White Rose - Running Up

[awk]

Neil, you are of course right in your comments about courses and classes. I also agree about the way to deal with age class competitions run on those courses - it's the system I use for scoring. Tried to eliminate the anomaly you highlight by using broader age classes.

[roadrunner]

Personally I think the fairest method is to say that adults running up are competing in the oldest class on their chosen course, juniors running up are competing in the youngest class on their chosen course.

Actually, I'd go for the opposite: if an M45 running up beat all the M35s and the M40s, I'd give him the M35 prize, as that would be (in principle) the most demanding class that he was eligible for - likewise, if a W18 won a course that was W18, W20 and W21 then I think she should get the W21 prize.

I still think it's good to keep the principle that no-one can win more than one (individual) prize, as that must surely help to motivate more competitors.

[graeme]

Weird: according to the rules 13 year olds are M16s.

2.4.3 Competitors aged 20 or younger belong to each class up to the end of the calendar year in which they reach the given age. They are eligible to compete in older classes up to and including 21.

Just like old people can get a medal in any younger age group, especially in the attendance prize competitions...

Graeme M21 (but last year simultaneously BOC medallist at Night M35, Sprints M40, Middle M45)

[Gnitworp]

I'd concur with that

JEP M21

[roadrunner]

Weird: according to the rules 13 year olds are M16s.

2.4.3 Competitors aged 20 or younger belong to each class up to the end of the calendar year in which they reach the given age. They are eligible to compete in older classes up to and including 21.

... except if they're under 16 and running an urban race

To complicate things further, rule 2.4.5 says that women are eligible to compete in men's classes - so (for example) on the White course (which inlcuded M10 and W10), should Sarah Pedley, the overall winner, have won M10 instead of (or as well as) W10??! This scenario probably happens quite often with the youngest junior courses, where men and women in the same age group often have the same course.

[IkeySol]

Personally I think the fairest method is to say that adults running up are competing in the oldest class on their chosen course, juniors running up are competing in the youngest class on their chosen course.

Actually, I'd go for the opposite: if an M45 running up beat all the M35s and the M40s, I'd give him the M35 prize, as that would be (in principle) the most demanding class that he was eligible for - likewise, if a W18 won a course that was W18, W20 and W21 then I think she should get the W21 prize.

I still think it's good to keep the principle that no-one can win more than one (individual) prize, as that must surely help to motivate more competitors.

I was second M35s. By your method of working this out Id have been about 10th as first would have been an M45 then loads of M60 competitors. I personally am not fit enough to run the long M35 but enjoy running and being competitive in my own class even if it is the short courses. Doing what you suggest completely removes my chances of that because there are some M60 and M45 people that Im never going to get close to and negates a lot of the fun for me.

I personally fail to see what the problem is with people (with the exception of 21 the "open" class) running their own age. If you want to compete against other ages good for you but why take their prizes, you have your own to run for.

[awk]

I personally fail to see what the problem is with people (with the exception of 21 the "open" class) running their own age. If you want to compete against other ages good for you but why take their prizes, you have your own to run for.

But if you're 50 or so, you are running your own age if competing in, say, M40. After all, you're over 40.*
(And bear in mind you've just said that you are not fit enough to run 'your age' )

All of this just underlines to me the nonsense of the way age classes are delineated at events like this.

*Edit: not that I think this is relevant when talking S versus L classes.

[keever]

I was second M35s. By your method of working this out Id have been about 10th as first would have been an M45 then loads of M60 competitors. I personally am not fit enough to run the long M35 but enjoy running and being competitive in my own class even if it is the short courses. Doing what you suggest completely removes my chances of that because there are some M60 and M45 people that Im never going to get close to and negates a lot of the fun for me.

I think the short classes are a bit irrelevant for this argument, the M60 competitors in this case are running their standard class whereas the M35/40s are running the short class so I agree with you that the M60s shouldn't be included because it would be like including them in the W35/40 results.

I personally fail to see what the problem is with people (with the exception of 21 the "open" class) running their own age. If you want to compete against other ages good for you but why take their prizes, you have your own to run for.

I don't see it like that. Personally I think if you achieve a medal/prize winning position in a "superior"(can't think of the right word) class you should be awarded the medal/prize for that class as well as whatever you've achieved in your own class.

The attitude of a lot of people seems to be that they want to win prizes even if they've been beaten by someone from an "inferior"(somebody help me ) class. Personally I'd be embarrassed to receive a prize in that case.

To complicate things further, rule 2.4.5 says that women are eligible to compete in men's classes - so (for example) on the White course (which inlcuded M10 and W10), should Sarah Pedley, the overall winner, have won M10 instead of (or as well as) W10??! This scenario probably happens quite often with the youngest junior courses, where men and women in the same age group often have the same course.

Difficult one I'd probably say for M/W10/12/14 to keep the prizes seperate as there is little to separate boys and girls at this age and is why they often have the same course. If they have different courses the difference will be minimal so there'd not really be much point in a girl running a boy's course anyway.

[LostAgain]

[quote="roadrunnerTo complicate things further, rule 2.4.5 says that women are eligible to compete in men's classes - so (for example) on the White course (which inlcuded M10 and W10), should Sarah Pedley, the overall winner, have won M10 instead of (or as well as) W10??! This scenario probably happens quite often with the youngest junior courses, where men and women in the same age group often have the same course.[/quote]

In theory, if we are advocating that the Men’s class in each age group is the "Open" class then this would be appropriate.

However, I personally would prefer to see the junior classes run along gender lines. Juniors who progress faster than others should continue to be allowed to run up (confined to their gender classes) to find competition and in doing so should also be allowed to receive the recognition (prizes) where relevant.

Adult women running the men's classes and being competitive, why not? You can potentially get bogged down in the course system and the "S" classes though, and I can see this being a nightmare to work out at something like the White Rose if entered by course rather than Age.

[andypat]

Maybe the point made above about short and long classes is helpful if expanded upon.

I might be wrong in this but at a Scottish O League event, an M40 can run course 2 (M40L) and also course 4 (M40S). But they can also run "up" in course 3 as this is M21S. (this is up from M40s but down from M40L). I dont think this is fair on M21S.

I think running "up" should be restricted eligibility for Long courses only.

ie in my example, if the M40 wants to run course 3 they are non-comp. If they want to run other than course 2 or 4 competitively then its course 1!

[DaveR]

I might be wrong in this but at a Scottish O League event, an M40 can run course 2 (M40L) and also course 4 (M40S). But they can also run "up" in course 3 as this is M21S. (this is up from M40s but down from M40L). I dont think this is fair on M21S.

I think running "up" should be restricted eligibility for Long courses only.

People are, quite rightly, allowed to run up, so surely S runners should be allowed to as much as L runners.

I can't believe that M21S runners need particular protection from pot hunting oldies

[graeme]

For those less au fait with things Scottish, here's what DaveR's referring to...

SOL M21S 2009
1st Steve Wilson, M40 CLYDE
2nd Jason Simpson M21 TINTO
3rd mharky

[mharky]

gutted

[roadrunner]

I might be wrong in this but at a Scottish O League event, an M40 can run course 2 (M40L) and also course 4 (M40S). But they can also run "up" in course 3 as this is M21S. (this is up from M40s but down from M40L). I dont think this is fair on M21S.

I think running "up" should be restricted eligibility for Long courses only.

People are, quite rightly, allowed to run up, so surely S runners should be allowed to as much as L runners.

I can't believe that M21S runners need particular protection from pot hunting oldies

But if you're running (say) M40S, then there are plenty of people running M40L who were certainly eligible to run that class and would have beaten you, so I can't see that coming first in a short class can really count for a lot - although getting good ranking points is a different matter. (And before you ask, I spent a lot of my time running the short classes and I don't think I ever won one.)

You could take the argument further and say that, now people can enter any course they like at Regional/District events (or whatever we call them these days), there's no longer a need to designate specific courses for the short classes - if you don't want to run the "long" course for your age group, just run whichever length you like.

[mharky]

I thought that the whole idea of the new system is that you can run the COURSE that is right for you, not the CLASS.