C-C Courses

[Red Adder]

How about redefining colour coding into two basic categories

Developmental - The white through to light green as at present, going up through length and TD1 thru' TD 4

Competitive - a Single colour (Purple ??) of TD 5 standard with sub division according to length (eg Purple 1 = 3 - 4 km, Purple 5 10km +).

A lot easier for a newbie (and old-timer) to understand and gets awAy from all the short green / long blue nonsense.

[NeilC]

How many sub-divisions of purple would you propose?

And would an 8-9k course in the Trossachs (say) be called the same as an 8-9k course around Thetford Forest (say)?

[mharky]

i think the distances are probably arbitrary...

[NFKleanne]

I think it is fine as it is. We started otrienteering in 2007. We all understand that we will progress from white, through yellow, to orange. The teenagers enjoy doing long oranges (red) because they know they won't have to wait ages for me to finish my course.
As for short greens and long greens (when I get there) I will be happier to do a short green that a green as I am not a runner, and a green course would take me forever.

But as usual changes happen and we all cope with them, when it boils down to it all I want to do is go out and try not to get to lost, and feel that I have done okay

[geomorph]

Guess we've been through this type of discussion quite a lot in the last two years, so maybe hence the lack of replies.

Red Adder, I am not a supporter of a lot of the terminology we use and historical inertia is not a good reason to perpetuate it. I to do not like long/short qualifiers as I think it adds a snobbery/delusion element that carries over from the age class L/S courses

Extending your idea, rather than Purple1..5, why not Purple3, Purple15, ie the numbers reflect the rounded down length (somebody else proposed this, apologies for lack of acknowledgement). If you then apply this to the Development set you can translate this into all categories of orienteering race ie an orange8 could be a designation for an urban race.

but that then defeats your split into development/learned and maybe urban needs to make clear the kiddie-safe courses ie those that avoid crossing roads.

So maybe you should have green and black for learned, the former for non-urban, the latter for urban terrains, and keep the current colours in the development group provided that the definition of a development course always ensures they are kiddie safe (through avoidance or escort/manning)

what then for a course of mixed terrains, brown1..15?

oh sugar, I've just made it confusing again

[Clive Coles]

I suspect your motives Red. Are you just trying to be

more categories

[Mrs H]

Yuk purple!

[NeilC]

Of course a similar proposal was made in the letters page of CompassSport - which I suspect was serious.

[Red Adder]

Really Clive -- my motives are honourable on this one.

I just want a relatively simple system, with a clear developmment path for juniors / newbies and an indication of what to expect in terms of combined length & climb for the experienced.

Each level could have range (so you could achieve the standard for Purple 2 for example) - or just be a generic so you could be a purple standard orienteer irrespective of the course lenths you ran And you could I suppose extend to use different colours for night /urban / sprint / middle distance events if really want

[Clive Coles]

I misjudge you Red

[andypat]

How many sub-divisions of purple would you propose?

And would an 8-9k course in the Trossachs (say) be called the same as an 8-9k course around Thetford Forest (say)?

Trossachs would be Purple People Eater.....