JK2013

[Spookster]

So looks like we ask these folks?

Helen Errington
Event Manager (2 days)

Dave Peel
Event Manager (3 Days)

No. Helen and Dave aren't responsible for setting or changing the rules, that's the responsibility of the Events and Competitions Committee. The new chair of that is Chris James.

I think competition in the supply of equipment and services in orienteering is a good thing. IOF allows the use of any approved punching system at its events, and I think BO should too.

[denzil53]

plus £1 a day for ******* emit hire.

Given much fewer people in the UK own an emit brikke than an SI card, I expect they'll have to hire quite a number, so don't think you can have anything against the cost.

A slightly different thought is that I'm still not sure why major events in the UK don't have SI as standard given the above statement

On arrival in Australia, I was delighted to find that Emit has not yet reached these shores. Long may this remain the case.

[seabird]

On arrival in Australia, I was delighted to find that Emit has not yet reached these shores. Long may this remain the case.

Any sign of trained gerbils?

[MIE]

On arrival in Australia, I was delighted to find that Emit has not yet reached these shores. Long may this remain the case.

Any sign of trained gerbils?

Import restriction mean that gerbils are banned (except in special circumstances)
so they have trained Joeys to do that job

[Ali Wood]

Can I point out that I don't care what punching system is used SI. Emit , pin punches or whatever -if the organiser of a otherwise attractive event chose to use trained gerbils to record arrival at controls I'd still be interested.

Well I do care. Not enough to dissuade me from going to the event, but let's put it this way, EMIT will detract from my run and it will disturb my flow physically and mentally through every single control.
I rang BOF about the matter of punching system for JK2013; they suggested e-mailing them rather than anyone (e.g. Chris James) directly. So have done, and urge others of like mind to do the same.

[LostAgain]

I agree with Ali.

I see the existence of 2 systems (Emit & SI) in the UK as a clear example of the poor leadership of our Governing body (BO). Surely one of the most basic purposes of the Governing body is to secure a standard, for me this includes the card reading mechanism.

[oo_wrong_way]

Any sign of trained gerbils?

In my experience gerbil blood from the wounds caused by the EMIT backup pins gets all over the map making it illegible. On SI events it is quite tricky getting the gerbil far enough in to the unit. I haven't tried using a joey.

[plain lazy]

I can't believe the hoo-ha over a timing system! 5 pages already?! It's what the region uses, the club members know what they are doing with it. Why overcomplicate things for the volunteers in the local clubs by asking them to train to use a different system for a one off event?

And for the record, I've been using EMIT for the last 10 years and I don't think I've had a unit fail on me yet. I don't think this makes me lucky, I just think the few folk who get a unit failing on them are unlucky. EMIT works, it does what it's supposed to, log your start time, your time through each control, and your finish time.

Punching with EMIT is not rocket science either, they only go into the control unit 1 way, if you aren't sure at the event, ASK! BEFORE you start your run...

[graeme]

Why overcomplicate things for the volunteers

Which raises again perhaps the only interesting question on the thread, Paul Frost's query as to whether we're going from a professional paid-for computing system to a volunteer one? It's a question which has a definitive answer known to some people here...

[AndyC]

Plain Lazy - why do you think I suggested "trained gerbils"? (BTB I was thinking of them perched in a cage on top of the control to mark time of arrival not carried by competitors but...)
I've been fortunate to have been exposed to both emit and SI regularly - in the Midlands OD use emit (and LEIOC and HOC use SI) in the North BAOC and NN use emit while CLOK and NATO use SI - and really don't care which I use and both have advantages. I've even suggested to NATO that we borrow emit for some of our events to reduce the cost of potential vandalism.
NATO held their club champs a few weeks ago at an NN event and because some people weren't too familiar with emit a demonstration unit was placed in assembly for people to practice on -soon dealt with uncertainty.
Now time to pack my SI Card to head to Castle Vale

[NeilC]

Which raises again perhaps the only interesting question on the thread, Paul Frost's query as to whether we're going from a professional paid-for computing system to a volunteer one? It's a question which has a definitive answer known to some people here...

Although it seems to be a question based on an assumption that there are no commercial providers capable of working with EMIT.

[Dave]

EMIT works, it does what it's supposed to, log your start time, your time through each control, and your finish time.

It records your start time, yes; your time through each control, yes; your finish time, no. It just adds up splits (rounded to 1s), which is why the World cup races using EMIT this year had to have emiTag in use for timing.

[Paul Frost]

Although it seems to be a question based on an assumption that there are no commercial providers capable of working with EMIT.

It wasn't intended to be viewed that way.
It was more related to the fact that SI have been the computing solution for JK, BOC and 6 Days for a few years now and so have extensive experience in the foibles of all these events and what can go wrong.

The fact that they are still providing the online entry system, made me wonder if computing at the event was going to be done by volunteers.
This would be a big step away from past practice and I was genuinely interested in the decision. Having been the person making such a decision for the 2011 6 Days I am quite aware of the hard choices that have to be made.

So, whilst there may be other commercial providers out there, SPORTident have the largest team of people experienced in regularly handling very large events. In the event of sickness or accident they can probably provide alternative people at short notice. It's that level of support and peace of mind that tempts organisers to pay the price rather than rely on volunteers or a low cost alternative. Which is why I asked the question.

[graeme]

Although it seems to be a question based on an assumption that there are no commercial providers capable of working with EMIT.

You're controlling the JK Neil! - why obfuscate rather than answer Paul's question .

Or are you saying that BOF have actively decided to drop the commercial SI provider and go with Emit, but haven't decided whether to use commercial-Emit or volunteer-Emit computing

[NeilC]

As part of the controlling team it's not my place to speak on behalf of the organisers. I know that due process has been followed and that commercial providers were asked to quote. I know who was chosen, and am happy with that choice, but there may be contractual or other reasons why that information has not yet been made public, so can only suggest that if anyone really needs to know, then they ask the co-ordinator.