Guidelines for level 2 events in 2010

[Roger]

I'm planning Chiltern Challenge 2010, and for the event flyer I need to specify the courses that will be on offer. So far, so good: it's our premier event so I'll use the full set of courses as defined by Event Guideline B (described as 'Effective January 2009 DRAFT'), although as there's no TD5 terrain sufficiently close to the finish I'll probably combine light green and short green.

The Chiltern Challenge Trophy is calculated from age classes, so I have to define those. Again, no problem: the nice table in the guideline specifies a reasonable mapping. Short brown for M20 (along with M18, M45, M50 and W21) seems a bit short, but there are always those inexperienced students to consider.

The problem comes with M21S etc., which are described in the table as "old 'S' Classes". If they were 'old' for the transitional year, surely they should be dropped in post-transition 2010? The only reason to assign 'S' classes to the relevant courses would be if they were still required for ranking purposes in 2010. Does anyone know whether or not they will be? If not, then the 'short' runners can now choose a course to suit them from the whole range rather than be directed at only one course.

I'm assuming that the results will be presented by both course and age-class. I've suggested that in the age-class results, anyone running in a higher course than the one specified for their age-class should be listed in the weakest class for which they're eligible, and anyone running a course below their designated one should be listed as 'Open'. So for example in the age-class results for short brown, an M16 would be included in the M18 class results (and identified as being M16), a W40 would be listed among the W21s and an M35 would be listed as 'Open'. Is there a better way?

The ranking question is the more urgent, as the mapping of ages to courses needs to be defined in the pre-event publicity. Pointers to relevant BOF documents, or even just wild speculation, are welcome.

[NeilC]

The official line is that the single ranking list will come into force on the 1st January 2010. Given this the "S" classes will have little meaning unless regions use them for more local leagues/competitions. They are also still in the guidelines to guide S course runners as to what would be a similar course to the one they used to run. Many people would like to see S classes disappear over the course of next year.

Assuming that the new ranking list does start on time then results just need to list a competitor's real age class.

[DJM]

Roger,

The new rankings scheme will be a single list which is then filtered by age class (no L or S, just age class). Anyone who is an M21 for example will get points which ever course they run, irrespective of whether they enter Brown, Blue, L or S.

This works because the time they run is compared with the times of others on the same course, and the existing points of others on the course are put into the eqaution as well so that the strength of the field is taken into account, to calculate the rankings points for that runner. The same quality of run should be rewarded with the same number of points whatever course is entered.

Does this help?

[Snail]

With a free choice (ie unconstrained by existing results software) I wouldn't bother to produce separate age class results.

A simpler solution is to just add a further column to the Course results to give age-class position within that course. The issue about assigning people to a secondary age class (weakest class on the course etc) then doesn't arise.

[Gnitworp]

I believe many people do like to know In advance which class their peers (same sex and age class) are running in major events. I like the former mixture the old format gave me of Age Class competition in Regional Events plus comparing myself against the best in the land on the longest available course in Colour Coded Events. I suspect there are still many others like me.

[Oldman]

I believe many people do like to know In advance which class their peers (same sex and age class) are running in major events. I like the former mixture the old format gave me of Age Class competition in Regional Events plus comparing myself against the best in the land on the longest available course in Colour Coded Events. I suspect there are still many others like me.

I thought that was what we now got! ie you enter whatever course you wish, but there is information saying which course you should enter if you wish to compete against others of your own age class. Some entry systems even default your entry to the course for your age class.

Mind you, some events are still not showing the age class results in addition to the course results.

[awk]

Mind you, some events are still not showing the age class results in addition to the course results.

Surely, in most cases, all one needs are the age classes listing alongside names. It's only when there is a specific competition that one might need to list age classes separately - and looking at other sports, even that is rarely done. Just another unnecessary job for an organiser.

[youngladdie]

[quote="NeilC"] Many people would like to see S classes disappear over the course of next year.
quote]

Who are these MANY people who want to see 's' classes disappear?
MANY people want to continue to run 'S' classes, and in their Age classes with their peers.
WE (members of British orienteering) were NOT consulted regarding these changes / abolition of age classes and they are not widely supported.
Many previously regular orienteers have considerably reduced their participation as a direct result of these enforced changes. It will be interesting to see the participation numbers - reduction next year.

[Mrs H]

Outside of major competitions there arn't MANY people in my 'S' class. In fact on occasions I have been entirely peerless!

[awk]

Who are these MANY people who want to see 's' classes disappear?

Well, if you mean the conventional 5-year age classes, then I'm one for starters. About the only event where they have generated anything like an interesting competition for some time has been the Scottish Six Day.

MANY people want to continue to run 'S' classes, and in their Age classes with their peers.

Well, you still can - it's very easy to run against your peers - I do it at pretty much all events I run in. As for "many" - well not many run them, so I doubt if that huge a number are that bothered.

WE (members of British orienteering) were NOT consulted regarding these changes / abolition of age classes and they are not widely supported.

An ongoing total misunderstanding. They have not been abolished. Simply, that it's now not imposed on clubs to run them. Any club or region that wants to include age class competition, may do so, as long as they enable any orienteer to be competitive on any course they want.

Many previously regular orienteers have considerably reduced their participation as a direct result of these enforced changes. It will be interesting to see the participation numbers - reduction next year.

Having just castigated NeilC for what you see is an unjustifiable assertion, the words 'pot' and 'black' jump to mind. Taking a quick glance at my club's participation figures, overall they look to be up. But then, that's because our local programme (with no age classes at all) has seen some very gratifying numbers at events. That's quite specific though, and I don't know about other clubs. Even if numbers do decline: given that they were declining for some years before course based competition was introduced, you would need stronger evidence than simply the numbers.

[ricardito]

MANY people want to continue to run 'S' classes, and in their Age classes with their peers.

I have no idea how many prefer the "S" system; I can speak only for my own views, and personally I would be happier with a self-selecting peer group than an arbitrary and often very small age-based peer group (to take today as an example, I rather think it may have been me vs. one other - pretty pointless really).

WE (members of British orienteering) were NOT consulted regarding these changes / abolition of age classes and they are not widely supported.

Well, as I said, I'm happy with them. I will magically gain more peers

"I am now standing up, and may be counted... One" (to quote Rowan Atkinson)

Many previously regular orienteers have considerably reduced their participation as a direct result of these enforced changes. It will be interesting to see the participation numbers - reduction next year.

Again, I haven't, and won't. If anything, freedom to choose any course and be competitive will encourage me to greater participation, not less.

[madmike]

Outside of major competitions there arn't MANY people in my 'S' class. In fact on occasions I have been entirely peerless!

me too - but only at night

[Adrian]

Will next year's JK have no M40S? That will be a shame. It will put me off going to big competitions if there aren't any S classes.

[Spookster]

Will next year's JK have no M40S?

The JK is a Level 1 event, and it will have short classes.

http://www.jk2010.co.uk/entries/

[Sunlit Forres]

As an occasional visitor to Nopesport, and a fairly average orienteer who appreciates simplicity, I can't see why there's a need for 'S' classes, especially now that you can enter any course you like at regional level.

I could choose to enter 'S' and finish in the top few, or enter 'L' and be mid-table mediocrity. I prefer L any day because on short classes (with a few exceptions) you're only comparing yourself with those who aren't good enough or fit enough to make any sort of impression on a longer course. Age class competition would be much more meaningful if everyone ran the same race - you can't enter your local half marathon and stop at 9 miles. I'd be happy if the length of 'L' classes were reduced slightly now and again if that made them more achievable to everyone in that age class. Dare I say it, you could then even call it a middle distance race.

If I were to enter any other course than that required to be competitive in my age class, I'd be happy with simply comparing my performance with everyone else running that course. My assumption is that everyone else on that course is running it becasue it's appropriate to their own ability.