4 Levels

[EddieH]

[quote]but why not just get on with organising lots of orienteering events for lots of orienteers.[/quote]

Exactly Jon, and that is exactly why I want the motion defeated as it will only cause further upheaval to start all over again.

[Clive Coles]

AUK is of course quite right.

There are at least 2 sets of justifications being put forward by advocates of a 4-tier system. So by having to vote (or abstain) for specific 4-tier proposal some of us might end up with a situation that still does not address our concerns.

In my own case I am looking more at the lower end. BOF placed old style District events in the same category as up-ended plastic cup mid week fun events, Yet District events formed the backbone of the Association co-ordinated orienteering programme. These events are not "local" events.

For me therefore 4-tiers provides an extra tier ( of Level 2 style events ) where we can have Association control and Association authorisation powers. That's where we could promote our main leagues and gallopens.

For others however they are more concerned about what to do about "Super" Regional events. Not a great issue for me as our region rarely attracts sufficient out-of area participants to justify national co-oordination. I agree very difficult to decide what event commands "Super" Regional status. Different people have different ideas.

As the registration processes currently stand, the National Fixtures group effectively acts as the Regional authority. Their function is to co-ordinate the big picture to try to ensure that big show case events don't go head to head for the same group of competitors. People quite fairly ask "how do you identify and select the "Super" Regional events.

Surely the planning time line resolves some of the issues. If you look at the major events list http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/major_fixtures.php you will see the dates (and region) of future level 1 events have been slotted into the programme up to 2013.[Sorry ~ you will need to use your BOF log-in to gain access to this report ~ a "feature"]

The Fixtures group operates planning cycles which allow level 2 events to be slotted into the timetable (once the level 1 events have been allocated) ahead of the time that Associations and clubs start to finalise their weekend fixture programmes. Why not let the Associations decide which events justify "Super " Regional scheduling ? They just need to identify these big events 6 months ahead of their other Regionals.

I believe a 4-tier system can address both sets of objectives.

Working with just 3-tiers can however be made to work. For those who argue like me for a lower extra tier we have a way forward if we stay with 3-tiers. If we want our old style district events to attract ranking points we can upgrade them to existing level 2 status. There will be more regional events that don't offer pre-entry options. They could well use level 3 controllers and mentored first time planners. In terms of facilities such as SI, overprinted maps, toilets etc they will be no different to any other level 2 event.

If a number of clubs take this line, the National Fixtures group will have a busy time saying "OK". That's a waste of their time but that's what the authorisation process currently requires.

What's best in the long run ? ~ what provides the better flexibility ? ~ the choice is yours. When you get your voting papers ..... use your vote.

[Red Adder]

The debate seems now to have reached the point I always feared - its all about perceived status of the event (and my event is bigger /better / higher level than yours so oh look I'm going to charge a premium). And with all arguments of abouit status it ends up as two bald men fighting over a comb.

And guess what, as somene predicted 20 pages ago we have already had creep in to 5, nay 6 levels being required.

As the sport has proliferated into so many format variations to try and attract new people / maintain enthusiasm (and thereby is in great danger of diluting the product into a myriad on poorly attended and financial non-viable eventlettes) any structure needs to be simple and flexible. I've come to conclude that all you need is three levels -

L1 - the genuine top level competitive events - JK - British - National/English Regional Champs

L2 - those offering pre-marked up-to-date maps / e-pinching - wide range of courses to defined standards etc

L3 - informal - pin punching paper-cupping 2 course one man jobbies

That way the Punter, be they experienced or relative newbie, has a good idea of what they are signing up for - all the other bells an whistles can not and should not be defined by their position in the structure, but in the event publicity.

[EddieH]

I agree with all you say Red Adder except in promoting [quote]e-pinching [/quote]

Encouraging vandalism is surely not your best suggestion

[Zokko!]

L2 - those offering pre-marked up-to-date maps / e-pinching - wide range of courses to defined standards etc

L3 - informal - pin punching paper-cupping 2 course one man jobbies

By that reckoning our club, and I'm sure many others, puts on nothing lower than L2 events. All our "local" events, about one a month, have recently updated maps, pre-printed courses on waterproof paper and SI punching. True there may be only 3 courses on offer but that in itself doesn't determine L3. Our L1 event in April has only 3 courses.

[seabird]

BOF placed old style District events in the same category as up-ended plastic cup mid week fun events.

NO, NO, NO. Whatever other cock-ups there were in the initial BOF guidance - this was not one of them.

That has been a decision of some Regions and some Clubs.

Often for a variety of reasons - amongst them the confused guidance regarding controllers; the fact that FC owned areas charge a higher access fee for "Regional" events. I think Clive and RJ have expressed the different again thinkng that occurred in their regions.

[greywolf]

Clive Coles wrote:BOF placed old style District events in the same category as up-ended plastic cup mid week fun events.

NO, NO, NO. Whatever other cock-ups there were in the initial BOF guidance - this was not one of them.

Sorry but that's bollocks. "District" events which had been registered in late 2008 were automatically re-labelled as L3 events - by BOF, not by the region or the clubs. Clubs were told (eventually) that it was possible to re-register as L2 but to do so they needed 12 month embargoes and Grade 2 controllers. Lots of events were affected, including the Culbin event, which despite top quality terrain (and a quality field that would put many National events to shame) wasn't allowed to get upgraded to L2 because the Controller ( multi BOC king of the forest / WOC competitor ) was only Grade 3 and because it was only 11 months since BOC on the same map.

This was a fundamental cock-up which has taken a year to sort out and seriously compromised the implementation of the new event structure, not least because it has provided lots of ammo for the "lets drag orienteering back into the 80s where it belongs" brigade.

Now just as it seems BOF has got its act together, and L2 is gradually expanding to take in the range of events it was originally envisaged to cover, there is a lobby for throwing things back into chaos again - the only problem is, every time i return to this thread they want to split different levels is it L3, L2 or L1 that needs subdivision? who knows, but apparently we must have (at least) 4 levels...

[seabird]

Greywolf
I totally agree with you about the cockup of the implementation.

That doesn't get away from the fact that the basic guidance was clear. However then a number of administrative barriers were put in the way - and still have not been entirely cleared up (see current guidance on Controllers.)

We found ways to register all our old District Events from 4 Jan 2009 as L2 events. The only one we ever had any difficulty with was in May 2009 when the Level 1 controller made fundamental objections - but he later emerged as one of the Lakeland Gang of 4.

[EddieH]

And that's exactly the point - it was this utter cock-up in implementation that caused and still causes all the confusion. Had that not happened I have little doubt the 4 level advocates would be in a substantial minority, and we would not be on page 25 or whatever it is

[Clive Coles]

Quite correct Greywolf

Sorry but that's bollocks. "District" events which had been registered in late 2008 were automatically re-labelled as L3 events - by BOF, not by the region or the clubs.

What's worse, BOF enforced this situation through their on-line fixtures registration system by not allowing Association Fixture secretaries to set up and authorise anything. The National Fixture secretary sets up event wrappers and authorises level 1 and level 2 events (after consultation with members of the BOF Fixture Group). Club Fixture secretaries ( not the Association Fixture Secretaries) can set up and authorise level 3 local events.

That's the cock-up. Until there is an announcement that BOF are introducing a way, through their Event registration System, for Associations to own( i.e Plan, set-up and authorise) their regions weekend Fixture programme I will cast my vote in favour of 4-tiers. That forces the issue ~ BOF then have to do something to resolve the cock-up.

The sad thing is that 3-tiers could be made to work too, if only BOF would find a different way to address the main issue contained in the NW motion. But I don't trust them to do this. They hope to win the vote, sweep the problem under the mat and move on to other things.

But..... we might find out if BOF have any changes in mind to the Registration process before the voting slips drop through the letterbox. They have 2 weeks to come clean and tell us what that might be.

[Spookster]

BOF enforced this situation through their on-line fixtures registration system by not allowing Association Fixture secretaries to set up and authorise anything. The National Fixture secretary sets up event wrappers and authorises level 1 and level 2 events (after consultation with members of the BOF Fixture Group). Club Fixture secretaries ( not the Association Fixture Secretaries) can set up and authorise level 3 local events.

You're right, that is how it is currently being done, but that is not how it is supposed to be working. Association Fixtures Secretaries currently give all their proposed L2 dates to Pat Martin (National Fixtures Secretary), and he puts them into the system.

I can't see any evidence of associations being refused L2 dates by National Fixtures Group, but even so, the process is not as "devolved" as it should be.

They hope to win the vote, sweep the problem under the mat and move on to other things.

No, not true. Whatever the real reasons are for the implementation having gone badly, we want to sort it out and make it work. But I strongly resist the idea that a "quick fix" change to 4-levels properly addresses the issues. It'll just put us back 12-18 months, and incur extra volunteer time and BOF money without adding much value.

[EddieH]

[quote]It'll just put us back 12-18 months, and incur extra volunteer time and BOF money without adding much value.[/quote]

The only thing I disagree with in your post Spookster is the word "much". I can see none.

[awk]

I think this is the biggest reason why I am so strongly against the 4-tier scheme: I totally agree that the root cause of the problems has been the complete cock-up made in implementation, something that BOF must learn from. However, things are moving in the right direction now, even if not fully sorted (e.g. Clive picks up on some of those points). The worst case scenario is a change to another structure, which is where the 4-tier proposal comes in.

As several have pointed out - people are orienteeering, and, for most people, the number of levels is of little if any importance to them. Other factors are FAR more important.

[roadrunner]

...the fact that FC owned areas charge a higher access fee for "Regional" events.

If this is the case, surely it's a valid argument for keeping the two separate? If we merge two classes of events with different access charges, do you think the FC (or any other landowner for that matter) will agree to all events paying the lower charge ... I don't think so.

[Big Jon]

From my point of view I can see no reason at all why old style district events are being registered as L2 events - it just increases the amount of crap for organising them. In Maroc we just register them all as L3 and advertise them as "4 course" or "7 course" local events. National ranking points are of little interest to most club members and the extra admin and hassle of having to pass everything to Association event secretary who then passes it to BOF event secretary is pointless.