Class based leagues - good or bad for younger runners?

[SeanC]

It's that time of the year where there are some bigger regional events, many with age class based leagues where competitors are required (for the league) to run specific courses.

Does this cause more harm than good for the younger runners? Picking (unfairly) on the Weald Park event this Sunday - EAOA league, because it seems fairly typical, M21s, M35, M40 are listed under brown, which for the less experienced M21 is a reasonably serious undertaking. Assuming an average level of fitness and a few 10/20 minute errors thrown in - possibly a 2 to 3 hour run. Scaling back this target distance at M21 to the junior courses, that gives M16s (potentially aged only 14) a 6.9km blue course, and also a potential 2 hour run for those just moving up from light green.

Alternatively it might encourage people to get out of their comfort zone, and concentrate the (few) juniors and younger adults onto certain courses to generate some rivalry.

Or should we be persuading younger runners to do tougher courses in different ways? Maybe make the longer course sound more impressive? (instead of brown, how about half marathon, mighty, massive etc)?

Thoughts?

Here's the event details. I'm sure the organisers don't mind a bit of free publicity https://www.orienteering-havoc.co.uk/ev ... 8-nov-2021

[Atomic]

I notice you didn’t get a reply, but think it merits one. Yes I do think there’s potentially an anomaly there. I understand where it comes from but there are multiple examples I see where it doesn’t actually help the competitor:

- a middle of the road youngster who has perhaps been doing ok on green or blue courses suddenly get shoved to brown. You wouldn’t take a 5k road athlete and say, sorry your a bit older now you should be doing the 1/2 marathon course!

- a 44 yr old who’s been competing closely with a bunch of friends/acquaintances that happen to be 1 yr older and should now be running on different courses

- mid 30s relative newcomers to the sport who either get a short Orange course (M21N) or Brown/Black course for their correct class!

- a fit 70 year old who runs half marathons - either gets a short Green or has to run against people perhaps half their age to get a course actually suited to the physical ability.

It would actually make more sense to have some sort of “seeding” that determines who you run against based on previous results and which encourages gradual progression up or down.

However driving that sort of change in a sport like O could be very hard as, naturally, the management/governance is dominated by people who have been doing it for many many years and so have usually been served well by the existing approach.

[NeilC]

It's that time of the year where there are some bigger regional events, many with age class based leagues where competitors are required (for the league) to run specific courses.

For the vast majority of Oevents there is no requirement to enter a specific course. And even when leagues are added some (eg the SEOA one) allow competitors to run up or down and still score - albeit for reduced points when they run down.

The seeding approach suggested by Atomic is used in the Yvette Baker trophy where inexperienced juniors are allowed to competitively run down.

No decent club should be forcing their members to run an inappropriate course for the sake of the league (which is really aimed at experienced orienteers) but instead encouraging them to run whichever course suits their ability and ambition best.

[buzz]

However driving that sort of change in a sport like O could be very hard as, naturally, the management/governance is dominated by people who have been doing it for many many years and so have usually been served well by the existing approach.

Actually management/governance of British Orienteering appears to be dominated by people with little or no experience of orienteering. However, the Events Committee, which oversees details like this, is largely composed of experienced orienteers, so in principle your point stands.

The management/governance entities best served to address the theme of this thread would be on the Development side with initiative like "Every Junior Matters", so the key to good governance would seem to be how closely the Development Steering group works with the Events Committee.

[SJC]

The management/governance entities best served to address the theme of this thread would be on the Development side with initiative like "Every Junior Matters", so the key to good governance would seem to be how closely the Development Steering group works with the Events Committee.

Club Leagues and Regional Leagues are the responsibility of the Clubs and Regions respectively, and nothing to do with Events Committee. So changing the way these leagues are run is something that can be done locally and therefore, theoretically, quite quickly.

[SeanC]

For the vast majority of Oevents there is no requirement to enter a specific course. And even when leagues are added some (eg the SEOA one) allow competitors to run up or down and still score - albeit for reduced points when they run down.

No decent club should be forcing their members to run an inappropriate course for the sake of the league (which is really aimed at experienced orienteers) but instead encouraging them to run whichever course suits their ability and ambition best.

Yes I know that these leagues are sometimes more flexible than they seem. And I agree orienteers are generally nice and wont pressure newer members into doing courses that are too long or tough through pushy communication.

The problem is that orienteering clubs generally don't communicate very much with new orienteers - or even find out who they are for months. These newbies will get their information from the event details - looking again at the HAVOC one, which I suspect is very typical, the impression is that competitors must run their age class course. Even if the newbie works out that they allowed to run a different course, they may conclude it's not the done thing, or not feel comfortable running a course for older or younger people. I'm putting myself in the shoes of someone new to the sport who will naturally want to fit in.

British Orienteering committees - are they relevant to most of these leagues? I think they are mostly regional leagues or sometimes club, so wouldn't the BO committees have no say in these competitions? Maybe I am wrong on this?

These leagues seem ripe for reform since I suspect most haven't changed for decades. Starting a league from scratch you could still do age class based results, but use ranking points. Then everyone could run the course they wanted, they would just need to turn up to the nominated event to compete in their regional league.

Perhaps the BO committees could propose a national structure for these leagues and agree the format with all the regions? If there was an IT system for generating the results, this would free a volunteer from the burden of generating the league results.

You could do some interesting things with a nationally organised set of regional leagues. For example you could have a 'final' where the top X competitors from each league are invited to compete against the other league winners.

Because under 16s don't get ranking points, this doesn't work for these juniors of course, but a separate regional junior league might be a good thing as it could focus on juniors, and use events that work better for younger juniors - perhaps select events with shorter walks to the start and devise a format that encourages juniors to get to know other juniors.

[spitalfields]

The problem is that orienteering clubs generally don't communicate very much with new orienteers - or even find out who they are for months. These newbies will get their information from the event details - looking again at the HAVOC one, which I suspect is very typical, the impression is that competitors must run their age class course. Even if the newbie works out that they allowed to run a different course, they may conclude it's not the done thing, or not feel comfortable running a course for older or younger people. I'm putting myself in the shoes of someone new to the sport who will naturally want to fit in.

I think this summarises the issue very well. I've had several conversations with people who in theory should be ripe recruits, but see the gap between where they are and where they 'should' be as one that's too big to bridge.

I was talking a few weeks ago to a friend's sister, just after we had finished a 10k trail run. She's been orienteering a few times, describing it as a fun but challenging experience, and the members of her local club as 'some of the loveliest people I've ever met, welcoming and encouraging even though we're rubbish at navigating. You can tell they just love orienteering and want everyone else to as well. And I can see why- but I can't imagine ever being able to do it competively'.

When we were talking, she looked up the events schedule of her local club, booked on to a forthcoming event, and thanked me for reminding her to look at what was coming up. But she was very clear she would never run a competitive course, and felt a bit silly doing courses designed for kids (she does Light Green), but enjoys it enough to do a couple of local events every year.

[duncan b]

Perhaps the BO committees could propose a national structure for these leagues and agree the format with all the regions? If there was an IT system for generating the results, this would free a volunteer from the burden of generating the league results.

You could do some interesting things with a nationally organised set of regional leagues. For example you could have a 'final' where the top X competitors from each league are invited to compete against the other league winners.

I agree leagues can link club-level to national-level orienteering, motivate newer runners to venture further from home and provide stepping-stones for improving youngsters. The Scottish Orienteering Association has launched a Junior Cup which I think is a great idea.

I actually think the English areas (North/Midlands/South) are an underutilised layer for basing events around and keeping the more enthusiastic within the sport. When you add in Scotland they have the benefit of roughly aligning with Scotland/North/South junior Talent Squads.

If the UK Orienteering League and UK Elite League (prize fund donations here please) were to focus on the spring/summer months, area-based leagues or branded series could take the winter months when people are less willing to travel the length of the country.

Picking 3/4 races November to February and giving them the necessary publicity push would make socialable events and competitive racing at all ages. Smart logistics with the junior regional squads in each area could bring them together for joint training the day before.

P.S. Developing your 'final' idea I think a relay where the best represent their area and everyone else can make their own teams could make a fun weekend.

P.P.S. Tough, Tougher, Toughest for Green/Blue/Brown

[buzz]

The management/governance entities best served to address the theme of this thread would be on the Development side with initiative like "Every Junior Matters", so the key to good governance would seem to be how closely the Development Steering group works with the Events Committee.

Club Leagues and Regional Leagues are the responsibility of the Clubs and Regions respectively, and nothing to do with Events Committee.

That's true for all events, but most clubs and regions follow event models proposed by Events Committee and some work with Development Officers. British Orienteering could propose guidelines and provide tools for administering leagues based on ideas from consultations like this thread.

[Len]

Couldn’t agree more that for the new or casual orienteer, recommending a course to an age class is off-putting. Scrap it. The experienced orienteers can work out what course they should be running anyway. The less experienced can make their own judgement based on length/climb/TD without feeling they are doing the ‘wrong course’. Or just keep the info on the league website rather the event pages.
I’d probably number the courses rather than colour code them too, (the number of times I’ve been asked what’s the difference between light green and short green) but that’s a separate debate…

[buzz]

It's that time of the year where there are some bigger regional events, many with age class based leagues where competitors are required (for the league) to run specific courses.

Does this cause more harm than good for the younger runners? Picking (unfairly) on the Weald Park event this Sunday - EAOA league, because it seems fairly typical, M21s, M35, M40 are listed under brown, which for the less experienced M21 is a reasonably serious undertaking. Assuming an average level of fitness and a few 10/20 minute errors thrown in - possibly a 2 to 3 hour run. Scaling back this target distance at M21 to the junior courses, that gives M16s (potentially aged only 14) a 6.9km blue course, and also a potential 2 hour run for those just moving up from light green.

Alternatively it might encourage people to get out of their comfort zone, and concentrate the (few) juniors and younger adults onto certain courses to generate some rivalry.

Or should we be persuading younger runners to do tougher courses in different ways? Maybe make the longer course sound more impressive? (instead of brown, how about half marathon, mighty, massive etc)?

Thoughts?

Here's the event details. I'm sure the organisers don't mind a bit of free publicity https://www.orienteering-havoc.co.uk/ev ... 8-nov-2021

It would seem that the solution to the problem you raise is to present the colour coded course descriptions up front for novices and hide the league details. The opposite to the HAVOC example (apologies to HAVOC).

As far as encouraging novices to progress their orienteering I would have thought the club coaching route is best, offering a social element as well as instruction/training and ideally advice on which events and courses to enter. For those who don't or can't attend club activities then a web page(s) with advice and coaching tips might suffice. That's the sort of thing that British Orienteering could assist clubs with.

I agree with Duncan that specific competitions for those who want to compete against their peers like the new Scottish Junior Cup are a good initiative.

For those who don't want to compete directly against their peers, the ranking system gives an indication of how well you are progressing and many use it as a measure of success. I've never understood why this isn't extended to younger juniors -perhaps someone could enlighten me?

[SeanC]

It would seem that the solution to the problem you raise is to present the colour coded course descriptions up front for novices and hide the league details. The opposite to the HAVOC example (apologies to HAVOC).

Yes, that would work (for the novices, and those with the technical skills but not the fitness or inclination to run the longer 'league' course).

I suspect this is the nub of the problem, that event details are written with the average competitor in mind, who is a longstanding experienced orienteer with a good level of fitness who would be quite happy running the league course. Countering my own arguments, these orienteers would probably appreciate being reminded which courses to enter for the league. I do like the idea of simply linking to a league homepage, but again to give an alternative argument, these regional leagues do need all the publicity they can get as they can have a low profile (test - if you have a regional league, what position are you in? What position is your club in?)

I think these leagues were mostly devised in the badge event era where it was seen as 'running down' if a younger competitor did a shorter course than their age course. I think the ranking list as mostly changed that for everything but the biggest events, as there is no weighting on course length. Every course has the same status (if you're 16 or over).

British Orienteering was bold over a decade ago by ensuring that the regional badge/age based courses were largely replaced by colours. I think they could do the same by working with the regions to replace the disparate regional leagues with something based on ranking points, and if done right it could be more attractive to experienced competitors, improve club spirit, and be more inclusive for inexperienced orienteers and the less athletic. And save the regions a lot of work. Organisers could shout about their events being in a regional league on event details without deterring those that want a shorter course.

PS. I think we can move on from the HAVOC event, as they no longer need the publicity, to neighbours CHIG, who are holding an event this Sunday at Epping East - which I'm sure many/most know is a really good area and one of the more technical in the South East. It's a South East League event. The event details say:

The SE League recommended age classes are offered:

Black M21
Brown M35, M40
Short Brown M18, M20, M45, M50, W21
Blue M16, M55, M60, W35, W40 etc

[NeilC]

I've never understood why this isn't extended to younger juniors -perhaps someone could enlighten me?

Because it was felt by whatever the BOF Junior committee was called at the time that it would encourage juniors to chase points rather than naturally develop their skills - ranking points were only awarded for TD5 courses.

The lack of ranking points for juniors is the main reason why SEOA hasn't adopted these for its league - but instead effectively calculates its own points for each qualifying event.

[graeme]

For those who don't want to compete directly against their peers...

But anyone getting into a sport wants to compete with their peers: that's what sport is!
The problem we've got into is our obsessive definition of peers as people of the same age. So a novice M21 is a "peer" of Kris Jones, but gg (M35) isn't.
We have it 100% wrong - instead of telling novice M21s that they must run Black, we should be saying they can't run Black until they proved themselves in the "lower" categories. Most sensible sports do it this way. Then, even in a league "aimed" at experienced people running the same course, novices can see success as winning qualification for ever tougher classes, instead of inevitable failure against age-group "peers".

I've never understood why this isn't extended to younger juniors -perhaps someone could enlighten me?

As a member of the group who designed the Ranking List, I can tell you I have absolutely no idea.

For those still obsessed with age-based competition, one easy addition I would make to the ranking list is to add an age-scaled ranking: http://bmaf.org.uk/age-graded-standards/. David May has done a huge amount of analysis which would allow this to be rolled out very straightforwardly. This analysis already underpins our course length guidelines, so it is hardly controversial!

[Nottinghamshire outlaw]

Oh dear! The colour coded system is designed to help people to progress through the various degrees of difficulty (technically) and according to their physical ability (length of course).

Our EM league is based on the colour coded courses and tailored with some mathematical tweak to allow for age (don't ask me how!). Anyone can run whatever course they feel happy with.