Southern Champs/Interland?

[IanD]

I should apologise for being a bit terse in my earlier post.

Results processing has taken longer than expected, for various reasons including a faulty computer (and it wasn't clapped-out kit, it was new last year). I'm not pestering the results person for details, but I'm sure that that he is even more anxious than you are to see the results done and posted, so that he can get on with the rest of his life.

I do take the point that we could have done better with links. We are used to having a webmistress working from home and able to post links as soon as data is uploaded. Our new webmaster goes out to work and can only tinker with the website on some evenings. We need to adapt our procedures to suit. But posting links in advance brings it's own problems; remember last year's European Championships where competitors were able to study their courses on RouteGadget before they ran!

In a way I pleased that there is a fuss about slow results, because if that's what people are complaining about, the more important things were probably OK.

Ian (chair MVOC)

[buzz]

Putting up results with known errors would have resulted in a barrage of e-mails to
the organiser and then a barrage of critisism as to why the correct results weren't
posted in the first place.

Well done for posting provisional results despite your comment. I think if you say the results are still being checked and ask people not to email errors then you should be OK. Note the Scottish 6 day have changed their policy on this so we should see prompt provisional results in future and I hope other major events can follow suit.

[MIE]

Putting up results with known errors would have resulted in a barrage of e-mails to
the organiser and then a barrage of critisism as to why the correct results weren't
posted in the first place.

Well done for posting provisional results despite your comment. I think if you say the results are still being checked and ask people not to email errors then you should be OK. Note the Scottish 6 day have changed their policy on this so we should see prompt provisional results in future and I hope other major events can follow suit.

That post of the results was one with the more glaring errors and omissions already removed. The one currently about to go up is a bit more final but still subject
to amendments if the relevant person(s) get informed.

The RG2 link for Sunday is http://www.mvoc.routegadget.co.uk/rg2/#37

Enjoy

[Happy]

I see results have now been classified as final but don't understand how my son who finished 3rd is now down as first with English Interland children removed from the results?

[MIE]

I see results have now been classified as final but don't understand how my son who finished 3rd is now down as first with English Interland children removed from the results?

If you look at the "Course" results instead of the class results you will see who
of the Interland competitors were the "Southerners" ahead of him.
It is/was necessary to create a separate "classes" for the Interland runners to enable
the results to be extracted for that competition whilst the Southern Championships were still running.

[RobL]

Unfortunately I was unwell over the weekend and unable to make the event. Was the Saturday a 'Southern Champs' event and if so, are there results somewhere to show who are the short distance Southern Champs? I can only find a list of 7 anonymous courses??

Thanks

Rob.

[IanD]

Was the Saturday a 'Southern Champs' event and if so, are there results somewhere to show who are the short distance Southern Champs? I can only find a list of 7 anonymous courses??

No, the Southern (& Midland & Northern so far as I know) Championships are still for classic (long) distance only. Perhaps it is time to invent Sprint and Middle-Distance Southern Championships? If this did happen, I imagine the Sprint would comply with BOF guidelines and be park/uni campus rather than forest.

Saturday's event was conceived as a fun warm-up for the main event on Sunday, although with the UK O League having a policy of trying to find two events per weekend, it became a UKOL event too.

[RobL]

Hi Ian

Thanks for this. We have a lot of new families in the club and there was a belief amongst a number of them that they had entered into a 'Southern Championships Weekend'. I must admit I had also not understood that the Saturday was just for fun.

On the matter of the medals, it does seem to be a missed opportunity to not acknowledge the performance of a child who has come second or third in the Southern Championships. It's hard to imagine any other sport that would allow an 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12 year old to go into school on a Monday morning excited about the sport and their success with absolutely nothing to show for it. Medals do help market our sport, especially in the age of facebook et al.

Rob.

[IanD]

Well once Saturday became a UK O League event, it was more than "just for fun" for some. Although as you will probably know, BOF don't allow the younger juniors into the UK O League - something to do with it being wrong to put too much pressure on them, I believe.

I agree in general with your comment about medals for juniors, but as Saturday planner I paid no attention whatsoever to Sunday's event and won't comment on it.

[Homer]

Great to see results published, whether 'provisional' or 'final'. I note these are now described as 'final'.

However, I can't see any mention of the control which was missing for early (Interland) competitors. I wasn't affected myself but understand it was a control late on course 7 (W18/20). I heard a rumour that the Interland results were determined by looking at times at the control before the missing one.
The final results (and splits) show the total times, with no adjustment for the missing control. I think some explanation of what has happened would be appreciated, particularly by those directly affected.

[IanD]

I think some explanation of what has happened would be appreciated, particularly by those directly affected.

The control was stolen. Someone clearly wanted to inflict the maximum possible damage on the competition, going out of their way to pick a control which was not readily visible from a path (presumably less chance of the thief begin spotted) and either removing it or hiding it effectively (rather than throwing it up a tree as per normal vandalism).

As for the effect on the results, I know little, but I have seen an email from England captain John Rye of which this is an extract

Be aware that the published individual results on the MVOC webpage treat the 3 classes affected by the missing control (156) in the way dictated by BOF rules. I will be producing an 'Interland' set of individual results in due course which reflects the agreement the team leaders made and informs the team scores.

[Tim]

In the olden days the winner of the class was the regional champion regardless of where they resided. Do you now need to be a southerner to be Southern Champion (that does have some logic)? If so is there a list of Southern Champions and information on obtaining silverware (if there is any)?

Tim

[MIE]

Great to see results published, whether 'provisional' or 'final'. I note these are now described as 'final'.

However, I can't see any mention of the control which was missing for early (Interland) competitors. I wasn't affected myself but understand it was a control late on course 7 (W18/20). I heard a rumour that the Interland results were determined by looking at times at the control before the missing one.
The final results (and splits) show the total times, with no adjustment for the missing control. I think some explanation of what has happened would be appreciated, particularly by those directly affected.

The rules relating to BO Level A events are quite specific in that they state

31.3 At level A events the results must be based on competitors’ times for the whole course, no changes are permitted to these times on the basis of split times.If 31.2 applies then the course or class must be voided. At level B, C or D events, results adjustments are permitted (eg removing leg times).

The Rules relating to the Interland competition are separate and the "problem" relating to the Interland competitors was handled by the Interland Team Managers.

AFAIK there was no complaint made, officially, on the day. Those "Southerners" in the classes affected by the stolen control who could have been winners were, I think, at the prize-giving and had the opportunity to make an official complaint.
There is an extensive set of "guidelines" (or whatever) in Appendix A to the rules, Sections 8.10 and 8.11 (http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/i ... a_2014.pdf ) including a section (8.11.3) relating to "top runners"

Although the results are final, as of yet, the officials reports have not be posted, and anything I have put above can not, and should not, be construed as part of their reports

[MIE]

In the olden days the winner of the class was the regional champion regardless of where they resided. Do you now need to be a southerner to be Southern Champion (that does have some logic)? If so is there a list of Southern Champions and information on obtaining silverware (if there is any)?

Tim

I believe that the designated Trophy Officer will be producing a list of Winners and
the Trophies (if they exist) and once complete it will appear.

(Think volunteers with full time jobs and families, please).

Yes, you are correct, that around the time Noah was building the ark you could win
the Southern (or Northern, or Midland) Championship Trophies regardless of where you
lived. Sometime after the flood all this changed and you had to be a member in one of the constituent regions to take the Trophies home. Anyone can still have the quedos of winning a Level A event . I believe Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have different rules (relating to nationality as well a residence).

[Arnold]

I noticed in the W21E results that Zoe and Lucy took 5 and 8 minutes for a leg near the end that everyone else did in 1 minute. Is that because of the stolen control?

It is a shame that a common sense solution of either removing that leg (which was anyway short) or else giving them an "average" split time is not allowed. Yes, they could protest and get it voided, but it's not very nice is it.

(Unless of course they made actual 4 and 7 minute mistakes there!!)