Time to end Chasing Starts?

[nooomember]

I know some people may like the idea of Chasing Starts, and all the 'excitement'; but following todays Shuoc Sheffield event, surely it cannot be the idea for everyone to just put their maps away and follow/catch the person in front. Surely the main part of orienteering is the navigational challenge, and not just a fun run which this was for many. Part 1 with 'normal' starts is fair enough, everyone is 'equal', and times reflect the competitors actual effort and achievement; but when a competitor then starts in a chasing start several minutes behind their leader, then just follows, cathces and passes other competitors without navigating, surely this cannot be right. I know, the answer may be dont do events with chasing starts and let those that want to do so, but this surely isnt in the spirit of orienteering?

Another note regarding the Shuoc Sheffield event, where a control went missing - maybe it isn't morally acceptable to place controls on gravestones? (control 40).

[roadrunner]

If you pass everyone and end up in the lead you'd better start navigating

Following isn't that good a strategy anyway, how do you know the person in front is going the right way?

[Gnitworp]

Caddihoe ?????

JOK ??????? Sprint

Give us a break

[awk]

I know some people may like the idea of Chasing Starts....but this surely isnt in the spirit of orienteering?

Well you obviously weren't in the same race as me today. Of course it was in the spirit of orienteering: rather more than some races, with head to head racing and mistakes of just a few seconds making all the difference. Certainly rammed home their importance to me.

As you say, the answer is if you don't like them, don't do them. There are few enough after all.

[greywolf]

Time to end Chasing Starts?

No, it's time to stop whining and start running faster

[denbydale]

but when a competitor then starts in a chasing start several minutes behind their leader, then just follows, .

If you'd used that tactic a the Fat Rascals chasing start you'd have been stuffed - they gaffled the chase!

[SeanC]

At today's real orienteering event at Hindhead i was helped in some measure by other competitors on 13 out of 19 controls. So for real real orienteering we need events with competitors spaced at 5-10 minute intervals, seeded by previous performance to reduce overtaking. The slower competitors need to go out last and since they'll be advantaged by elephant tracks, the numbers need to be limited to say 10 per course. Oh and no sharing of controls between courses. Also to avoid the advantage of local knowledge we need to only use areas once and ideally launch a denial of service attack on route gadget.

But still, good navigators will be beaten by faster runners, so we need to ban running. Perhaps we could have three legged race courses with competitors only allowed to compete tied at the right leg to non-orienteering wives/husbands/partners.

Being slightly serious for a second could we have more chasing start courses please? It's possible to use the ranking list maybe to generate a chasing start list without a qualifier. Maybe it could be an extra course at a standard regional.. maybe dispense with one or two of the short/slightly short X colour course and do a chasing course instead. Traditionalists are then happy doing their "real orienteering" and those that want an exciting race and more chance to talk to people afterwards are also happy.

[graeme]

A short list of rubbish navigators who followed their way to victory

[Gnitworp]

Being slightly serious for a second could we have more chasing start courses please? It's possible to use the ranking list maybe to generate a chasing start list without a qualifier. Maybe it could be an extra course at a standard regional.. maybe dispense with one or two of the short/slightly short X colour course and do a chasing course instead. Traditionalists are then happy doing their "real orienteering" and those that want an exciting race and more chance to talk to people afterwards are also happy.

Sean, something like this was done at the OK Nuts Trophy 1978. Here are Controller Chris Morris's comments on the 'experiment':

'A new seeding system, to be discussed by BOF Competitions Committee, was used experimentally on the Trophy course: the fastest runners all start at the head of the field, with the largest start intervals, thus promoting the fairest possible race conditions. This experiment received mainly favourable comment and we judge it enough of a success to try using it in a Championship'.

In the absence of a ranking list of more than the top few dozen in the country, seeding was based on personal opinion of form. Iain Rochford won, and was probably top seed. I started 12th and finished 12th and saw no one. As far as I know the 'experiment' was never repeated. Bizarrely it's the exact reverse of current practice in world class events.

Ideally, with perfect seeding and everyone running exactly to paper form, the field spacing should elegantly expand, but of course the earliest starters have the distinct disadvantage, which they hardly deserve, of no beaten trails and no one to show them where the controls are, and of course everyone's starting from 'scratch', not with the time advantage they get in a 'chase'.