Results and Rankings.

[Oldman]

There would appear to be some sort of backlog in supplying the nominated CRS's with the relevent info. I have been waiting for 4 weeks for the login info and operating instructions. I will not be holding my breath whilst waiting for the info. to arrive. I can only hope that the info arrives before the next event for which I am doing results, otherwise competiors will have to rely on the club website

Why not just phone them and ask?

[Clive Coles]

Our problem, and consequent delay, seems to have been caused by the fact that the Punch/Dumpling weekend was staged by two clubs SUFFOC & NOR.

The BOF data model appears to require one club to own the entire weekend.

So for now SUFFOC are unable to upload their PUNCH results as their event now seems to be under NOR's control. After login and going to the finished events our CRS reports the PUNCH event is there but no link is shown to alllow for levy or results to be input.

The problem has been referred to BOF.

A feature

[mappingmum]

So for now SUFFOC are unable to upload their PUNCH results as their event now seems to be under NOR's control.

Boo! You have no idea how eagerly I am awaiting these results so I can officially record my highest ranking score ever!

But thanks for the explanation - it saves me the "will it? won't it?" suspense as I wait for the BOF results page to load . . . when I check . . . .daily.

[andy]

it's very easy to upload results files (for non-ranking events anyway):
http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/e ... eday=56504

don't try to use the autodownload 'csv results', use the 'oe splits' file though

[Spookster]

it's very easy to upload results files (for non-ranking events anyway)

Uploading results for ranking events is no harder, because there is nothing different that you have to do!

[Clive Coles]

Mappingmum ~ your ranking points for the SUFFOC PUNCH event should now have been allocated as the results went up yesterday.

Not sure how the upload problem was overcome ~ could have been a program fix or some form of clerical workaround. But after a little pushing and shoving the desired result has been achieved.

[andy]

it's very easy to upload results files (for non-ranking events anyway)

Uploading results for ranking events is no harder, because there is nothing different that you have to do!

One must assume there is difference between the two when two user manuals are sent out! (and I haven't read the 2nd one yet)

[Spookster]

One must assume there is difference between the two when two user manuals are sent out! (and I haven't read the 2nd one yet)

The two manuals are for uploading Local Level 3 events, and for uploading Regional Level 2 (or National Level 1) Events. The latter is somewhat different, and needs to include both course and age class data, but it's not really harder.

My point was that ranking events (which are some but not all Regional events) are no harder than non-ranking events, because there is nothing extra to do.

[Clive Coles]

Simple question ~ why are we uploading level 3 events ? They are not ranked.

Is it just to save clubs having to display the results on their website or is BOF recording them with a view to putting the information to some use ?

If there is a good reason for this additional work I am sure many clubs will upload their L3's

But what's the reasoning behind the introduction of this option

[graeme]

I think its a nice idea to have some proper curation of results data. I'd like to be able to find how I did in big events years ago (especially when someone claims to have beaten me).
Quite a lot of stuff has either vanished, or is too hard for me to find (e.g. Elite British Champs before 2005). Maybe L3 events are overkill, but its a good principle to have, and BOF is the place to keep it.

[Clive Coles]

Yes - agree. If the L3 results data is worth holding for all to see far better to hold it centrally in a consistant format on the BOF database. I am not sure however that this view is shared at club level.

I wonder if Clubs were actually asked if they wanted a repository for their level 3 results. If a need was established what we have developed and paid for is worth having. (IMO rather good !) If however someone in the development team just said " we may as well provide it" it's value is at least questionable.

I wonder if Spookster can throw any light on this matter. Do BOF have any use for level 3 result information or is the facility just "nice to have".

I have come across quite a resistance from clubs who promote their web sites as their preferred first port of call for orienteering information in their areas. That's of course where they store all their event results. To store the same information on the BOF site creates more work for someone.We have to store the L1/2 results for ranking purposes. Is there a real reason for storing the L3 information ?.

I have contacted a number of fixtures secretaries over the last few months to try to understand why important fixtures data is still not being set up on their BOF database record. The answer most common seems to be : Up to date information regarding courses, fees etc is found on our web site ~ that's where we would rather folk find out what is being staged.

With views like that I am left wondering "why are we bothering". Should we reign in this project before it becomes all consuming ?

We are spending a lot of time (and our money) on developing the BOF web based facilities. Have we over-engineered the solution to the extent that clubs will not spend the time and effort to enter data to the various systems ?

The web based facilities developments are ongoing ~ It would be good to get some clarity from the Annual report as to what is coming next. It is however important that such development efforts are focused on real need.

[graeme]

why are we bothering

The only reason to bother would be that clubs don't do a good job.

For event details, they do, and by and large all the BOF site really needs to have uploaded
is a weblink. Clubs are best placed to keep the changing event data up to date.

For results, it's very patchy. Things seem to disappear as soon as the volunteer webmaster or hosting changes. It could be a lot better. Mind you, BOF seem not to care about their own archive, as I can only see back to 2009.

[Spookster]

I wonder if Spookster can throw any light on this matter. Do BOF have any use for level 3 result information or is the facility just "nice to have".

Firstly, as Graeme says, it's nice to have a good archive of results in one place. Results stored on clubs' websites can become unavailable over time, whereas results stored on the BOF website won't. And for years many people have been asking for it.

Secondly, the new Navigation and Racing Challenges will be achieved at Level 2 and Level 3 events. I believe (though I am not involved in the website work) that in due course the online results system will be able to tell you, for example, if you achieved the Gold, Silver, or Bronze Racing Challenge level, because uploaded results include the length of each course, and those standards are based on min/km.

Thirdly, why not put the results on the BOF system as well as your club's website? In my experience you get home from an event, grab a cup of tea and some cake, and fire up the results computer. After half an hour you have checked and resolved any mis-punches or other anomalies. It takes 10 minutes to then upload the data to the SYO website and create the links. It takes another 5 minutes to submit the CSV file to Winsplits, and another 5 minutes to submit the CSV file to Splitsbrowser. With exactly the same CSV file, it takes me another 5 minutes to submit to the BOF results system. After all that I go back to the SYO web page and insert the links to Winsplts, Splitsbrowser and BOF. It's all done within an hour.

(If we're putting it on Routegadget, that's another hours job, but I've only done a couple of those. With practice it could be 30 minutes).

Is it too much to ask a CRS to spend an hour putting the results online on the evening of the event? I don't think so. There is no need to put every Level 3 event on, but I think those events which have a range of colour coded courses and which have attracted a reasonable number of competitors should be. SYO has held four Level 3 events so far this year. Two of those have their results uploaded, the other two will not.

[andy]

I won't upload an L3 event that's old C5, but I will upload an event that's old C4.

Reason being that C5 events generally have more non-bof members (as well as family groups going round on one entry) and at best an easy green course whereas C4 events generally have the full compliment of colour codeds up to brown and a decent field of people with bof numbers.

Why they were ever put into one level of event is verging on insanity (but been discussed to death elsewhere)

edit: just read what spookster wrote, he put it much more eloquently than I did though, adding bof results to the list of other things to do after an event is inconsequential!

[ricardito]

I have contacted a number of fixtures secretaries over the last few months to try to understand why important fixtures data is still not being set up on their BOF database record. The answer most common seems to be : Up to date information regarding courses, fees etc is found on our web site ~ that's where we would rather folk find out what is being staged.

With views like that I am left wondering "why are we bothering".

I am sympathetic to the issue of maintaining data in multiple places - that's never a great thing to be doing. Maybe BOF could provide an XML feed of the fixtures data? That way club web sites could re-format the information as required for their own style.

You could even envisage neighbouring clubs' web sites having information about your club's events, automatically updated, (more or less) as soon as it's provided to BOF.

The technology exists to allow maintenance in one place, with presentation where it's needed - let's use it!