Oh no not another British Sprints format thread

[pete.owens]

Well that is an improvement on the current format where the M40A final loses all those who enter the elite competition and end up running M21B - rather than just those who manage qualify for the elite A final.

[The Loofa]

I like Pete Owens idea - not least becuase somewhere in the dim and distant past i suggested something almost identical.
The M40 in the elite final is simple. he runs M21E and has already won for himself the M40 gold. M40A final is then for silver and bronze.
Argument against the idea is that the heats are the wrong length for the other age groups. Although true, I think that's a very boring line to take.

[graeme]

...if an M40 qualified for the elite final? Either they go into the elite final, in which case the M40 is simply for the leftovers, or they go into the M40 final, in which case the elite final is weakened and they are deprived of their place

Which is not ideal.
However, it is better in every way than the current system where the final they run in is determined by a tick on a bit of paper rather than the result of a run. I don't like the idea that you can win the title based on the heat, but if (like this year) the elite and M40 final are the same then even that's not a problem.

[EddieH]

I love Pete Owens suggestion.

I think the M40 qualifier should choose whether he wishes to compete for M40 gold, or an also-ran in the elite - definitely NOT be automatically awarded the M40 title - after all he could have had a worse run than another M40 in another heat who was not in the top 6.

[JK]

Its a shame I missed the Sprints, I'd have run my legs off in the Qualifyer and got some nice ranking points by beating (or being closer to) all these higher ranked people who were out for a stroll.

Is that how it works?

I too like Pete's idea as qualified by Eddie.

JK

[NeilC]

The Pete/Loofa/Eddie/JK format would mean winning times of 25 minutes plus for some British Sprint champions. Is this OK? Or does the proposal need a bit more work?

[Scott]

This year we had four age classes won in over 20 minutes anyway, but I don't see why this proposal would make it any worse in the Finals, as you would have the same range of "FA" courses as you had this year.

I think the bigger problem is the qualifiers - it will be difficult to devise qualifier courses that are a decent length for the top M21E but short enough to actually resemble a sprint for the M80s. I don't have a good suggestion for this, but somebody else might?

[JK]

If I understand Pete I think that would be the Qualifying events winning times, not the Championship courses. So I believe some tweaking would be needed.

Non exclusive tweaks could include:

1. V50+ having a separate course (V instead of M ... guess who was in Lithuania last week!)

2. 21E winning times being reduced to the lowest permitted (or even under, 10-12 mins prologue winning time anyone?)

Neither of these are perfect of course.

JK

[Scott]

1. V50+ having a separate course

I was just about to edit my post to suggest something similar. I guess Nopesport could have fun arguing over where the cut off should be - I suspect there will be opinions for anywhere from 50+ to 65+.

I'm not sure there would be much support for "compromising" the 21E event by reducing the qualifier winning times.

[NeilC]

Many hours were spent last year putting together various options for the combined sprint championships. None were ideal but the one that has just happened was perceived to be the one with the least flaws. A proposal which sounds great at first often falls apart when the detail starts to be considered eg exactly which classes should compete against which? Does the format mean that it's easier for some people to qualify for a particular final than others? That's not to say that a better format doesn't exist but let's see the entire proposal not just the M40/M45 bit.

[distracted]

I like Pete Owens' idea - I'd much prefer to be competing to get into a B-final of 60 runners from all age groups - but also understand Neil's concerns about the format. Age classes appear to be important for the older groups though - a quick glance at the results from this year and elite sprint champs of the past shows plenty of 65+ runners competing under the new format, when there were only ever a handful at the elite champs. I haven't looked at the old age-class sprint results.

However, the elite champs of the past have had M55s sneaking into the B final and M60s in the C final (but never higher) - showing the top end of these age groups can compete in heats planned to meet a winning time for the elites.

So perhaps some better analysis of the statistics of this and previous years results would help aid discussion?

[NeilC]

Another scenario for the revisionists to consider (expanding on Graeme's earlier comment). The heats are all perfectly seeded such that none of the M40s are expected to make the A final and indeed the top M40s in each heat all have equally good runs by whatever criteria you choose. However the heats become unbalanced because a top M21 mispunched/withdrew or whatever. This won't really affect the M21 champs because the top runners will have qualified anyway. What this DSQ/DNS does allow is for one of the M40s to qualify for the A final and thus automatically be awarded the gold medal. This will happen with one or more age classes. Is this what we want? If not how will the format prevent it?

[Scott]

What this DSQ/DNS does allow is for one of the M40s to qualify for the A final and thus automatically be awarded the gold medal. This will happen with one or more age classes. Is this what we want? If not how will the format prevent it?

I think the M40 qualifier should choose whether he wishes to compete for M40 gold, or an also-ran in the elite - definitely NOT be automatically awarded the M40 title - after all he could have had a worse run than another M40 in another heat who was not in the top 6.

[IanD]

I think the M40 qualifier should choose

Hard enough for the organisers to issue the start list for the second round promptly as it is - having different people choose different options would make it a nightmare - and error-prone.

[Scott]

In the case of the M40 (or, more realistically, W35) who qualifies for the Elite final, I'd say you'd just put them in the start list for both the Elite final and their age-class A final, which means you don't have to wait for them to confirm their decision before you put the start lists on display.

The drawback is that one final or the other then ends up with one person fewer than they should have, but I'm not sure how big a problem this is - if an A final qualifier decided to go home instead of running their final you wouldn't promote someone from the B final to replace them, and I guess the same applies if they' have decided to run the Elite final instead.