British Middle and Sprint Championships - who's it for?

[EddieH]

Many people complain about tick in the mud attitudes to orienteering. Yet BOF introduce a middle and sprint championships and years down the line only the slightest lip service is paid to he non Elite.

This year I went to the British Sprint Championships at Milton Keynes as a final year M50 and had to compete with the Elite. Had I been a year older I'd have been the British M55 champion as this seemed to be the other class. At least this is as I remember it - maybe I was actually cmpeting in M35+. The results page completely fails to mention the 55+ winners.

Is it a British Champs ONLY for the elite? Because it not advertised as such. Yet what incentive is there for other classes to travel? Surely we want to encourage everyone to try this great aspect of the sport. It was not appealing to me until I did it And I know countless other people that have said the same thing.

There is NO extra work needed to recognise class winners - no extra courses are needed - the highest finisher in the highest final should be the British Champion.

Not onlyshould this encourage more veterans to attend, but it should enhance then status of the Elite champions in the minds of more people.

Regarding that that's another subject.... Click on MAJOR EVENTS on the BOF page - then British Championships and what do you get????????????

I am sure the sam applies to the Middle distance - I have no personal experience of it.

[bendover]

good idea for the sprint champs. really easy to do aswell.

as for the middle, yeah i think its about time that as a format it was expanded to take in other classes.

[Adventure Racer]

You were competing in M40+, just that the winner of that was in the top 10 of the elite IIRC! Though I note that you didn't even make the podium in M50

Good idea about having class results - I note there don't even seem to be separate results for those classes they did award prizes for.

[EddieH]

Exactly - M50 was VERY competitive (assuming itwas a class) - Maybe the results might have been different if the lower finals were not treated as irrelevant - the control marshalls were removed after the A final and a control was missing. The fact it was described as "Building" without mentioning that it was only 1m high really confused the issue.

[NeilC]

The sprint and middle championships are currently only for the elite. Additional courses, classes and winners are currently at the discretion of the organisers (there are only four official champions). There are obviously complications with making the events full age group championships - how many courses to plan? Should the distances for all age groups be scaled down the same amount as the elites etc etc. Rules group plan to take a look at this following the 2007 championships.

[EddieH]

Good Neil, you've cleared that up.

I strongly suggest the rules group take a look at who most orienteers are. And as for the Elite, the best way you have of enhancing your status and having the oldies put in the money to keep it all going is to have the rest of us along.

Regarding lots of courses - not necessary - it is a great opportunity for many to run alongside the elite. I appreciate that the winning times will not be truly sprint, but it might make up for the fact that our standard championships are scarcely "long" either.

[SJC]

It is probably ok to have just one course for the Sprint Chamionships - even if it is a bit of a long sprint for the oldies.

Middle distance would be more of a problem. The Elite concept of Middle Distance usually ends up with a course of 6 to 7 km. This is almost the same length as the normal Long course for an M60.

Also, would you also use all the age classes (which could have very few runners in each), or have say Open, Senior M40+, Veteran M60+, to make it more of a race.

[Adventure Racer]

You're being a bit unfair on the marshalling, Eddie - they did still have marshalls out, and the control was actually replaced part way through the B final. Particularly frustrating for me, as I lost considerable time (for a sprint) there trying to work out how I'd read the map wrong, and removing the splits either side would move me above 2 people for who the control was there. Then again if they had considered this to be a "championship" they would have just had to void the whole course - is that what you want? Interesting question though, given there were considerable amounts of UK cup points available at the sharp end of the B final.

Notably for the finals, they did do an element of decreasing the distances for the higher classes, but based on ability rather than age, as the C and D finals were shorter.

[roadrunner]

Apart from recognising the winners, I think the way things were done at the Sprint Champs - and at the Oxford City Race - wasn't bad at all. Three adult age categories (open, 40-54 and 55+) gave decent competition. OK, personally I'd have preferred 40-49 and 50+, but that's just because I'm an M50 who doesn't stand a chance against the M40s

But let's at least be consistent about what we call them; for 2007 we have (according to the BOF major fixtures list)

British Sprint Championships
British Elite Championships (Middle)

while for 2008 it's:

British Elite Sprint Championships
British Elite Championships - Middle Race

Confused? I am!

[awk]

Definitely keep the broader classes.

For the sprint - all run as at Milton Keynes. For the middle: I thought the courses at Rowney Warren (I know it wasn't the British, but that's the one I went to and it was excellent) were fine - still kept numbers of courses down to a sensible level.

[Axel]

This is typical UK/Brit orienteering farting around, it needs sorting, we are our own worst enimies and this just wouldn't happen on the continent.

If you want to expand orienteering as we all do, then lets be a bit more realistic ie this:

W/M 16 and under - Junior Class.

W/M 18 to 44 - Elite Class.

M/M 45 TO 54 - Senior class.

W/M 55 and above - Veteran class

Using these age classes in both Sprint and Middle Championships would not overburden the course planners for these events. I believe adopting this system would increase the entry and participation and that after all is what we are trying to achieve

The much talked about City Sprint Series could an ideal trialling ground for this system. Any more news on this series??

I will have to ask BAOC to try these age groups at their event at HMS Sultan. Excellent Sprint venue that must not be missed!!

[NeilC]

This is typical UK/Brit orienteering farting around, it needs sorting, we are our own worst enimies and this just wouldn't happen on the continent.

If you want to expand orienteering as we all do, then lets be a bit more realistic ie this:

W/M 16 and under - Junior Class.
W/M 18 to 44 - Elite Class.
M/M 45 TO 54 - Senior class.
W/M 55 and above - Veteran class

Using these age classes in both Sprint and Middle Championships would not overburden the course planners for these events. I believe adopting this system would increase the entry and participation and that after all is what we are trying to achieve
The much talked about City Sprint Series could an ideal trialling ground for this system. Any more news on this series??
I will have to ask BAOC to try these age groups at their event at HMS Sultan. Excellent Sprint venue that must not be missed!!

I hadn't realised that we were the most disorganised orienteering nation in Europe.

As I mentioned in a previous post the current sprint and middle champs are open events that anyone can enter. Organising clubs can embellish the event with additional courses and prizes if they so wish.

The champs at Sandhurst advertised the sort of prizes mentioned above (though they then forgot to award the junior one). Attendance wasn't great (the junior competitions were won by an M12). A pet hate of mine is defining Veteran differently at different events 35 at some, 40 at others and now a proposal for 55.

Again as mentioned previously rules group will be looking at these events next year. Your regional representative will be more than happy to receive constructive suggestions.

[mharky]

I was under the impression that the British Middle and Sprint were elite championships, in which case their should be 4 courses: Mens/Womens Junior/Senior. Anyone who can't or doesn't want to run those courses aint' elite.

However, I totally agree that there should be a British Championships for the non-elite in both middle and sprint as these are both now recognised disciplines of orienteering.

I think it would be appropriate to name these races correctly, and if they are British Championships then they should be given equal everything as the long/relay champs.

I think the age classes Axel has come up with look pretty good. Although whatever the split is, there will also be some unhappy people. But I would assume this age split is just for who runs what course, if there are enough people attending then one could award the usual age-class awards for 45,50,55,60,65,70,75,80,85,90,95

[EddieH]

Mharky you are quite right as usual. However many courses courses you decide to use it is absurd to expect a 65 to seriously compete against a 50. If you reduce the number of British Championship categories in one type of O you immediately devalue it. However run the same courses - that is great.

Regarding separate Elite and non-elite championships, this has not proved that popular with the classic where there is far more of a case for it. To have separate sprint championships would in my mind be absurd. Lets build the valuof Sprint in people's minds, then they will come and race their own race, and will see and support the Elite, (in fact because of the format, much more so than in the classic).

[Gross]

As I mentioned in a previous post the current sprint and middle champs are open events that anyone can enter. Organising clubs can embellish the event with additional courses and prizes if they so wish.

I thought these events were Championships with selection required if numbers reach an unmanageable level and no events that were 'open to anyone'