Selections

[Gross]

well actually if you are aiming for selection you should have either a coach or an advisor who keeps you informed of such things.... but do admit it's possible not to relaise that Spring Cup etc is just like the JK. The majority of competitions talked about here unless called World / European / etc are open to all.... good luck if you travel:)

[Guest]

Public apology.
I was wrong to post in that fashion. Having a sh*t day and disappointed with a certain selection.

Will count to ten before posting next time.

[Mrs H.]

Is that you apologising Hocolite - well don't this is exactly where you should be able to ask that kind of question and get some helpful advice back - not a smart-arse reply

[rob f]

No I think its the first guest *cough*klebe*cough*, mum will always own up and she's not been on the computer. Congratulations all. Time for me to get a job.

[Mrs H.]

Time for me to get a job.

time for you to get yourself healthy and fit - you can still go to Uppsala next year

[Jene]

no disrespect to rhodri..he's an amzing orienteer like, but shouldnt tour places go to ppl who have been to all the races and competed all year rather than those who havent run at all??

[CHS]

You could say that buton the other hand why drop someone from the squad whe they are recovering from injury- isn't that when they need the support most. In previous years they haven't done this but maybe its a good start?

[Jene]

maybe but, keep the injured runnners and encourage other juniors as well?? as a junior, often your only thought of as "good" if your in start...in my opinion any way....i dunno, n theres gonna be quite a few dissapointed 18's who have all raced pretty hard this year...n since class sizes are reducing every year! the number of 20's has halved in the last 5 or so years hasnt it? well, looking at fcc results least ways.....

[Doug Tull]

i think it would have been really unfair to drop rhodri cos inthe past he proven that he is the probably the best from our age group.people like him need to be kept in the sport.

having said that orienteering does also need girls and they left out too many from upssala in my opinion.

i think people who missed out need to stick at it and train hard and get selected next year.

[awk]

no disrespect to rhodri..he's an amzing orienteer like, but shouldnt tour places go to ppl who have been to all the races and competed all year rather than those who havent run at all??

As an ex-selector (very ex!), I would say the answer to your question is "not necessarily". It depends on a huge range of variables, and attempts to balance up often conflicting evidence. Tour places aren't a reward for relative performance, they are an attempt to ensure that the 'best' people in a year group get experience/coaching to enable them to progress as much as poss.

A substantial part of that evidence will be the selection races, but selectors usually will (and IMO should) reserve the right to take other info into account. (But then I'm not a fan of guaranteeing the majority of places in a team to the first past the post in selection races - far too restrictive and open to all sorts of problems - much prefer the selectors being given and taking the responsibility for the decisions).

Can't comment on the specifics of this year's selections, as know sweet Fanny Adams about the detail.

[Mrs H.]

I think they seem to have plenty of people going on tour this year - which is a good thing. The Start Squad looks like it's had a severe pruning - which may be a canny way to save money on the tours by making people pay for them - i think that is good too - I'd rather pay and give Nev the opportunity than for him not to go because he is not in the start squad. I suspect there will be a rash of appointments to the squad after the tour.

In retrospect it might have been fairer or more consistent to have dropped all the athletes who have been ill or injured from the squad and given them the chance to prove themselves on tour. Re-appointing them afterwards if they cut the mustard - then we wouldn't be debating whether certain people should or should not be in the start squad.

Very pleased to see Mikey Hopkins up there. He's only been in the sport a couple of years and risen steadily up the results - still plenty of potential to be realised there i think

[Klebe]

Rob is quite right Mrs H.

To scratch the surface of the issue, despite an acknowledged poor weekend at the Surrey 5-O, severely disappointed that someone who finished 3rd overall at her age group in the FCC was placed behind those that she had proved herself against throughout the year. If the rationale was based on the weekend, then others who had a poor weekend yet had done well prior to the final were still selected. A contradiction it would seem.

We suffered at the hands of the selectors last year when late injury recovery prevented her reselection to the start squad. Maybe a bit more compassion has been made this year for those that were injured. I can understand Mharkys view that maybe the selectors wanted to maintain the group they had created in order to bring some continuity to the squad (We have pm'd each other since the original posts).

Awk says that selections "aren't a reward for relative performance, they are an attempt to ensure that the 'best' people in a year group get experience/coaching to enable them to progress as much as poss.
A substantial part of that evidence will be the selection races, but selectors usually will (and IMO should) reserve the right to take other info into account."

This appears to back up my original, 'heat of the moment assertion', for which I received complimentary response.
If a junior has someone close to the selectors who is championing their cause, then if the selection criteria is outside relative performance those who have the contacts will prosper over those that don't. Whether this is right or wrong I will leave open to debate.
I would question Awks approach, if results are not the governing factor, how do the juniors know whether they are wasting their time, effort and money travelling from Scotland to Cornwall via Scarborough to attend all possible relevant events if at the end of the day someones subjective opinion, whether guided by others or not is the governing criteria.

Thanks for wading through this post. Hope it clarifies the reason (though not the manner) for the original post.

[Guest]

If a junior has someone close to the selectors who is championing their cause, then if the selection criteria is outside relative performance those who have the contacts will prosper over those that don't. Whether this is right or wrong I will leave open to debate.

Even if you don't have someone "championing your cause" - and i don't believe that selectors should do this, although i can think of instances where it appears to have happened in the past - you should really blow your own trumpet and write to the selectors, detailing your aims, what you've been doing to achieve your targets, and injuries or other things which may have impacted on your races, and also any successes the selectors may not have picked up on - cross country/ hill running results, runs at overseas competitions etc.

you can't expect the selectors to have researched the lives of every possible athlete, and equally you can't expect the selectors with a vested interest in an athlete to forget all they know about them.

[FatBoy]

how do the juniors know whether they are wasting their time, effort and money travelling from Scotland to Cornwall via Scarborough to attend all possible relevant events if at the end of the day someones subjective opinion, whether guided by others or not is the governing criteria.

This is the other edge of the sword. Many juniors train their a*se off, travel the country, get results that appear to be good enough then don't get selected or even a mention. For summer tours more than JWOC (because there's more places) I would personally advocate a core set (Start Squad?) who go regardless, and then go on the first past the post system. If the FCC does what it says on the tin then I would take the top x not in the Start Squad in the overall standings.

I look back to when I was summer tour age and some of the top guys then are top guys now - e.g. DanM has been near the very top of the tree in my era ever since 2nd place JK 84 at M10. Other guys from that era - Godders, Dickie, Al Buckley, Jules still up there, but where have all the other tour go-ers gone? I know AndyS is pretty good with a bike now. (Sorry I have concentrated on the boys - Helen W is pretty good ). On the other hand Jamie and JD were both guys who came in later and neither started achieving top top results until late junior years. Maybe if they didn't break into the squad/tours when they did (because they weren't "known good" maybe they'd not have bothered to keep it up?

Edit: Just remembered Roger G is a pretty good orienteer too. Apologies to anyone else I've missed...

[Godders]

If a junior has someone close to the selectors who is championing their cause, then if the selection criteria is outside relative performance those who have the contacts will prosper over those that don't. Whether this is right or wrong I will leave open to debate.

Selectors can only use the information they have. If you've been ill/injured etc then the selectors won't necessarily know this. It's up to the athlete/coach to inform the selectors of this - there are hundreds of juniors out there so the selectors can't be expected to find out about everyone. The names of the selectors are published in BOF news - if you're keen enough to want to be selected then you should make the effort to inform the selectors if your results won't speak for themselves.

This might not seem fair but I believe its far better than an American style first X in the selection race(s), especially for selection for competitions where we want to have the best possible team.