I'm clearly not going to do any more work so instead..
anybody read O sport? What do you think of Micro Orienteering? Is this a step too far in making orienteering more spectator friendly?
For those who haevn't see the latest edition of O Sport (with Hakan Eriksson's head falling apart on the cover) the idea is to have a biathlon style loop in between the long loop and the final spectator loop of a race. On this "micro orienteering" loop every control will be a tv control with a few false controls within say 20m of the correct control. You will run thru and spectators watching the big screen or watching on tv will be able to see (via a panel on the side of the screen) whether you are correct or wrong (like when you watch biathlon and you can see ok that person hit 3 of the 5 targets correctly) so the spectators will know how many punishment rounds you will have to do as you return from the micro orienteering loop, before the final spectator loop.
The punishment round will be some spectacular off road running and could only take 30 seconds or so meaning tictacs could come into play. Do you go real fast thru the groups of controls and risk taking on punishment rounds or take a little more time to get it right.
To me it sounds like it's sailing close to the "trail-o" concept but it would be fun to run and/or spectate a race like this. Obviously micro orienteering would mean a bit more work for the organiser, the two regular loops would mean the same as for a normal classic race but the micro orienteering loop would be a lot more organisation for the cameras and massive increase in online controls as all the blind controls would have to be online too.
I apologize if this has already been discussed on nopesport i'm a bit on-off in my dedication to reading all the topis.
Micro orienteering
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
13 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Sorry, haven't read O-Sport.
Out of interest, is this idea something which has already been tried in other countries, or is has it only just been thought up?
Format may certainly make 'orienteering' more popular, but would 'orienteering' be orienteering any more?
Out of interest, is this idea something which has already been tried in other countries, or is has it only just been thought up?
Format may certainly make 'orienteering' more popular, but would 'orienteering' be orienteering any more?
- Benjamin G
- orange
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:29 pm
- Location: Oxford
Ahhhhhhhhh........ Mr G makes the same comments heard at the conception of the PWT and Sprint Orienteering
If this format of orienteering can introduce the sport to more people and attract more money then well & good.
These developments are aimed not at the vast majority of the orienteering public who Joe Punter has zero interest in but at the small number of marketable 'Super Stars'.
I doubt is any more than 2 or 3 Brits would get an invitation to one of these competitions if it was held in Scandie Land
If this format of orienteering can introduce the sport to more people and attract more money then well & good.
These developments are aimed not at the vast majority of the orienteering public who Joe Punter has zero interest in but at the small number of marketable 'Super Stars'.
I doubt is any more than 2 or 3 Brits would get an invitation to one of these competitions if it was held in Scandie Land
- gross2004
I'm all for trying out different formats. Think street races - especially the York one and the soon to be held Oxford spectacular - are brilliant.
- Benjamin G
- orange
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:29 pm
- Location: Oxford
gross2004 wrote:Ahhhhhhhhh........ Mr G makes the same comments heard at the conception of the PWT and Sprint Orienteering
If this format of orienteering can introduce the sport to more people and attract more money then well & good.
...and what if they have the same impact as PWT and Sprint Orienteering have in the UK? Who is the target market for this?
Graeme
(Planner, 2004 Chasing Sprint, Edinburgh Urban Orienteering)
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4726
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
For those who haven't read O-Sport, the same article can be found at http://www.noc2005.org/index.shtml where you will see that Micro-O will be used at the Nordic Championships Middle race next year, no less.
David
David
- David May
Graeme wrote:
...and what if they have the same impact as PWT and Sprint Orienteering have in the UK
I'm sure Jamie S has had some impact in GB? These events are aimed at a few elite & the spin off's for orienteering in general come from there success.
The PWT race held in Glasgow was a wasted opportunity but I am sure BOF have learned from thier mistakes and next time round would do a bit better on the publicity front..............
- Guest
Anonymous wrote:I'm sure Jamie S has had some impact in GB?.
Such as? We're all very proud of him, and he might have safeguarded some elite squad funding - but his success hasn't brought members or money to my club(s) - or any others AFAIK
These events are aimed at a few elite & the spin off's for orienteering in general come from there success
but there haven't been any spin offs.
Indeed the fact that PWT is aimed so squarely at the elite seems to mean ordinary club members dont want to do it, and dont see it a recruiting tool. Which is a shame, since our "urban orienteering" series (fast, not too tricky, and with none of that nasty terrain stuff) is an ideal introduction seems to have brought in more new members this summer than our standard CATIs ever did.
As for trail/micro-O - I've never managed to excite new members with the niceties of distinguishing between knoll side and knoll foot.
Graeme
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4726
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
i think it would be exciting to watch the best in the world deciding between the controls at speed without breaking stride.
what about for a training exercise tho, we did it once years and years ago on an EM squad weekend, clusters of controls just like in some relay gaffles but no codes. You had to be disciplined to race but be totally in control through the controls. The controls weren';t as close together as they're proposing for micro O tho. might be fun to try it on a seds weekend or something. manual punching and then check all the punching afterwards and punish errors in the second round with extra loops or whatever.
what about for a training exercise tho, we did it once years and years ago on an EM squad weekend, clusters of controls just like in some relay gaffles but no codes. You had to be disciplined to race but be totally in control through the controls. The controls weren';t as close together as they're proposing for micro O tho. might be fun to try it on a seds weekend or something. manual punching and then check all the punching afterwards and punish errors in the second round with extra loops or whatever.
-
harry - addict
- Posts: 1252
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:18 pm
- Location: Halden
Murray's Micro was excellent, most enjoyable,
but it was a straight course, no spoof controls.
Spoof controls might be interesting , though I think it needs careful controlling to avoid deliberate or gratuitous trickery.
Penalty loops seems daft.
Is the sport about finding the right feature or not ?
If you can' the penalty loop idea then you go back to having to find the right control, so people would just focus down and make sure they do get it right.
Either that or just punch them all and get out of there.
So I wonder about the point ?
What we did on Saturday was a great and fun use of a small but very detailed piece of terrain. Good fun good orienteering, spectator friendly.
For spectators though does the intricacy slow it down, make it seem a slow sport to the uninitiated ? Would a non-orienteer have any kind of clue?
This is the big problem with trying to be media / spectator friendly for the purposes of attracting a wider - non-O audience - Is anyone who doesn't orienteer ever going to understand and appreciate what they are seeing?
but it was a straight course, no spoof controls.
Spoof controls might be interesting , though I think it needs careful controlling to avoid deliberate or gratuitous trickery.
Penalty loops seems daft.
Is the sport about finding the right feature or not ?
If you can' the penalty loop idea then you go back to having to find the right control, so people would just focus down and make sure they do get it right.
Either that or just punch them all and get out of there.
So I wonder about the point ?
What we did on Saturday was a great and fun use of a small but very detailed piece of terrain. Good fun good orienteering, spectator friendly.
For spectators though does the intricacy slow it down, make it seem a slow sport to the uninitiated ? Would a non-orienteer have any kind of clue?
This is the big problem with trying to be media / spectator friendly for the purposes of attracting a wider - non-O audience - Is anyone who doesn't orienteer ever going to understand and appreciate what they are seeing?
If you could run forever ......
-
Kitch - god
- Posts: 2433
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:09 pm
- Location: embada
Long post this one, don't read it if your not into micro-O or hip-hop - enjoy...
This Sunday a test of the Micro-O format was run near Halden. I thought I would give you a summary of it as a Christmas present, and it’s been wrapped by Snoop Doggy Dogg…
Yo, dee damn dizzle, I was out for an orienteerizzle,
First there was some normal shizzle, then it went all microizzle…
Sorry, I have unrapped the rest…
The course consisted of a normal “loop” of around 2km with normal orienteering - start as normal, run to normal controls, 1:10 000 map etc etc. Then at the end of this part there is a map exchange, this map is for the micro-O. It worked like this, there was a (almost) normal course marked on this 1:4000 map about 1km, but at the control sites you could see at least five other controls in a very small area. It was quite obvious to me which was mine at number 1 as I went in with a lot of care and the feature (a dot knoll) was quite obvious amongst the other detail (also the description said south side so you could check this too). The same was true for the second (a crag), and the third (a boulder). The next control was marked on a ditch, but not on a bend or a junction, just a ditch and when I approached it there were 4 controls along this straight ditch. So I had to distinguish the correct one by the proximity of it to the other features around it (there was a knoll and an ant hill in this instance). A tough and ambiguous thing to have to do. The next control was marked with a circle and triangle (ie. Start), this was the compulsory control, the furthest away from start and finish, that has to be punched otherwise you are disqualified (there is only one control post here). All the micro-O controls don’t have to be punched. Then the course went back to the “arena” via two other micro-O controls. In the arena the emit card was read, and whilst the organisers calculated how many penalty loops (if any) were to be done for punching the wrong control, you ran round a “buffer” track of about 100m. If you had punched a wrong control, or even two controls in one “micro area” you had to do penalty loops of about 100m. Once you had completed your penalty loops, or if you didn’t have any, you headed out of the arena on a last loop of normal orienteering 0.9km on a 1:10000 map. And you finished as normal.
Some points about it…
The intention of this micro-o is to make it more inviting for TV. It is based a bit on Biathlon where you ski a bit, shoot at five targets and if you miss one then you have to do a short penalty loop on the skis before going and skiing more. So you have to be fast on skis and good at shooting. Or bloody fast on skis, if you are bad at shooting or…etc etc. In biathlon, the outcome is almost always decided on the shooting, if you shoot all five you are at a huge advantage if you can ski well as you have no penalty loops. But it is hard to shoot 5 targets, especially when you are tasked to do this 2-4 times in a race where you are working the body so hard.
Therefore the micro-o section is envisaged to be the decisive part in the race if it is going to be exciting for TV viewers, and therefore the “micro area” shall be the bit predominantly on TV, all the controls will be online and if the runner punches the correct control a green light will show on the TV and red if wrong.
This test…
The first normal orienteering section was too long. Holger Hott Johansen was minutes ahead before the micro-O section! You want the difference in time between runners to be minimal to make the micro-O part the decisive one. This would mean that this would have to be technically and physically “easy” to get the most effect. Therefore takes away from it being a “good test” of orienteering.
But then, the micro-O section has to be really technical to make the chance of people “missing” more possible. The use of the ditch control in this test could be seen as this (it was my only “miss”). But to me it was ambiguous, and not true orienteering.
Another part that is not really orienteering was that in this test the best tactic for the micro-O section, was to take care and get the controls right to the compulsory control. Then from this run on a path straight to the finish and take two penalty loops because it saved time on navigating to the control, risk of “missing”, and running in terrain etc. To me that is not orienteering, it is more towards running, but it could be quite exciting for TV maybe. And after all, one of the reasons for developing this format for the TV is to show orienteering is a sport where you have to make decisions with a map.
It is easier done in detailed areas like Scandinavia, but it could be hard to find some places to put “micro areas” in less detailed terrains.
I think it would be great in sprint as times are so much tighter there, but not for middle distance. And it is a lot of work to get everything right so I am sceptical about it taking orienteering by storm. But it is absolutely wicked that guys are trying these new concepts and orienteering ain’t being left to rot. If nothing else it is a class idea for training.
Anyway I think I have written enough, go and enjoy your other presents…and eat a bucket load of mince pies!
This Sunday a test of the Micro-O format was run near Halden. I thought I would give you a summary of it as a Christmas present, and it’s been wrapped by Snoop Doggy Dogg…
Yo, dee damn dizzle, I was out for an orienteerizzle,
First there was some normal shizzle, then it went all microizzle…
Sorry, I have unrapped the rest…
The course consisted of a normal “loop” of around 2km with normal orienteering - start as normal, run to normal controls, 1:10 000 map etc etc. Then at the end of this part there is a map exchange, this map is for the micro-O. It worked like this, there was a (almost) normal course marked on this 1:4000 map about 1km, but at the control sites you could see at least five other controls in a very small area. It was quite obvious to me which was mine at number 1 as I went in with a lot of care and the feature (a dot knoll) was quite obvious amongst the other detail (also the description said south side so you could check this too). The same was true for the second (a crag), and the third (a boulder). The next control was marked on a ditch, but not on a bend or a junction, just a ditch and when I approached it there were 4 controls along this straight ditch. So I had to distinguish the correct one by the proximity of it to the other features around it (there was a knoll and an ant hill in this instance). A tough and ambiguous thing to have to do. The next control was marked with a circle and triangle (ie. Start), this was the compulsory control, the furthest away from start and finish, that has to be punched otherwise you are disqualified (there is only one control post here). All the micro-O controls don’t have to be punched. Then the course went back to the “arena” via two other micro-O controls. In the arena the emit card was read, and whilst the organisers calculated how many penalty loops (if any) were to be done for punching the wrong control, you ran round a “buffer” track of about 100m. If you had punched a wrong control, or even two controls in one “micro area” you had to do penalty loops of about 100m. Once you had completed your penalty loops, or if you didn’t have any, you headed out of the arena on a last loop of normal orienteering 0.9km on a 1:10000 map. And you finished as normal.
Some points about it…
The intention of this micro-o is to make it more inviting for TV. It is based a bit on Biathlon where you ski a bit, shoot at five targets and if you miss one then you have to do a short penalty loop on the skis before going and skiing more. So you have to be fast on skis and good at shooting. Or bloody fast on skis, if you are bad at shooting or…etc etc. In biathlon, the outcome is almost always decided on the shooting, if you shoot all five you are at a huge advantage if you can ski well as you have no penalty loops. But it is hard to shoot 5 targets, especially when you are tasked to do this 2-4 times in a race where you are working the body so hard.
Therefore the micro-o section is envisaged to be the decisive part in the race if it is going to be exciting for TV viewers, and therefore the “micro area” shall be the bit predominantly on TV, all the controls will be online and if the runner punches the correct control a green light will show on the TV and red if wrong.
This test…
The first normal orienteering section was too long. Holger Hott Johansen was minutes ahead before the micro-O section! You want the difference in time between runners to be minimal to make the micro-O part the decisive one. This would mean that this would have to be technically and physically “easy” to get the most effect. Therefore takes away from it being a “good test” of orienteering.
But then, the micro-O section has to be really technical to make the chance of people “missing” more possible. The use of the ditch control in this test could be seen as this (it was my only “miss”). But to me it was ambiguous, and not true orienteering.
Another part that is not really orienteering was that in this test the best tactic for the micro-O section, was to take care and get the controls right to the compulsory control. Then from this run on a path straight to the finish and take two penalty loops because it saved time on navigating to the control, risk of “missing”, and running in terrain etc. To me that is not orienteering, it is more towards running, but it could be quite exciting for TV maybe. And after all, one of the reasons for developing this format for the TV is to show orienteering is a sport where you have to make decisions with a map.
It is easier done in detailed areas like Scandinavia, but it could be hard to find some places to put “micro areas” in less detailed terrains.
I think it would be great in sprint as times are so much tighter there, but not for middle distance. And it is a lot of work to get everything right so I am sceptical about it taking orienteering by storm. But it is absolutely wicked that guys are trying these new concepts and orienteering ain’t being left to rot. If nothing else it is a class idea for training.
Anyway I think I have written enough, go and enjoy your other presents…and eat a bucket load of mince pies!
-
Joykok - yellow
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 1:05 pm
13 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 197 guests