Elite course winning times

[awk]

Brilliant performance by Doug. Really nice to see him and Hector coming through to win the domestic trophies. Short? well maybe, but I'd like to see anyone run sub-90 off an 11am start time.

I am so glad I don't run elite.

I'm so glad I run elite. 129mins felt like a proper challenge with the control a sensible distance apart. How could anyone not want to do the National Championship in their favourite sport?

In that sense I agree with you - although i'll stick to running for 80-odd minutes. I was talking more about what looks like a case of never mind the quality, feel the width. I'm more interested in whether those who ran it thought it a good course. Hope so - mine was excellent.

[PG]

British Orienteering Championships target winning times for M21E are 85-95 minutes. Doug Tullie has a fantastic run to beat this target by just 29 seconds.

All other course lengths are specified in the rules to be planned based on a ratio of the M21E distance. What should they have done? To meet the WRE target, they might have increased the M21E length by 10%. What should they have done with the other courses? Ignored the rules and planned them to different ratios? Or increase them all by 10% and had everybody else complaining that they were too long?

What would have happened if we hadn't had an almost unique absence of "April showers" this year and mud and wet vegetation had made the going 10% slower?

[ba-ba]

1.) I think moaning about short winning times is just taking away from a fantastic 'World Class' performance by Doug.
Without tracking-up, lack of mud etc. Doug, Craney and Ralph et al. may have met the 90 minutes you gag for - at least there was some undergrowth to 'liven up' proceedings.
2.) I think questioning OJ and JJs' ability to plan an elite course is ludicrous - why do you think I said they were ideally suited for the job?
3.) 'all other courses were long' should have read 'some courses were long [due to the planing constraints]' - forgive me a miss-speak after a long weekend racing and helping with poor sleep.

I'm looking forward to competing on 21E (after 3 years learning the 'trade' on 21L) from next weekend onwards. If I'm not out for at least 135 minutes on a classic I'll be asking for my money back

In the grand scheme of things missing an EWT by a whole 29 seconds means bog-all.

[Gross]

Ba=Ba.... can't see any posts of anyone questioning the planner's ability....

Elite winning time IS important for long races if UK is to continue to be competitive in WOC & WC races... no one can argue against that

Would BOC have been 'improved' by sticking an extra km on the end? That's almost impossible to say.... the race was the length it was & the winner is the winner!

It maybe that the course ratio's need looking at more often, it maybe that the forest speeded up more than anticipated due to snow / rain / dry.... wouldn't have thought that anyone would immediatly say they thought BOC was a sub 6min / km forest

What are the WOC test races advertised as.... that is a race where it is important that the length is correct as it's producing the GBR team for WOC.... and on another subject... how many sports subject it's top athletes to 2 90 min races within 8 days? That's more worrying than missing a BOF target by 29 seconds

[Ravinous]

Making BOC Long a WRE means IOF rules take precedence where they differ. This is only relevant for 21E course and nothing else. Just add on an appropriate amount to those courses. The rest follow normal BOC Long BOF guidelines.

Unlikely as it may seem to some, somebody could have been sub 80 on that course. (Craney was the highest World ranked runner in 75th in the field - if they had come from abroad - although I hear many of the top runners are in France at the moment - most of the top nations have their WOC selection races next and the weekend after - NOR, FRA, SWE, DEN? etc, on somewhat more relevant terrain for WOC than the Lakes - but that is a different story...

I don't think it is a problem to have a WRE and state that this is a shortened Long with an 80 minute (World Class) EWT. But I feel we should be putting on a full 90 - 100 minute winning time M21E at BOC. WOC Longs in the last decade or so tend to be too long or in the zone, and rarely too short. (OK - so I felt the need to back up my point with some facts... Out of the last 16 WOCS, 2 M21E races have been under time - 1993 = 87:36 & 2001 = 89:43. 7 have been 'in the zone' average = 95.4, and 7 have been too long - by quite a bit - '91 109:25, '97 100.16, '03 108.20, '04 105:25, '06 105:01, '07 104:28, '08 106:08). This is of course for a World Champion and the Brits normally figure further down and so would be running for longer. Are we preparing them for this in the UK?

Have looked on RouteGadget at Men's 21E course and it looked very good. Had me thinking quite a bit about routechoice. The vegetation mapping showed it was going to get rough in places but there were quite a lot of paths although Oli/Jen did their best to keep you off them on the shorter legs. Well done for taking on the task - nodoubt a huge undertaking for no monetary reward of course.
If they had to battle to get the course even that long, then I am disapponted. GBR seems to have given up on the Long distance. If BOC Long and JK Long and WOC Selection Race Long isnt going to help with preparation for WOC (&WCup) Longs, then what is? Teams to World Cups are small and often incomplete. We should be brewing good strong Long runners on home soil.

It has been known for the Czechs to have 2 back to back full length classic races which are selection races. 8 days apart is still a tough prospect and one certainly I chose to avoid. Scott Fraser too I think.

One bright note I thought (and I apologise for the predominantly male perspective on this post) is that the M18E was won in 77:40 mins. (2nd 81:59 and only 5 under 90.) Sounds a beast compared with the M21E winner only doing 6:51mins longer. This to me sounds good stuff and JC can feel very chuffed as an 18.4 year old. (Or are they thinking it only gets easier after M18E! ) M20Es won in 67. I dont think our 18s are any worse or better for their age than our 20s.

I firmly believe we can achieve WOC Long medals (in the men! I know Yvette has already shown the way in the womens) but our UK races are simply not helping towards this goal.

[graeme]

I'm more interested in whether those who ran it thought it a good course.

Yes, it was a good course. It tested pretty much every skill and was consistently challenging. I'm sure Oli and Jenni wouldn't accept some crappy excuse about nearly being in the acceptable range: it should have been a km longer, but in the context of previous BOC M21E courses that's a pretty minor criticism (and I suspect I've run more than anyone...). Not a problem: everyone makes mistakes.

just taking away from a fantastic 'World Class' performance by Doug.

Unlikely as it may seem to some, somebody could have been sub 80 on that course.

Words are cheap. When they pick the WOC team we'll see what respect the fantastic 'World Class' performance receives. Simple fact is that Doug didn't get the chance to measure up against anyone who ever ran a WOC classic. Not Doug's fault, and its hard to criticise other elites peaking for selection next weekend. Is sub-80 possible? I think so, the alternative is that Doug is a real WOC medal contender.

Personally, I have nothing but admiration for Doug, treating the BOC with respect. I hope he goes to WOC (though I dont expect him to medal), but even if he doesn't "I was British Champion" is way ahead of "They picked me to run at WOC".

[Scott]

Does anyone know why we had a map exchange?

I already asked that one.

[distracted]

Details for the WOC selection races are out, for the long races:

M21E is 12.9km, 965m climb in comparison to 12.5k, 665m in 2004 which was won by Jamie Stevenson in 88:35.
W21E is 7.7k, 605m climb in comparison to 9.1k, 570m in 2004 which was won by Helen Winskill in 84 mins.

Apparently plenty of climb is avoidable by route choice. No idea how the conditions of the area have changed in the past 7 years though.

Bigland middle races are men 5.2k/310m, women 4.3k/250m. All details on the event pages of the LOC website.

[Rich R]

in comparison to 12.5k, 665m in 2004 which was won by Jamie Stevenson in 88:35. LOC website.

Remember that being a tough race particularly being pretty unfit in those days and remember finishing the race and rubbishing the climb that was quoted. I was right to, I counted the climb and worked out I had done getting on for 1.5km of climb! Some imaginative guestimation may be?

[gaw]

Holme Fell provided a winning time of 97mins and only the top 3 under 100mins. If this is what M21E should expect why did so many drop out?

[graeme]

Holme Fell provided a winning time of 97mins and only the top 3 under 100mins.

With our best ever WOC result: Scotia in 97 mins. I don't suppose we've ever had 3 under 100mins at WOC. These 20 odd minute time differences (c/f BEOC, JK) are not trivial, they are the difference between a race where you need to eat, and one where you don't.

[Simon E]

I don't suppose we've ever had 3 under 100mins at WOC.

Can't resist that challenge. The answer is that we have, and at what I'd always thought of as one of the toughest races: WOC 1993 at Surebridge Mountain in the USA. The full list of those who have broken 100 minutes is:

15 Stephen Palmer GBR 94:37 1993 USA
12 Colin McIntyre GBR 97:02 1985 Australia
23 Steve Nicholson GBR 97:11 1993 USA
6 Scott Fraser GBR 97:36 2010 Norway
28 Steve Hale GBR 97:55 1993 USA
18 Stephen Palmer GBR 99:29 2001 Finland

[Becks]

I'm sending my training campers to Surebridge mountain when they wake up today. I can confirm that it is super tough. Thierry re-ran it a couple of years ago, can't quite remember what time he did.

[Kitch]

If this (100minutes) is what M21E should expect why did so many drop out?

most of those that dropped out whilst running M21E are not contenders, many were younger and looking for experience, many were older.

or maybe,
becuase they never get the opportunity to test themselves over 100 minue to 2 hours in this country.....

[Ravinous]

Graemes comment of : "I don't suppose we've ever had 3 under 100mins at WOC" I took to mean in the same race and USA 1993 we managed it - although as my post a few up from here says, 1993 USA had the quickest winning time of 87 minutes of the last 16 WOCS I looked at in my stats. So perhaps not surprising we managed it then, especially as those 3 went on to get a Relay Silver. (But we have never had 2 in the same race!) Perhaps more depressing is there have only ever been 3 other results under 100 mins. Which suggests that we need to get tougher on our Longs if we want to do better and prepare our lads for top results. Scotts result last year was the first sub 100 min performance for 9 years!
Preparing for a JK Long of 74mins is, as Graeme notes, quite a different prospect to a WOC long where you can expect to be heading to 2 hours+, and the temperatures are often much higher. Food/sportsdrink, etc. are vital.
I agree with Andy Kitch. Too limited 95+ winning time Longs in the UK (they are rare), particularly in recent years. I expect some of the oldies will come back and tell me back in the early 90s, BOC and JK (2 full length Longs no doubt) were all 'whoppers' and maybe that helped our 1993 boys to fine results...
People dropping out at Holme Fell.... not used to it, not prepared, are too soft, have planes to catch and course taking too long!! M21E Long: this is a beast and deserves respect. We have softened it up in Blighty and made people think anyone can enter it.
Holme Fell was great - more of the same please and we might make 6 more sub 100 mins at Mens WOC Long Finals in a quicker time period than the 26 years it took us to do our first 6!