Junior entry fees for M/W21?

[SeanC]

Plenty of space on this forum for chatting, but we could try to get back onto the subject.

The JK needs one more course - a score course.

I had a quick look at the JK website. Looks like some great areas - a pity I have to work that weekend

Looking at the website from the viewpoint of an inexperienced M/W21, such a person it's quite hard to know what is on offer in terms of course length/difficulty etc as there is a lot of assumed knowledge, which might lead the newbie to wait until there is more information in final details, by which time the entry fee has gone up (bonus point for tentatively linking back to the original post). Or ending up entering an excessively long and tough course.

Of course it would be reasonable to say the JK should be for experienced orienteers, but the event is so successful that there's nothing else on in mainland UK for the whole double bank holiday weekend.

[Snail]

I see we've got bored of discussing ideas for retaining current younger orienteers and recruiting new ones and instead moved onto ephemeral rankings nonsense and ideas for the JK to have even more courses that it already doesn't need.

On the contrary. Although perhaps no longer 'young' I am reasonably sure that Scott is younger than most people here, and younger than the average orienteer. So his point that if seeded off M21E he doesn't see a suitable alternative course for him is a valid perspective.

And I certainly didn't mean to imply there should be more courses. Roughly 10 championship courses in the range 3 - 15km plus 10 colour courses should be sufficient, even for around 3000 entries. That would actually be a reduction. No objection to a score course either, which I agree suits some novices well.

The significant point is surely that our bigger events, which have the best atmosphere and facilities so ought to be a showcase for attracting newcomers, from the local area and more widely, are actually the opposite - offering unsuitable courses and no EOD.

[Len]

Looking at the website from the viewpoint of an inexperienced M/W21, such a person it's quite hard to know what is on offer in terms of course length/difficulty etc as there is a lot of assumed knowledge, which might lead the newbie to wait until there is more information in final details, by which time the entry fee has gone up (bonus point for tentatively linking back to the original post). Or ending up entering an excessively long and tough course.

Fully agree - and I said as much on page 2!

I really cannot fathom why there are 4 options for an M21 at a middle distance event.
No wonder the M21E is at risk of being over subscribed - It isn't clear anywhere what the difference between the courses is likely to be.
Why not just have a 'long' and a 'short' for each age if it is middle distance?

[pete.owens]

Because, the competition is a two day event with the results for each class as the sum of the two. This means every class available on the long distance race must also be available for the middle distance race.

[King Penguin]

doesn't stop 2 separate classes / courses on the Long day sharing a course on the Middle day.
I was very tempted to run up, but as first year in age class thought I would see how I might do event though shorter than I would like.

[pete.owens]

Roughly 10 championship courses in the range 3 - 15km plus 10 colour courses should be sufficient, even for around 3000 entries. That would actually be a reduction. No objection to a score course either, which I agree suits some novices well.

Not really.
I am with you that S classes should be scrapped in favour of people entering colour coded courses of their choice. However, the overall number of courses is needed in order to supply enough start slots for all the competitors.

Some such as for the junior classes, the hyper veteran classes and the elite classes are needed even though they will cater for relatively few competitors. Some similar length courses are needed due to the sheer number of competitors wanting a course of that length.

The vast majority of those running S classes would probably want to enter Short Blue, Green or Short Green so you would probably need to plan two of each. There would be a reasonable number wanting to run Blue and VSG. Black would cater for M21L, but there would be minimal demand for Brown or Short Brown courses.

[Len]

Because, the competition is a two day event with the results for each class as the sum of the two. This means every class available on the long distance race must also be available for the middle distance race.

I was actually being a bit generous to the long distance day - 4 classes aren't needed then either.

Taking last years results: W21V - No one, W20S - 2, M21V - 3
2019, difficult though the results are to decipher, looked similar.
There is no need for any of the 18/20/21 to have more than 2 courses based on current demand.
At a push you could argue 21 might need three based on the status of the competition and needing an 'elite' course, but this just dilutes the 'long' entry in many respects.

[pete.owens]

Think of M21V as an open green course.

With championship length courses, even the S courses are pretty long (longer than blue in the case of M21) so there needs to be something for those who are not up to running that far. (and it isn't just M21s anyone from M18-M60 might want a shorter course). In the absence of colour coded courses you need to define a class that M21s are allowed to enter. There might not be a huge demand, but why would you choose to exclude people just because they are in a minority.

it is not as if it creates any work at all for the organisers or planners, they will be running a course shared with other classes - unlike the W90 class which has in the past resulted in a course for a single competitor with a start not shared with any other courses - and a W90 actually has a choice of 25 other courses!

There is actually another class not provided at the JK that you would expect to be provided at large class based events - M21N. But this is catered for by the Orange course.

So that means that M21s actually have a choice of 8 courses at the JK

[miklcct]

I did say I'm biased!
I can see that urban and sprints draw in a lot of competitors, young and old, it's just not the sport I came into.

Urbans and sprints is the sport I come to. I don't have the physical ability to handle forest terrain at the elite level.

[awk]

I see we've got bored of discussing ideas for retaining current younger orienteers and recruiting new ones and instead moved onto ephemeral rankings nonsense and ideas for the JK to have even more courses that it already doesn't need.

Where the rankings scheme may help, though, is providing some sort of cross-course measure of attainment (even with the issues surrounding bias). I know of several relatively new orienteers who have used rankings as feedback as to progress, whilst still choosing to run a 'course' as opposed to a 'class'.

On a wider front, I found the discussion over course versus class interesting, simply because so many people I know (including myself) tend to mostly choose what course to run rather what class anyway. The last time either of us chose a course at a terrain event based on our age was last year's JK. Urban does seem to be more age based, but then age classes are simpler and broader, there are fewer technical issues (in terms of learning!), and, if anything, courses tend to be shorter rather than longer (at least in terms of time).

I can see that urban and sprints draw in a lot of competitors, young and old, it's just not the sport I came into.

I agree, it isn't. There's a lot more variety and interest now!

[Atomic]

@Karen - I didn't start orienteering to run round a housing estate either. Buuuuut, now that I've done it a few times in really complex fine detailed areas I love it. I'll still happily traipse across a moor or wander in a forest but (1) Sprint suits my fitness level better; (2) A well planned Urban is actually just as much a navigation challenge; (3) Urban seems to make me both technically and physically better when I go back to the forest.

@Awk - as a thoroughly mediocre orienteer I use the ranking scheme exactly as you say. I think it could be promoted better for that benefit (I think people assume its more interesting to the top 10 rather than someone at 2000th). Its also a shame that SOA only members don't get listed (for sensible reasons) because there's about 1000 regular but not top-level orienteers in the UK being missed off that list.

The fact that some in the orienteering community still see score events as something "less worthy" still bemuses me greatly. In fact, they should be seen as being harder, as you not only have broad and fine navigation guaranteed, but also time pressure and strategy on top.

Perhaps we need a British Score Champs - or a score specific big weekend (a Forrest Score a Night Score and a Urban/Sprint Score combined?) to make it "prestige" ?