Purple & Black

[EddieH]

Not convinced agree with Graeme re scrapping LG, particularly in many of our technically demanding forests (how else can youngsters step up?)
However having controlled Graeme I know what a fastidious planner he is. When we REALLY try to plan properly on many areas up here it really is impossible to combine many controls of different technical difficulties. Running legs into controls from opposite directions can do it, but Graeme is one of those that would avoid this common practice as being unacceptable. In the end we have to compromise otherwise we run out of controls, or spend an unacceptably long time putting them out.
I have just planned a C4 at which I compromised more than ever before partly because I knew I had a limited time to hang the controls.

And before Groos says "Wrong- Bad planning" we all do this for pleasure and there have to be limits - if I hadn't done this the event would not have happened. And by all accounts the punters were happy.

[Gross]

And before Groos says "Wrong- Bad planning" we all do this for pleasure and there have to be limits - if I hadn't done this the event would not have happened. And by all accounts the punters were happy.

And knowing you Eddie then even the compromises would have been thought through..... so you're WRONG... gross wouldn't say bad planning but good planning given the constraints

[Fyrish]

Ran Blue yesterday. I thought it carefully planned and a good challenge. The Brown course was equally well received. Thanks Eddie

[HOCOLITE]

I am not grey or even in the age classes reffered to. I quite happily do TD5 for my badge class, which does double up with grey age classes, but I rarely do a green at colour coded because they are usually physically beyond me. Yesterday I did a green it was refreshing to find one planned at 4.4K and 95m climb. I believe this may be because the young lady who planned it did not go OTT on the climb and length. I find generally male planners feel the need to plan greens at the upper end of the range whatever. The short green of CSC is a great idea. I feel that there is not need to push green to the upper level where there is a blue and brown. I think orienteering looses a lot of the female interest because of the upper end planning of greens.

[graeme]

Not convinced agree with Graeme re scrapping LG, particularly in many of our technically demanding forests (how else can youngsters step up?)

You make a good case for not doing both, and if you look at the facts the LG is
populated by short, technically competant often female orienteers, not "steppers up". e.g. at your event you had 77% female: 12 experienced senior orienteers and only one junior (who finished 13 mins clear...). This is similar to a more lengthy study I did before switching the shortest course at the Scottish relays from LG to short TD5.

Given infinite time and resource, sure, do both. Given an area capable of TD4 only, it doesn't matter what you call the course, it will cater equally well for all. But given a good area, finite time and resource then short TD5 is what's wanted.

"Only my mum calls me grey" (12 mins for the Light Green this Saturday, then 11 second time )

[seabird]

[quote="graeme"] if you look at the facts the LG is
populated by short, technically competant often female orienteers, not "steppers up". e.g. at your event you had 77% female: 12 experienced senior orienteers and only one junior (who finished 13 mins clear...). This is similar to a more lengthy study I did before switching the shortest course at the Scottish relays from LG to short TD5.

At Harden this weekend 43 people did the (slightly long) Light Green. Of those whose age is identifiable I estimate there were
13 juniors, who by and large led the pack.
11 "Grey" competitors i.e. M/W55+ experienced orienteers, all of whom took comfortably over one hour.
16 younger seniors, who seemed roughly evenly split between experienced females, and stepper-up seniors of both genders.

The course seemed from the results to meet the various needs of each group in reasonably equal proportions. (I can't claim to have heard feedback from any of these competitors.)

[SeanC]

It seems to me that overall longstanding orienteers are well served by the sport. Experienced orienteers want a good network of events at a reasonable price. Considering the numbers in our sport, and the complexity of putting on events, its amazing there are so many events. And £5 for a colour coded event is hardly expensive. In contrast, newcomers generally don't get such a good deal. I really think we should be diverting any extra time that might be freed by having less regionals into helping newcomers. That would mean more C5 events, more coaching, more publicity, more buddies etc, not more courses for experienced competitors. As the numbers in our sport begin to increase, instead of decreasing as they are now, then it makes sense to look at more courses for the experienced. If the numbers carry on declining then there will be less events and less choice of courses in 10-20 years time no matter what the experienced orienteers want.

Maybe a compromise would be two tiers of colour coded events, with some offering black, grey/ short green etc, in more technical areas, but with a corresponding increase in price?

I agree Green courses seem longer than I remember them 20 years ago. My (possibly dodgy) memory tells me that Green courses were rarely much above 4k, even in the soft south, whereas now 5k seems quite common now.

[seabird]

Agree with Sean about the need for local events, but we should also make sure these feed into a regular supply of district events, which can have the buzz that comes from greater levels of participation.

I gather Aire had a flurry of new members attracted at yesterdays district event. This followed on from a long summer series of informals, through which some but not all these new members were first attracted to the sport.

For the district event I noticed that the organiser had advertised on the website of the most local running club. It would be interesting to learn how successful this was.

As for 5k Green courses. Just within the guidelines if most runners finish between 45 and 75 minutes.

[EddieH]

Thank you Fyrish for your positive comments about yesterday's event.

I am suprised that blue and brown were so well received. The first longer leg up the hill to the ride end was I thought a poor leg. It was my aversion to reading off the screen that caused it - I can now reveal that I accidetally placed the control on the wrong ride end. Mike Atherton did not like the leg and tried to get me to change it, but I was looking at my hand-drawn map and still liked the leg to the ride end immediately to te west, not far away but a very different leg aiming to keep people off the rides higer up the hill. I am sorry for that - I am sure the intended courses were markedl better.

[NeilC]

I agree Green courses seem longer than I remember them 20 years ago. My (possibly dodgy) memory tells me that Green courses were rarely much above 4k, even in the soft south, whereas now 5k seems quite common now.

Ah yes the soft south where the light greens are too easy (how is that evidence coming along Tatty?) and the Greens too long (Sean please let me know which events have had 5k+ greens this year, or last if you like)

This all came up at a Technical Conference that I organised a couple of years ago where perception and reality did not match. The Green may be too long but my analysis at the time showed that, with the odd exception, they were being planned according to the guidelines. One event that did fail I recall was a DFOK event at Westerham.

[SeanC]

I wrote

"My (possibly dodgy) memory tells me that Green courses were rarely much above 4k, even in the soft south, whereas now 5k seems quite common now."

OK, I retract this bit as the evidence is based on a sample size of about 3 over the last couple of years where I can actually remember the course lengths (and I'm not about to go back through all the websites and repeat Neil's analysis). Must remember not to post on a monday afternoon. Too sleepy.