age group, both Men & Women.
(though I know some in those age groups are reluctant to run CS Cup events, because of the length of their course)

Overall, I don't think there's much to fix with the CS Cup, but is there any way of getting more people to contribute to their club's score? For example, there were over 70 AIRE runners at the final, but how many of us had a realistic prospect of affecting our club's position?
I've also calculated that SYO's 2nd 25 scored about 1650 points, more than either SOC's or WAOC's 1st 25. How much of a sense of achievement that gives them, or SYO, I really don't know.

[The Loofa]

Thank you, Neil C for the hint. yes I have a few ideas.

There's not a lot wrong with the current format - so most of my thoughts involve a bit of tinkering..
except one...
I agree with Awk in that only a minority of clubs in the country are motivated to do well in the Cup and a change to a league system with promotion and relegation would motivate a lot of clubs.
My preferred model is
Div 1 - top 10-12 clubs. Div 2 - next 10-12 and so with maybe divs 3 and 4 having north and south sections. Plenty of promotion and relgation (say 3 each way) so every club has something to fight for.
Only disadvantage I see is there need only be one match a year (and some may see that as an advantage). Awk's model may work just as well.
One area I do agree with awk (well, it was my idea in the first place!) was reducing number of counters per division. I'd go for 24 in Div1, 20 in Div 2, 16 in div 3, 12 in div4. 25 is an awful lot of counters for some clubs. Have a look at the qualifying rounds and see how many clubs can't get a full team out.

This thread started with Blonde Bombshell not uderstanding the points differential between different courses. The theory is that you score the same number of points for finishing the same proportion of the way down the field, whether you're competing against 150 in Blue Men or 30 in Orange women. Ideally there'd be the same number of people on each course but the demographics are never going to make that possible. So if course X has 3 times as many runners as course Y, the points differential between places on Y should be 3 times what it is on X.
The current system started in 2005, and there has been very little (none!)in the way of review of class-to-course-allcation since then. It's somewhat over-due.

And my other pet hate in the current set-up is limiting the number of counters each club can have on each course. It's completely unnecessary. Clubs with skewed membership numbers are disadvantaged anyway. Consider the extreme example of Club A with the best 25 M21s in the country but no-one else competing against club B with 25 moderate runners spread evenly across classes. easy win for Club B. The main effect of the numbers limit is to prevent some clubs fielding a full team (as Graeme has mentioned)

So will it get looked at? I understand it's down to Senior Competitions Group, where myself, Awk, Graeme and Scott are among the regional reps. Despite that I'm not holding my breath

[awk]

One area I do agree with awk (well, it was my idea in the first place!) was reducing number of counters per division.

It may well have been - I know we've had this discussion before, and I may well have absorbed that bit from that! Show's it's a good idea! Whilst I obviously prefer my model, I agree that yours would also be a big improvement over the current structure, and would rather go for it rather than sticking with the current system, with which I'm distinctly unenamoured (not list the, to my mind, current way of differentiating clubs: size does not necessarily represent strength).

One could, of course, still have two fixtures, adding the two scores together.

[SeanC]

I'm sure there's something in the league model's of The Loofa and Awk, but for the Compass Sport Cup/Trophy, the old style head to head knockout competition proposed by IanD (ie the original CSC format) will be much more popular with my small, peripheral club. About half of my club prefer to stay local. The CSC is often the only event that persuades these local Orienteers to travel further. They would be much less likely to do so if there were 3 heats in England instead of the current 6. I suspect the small peripheral clubs will enter incomplete teams and it will be treated as just another regional by the small core of keen travellers in those clubs.

A head to head match for small to medium sized clubs has much more possibilities. It will be more local, and much more chance for the different teams to mingle and have a bit of friendly banter and get to know each other. That can only be a good thing (especially for small clubs where inter-club co-operation is pretty much essential, and where new Orienteers don't have many clubmates to bump into at non-local events). A big heat with lots of teams wont give you this.

It's probably no coincidence that Awk and The Loofa both run for large 'cup' clubs, and IanD and myself run for smaller 'trophy' clubs.

Would running head to head competitions at South East regional events work though? I think the SE League would still work OK, but what would be the effect on the SE Gallopen (can't find any SE Gallopen rules online).

[NeilC]

(can't find any SE Gallopen rules online)

http://www.moorenet.co.uk/seoa/events/eventinfo/seoa_competitions.pdf

[PMG]

Well - when I was involved in Fixtures I proposed that clubs qualified by way of local league for the Compass Sport Cup Finals, which could have increased participation in the local leagues.
Some tinkering required to make it more interesting YBT stsyle.
But - it fell on stony ground.

Peter G Ex Fixtues