Longer Courses

[PorkyFatBoy]

I've heard a rumour, but seen nothing concrete, that there are new guidelines coming in soon that will increase the suggested course lengths for colour coded courses - e.g. making oranges and reds longer so that we don't need purples any more.

Anyone know anything about this and when they change will be implemented? I'm planning at the moment, and don't want to get it wrong.

[gross2006]

Well as a grade 1 controll I've heard sweet FA about it.... and if these suggestions are imminent you'd have thought controllers might be aware.... but this is the land of the secret squirral

[mat d]

I think lengthening oranges is silly as they are at a technical level for most "mature" beginners who know what a map is but aren't ready to either follow paths around/get lost in the abyss of a nettle infested forest (and being in the wrong place)...

I think things should stay as they are anyway, more courses means more expense - why not create another colour near the blue/green level to cope with HUGE rises of the aging popultation - MW40-60's(ish) - who run these oversubscribed courses.

[Mrs H.]

I agree Mat. I like Green course (better than my W50L - too long or W50S - too short) but whether I will in 10 years time is another matter. I think there is a case for ensuring green and blue stay on the longer side of their guideline length and introduce a shorter green (Turquoise3.5-4.5k TD5 where possible) to cater for the oldies and the progressing juniors which would ease the pressure on the often massively over subscribed green course.

[gross2007]

Pink & mauve for me please

[Red Adder]

I spoke to a G3 controller last night and he told me that the max length of the yellow has gone from 2.5 to 2.9 km. Won't this compromise existing standards ? May be an unpleasnt suprise for a yongster who can manage a short yellow quite ok - so choses yellow as before and then has to go 50 % further than usual - has a bad run - is disheartened and lost to the sport. Why fix was wasn't broken ?

[mharky]

yellow has gone from 2.5 to 2.9 km.... 50 % further than usual

I hate maths as much as the next guy, but surely that is wrong

[rocky]

technically i'm the next guy, and i quite like maths.

its still wrong though. looks like about 16% further to me.

[Adventure Racer]

That's cause you're doing the wrong sum. That 2.5km is the current maximum, as there is a range of recommended lengths. So if as Red implies a youngster is used to events at the shorter end of the range (say 2km - I don't know what the recommended min is), then 2.9km is a 50% increase as opposed to only a 25% increase if they get a max length course under current guidelines.

[NeilC]

Nopesport would be such a boring place if everyone read the rules/appendices/guidelines and didn't treat rumours as fact.

[PorkyFatBoy]

Now I'm at home I've dug out the e-mail with the rumour. It says -

"Are you up to speed with the revised course length guidelines that come into force on 1st Jan? I am still awaiting a revision of rules from BOF. However, I believe that some of the new lengths will be :-

Yellow 2.0 -2.9 k
Orange 3.0 - 5.0 k
Light Green 3.0 - 4.0 k
Green not sure
Red 5.0 - 7.5k"

This is probably from the same Grade 3 controller as Red Adder was speaking to. Since I am planning for Jan 8th it might be helpful if BOF Central could get its act together and let everyone know fairly quickly!

Neil C-> is this a topic you could enlighten us all with your wisdom ??

Gross2007 -> I think pink and mauve are already used for trail O.

[David May]

In one sense, BOF Rules Group has changed nothing in that the "time for most competitors" remains the same as before for every colour coded course. But the length range for some courses has been updated to reflect what happens in practice.

The only significant change in recommended lengths is to the Red course, which is now 5.0 - 7.0 km. Other than this, planners of 2006 CC courses should meet the new standards if they plan Yellow towards the top end of the old range and the rest to around the middle of the old range in length.

Not too much to get heated about I think ...

David

[awk]

In one sense, BOF Rules Group has changed nothing in that the "time for most competitors" remains the same as before for every colour coded course. But the length range for some courses has been updated to reflect what happens in practice.

Not too much to get heated about I think ...

David

Except that if that is really done, Green courses will be even longer, and they are already too long much of the time (in that they are the shortest TD5 course, and there ARE TD5 areas!).

The problem I find David, is that the "time for most competitors" criteria is way too wide - I've seen well overlong Greens where "most" of the competitors have still achieved the time (it's also possible to do the opposite of course, and hit with a course way too short).

As "most" can mean anything between 51 and 100 percent, this is so vague as to be useless, and I remain mystifed why it was ever introduced: for an individual it can still mean courses that are a good 50% different in time taken - far too broad. Far more useful to a planner is a distance range which emphasises that physically easy areas are at the top end, and tough areas at the bottom (try telling the Cumbrians though!!).

[RJ]

The problem I find David, is that the "time for most competitors" criteria is way too wide - I've seen well overlong Greens where "most" of the competitors have still achieved the time (it's also possible to do the opposite of course, and hit with a course way too short). try telling the Cumbrians though!!.

The spread of lapse times reflects the spread of ability in the competitors. From the competent, those running down a course, those new to the course, those consistently running at that level, the novice, and those whose fitness restricts their *wished for* performance. Looking at the analysis I did on an alternative thread I see no way of being able to regulate the course designs any further. At each event the planners tried to meet the guidelines, in good faith, taking previous events into account. On the day it depends on the quality of the competitors who turn up as to how the lapse times spread themselves out.

The Green course has a particular problem..... its remit is now too wide. With the increasing number of older people whose competition fitness is *physically challenged* there is a need for a new, much shorter Green course. Not pale Green, just a short Green.

try telling the Cumbrians though!!.

I hope you're not turning into a softie!

[NeilC]

Neil C-> is this a topic you could enlighten us all with your wisdom ??

At any one time there are many ideas and proposals going through BOF central and associated committees. Wouldn't be sensible to try and implement any of them before they become official, the revised membership proposals would be an excellent example.

David has already indicated that the original rumour and associated justification are without foundation, although some minor changes are being proposed to event guidelines.

Very impressive that PorkyFatBoy is so conscientious though. All too often events simply don't follow current guidelines/rules, one day for example it would be nice if all regional events adopt the 2004 specifications for pictoral descriptions.

As for Awk's point about the vague definition of course distances... the basic concept that if an area is tough plan to the lower limit and if easy plan to the higher should be familiar to all controllers if not planners. This information can be passed on from clubs and associations and not just BOF.