Short course racing

[Steler]

[code][/code]
It really anoys me the attitude of most British orienteers to short courses. Why is it so second class? I believe that it's only because of the old cronies who only think that classic racing is important. We need to sort it out as only a proportion of humans are long distant runners, as many are short distant runners and these are precluded from competing in orienteering. Having come from competitive 400m running I cannot compete with the top in my age group over the classic distance but would have a much better chance if they competed at the shorter distance. I always like it when a top runner runs shorter distances.
The logical first step would be to have at the British champs a classic one day and the following the short course race so that everyone could race at both lengths so that the best can win. Nobody could then complain that short course winners are inferior.
I look forward to the day when sprint, short course, medium course, and long course competitors are all looked on as equal, as they are at elite level.

[EddieH]

As middle distance is 35 minutes and short is 2/3s of long which is regularly won in 50 or even fewer minutes what exactly is your short course championship supposed to be?

[RS]

I'm not sure what you are getting at , Steler. And as for old cronies, have you ever looked at the lists for sprint and urban races? Think you'll find that the largest classes here are old cronies, as you so rudely call them. I only hope I can run as fast as them when I reach their age

[bedders]

I am not going to call myself an elite (especially not after 7 months in Germany eating sausages) but I did start this weekend intending to run all 3 days on M21E and then do JK trophy but I injured myself 4 controls into the middle in Kyloe. I then ran short on Sunday just to have a jog round a course. The number of people coming back from injuries and illness who run short might have something to do with this feeling that short courses are of a lower class. Other than that, the best orienteers (ie running and navigational ability combined) do the Long courses. So if you want to be labelled the best or just test yourself against the best, you do the long course.

[JK]

You might interested in the structure that Switzerland has for championship races:

Long (EOM)
Middle/short (MOM, previously KOM)
Sprint (SPM)
Night (NOM)
Relay (SOM)
Team (TOM)

as well as a couple of Ski-O and Bike-O of course

There are never short distance classes for anything other than 21, where there are
Short, Medium and Long in addition to the Elite classes (no Medium for women).
Any M35, 40, 45 or 50 who want a shorter run do the M21M, older age groups have the
option of M21S. There isn't really a shorter option for the oldest competitors.

JK

[awk]

Other than that, the best orienteers (ie running and navigational ability combined) do the Long courses. So if you want to be labelled the best or just test yourself against the best, you do the long course.

Only if it's a standard event. If it's a middle or sprint event, then it's different. What I think Steler is saying is that we need more of these. Incidentally, RS, urban does not mean sprint or middle. Whilst the number of urban races is going up (great!), not many of them are sprint/middle.

[LesS]

On the day, on that course, in those conditions, be it long or short, the best person won. O is great in giving everyone the opportunity to pick which length/winning time suits them - there is nothing in any guidelines about which version is rated more highly.
Why do those on the JK thread feel embarrassed about winning their event - a matter of personal choice? Are there others feeling embarrassed because they didn't win?
We have been told in many articles by our elite that there are differences in technique between the different types of event - and for the shorter distances this sums up as you have to run faster, you are therefore more prone to mistakes, you have less time to recover from them.
Over the years, there are regular occasions where Short winners do faster mins/km than their equivalents on Long - not often admittedly, but it happens. There are increasing numbers of events where there are more competitors on Short than Long.
At what stage does opinion decide that Short is the defining course rather than Long?

[NeilC]

there is nothing in any guidelines about which version is rated more highly.

The minutes of the January Events Committee suggest that they should though.

British Championships trophies and medals: After discussion re the awarding of
trophies and medals to the winners of classes in a particular Age Group at the
British Championships it was confirmed that these only go to the winners of the
highest class in each age group. e.g. the winner of M21E should be awarded the
trophy, with medals to the first three. The winners of classes M21L and M21S only
receive mementoes. It was also suggested that the specific Event Rules for Major
Events should contain details on the awarding of trophies and medals.

[awk]

Why do those on the JK thread feel embarrassed about winning their event - a matter of personal choice?

They're not embarrassed about winning - they're embarrassed about being presented with a prize/trophy when they feel that competitors on the main course were more worthy.

We have been told in many articles by our elite that there are differences in technique between the different types of event - and for the shorter distances this sums up as you have to run faster, you are therefore more prone to mistakes, you have less time to recover from them.

Yes - but most S classes are not planned as middle distance courses, not least because they are often somebody else's L course (e.g. M45S is often run on the same as W45L), so the technical issues are rarely different. Which is a bit sad, because when I run S, I'd much rather run a middle distance course than an abbreviated long course.

There are increasing numbers of events where there are more competitors on Short than Long.

. Often stated, but is it true? My anecdotal experience is that the opposite is the case.

At what stage does opinion decide that Short is the defining course rather than Long?

When the event is publicised as a middle distance event, and long distance courses are provided for those who don't want to compete over the shorter distance (I live more in hope than expectation).

[Big Jon]

Why can't the short relay be scrapped as the JK trophy relay is already a short relay - it was won in 103 minutes - for 4 legs of a relay. The men's short had leg winning times of 19, 18 & 18 minutes. I don't believe for one moment that all those running the short relay couldn't run for another 10-15 minutes and compete in the top class.

[madmike]

Yes Jon,
but JK Trophy has 4 legs and short 3 - not all Clubs have strength in depth to generate 4 good runners.

Frog,
you might wish to know that half of our relay teams went to Inverness after the relays and the other half to SE England. The Inverness car got home first so not sure about your travel south comment Goodness knows how long it took Kerno to get home?

[Scott]

Why can't the short relay be scrapped

I believe that that is going to happen from next year, alongside the reduction from four legs to three on the Men's Open (to bring it back in line with the WOC format).

[Stodgetta]

I know the top few teams are quite capable of running an extra 10 - 15 minutes a man each, but for many (most?) the relays are a bit of fun with your clubmates at the end of a weekend and after 2 long days, another long run is not appealing.
Don't look at the top teams, look at the middle to bottom teams - would they want to run another 20 - 30 minutes a man each? There were several who were entered (or wished they were entered!) on the short open because they didn't have to run as far as the 120+ legs, or because the only other alternative for the ages of competitors would have been the Ad Hoc with a 4.2km course and an orange.

[madmike]

There were several who were entered the short open because they didn't have to run as far as the 120+ legs, or because the only other alternative for the ages of competitors would have been the Ad Hoc with a 4.2km course and an orange.

Exactly right Stodgetta, that was our view

[awk]

Why can't the short relay be scrapped as the JK trophy relay is already a short relay

I believe that that is going to happen from next year, alongside the reduction from four legs to three on the Men's Open (to bring it back in line with the WOC format).

The former seems a good idea. A real pity about the latter - very short sighted thinking if true. So what about WOC? That's for national teams, the JK is for clubs (just in case people hadn't noticed). By the same logic, the Tio Mila, Jukola, Harvester, Spring Cup and all should be reduced to 3 legs.

And if true, can anybody tell me where it has been discussed/publicised, please, as I can't recall seeing anything about it - it certainly hasn't come up at club committee level.

Madmike - what do you mean by 4 'good' people? Even the long legs in the Trophy were shorter than M45S ran in the individual!! (Bet those thinking this too long are the same people who object to a middle distance race on the Saturday too ).