Latest edition of Focus.....

[Steler]

Well I've just waded through the latest edition of Focus over my breakfast and it looks like we're in for a change of direction. BOF Central have decided it's time to "Take orienteering to the people" and it now seems park O is the prefered method after years of banging away at schools development - it makes a nice change.

But is it really going to do the trick? park O may be a good gimmicky format to try ona a summer evening but it's not what Mrs Palmer dismisses as:"real orienteering" is it/

for one reason it lacks the most important element which makes up orienteering - adventure. unless you call being abused by a bunch of yobbos and trying to find a control that's been hurled into a nearby pond an adventure.

[Gnitworp]

Isn't Jamie Stevenson a real world orienteering champion then?

[Steler]

Well you'd have to ask Mrs Palmer that would't you - but his discipline looks like street O to me - I don't think that's what they're advocating. (and I think he's currently the bronze medalist not the champ )

[Gnitworp]

World Cup 2005, Sprint Final, Battersea Park, Real Orienteering?

[Adventure Racer]

(and I think he's currently the bronze medalist not the champ )

Yeah, but that's at what all but the real stuck-in-the-mud traditionalists would consider to be real orienteering. However doesn't winning the sprint a few years ago make him a champion, if not a current one?

Oh, and I thought from the thread title that this was going to be about something different - but then I guess that has it's own old thread lurking for sombody to dig out...

[Steler]

Oh, and I thought from the thread title that this was going to be about something different

Well so did I actually - I was asking whether people thought thisa new direction would do the trick as far as getting people into the sport - or whether BOF central would have been better advocating a Mrs H. MADO type style of initiative which sounds like it has been very successful at getting people to try - how shall I put it - traditional style orienteering.

I was not intending to question Jamie Stevenson's credentials.

Personally I think it is an interesting change of emphasis from the top - I'm just not sure it's the right one - what do other people think?

[RJ]

It depends on which part of the country you are working in. MADO works fine in "middle England", and I am sure in other parts as well. School development has its place where clusters of schools can co-operate and compete amongst one another. Park races work where you have good city parks and you are miles away from other 'O' assets.

We, the sport as a whole, has very limited resources in terms of volunteer effort. A club must find a model which they are happy with, stick with it, and try and get the maximum back from the work put in.... which is pretty well what most clubs are doing. Park O is just another idea.... a good one.... but perhaps not suitable for all.

We run a series of five park races each Autumn and have been for the last four years. And yes it has has some success!

[johnloguk]

The proof will always be in the pudding as they say, but I don't think Mike Hamilton was actually saying that Park Racing and Street-O was the new direction for BOF. He clearly says that it is in addition to what we already have, therefore it is not going to replace the more traditional orienteering disciplines. Personally I would have added that it should be in addition to the best of what we already have, and maybe look at some of the more sub-standard C3s that are around.

What he says is largely right, in my opinion, and anyone who thinks what we have now is perfect is frankly barmy. Park Races and Street-O are good ways to raise the profile of orienteering, so that even if people don't take part they will at least know what it is about. Not everyone plays football, but you'd struggle to find someone who didn't recognise it.

In a previous Focus Mike suggested starting some orienteering events from Sports Centres or Community Centres, and I think that is a brilliant simple idea. Alongside MADO type initiatives this could be a huge plus for orienteering. It all comes down to bright ideas, publicity, enthusiasm and helpers on the ground.

Let's not have another thread of subtle BOF bashing when they didn't actually say what we are bashing them for.

[Steler]

Let's not have another thread of subtle BOF bashing when they didn't actually say what we are bashing them for.

Well Peter bylett is very specific in what "bringing sport to the people" means and Mrs Palmer is by implication.
I'm not BOF bashing - I've asked for people's opinions as to whether this is going to be a good way to get people into the sport - or whether it is going to end up changing the nature of the sport - and whether that in it self is a good thing. Park O is a very different animal from 'traditional" O with very different challenges which will attract different people. I'm just surprised they are not pushing the MADO model - to suggest that is only suitable for middle england is mystifying - surely it suitable for anywhere with a population and a bit of terrain (be it park or otherwise)

mind you if you want a bit of BOF bashing have to admit I roared with laughter at Mike Hamilton's example of a want of club care by allowing a disqualified drink driver to drive the hired mini-bus - has he tried to hire a mini-bus lately - the driver/s have to produce their licences and if you don't have the right bit (and not everyone does these days) then that's it. so it's a bit insulting to suggest that a club would fraudurlently hire a mini-bus on someone else's licence and then allow said fellon to drive it.

but that's by the by.

[johnloguk]

Maybe "BOF bashing" was a bit strong, and I totally agree that BOF should certainly be pushing the MADO model a lot more than it has. "Bringing the sport to the people" is exactly what MADO and Park races etc do. I just worry a bit when we seem to polarise between traditional orienteering and the newer disciplines such as Park Races and MTBO. I think they are all wonderful facets of the same brilliant sport. Yes they do attract different people, and I haven't got a problem with that, and I'm also sure that a large proportion of the newcomers will end up with a similar broad love of the sport to me/us.

If we get new members who only like Park Races or Street-O is that a bad thing anyway? Lots, too many for my liking, of traditional orienteers won't try anything other than "traditional" orienteering. Like most threads I guess we are saying similar things but with a slightly different emphasis.

To answer your specific questions Steler I would say that these new disciplines are good ways to attract new people to our sport. They will only change the nature of orienteering by adding to it, not replacing more traditional styles. If they do take the place of some of the high price/low quality C3s that are knocking around then all well and good.

And yes I think Mike Hamilton's example of the drink driver was ludicrous, and probably detracted from an otherwise serious point.

[Gnitworp]

Your point, in your original post, Steler, about vandalism in parks highlights a real problem. In my local park you need a small army of control marshals every time to stand a chance against the vandals, and we daren't use e-punching.

[mharky]

World Cup 2005, Sprint Final, Battersea Park, Real Orienteering?

No.

[awk]

World Cup 2005, Sprint Final, Battersea Park, Real Orienteering?

Yes!

[RJ]

...... Real Orienteering?

Yes and no!!!

What exactly is real orienteering.... that should engage a view or two!

[Ravinous]

What is "Real Orienteering"? This is a definition problem. For me, orienteering is getting from A to B using a map. You need a map as the terrain is unfamilar - naturally. I think everybody would agree with this.
The tricky definition is 'real'. I see there are 11 adjectival definitions on dictionary.com for the word.
It wasnt played on a computer like catching Features so Battersea Park was definitely real. But I suspect the posters are using the word in the sense of it not being authentic or genuine.
Personally, I think it a poor choice of word. Better to say 'techincal' or 'non-technical' or 'less-technical'. Naturally you are entitled to your opinion, but who is to say that folk or beginners used to park-o or technically easier courses for eg, are not doing 'real' orienteering. Those who do merely sound like O-snobs.