JK Relay

[awk]

Wow Jon - that must have made great television! And there was me thinking it was blindingly obvious (and having read about the Jukola, I had made the gross assumption the Tio Mila was the same - just goes to show!).

Not as big as the Tio Mila, but reading about this did take me back (many years) to a White Rose in Wykeham in the days when relay entries were still big. I was in one of the shorter relays which started 5-10 mins after the big open relay. Our first control happened to be their 3rd or 4th, and both races arrived at the same control at the same time. This in the days of pin punches; the scrap was something to be witnessed! What added to the fun (at least in hindsight!) was that there was another control only 40-50m away on a similar feature, and quite a few found after a minute or so of fighting there way to the control, that it was the wrong one!

Have to say, this memory was in mind when I commented about the learning process.

Actually, it was the comment I was meaning to have a go at, not the actual mistake itself. We all make those, even when we realise we shouldn't have. Just a bit weary of all things management-speak!

[RS]

Yes Awk, but JK relay cock-ups 2 years running....and again the controller doesn't accept liability. I thought the controller was supposed to see the competition was fair for the competitors. While I'm moaning I also thought the yellow and orange leg relays were a tad difficult (I think only 1 runner got EWT on mini relay and some experienced adults were a loooooong time on the orange ad hoc leg).
On the praise side, oodles of it for an excellent effort from a very small region (man power wise).

[awk]

Yes Awk, but JK relay cock-ups 2 years running....and again the controller doesn't accept liability. I thought the controller was supposed to see the competition was fair for the competitors. While I'm moaning I also thought the yellow and orange leg relays were a tad difficult.....

That's because I think that now the controller isn't responsible. But they are the only one in the organising team who is 'qualified' - another oddity in our system.

The younger relays are another perennial problem that regularly raise 'learning points' - often the same ones as before.

[Roger]

Actually, it was the comment I was meaning to have a go at, not the actual mistake itself.

To be fair to the controller, "a learning point" was my interjection when he said "yes, that's ...er...". He actually continued "something to put in my report", which in the management-speak arena falls short of the highest aspirations that an organisation could have quality-wise, going forward.

To add to the praise from others, I thought that the planning was good on all four days, with the first two days especially making excellent use of less-than-ideal areas.

[Mrs H]

Young Neville said there were about 15 people at the control when he got there arguing so ernestly and slapping hands away about 6 inches above the control that he just reached in low down and punched straight away and legged it reckoned he must have gained about 20 secs. He thought the whole thing quite funny. Pity it wasn't a spectator control.

[Arnold]

One way round the issue of boxes would be to just have fewer controls which are further spaced out.

Scandi relays tend to have really long first legs to space runners out so you don't need to have as many boxes. They also have only 20-25 controls in 12+k.

Our relays are more and more becoming control picking exercises, sort of long sprint races.

I'm not suggesting to make each leg an hour long, but just because it's a short relay doesn't mean you have to have loads of controls (depends on the area, too). Though I do wonder whether we've made the relays a bit too short - 82 minutes for JK trophy is less than an individual classic now.

[graeme]

I hope it is a learning point. The JK relay has been so weak for so long we seem to have forgotten a lot.

There was a real excitement in the start pen. Actually enough people to make it feel like a race was about to happen. I had the longer first gaffle, and expecting that the gaffling would be trivial. A very short leg meant neglible navigation was required, and so starting steadily I was able to identify the relevant people who would be running my course. Things spread a bit on the longer second leg, then the comedy fight at 3. I got shoved away and, uncertain if I'd punched, queued up again.

After that, as Arnold says, there were simply too many short legs. By the time you'd found the control code, refolded the maps, refound your position you were in almost at the next control. Since the gaffling was trivial, you just looked for the people you knew were on your course, and went where they were punching. Well done to the umpteen people who passed me on the run-in!

Like six of the top seven teams in M120+ (and INT's MOpen team ), I was on the "slow" gaffle and we duly finished 4 mins down on the "fast" gaffle. It's not that the course itself was slow, simply that by chance the better runners were in the other pack, and towed it round.

Still, there are some learning points...

Common controls need multiple boxes.
There's not enough variation in running speed that lots of short legs will split people up.
Trivial gaffling means that for the majority your result depends on which pack you're in.


I'd better get a bid in to plan 2012.