New Event Structure

[IanD]

So, if such a scheme were to be implemented ... Would this be of interest?

Not merely of interest, it would seem fundamental to keeping rankings working given the intention of the events structure review group that people could run competitively on any course of appropriate difficulty (irrespective of length). In my view, the Regional event changes should not have been introduced before the ranking list changes.

[Brian Hughes]

I agree with Ian on the importance of the new Rankings system emerging quickly and that it would have been preferable for this to have been tested before implementation of the New Fixtures structure.

It may be more important than youngsters realise to print results by age-class as well as by course. Several of my peer group who have been motivated by seeing their name high on (say) the M65L list have expressed the fear that finding themselves regularly around 40th ex 80 on Green or Blue will be highly de-motivating, even to the extent of causing them to quit the sport.

Personally, I could live with that if someone could convince me that all the changes will address the real problem the sport faces, too few M/W 21s entering and staying in Orienteering.

Brioan Hughes (M60 HOC)

[Snail]

Provided age classes are stil captured in all cases* it should be straightforward for results systems to indicate both course position and class position (on that course).

*A possible problem is that this won't necessarily still be the case, even at level 2 events, once age class is no longer necessary in determining a course. For EODs in particular age class may be missing, as used to happen at some district events.

(Presumably the ranking system is based on membership number, so avoids such issues?)

The new ranking system will also have to cope with other oddities, such as people running a course far away from their "norm" because they want to leave early / are injured / their first choice course is full; people walking around a course with friends, etc. In the current structure these are easy to exclude, but under the new structure all competitors, including those that would have previously been on "colour coded" courses, get included...

... irrespective of which course they ran (within reason obviously - they would all need to be of the same TD).

Does that mean Light Green competitors get included for ranking purposes events where all courses are TD4 - but not at those where harder courses are TD5?

[SeanC]

I wrote

"Looking at the results, something that might annoy some is that the results can't be displayed by class"

Personally I'm more interested in comparing my speed with those of whatever age who are about the same speed, but I know of others who have expressed similar views about displaying by class as Brian. However this is just extra work for the computer and the programmer and nothing to get to worried about, the sort of thing that would be addressed in response to constructive criticism in a transition year (if this structure wasn't already defunct ) Certainly seems a good idea for the ranking list.

The big plus seems to be for the B class runner. As a punter M40 a 10K M40A course in a place like Eridge is just too long. The 6.7K M40B course is better but maybe I should be pushing myself a bit more. With this new structure I can run the intermediate course (8.2K) and still be competitive. For new orienteers 6.7K might be too long, so now they can gradually progress up the distances, giving them experience at technical orienteering without forcing them into an epically long time. Since M21's have the longest A course, this would seem to benefit them most.

Reading/scanning between the lines of the various committees I think the argument for this structure attracting newcomers is indirect benefit. It seems to go like this:

- Overall the sport has got stuck into a rut of offering too many regional and district events with rather rigid formats.

- Well designed local events with the right mix of publicity, coaching etc seem to be the way to get more people into the sport (eg MADO series, MDOC local series etc).

- Changing the structure to promote fewer (but higher quality and more flexible) regional events will free up time and resources which clubs can use to put on local events, do more publicity, coaching, development work etc.

I think that's the argument. It seems a good one to me, but no doubt I will be corrected.

[graeme]

In my view, the Regional event changes should not have been introduced before the ranking list changes.

I'm not sure why the single ranking list is delayed. I wrote the algorithm two years ago, Mike Cumpstey (?) coded and interfaced it with the data from previous events and tested stability over the last two years - the thing has been tested and ready to run for over a year.

[Mrs H]

Several of my peer group who have been motivated by seeing their name high on (say) the M65L list have expressed the fear that finding themselves regularly around 40th ex 80 on Green or Blue will be highly de-motivating, even to the extent of causing them to quit the sport.

I think it a particularly male attribute only to want to do things you perceive yourself to be good at - I've come across the attitude many times and wondered where the enjoyment lies - in the doing or the winning? Still it can only apply to a very small minority otherwise there would be no one left to prop them up.

I wonder what said M65's wives will think or do if their husbands quit the sport - could be a long and boring retirement!

[Gnitworp]

Maybe we could scrap timing as only a minority are interested in seeing how well they have done relative to others and try to do better; it would make organisation lot easier.

PS Maybe we need to put on one course with timing occasionally to cater for the small number of competitive males.

[DJM]

snail wrote

Does that mean Light Green competitors get included for ranking purposes events where all courses are TD4 - but not at those where harder courses are TD5?

My view is that, yes, TD4 courses can be included for rankings purposes. Each course is, in effect, treated as a standalone event by the ranking system; some level 1/2 events will have courses which can only be planned at a maximum of TD4 and results from all these will naturally contribute to the rankings system.

A single TD4 course from an otherwise TD5 event will be no different from these.

[Nottinghamshire outlaw]

I am not convinced that mapping age classes against particular colour course at Level 2 events is helpful - apart from instances where an event is a regional championship. I thought that having the colours at Level 2 events was to encourage clubs to offer the range of courses which they thought their clientele would want and also so that less experienced competitors would feel able to enter the course which was appropriate for them.
At my club coaching session last Saturday I asked some relatively new adult members how they felt about entering the age class courses at our upcoming Level 2 event (which still uses age classes in this transition year). Naturally they felt a bit apprehensive about the jump in distance and technical difficulty which would be involved compared with what they usually do at a Level 3 event. I still remember that I felt worried about the jump from doing a 3.5km orange course to a 5+km W35B (as it was then) when I first entered an age class event. Similarly a youngster should not feel pressurised to do a course for which they do not feel ready because their age class has been mapped against a harder course.
A lot of the posts on this and other threads have been about what experienced orienteers want with no thoughts about trying to encourage newcomers to progress (if they want to). Experienced orienteers know what course they want to do and will be able to check the results and filter out (mentally) those people with whom they do not compare themselves. When I look at a Green course results list I don't care if juniors or fast men beat me; I look to see how I have done compared with the people I want to compare myself with (other 'senior' women, my husband etc!!).

Rankings: How about a radical suggestion? If course lenghths are a ratio down from the longest course (the Green/W60L which I usually do is 0.39 compared with the 1.0 of the M21, I think) surely it should be possible to produce a single ranking list so that anyone could get some ranking points whatever course they do and if person X gets (say) 50 points on a Light Green course s/he will see that they are improving when they feel more confident and do a Green course and get more points on the longer/harder course.
Ahh... I can hear the screams coming from the brigade of 'I want to know that I am the top of my M/W XX class' (:

[SeanC]

But these mixed mode regionals allow us to have our cake and eat it. Beginners and the less fit can treat it as a colour coded event, those motivated by being top of their age class can aim for such.

The only problem is the time needed to build computer programs that can display results in both modes.

If people are motivated to orienteer by competing against their age class then this will raise participation, improve the economics of the sport and give us more publicity opportunities. It's only sport, why spoil their fun?

[DJM]

Nottinghamshire outlaw wrote:

surely it should be possible to produce a single ranking list so that anyone could get some ranking points whatever course they do

This is exactly what the main model under discussion should achieve, but without needing to look at the dubious method of comparing course lengths ...

[Mrs H]

I think Gnitworp is willfully misinterpreting me - my point is you can still be competitive against people who don't happen to be the same age/sex as you - just like nottinghamshire Outlaw says. I do it all the time and frequently have to cross reference my results with other classes on the same course to see how I really did.

As that information is frequently available (course results in conjunction with class results) will it really be so hard to provide that information for people who want it?

the new ranking list sounds very exciting - so when will it come on line?

[Scott]

Mrs H is right - personally, I'd much rather compete against people of a similar standard to myself, regardless of age and sex. Therefore, I'm hoping that the new structure will see a lot more people running Black than there used to be on M21L - I like the distance, but coming 6th of 8 with nobody five minutes either side of you and the fastest two or three a good 20mins ahead of the rest gets a little tedious after a while... Otherwise, I might have to start "running down" on Brown at the new-style Regionals to get a bit more competition.

[PKJ]

Well, this is interesting. As an M50, I appear to be a 'youngster' and not to be 'peculiarly male'.
I'm more motivated by finishing 40th out of 80 in a quality field, than by finishing near the top of M50L when the best M50s are running a longer course, and other M50s are running M50S, and I've been beaten by an M55, etc etc
(Perhaps a legacy of those 150-strong M21A classes in the 1980s)

But most of all I want a good course on a good map. And these days I nearly always get both - regardless of the Event Structure.
It would be a shame if continual discussions and changes to Event Structures got in the way of the good (and long overdue) efforts to increase participation.

[Brian Hughes]

Is Mrs H wilfully misrepresenting me?
I left road running (at which I was good) in 1994 and for the first 8 years at least I was absolutely hopeless at Orienteering. I still kept going as I enjoyed O so much, so clearly being competitive was only a small part of the experience. Now I can be reasonable on a good day and doing well obviously adds to the enjoyment, but it is certainly not everything.

I find it frustrating that having recognised the advantages of the new Structure for those who were stuck in small classes under the old system, the legitimate concerns of the older competitor might be ignored. When prominent members of clubs threaten to leave the sport, I get concerned. A unified Rankings System and results at Level 2 published by course AND Class is all I ask. Is that unreasonable?

Brian Hughes (M60L HOC)