With today being international women's day, I was having a think about the course lengths used in m21e and w21e long races. With an expected winning time of 90-100 minutes for men and 70-80 for women it's clearly not equal, is there any historical reason for this and what would be stopping the winning times to be equal in future? Or even more extreme, why not make the courses the same length like in virtually all of athletics now?
As an m21 myself, training for a race where the elites win in 90-100 minutes means I have to put harder training in than my female counterparts for the same competition, for the additional and hardest 20 minutes at the end of my race. In times where I've been injured for a while, I would still prefer to race m21e when I come back, but would physically be incapable unless I were to walk some of it. If I was in w21e, it would have been more manageable.
This clear disparity isn't fair when comparing men to women looking at it from both sides, not rewarding the physically more capable women to the same extent as it does the men. I personally think having equal winning times would be the best and fairest options since orienteering races aren't a set distance like in athletics, has there been any talk of this in the past and what do others think?
International Women's day
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
20 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: International Women's day
You are not alone in your opinion. The IOF ran a consultation in 2016, and the comments to the following article at World Of O are thoughtful and informed.
http://news.worldofo.com/2016/04/13/how ... stance-be/
One difficulty would seem to be that it is feared participation might decline if courses were made longer.
In the 2019 rules winning times for men and women are equalised in all formats except long distance: for finals they are 90-100 men, 70-80 women.
It is the same for the British Champs and the three English Area Champs. Although planners probably do not plan the W21E course based on W21E runners, but rather use a ratio based on top W21E runners doing 0.82 the speed of the top M21E runners.
http://news.worldofo.com/2016/04/13/how ... stance-be/
One difficulty would seem to be that it is feared participation might decline if courses were made longer.
In the 2019 rules winning times for men and women are equalised in all formats except long distance: for finals they are 90-100 men, 70-80 women.
It is the same for the British Champs and the three English Area Champs. Although planners probably do not plan the W21E course based on W21E runners, but rather use a ratio based on top W21E runners doing 0.82 the speed of the top M21E runners.
- afterthought
- green
- Posts: 324
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:40 pm
Re: International Women's day
Haven’t the Swedes agreed to have the same (longer) winning times for women too?
I’ve never understood the reason, just like the 2 set / 3 set rule in tennis.
And doesn’t the discrepancy in winning times go through most age classes for Classic distance?
I’ve never understood the reason, just like the 2 set / 3 set rule in tennis.
And doesn’t the discrepancy in winning times go through most age classes for Classic distance?
- Arnold
- diehard
- Posts: 738
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:24 am
Re: International Women's day
A Swedish proposal to increase the W21E winning times was actually discussed and voted down at the 2016 IOF General Assembly - pages 10 to 11 of these minutes.
I have to say I've never really understood why the women's winning time should be shorter.
I have to say I've never really understood why the women's winning time should be shorter.
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: International Women's day
fwiw it's worth I think the winning times should be equalised, but this
Are you seriously suggesting that Tove & co slack off from training because they have an "easier" race? By the same "logic" you'd presumably argue that middle distance runners don't train as hard as 10k runners, who in turn are lazy compared to marathoners, who are a bunch of skivvers compared to the ultra mob....
is bollocks.Shrimpdog wrote:As an m21 myself, training for a race where the elites win in 90-100 minutes means I have to put harder training in than my female counterparts for the same competition, for the additional and hardest 20 minutes at the end
Are you seriously suggesting that Tove & co slack off from training because they have an "easier" race? By the same "logic" you'd presumably argue that middle distance runners don't train as hard as 10k runners, who in turn are lazy compared to marathoners, who are a bunch of skivvers compared to the ultra mob....
-
greywolf - addict
- Posts: 1416
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:45 pm
- Location: far far away
Re: International Women's day
The calling for women and men’s courses to be equal is just so ignorant - mainly as those that argue loudest for ‘equalisation’ are either men, or those athletes that it would suit most!
English athletics asked all women competitors at the end of the 2018 National XC if they wanted to run the same distance as the men. 2/3rds said no. English athletics acknowledged that although there was a small but voiceforous movement for equalisation, the views of those that actually chose to run the race should be respected. Scottish athletics were nowhere near as democratic and decided that the women should runn10k regardless of whether they wanted to, alienating a number of athletes.
75 mins is a great winning time for a race. Why change it? There is one reason why domestic W21e races should be lengthened, and that is at the behest of the women that compete in it. I would find it deeply, deeply offensive if the course was lengthened for any other reason!
P.S. laura Muir, what a skiver! Only runs for 4mins!
English athletics asked all women competitors at the end of the 2018 National XC if they wanted to run the same distance as the men. 2/3rds said no. English athletics acknowledged that although there was a small but voiceforous movement for equalisation, the views of those that actually chose to run the race should be respected. Scottish athletics were nowhere near as democratic and decided that the women should runn10k regardless of whether they wanted to, alienating a number of athletes.
75 mins is a great winning time for a race. Why change it? There is one reason why domestic W21e races should be lengthened, and that is at the behest of the women that compete in it. I would find it deeply, deeply offensive if the course was lengthened for any other reason!
P.S. laura Muir, what a skiver! Only runs for 4mins!
- housewife
- green
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:28 pm
- Location: probably at work
Re: International Women's day
housewife wrote:The calling for women and men’s courses to be equal is just so ignorant
But that's just a really poor choice of language.
housewife wrote:75 mins is a great winning time for a race. Why change it? There is one reason why domestic W21e races should be lengthened, and that is at the behest of the women that compete in it. I would find it deeply, deeply offensive if the course was lengthened for any other reason!
Where I agree (I think) with Housewife is with regard to the assumption that equalisation means lengthening the womens race. Thats not equality thats discriminatory. Absolutely why should it not mean reducing the length of the mens course?
Orienteering - its no walk in the park
- andypat
- god
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:58 pm
- Location: Houston, we have a problem.
Re: International Women's day
It’s not a poor choice of language. I have had this debate with the chief executive of Scottish athletics. So many women want to run 8k not 10k, but his attitude is that we must be pleased that he has changed our race, because we must have felt so patronised, without asking anyone, just assuming the cries of the handful of women that had complained reflects the whole field. Is being ignorant, not choosing to ask, just assume.
If you want to make women and men equal in Orienteering, there are easierplaces to start. Take a race like the JK sprint - how many times do we see the junior races finish, then the women’s, then the men’s, as though the men’s races is the one that is most important. And the prizegivings that always cumulate with the M21e class as opposed to the W21e class.
If you want to make women and men equal in Orienteering, there are easierplaces to start. Take a race like the JK sprint - how many times do we see the junior races finish, then the women’s, then the men’s, as though the men’s races is the one that is most important. And the prizegivings that always cumulate with the M21e class as opposed to the W21e class.
- housewife
- green
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:28 pm
- Location: probably at work
Re: International Women's day
andypat wrote:Where I agree (I think) with Housewife is with regard to the assumption that equalisation means lengthening the womens race. Thats not equality thats discriminatory. Absolutely why should it not mean reducing the length of the mens course?
The main reason "equalisation" is often talked about in terms of making the women's winning time made longer is simply that a number of top female athletes have said publicly that that's what they want, whereas there have not - as far as I'm aware - been many (any?) top male athletes saying that they want the men's winning time made shorter.
Of course, a number of top female athletes have also said that they oppose the winning time being made longer, and the Athletes' Commission survey that afterthought mentions above showed a fairly even split. If you haven't done so already, the comments on the WoO article that afterthought linked to are (mostly) worth a read - with the disclaimer that a lot of them are from men...
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: International Women's day
housewife wrote:And the prizegivings that always cumulate with the M21e class as opposed to the W21e class.
To be fair, the usual practice now seems to be to call the men and women from the same age class up to the podium at the same time, i.e. to call the M21E and W21E bronze medallists together, then then two silver medallists, then the two gold medallists. But it certainly doesn't always happen this way.
British Orienteering are planning a refresh of the organisers' handbook, which could be a good opportunity to set out some best practice guidance on equitable prizegivings.
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: International Women's day
housewife wrote:The calling for women and men’s courses to be equal is just so ignorant
housewife wrote:It’s not a poor choice of language.
Sorry but I think it is a poor choice of language. You are effectively calling people like Kathy Switzer ignorant. That might not be what you mean but its what I'd take from that. So if you had a point to make I stopped listening sorry. And I usually do listen to what you have to say.
Orienteering - its no walk in the park
- andypat
- god
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:58 pm
- Location: Houston, we have a problem.
Re: International Women's day
housewife wrote: So many women want to run 8k not 10k,
...and so many men want to run 12k like we have for the last 100 years and not 10k.
Haven’t the Swedes agreed to have the same (longer) winning times for women too? ...
A Swedish proposal to increase the W21E winning times was actually discussed and voted down at the 2016 IOF General Assembly
Yes, Sweden had a 90 minute winning time for their WOC trial in 2016. Then they set a near 90 minute W21E course in the Swedish WOC. And the Swedish athlete passed the Russian after the race should have finished.
Sorry but I think it is a poor choice of language
IMO "Ignorant" is quite a good word for people who ignore what most runners want.
I don't like the ageist approach that gives us vets shorter winning times than younger runners. But I'm not ignorant of the fact that others may reasonably disagree.
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4727
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: International Women's day
graeme wrote:IMO "Ignorant" is quite a good word for people who ignore what most runners want.
Although, of course, it depends how you define your group of runners, and also how you define "most".
The only real evidence we have to go on at the moment at is the AC survey, which found that among those female athletes who responded to the survey, a plurality but not a majority of those who had run at a WRE at any level favoured keeping the same winning time, but that a plurality but not a majority of those who had actually run at WOC favoured making the winning time longer.
I'd suggest it's not really clear what most runners want.
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: International Women's day
Scott wrote:but that a plurality but not a majority of those who had actually run at WOC favoured making the winning time longer.
i.e. most WOC runners who expressed an opinion wanted the same or shorter winning time.
I'd suggest it's not really clear what most runners want.graeme wrote:IMO "Ignorant" is quite a good word for people who ignore what most runners want.
It's a fair point. If only there was an appropriate word housewife could have used that meant lacking in knowledge
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4727
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: International Women's day
graeme wrote:Scott wrote:but that a plurality but not a majority of those who had actually run at WOC favoured making the winning time longer.
i.e. most WOC runners who expressed an opinion wanted the same or shorter winning time.
or most WOC runners either wanted courses to be longer or didn't care.
or most WOC runners who expressed an opinion were dissatisfied with the current course lengths.
As with a lot of opinion polling, it's easy to spin it to get the answer you prefer.
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
20 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests