Results and Rankings.

[NeilC]

This sounds a very sensible idea to me

Because people are more interested in ranking points than the challenge of competing over a Black length course?

Those at the top end of Black are unlikely to have more competition on the Brown - just a lot more people below them in the results.

[slang]

This sounds a very sensible idea to me

Because people are more interested in ranking points than the challenge of competing over a Black length course?

Those at the top end of Black are unlikely to have more competition on the Brown - just a lot more people below them in the results.

At best I appear midway in the results, black or brown. The difference in length is not that great (c. 15%). It's nice to chat with others who do the same course. It's rewarding to overtake someone, motivating to be overtaken, and exciting to run head-to-head. It interests me to compare my results and splits with other competitors, especially with those who are close to me.

Running on a course with very few competitors feels very isolating. I can understand why some, i.e. M\W21, gradually drift away (of course there are many other reasons).

I had hope the introduction of colour coded courses at large events would result in amalgamation of smaller courses.

[AlanB]

Note to self - dont follow Eddie at next SOL!

I've nothing sensible to contribute, just that your comment really made me chuckle!

[Scott]

This sounds a very sensible idea to me - not just for the Black course, but for anything (except White and Yellow)

I can think of a few senior ladies who would be unimpressed if they had entered Short Green and you told them that because of insufficient entries they had to run a course that was 20% longer.

Speaking as a mediocre M21, I tend to run Black because I like to get the distance in, but it is probably fair to say that I often enjoy myself more at events where I'm on a course with more people of around my ability, either because there's no Black and I'm running Brown, or because there are more classes combined on the course for some reason (eg. urban events). It can be hard to motivate myself on Black knowing that 5mins either way in my time will often make no difference to my result

[MIE]

Just checked, one was the London City Race womens open, the other was blue at Westerham, other competitors ranked on both courses. Just wondering if it's a general bug affecting newcomers, the sort of thing that might get missed in a new system as new members are going to shout least loud.

.............. There is however a time limit on subsequent uploads. ..............

And if your results Poster updates the results after the time limit all the ranking points gained by the competitors at that event get set to zero. As happens to be the case for one of SeanC's listed events

[SeanC]

mmm, the good news is that we worked out why one of our new members wasn't getting his points.

The bad news... see above.

I've emailed the person who I think innocently updated the results for Westerham, hopefully your points can be recovered soon.

Version 1.1 of the BOF ranking system, all submissions impossible after 1 month?

[pete.owens]

I can think of a few senior ladies who would be unimpressed if they had entered Short Green and you told them that because of insufficient entries they had to run a course that was 20% longer.

... or one 15% shorter.
... or even one of similar length but at TD4 in terrain that couldn't support TD5 courses in the first place.

It is less of an issue with the intermediate courses than those at the extremes because everybody has a choice whether to run a longer or a shorter course than their first preference (which would have been shorter or longer than any individuals ideal course length in any case)

[DM]

GO 1995 M 4061; 961, 1087, 1026

Looked at the M16 (yr2) rankings and spotted this one, something is not right with the maths here, I make the total of those 3 = 3074.

[EddieH]

Now that so many events are ranking ones, it seems to me that there is no longer any need to limit counting events to 6 per year - most people interested in their ranking should comfortably manage 10 events in the year.

Increasing the number of counters would diminish the occasional silly score due to some anomoly, and also due to a good athlete running round his well known TD 3/4 local patch.

The rankings would then tend more towards consistency than flash in the pan performance.

[DJM]

GO 1995 M 4061; 961, 1087, 1026

Looked at the M16 (yr2) rankings and spotted this one, something is not right with the maths here, I make the total of those 3 = 3074.

...which is what the rankings page makes the sum too (3074)!

[DM]

GO 1995 M 4061; 961, 1087, 1026

Looked at the M16 (yr2) rankings and spotted this one, something is not right with the maths here, I make the total of those 3 = 3074.

...which is what the rankings page makes the sum too (3074)!

It does now, It did not last night or this morning when I CUT AND PASTED THE DETAILS.

Please don't try and suggest it was right all along. George Simmons was placed above Aidan Smith who also had 3 scores, all exceeding those of George - this is what drew my attention to it in the first place.

[The Loofa]

and the current list says George dropped 423 places since last week
which as we are talking about M16s born in 1995, they ahve no scored from last year to drop out.
So there's summat up

[SeanC]

George went to Westerham (see previous posts).

[Adrian]

Sorry if this has already been answered, but where on the BOF website is the list of the ranking events of the last 12 months? Thanks.

[Scott]

It's not easy to get to as the changing-pages-on-the-results-screen bug doesn't seem to have been fixed yet, but try http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/index.php?pg=results&evt_level=-4&perpage=200&bSearch=Search&pg=results (and ignore all the relays etc).