W16 talent

[ifor]

At that age I would think that anything that gets someone upsett with the sport is dangerous especialy if as is all to likly they are potentialy good at lots of other things they could go and do instead... early burnout is one thing pissing off a talented and enthusiastic teanager is another...

Ifor

[mharky]

AWK, you're only real argument is "it doesn't do them any harm not running, does it". Well we can say that about everything, it wouldn't do children any harm not learning a foreign language, it wouldn't do them any harm not learning about the history of WW2. I can only think of a few things that would harm a junior if you forbid them from doing it; mainly breathing.

This year our 16's are being protected from 2 races. One of which they will actually be running further than the FCC course at if they run M/W16!

I can understand why this rule exists, but it does absolutey nothing. They can run M21L 50 times a year if they wanted. All this rule does do is stop our most talented 16's from getting some half decent competition at a 25 minute middle race.

In cycling the size of the gears a junior can use is limited to "protect" them. All this means is that they have a racing bike with smaller gears and their trainign bike would be the same as any other seniors. You can't control what young cyclists (or orienteers) do in training, and that is where a 90% of the exercise which leads to burn out is done.

Yes, so it does no one any harm, but it doesn't do them any good either. If there was a BOF wide rule abuot running up (which I would be massively against) then maybe it could be said to be protecting burn-out.

[NeilC]

From the Fabian4 website it can be seen that the M and W16 JK winners have entered both middle and classic distance FCC final races. Hopefully they will be allowed to run. As results at JK sprint, BNC, JOK sprint show the top 16s can compete with the older juniors at big races, although I suspect that the boys at least would struggle more over the classic distance. Common sense does generally seem to be used and they are being encouraged to gain big race experience by running elite at sprint/middle races and by potential talent being taken to EYOC etc. Minimum age (top year 14s) regulations for Interland and BOF tours are being maintained though which I think most people agree with.

[Mrs H]

The problem is that casualties tend to disappear off the scene and get forgotten. there were a lot of very promising young orienteers in the 14-16 age classes when young Neville and the elder miss h were that age who seemed to suffer long term injury and recurrent illness and faded into the woodwork - it would be wrong to mention names - but I'm sure you can all think of a few who were going to be "the next big thing" and some even got as far as JWOC and no longer seem to be in the sport at any level. What happened to cause their problems - was it "too much too soon" or just bad luck?

[awk]

Yes, so it does no one any harm, but it doesn't do them any good either. If there was a BOF wide rule abuot running up (which I would be massively against) then maybe it could be said to be protecting burn-out.

This is where we disagree on both counts. My argument is not what you say; it is that running up on the longer courses is potentially harmful AND that not running doesn't do them any harm. I think the Scandis have got it right, and we (and you, given your comment above) have got it wrong. And, frankly, I can't understand the rush - they will have four years when they are eligible to compete. The junior years are about laying foundations, and those foundations take a long time to put in place properly.

Unlike NeilC, I'm very disappointed if M/W16s are running the long course of the FCC Final. I've seen way too many young orienteers do too much too soon and fall by the wayside or have to take long periods of time out.

Those juniors, Ifor, will be a lot more pissed off if that happens than if they have to wait to run a race that's not even for them (not that I think that rule will piss any of them off one iota; but if it does, they need to do some growing up mentally too). There's plenty of other things for them to focus on.

[RJ]

This is a complex matter. In the end, however, which course a particular athlete runs is up to that athlete. Anyone can run up a course, or two courses, using them for training, or in order to measure themselves against older opposition. They can train seven days a week, twice a day if they want.

The sport is improving though..... in the provision of coaching support for a lot of the juniors. Many of them have 'mentors' and coaches who help and guide them through these decisions. I would feel quite at ease with an athlete deciding to run 'up' if the decision has been thought through with their coach. The coach is the person who will be able to assess the situation best. Rules can't do that! It is important that clubs and the sport gear themselves up to provide the support and coaching that is needed to help these juniors make the right decisions for themselves.

The sport suffers generally from a lack of numbers, and often the level of ability is not as great as it might be if there were a larger group of athletes. At the moment there is a group of W16s who are very able. The competition they produce amongst themselves is intense.... and they can give the W18s something to think about as well!!

It will be good if most of them keep going and stay committed into their twenties. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. They may find a life elsewhere! Those decisions belong to them. I wish them well..... and hope they get what THEY want out of the sport.

[awk]

I seem to remember reading somewhere fairly recently, that Yvette felt she had done too much too soon (but may have misremembered).

I did misremember: somebody else suggested this, but I've seen no evidence to suggest Yvette ever did.