4 Levels

[Mrs H]

Well personally I am rooting for Rafa

[Gross]

On BBC website as he's doing well just now he's British !

[SJC]

Will these "best" events be significantly different from the regional champs which currently also occupy level 1? Should they be? After all, for people registered outside the region, a regional champs is just another guaranteed quality event - so by all means lets have more of them - include the top multi days and urban races as well - use them for selection, UK cup and FCC as well- make them really worth travelling for and not just for people who want to crank up ranking points.

So, put a lot more events into the Level 1 category and then split them into those that are under the control of BOF (who lay down all the rules, monitir the event, and take all the profits) and those still under the control of the regions/clubs.

Looks like just another way of having four levels of event whilst pretending there are only three.

[Mrs H]

Well it looks like something everyone agrees on is that its the interface between the event and the public which is where the level is on show - should the behind the scenes stuff dictate the level - does that help people decide which are "the best" events? Does it make any difference whether its BOF or anyone else who is in control of the events and subject to the guidelines - after all arn't we always being told "we are BOF"?

Bugger Rafa's retired

[pete.owens]

The Cumbrian Galoppen series of events are not regional, L2, events.
They are District events in the previous system. They fit very neatly into that category.

Just as they now fit neatly into L2

No they aren't.... they are level 3 events in the previous four level system.

No, they were C4 events under the previous five level system.
Now they fully fit the guidelines and intentions of L2. (as they actually are rather than how you think they ought be)
Read the overview of the event structure:
http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/d ... line_a.pdf
and explain to us specifically the way you think these events fail to meet the guidelines for L2 - and also tell us if you think an event that didn't meet those guidelines would be suitable for a Cumbrian Galoppen event.

When we stage a L2 event even on the same area it is a different animal. When you have had a bit more experience of your Type A,B,C events you will see what I mean.

In what way - specifically?

As I said in an earlier post, this could possibly be where the area/event is used for the Northern Champs add-on to the competition. An L2 event, not L1. That will be why the Northern Champs this weekend, run by SYO, is an L2!

Twas L1 when I last looked - just as the last one in the Lakes should have been, but for the bust up about map scales. There seems to be a patterm with lakeland dislike of guidelenes.

[Neil M40]

Nobody is denying that there are more than 3 levels of event in the eyes of the competitor, but that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about how many levels of event there are in the eyes of BOF. There are only 3 sensible ones – those over which BOF takes some level of direct control (L1 events), those that claim to be run under BOF guidelines (L2 events), and those that do not claim to be run under BOF guidelines (L3 events).

There is obviously a huge variety in quality of events under L2, but for BOF to legislate for a difference in quality where they have no direct oversight makes no sense. I cannot see that there would be any difference in the guidelines for the split L2 events (All the nuts and bolts of the event would be the same – colour coded courses, electronic punching, overprinted maps) – other than that L2a will be “better” than L2b. This means (a) BOF deciding which events are the “better” ones and (b) that it would have to be applied consistently across all regions. This is not possible – as has been shown by the huge variety in standards of Regional and National events over the past few years.

Much better to give that control to the regions and clubs, depending on local circumstances. RJ keeps banging on about Cumbrian Galoppen events being a different beast to Regional Events – but that only applies to Cumbria. What about Regional Events in other parts of the North-West? Without wanting to denigrate any particular clubs, I would say that standards are not even applied consistently across a single region. Regional Events in one part of the region are (were) a different beast to Regional Events in another part pf the region. And nothing in the new rules stops Cumbrian clubs from organising the events they have always organised.

Lots of things need ironing out in the new system. Event listings are a mess, in part because lots of events are being registered at an unsuitable level, which is in part because last year’s rules made registering at L2 difficult. SOA have put their own barrier in the way of registering at L2. The names Regional and Local should be dropped and the Target Audience section of the guidelines should be dropped.

It remains to be seen to what extent BOF are going to take control of L1. I would be interested to hear from Spookster what involvement BOF have had with the Northern Champs. I certainly don’t think L1 should be expanded until we see how well this system is working and whether we are getting anything consistently better than the old National Events.

[Homer]

Well said Neil!

And any vote at the AGM to change to a 4 level system would cause major upheaval.

Do those that seek to change the newly introduced event structure have any idea how much time and effort (mostly by volunteers) has gone into the change from the old five level structure? Another change, before the new system has had a chance to bed in, would be most unwelcome (and possibly lead to the resignation of many hard working volunteers).

[RJ]

The Cumbrian Galoppen series of events are not regional, L2, events.
They are District events in the previous system. They fit very neatly into that category.

They are District events in the previous categorisation and then a C4 in the penultimate categorisation.

As I said in an earlier post, this could possibly be where the area/event is used for the Northern Champs add-on to the competition. An L2 event, not L1. That will be why the Northern Champs this weekend, run by SYO, is an L2!

Twas L1 when I last looked - just as the last one in the Lakes should have been, but for the bust up about map scales. There seems to be a pattern with lakeland dislike of guidelenes.

Apologies about Northern Champs. I'm not correct, it was a poor choice of add-on for the debate. Perhaps a NW Champs would have been a better add-on to make the event an L2.

And never mind any of the snied comments about NW and a dislike of the guidelines. Behave! You degrade your argument with such comments. From the region that brought electronic punching to UK orienteering I think we have the right to be innovative!

[mike g]

Nobody is denying that there are more than 3 levels of event in the eyes of the competitor, but that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about how many levels of event there are in the eyes of BOF. There are only 3 sensible ones – those over which BOF takes some level of direct control (L1 events), those that claim to be run under BOF guidelines (L2 events), and those that do not claim to be run under BOF guidelines (L3 events).

..........

It remains to be seen to what extent BOF are going to take control of L1. I would be interested to hear from Spookster what involvement BOF have had with the Northern Champs. I certainly don’t think L1 should be expanded until we see how well this system is working and whether we are getting anything consistently better than the old National Events.

Hurrah! Someone has finally talked sense on this thread.

[SJC]

Nobody is denying that there are more than 3 levels of event in the eyes of the competitor, but that is not what we are talking about.

Doesn't this just sum up what is wrong with BOF.
Let's not worry about what the competitor wants or needs. Our iadministrative processes are far more important than that.

the Target Audience section of the guidelines should be dropped.

Again, completely the wrong approach.
This is exactly what any prospective competitor wants to know.

The four level approach starts from the perspective of the competitor, not BOF's internal workings. And that is the way it should be.

[Neil M40]

The four level approach starts from the perspective of the competitor, not BOF's internal workings. And that is the way it should be.

Agreed. So why are you insisting it should be part of BOF's internal workings?

[Mrs H]

That was my point too - it's the event/customer interface that matters. You get big, medium and small events. If you want more big events put them in the big event category don't event a big event out of BOF's control category

[Mr Chips]

Hurrah! Someone has finally talked sense on this thread.

I was about to post much the same sentiment but Mike got in first. Reading recent posts from Neil M40 and pete.owens has done much to clarify for me what this is all about and I thank them for it. The last thing orienteering wants is yet another reorganisation - let's focus on making this one work. However, I do think that more could have been done to explain to us punters why (and by whom) there was perceived to be a problem, what the nature of the problem was, and in what way the new situation was felt to be an improvement.

[Mr Chips]

Last year's City Race was L2 and its results have been uploaded to the new ranking scheme. (Not the old one - too difficult!)

I noticed this too... but there's no points against anyone's name!

http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/e ... 9&course=1

I followed this up with BOF. Apparently it wasn't a ranking event last year.

[greywolf]

From the region that brought electronic punching to UK orienteering

"May 1997: JOK stage the first electronic event in Britain at Shotover Country Park using Emit." according to Maprunner's article http://www.maprunner.co.uk/content/view/61/186/