Many Selections

[Gross]

Not if you're Stan in Japan (apparently picked for WOC relay only and wasn't allowed to run because Palmer mispunched).

Stan flew over only for the relay at Fuji and not the WC in Oz as at that time the GB target was the relay.

Stan ran.... Palmer mispunched but we put a protest in until Stan had gone out... he didn't know about the DQ until he'd finished.

[fleetfoot]

Not if you're Stan in Japan (apparently picked for WOC relay only and wasn't allowed to run because Palmer mispunched).

I think you need to check that one Buzz! Stan's last WOC was 2001 (and that was the last time Steve Palmer appeared in the relay team too) but WOC in Japan wasn't until 2005. Also Stan was never only picked for a WOC Relay.

[buzz]

Not if you're Stan in Japan (apparently picked for WOC relay only and wasn't allowed to run because Palmer mispunched).

I think you need to check that one Buzz! Stan's last WOC was 2001 (and that was the last time Steve Palmer appeared in the relay team too) but WOC in Japan wasn't until 2005. Also Stan was never only picked for a WOC Relay.

Passing on an anecdote I heard yesterday - must have misheard! Anyway I like they way it rhymes - what about a bit of artistic license!

[buzz]

Stan ran....

That works for me as well

So how about...

Stan ran in Japan, but Palmer caused a Drama

Now if only here was a Llama involved like the time in.....

[Gross]

Stan ran in Japan, but Palmer caused a Drama.

Most of the Drama was Stanley cursing when he crossed the line in 3rd ? only to be told by Dr P that he'd DQ'd

[andypat]

Surely that's up to BOF to decide how much they need from whatever levy they choose to enforce and how to spend it?

You make it sound like a dictatorship, Andy ! :

[/quote]

Yeah sorry Spookster - that wasn't my intention...at least not this time . My focus was really on the implication that clubs were overburdened with money. I'm pretty sure ours isn't - we do fairly well getting external funding for some of our projects, but have plenty of others on hold due to lack of funds. On a personal level I'm very much in favour of supporting/funding elite development.

[graeme]

I think if people focussed on a specific race then they would be likely to achieve a higher position in that race

I would think so too. But when I tried to disentangle it, by looking e.g. at whether people who run two WOC races do better than those who run one, or if people do better in the years when they run one race than when they run two, I found there's no evidence for this idea.

Even if it were true, then what? The "likely" improvement is certainly smaller than the "getting lucky" factor. So for an individual athlete, taking two chances to "get lucky" are better than one. For the overall team score, again its better to have a better runner run twice, than to pick a poorer athlete.

Probably the biggest factor is individual preference. Denying someone the chance to do a race they want, or demanding someone run when the don't want to, is likely to be more damaging in the long run than insisting on a one-size-fits-all policy.

[gg]

At WOC level, if you want 3 spots in each forest distance, you need the results from previous 2 WOCs to earn them (unless you are home nation).
Therefore, you could argue that you want your best runners doing as much as possible to earn places for the other runners!

[graeme]

I think if people focussed on a specific race then they would be likely to achieve a higher position in that race

I would think so too. But when I tried to disentangle it, by looking e.g. at whether people who run two WOC races do better than those who run one, or if people do better in the years when they run one race than when they run two, I found there's no evidence for this idea.
Even if it were true, then what? The "likely" improvement is certainly smaller than the "getting lucky" factor. So for an individual athlete, taking two chances to "get lucky" are better than one. For the overall team score, again its better to have a better runner run twice, than to pick a poorer athlete.
Probably the biggest factor is individual preference. Denying someone the chance to do a race they want, or demanding someone run when the don't want to, is likely to be more damaging in the long run than insisting on a one-size-fits-all policy.
In the old-style WOCs, top athletes have tended to skip one discipline and race 3/4. I wouldn't discount the possibility that they know what they're doing.

[Kitch]

I don't doubt your analysis Graeme ( I wouldn't dare )
The problem is controlling the variables
if the same person runs 2 races one year and one the next maybe that's because they are not on such good form, counterbalanced by putting all their effort in to one race.... etc.

n=1

[graeme]

I think if people focussed on a specific race then they would be likely to achieve a higher position in that race
The problem is controlling the variables

Absolutely true. But the sample is a lot better than n=1, and we can be fairly confident the effect is smaller than the random fluctuations. For our better runners, these are about +-10 places, or several minutes.

So, even if you are right (and to repeat, I think you are, though there's no evidence), its still the right strategy for the athlete* and for the team** to pick the best runners for multiple races.

Assuming-
*athlete - trying to get the highest position in a single race.
** team - trying to maximise GBR points to get 3 WOC slots.

[housewife]

In the case of JWOC, do the athletes at their first JWOC really know what their best disciplines are? The planning styles differ a lot internationally compared to in GB, and we run so few middle races and big relays here, I think juniors should run whatever they want at JWOC, preferably everything, in order to gain as much experience as possible.

As for WOC, decisions at this level really do depend on the athlete. Can they put the time in to preparing properly for forest and sprint is a big question. Are they comfortable running the relay, esp in the legs that may be available. I decided to run all disciplines in WOC 2012 and it was 100% the right choice for that year. Athletes should always have the first say in the races they are to run in both woc and jwoc.

[SeanC]

My focus was really on the implication that clubs were overburdened with money.

I never said that Andy, what I said was that many have more reserves than they need, many, not all. I know that some clubs run a tight ship financially. And in many cases excess reserves are accidental, the result of successful events or lack of agreement or opportunity to spend the money.

£10,000 reserves are not uncommon for UK clubs. 84 clubs - that's north of 3/4 of a million. Because of our clubs structure with lots of small clubs, it's not a terribly efficient use of this money. With a bit of imagination some of this money could be freed up for the "common good". For example I know that individual clubs need reserves in case a big event get cancelled and there's a big loss. But a big loss is a relatively uncommon event. Lets assume each club is holding £5000 for such an eventuality. Instead a single insurance fund holding, say £20000 could cover this risk for all clubs, releasing £400,000 for the "common good"**, with each club paying say £100 per year for the insurance.

As a side effect of this, it would also be easier for a new club to start as they would be less exposed to financial risk.

I realise these figures are made up and would need some proper analysis to get the right figures, but you get the idea. I'm sure there are also other ways of accessing this money that cleverer people than me can work out**. Also I realise there are 400,000 definitions of the "common good".

** A lot of orienteers seem to be accountants.

[greywolf]

At WOC level, if you want 3 spots in each forest distance, you need the results from previous 2 WOCs to earn them (unless you are home nation).
Therefore, you could argue that you want your best runners doing as much as possible to earn places for the other runners!

But the points distribution is skewed - so for example having your best runner run both M & L and finish 11th & 3rd scores fewer points for the team than if they rest up, get 2nd in the long and someone else is 30th in the middle...

[housewife]

But it is not just a physical sport. There are so many more factors in orienteering. Take last year's woc relay. I had run the middle the day before. This meant that I got a lot of the way to number 1 running hard cause it was next to the 2nd last control from the previous day, and mid way through the course there was a tricky leg that was similar to the day before. Even if the courses were totally different, the athlete may feel lots more confident, and therefore less stressed, having races in the terrain the day before. You might be hyper-nervous, and running races earlier in the week can take the nerves off races later in the week you may be aiming for.Adrenaline takes care of the running, especially when you are used to hard training day in day out.

Everyone athlete is different. Good selectors will know the athletes well enough to make the right selections for each athlete.