Have I missed out somewhere? How broad is "this" system - junior classes or all classes? I certainly needed reminding - or possibly informing. How should I have known?Becks wrote:Just to remind you all that Alex at BOF needs any comments you want to make about this system by the last day of this month. Get writing, or PM me and I'll pass them on.
Junior badge courses (again!)
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
40 posts
• Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
- SIman
- brown
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 5:09 pm
The Ageless Adult system experimented with was discussed at Development Committee today, and I'll let you know the outcome when we get the minutes to ensure I get it quite right. The review of the JM/W 1,2 etc system is due at the next meeting as FOCUS said the date for the last feedback was the 1st May. Does that clarify things?
Will? We've got proper fire now!
-
Becks - god
- Posts: 2633
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:25 pm
- Location: East Preston Street Massif
SIman wrote:Have I missed out somewhere? How broad is "this" system - junior classes or all classes? I certainly needed reminding - or possibly informing. How should I have known?
We're just talking about reviewing the junior classes at the moment.
Are you saying you haven't read the note in your most recent Focus about sending stuff to Alex Ross for review of the Junior Badge Scheme?
(Though admittedly it did also says that 'BOF and Development Committee are minded to continue the experiment' or something along those lines, so how much any suggestions are going to make a difference, I don't know...)
- Blanka
- green
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 5:54 pm
- Location: Oxford
Blanka wrote:(Though admittedly it did also says that 'BOF and Development Committee are minded to continue the experiment' or something along those lines, so how much any suggestions are going to make a difference, I don't know...)
I know I'm starting to sound like a BOF monkey here, but less of this please! Everyone at the Development Committee meeting was handed a leaflet with all responses given so far over a week ago to look at before today's meeting - any more comments will be disseminated before the next. We are listening and so far the feedback has been mostly positive - only one and a bit negative views out of 11 (I think) replies. I assume this is why the comment was made that they're in a mind to continue the experiment. So if you're really against it make sure you let us know and you WILL be heard - but only if you tell us. Posting here is not enough to make it official - but if you PM me and direct me to a post of yours I'm happy to cut and paste specific posts and pass them on.
Will? We've got proper fire now!
-
Becks - god
- Posts: 2633
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:25 pm
- Location: East Preston Street Massif
Well that restraint didn't last long did it?
No, because they were provide fewer classes than old badge scheme, bringing more juniors together of similar ability, generating more competition. National event classes only work if there are sufficient juniors - smaller ones generate less competition than colour coded events!
If you look at the current scheme, with fewer classes, you'll find that peer group competition is alive and kicking - more so, when you consider that the age based scheme dictates that those only a few months/weeks/days apart are split apart 50% of the time if born across the January boundary. Peer groups are also just as much about ability as age. Junior age classes generating genuine peer group competition was one of those myths that doesn't hold up under any sort of scrutiny.
Partly, but also because the top M14s run TD5 courses - doesn't matter how long the course is, the TD isn't what they are after.
Then you get into the question of what is a badge event for. If to provide a bridge between CC and National events, then the ageless classes must surely be a step backwards?
No, because they were provide fewer classes than old badge scheme, bringing more juniors together of similar ability, generating more competition. National event classes only work if there are sufficient juniors - smaller ones generate less competition than colour coded events!
Interesting that, because the strongest supporters are usually families, speaking as one who is part of an orienteering family, and spent hours discussing with other families.Don't get me wrong, I have gradually seen some of the plus points of the system, but I think the family orienteer is being cheated a bit.
This simply doesn't work in practice. Firstly, under the old scheme, 15/16s were running 16A, some running 16B, some running 18A, some running even higher, some running colour coded. I remember badge events where not a single winner above M/W10 was actually in the class they were competing in. So - no more concentration of 15/16s than under the new scheme.Yes, but I would say that with age classes you have a greater chance of running against your peers (I expect most people who are 15/16 would run 16 whereas with JM/W's you have quite a large number of options, so you can't say as easily that you'll run against you friends/peers)?
If you look at the current scheme, with fewer classes, you'll find that peer group competition is alive and kicking - more so, when you consider that the age based scheme dictates that those only a few months/weeks/days apart are split apart 50% of the time if born across the January boundary. Peer groups are also just as much about ability as age. Junior age classes generating genuine peer group competition was one of those myths that doesn't hold up under any sort of scrutiny.
But surely that's more the problem of under-planning (as you mentioned earlier) than the problem of the system?
Partly, but also because the top M14s run TD5 courses - doesn't matter how long the course is, the TD isn't what they are after.
Here I agree with you - but then the current system isn't what I wanted to see. I wanted to see National Events running what you are proposing for Regional events: JM/JW courses (but probably longer at older end), with separate A age classes incorporated. Then the metal system (inc Championship) spread across all three levels (up to Silver at colour codeds, up to Golds at regional etc). But was told too much at one go - so only got half way, and scheme not fully integrated as planned.One other issue is with too many different badge schemes.
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
Becks wrote:I know I'm starting to sound like a BOF monkey here, but less of this please!
Can you post a summary or link to what's being proposed?
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
Nothing is actually being proposed here. When the new scheme was introduced a review was promised after 2 years of use - we're approaching this review date now. So any opinions are being welcomed.
Will? We've got proper fire now!
-
Becks - god
- Posts: 2633
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:25 pm
- Location: East Preston Street Massif
AWK said "I wanted to see National Events running what you are proposing for Regional events: JM/JW courses (but probably longer at older end), with separate A age classes incorporated. Then the metal system (inc Championship) spread across all three levels (up to Silver at colour codeds, up to Golds at regional etc). But was told too much at one go - so only got half way, and scheme not fully integrated as planned."[/quote]
Please do not mess with the Championship / National event categories , at some point the Juniors should be allowed to run in their age group. Note there is no ranking list for the juniors, my kids generally run out of class (up) relative to their age but do like to occasionally run against their age peers. This gives their ego's a lift as they are very competitive against their own age but find it difficult to run as fast as the bigger kids, but their growing!
Please do not mess with the Championship / National event categories , at some point the Juniors should be allowed to run in their age group. Note there is no ranking list for the juniors, my kids generally run out of class (up) relative to their age but do like to occasionally run against their age peers. This gives their ego's a lift as they are very competitive against their own age but find it difficult to run as fast as the bigger kids, but their growing!
"If A is success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut" Abraham Lincoln
-
LostAgain - diehard
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 2:32 pm
- Location: If only I knew
I agree, don't start messing with the national event classes. Speaking as a junior I really like running against my own age group occasionally and the system at the moment at nationals seems to be working. Why go to all the trouble to change it?
- RWK
- orange
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 12:08 pm
- Location: Leeds
LostAgain wrote:AWK said "I wanted to see National Events running what you are proposing for Regional events: JM/JW courses (but probably longer at older end), with separate A age classes incorporated. Then the metal system (inc Championship) spread across all three levels (up to Silver at colour codeds, up to Golds at regional etc). But was told too much at one go - so only got half way, and scheme not fully integrated as planned."
Please do not mess with the Championship / National event categories , at some point the Juniors should be allowed to run in their age group.![/quote]
If you read what I wrote, you'll see that I'm advocating age classes at national events.
- Guest
40 posts
• Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 179 guests