Are our Elite spoiled brats or prima donnas?

[Freefall]

You and I both remember when there were so many M21s that we had double courses to cater for the numbers. With the concept of a separate Elite, no doubt the right thing to do to get our very best athletes in shape for world class competition, the M21 class has been left out on a limb. With M21E. M21, M21S and M21V how on earth does one choose what to run if not in the top echelon? It isn't working and hasn't worked for years. It has even impacted on M20s, and when my son was running as a Junior Elite (Scottish Champion in his age group on several occasions) it was very hard to know what he should be doing as some of his rivals were actually running up. Combining M21 with 18/20/35/40 gets my vote. In competitions such as the Northern Champs, add M21E to that list too.

[madmike]

Combining M21 with 18/20/35/40 gets my vote.

that would get my vote now I'm M45 but previously at the wrong end of M40 would have thought it was a very bad idea to make me run against people less than half my age.

PS: last double course for M21L I remember was JK at Dollgellau (apologies for spelling) when day 2 near Cadr Idris was cancelled due to snow.

[graeme]

a very bad idea to make me run against people less than half my age.

The best race I've had this year was vs Matt Elkington at the JOK chasing sprint. Started one second apart, swapping the lead innumerable times (and hauling past others), with a big effort I got a gap near the end, but he closed it down and pipped me on the run in. Matt is M16, I'm M49.

So don't flatter yourself that the kids cant run at your pace

Quite agree that a separate 21L is now pointless when 21E is on offer. There was even a brief period in the 80s when the guidelines had W35L further than W21L.

[madmike]

Sorry Graeme i didn't realise you were only 49 My best races by contrast have been against M60/65s!

I don't disagree that it may be the time to combine classes for example how about 20E 20L and 20S which can sometimes have 5 or 6 runners between them

Moreover, how about combining some short courses why have a short class for M35, M40 and M45 when you could probably get away with a 35-45S and say one for 50-65S and 70+ for example - particularly given lack of M35s and M40s in the sport at the moment.

[EddieH]

I agree totally ith reducing the range in the S classes. With my younger hat on I could not agree with bunching 21E in with 35 and 40 because it will all add to the steady reduction in longer courses available. Remember all other courses have the option to run up if they wish.

I'd keep the E for the regionals and amalgamate the others. I've never understood why an extra course is considered such a huge amount of extra effort - far far less than in the old days of hand overprinters and hand measuring.

It sounds as though we'd get more E runners if we were a little more careful about the dates of these events.

[Scott]

With or without pavements?

If it happens I expect there'll be map by someone with a better idea of what they're doing than me

[greywolf]

Moreover, how about combining some short courses why have a short class for M35, M40 and M45 when you could probably get away with a 35-45S and say one for 50-65S and 70+ for example - particularly given lack of M35s and M40s in the sport at the moment.

This might reduce a bit of admin, but would make no difference at all to the planner / controller because these are classes not courses - i'm not sure there is ever a separate course required for an S class - so e.g. M45S uses the W45L course, M50S the W50L course. And I'd guess at the Northern Champs if the planners got any sense all 4 are already on the same course, maybe with M65L

[edit: it occurs to me there might be some scale nonsense at BOC that means W35S & W40S need a (shared) separate course}

But there is some scope for reducing the number of courses: e.g. having separate courses for each of M21E and M21L (at 83% of the length of M21E) when there's 3 or 4 competitors on each is just silly - if you're going to have M21E then the M21L class could go on the M35L/M40L course

[awk]

Moreover, how about combining some short courses why have a short class for M35, M40 and M45 when you could probably get away with a 35-45S and say one for 50-65S and 70+ for example - particularly given lack of M35s and M40s in the sport at the moment.

Why limit it as much as that? At the Swiss Six Day a couple of years ago, I ran HA Short - which was effectively a short class for H21-50. They didn't bother with any other shorts, reckoning courses were already short enough (so I gather).

[madmike]

Why limit it as much as that? At the Swiss Six Day a couple of years ago, I ran HA Short - which was effectively a short class for H21-50. They didn't bother with any other shorts, reckoning courses were already short enough (so I gather).

cos some slower 54 year olds might not find it fair racing fit 20 year olds

[IkeySol]

Why limit it as much as that? At the Swiss Six Day a couple of years ago, I ran HA Short - which was effectively a short class for H21-50. They didn't bother with any other shorts, reckoning courses were already short enough (so I gather).

cos some slower 54 year olds might not find it fair racing fit 20 year olds

Same could be said for 35 year olds 40 year olds etc etc etc. If we limit classes to people were as fit as to make it fair we'll end up with 300 odd classes all with one person in!

As a slowish 37 year old who more often than not runs and wins the 35 short often by quite a long way against very limited competition I have to say that sounds an excellent idea to me as it would increase the competition greatly without making me have to run further than I want.

Might have the added bonus of making the short a little higher regarded as well or maybe thats wishful thinking

[frog]

Do people care if they are beaten by someone younger on the same course though? Most of us look at the results and compare ourselves with a few folk we know to judge our performances, after all if you do a road race everyone does the same course and no-one moans.
You could still divide the results into age groups if you want.
1 short course for 21-5 year olds sounds reasonable, I don't see why we'd ever really need more than 4 or 5 TD5 courses of differing lengths. If you can't find a course to suit you with 5 to choose from you are maybe in the wrong sport. We make it far too complicated and time consuming.

[awk]

cos some slower 54 year olds might not find it fair racing fit 20 year olds

They're not required to compare themselves against them. (Although not many fit 20 year olds would actually run H21-50!). I always find this attitude in orienteering a bit odd anyway - doesn't apply in any of the other sports I've competed in in recent years.

[EddieH]

Frog wrote "1 short course for 21-5 year olds sounds reasonable"

You might be getting the police round for child abuse

[madmike]

cos some slower 54 year olds might not find it fair racing fit 20 year olds

They're not required to compare themselves against them. (Although not many fit 20 year olds would actually run H21-50!). I always find this attitude in orienteering a bit odd anyway - doesn't apply in any of the other sports I've competed in in recent years.

well some of us are clearly odd and some of you are normal - different strokes Awk - different strokes. Let's strive to be inclusive as we will have enough difficulty as it is to stop further decline in the sport.

[seabird]

As a not very fit M60 I'm increasingly finding that the races I enjoy most are the simple one course events which pit me against everyone, including a phalanx of M21s. Of course I am way down the field, just as I am in fell races, road races and park runs. Doesn't diminish the enjoyment or the atmosphere one bit.