World Champs 2022

[graeme]

All the available information is here:

https://www.woc2022.dk/wp-content/uploa ... 4-ver2.pdf

There is no announcement of the forking, or how it will be done. Equal but different courses are not permitted, they may do loops or nothing or "athletes choice".

It's not our problem yet, but I would be surprised if they go for "athletes choice". I did it once and its unbelievably complicated in terms of how many things can go wrong. Except in the final, any mistakes have to be fixed under serious time pressure. OTOH, I hope they do, so we can learn from the experience.

[Scott]

The map shows a high fence in the olive green beside the railway, actually it doesn't exist.
So once you fail to go under the river, and stamp though some fairly low bushes (mapped as uncrossable hedge)

The uncrossable fence exists, at least at the end where you enter the OOB. It is broken down and in a fairly overgrown state, but the fence posts are obvious, and you would certainly notice (/trip over) the wire mesh if you ran into it. The uncrossable bushes are over head high and look pretty impassable to me, but you don't need to cross them - as the map suggests, you can just run straight on from the end of the mapped path into the olive green.

I can't see that there's anything particularly wrong with (that bit of) the map, although I am surprised that the railway line wasn't omitted and the triangles extended to show the river as well as the (correct) footpath, as the Map Commission 'complex urban structures' guidance would suggest (example 3.2.4 A). That might have helped to make it clearer that you simply need to stay beside the river.

[Scott]

There is no announcement of the forking, or how it will be done. Equal but different courses are not permitted, they may do loops or nothing or "athletes choice".

I took these lines from bulletin 4 to mean that they won't be using athletes' choice:

For the elimination rounds, the courses may incorporate forking/splitting systems:
1) No forking
2) Forking with loops
There will be no announcement in advance which method is used in which round.

[Arnold]

Why is "athlete's choice" so hard?

Isn't it just:
- Athlete chooses map, official writes down A/B/C
- Athlete runs, official puts correct forking into computer
- Athlete downloads

?

[Arnold]

Whether it's truly fair / a good idea is another matter.
Although at least all the hours doing virtual-o last year will have been of some use.

[rf_fozzy]

although I am surprised that the railway line wasn't omitted and the triangles extended to show the river as well as the (correct) footpath, as the Map Commission 'complex urban structures' guidance would suggest (example 3.2.4 A). That might have helped to make it clearer that you simply need to stay beside the river.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/oriente ... 988750621/

[graeme]

Why is "athlete's choice" so hard?
Isn't it just:
- Athlete chooses map, official writes down A/B/C
- Athlete runs, official puts correct forking into computer
- Athlete downloads
?

The chooses map (small segment) is different from the competition map. So you need to match them correctly.
You can't have the same A B C chooses -> A B C competition for each athlete, otherwise they can communicate their choice (no, I don't understand it).
The main problem is the time pressure - if world champions can't distinguish a railway from a river under pressure. And TV: if you get it wrong, you can't just delay the starts.

[pete.owens]

Whether it's truly fair / a good idea is another matter.

Well it is certainly fair.

All you are presenting is a route choice - a key orienteering skill (particularly for sprint) that competitors in an interval start race are expected to evaluate at running speed for each leg during the course of a race. Each competitor is given the same amount of time and the same information to evaluate.

[rocky]

You can't have the same A B C chooses -> A B C competition for each athlete, otherwise they can communicate their choice (no, I don't understand it).

It has worked fairly seamlessly (or appeared to from the coaching zone at least) at the World Cup races where it has been used, although as far as I've seen A has always been A.

However, trying to organised a runners choice training exercise in a Livingston housing estate, in February, in a torrential downpour, with a manpower of 2 - that was challenging! Lots of very soggy bits of paper blowing around. Hopefully it was worth it - we'll find out tomorrow.

I took these lines from bulletin 4 to mean that they won't be using athletes' choice:

For the elimination rounds, the courses may incorporate forking/splitting systems:
1) No forking
2) Forking with loops

That's the team's interpretation too.

Some sort of "pick your heat" selection process, perhaps with the fastest qualifiers picking first and the 36th ranked qualifier picking last.

Like many things in international orienteering this is a concept introduced from XC skiing. It actually works with the 'almost fastest' picking first, then the fastest down to the slowest: so that the heat winners have the advantage of choosing who to go up against from their closest competitors. There are various aspects of nuance to the choice:
- who you will face in the 1/4 final
- who you would face in the 1/2 final, should you get through 1/4 final
- recovery time between rounds
- being with/avoiding your own teammates

IIRC at EOC last year Megan chose a relatively straightforward 1/4 final but then met Tove and Simona in the 1/2 final, with only two to go through. She didn't, although if the same line up happened tomorrow I wouldn't be certain of the same outcome.

Anyway, it is super fun and exciting to watch so make sure you finish work early, pay your 6euros and get ready for the thrills and spills of the race.

[buzz]

It's Knock-Out Sprint tomorrow. Is there an easy-to-understand description somewhere of how it works? I've tried the IOF Rules document, but it's not yet clear to me.

Here's what I think is happening:

• 3 heats, with the fastest 12 from each heat going through to the KO stages.
• Some sort of "pick your heat" selection process, perhaps with the fastest qualifiers picking first and the 36th ranked qualifier picking last.
• 6 Quarter finals, with the first 3 over the line going on to the semis.
• 3 Semi finals, with the fastest 2 making the Final
• A Final with 6 runners.

Which rounds have the "athlete choice" of course, picked after a 20-second look at maps A, B and C?
How many minutes is each round supposed to take?
Are courses gaffled if there isn't an "athlete choice" process?

The 'pick your heat' selection process is more complicated than you suggest but not worth worrying about (even if you're an athlete)!

Gaffling can be 'athlete choice', or a 'loop' (e.g. phi or butterfly), or no gaffling. Gaffling tends to be in the QF and/or SF with the final at least usually ungaffled.

Athlete choice involves picking part of the course (2 or 3 legs) - really hard to plan so its not too obvious and not impossibly difficult to pick the best route. Perhaps fairest to offer three balanced choices. Not that popular with athletes and probably won't be used tomorrow, but it was used at the recent world cup.

The rounds tend to be 6-8 minute winning times with losing times only a few seconds slower!

I think technical ungaffled courses with lots of route choice is the best option, and the key for spectators is how well presented the route choices are and how well briefed the commentators are. Showing B finals first so spectators understand the nuances of the course would be a good idea (you get a bit of that with the semis).

[pete.owens]

Why is "athlete's choice" so hard?
Isn't it just:
- Athlete chooses map, official writes down A/B/C
- Athlete runs, official puts correct forking into computer
- Athlete downloads
?

The chooses map (small segment) is different from the competition map. So you need to match them correctly.

Like picking up your correct relay map.
They will be generated from the same planning file with the course variation printed big and bold on both.

You can't have the same A B C chooses -> A B C competition for each athlete, otherwise they can communicate their choice (no, I don't understand it).

I guess you are worried about competitors from the same nation agreeing to run together. In any case that is easily solved. Presumably it is a silent start so the only way to collaborate would be to agree in advance to choose option A. So don't tell them in advance what the options are named. It might be 1/2/3 or X/Y/Z or red/green/blue.

[pete.owens]

There is no announcement of the forking, or how it will be done. Equal but different courses are not permitted, they may do loops or nothing or "athletes choice".

I took these lines from bulletin 4 to mean that they won't be using athletes' choice:

For the elimination rounds, the courses may incorporate forking/splitting systems:
1) No forking
2) Forking with loops
There will be no announcement in advance which method is used in which round.

And given that there are only 8 controls in the QF that pretty much rules out forking since a loop requires a minimum of 6 controls.

[buzz]

The links to the live results for the KO Qualifications this morning seem to be pointing at the WOC Selection races from earlier this year (at least on my PC) hopefully that will get sorted later. First 12 in each heat get through to this afternoons QF.

[Spookster]

Yep, they fixed that.

Kris is back, 2nd out of 8th so far, with what looks like a great time. Fingers crossed for 6 out of 6 GBR runners to progress.

[Wendles]

Could someone please explain how the knockout works? How many will be eliminated from the first qualifications?

Ah thank you buzz, found your post!