London City Race

[DM]

Graeme,

Think you misunderstand me. My view is we should keep plugging away and get the insurance issue sorted so that 16- (elite or not) have a choice of the courses they can run. Maybe urban racing is the way to startkeeping more juniors and shift the demographic a bit? I am not disagreeing with RJ (more agreeing) and as you say a reason was given for ignoring 16-, namely insurance. Get the insurance issue sorted more people will be happy and urban racing can continue to evolve.
I just remain unconvinced that all avenues have been investigated to sort the insurance issue.

Arnold,
Enjoyed course 3, thanks.

[EddieH]

RJ is right to the extent that, outside of national events it is up to clubs to decide what to put on, and what classes to offer. But the tone reads so ageist I can see nothing good coming out of that.

Firstly ALL sports are showing low numbers of young adults competing (they are too busy with their lives - and inevitable travel to o events makes it even harder for orienteering to attract regular attendance.

Of course it's great that London and potentially others can attract unusually high numbers in this demographic, but that is a long way from making them regular participants.

Secondly I do not share RJ's doomesday prognosis of a zimmer frame sport. Our sport IS very attractive to an older age range that are past the major pressures on their time and wish to get out and get a bit fitter. New people in this demographic are far more likely to be attracted if seeing a typical mixture of runners in an urban event, than they are if only the younger and elite are present.

Just looking at the new adults that have joined Moravian in the past 3 years I can think of one M21 and a whole pack of M45s. The way RJ talks he doesn't want the latter despite the fact that they are also planning and organising our events.

[Oldman]

I just remain unconvinced that all avenues have been investigated to sort the insurance issue.

Why assume that all avenues have not been investigated?

[RJ]

To recap.... The Urban racing scene was generated by the 'new youth' in the sport. Am I therefore wrong in assuming that this is something they are attracted to and find attractive.... and that perhaps other like minded 'youth' might be attracted to it too. Judging from the steady increase in interest in the NopeSport league and the increasing number of Urban maps now being drawn there is the possibility that the demographic WILL change.

Yes, it is a pity about the 16- group.... but all the M/W 16s that I know are sensible enough to understand the problem of the insurance and 'get on with it'.

.....the super ultra very old vets.... if you are including M45s in that group EddieH then we are not on common ground! You're one!! The BOF demographic has been moving inexorably towards the zimmer frame end.... you don't need much of a study of the membership trend over the last ten years to come to that conclusion.

I still wish to take part in these Urban races, but will be more than happy to race on whatever course is offered. The main race is for the 'elite' and that is where the main competition is. Anyone can race with them! But I am quite happy to be a 'fun runner' and just enjoy the city and the views. Bit like my efforts on a 10K or half marathon.

So, to this 'new youth'.... thanks for all you have done, but please keep it going, and continue to make it attractive to your demographic. If that requires compromises then go with them.

[awk]

One thing in all this debate that does mystify me a bit. Why is that in sport like (say) road running, fell running etc, all adults are happy to compete on the same course, be it 5k, 10k, half marathon, marathon or whatever, yet when it comes to orienteering, we seem to need separate classes and increasingly shorter distances? Is it that we don't actually have the same variety of race distances or just an attitude of mind?

Having recently looked at a number of M55 urban courses, I have to admit that, as someone not that far off moving up, I'm not overly anxious to get there, at least at present. It's not that I'm a 'value for money' person (I love sprint, middle etc.), it's just that the younger runners seem on the whole to get so much more fun. I was lucky that this, the first year I didn't run the open at London, was a year when the M40 course was really good - the open courses were certainly better the previous two years.

All in all, I thoroughly agree with RJ's penultimate paragraph in the previous post.

[EddieH]

Put in that language RJ I agree totally with your last post.

[distracted]

Are these races also an opportunity to allow pairs/teams to take part "competitively" on a course? There must be a certain proportion of people, of all ages, who are put off by orienteering being an individual sport, yet we do nothing to cater for them at present... Or is this the sort of thing that would be better catered for at a different "type" of event?

[graeme]

What about carrying a streetmap? I reckon this would remove a big barrier for non-orienteers, who would soon learn that/why O-maps are better!

Regarding insurance for children. "The Seven Hills of Edinburgh — a combination of road-running, cross-country, hill-running, and urban orienteering" (now in its 30th accident-free year ) appears to welcome juniors under scottishathletics insurance.

[SeanC]

How about putting the map for the newcomers course online a few days before the event? For newcomers just doing the map navigation thing with the strange new symbols is hard enough without worrying about route choice.

[DaveR]

I just remain unconvinced that all avenues have been investigated to sort the insurance issue.

Why assume that all avenues have not been investigated?

Well, I've asked various questions and have yet to have anyone say that all (or indeed any) avenues have been investigated. Perhaps they have been, perhaps not, but all I've really seen are statements that "this is how it will be".

[Scott]

Might be a good thing to bring up at the BOF Regional Roadshows (assuming you or someone from your club can make it).

[seabird]

As a parent of a M/W16 and possibly younger - I'd be miffed at the Insurance position.

As an official at urban events, I'm relieved. The insurance position has resolved a matter that was troubling very many organisers - and quite rightly.

Most people I speak with expect that one day there will be a traffic accident in an urban race resulting in personal injury. No organiser worth his sorts wants to feel responsible for that injury being to a child, however responsible that child and its parents may feel them to be. And they would feel responsible - and even worse could run the risk of being held to account.

Which does, of course, mean how do we make these ever burgeoing urban events attractive to family groups, who often feel excluded - and that was the case for many before the insurance restrictions.

[DaveR]

Most people I speak with expect that one day there will be a traffic accident in an urban race resulting in personal injury. No organiser worth his sorts wants to feel responsible for that injury being to a child, however responsible that child and its parents may feel them to be. And they would feel responsible - and even worse could run the risk of being held to account.

No organiser want to hold an event at which anyone is injured, but personal injuries already happen at plenty of orienteering events to both children and adults. What we have in place is the Risk Assessment to show that we have taken reasonable precautions to reduce the risks to acceptable levels.

The logical conclusion of your argument would be to exclude unaccompanied U16s from all orienteering races as they might injure themselves.

I think the real argument here is about the danger of being held to account. That, presumably, is what the insurance cover is for, and that is what we apparently may not have with our current insurer. The answer might be to get a better insurer! As others have pointed out WE are paying the INSURER to cover ourselves, so it is up to US to sort out what is acceptable cover and to see what the insurer will charge for it. This may or may not have already happened - I've asked various questions and still don't know.

[Scott]

I think the big difference at non-urban events is that you are relatively unlikely have a serious accident involving a third party. Organisers need to take reasonable precautions, but competitors of all ages are ultimately taking part at their own risk. In urban events, however, there is much more significant risk to third parties - it would be quite easy for a careless runner to cause a car accident in which members of the public were seriously injured or killed.

I've asked various questions and still don't know.

Have you tried asking anybody who might actually know the answer? Emailing the Chair of Events Committee would probably be a good place to start.

[roadrunner]

What about carrying a streetmap? I reckon this would remove a big barrier for non-orienteers, who would soon learn that/why O-maps are better!

In Venice, the O-map (without street names) was easier for finding your way around than a proper streetmap