Short Green vs Light Green

[SJC]

possibly because of this hazyness between TD5 and TD4

There isn't a hazyness in what the technical standards of these courses should be - it is clearly layed out in the BOF rules and various planning guides. But as has been said, too often the Light Green course is made easier than it should be so that it isn't as hard as the Green. Unfortunatley this can give people a false impression as to their ability which is exposed once they get to an area that supports proper TD5 courses. I think that this can be a particular problem with juniors the first time they go to Scotland or the Lake District.

[SeanC]

I guess these sorts of issues is why BO had the 'grid' of technical difficulty and distance a few years back.

If South East events with Short Green and Light Green courses simply dropped the Light Green (which seems like a good simplification) it doesn't solve the 'first time in the North' problem as SJC describes, since the other colours (Green to Brown) will also be much harder than normal (for the south east). Seems like a fundamental problem with the colour system.

It's really helpful when clubs display a link to a previous map on RouteGadget on their event details though, then you can see what you're getting into and adjust course choices accordingly

[NeilC]

I can see that the 'Sunny Sussex' event had light green and short green combined.

For that event both the Short Green and the Light Green were either on paths through the grotty bits of forest or in the beautifully runable white sections to the north. Thus both the TD (4) and PD were appropriate for both courses. That didn't stop one of your club members complaining that we were dumbing down the Short Green. SLOW did the same at their 2024 OK Nuts event at Hankley. At the Worthlodge National event that I planned a couple of weeks ago I separated the courses which allowed the LG to use more physically demanding terrain - both were still TD4. Similarly for the 2023 OK Nuts SG stayed in the nice forest, LG went into the bramble-fest - no difference in technicality. Perhaps your view that SE planners deliberately make LG easier than it should be is based on a more localised view than the entire region.

[SeanC]

Yes, my opinion on light green courses being a transition between (local) orange and green standard is based on events I've experienced, which are often local events without such expert planning/controlling.

It sounds like from what you say Neil that you see the Short Green course as designed for older people (ie less physical), and the Light Green course as designed for juniors? I thought the idea behind colour courses was that you choose whatever course you feel comfortable with? By expecting a 'physical' short green and a 'less physical' short green that makes Dave's job harder, or is this really an expectation of the South East League?

However I wonder if many of the juniors would be happy with the less physical short green anyway (especially if physical = brambles!) and of course there are many longer courses for juniors looking for a more physical challenge. So it sounds like Dave/DFOK are safe removing the light green course... though it might be worth explaining why in the final details since someone from my club will always complain

Having said all this, and slightly contradicting myself, there is an argument for junior only courses, with no adults allowed with courses tailored to the juniors need. Perhaps compressing the start blocks, adding coaching before/afterwards or adding a separate junior competition.. This would give the juniors more of a chance to hang out with other juniors rather than feel they are doing something that people aged 50+ do. You would call this a junior course rather than an open to all colour course.

[SJC]

Since the other colours (Green to Brown) will also be much harder than normal (for the south east). Seems like a fundamental problem with the colour system.

Which could be fixed by calling the courses in the south east Light Green mark 2, Light Blue, Light Brown, and Light Black. But somehow I don't think it would catch on.

[pete.owens]

Not really, because if you did that it would force planners to actively avoid any legs that require navigation above TD4, rather than to actively search out what limited possibilities the terrain offers to maximise the navigational challenge.

[pete.owens]

Yes, my opinion on light green courses being a transition between (local) orange and green standard is based on events I've experienced, which are often local events without such expert planning/controlling.

Maybe your club could do with organising so training for novice planners.

Checking the TD of courses is a basic part of the controllers job, but they will be more concerned about legs being too hard rather than too easy.

[DaveL]

Lots to think about !
All obviously subject to agreement with the Controller (Any voluinteers ? ???) but my current feeling is -
Brown is absolutely needed otherwise gap between Black (c 11k) and Sht Brown (c 7.6k) per BOF course lenth ratio guidance is just too much. It may well though be simply Black with a couple of controls cut out!
Tempted to combine Sht Green (which is TD4) and Light Green assuming no issues with "physicality"
My only concern is whether the top end "normal" green runners would be upset if they failed to win the combined course because of the fast juniors joining them ?

[pete.owens]

Brown is absolutely needed otherwise gap between Black (c 11k) and Sht Brown (c 7.6k)

People really do not need that micro-precision degree of choice when selecting courses.

Even if your ideal course was exactly brown (9.3km in this case) then you have a choice of a courses with lengths +or-18%. And your ideal is likely to be shorter or longer than exactly brown so the difference will be less than that.

We are talking about 6ish competitors out of a field of 300 - and some of those will only be running that particular course because the league has allocated it to their age class.

[Atomic]

Having said all this, and slightly contradicting myself, there is an argument for junior only courses, with no adults allowed with courses tailored to the juniors need. Perhaps compressing the start blocks, adding coaching before/afterwards or adding a separate junior competition.. This would give the juniors more of a chance to hang out with other juniors rather than feel they are doing something that people aged 50+ do. You would call this a junior course rather than an open to all colour course.

Sounds like a bad idea - we should be encouraging adult novices (including M/W21 newbies which we need more of) to progress from Orange to Light Green too. In fact, it can be quite rewarding for them because now instead of being beaten by 12 year olds with springy legs you can potentially get mid pack using your brain not just your lungs!

[Atomic]

Except, that now the marketing is even more confusing, there is now a new shade of green, 'light/short green'. Or is it short/light green? If it is confusing to experienced orienteers, what must it be like for the newbie! So will DFOK be brave and just axe the Light Green completely? at least cutting out one shade of green...

In my view that is the worst possible outcome. It confuses people who go Orange to SG in one area then find SG much harder elsewhere. It puts people off who know that this is a TD3-TD5 leap in theory.

If you decide Short Green and Light Green are going to end up as the same course and should be combined then kill off the Short Green and keep the Light green. Anyone who is experienced enough to understand the difference between VSG, SG, G should be smart enough to know that LG might be the course for them. We often see experienced M/W75+ opting for a LG course when there is O/LG/G/B to choose from.

[DaveL]

"If you decide Short Green and Light Green are going to end up as the same course and should be combined then kill off the Short Green and keep the Light green." -

that is exactly what is being proposed, the area is too simple to provide a TD5 course so it is being merged with Lt Green. A note will say something like "the area does not support the provision of anything more than a TD4 course and therefore the Short Green course has been merged with Light Green"

if an area supports Td5 then there is no question that the 2 courses should be seperate, it's only where TD5 cannot be provided that we have this issue

[Atomic]

I suspect those rules are widely ignored in the South East at least, possibly because of this hazyness between TD5 and TD4.

People tend to get hung up on the catching features as THE differentiator between TD4 and 5 but the rule book says:

TD4 should have significant route choice
TD5 should have significant route choice and force regular changes of technique (long/short intricate etc).

TD4 - any feature which does not require map reading through complex contour detail
TD5 - any feature particularly those demanding careful map reading to locate.

TD5 then also introduces a number of specific skills - eg. recognition of indistinct features*, and concentration over long distances.

* thats not just contour features - it could be indistinct vegetation boundaries.

The perfect TD5 course is in an area that has everything that is wanted - including the "punishment for mistakes" etc - but any course which is too hard for TD4 is TD5.

I see all sorts of stuff going on, like "its a local event so it doesn't really matter" or "its a league event so it needs to be tougher" (then we wonder why new people are scared to go to regional events). I wouldn't necessarily look to previous events as a clue to the right answer unless you had been there and heard all positive feedback.

[SeanC]

yes, I agree there is a conflict between all these groups.

Personally (at least in 'easy' south east terrain) I think adult beginners are best served by a score course that has a mixture of easy and hard controls and no time penalties. There is such a difference in physical and technical ability in this group.. many do have orienteering experience but just don't go very often. The colour system doesn't serve this group that well because without appreciation of the colours and their ability, it's easy to pick an unsatisfying course that's too easy and they'll be back in a short time, or pick a too long course ("blue - how hard can that be? It's only a park run and a bit") and take a long long time/retired and come back with a feeling of failure/I'm no good at map reading etc. Appropriately planned score courses address both of these issues.

Juniors - there are different problems. For the older juniors, between the start and finish is great but the feeling that they are out of place with few other juniors and adults not even close to their age range - something that is felt more in small clubs with few juniors. This is mitigated for juniors in regional squads and the like and at the few junior competitions like YBT. Younger juniors are much less likely to feel this self conscious but the challenge can be (at the bigger events) long walks to and from the start.

So I think a good option is to use the white to light green courses just for juniors, in a separate start/finish (not miles from the car park) and separate competition within a competition and with other innovations to encourage juniors to get to know each other and learn some skills, eg some post/pre event competitions between juniors of different clubs, short relay competitions, some basic coaching etc. Eventually (perhaps aged 15 or 16) the juniors will outgrow this event within an event and will want to move on to the full adult course at the different start, but hopefully armed with good skills and with friends of the same age keen to show the old people that they have arrived (as opposed to simply giving up orienteering at this age as is common now).

Back to Dave's question about needing both Light Green and a Short Green. This option would be to repurpose the Light Green as part of a series of dedicated junior courses / event within an event with adult newcomers sent to the specially designed score course. For experienced orienteers, courses starting at the 'dark' green courses and getting longer (Very Short Green, Short Green etc).

I don't for a moment think this would ever happen at any regional event of course as changes in orienteering happen painfully slowly.

[DaveL]

Thnaks Sean - you've written an essay !

How do you think the "Red" course I planned at Shooters Hill fits into what is needed ?

And also, I'm less of a fan of Score courses than you are (and not because I'm really not very good at them!!!) - my issue is that the whole point of a Score course is to simplify the neviagation and shorten the legs, so "improvers" are not forced to stretch themselves to take on difficult navigation on lng legs