Live in the South of England? Still suffering O withdrawal symptoms? Then help is at hand!
There are a few spaces still available at TVOC's regional event at Bradenham on Sunday 18th April - see https://tvoc.org.uk/events/bradenham-3/. It's a great area, as used for the British Middles 2015 and BUCS 2018.
Apologies for the blatant bit of event promotion, but we don't want people to miss out.
In need of an O fix?
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
24 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
In need of an O fix?
Last edited by Alun on Sat Apr 10, 2021 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Alun
- off string
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:15 pm
Re: In need of an O fix?
Saxons also has an event at Blean Wood, near Faversham on 18th April - a lovely area, details here -
https://www.saxons-oc.org/
https://www.saxons-oc.org/
-
DaveK - green
- Posts: 359
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 5:28 pm
- Location: The garden of England (too many gardens though and not enough forest).
Re: In need of an O fix?
A quick update on our event at Bradenham yesterday.
We had 550 pre-entries, and 521 actually took part on the day. We were really delighted with the number of entries - was it the biggest event of the year so far?
We had gorgeous weather, everyone was incredibly friendly and glad to be seeing old friends again, and the organisation went like clockwork - well, I thought so anyway!
Two things other clubs might want to consider for their larger events:
1. Although each entrant had a specified start time (self-selected when they entered), we used start times as a guide to control the flow of competitors to the Starts, rather than sticking rigidly to the times. When people arrived at the Starts we encouraged them to immediately join the queue for their start lane. By opening the Starts early, we never had any queues build up. As a result, we could easily slot in any late arrivals.
2. We restricted the event to BOF members. This ensured that by far the majority of attendees knew exactly what they were doing. Interestingly, a number of entrants chose to join (or rejoin) a club in order to come to the event.
Bradenham might have been the biggest event of the year so far, but we now want to beat it. Our next event is the Chiltern Challenge at Hambleden on 23rd May - details at https://tvoc.org.uk/events/chiltern-challenge-2021/. Hambleden is a superb area. Entries only opened last week, but we already have 500 entries. But there's plenty of space for more, so do enter!
We had 550 pre-entries, and 521 actually took part on the day. We were really delighted with the number of entries - was it the biggest event of the year so far?
We had gorgeous weather, everyone was incredibly friendly and glad to be seeing old friends again, and the organisation went like clockwork - well, I thought so anyway!
Two things other clubs might want to consider for their larger events:
1. Although each entrant had a specified start time (self-selected when they entered), we used start times as a guide to control the flow of competitors to the Starts, rather than sticking rigidly to the times. When people arrived at the Starts we encouraged them to immediately join the queue for their start lane. By opening the Starts early, we never had any queues build up. As a result, we could easily slot in any late arrivals.
2. We restricted the event to BOF members. This ensured that by far the majority of attendees knew exactly what they were doing. Interestingly, a number of entrants chose to join (or rejoin) a club in order to come to the event.
Bradenham might have been the biggest event of the year so far, but we now want to beat it. Our next event is the Chiltern Challenge at Hambleden on 23rd May - details at https://tvoc.org.uk/events/chiltern-challenge-2021/. Hambleden is a superb area. Entries only opened last week, but we already have 500 entries. But there's plenty of space for more, so do enter!
- Alun
- off string
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:15 pm
Re: In need of an O fix?
Excellent event yesterday.
Thanks to everyone involved in putting it on.
Thanks to everyone involved in putting it on.
- SJC
- diehard
- Posts: 625
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:45 am
Re: In need of an O fix?
SJC wrote:Excellent event yesterday.
Thanks to everyone involved in putting it on.
Seconded.
The start system with built in flexibility worked very well.
- mikey
- diehard
- Posts: 844
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 3:32 pm
- Location: here and there
Re: In need of an O fix?
Alun wrote:1. Although each entrant had a specified start time (self-selected when they entered), we used start times as a guide to control the flow of competitors to the Starts, rather than sticking rigidly to the times. When people arrived at the Starts we encouraged them to immediately join the queue for their start lane. By opening the Starts early, we never had any queues build up. As a result, we could easily slot in any late arrivals.
So effectively you were operating a start block system. Did you tell competitors in advance that was how it was going to work?
Events I have been to have operated a start block system, which does seem to work very well at limiting queues - but Ive entered an event at the weekend in which I booked the last remaining time slot of a full entry list - and this seems guarunteed to generate a large gathering at the start. There is a reasonably long walk to the start so I need to build in contingency to make sure I am there in time for my slot - I guess I will aim to arrive roughly 10-15 minutes before my alloted time, and most other runners will be be doing likewise. With 2 starters per minute that means a gathering of 30 is built into the system.
To keep safe, my plan is to get to the start - note the time of the start clock and then move away from the area till just before my callup. However, this would not be an option if we all have to form a queue - or even worse multiple parallel quesues for each of the course.
- pete.owens
- diehard
- Posts: 752
- Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:25 am
Re: In need of an O fix?
pete.owens wrote:Alun wrote:1. Although each entrant had a specified start time (self-selected when they entered), we used start times as a guide to control the flow of competitors to the Starts, rather than sticking rigidly to the times. When people arrived at the Starts we encouraged them to immediately join the queue for their start lane. By opening the Starts early, we never had any queues build up. As a result, we could easily slot in any late arrivals.
So effectively you were operating a start block system. Did you tell competitors in advance that was how it was going to work?
Events I have been to have operated a start block system, which does seem to work very well at limiting queues - but Ive entered an event at the weekend in which I booked the last remaining time slot of a full entry list - and this seems guarunteed to generate a large gathering at the start. There is a reasonably long walk to the start so I need to build in contingency to make sure I am there in time for my slot - I guess I will aim to arrive roughly 10-15 minutes before my alloted time, and most other runners will be be doing likewise. With 2 starters per minute that means a gathering of 30 is built into the system.
To keep safe, my plan is to get to the start - note the time of the start clock and then move away from the area till just before my callup. However, this would not be an option if we all have to form a queue - or even worse multiple parallel quesues for each of the course.
At TVOC competitors were told to arrive very much on time to their individually assigned start time but not worry if they were late - and hence you didn't need to build in any contingency time. Individual allocated times spread the load out, including some gaps/spares, so definitely not a block system.
- paul
- yellow
- Posts: 88
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:57 am
Re: In need of an O fix?
But that is exactly how a block system operates.
To allocate a specific start time of 12:07, but say it is OK to arrive a few minutes eary or late is exactly the same in practice as allocating a start block of 12:00-12:15. So long as there are spare slots so that people can be processed at a greater rate than they arrive then queues won't build up.
With fixed start times you elliminate the queue altogether. The competitor presents themselves at their allocated start time and goes. The problem is that while there is no queue there is a gathering of people arriving in good time for their specific slot.
What it appears that TVOC are doing is nominanally allocating start times while in practice operating a start block system. Presumably to bypass one itteration BOF rules that allowed a greater throughput of starters with a timed start system.
To allocate a specific start time of 12:07, but say it is OK to arrive a few minutes eary or late is exactly the same in practice as allocating a start block of 12:00-12:15. So long as there are spare slots so that people can be processed at a greater rate than they arrive then queues won't build up.
With fixed start times you elliminate the queue altogether. The competitor presents themselves at their allocated start time and goes. The problem is that while there is no queue there is a gathering of people arriving in good time for their specific slot.
What it appears that TVOC are doing is nominanally allocating start times while in practice operating a start block system. Presumably to bypass one itteration BOF rules that allowed a greater throughput of starters with a timed start system.
- pete.owens
- diehard
- Posts: 752
- Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:25 am
Re: In need of an O fix?
In practice there were 150 start blocks, not 10, with none of the potential problem of people bunching up at the start of a block having arrived "early". We were encouraged to join the modest queues to avoid milling around, and with one minute start blocks, we were arriving randomly and statistically more evenly.pete.owens wrote:What it appears that TVOC are doing is nominanally allocating start times while in practice operating a start block system. Presumably to bypass one itteration BOF rules that allowed a greater throughput of starters with a timed start system.
- maprun
- diehard
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:37 am
Re: In need of an O fix?
My apologies to those, like Pete Owens, who were not at Bradenham. I have clearly not described our approach very well. First some background.
With a block system, entrants in the block tend to arrive at the beginning of the block. With two start lanes, that will be 30 people, so probably 20 of them will have to wait to enter the start boxes. That might work in an open area, but it’s asking for trouble in a confined space, in a wooded area for example.
With set start times, and a rammed start list like we had at Bradenham, people would be forced to arrive at the Start early, to ensure they were not late (and thus waiting potentially a very long time for a free slot to go into). People might well arrive 10 minutes early, so 20 people milling around again. Set start times also require a start official calling out starters’ names. That’s an extra person making it even harder to comply with the rule of six; and shouting is known to spread aerosols, not ideal at present.
As Paul commented, our approach was to try to provide more flexibility. My use of the word 'queue' was perhaps a poor choice to describe it. As well as -1, -2 and -3 boxes, we effectively had -4 and -5 too. If these boxes were free, we encouraged people to enter the boxes as soon as they arrived at the start. We did find we had more than 5 people ‘queuing’ at times. But orienteers are sensible people, and they formed a well-spaced queue - just as the did at Tom’s later in the day.
Anyone who did not attend may wish to view the photos at https://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/news/5537 to see how well spaced the starters were.
All systems have their drawbacks. But we thought our approach worked well. Based on the straw poll of people who attended and have commented here, they did too.
We plan to use the same approach at the Chiltern Challenge https://tvoc.org.uk/events/chiltern-challenge-2021/, where we will have three starts each with two lanes. We would welcome Pete and others entering, so they can see the system in action.
With a block system, entrants in the block tend to arrive at the beginning of the block. With two start lanes, that will be 30 people, so probably 20 of them will have to wait to enter the start boxes. That might work in an open area, but it’s asking for trouble in a confined space, in a wooded area for example.
With set start times, and a rammed start list like we had at Bradenham, people would be forced to arrive at the Start early, to ensure they were not late (and thus waiting potentially a very long time for a free slot to go into). People might well arrive 10 minutes early, so 20 people milling around again. Set start times also require a start official calling out starters’ names. That’s an extra person making it even harder to comply with the rule of six; and shouting is known to spread aerosols, not ideal at present.
As Paul commented, our approach was to try to provide more flexibility. My use of the word 'queue' was perhaps a poor choice to describe it. As well as -1, -2 and -3 boxes, we effectively had -4 and -5 too. If these boxes were free, we encouraged people to enter the boxes as soon as they arrived at the start. We did find we had more than 5 people ‘queuing’ at times. But orienteers are sensible people, and they formed a well-spaced queue - just as the did at Tom’s later in the day.
We had two starts, each with three lanes - the middle lane was blank, only the two outer lanes were used, so all those waiting to start were well spaced.multiple parallel queues
Anyone who did not attend may wish to view the photos at https://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/news/5537 to see how well spaced the starters were.
Yes, of course we described it in final details.Did you tell competitors in advance that was how it was going to work?
All systems have their drawbacks. But we thought our approach worked well. Based on the straw poll of people who attended and have commented here, they did too.
We plan to use the same approach at the Chiltern Challenge https://tvoc.org.uk/events/chiltern-challenge-2021/, where we will have three starts each with two lanes. We would welcome Pete and others entering, so they can see the system in action.
- Alun
- off string
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:15 pm
Re: In need of an O fix?
Yes, it does sound like a sensible system - because what you are effectively doing in practice is operating a block system to avoid a large gathering of people making sure they arrive in plenty of time that comes with a timed start. So long as people know in advance that their time is for rough guidance rather than a specific slot there is absolutely no difference between telling someone to turn up at approximately 11:07 and join a queue or telling someone to turn up roughly between eleven & quater past and join a queue.
I have been to a few block start events and it works well. There isn't an issue of everyone arriving for the first minute of a block - some might aim to do that others might choose to aim for the middle of the block and since noone knows exactly how long it will take to get there they would naturally spread out even if they were all initially aiming to arrive for exactly the same minute.
What worries me is how a genuine timed start allocation system is going to work - since I have entered one this weekend - and any event I have been to with allocated times has always featured a large gathering near the start waiting to be called up.
I have been to a few block start events and it works well. There isn't an issue of everyone arriving for the first minute of a block - some might aim to do that others might choose to aim for the middle of the block and since noone knows exactly how long it will take to get there they would naturally spread out even if they were all initially aiming to arrive for exactly the same minute.
What worries me is how a genuine timed start allocation system is going to work - since I have entered one this weekend - and any event I have been to with allocated times has always featured a large gathering near the start waiting to be called up.
- pete.owens
- diehard
- Posts: 752
- Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:25 am
Re: In need of an O fix?
I cannot understand why the BOF guidance allows 2 starters/minute (on different courses) if there are allocated start times but only 1 starter/minute if allocated blocks are used. The important thing would seem to be to have the start ready to go a bit earlier than the first start time/block and get people away so there is minimum of queuing.
- MJG
- white
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:25 am
Re: In need of an O fix?
Since this is a kind of 'plug your events' thread, I thought it was worth mentioning that Saxons are going to hold their Chilham Castle + Kings Wood South East League event on Sunday 30th May.
A new area (at least the castle grounds and adjoining woodland) plus it uses the nice runnable and contoured northern section of Kings Wood.
https://www.saxons-oc.org/events/chilha ... 0-may-2021
The Chilham Castle event was one of the earlier cancelled events (was supposed to be 29th March 2020). Unfortunately we haven't got a date to reschedule the indoor event at Discovery Park ... maybe one day.
A new area (at least the castle grounds and adjoining woodland) plus it uses the nice runnable and contoured northern section of Kings Wood.
https://www.saxons-oc.org/events/chilha ... 0-may-2021
The Chilham Castle event was one of the earlier cancelled events (was supposed to be 29th March 2020). Unfortunately we haven't got a date to reschedule the indoor event at Discovery Park ... maybe one day.
Last edited by SeanC on Wed Apr 21, 2021 2:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- SeanC
- god
- Posts: 2251
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 6:46 pm
- Location: Kent
Re: In need of an O fix?
Latest guidelines:
For our (SLOW) event at Winterfold on May 9th the entries secretary does not have to allocate individual start times. We are loading the 15 minute blocks up to 80%. The plan is to do what TVOC did so successfully at the terrific Bradenham event on Sunday, asking runners to arrive at pre-start during their block and ready to run. We put timing for the car park - start journey in the event invitation
https://slow.org.uk/events/ok-nuts-2021 ... nvitation/
At Step 2 (from 12 April), a maximum of two starters per minute is permitted from each start location, regardless of whether start times or start windows are allocated.
For our (SLOW) event at Winterfold on May 9th the entries secretary does not have to allocate individual start times. We are loading the 15 minute blocks up to 80%. The plan is to do what TVOC did so successfully at the terrific Bradenham event on Sunday, asking runners to arrive at pre-start during their block and ready to run. We put timing for the car park - start journey in the event invitation
https://slow.org.uk/events/ok-nuts-2021 ... nvitation/
- afterthought
- green
- Posts: 324
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:40 pm
Re: In need of an O fix?
MJG wrote:I cannot understand why the BOF guidance allows 2 starters/minute (on different courses) if there are allocated start times but only 1 starter/minute if allocated blocks are used. The important thing would seem to be to have the start ready to go a bit earlier than the first start time/block and get people away so there is minimum of queuing.
You may have seen from the new Roadmap:
At Step 2 (from 12 April), a maximum of two starters per minute is permitted from each start location, regardless of whether start times or start windows are allocated.
I guess that the BO Office has been rather busy with preparations for the AGM so the revised Guidance to reflect that has not yet appeared. I expect it to be published in a few days.
David
BO Director
Chair
IOF Rules Commission
IOF Rules Commission
- david_rosen
- white
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:09 pm
24 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 16 guests