Event Structure - four levels!!

[RJ]

Does anyone agree that the move to a three level structure for orienteering events has been a disaster?

The classification of Local, District, Regional and National was just so intuitive. Clubs made the mistake of thinking that by holding a regional event allowed them to inflate the entry fees and improve their profit margin (surplus!!)

Current colour coded district events are often just as good as anything planned with a fancy title.... the Red Bracelet Regional!! But just because district events are now really good, this should be seen as positive, and not as a hammer to beat the regional event. The answer lies in improving the quality of proposed regional events. A scrutiny 'group' can simply examine any proposal for a regional event and decide if the package will come up to scratch. If not then the event remains at district level. Regional events are where you compete in age classes..... call the courses by colour, but allocate an age class to the course, so that people can compete against their peers and rivals.

I don't see why the current district event has to be rebranded and upgraded to a L2 event just because they are now seen as being excellent events and great competitive platforms. Lets have local events at L4, district events at L3, regional events as L2, and national events as L1. It made so much sense in that form! Think of the pyramid..... membership, involvement, ability and progression all rely on the pyramid having the right configuration.

[roadrunner]

I agree - and to make things worse, we've got into a mess where some events are assigned a level because of the grade of controller used, rather than anything to do with the event itself.

Having four levels also makes the ranking list and incentive scheme ideas more logical: the former could include L1 and L2 events (much more inclusive than just L1 as presently proposed), and an incentive scheme covering these events could more easily take account of age and gender.

[Clive Coles]

Quite agree with you RJ

The bread and butter Sunday event is, and probably will be for years to come, a good quality colour-coded event offering White through to Brown courses.

BOF seem to want us to upgrade these to level 2 and train up more level 3 controllers to officiate at level 2. Isn't this a pointless exercise ?

Frankly this hope has gone down like a damp squib in many regions of the country.

I my opinion the regional event should be that little bit special. Clubs should stage these on good quality land ( and maps) that has not been overused by orienteers. We devalue the regional event by trying to turn many of our colour-coded events into regional fixtures.

If you think back a few years that was one of the criticisms that led to the event review ~ too many regional events of questionable quality being staged to inconsistant standards.

It's all very well BOF having visions ~ by next year we may even have a BOF events strategy ! Do however we really need BOF to be doing this ?

Clubs are just ignoring BOF at present and getting on with staging Sunday events that their members enjoy and for which their controllers and planners are content to stage. Long may this continue.

Clive

[Big Jon]

Scotland has for many years had a format where the old "badge" = regional events were mostly put on as part of a Scottish Orienteering League - 7 or 8 events that were in effect Scotland's national events (but without the extra organisational workload). To my knowledge the only club that put on regional events outside this series was Tinto with its Tinto twin. The SOA involvement meant that there was a consistency across the SOLs that moved them above local or district events. I cannot ever see SOA clubs moving towards more of these events as the system of SOL and then district/local (call them what you will) events fits well into the structure of the sport in Scotland.
As regards district and local events - in the north of Scotland they are still going strong- the old set-up of some events having 7 or 8 courses (district) and others 4 or 5 courses (local) is a suitable one for us - the local events can be used for introducing newcomers to organisation and planning on smaller areas with less pressure, and the larger district events are used for local club leagues etc.
The district/local event is dead, long live the district/local event!

[awk]

Talk about a confusing thread.

A good half of your post RJ reads as an argument in favour of the three tier scheme. One very big problem with what you propose though is to go back to ages: certainly most of my peers and rivals are not in the same age class as me, and at a recent club committee meeting, there wasn't a voice in favour of an age class structure as the fundamental organisation at level 2. But if you want an age class competition at an event then simply put it on based on the colour courses, it's not a problem. If you want it over a series of events, then get your association to organise it in the way the Scots have done. You can even have all those 40+ senior classes if you really want to get rid of any real competition, or go down the much more competitive route of having half a dozen (as for instance at many street races) - it's up to you.

Equally Clive - clubs are not ignoring BOF - they are simply getting on putting on events within the new structure.

Roadrunner - where did you get the indication that only L1 events would be used for rankings; I missed that.

Yes I agree the introduction has been completely fouled up - I don't think BOF could have done a worse job if they'd tried to do so deliberately, so much so that a true conspiracy theorist might even think they did!! One of BOF central's most ignominious failures: the introduction was rushed, the Event review group's recommendations were messed around with, the rules over controllers and embargoes were completely opposite to what we wanted to see, there's been a massive and completely unnecessary delay in implementing a one-list ranking scheme that was integral to the new structure, and the transition year was a ridiculous and confusing idea.

But the scheme as it stands is far more flexible than the old one - just use it as such. Organise the events you want using the colour structure that is well proven, base any other competitions you want on them, and promote them.

[LostAgain]

I agree that the 4 tier system is what I would prefer and find it surprising that AWK sees it differently.

CATI / Local
Colour Coded
Badge (Age class Competition)
National / Championship

There was nothing wrong with the old system. The new system is appalling and ill conceived, it makes me angry

The membership was not consulted, it has been tried and in my opinion failed.
I guess I am not alone

[IanW]

at a recent club committee meeting, there wasn't a voice in favour of an age class structure as the fundamental organisation at level 2.

I hesitate to bring this up, because I know the organisers are reluctant to publicise the results as they are concerned that they may be open to accusations that the poll may not have been entirely representative.

However, I believe that the result of the survey conducted at the Scottish 6 day showed a majority, in favour of age class competition, of Mugabe proportions (and the sample size was many hundreds)

Maybe an 'official' poll is in order?

[greywolf]

However, I believe that the result of the survey conducted at the Scottish 6 day showed a majority, in favour of age class competition, of Mugabe proportions (and the sample size was many hundreds)

Said survey was typical of much of the debate on this topic: featuring leading questions, and demonstrating a wilful representation (or to be charitable, a complete misunderstanding) of the new events structure, any results can hardly be regarded as an objective verdict.

It doesn't help mind you that (in my experience) many of those most vocal against change actually had a fairly sketchy notion of what the old structure was...
(Or rather, they assumed that the old events structure was identical to the events that they were putting on, regardless of how much in reality these events diverged from e.g. planning guidelines..)

I agree with awk that the introduction has been botched, unfortunately nonsense over embargoes and controllers has obscured the reality that in practice there has been very little fundamental change - in most cases at Regionals most competitors ran the same courses as their age class and a range of other age classes, and now most competitors run the same course as their age class and a range of other classes...it's just that now anyone who dares demonstrate some individuality and chooses a different course for whatever reason is not automatically marked as some non-competitive second class citizen....

[Oldman]

... the reality that in practice there has been very little change

I'm glad someone said that, because I haven't found it has made much difference to me, although I see from this and other threads that there seems to be a lot of passion about it.

[awk]

There was nothing wrong with the old system.

That's the point - there was plenty wrong with it in terms of its restrictiveness, and plenty of feedback to indicate it was wrong. The new scheme has been appallingly badly implemented as I said earlier, about which I am equally angry, but that is the fault of those who messed it up not of the system per se.

Really, all the new system was about was creating greater flexibility. If you really look at it, not a lot has changed. It even allows for age class competition: as I've said, there's nothing to stop it being implemented, but what we now have is an opportunity for it to be tailored to more local circumstances. The SOA have an age class structure which works fine within the three tier system, but that is because THEY are running it and tailoring it to Scottish needs. Indeed, their system has hardly changed from what it was before, because they'd already worked towards adapting the structure to local needs.

However, the full 40+ classes is simply arrant nonsense in some parts of the UK, so to impose that as the fundamental event structure remains plain silly, even sillier with all the microvariants to offer people in different age classes different distances (Ls, Ss, Vs etc etc) to make it work. Regions/clubs now have a structure of courses on which they can offer what they feel suits their local needs best- the only requirement being that anybody can run a course competitively, and that results are published by course (you can always bolt on separately ordered age class results for those who need their hands holding). You can have an age class competition organised by one year age bands if you want, or ten years, or fifteen years as in some street races; you can XXL, XL, L, M, S, XS, XXS each age class in if you really want! You can offer a single age class course, and then offer combined short classes; you can put age classes on shorter courses if you want to host a middle distance competition, or long ones if you want a long-O.

But rather than whingeing about it, or carrying out unnecessary surveys, polls etc. - if age classes are particularly needed/wanted then clubs and associations should simply get on and do something about it and offer them just as happens in pretty much every other running sport; the means to implement age class competition is already there without forcing those who aren't interested in only competing against a sub-group of a small age class to do so.

[distracted]

At the most fundamental level, this is what has happened:

Level of event no longer implies a specific type of competition.

Is that difficult to understand? And can someone tell me why that is such a great problem? Your reasoning would be interesting to hear...

[SJC]

CATI / Local
Colour Coded
Badge (Age class Competition)
National / Championship

Rather than just thinking of this as a Colour Coded vs Age Class debate, it is also worth considering who is likely to be attracted to the event and what they are typically used for. Using the four levels rather than names:

Level 4 = orienteers who live close to the event - club members and newcomers .
Used for introductory events and ccompetitions such as a club legaue.

Level 3 = members of host club and neighbouring clubs.
Used for Regional Leagues. e.g EMOA league based on colour coded courses.

Level 2 = orienteers prepared to travel further for high quality orienteering, both in terms of terrain and organisation and competition.
Events such as the Scottish 6 Day, Twin Peaks, and November Classic fit in here, and probably such series as the nopesport urban league.

Level 1 = Should be attractive to everyone.
Championship events - British and JK.

This should also fix the cntroller problem as the number needed for the Level 2 events will be less than it was in the old days.

In fact most of the requirements of the Event Structiure review could have been addressed without changing the old structure at all by:
a) Ensuring that the old Regional events were of the quality they should have been.
b) Allowing competitors to run out of age class at these events by entering the standard colour coded courses mapped against those already there for the age classes.

Not sure why nobody thought of this though.

[Snail]

I'm with awk on this.

There is nothing in the new structure that stops any club putting on an "age class competition" at a Level 2 event. All it has to do is effectively to say: " if you are in age-class X then by default we will put on on either course Y or course Z, depending on whether you want a 'long' or 'short' run". And then present age-class results - either within the course results or separately. If it proves popular it will continue.

But to enable the sport as a whole to thrive clubs need to offer a wider choice: be it for better athletes wanting to "run up", or newcomers / improvers to the sport wanting to "run down". (And in my view many "badge" events in recent years haven't offered true age-class competition in M/W35-50 anyway, because of the number of people running up!)

The new structure offers the best of both worlds - long may it continue! (Once Rules Group have seen sense on the controller issue )

[graeme]

I've been completely oblivious to the levels of events I've been to this year. I did the BOC, JK, BEOC, Age Class sprint, several SoLs, the six day and assorted local events.
The level makes no difference to me. Local SoSoL events are the only chance I get to race against many of my peers (i.e. people who I beat on a good day, but not on a bad day): at the bigger events they're mainly running different courses.

In fact, I'm currently involved with mapping/planning five events and I don't even know (or care) what level they should be at. All I know is they'll be as good as I can possibly make them, and the courses will be independently vetted by top quality orienteers, some of whom will have been to some sort of controller course.

I did ask one of the people campaigning so vocally against the new structure at the six day what level of event the six day was: he/she didn't know!

For experienced orienteers this level business simply doesn't matter: we know what to expect.

The only convincing arguments I've seen are about avoiding clashes of big events (here the "botched" introduction has prevented clubs registering high profile Urban races as L2, leaving the fixture committee powerless to avoid clashes).

[martyn]

Having four levels also makes the ranking list and incentive scheme ideas more logical: the former could include L1 and L2 events (much more inclusive than just L1 as presently proposed)

The proposed Ranking scheme certainly does NOT say that only L1 events should be included. The proposals provide for as wide a range of events as reasonably possible be included.