No M/W20s in the YBT

[SeanC]

This is already allowed

only "small" neighbouring clubs as far as I'm aware - you can't have a "large" club combining with a "small" club, only "small" with "small" - correct me if I'm wrong - I'm sure you will !!

I checked the YBT rules on the BOF website and it makes no mention of this rule. Are you both thinking of the Peter Palmer relays where the rules for that competition lists a rule as Haloite describes? If this rule also applies to the YBT then that would be very good news.

Out of curiosity I checked the results of the SE regional YBT heat for 2009. SO were first, then HH, 3rd were..... there was no third team. Then I checked the South Central heat, again only two clubs.

Perhaps things are better in other regions, but if they are anything like these southern regions the event rules need a radical rethink rather than minor tinkering. No-one can want a key junior competition that is only accessible to a minority of juniors.

[awk]

Hold on Sean. Where on earth do you get the impression that the YBT is "only accessible to a minority of juniors"? And how would you propose making it even more accessible?

Whilst the PPR allows joint club teams, there are a number of reasons that it is somewhat more restricted - you need night runners, you need runners who can run specific distance/colour combinations, including two or three longer ones, it doesn't allow M/W10s and under.

YBT allows all juniors (at least until M/W20s banned - which I don't agree with). Rather than fitting children to courses, the juniors can run the courses appropriate to their ability. The longest course is Green, but you don't actually need anybody who can run it - you could have an entire team on Yellow, Orange and Light Green if that is the way the club profile works out (and it has happened!).

So how is this inaccessible to only a minority? Is this because only a minority of clubs can raise a team? Actually, even if a minority of clubs take part, that doesn't mean a minority of juniors - these are, after all, the clubs that can't raise a team. Perhaps the majority of juniors are in clubs that can raise a team (which is perhaps why then can raise the team?). Perhaps the issue is having somone prepared to make the effort to get a team together?

Having said that, one issue that I know does affect participation is the location of the final, especially given that the final is in December. Hopefully, this year, that won't be such a problem, but that is not a rule issue (except that when I ran it, we insisted on events being within or close to the M4-M5/6-M62-A1 box, so it was a rule in effect).

Overall, though, I would argue strongly against combined teams. The event is aimed to encourage clubs who do work to raise teams, and to promote club competition. That would be undermined by joint teams. And after all, it's less than the size of a football team we're talking about.

[SeanC]

"So how is this inaccessible to only a minority? Is this because only a minority of clubs can raise a team?"

Yes, and this is the problem. We must all agree that this is a problem worth addressing, particularly as the YBT is a popular competition and ideal for retaining juniors.

I don't know if the total number of juniors in MV, DFOK, GO, SAXONS, SLOW and LOK* exceed that of SO and HH. Maybe, maybe not. But the total number of potential junior orienteers is greater in the SE non-participating clubs based on population size.

I agree joint club teams are not ideal - imagine if everyone tried to do it.

One option might be to make it a regional competition, but this would move away from the club aspect so not ideal too.

Some kind of additional competition run on the same day with the same ethos with a smaller team (4 or 5?) seems like the solution. Clubs could choose to enter the smaller competition, or the larger YBT trophy, but not both.

I know you devised the rules to this party, at a time when there were more juniors no doubt, they can be changed whilst maintaining the original ethos.

*SN, HAVOC and CHIG are also sometimes South East clubs, sometimes not

[haloite]

I checked the YBT rules on the BOF website and it makes no mention of this rule. Are you both thinking of the Peter Palmer relays where the rules for that competition lists a rule as Haloite describes?

Yes, I probably am !

[awk]

Before proposing any changes Sean, it's important to check the clubs themselves. Just because a club isn't there, doesn't mean it hasn't got the juniors. It's about raising a team.

I'm sorry, but 9 isn't a lot. It's less than t he size of a football team, and it's pathetic if a club hasn't got 9 juniors who can run Yellow, Orange or Light Green. I see no reason to compromise - and as for 4 or 5 - even downsized football and rugby play with more than that. Good grief, even the reduced size netball (High Fives) has five playing, and that's specifically aimed at under-11s.

My own view is that it's something to aim at. Get the clubs to pick their game up - don't drag the game down.

And as for diluting with another competition. No, no, no, no, no!!!!! There's far too much of that in orienteering already, and all it has ever done is suck teams away fro main competition.

I don't think there weren't more juniors in those days - the event was set up partly to try and give clubs a vehicle for getting more juniors involved.

[madmike]

Overall, though, I would argue strongly against combined teams. The event is aimed to encourage clubs who do work to raise teams, and to promote club competition. That would be undermined by joint teams. And after all, it's less than the size of a football team we're talking about.

Not sure I entirely agree AWK, it was easier to raise a HH Team for the last event as we were playing at home, so to speak, and the junior coaching team were able to borrow a few kids for an hour or 2.

If you wanted a meaningful competition in the SE it would probably have to be SO v combined all the other clubs. The danger of an annual massacre is that it will probably not promote club competition just despair.

That said - we are taking a load of juniors out training tomorrow so 2010 may be different!

And to be crystal clear, I admire what SO have done in recruiting and developing junior talent and am not criticising them in any way shape or form.

[awk]

Why should it promote despair? OK, so SO might well win it by a country mile - but it's not only about winning. Meaure yourself against the other clubs. Get more clubs there, so that more clubs qualify. Cheer SO on, to get a top five place, so that even if they win, another club can qualify.

The event was set up not just for winners, but to get other clubs involved and give clubs in areas with a dominant club a chance still to progress.

And if you want to score an informal SO v the rest, then do so, or any other combination, then do so, but don't dilute by relying on another club.

At the end of the day, as I've iterated before - all one needs is 4 Yellow, 4 Orange and a Light Green to score a complete team. I'm pretty shocked if all but a few clubs can't manage that.

[mappingmum]

I'm pretty shocked if all but a few clubs can't manage that.

We can't.

[Clive Coles]

Afraid our club doesn't either. We have around 30 adult members ~ it may take us a little while before we can raise a 9 strong YBT team.

[SeanC]

To make a full team you need more than 9 juniors. You need 9 juniors who are available on that day and active enough to want to travel and you need juniors capable of competing on the various courses.

To give an indication of the number of active juniors in each club, I've used the ranking list to list the number of active seniors in SE clubs (defined as people who have been to at least 1 ranking event). At our last regional, about 10% of competitors were juniors, so just divide these figures by 10 to estimate the numbers of active juniors.

SO 132
HH 79
SLOW 116
DFOK 34
SAX 69
MV 43
LOK 41
GO 30

Based on this, most south east clubs would need to double their size or more to stand a realistic chance of making a YBT team. It depends whether you believe exclusion from the YBT makes this growth more likely or less likely. I'm of the opinion it makes it less likely.

The Compass Sport Trophy works to motivate small clubs. No reason why you couldn't have a similar trophy for clubs with small junior numbers and let more join the party. Clubs with good numbers of juniors like SO, AIRE etc wouldn't be eligable so no dilution of the existing competition. You've created a great competition AWK - so I'm hopeful you'll see the viewpoint of those of us in small and medium sized clubs who want to join in.

[RJ]

I bet this doesn't turn out to be a popular comment......

Stop complaining about the competition not being adequate for your club's numbers. Do something about it..... make your club competitive by increasing the junior membership.

Ten years ago we had just a mere handful of juniors, total, who were available to compete at any level at all. We recognised that and decided to do something about it. We now have sixty (eighty if you count the 4-8 group) or so, with many competing at Interland, JHI, JIRC, and forming a large part of the NWJS.

It wasn't easy. It has involved a lot of volunteer time. It's not for me to say if it was worth it....... although I'm prepared to do it all again.

We would have been at the 2009 YBT to defend our runner-up trophy, but the travel was not realistic. The moving of the competition venue to the periphery of the country was a great mistake and is something I would advocate is changed back to what it used to be.

[Blonde bombshell]

I agree ..... and disagree with you RJ.

You are correct about it being up to clubs to improve junior membership. If you don't have enough - go out and get some. It takes time and effort, but you often find that you also increase senior membership when parents join in as well. I am pleased to see that the CSC has addressed the issue about juniors, and in particular, girls. The best clubs consists of juniors & seniors. Some years ago one very strong club was mailny made up of senior runners. The change in rules has meant that that club has gone out and now has a good junior base as well.

However, I continue to disagree about a centralised venue. You must all agree that long journeys are not conducive to having a good run. A central venue favours central clubs. They are more likely to find juniors happy to travel a short distance for a short course. We have problems getting yellow runners when a long trip is needed (to a central location). A short journey is beneficial and clubs on the periphery have to cover the cost of transport time & time again.

It is fairer to all clubs if the competition is moved around the country every year. Travel time & cost is then shared out and the benefits of a 'close' location is enjoyed by a far larger number of clubs rather then a few 'central' clubs.

[SeanC]

That's great fighting talk RJ.

To respond in nopesport fashion, following your logic we should dispand the Compass Sport Trophy - those small clubs should keep away from the fun, and pull themselves up by their bootstraps until they are big enough to compete in a proper competition.

Being a bit more serious, your viewpoint assumes clubs can reproduce your heroic efforts. I'm afraid that is optimistic. Most clubs will grow slower. Not every club can have an RJ, or an AWK or a Mrs. H.

As it happens I'm optimistic that my tiny club can get enough juniors for a team within the next few years. But I know that in the meantime some of our juniors will drift away from the sport because some always will, and a great competition like the YBT can help reduce this loss. That's not complaining that's just how it is.

[RJ]

I see your logic, Blonde Bombshell, about the location issue. Being on the periphery we would be prepared to travel to the centre every year, as it would be a 'doable' journey. Last year's final in the SE was not 'doable' and so we gave up the opportunity to defend our trophy.

Having the final in the centre makes it 'doable' every time. Using the periphery makes it impossible when it is a southern venue.

And SeanC, I wish I could claim that 'it was all my own work, guv!', but unfortunately not. It has been a team effort by quite a few senior members of the club. I played a part, and was very pleased to be able to. The 'club' has such a strong function in the sport, and when it is motivated it can make real progress.

[Snail]

My sympathies are more with RJ on this one.

a. I think at present you roughly need to double (?) ranking list numbers to get to BOF National Membership figures, or treble them to include BOF Local Members. This is partly because many members only go to their local club (non-ranking) events - but many might be persuaded to turn out for a one-off regional YBT event.

b. You don't need to even be a Local Member to take part in the YBT. Schools that are "associated" with their local club can participate, so any club with an active programme attracting local schools should be able to field a team if they really want to.

(And although it seems harsh I would also agree with the comment that says a logical parallel would be to drop the CS Trophy. I have sometimes speculated that if only we could lose a few peripheral members we would be eligible for the Trophy and probably do quite well. That is hardly the approach we want to encourage!)