https://orienteering.org/3rd-sprint-format-testing/
Some interesting discussions about the potential forking methods.
IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
15 posts
• Page 1 of 1
IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
Check out The Run In for all your orienteering podcast needs https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-ru ... refid=stpr
Team Maprunner https://www.maprunner.co.uk/
Routegadget 2 https://www.routegadget.co.uk/#
Team Maprunner https://www.maprunner.co.uk/
Routegadget 2 https://www.routegadget.co.uk/#
- JamesE
- white
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:21 pm
- Location: Southampton
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
Personally I think this format is a terrible idea, for the reasons Elena states:
“I think that in this type of competition, some runners can achieve better results than they would achieve in an individual race, because they could benefit (technically and physically) from having better runners in the same heat. And sometimes, better individual runners could lose because they have to do the whole work during the race but get beaten in the end. That’s maybe a negative part of this format. On the other hand, it is good way to open up the competition and give more athletes a chance to win.”
It brings an element of luck into the sport, of chance, and those that work hardest get beaten by those that don’t work as hard and get lucky. But if it is good for TV...
“I think that in this type of competition, some runners can achieve better results than they would achieve in an individual race, because they could benefit (technically and physically) from having better runners in the same heat. And sometimes, better individual runners could lose because they have to do the whole work during the race but get beaten in the end. That’s maybe a negative part of this format. On the other hand, it is good way to open up the competition and give more athletes a chance to win.”
It brings an element of luck into the sport, of chance, and those that work hardest get beaten by those that don’t work as hard and get lucky. But if it is good for TV...
- housewife
- green
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:28 pm
- Location: probably at work
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
Presumably there would be some tactical running elements introduced, as in any middle distance race: if you know there are people in your heat with a strong finishing kick, do you go harder earlier, perhaps in conjunction with someone else, in an attempt to drop them? Whether this still retains the essence of orienteering is debatable.
For earlier rounds the beneficial "heat" effect could perhaps by reduced by having just 2 people in each heat; retain phi/butterfly loops; and start heats at say 2-3 minute intervals. But then even more dependent on who you get drawn against, and may need a seeded draw. For the semis / final I can see why they want a single race.
With just a 6-8 minute winning time is there a greater "chance" element introduced from the general public - or will it be "pedestrian-free" as well as traffic-free?
For earlier rounds the beneficial "heat" effect could perhaps by reduced by having just 2 people in each heat; retain phi/butterfly loops; and start heats at say 2-3 minute intervals. But then even more dependent on who you get drawn against, and may need a seeded draw. For the semis / final I can see why they want a single race.
With just a 6-8 minute winning time is there a greater "chance" element introduced from the general public - or will it be "pedestrian-free" as well as traffic-free?
- Snail
- diehard
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:37 pm
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
It certainly shifts the balance towards tactics, and there will also be an element of luck, but I think it has some potential. I'm not saying I agree with it being in the World Champs, I would have liked to have seen it trialled more, but that is not going to change now.
I don't think it is bad that different skills could be needed to win, as Elena seems to suggest. The best orienteer doesn't necessarily win in any race, nor the hardest working, and I still think you need orienteering skills to win.
With regard to the forking method, I actually think that runners choice has the most potential. As a disclaimer, I haven't actually run an event with this forking. The way I see it though, it shifts some of the 'luck' of the forking onto the runner. I see quickly selecting the quickest course as an extension of orienteering skill, somewhat akin to quickly selecting the best route on a score event. I don't think it is that difficult to explain, or at least is no more difficult than forking in a relay.
I don't think it is bad that different skills could be needed to win, as Elena seems to suggest. The best orienteer doesn't necessarily win in any race, nor the hardest working, and I still think you need orienteering skills to win.
With regard to the forking method, I actually think that runners choice has the most potential. As a disclaimer, I haven't actually run an event with this forking. The way I see it though, it shifts some of the 'luck' of the forking onto the runner. I see quickly selecting the quickest course as an extension of orienteering skill, somewhat akin to quickly selecting the best route on a score event. I don't think it is that difficult to explain, or at least is no more difficult than forking in a relay.
- Kris
- off string
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 9:39 pm
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
housewife wrote:But if it is good for TV...
I guess TV is the motivation but I'm not sure KO Sprints are necessarily the best format. For me, good television needs both visual interest and a story, with the story being the most important.
I've been following the video footage of the trials at MOC camp etc. and whilst its interesting to see the whole race https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaYbPQ_iZDg, I reckon it will be very difficult to present the story of the race live. This example does have some drama, but the KO sprint format lends itself to subtle tactical and navigational challenges which will be difficult to capture.
Commentators struggle to follow conventional forest and sprint relays even when the story unfolds slowly so I doubt they will be able to keep up with what's happening in head to head sprints.
I think the choice of format for TV should be a balance between what generates the best story (typically navigation errors and route choices) and what's easy to capture visually (open/urban/compact).
Longer formats perhaps offers more chance of generating an interesting story and edited highlights are better for visual interest and story telling.
There are plenty sports which show athletes running around streets so orienteering needs to focus on what makes it different.
To oblivion and beyond....
-
buzz - addict
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:45 pm
- Location: Sheffield
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
I’ve always thought edited highlights of orienteering, properly done, has great potential for TV. You can splice together map extracts, GPS tracking, actual footage, pre run headcams and potential additional analysis (like route choice X is 100m shorter than Y) into something quite compelling - for geeks at least.
Given enough time in editing you can make it sufficiently interesting without it being ao confusing that people tune out. Whereas live coverage will always be either boringly long or too bamboozling?
Given enough time in editing you can make it sufficiently interesting without it being ao confusing that people tune out. Whereas live coverage will always be either boringly long or too bamboozling?
- Arnold
- diehard
- Posts: 737
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:24 am
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
buzz wrote:Commentators struggle to follow conventional forest and sprint relays even when the story unfolds slowly so I doubt they will be able to keep up with what's happening in head to head sprints.
The current commentators used by the IOF, perhaps. But they are absolutely terrible.
-
mharky - team nopesport
- Posts: 4541
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:39 pm
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
housewife wrote:And sometimes, better individual runners could lose because they have to do the whole work during the race but get beaten in the end. That’s maybe a negative part of this format.
I suppose it would spoil it a bit for TV, but to avoid someone following much of the way then sprinting home for a win, one or more of the rounds could be scored like a cycling points race, if 2 qualifiers, 2 point scored for every common control you arrived in the lead, 1 for 2nd then an bundle of points scored for finishing first. E.g if 8 common controls, maybe 8 points for finishing first, adjusted so someone leading all the way but out-sprinted into 3rd place at the finish would still qualify.
- PG
- light green
- Posts: 226
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:52 pm
- Location: In the Peak
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
Or like an elimination race: last at one or more designated common controls is eliminated. Either could add some more interest on TV - but they are not really orienteering!PG wrote:housewife wrote:And sometimes, better individual runners could lose because they have to do the whole work during the race but get beaten in the end. That’s maybe a negative part of this format.
I suppose it would spoil it a bit for TV, but to avoid someone following much of the way then sprinting home for a win, one or more of the rounds could be scored like a cycling points race...
- Snail
- diehard
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:37 pm
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
mharky wrote:buzz wrote:Commentators struggle to follow conventional forest and sprint relays even when the story unfolds slowly so I doubt they will be able to keep up with what's happening in head to head sprints.
The current commentators used by the IOF, perhaps. But they are absolutely terrible.
Yeh its not been great. I guess partly due to lack of experience but partly due to poor information or at least analysis of the information that's available.
I recall writing a spec for a commentary system after doing the commentary at the 95 World Champs - the idea was to analyse live splits, highlight changes and pre-warn key events to help the commentators build a story. I don't know how much analysis if any is automated these days, but perhaps the amount of data available actually makes it harder for commentators to pick up the important bits.
To oblivion and beyond....
-
buzz - addict
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:45 pm
- Location: Sheffield
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
PG wrote:I suppose it would spoil it a bit for TV, but to avoid someone following much of the way then sprinting home for a win, one or more of the rounds could be scored like a cycling points race.
Like the idea - not sure it necessarily spoils it for TV if the commentators can see the points scored.
To oblivion and beyond....
-
buzz - addict
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:45 pm
- Location: Sheffield
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
buzz wrote:mharky wrote:buzz wrote:Commentators struggle to follow conventional forest and sprint relays even when the story unfolds slowly so I doubt they will be able to keep up with what's happening in head to head sprints.
The current commentators used by the IOF, perhaps. But they are absolutely terrible.
Yeh its not been great. I guess partly due to lack of experience but partly due to poor information or at least analysis of the information that's available.
I recall writing a spec for a commentary system after doing the commentary at the 95 World Champs - the idea was to analyse live splits, highlight changes and pre-warn key events to help the commentators build a story. I don't know how much analysis if any is automated these days, but perhaps the amount of data available actually makes it harder for commentators to pick up the important bits.
Do the commentators have access to the competition maps (and time to study them to pick out key legs, route choices, etc)? If so they could provide a more interesting discussion, though I guess it would have to be broadcast after the event had finished to ensure fairness.
- roadrunner
- addict
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:30 pm
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
Sport commentary is generally more effective with an off-the-camera analyst or two to feed the commentators with interesting facts and the narrative away from what the producer is currently showing.
There shouldn't be any fairness issues with talking through the course in detail once the athletes have gone into quarantine.
There shouldn't be any fairness issues with talking through the course in detail once the athletes have gone into quarantine.
British Orienteering Director | Opinions expressed on here are entirely my own, and do not represent the views of British Orienteering.
"If only you were younger and better..."
"If only you were younger and better..."
-
Scott - god
- Posts: 2384
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:43 am
- Location: in the queue for the ice-cream van
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
roadrunner wrote:Do the commentators have access to the competition maps (and time to study them to pick out key legs, route choices, etc)? If so they could provide a more interesting discussion, though I guess it would have to be broadcast after the event had finished to ensure fairness.
As a member of the media at WOC 2017 we were given copies of the map with courses on when quarantine closed, so about an hour or so before the event started - for example me and Dad had time to wander out to the far end of the Sprint Relay area and find some spots for spectating and photos, and then wander back to watch the start.
TV media may well get copies beforehand, but I don't know about that.
Check out The Run In for all your orienteering podcast needs https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-ru ... refid=stpr
Team Maprunner https://www.maprunner.co.uk/
Routegadget 2 https://www.routegadget.co.uk/#
Team Maprunner https://www.maprunner.co.uk/
Routegadget 2 https://www.routegadget.co.uk/#
- JamesE
- white
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:21 pm
- Location: Southampton
Re: IOF news article on new WOC head-to-head Sprint format
It's not hard; the IOF commentators are just bad.
When commentating for a purely TV audience, your primary focus is always what is shown on screen. When there is a lull, then you may pad things out with random chat (summary of results up to this point, previous events, expectations of results, Q&A with 'expert' about certain aspects of orienteering). But most of the time is narrating what viewers can see and contextualising it.
All the hard work is done by the producer. They are the one who has to decide where the action is happening. They may have up to 5 filming locations, each with multiple cameras. They have to decide if anything important is happening at any of those locations, and if nothing is happening, they need to fill air-time with useful graphics like intermediate results, GPS, replays, or even adverts.
The shorter the race the harder it is for the producer, in the sprint there is someone starting every minute, and towards the end any one of perhaps 10-15 people could be fighting for a medal. So very quick decisions have to be made about what is the most important thing to show. Kyburz starting is more important than a lot of people finishing, for example.
That is all beside the point, it's not the editing that is the issue, it's the terrible commentating, the lack of knowledge of the athletes, not being able to identify even the most famous athletes, not even being able to identify team kits, the inability to keep track of the race situation, not being able to really give any insight into elite level racing. Just awful.
When commentating for a purely TV audience, your primary focus is always what is shown on screen. When there is a lull, then you may pad things out with random chat (summary of results up to this point, previous events, expectations of results, Q&A with 'expert' about certain aspects of orienteering). But most of the time is narrating what viewers can see and contextualising it.
All the hard work is done by the producer. They are the one who has to decide where the action is happening. They may have up to 5 filming locations, each with multiple cameras. They have to decide if anything important is happening at any of those locations, and if nothing is happening, they need to fill air-time with useful graphics like intermediate results, GPS, replays, or even adverts.
The shorter the race the harder it is for the producer, in the sprint there is someone starting every minute, and towards the end any one of perhaps 10-15 people could be fighting for a medal. So very quick decisions have to be made about what is the most important thing to show. Kyburz starting is more important than a lot of people finishing, for example.
That is all beside the point, it's not the editing that is the issue, it's the terrible commentating, the lack of knowledge of the athletes, not being able to identify even the most famous athletes, not even being able to identify team kits, the inability to keep track of the race situation, not being able to really give any insight into elite level racing. Just awful.
-
mharky - team nopesport
- Posts: 4541
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:39 pm
15 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 193 guests