Planner/Organiser/Controller's Comments

[roadrunner]

In the pre-internet days, the results of every event used to include some comments from the planner, organiser and controller. In recent years, when results are posted on the internet, these seem to be appearing less and less often - even for some high-profile events. I always found these comments interesting as a competitor, and I'm sure they were useful when the next event was organised on the same area. In addition, where there has been controversy about some aspects of an event, without these comments we get a rather one-sided view of things. What do people think - should results always include input from the event officials?

[Spookster]

And if you go even further back in time, paper results also used to include a summary of the event income and expenditure (at least they did where I started orienteering in the South East region), so that you could see how the organising club had used the entry fees money, and what surplus they had made. We occasionally get threads on Nopesport about how much events cost these days, so perhaps we should try to make the economics of them more visible to punters?

[NeilC]

Not sure that publishing the accounts would be that helpful. Clubs run their accounts in many different ways - some charge the entire mapping costs to a single event such that that event does badly finacially whereas followup events do well. Some take money from each event to cover printer, SI, EMIT etc depreciation costs, others just build up a surplus to deal with this.

I certainly enjoy reading officials' comments. Especially comments like "All the competitors I spoke to at the finish seemed to enjoy their runs" whereas everyone else in the car park is moaning about that 2k track run, course too short, course too long, dodgy controls etc etc.

[SeanC]

Although I read the event comments, the answer to the original question should be no, at least for all events at C3 level and below. Some dislike making public comments and making it a requirement could put some off volunteering to be an organiser/planner/controller.

[IanW]

whereas everyone else in the car park is moaning about that 2k track run

Do you have any particular 2k track run fresh in your mind?

[drobin]

How about this comment from the controller of yesterday's WIM Regional?

Why does Brit O (Nicer than BO don’t you think?) insist on a taped route from the final control to the finish? It satisfactorily negates the final control; never mind allowing us to run to hit the tape and then back up it to the last control!

[King Penguin]

whereas everyone else in the car park is moaning about that 2k track run

Do you have any particular 2k track run fresh in your mind?

Last year's November Classic, leg 1, M45, was over 2km straight track run; 25% of the course !

[seabird]

Why does Brit O insist on a taped route from the final control to the finish? It satisfactorily negates the final control; never mind allowing us to run to hit the tape and then back up it to the last control!

If anyone's done this they are likely to already have lost time on the leg. Where is the problem? It is rare that final controls are particularly hard navigation. Leave that for the penultimate control and all those before it.

[EddieH]

I do hope that no-one is going to take from this thread thatlong legs are poor.

It is absolutely clear to me from Winsplits statistics that long legs produce a consideraly higher percentage of errors than shorter ones. Unless Winsplits error measuring system fails to adjust enough for time difference on these legs, (and I don't think it does,) it is clear that long legs have a major effect on the majority of orienteers.
For those that have Winsplits try it for yourself.

[SJC]

it is clear that long legs have a major effect on the majority of orienteers

I wouldn't disagree with this statement.

However, the conclusion that:

long legs produce a consideraly higher percentage of errors than shorter ones

does not necessarily follow.
In my experienece a long leg simply exagerates the difference in running speeds between competitors which a short technical leg does not.

[roadrunner]

it is clear that long legs have a major effect on the majority of orienteers

I wouldn't disagree with this statement.

However, the conclusion that:

long legs produce a consideraly higher percentage of errors than shorter ones

does not necessarily follow.
In my experienece a long leg simply exagerates the difference in running speeds between competitors which a short technical leg does not.

This has veered rather off-topic, but I think that long legs can be good, although they aren't always so. If the navigation requires care all the way - either no line features or an overwhelming number of them, for example - then yes, it's a good leg. But the one at the November Classic - which was am obvious route for most of the way - didn't seem to me a good test of orienteering, and I wonder why the planner didn't put another control in. But isn't that just the sort of thing we'd learn from reading the planner's comments

[runnerbean]

I enjoy reading the comments, but if they're not there when the results are posted (which would be a pretty tall order), it's hard to remember to keep checking back to see if they've appeared. Maybe that's the reason for the decline in publishing them - the assumption that by the time they're posted, no-one will be reading.

[IanD]

I enjoy reading the comments, but if they're not there when the results are posted (which would be a pretty tall order), it's hard to remember to keep checking back to see if they've appeared. Maybe that's the reason for the decline in publishing them - the assumption that by the time they're posted, no-one will be reading.

Indeed I looked for comments on the WIM site after the event and there were none there; if it hadn't been for this thread, I wouldn't have looked again.

[IanD]

How about this comment from the controller of yesterday's WIM Regional?

Why does Brit O (Nicer than BO don’t you think?) insist on a taped route from the final control to the finish? It satisfactorily negates the final control; never mind allowing us to run to hit the tape and then back up it to the last control!

An intriguing comment, seeing as the taped route from the last control on course 3 didn't go to the finish (presumably being part of a Yellow-standard course as well as M50L).

[DavidJ]

as the taped route from the last control on course 3 didn't go to the finish

I am intrigued - where did it go?