Colour Codes

[Red Adder]

Am I being thick but I can't seem to find a definitive list of the course colour codes - there used to be a table in the Event guidelines appendix (my printed version is 2007) but since the reordering of things I can't find them anywhere on the BOF website (I'm looking under Event/Rules). Since the various CCs are mentioned everywhere I would expect to find a simple definitive table as in the previous guidelines.

[Neil M40]

The table is in Event Gudelines B : Long Distance Cross Country Events. In fact there are three tables, but the one for the largest events gives the full list.

http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/i ... line_b.pdf

[Red Adder]

I'd found this one -- I would not consider it a definitive CC table as its is tailored towards an event category- it certainly doesn't give the expected time range the old table gave - expected winning times would also be useful.

[Neil M40]

There are no longer guidelines on winning times - you get course length ratios instead. The only time guideline is that Black has a winning time for a top elite of 67 minutes (this is in the notes under the tables).

There are different tables for each event type - Long, Middle, Sprint - I assumed you wanted the table for long (= normal orienteering event as far as most people are concerned).

[NeilC]

Also if Blue (say) is the longest course at an event it's probably going to have a quicker winning time than if the event also has a Black, Brown and Short Brown on offer, but shouldn't be planned any differently.

[Red Adder]

I've also realised that this table appears to have minor errors. If you apply the courses length ratio to the min/ max lengths then the figures actually equate to

Published Computed
max min max min
White 1.0 1.9 1.4 2.0
Yellow 2.0 2.9 2.2 3.1
Orange 2.5 3.5 2.5 3.5
Lt Green 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.2
Sht Green 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.2
Green 3.5 5.0 3.9 5.5
Blue 5.5 7.5 5.6 7.9
Brown 8.5 12.0 8.5 12.0

{also the Brown to Black/M21 ratio has changed from .77 to .85, though that sort of makes sense]

[greywolf]

I've also realised that this table appears to have minor errors

It says quite clearly that the lengths shown are intended as a guide (rather than a specified range) - it's the course length ratios that matter

[AndyC]

What really matters is that the orienteers who complete any course enjoy themselves and think that the course was challenging at the right level i.e. if I've just run what the planner thought was a Green course I feel like I've run a Green course.
Guidelines are just that ; it is the subjective experience that counts

[LostAgain]

What really matters is that the orienteers who complete any course enjoy themselves and think that the course was challenging at the right level i.e. if I've just run what the planner thought was a Green course I feel like I've run a Green course.
Guidelines are just that ; it is the subjective experience that counts

I'm not convinced that you are correct here. We go to an event in the expectation of courses being planned to the correct guidelines (now length ratios), which in my opinion also has a time expectation for me.

I find these days that far to often the courses fail to live up to expectation. Far to frequently planners feel obliged to put on a "full range" of courses despite the fact the area will not support it. In these cases, the preliminary details make no mention of this and you turn up to run a brown to find it is won in 35 minutes, barely a green. This is misrepresentation and possibly an issue for "Trade Description Enforcers"!!

[Adrian]

you turn up to run a brown to find it is won in 35 minutes, barely a green.

This sounds rather far-fetched. Can you give an example of an event where it has happened? (apart from any middle-distance events that have been clearly labelled as such) In my experience, planners tend to make courses too long rather than too short. It's not unusual, for example, to find Blue courses that are 7+ km with 200+ m of climb, which is way outside the traditional guidelines. Perhaps they do this because they know the area has the potential for very few TD5 legs, but the average times taken on such courses are often very high.

[AndyC]

In which case my test of "did the competitors feel it was a Brown course" would decide it wasn't.

[LostAgain]

you turn up to run a brown to find it is won in 35 minutes, barely a green.

This sounds rather far-fetched. Can you give an example of an event where it has happened? (apart from any middle-distance events that have been clearly labelled as such) .

Latest example:

http://www.logonline.org.uk/wp/events-c ... x/results/

[LostAgain]

2nd example:

http://www.cix.co.uk/~neper/wales10/results.htm

[LostAgain]

you turn up to run a brown to find it is won in 35 minutes, barely a green.

It's not unusual, for example, to find Blue courses that are 7+ km with 200+ m of climb, which is way outside the traditional guidelines. Perhaps they do this because they know the area has the potential for very few TD5 legs, but the average times taken on such courses are often very high.

I must say I rarely find a course that has been planned over length with respect to winning time. This is probably a product of the fact there are few new areas without some former results from which to get a guide for running times.

I generally find SYO courses closer to the guide and therefore tough when you have been fed a diet of under-planned courses.

[NeilC]

I generally find SYO courses closer to the guide and therefore tough when you have been fed a diet of under-planned courses.

Surely last Autumn's Wincobank and Ramsley Moor events were underplanned? Remember a top elite orinteer should be winning a Brown in 57 mins.
Ramsley Moor won by a Junior in 46 mins
Wincobank in 42 mins