Lakes 5 Days 2010

[Gnitworp]

The good thing about 4 from 5, 3 from 4 or 4from 6 is that it prevents those of us who are newer to the sport/of less ability (or both ) being thrown out of the week's competition on, say, Day 2 because they made a silly mistake.

No, the good thing is that it allows officials etc, who are unable to do all the events, to be competitive. If you make a silly mistake on one day (newer to the sport or not) you deserve to be, as you put it, 'thrown out' of the competition. That's exactly the essential nature of orienteering. There are no other 'good things' about not counting all events than the one I've described above.

[mharky]

Agreed, that is a very good advantage.

[Jon Brooke]

If you make a silly mistake on one day (newer to the sport or not) you deserve to be, as you put it, 'thrown out' of the competition.

What do you mean "deserve" to be thrown out?

Get off your high horse.

[mharky]

Getting DSQ isn't a silly mistake, it's a cardinal sin of orienteering. If you can't find all the controls then you don't deserve to stay in.

If a golfer didn't actually putt in, you wouldn't let them continue with the round, or the competition, would you?

[EddieH]

Unless of course it is Matchplay

[mharky]

Touche...

Point still stands though, not finishing an orienteering course isn't a silly mistake...

[King Penguin]

... but if a golfer triple bogeys he is still technically in the competition, albeit with a reduced changes of winning - though it does happen. If someone makes a 20 min navigation error on one leg they have no chance left of winning overall in a competition of reasonable size with decent competition on the course.
So should the "winner" be the fastest orienteer who makes the occasional navigational howler (which they can then drop), or someone less fast who is always navigationally accurate ?
Discuss.....

[Gnitworp]

If you make a silly mistake on one day (newer to the sport or not) you deserve to be, as you put it, 'thrown out' of the competition.

What do you mean "deserve" to be thrown out?

Get off your high horse.

Then of course I've never ever made a silly mistake, not even hardly ever

Have missed one or more controls in approx 50% of urban races run

[mharky]

So should the "winner" be the fastest orienteer who makes the occasional navigational howler (which they can then drop), or someone less fast who is always navigationally accurate ?
Discuss.....

The winner should be the person with the fastest time. I believe that is how most running races are decided.

[Jon Brooke]

The winner should be the person who does the best under the rules of the particular competition they've entered.

Or should all competitions be run under exactly the same rules as laid down by a couple of Nopesport users?

Discuss...

[SeanC]

Being listed as "disqualified" for not being able to find 1 or more controls can be quite offputting to newcomers though. An inexperienced orienteer finding 10 out of 12 on a green course could be a big achievement... and it seems strange for this to be displayed in the disqualified/naughty step section. I wish the computer software clubs use could place people who have missed controls behind everyone who got them all, eg.

12. A Punter 97.31
13. A Nother Punter 102.02
14. J Prowting 51.40 (missed 1 control)
15. B Ginner 99.00 (missed 2 controls)

Looks better than "B Ginner DISQUALIFIED" (now go home and don't come back again).

At ranking/regional/lakes 5 days type events inhabited by nopesport types ... disqualifications for mispunching... can't see that it's a problem. We'll all come back again for more.

[Gnitworp]

There was a very competitive sub-competition on Day 2 of the White Rose on Blue. I came 3rd out of the 10 people who missed No 16, including some noteables. I'm quite proud of that

[housewife]

As someone who would have won my class under the scoring system used at the 6 day last year, i found the scoring system used at the lakes this year way fairer. Not so reliant on others doing badly to achieve a good result.


The overall competion was good but very child unfriendly. I know a lot of this could not be helped, but the start at the
same place of the finish on day 1 would not have made a massive difference to the planning of the courses, and would have cut chunks off the walking. Also some of the planning on our td 5 course was pretty easy. We had a few controls visible from previous controls and others tucked behind cairns which could be seen for miles. Minor grumbles though for a great week.

[awk]

As someone who would have won my class under the scoring system used at the 6 day last year, i found the scoring system used at the lakes this year way fairer. Not so reliant on others doing badly to achieve a good result.

I think that pretty much all scoring systems are equally fair - after all they are the same for everyone. Different scoring systems may emphasise different abilities/strengths etc., but that's not about being 'fair'.

Personally, if one is not going to use all days, I much prefer the simple systems with points based on the position you finish. I know all the arguments for and against, but don't like any system which starts introing complex maths to try and compensate for the vagaries of orienteering racing. As you can't use time, use position (which to my mind is just as, if not more, important).

[mharky]

AWK >>> Position is misleading, time is absolute. So, say in a Scottish 6 days, Runner A wins 2 days by 5 minutes and is 2nd on 4 days by 1s, Runner B wins 4 days by 1s and is 2nd on 2 days by 5 minutes...

Who is better?