Technical Difficulty

[buzz]

Here's one for all you expert controllers...

Assuming that BOF rules stipulate technical difficulty and course characteristics for different types and levels of event, what would happen if a protest was submitted on the grounds that the courses didn't meet those requirements? If the protest was upheld would the results need to be voided and/or entry fees refunded? I'm thinking of level A events where there is an expectation of certain standards and trophies are awarded and selections influenced.

[King Penguin]

We have to interpret the requirement for TD5 as "as technical as the area can support", as many UK areas cannot offer sustained TD5 and will be partially / mainly TD4.
One complication comes on such areas if people think Light Green should be technically easier than Green, which will not be the case if both are actually TD4.
I would hope the issue would not arise, certainly at Level A events where a competent Controller should ensure the guidelines are complied with. The greatest risk is probably that White/Yellow/Orange would be too hard, or Yellow/Orange too easy. Would someone really put in a formal protest if this were to occur; I would hope not. Maybe a comment / complaint to an event official perhaps ?
My view would be not to void the course, on the basis that it is the same for everyone, even if not strictly as it perhaps should be.
A greater risk I think is Short Green being physically (not technically) too tough for our older competitors.

[buzz]

We have to interpret the requirement for TD5 as "as technical as the area can support".....

Agreed for most races but for Level A I'd suggest it should be a requirement not a nice to have, particularly for Middle races.

I would hope the issue would not arise, certainly at Level A events where a competent Controller should ensure the guidelines are complied with.

Agreed, but would a controller veto a choice of area or start/finish locations? Have any Nopester controllers ever done that and what was the outcome?

There may be issues with land access, OOB, that impact the course planning late on. What's the responsibility of the controller then? Should the event be downgraded if it doesn't meet the guidelines, and what consequence does that have for Championship status and selections?

My view would be not to void the course, on the basis that it is the same for everyone, even if not strictly as it perhaps should be.

I don't think it is the same for everyone - less technically competent competitors get an unfair advantage.

[King Penguin]

I don't think it is the same for everyone - less technically competent competitors get an unfair advantage.

I'll accept "an advantage", but not convinced about "unfair". Different areas play to different people's strengths.
Is it unfair if an area plays to my strengths by being flat and runnable, as opposed to a different event playing to someone else's strengths by being rough with lots of steep hills and lots of brashings ? Both could equally be TD5 (or TD4).

[buzz]

I don't think it is the same for everyone - less technically competent competitors get an unfair advantage.

I'll accept "an advantage", but not convinced about "unfair". Different areas play to different people's strengths.
Is it unfair if an area plays to my strengths by being flat and runnable, as opposed to a different event playing to someone else's strengths by being rough with lots of steep hills and lots of brashings ? Both could equally be TD5 (or TD4).

I agree you have to accept that different races are always going advantage certain competitors, but in my opinion its fair as long as its it meets the rules. The rules allow for different types of terrain and variations in technical and physical challenges but also stipulate specific requirements such as the character of the courses, technical difficult and limits on climb.

There's also the selection implications - selectors quite reasonably expect level A events to be suitably challenging technically and physically. Selections are never completely 'fair' but the selection races need to be relevant to be effective in the short and long term.

[rf_fozzy]

Perhaps you could do a controllers course and do some controlling?

The sport is desperate for more controllers, especially grade A ones, where my understanding is the number under the age of 65-70 can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

As a grade B controller, I would not retrospectively void an event due to terrain "inadequacy" because in the end, this is an *amateur* sport in this country. And it's not all about international competiton. Nor selection races.

For Major event, the terrain should be inspected by the controller beforehand and deemed acceptable (can't remember if E&CC have to approve? - can someone confirm).

And for all events, the controller should be looking at start and finish locations, but for me logistics are always > technicality. THis is a personal opinion, but if an event involves a 2km walk to the start and back again at the end, then it's worth sacrificing not visiting that bit of terrain to have an alternative event with a 200m walk to and from. I appreciate that others may not share that view. I turn up to orienteer and not to have a ridiculous trapse just so that that bit of terrain is visited.

Having done all this beforehand, there should then be no reason for such a protest. I'm also not sure under what rule you'd protest - selections are not part of the race rules to my knowledge (certainly not BNC or BSC).

In the event of permissions issues, withdrawl of land access etc (which happened at BOC2019 ~ 1month before the event), then the question is then always is it better to have an event (which is what was decided at BOC2019) or to cancel (which in that situation would have affected the XSR and BRC too). I'd always have an event - even if not perfect.

Because you cannot let perfection be the enemy of good.

But as I said above, please do sign up to be a controller and move up. We need more.

[rf_fozzy]

Re: downgrading an event - I think this is in the rules, but I think it's an E&CC decision, not the event controller.

Again, it would have to be highly unusual circumstances to do this.

[pete.owens]

We have to interpret the requirement for TD5 as "as technical as the area can support".....

Agreed for most races but for Level A I'd suggest it should be a requirement not a nice to have, particularly for Middle races.

It can't be a requirement; the TD is an upper rather than a lower bound.
ie. an orange course cannot include a single TD4 leg but may include any number of TD2 legs. Though good planning would try to keep up the technical challenge. So the only possible protests that could legitimately invalidate a major championship course would be in the MW10-12 classes. (eg a 9 year old submitting a protest due to there being 3 decision points on leg 5 of the M10A course at the British Champs).

When it comes to TD5, legs of this difficulty are rare even in good quality terrain and impossible in most English forests. Take a look at routegadget for short green courses at quality events and imagine you were the controller. Count how many legs you would actually object to if the planner had included them on a light green course.

[Lard]

This is on the SOA website:
Scottish Night Championships (SNC) – intended to provide a high level of technical night orienteering competition in Scotland.

Last year the event was hosted at Balmoral Forest, don't think it could have been anywhere more suitable...... this year.....a campus and urban/grassland in Dumfries Town....... and you wonder.......

Because of our ageing population I fear we are pampering to those who can't lift their legs up and can't, probably never did, manage to navigate round a TD5 course.

At least there's hope that dull orienteering (Urban and parks) is kept to a Saturday and I can look forward to sunlit forests and more technically challenging Sundays.

(Yes, I am writing this to get a few people's backs up.)

[CrawfordL]

This is on the SOA website:
Scottish Night Championships (SNC) – intended to provide a high level of technical night orienteering competition in Scotland.

Last year the event was hosted at Balmoral Forest, don't think it could have been anywhere more suitable...... this year.....a campus and urban/grassland in Dumfries Town....... and you wonder.......

Because of our ageing population I fear we are pampering to those who can't lift their legs up and can't, probably never did, manage to navigate round a TD5 course.

At least there's hope that dull orienteering (Urban and parks) is kept to a Saturday and I can look forward to sunlit forests and more technically challenging Sundays.

(Yes, I am writing this to get a few people's backs up.)

Given it's Sprint WOC year in Scotland it was a missed opportunity for a cracking night sprint in The Crichton. That would have been fun.

[King Penguin]

... but was it approprioate to have night events in the Crichton in November & December so shortly before the Scottish Night Champs there ?

[awk]

At least there's hope that dull orienteering (Urban and parks) is kept to a Saturday and I can look forward to sunlit forests and more technically challenging Sundays.

It makes sense to put more urban events on on Saturdays, when one actually has a a chance of getting to them by public transport!
The problem is that for many clubs (including mine), the bulk of sunshine occurs during months where terrain is either utterly inaccessible, or revolting vegetation-wise. And what's left is almost invariably less technically interesting than a good sprint
In fact, access/parking is a nightmare at any time (and inaccessible events don't attract sufficient numbers, including the younger and fitter).