4 Levels

[Scott]

Perhaps we only need two grades of controller?

[Snail]

Agree.

Existing Grade 1 controller remain, and can control new L1/L2 events
Existing Grade 3 controllers can control L2 events (and perhaps are renamed Grade 2)
Existing Grade 2 controlers get split between new Grades 1 and 2.

If associations or clubs want to ensure more experienced controllers are used for their "higher level" L2 events, it is within their ability to make this happen. It shouldn't be difficult to produce an "experience" list for controllers - either automatically (from the BOF events database?) or via regional controllers officers.

[Mr Chips]

Last year's City Race was L2 and its results have been uploaded to the new ranking scheme. (Not the old one - too difficult!)

I noticed this too... but there's no points against anyone's name!

http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/e ... 9&course=1

I followed this up with BOF. Apparently it wasn't a ranking event last year.

Now re-uploaded and showing ranking points correctly as far as I can see. Many thanks to Caroline at BOF for sorting this for us.

[fish]

Perhaps we only need two grades of controller?

Completely agree - might even mean more people are able / happy to control events.

And RJ - I have to disagree - I think the Cumbria Galoppen events are completely suitable for the new intermediate level - they are run to a consistent standard, you know what you're likely to get, results get sorted quickly, and they attract a mix of new/local/more distant orienteers.
Yes, there aren't as many courses as some events, but it's a well run series seemingly well suited to the 'intermediate' level. Why does it need to be 'level 3 of 4' ?

[awk]

Another little snied swipe! Perhaps it is BECAUSE they and others have spent many hours trying to make a system work that just won't, is why they have tabled the motion.

Whilst others (including seabird who is club fixtures secretary, Grade 2 controller, regular organiser/planner, and one of the club's leading mappers) HAVE managed to make the system work (so it can!), and have no desire to see that work messed around.

[RJ]

I think the Cumbria Galoppen events are completely suitable for the new intermediate level - they are run to a consistent standard, you know what you're likely to get, results get sorted quickly, and they attract a mix of new/local/more distant orienteers.

The series is run to generate a Galoppen league, which is seen very much as a target for the youngsters in the region. Their position in the league improves as they do more and more events. Over several years they will develop through the colours. IMO any linking to the ranking structure will have a detrimental effect on the league. Granted this should not affect juniors, but I am not sure that there won't be pressure to alter a working structure to take account of 'ranking requirements'.

The question of controller grade is also a concern, Perhaps that is being solved.

The Cumbrian Galoppen is very much a Cumbrian event and is controlled and organised by LOC, Bl and WCOC. No governance from NWOA is involved. It will be up to those clubs to decide which level the CG remains in!

[RJ]

(including seabird who is club fixtures secretary, Grade 2 controller, regular organiser/planner, and one of the club's leading mappers)

That degree of volunteering energy is not unique to seabird. I applaud the amount of selfless effort he puts into the sport, however. The quality of the argument is what counts, and snied comments do not move the argument forward in a constructive fashion. Keep it polite

[Scott]

Anybody want to talk about how we've managed to end up in this situation in the first place?

Apparently not .

[fish]

The series is run to generate a Galoppen league, which is seen very much as a target for the youngsters in the region. Over several years they will develop through the colours.

RJ - I understand your closeness to the series, however I also feel in a reasonably relevant position to comment on the alternative view - I grew up on that system, did develop like that, helped out at many of these events, been involved in keeping track of scoring, etc, etc, and see no obvious reason why it doesn't work in the present format.

IMO any linking to the ranking structure will have a detrimental effect on the league. Granted this should not affect juniors, but I am not sure that there won't be pressure to alter a working structure to take account of 'ranking requirements'.

Fair enough to have concerns , but these seem very vague -and as long as the controller issue is sorted - there is no evidence to suggest that this happens. Can you give some examples of problems that you think will occur?

The Cumbrian Galoppen is very much a Cumbrian event and is controlled and organised by LOC, Bl and WCOC. No governance from NWOA is involved. It will be up to those clubs to decide which level the CG remains in!

I'd hope that in the new system it is clearly the clubs that will continue to drive/govern the galoppen and I see no reason why it can't remain like that. I just dont see how having 4 levels will make any real difference to this sort of issue, as it will be treated differently by every individual/club/region, thus making the levels not that meaningful (to begin to repeat ad nauseam)

[RJ]

Yep, Fish, I follow your argument totally, and I agree with what you are saying.

The upper end of the Level 2 events will define what the level 2 expectation is. There will always be pressure on the lower end of these events to increase the number of courses offered, and to improve their overall quality to bring them into line with the better events.

It will probably be better to register the CG events as Local/L3 events, promote them as District events in the advertising, and be able to keep their current structure intact. The audience is 95% Cumbrian anyway. It is important to keep the CG events easy to stage because the three clubs are managing a series of twelve events in the year. But then someone will say.... why don't you just do three events a year, put all your efforts into them, and have really good events that we can come to from the SE.

Should the resolution go ahead at the AGM, there will be a vote, and a clear decision will emerge. Whatever the outcome it will probably be the will of the majority of British Orienteering, and will be none th worse for that. At least the event structure debate will have had a national airing and a VOTE at the AGM. Scott wants to know if anything can be learned from the current debacle! Well yes.... Nopesport has turned out to be a good 'forum' for the debate, and it is such a pity that the initial ideas were not aired on here to begin with.

This is where any of the problems with implementation are going to appear. It will be a very public affair..... as it should be. Is the sport not run by the hundreds of volunteers out there? New ideas, formats, innovations, changes.... they all happen in various clubs as a consequence of things not being as needed/required, with solutions offered. The various committees/groups should be collecting good practice, not inventing it.

The 'gang of four' (to invent a phrase ) who formed the event review group could so easily have said that..... we perceive the problem as being..... any thoughts? .... this is what we have in mind..... what do you think?..... got any other ideas?..... etc.

[SJC]

If associations or clubs want to ensure more experienced controllers are used for their "higher level" L2 events, it is within their ability to make this happen. It shouldn't be difficult to produce an "experience" list for controllers - either automatically (from the BOF events database?) or via regional controllers officers.

This looks a familiar approach to things. Merge all the grade 2 and grade 3 controllers into a single grade, and then split them into two. Those that are experienced and suitable for higher level 2 events, and those that aren't. That way we can pretend there is only one grade when it is blatantly obvious there are two.

[Mr Chips]

Anybody want to talk about how we've managed to end up in this situation in the first place?

Apparently not .

Sorry Scott - just taking a bit of time to think about it. This is worth a whole thread in its own right!
For starters - what problem was this exercise supposed to be tackling**? Who decided to set the process in motion? What brief was given to the Event Review Committee? How did it happen that, when the outcome was published, we were treated to a long war of words between members of the various committees blaming each other for messing it up? Why is it that so few orienteers seem to understand what is going on? Why is it that those who ought to be "in the know" seem to have completely different understandings of the outcome?
I have had a good look through the minutes of BOF committees and have as yet failed to unearth answers to these questions. If you are looking for an answer to your question, how about a bit more information-sharing at an early stage; e.g. asking orienteers what they think of the event structure before changing it rather than after?

(** FWIW my perception of "the problem" of the old system was that there were too many events at National and Regional level on unsatisfactory areas or with various other failings that meant that they did not deserve their status. Has this improved under the new regime?)

[fish]

RJ - thanks for the response, I can see what you mean - but I'd just really hope this wouldn't happen (and elsewhere it seems to be working). It should be possible (and I think this was the idea of the original working group) to have a range (range is the key word - it isn't a simple upper-lower split) of events in this intermediate level. And, I guess we'll just have to disagree - to me this seems like the perfect level for the CG. I dont even see it as a bad thing if they're included in rankings.
For the reasons I've said earlier I just don't see 4 levels as an 'answer', or a way for things to be 'clear' at a national level.

[Neil M40]

Why the event structure was changed in the first place?

Strict age classes were not really working at many regional events because there were too many classes with too few people in them. This does not make for a good competitive experience – as an M35 and M40 I frequently ran in events with only 3 or 4 competitors. If you were a W35 or W20 you could win by just getting round the course, but there were 50 classes per event. They were also confusing and inaccessible for beginners – for a description of why see pete.owens earlier posts.

If you remove the age-class structure, most of the other differences between Regional and District events had more or less disappeared because of the increased use of electronic punching and overprinting for all events, so there was no longer any cause to differentiate in the rules.

No amount of legislating from BOF could ensure that Regional events got better standards of terrain, planning, controlling or mapping than District events – an issue frequently borne out by experience – nor that standards could be applied consistently across the country.

Also the existing rules were very prescriptive on the type of event being held – basically they were designed for the standard long cross-country type event and made no allowance for other formats – urban, middle, sprint, long-o, all of which are becoming more popular, particularly urban.

So, new rules have been introduced which still allow the old event formats to go ahead, but are also much more flexible to allow new and innovative formats to be introduced.

They make the larger L2 events (formerly regional) more accessible by using an extended version of the same colour system that the smaller L2 (formerly district) events use. They allow any runner to run competitively on any course, so beginners are not pushed into doing a course beyond their abilities. Most larger events will publish results by course and age-class and recommend age classes for courses, so if you like to compare yourself only against your age-class you can. If you are in a small age class then you get increased competition from other age-groups.

Events run under new formats fit more sensibly into the event structure.

What you no longer have is a meaningless endorsement from BOF that says one event is better than another.

So, the new rules are good for beginners, good for experienced orienteers running in the younger age groups, and good for innovation – all of which you would hope will be good for the future of the sport.

That, more or less, was what the event review said.

Unfortunately it doesn’t seem to be working out like that, not because the idea is wrong, but because some of the details have been messed up.

[Neil M40]

The new L2 level guidelines allow for a variety of formats – Long, Middle, Sprint, Urban, Relay and Score. Most of the events that are organised will continue to come under the Long Distance format – the equivalent of the “traditional” orienteering event. Most of those Long Distance events will, at least in the short term, be organised roughly along the lines of an old Regional event (12 or 13 courses, results published by course and age class), or an old District event (7 or 8 courses, results published by course only). Since that is the expectation, I would have no problem with these two sub-formats being recognised in the guidelines, and more importantly in the fixture list.

IMPORTANT NOTE : These would be different formats of event at the same level. There is no difference in status between a long (large) event and a long (small) event, nor can anything be inferred about the quality of the event or its target audience. Nor does the acknowledgement of these sub-formats preclude any other format of long event - for example something like the British Student Champs would be a long (other) event. Maybe the terminology could be worked on, just don’t call them Regional and District.

RJ – I can see your point about trying to compete with other events at the same level but I don’t see it happening myself. The Cumbrian Galoppen is a strong brand in its own right and I don’t think anybody will want to change it – it will attract the competitors it always has if it continues in the same format.