Harvester 2025 and JOK chasing sprint

[SeanC]

I agree the rules should make it easier for combined club teams, but I think it would only help attendances a bit. Lots of captains would likely call it a day if say there were only 2 or 3 interested rather than contact the neighbouring clubs for lots of different reasons. That doesn't mean it's not worth doing of course.

If we want a significant increase in attendance then I think more radical thinking is needed. The rules for the Harvester are encoded in BO documents and changes need to be agreed by a BO committee I believe. This tends to lead to tiny incremental changes - someone has to suggest a change and then the committee has to agree.

Another way would be to put a red line through the encoded rules and let an individual or small group of 'owners' define the rules as they see fit (like the Compass Sport Cup, or perhaps Coast and Islands), with BO giving very basic guidelines (eg it must be a night relay organised in the warmer months of the year). This would encourage innovation, but / and could lead to a radically different event. Of the top of my head very different ideas might include:

- a three person team option.
- regional teams (with people entering as individuals with the computer matching based on age/sex/ranking points).
- a TD2/1 option aimed at trail runners / non orienteers (to bring in the money and for new orienteers)
- Fixing the event in a certain regions or areas, to build up a local following.

All such suggestions might cause puzzled faces at a BO committee with the questions each would raise, but a small group or individual could go away and analyse and make something work

[IanD]

Some interesting ideas there.

My own suggestion would be an extra trophy for an A course Handicap class consisting of runners from the same BOF region.

I know some will roll their eyes at the idea of yet another trophy, but it wouldn't be fair to make club teams compete against a team from an entire region. The cost of the trophy (if nobody donated one) would only be about two teams entry fees, and hopefully would be outweighed by the extra income from regional teams.

[SeanC]

You could just have an ad hoc prize on both the A and B, with the existing rule that a team can't win more than one prize.

An ad hoc category would have meant that the EUOC + 1 guest from SN team would have gone away with a prize for being 90 minutes quicker than the next team.

Maybe with a regional category EUOC might have found a guest closer to home?

The problem with committees is that, even if someone emails in the suggestion of ad hoc categories, the instinct is to look for the problems with the suggestions. Eg ad hoc teams might lead to groups of elite runners from multiple clubs joining up and the idea gets sunk. Whereas a single individual or group with autonomy could just think, 'yes that might happen, and if it does I'll just change the rules the year after'.

I'm interested in being in a SEOA Harvester team next year assuming Saxons don't want me

[SJC]

Another way would be to put a red line through the encoded rules and let an individual or small group of 'owners' define the rules as they see fit (like the Compass Sport Cup, or perhaps Coast and Islands),

CompassSport Cup and Coast and Islands have both come from individuals with an idea. So no problem with putting a red line through the existing rules and coming up with something radically different to attract more competitors, but then it would no longer be the Harvester.

[NeilC]

Some years ago there were problems at the Peter Palmer relay with elite juniors from multiple clubs forming their own team rather than running in a club team. I fear that a regional team would work against the ideal solution of getting more club teams together.

The biggest issue in my opinion is that many of the legs are simply too long to find enough club members willing to run. Is that the reason why SAX didn't enter an A team - or were they pot-hunting on the B? The have-a-go ethos that one sees at Jukola just doesn't exist in the UK and so the event does need to be made more friendly. The overnight timing is exciting for some but off putting for others. I have always really struggled with the drive home from a distant event. It has been suggested that a Nighthawk (and now Tio) approach of splitting the event and then allowing people a decent sleep in the middle would be more appealing. More radical ideas such as allowing individual legs to be split into two might help clubs that have people willing to run short courses only.

[IanD]

I fear that a regional team would work against the ideal solution of getting more club teams together.

Maybe I'm unusual, but I'd rather run for my club than for my region. For me, a regional team would be a fall-back for when the club couldn't get a team together (possibly less of an issue for a large club, but small clubs do struggle especially when the event is remote).

The overnight timing is exciting for some but off putting for others

The overnight timing is the whole point of the Harvester for me. We have other inter-club relays for daytime (and they're not blessed with over-large entries either; we don't need another national daytime relay).

[NeilC]

we don't need another national daytime relay.

The two aforementioned relays are not daytime ones, like the Harvester they involve a mixture of night and day legs. After the break there is another mass start which would help encourage more head-to-head racing. I ran the dawn leg on course A on Sunday and the only other competitor that I saw out in the terrain throughout my 75 minute run was my wife! It would not be inconceivable to have a mass start after every leg (as with some long distance trail relays) to avoid people hanging around in the waiting pen/area for ages (hours for some on Sunday).

[SeanC]

The biggest issue in my opinion is that many of the legs are simply too long to find enough club members willing to run. Is that the reason why SAX didn't enter an A team - or were they pot-hunting on the B?

Neil - that's fighting talk . The Saxons victory on the B course handicap was hard fought - SN and SAXONS swapped the lead after every leg. Saxons Threshers won the ladies competition, helped possibly by being the only ladies team, but with a handicap points of only 14 and well out of their comfort zone. 2 runners took over 2 hours, 1 nearly 3. Jokes about pot hunting would have been a brave thing to say anywhere near the Threshers on Sunday morning.

I don't know why we had 3 X B teams. I just said I wanted to go and got allocated a run. I suspect it was simply down to numbers. 15 competitors divides into 3 B teams. DFOK told me they entered the A course because they had 7 competitors, but obviously enough of them were willing to do the A course so you have to get a bit lucky.

Another option might be to have a B relay of say 10 shorter legs, with competitors free to run as many as they want, so long as the total handicap didn't exceed the 26 points. Ie a team of 3 M40 or under would have to take it in turns LeMans style, whereas a team of older people could have just one or two runs each. This would work well at Eridge, the Saxons 2011 Harvester venue, where you can start in the middle of the area, but more challenging at Kings Wood with the car park on the edge. That also gives a bit of flexibility if someone drops out or picks up an injury that limits how far they can run.

Another idea is to correlate the handicap points with ranking points not age to encourage clubs with inexperienced younger members.

All these ideas face the straightjacket of the detailed encoded rules. The event has changed lots in 40 years in ways not in the rules (eg there used to be a marquee - on Saturday night it was just a remote campsite or sneaky car naps). It can still be managed loosely by BO - with encouragement and support to innovate.

[sborrill]

How did the logistics work out at the weekend? It sounded like there was a lack of camping, club tents, parking, etc. and that was what put us off entering; it just seemed too much hassle.

[SeanC]

How did the logistics work out at the weekend? It sounded like there was a lack of camping, club tents, parking, etc. and that was what put us off entering; it just seemed too much hassle.

There was loads of space in the car park, which was right next to the changeover area.

Club tents weren't needed on such a dry warm evening.

People congregated on a grassy area with the computer showing who was going through the radio controls a focal point. It was quite sociable with a small event vibe.

After finishing the first leg I was supposed to ring our third leg runner who was going to drive in from the campsite a few miles away, which would have been a problem as the mobile phone reception was bad, but she was already there when I finished.

Forestry Commission don't allow camping, though I suspect a few people accidentally 'nodded off' in the car whilst waiting for their run. But 2/3rds of the way round I came across a wild camper in the woods at 2.30am, I steered towards him thinking it was a manned radio control. He was laughing.

Everything was run efficiently by the small JOK team with borrowed SLOW kit.

[Homer]

I suspect a few people accidentally 'nodded off' in the car whilst waiting for their run.

I 'accidentally' put the back seats down and snatched a couple of hours sleep both before and after my run. Running 4th leg it just didn't seem worthwhile finding remote accommodation.

I do think the fact that we weren't allowed to camp probably put off a few potential entrants. Hopefully that was a one-off...

Thanks to all who helped make the weekend happen. Both events were great fun on areas well suited to the format. It's just a shame there weren't larger numbers of entries..