National League proposal

[awk]

I read the latest edition of Focus and the article that included mention of a proposal for a National League with interest and more than a little concern. I'm not against a national competition - far from it - but the concept and format of this just looks all wrong.

It looks like it aims, amongst other things, to merge the UK Cup, the Future Champs Cup and the UK Masters Cup into one series. That series looks as if it will be something along the lines of roughly one double header weekend a month throughout the year.

Is this really going to satisfy the needs/wants of these different target groups? What's going to happen to the fixtures list, when there is a big national competition coming off once a month (even if it includes some of the big races that are already happening). What is going to happen about alternative format races (eg urban races - which are difficult for juniors, and which have generally adopted a simpler age class structure than more conventional races).

I can see why a National League initially looks attractive, but frankly the proposals as they currently stand, bother me enormously, and look to be a significant retrograde step, threatening to impact negatively on large sections of the positive developments we have seen over the past few years.

Is this just me (very possibly!), are others enthusiastic about the idea, or do others feel the same? Or just indifferent?

[IanD]

I can see some advantages to merging the national competitions. Consider for example the case of a family containing both adults wanting to compete in the UK Masters Cup and children wanting to compete in the Future Champions. Better for them to have a common event list for both Cups.

On the other hand, I can see that some events might not be suitable for all the competitions. For example, an area might be able to support the extra attendance that a UK Cup billing might bring, but not cope with the Masters Cup too. Or as awk suggests, Future Champions competitors might not even be allowed (a technical course) at an urban event.

I suspect the best way forward might be to keep the competition event lists formally separate, but to look to select the same events for each competition whenever sensible.

[awk]

It's not just the type of event, but the whole structure of the season . The FCC and UK Cup are Spring competitions, but the feedback was that Vets wanted an all-year series.

I agree - IMO the best solution would be separate competitions with co-ordination!

[FATBB]

as awk suggests, Future Champions competitors might not even be allowed (a technical course) at an urban event.

FCC is for M/W18s+, no problem for Urban races.

For example, an area might be able to support the extra attendance that a UK Cup billing might bring, but not cope with the Masters Cup too.

See the list of UK cup races below. How many of these events wouldn't cope with the Master's cup?

The FCC and UK Cup are Spring competitions.

No they aren't.

List of UK cup races 2011:

05.02.2011 - British Nights
12.03.2011 - JOK Chasing
13.03.2011 - Southern Champs
09.04.2011 - British Sprints
10.04.2011 - British Middles
22.04.2011 - JK Sprint
23.04.2011 - JK Middle
24.04.2011 - JK Long
14.05.2011 - British Long
21.05.2011 - WOC Selection Middle
22.05.2011 - WOC Selection Long
01.08.2011 - Scottish 6-days Day 2
02.08.2011 - Scottish 6-days Day 3
10.09.2011 - City of London Race
09.10.2011 - UK cup final

The FCC is mostly based around these events. The UK masters cup also incorporates a lot of these races. Why is it that we have three competitions based on the same sets of races in the first place? What is so wrong with having one series with prizes and competition for different age groups?

[mharky]

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one AWK.

As FATBB has pointed out, the UK cup now extends from FEB - OCT, using many of the same events as the UK Masters Cup. I believe, but can not confirm that the FCC will be following a similar calendar.

The FCC & UK cup have always shared races, leading to ridiculous event titles such as "The Bla Bla Trophy: national event incorporating the Bla's-ville championships, UK Cup and FCC"

Elites / Vets are sharing 10 races this year. Would it not make more sense to call your race the "Bla Bla Trophy, National Series Event".

Being combined will be more attractive to prospective sponsors. This is something important. Norway has the Craft Cup. Why can't we have the Inov8 National Series? It will also make the events easy to get into the press. A national series event sounds a lot more serious than FCC, which is a bit of a silly name if you aint an orienteer. Perhaps a change to UK Junior Cup?

I think it will make all of the events a little bit more special if everyone there is competing in a bigger competition. For too long the FCC has had tiny stand alone races, where juniors compete on their own with own parents and taxi drivers in attendance.

It will undoubtedly put a little bit more work onto the organising club's shoulders. But it will also put a few more pounds in their pockets if they get the massive increase in numbers a national series could bring.

I'd like to think it could perhaps drum up a bit more interest in the elite level of our sport, be it junior, senior or even the top vets. Most of the British orienteering public do no pay any attention to the top level. Perhaps having big events will increase awareness.

What bothers you so enormously? Considering how the points about calendar and juniors don't actually affect the proposal?

[graeme]

It could work well.

What bothered me was that we've been persistently told that elite races had to be in the spring season, and that combining this would run against the Masters desire to run year round. And that junior races couldn't be in (English) school holidays.

This "racing season" argument is bollox. Over 20-odd years speak to real elites (i.e. WOC-team candidates) I hear that yes, the top elites have a structured training year and a short racing season, but no, they don't plan to target domestic races then (unless they're selection). They'll happily skip BOC to run a mass-participation relay.

It seems to me someone has looked at what the elites actually do, and shifted the UK Cup to run through the year. At which point it fits nicely with what the Masters always wanted. So it's all good. And as Mharky says, if the elite bother their bums to race in major events in Britain, people might show interest in them; something they'll badly need once their funding vanishes...

(Masters classes look like an attendence prize, but who cares?)

[awk]

Thank you for putting me right about the UK Cup timetable! Certainly that deals with one of my biggest concerns (and I should have been aware of this!)

However, I remain equally concerned about the limitations and degrees of compromise that will be needed. Just take one small instance: this year's UK Cup programme includes WOC selection races - well forget that if you merge. Nor is it necessarily a good thing that greater numbers will be attracted to some events - bigger doesn't necessarily mean 'special'. Would the JOK Chasing Sprint be able to handle, for instance, 1000+ competitors? Or would many urban areas? So, what we land up with are big compromises, with National League events defined more by areas that can handle the numbers than actually providing quality terrain. This year's UK Cup Final organisers already had initial doubts about the ability to handle a UK Cup Final - what if they also had all those extra vets and juniors to deal with?

And what if the elite, for instance, wanted/needed to change the format or timetabling? (It does happen!). Well, it couldn't be done, because it's all part of a National League, and the juniors and vets need to be taken into account as well. The fact that the programmes are different shows that compromise will be required.

Being combined is more attractive to sponsors? Where's the evidence? I've certainly seen evidence that orienteering finds it easier to attract sponsors for smaller, well-defined and targeted projects; I've yet to see much that indicates we can attract sponsors for bigger more costly projects.

By having nominally separate competitions which are co-ordinated, one can handle all those issues. But not if they are permanently lumped together, creating one set of blanket requirements, and a strait-jacket for everybody.

A couple of things on the junior side.
Firstly, I didn't say FCC - I said juniors. Under-16s can't compete without very heavy restrictions in urban races, so that point remains, unless the National League excludes these classes (which it might, but hasn't been mentioned).
Secondly, on the FCC name comment Mharky - I've just got back from Revolution 32 at the Manchester Velodrome. The name of the junior competition there? DHL Future Stars. (Sponsor for a specific project). Indeed, all mention of juniors at Revolution uses the "Future Stars" phrase. so, it's obviously not just orienteers who are "silly"!

And on the interest in the elite side. Well - over the past few years, the British Elite Sprint Champs did generate quite a bit of interest amongst the growing number attending, not least because it was all part of the same competition. As soon as people start competing in their own age classes (as will happen this year) their focus changes, and the interest wanes. Giving vets their own competition to focus on at the same race as the elite are racing, won't generate an awful lot of interest, because it doesn't already. You don't get people interested in the elite by giving them own races to focus on.

Believe it or not, I'm not necessarily against a National League in principle. But I do have reservations, not least because there has been so little discussion. Now that may be because I'm seeing concerns where there aren't any, and worrying unnecessarily, but it all seems to have been presented as pretty much a fait accompli, one where these sorts of issues don't seem to have been dealt with. Hope I'm wrong, but top down innovation hasn't had a good track record lately in BOF.

(Masters classes look like an attendence prize, but who cares?)

Yes, well you have to attend competitions in order to win them, I do agree!

[EddieH]

The one thing I do agee with in the Focus article Is the desire to have muti event weekwnds. The area champs would be so much more attractive if there were another different format cup race the same weekend. For a starter why does BNC not precede a regional champs?

[FATBB]

Just take one small instance: this year's UK Cup programme includes WOC selection races - well forget that if you merge.

Forget that if you merge? The WOC selection races are part of this year's UK Masters cup. 21st May, Bigland middle distance...

This year's UK Cup Final organisers already had initial doubts about the ability to handle a UK Cup Final - what if they also had all those extra vets and juniors to deal with?

This years UK cup final is joint with the FCC final. They already have the juniors to deal with and I imagine being the UK cup final, quite a few of the younger vets will turn up and run up.

I've yet to see much that indicates we can attract sponsors for bigger more costly projects.

Park World Tour in Scotland did pretty well for sponsors. I'd say that that was a big costly project and a from quick look at the website I can count 12 sponsors. Never seen that level of sponsorship for "smaller, more well defined projects"

Believe it or not, I'm not necessarily against a National League in principle. But I do have reservations, not least because there has been so little discussion.

But who's job is it to discuss it? Yours? Or is it in fact British Orienteering's job to discuss it and then make it happen?

Hope I'm wrong, but top down innovation hasn't had a good track record lately in BOF.

Maybe they'd have a better track record if when a change was put forward people didn't jump at the first chance to pick holes in it.

[awk]

Forget that if you merge? The WOC selection races are part of this year's UK Masters cup. 21st May, Bigland middle distance...

They are this year, but in many years they are special one-offs.

This years UK cup final is joint with the FCC final. They already have the juniors to deal with and I imagine being the UK cup final, quite a few of the younger vets will turn up and run up.

Doesn't make any difference - what I said is still valid: the organisers had doubts about being able to handle the UKC Final.

Park World Tour in Scotland did pretty well for sponsors. I'd say that that was a big costly project and a from quick look at the website I can count 12 sponsors. Never seen that level of sponsorship for "smaller, more well defined projects"

You might say that, I'd say that the PWT at Perth is a good example of what I mean by a smaller well defined project.

But who's job is it to discuss it? Yours?

Yes - mine, and yours, and others. As a member of BOF, a club chairman, and a member of one of BOF's working groups - Senior Competitions Group - I would expect to have at least seen discussion and feedback being sought. Aside from the roadshows, that hasn't happened.

Or is it in fact British Orienteering's job to discuss it and then make it happen?

Exactly - see my point above. It hasn't been discussed by "British Orienteering" in anything but the narrowest sense.

Maybe they'd have a better track record if when a change was put forward people didn't jump at the first chance to pick holes in it.

It's called discussion and consultation. You put an idea forward, and people look at it and subject it to scrutiny. The holes need to be found in order to fill them. It's because people haven't had a chance to "pick holes in it" that I have big concerns.

The point I'm making is, yes there are a lot of points of similarity and a lot of events will remain common, but flexibility should be retained rather than forcing everything into one compromised strait-jacket. The UKMC and UKC do share races - that's good - but they also have different races to cater for their targets, and that should be seen as a good thing too.

[Arnold]

I also don't agree with you on this one AWK.

Most other countries have 1 "proper" National League with a smallish number of race weekends for all age classes, and there are many advantages to that:
- Much higher participation at these events as it's clear they are "the ones to attend"
- Better organisation at them
- Worth travelling for as 2 races each weekend (could even be 3 if sprint/middle/urban)
- Easier to get sponsorship
- Easier to explain to newcomers

In many ways the fact that there is now a UK Cup, a Masters Cup and a FC Cup shows the need for a clear list of key events to attend. Except that each Cup has chosen slightly different ones for really little apparent reason.

It doesn't have to be too many races either, I think 1 weekend each in Feb-May(Jun) and Sep-Nov would be plenty - 14-16 races in total. Many of these are existing ones anyway, BOC, JK, Sprint/Middle. ideally Night+something else

Personally I think the one key thing to make it work is that National Ranking Points should only be awarded at National League races, and not Regional Events. Which doesn't stop you from having your local Galoppens etc. but it would certainly focus the mind.

[Clive Coles]

Nice idea

the UK cup now extends from FEB - OCT, using many of the same events as the UK Masters Cup.

This should mean events that would have been planned anyway are utilised to form the league programme.

The problem, which I raised at the BOF roadshow, was that in many parts of the Country land access is restricted in the summer months by the conservation lobby (ground nesting birds) and by seasonal vegetation growth.

After 1st March therfore we fall back on Urban and Park O races to keep our club members orienteering locally. Many orienteers however take the summer off and engage in different pastimes.

There currently seem to be enough races around the country to make up a league programme. I just wonder if there is sufficient demand from orienteers (with money in their bank and fuel in their tanks), to make the experiment sustainable in the longer term.

[mharky]

Dear Dragons,

I am organising two running races. One is called the Future Champions Cup, it will have about 120 of the best juniors in the country running. The other is called the National Series, it will have over 1000 people there including the best juniors, veterans and elites; everyone in the country who races seriously really.

Which would you like to sponsor?

Regards,

Mharky

The PWT was international and elite, it had backing from national governing bodies and sports funding agencies, it was in a city centre and had a high profile. It was, for now, a one-off in UK orienteering.

FCC or UK Cup or Masters cup vs. National Series are two events of the same standard, the only difference would be the number of participants. Sponsors and advertisers are particularly interested in those statistics.

[awk]

I also don't agree with you on this one AWK.

That's fine! If the things I'm saying do not concern others, or are seen as worthwhile putting up with because of the advantages that a National League brings, then we go with the concept. Hope they don't raise there heads later. I'd be interested in what others think too.

[mharky]

I think that you have raised some interesting points, which essentially comes down to the fact that the junior/senior/masters can't be at the same events the whole year round. But I think having at least some National Series events with other FCCs, UKCs and UKMs on their own can be a good thing. UKC at the WOC test, UKMs at some boring urban etc. But a big national series can only be a good thing where the area, infrastructure and organisers can manage.