2012 GBR National Squad Selection Criteria Revealed

[Gross]

Selection policy has always been controversial & Harry's and Tess's approach is good... just get on with it!

Must admit though that I am no great fan of this stastitical selection... a world class athlete in orienteering has more to offer than stastitics... personality etc etc...

Bilbo was a perfect example of someone who told the squad to stuff it... another potential athlete was never seriously considered for selection as he drove the rest up the wall..

To my mind the Finns had selection policy correct for years (don't know about now) but Totte was head coach & he took responsibility... his head was on the line if the team failed.

(just had a look at the BOF website & it's cr*p... no obvious mention of selections or policy for 2012... whatever selection criteria is chosen there is no excuse for it not being online!) Yippee... another BOF Bashing excuse

[harry]

FYI as far as I know..

JK is selection for EOC (but maybe not all the top ones going for EOC because it is not funded at all and also clashes with some people's exams).

Scottish Champs and associated races are selection for WOC (plus presumably all known form and various other subjective/ objective constructs).

This is the info that has filtered to me. Not seen any official documents yet but expect they'll come out by Jan-ish.

[andypat]

This is slightly off topic but is it the norm for other countries to have selection races (May) quite so close to the actual WOC? Never been an elite but I'd have thought it might be better to have them earlier so the team would know and could concentrate on preparing for the main event.

And a word for the selectors - this must be a nightmare job - no way can you please everyone. I'm sure these guys are well liked and respected by orienteers and are just trying do their best to fit probably 8-10 each men and women into the available slots.

If theres a communication issue I suspect it isnt anything much to do with most of the selectors.

[Becks]

I also don't like wholly statistical selection. They use a wholly objective means to select over here, and this year it had a weird outcome.

Basically, everyone here has a ranking quite like the BOF ranking system, and to take more than 4 people to WOC, the 5th person has to get a over a certain number of points. In the women, this is skewed by the that fact that the top two women are exceptional, leaving the rest with relatively low points scores. This meant that despite the fact the 5th runner was 0.2 points behind the 4th place runner, with multiple WOCs and final qualifications behind her (and an excellent track record of being tough, strong and accurate in thick forests), she was unable to attend. No leeway whatsoever. I'm confident that she would have qualified in the middle, and so are most people here. And that's a big deal for a US athlete (or at least it was until a certain ex OUOC member took off in to the stratosphere ) and meets certain strategic targets for the NGB.

In the men, there is much less spread at the top, and the runners are way way less consistent. This resulted in all men having higher average rankings than the women, and a team of five was taken. None of them qualified for anything (I acknowledge this is harder to do in the Men's). Fans of the objective system say that taking five average men gives them more chance of focusing and qualifying in a single race, but when results from the season were really examined I'd have argued that only two of them had much chance of qualifying IN FRANCE on an excellent race.

To summarise, I think absolute objectivity is bad. I think absolute subjectivity is bad, when it rests on the heads of a couple of people.

But as many people have said, if there are criteria, they need to be freely available. People need to know if the basic fact of their birthday counts them out of selection before their performance is even considered.

Having said all this, we're not talking WOC, we're talking selection for a group that seems to provide increased regulation and rapidly dwindling real support. The things I've been most impressed by over here is the way everyone clubs together, trains hard, inspires each other, mucks in to organise and has fun with almost no NGB support. That's a lesson we could learn for sure. Especially the fun bit. Otherwise there's no point.

[Tessa]

Harry is right. I pulled out because I had already made plans for my training over the next year and they did not combine with the compulsory weekends.

[distracted]

I've been most impressed by over here is the way everyone clubs together, trains hard, inspires each other, mucks in to organise and has fun with almost no NGB support. That's a lesson we could learn for sure. Especially the fun bit. Otherwise there's no point.

Couldn't agree more. Here's to more weekends like BUOT on Cannock for next year

[rocky]

This is all terrific fun. Who would have thought we would find something Harry, Becks and Gross all agree on?
Any more big exclusives to keep us going through the winter OrienteeringUK? Maybe a BOF expenses scandal or an IOF phone hacking expose?

everyone clubs together, trains hard, inspires each other, mucks in to organise and has fun with almost no NGB support.

Perfect description of a SEDS weekend too...

[Becks]

It's a bit unprecedented isn't it? We'll be holding hands singing carols round our multinational tree next!

[Gross]

Perfect description of a SEDS weekend too...

And of course being the designer & head honcho of both NEDS & SEDS I'll take the credit for the best elite training / coaching undertaken in the UK over the last 20 odd years

[harry]

Today it has emerged that the British squad is providing some support / training after all so I might have to take back my words that the performance group are self-help only.

The point I was trying to make before was that things might be different than meets the eye - to an outsider it may have looked like Hollie & Tess were snubbed into only being in the development group but to me -from looking at the actual programme - it looked more like the development group was the only one worth being part of. Now it has emerged that possibly performance group also get some support. Which is really nice - if it is true.

I think to be honest the people running things and making these decisions are trying to do a good job and we (as interested observers or "o nerds") should perhaps just watch the results over the next few years to judge if it has been a success rather than judge it based on what we believe right now.

I have changed my tune a little bit, only because I think I should reserve judgement a bit as well (speaking now as an o-runner or "mega o nerd") and see how it turns out being in this squad.

Still doesn't change the fact that TAFKA Mharky and maybe others perhaps got slightly screwed over wrt selection but they should just keep going in the same way and the margins will be in their favour next time. Sad thing these margins but that is sport and life, often arbitrary & unfair! Just got to get down with that asap, be zen about it & not take it personally. Easier said than done but totally worth doing to enjoy sport & life!

[Ravinous]

Read the next issue of CompassSport magazine about to be posted for an indepth statistical analysis of Team GBs WOC results from 1967 today. It looks at % time behind 'the winner' (average of the top 3 in fact) and includes total and man/women split. It is a very interesting read. What do people think? Have we been getting steadily better until now? Are there peaks and troughs, if so when!? Have the girls been outperforming the guys? Or the other way round? Over which periods? The article also looks at JWOC results and tries to correlate any good JWOC years with good WOC years maybe a few years down the line - any correlation there? Are JWOC results getting better?
It is easy to forget past results and this is a very thorough look at the progression and hopefully get people thinking about Team GB and its current set up, compared with what it had before. Remember Lottery Funding came in around 2001 I think and I am sure people will be interested to know what effect that had on the performance.

[Gross]

Remember Lottery Funding came in around 2001

Lottery Funding started being cut in 2001 WOC 97 in Grimstad was the last pre Lottery WOC... Goran A came along in 1998 at the start of Lottery... he was in place for sure for the World Cup in Finland but not in Estonia the week before.........

[Big Jon]

You beat me to it Gross - shows you sepnd even longer on Nopesport than I do
The lottery funding was cut from 2001 but it didn't really impact on activities for a few years after that, perhaps 2005/6.

[Kitch]

And of course being the designer & head honcho of both NEDS & SEDS I'll take the credit for the best elite training / coaching undertaken in the UK over the last 20 odd years

unfortunately though Gross these days they have no funding, no design, no head honcho
kids are doing it for themselves, better than ever

so we can only conclude that your initiative got in the way.....

[Gross]

so we can only conclude that your initiative got in the way.....

aawwwww Andy I'm all upset now And to think my daughters were named after your girlfriends