British Sprint Championships
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
72 posts
• Page 5 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
I just wanted to say well done and thank you to the organising team for a very enjoyable event - great courses, and a good spectator area.
(Shame about the weather but even the best organisers can't do anything about that!!
)
(Shame about the weather but even the best organisers can't do anything about that!!

- Blanka
- green
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 5:54 pm
- Location: Oxford
I agree, great event though I do think that the situation of missing controls could've been handled slightly better as I overheard many people moaning about it afterwards. Overall though, a very enjoyable event.
-
J Taylor - off string
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 9:54 pm
- Location: IKEA Retail Park
The question is, what else could they have done? Arguably they shouldn't have replaced the control, as this gave an advantage to those for whom the control was there - but then otherwise it was just random whether you lost time or not, and it's questionable whether that is any better. I did hear somebody suggesting they should just remove the splits for those legs, but as has been discussed here before, that's not a possibility as the rules don't allow it. The only option had somebody protested would be to void all the finals (apart from the A finals as it didn't affect them), and I certainly wasn't about to protest and have that happen. Not having been involved directly, I don't know exactly what happened with the women's heats, but it seemed the right decision was made about A final qualification.
For the record, the control was missing for me in the final, and I did lose substantial time (for a sprint event). Had they removed the splits for those legs I think I would gain 3 places, but then I could say the same about a big mistake I made on another leg, and as somebody will inevitably point out it was only the B final, so not really that important anyway
p.s. Thanks to the organisors for a fun event. The weather almost added to the atmosphere of spectating on the knoll for the finals!
For the record, the control was missing for me in the final, and I did lose substantial time (for a sprint event). Had they removed the splits for those legs I think I would gain 3 places, but then I could say the same about a big mistake I made on another leg, and as somebody will inevitably point out it was only the B final, so not really that important anyway

p.s. Thanks to the organisors for a fun event. The weather almost added to the atmosphere of spectating on the knoll for the finals!
- Adventure Racer
- addict
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:53 pm
- Location: Somewhere near Malvern
A really enjoyable 2 days of racing - thanks to all the organising clubs, officials and helpers. The beer prizes were well received too!
- Nottinghamshire outlaw
- red
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:24 pm
Must reiterate what a great weekend of racing. From the spectator point of view the A Finals were great - especially when one competitor fell in the pond!! Msny thanks to both clubs. Super event at Rowney Warren. Like the specially brewed beer given as prizes!!
- Tatty
- guru
- Posts: 1626
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:21 pm
I'd just like to back up the positive comments. I really enjoyed the weekend. Both days had well planned courses and the spectating set up Saturday was fantastic - just a shame the weather wasn't kinder to the organisers!
- El
- light green
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 10:05 pm
- Location: London town
A great event
- well organised - and good use of overlapping areas for the heats and the finals. Thanks!
The missing control caused me 5-10sec hesitation/map check/etc, but there's always a risk of them disappearing.
(Has anyone ever been prosecuted/hit(!) for moving controls?)
Watching the event brough to mind the possible scope for TV coverage for a future sprint event, from the vantage point on the massive spur?
WRT late entries - late entries per se should only be allowed if specified in the event details, but substitutions, well, that's debatable - I'd say it depends on the organiser's discretion, but I'd allow it, although I recognise that the situation with regards to elite runners and seeding is a tough one. Being of a distinctly carnagerous standard, no-one noticed that I ran as a woman in the 2002 Great North Run, having found a friend of a friend with a spare number...

The missing control caused me 5-10sec hesitation/map check/etc, but there's always a risk of them disappearing.

Watching the event brough to mind the possible scope for TV coverage for a future sprint event, from the vantage point on the massive spur?
WRT late entries - late entries per se should only be allowed if specified in the event details, but substitutions, well, that's debatable - I'd say it depends on the organiser's discretion, but I'd allow it, although I recognise that the situation with regards to elite runners and seeding is a tough one. Being of a distinctly carnagerous standard, no-one noticed that I ran as a woman in the 2002 Great North Run, having found a friend of a friend with a spare number...
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do." - Mark Twain
Real name: David Alcock, M35
Real name: David Alcock, M35
-
Carnage Head - light green
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 3:24 pm
- Location: Leeds
Here's what happened with the missing controls. Guess what, yet again it wasn't quite as simple as anyone thought.
Heats
Control 111 (on Men's B and Women's B) went missing fairly early. This was on a small (!) spur in one of the blocks of parkland between the houses, and was a very obvious control site. A marshal went to stand where it should have been whilst we waited for a replacement control but the original control was found in a nearby bush and replaced by a marshal before a new control got there.
We had one complaint about this. One runner missed qualification for the A Final by 23 seconds and claimed that she lost around that much time. After discussions between the Organiser and Controller and a check of the splits we confirmed that she had been affected as described. The Organiser therefore decided to allow her into the A Final as a 10th qualifier.
Finals
Control 138 (on Men's B, Men's D and Women's B) went missing. This was on a small brick building in a block of woodland just below the maze. I went out to replace it, but at that stage was uncertain exactly which control was missing, knowing only that it was "near the start". I discovered that control 139 had been moved only about 5 metres but was now behind a hedge and invisible from the correct location. I moved it back, and the Planner and I then spent several minutes encouraging a large group of teenagers to move away from the control. The Planner then went to check 138 and discovered that the control flag was exactly where it should have been. The next day I found out that a competitor had found the flag which had obviously been moved, and the competitor replaced it in the correct location.
There is clearly a case for taking out the legs to and from 138, since a significant number of people were affected, although maybe not significantly. This debate has occurred many times on Nopesport, and there is still no simple answer. Note that there is no rule about what to do in this situation. It is purely guidance provided by Rules Group and the Electronic Punching Appendix.
I have done the calculations to adjust the times (it's easy in Winsplits) and checked that the top three positions in all classes for which we awarded prizes do not change. As you would expect, there is a change of a few places up or down for most people on each affected course.
Our view is therefore that we will leave the results as they stand, without adjustment. Our apologies to those who were affected by this.
Heats
Control 111 (on Men's B and Women's B) went missing fairly early. This was on a small (!) spur in one of the blocks of parkland between the houses, and was a very obvious control site. A marshal went to stand where it should have been whilst we waited for a replacement control but the original control was found in a nearby bush and replaced by a marshal before a new control got there.
We had one complaint about this. One runner missed qualification for the A Final by 23 seconds and claimed that she lost around that much time. After discussions between the Organiser and Controller and a check of the splits we confirmed that she had been affected as described. The Organiser therefore decided to allow her into the A Final as a 10th qualifier.
Finals
Control 138 (on Men's B, Men's D and Women's B) went missing. This was on a small brick building in a block of woodland just below the maze. I went out to replace it, but at that stage was uncertain exactly which control was missing, knowing only that it was "near the start". I discovered that control 139 had been moved only about 5 metres but was now behind a hedge and invisible from the correct location. I moved it back, and the Planner and I then spent several minutes encouraging a large group of teenagers to move away from the control. The Planner then went to check 138 and discovered that the control flag was exactly where it should have been. The next day I found out that a competitor had found the flag which had obviously been moved, and the competitor replaced it in the correct location.
There is clearly a case for taking out the legs to and from 138, since a significant number of people were affected, although maybe not significantly. This debate has occurred many times on Nopesport, and there is still no simple answer. Note that there is no rule about what to do in this situation. It is purely guidance provided by Rules Group and the Electronic Punching Appendix.
I have done the calculations to adjust the times (it's easy in Winsplits) and checked that the top three positions in all classes for which we awarded prizes do not change. As you would expect, there is a change of a few places up or down for most people on each affected course.
Our view is therefore that we will leave the results as they stand, without adjustment. Our apologies to those who were affected by this.
-
Simon E - green
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:13 pm
- Location: St Albans
I also really enjoyed both days.
I thought that the Sprint Champs day would be a perfect introduction to the sport for beginners in that troublesome M21 category (at least if it had been sunny). Exciting, fun, not too technical, more likely to hook their attention than running Orange and losing against the kids at a colour coded. Would need to have a more flexible entry policy including EOD though.
I thought that the Sprint Champs day would be a perfect introduction to the sport for beginners in that troublesome M21 category (at least if it had been sunny). Exciting, fun, not too technical, more likely to hook their attention than running Orange and losing against the kids at a colour coded. Would need to have a more flexible entry policy including EOD though.
- Guest88
- yellow
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:50 pm
tendon wrote:The pairing of sprint and middle distances worked really well - can we have more like this?
Totally agree. Perversely, its also good from the perspective of not especially liking either (and I think there are many of us), because it's a weekend to miss in a crowded calender. I suspect sprint/middle fans are the same people so its a natural combination.
Coming soon
Boston City Race (May, maybe not)
Coasts and Islands (Shetland)
SprintScotland https://sprintscotland.weebly.com/
Boston City Race (May, maybe not)
Coasts and Islands (Shetland)
SprintScotland https://sprintscotland.weebly.com/
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4748
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
72 posts
• Page 5 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 189 guests