British middle and Sprint start times

[Mrs H]

I was just looking for the British Middle and Sprint start times and according to the OD website

START TIMES

These should be available here (Fabian) from the evening of Tuesday 2nd April.

that's a bit worrying - or do you think it was an April Fool

[PMG]

No just the web person ...... I will correct it now!
Peter

[greywolf]

...but are you going to get the start times up by midnight?

[PMG]

No, but it looks like someone worked very late from the file generation time!

Sprint times now up see http://www.pgopage.btinternet.co.uk/beo ... t_2008.htm
More to follow. I will update as info comes through. Back to planners tasks!

[andy]

Start times for Course A and B on Saturday have been seeded, therefore it was not possible to comply with requests for early, middle or late starts.

yay, that makes it much less feasible to drive down on Sat morning as I'll have a 12:00 start time..

[Nails]

Peter

I thought that the heat startlists are normally combined so noone knows what course/who to follow?

Too late now....

[Gross]

The Controller should be mightely blushing..... plenty time for a re-draw & re-seeding:)

[Simon E]

The Controller should be mightely blushing

The Controller is doing no such thing and is entirely happy with the situation, having discussed it at length with the Planner and Organiser. I refer you to the exact same discussion that occurred two years ago before the Sprint Championships in Milton Keynes.

very strange that they've announced who's in which heat in advance.

1) Why did we publish the heat allocations?
Various reasons. Even if we try to keep it a secret people will compare control descriptions in the start lanes and see who has what. It probably doesn't make a huge deal of difference. It removes a distinct possibility for mistakes and protests (wrong map, wrong control descriptions, etc). Because it makes the heats just like the finals (and just like nearly every other race you'll run). Because Guideline K doesn't say you shouldn't.

Is there an echo in here?

[Gross]

Gross is now mightely blushing for not remembering that discussion:)

[andy]

<edit>removed a pile of moan that I couldn't face being argued publically, kept it to email!</edit>

[Ravinous]

I have to say that I am NOT in favour of telling people who is in what heat. It doesnt happen in IOF events - ie WOC, WCup, it didnt happen it the Czech and Swedish National Champs I have run in, that have had heats.
Maps and control descriptions all have names and numbers on them to avoid mistakes. It is really not rocket science and orienteers who run starts are not morons.
You dont have 3 lanes with Heat one, 2 and 3 - they are randomised so you dont know, irrespective of what lane you actually start in...
You certainly DONT compare control descriptions in the start lanes as that is cheating and you have start officials who stop you, PLUS you keep the start lanes a little apart - it is the National Champs afterall and should be taken seriously.
I really don't see why we should be different to the IOF rules on this - and probably most other nations. I do think knowing who is behind and infront has the potential to decrease the amount of orienteering you have to do. Well planned courses with gaffles that overlap one but not the other heat for eg can be great at keeping you on your toes and navigating.
If it is not in the guidelines, then it should be - and I can only imagine it has been left out through ignorance of what is done at IOF level and other countries.

[Homer]

I must say that I have to agree with Ravinous in principal. I'm sure the current guideline doesn't mention this issue and therefore OD are within their rights to have made the heats known.

In order to keep the heats secret the organisation required at the start to ensure everyone gets the right descriptions to go with the right map is significant. The competitors starting on the same minute would obviously know that they were on different heats. There would need to be a reasonable distance between the call-up box and the box where descriptions are issued to ensure people couldn't work out which of the starters on the minute ahead were on their heat. The start team would need multiple start lists (at least one at call-up, one at description issue) with the heats in which everyone was running marked on (ie different from the published start list). They would need to ensure competitors couldn't look at these over their shoulder. Then competitors would have to be reminded to pick up the correct map. Inevitably someone would end up with a map which didn't match their descriptions. I can see why organisers have avoided all these issues by publishing the heats.

On a similar theme, has anyone any thoughts on the seeding of the heats for Sunday?
To my casual glance, some heats look considerably stronger than others. I think I'd fancy my chances more in heat 4 than heat 3 for instance.

[roadrunner]

The thing that intrigues me is that, on the sprint heats, all the older competitors are concentrated on the early start times - for instance, on heat M2, the first M21 runner doesn't start until 10:34, whereas only one M50 or above starts after 10:21. If the best runners are seeded, wouldn't you expect to see the top M21s spread uniformly across the start times?

[SJC]

If the best runners are seeded, wouldn't you expect to see the top M21s spread uniformly across the start times?

From the sprint championships Guideline:
2.2.3 The start list for each heat should be seeded. Seeding should follow the guidance produced by the Elite Competitions Group with the best competitors starting last.

[roadrunner]

From the sprint championships Guideline:
2.2.3 The start list for each heat should be seeded. Seeding should follow the guidance produced by the Elite Competitions Group with the best competitors starting last.

And yet Appendix L (Selection, Seeding and Start Lists) says:

2.1.1 Seeding is the process whereby the likely leading competitors in a class are
spread through a start list, so as to avoid their starting too close together.

2.1.2 The purpose of seeding is to ensure as fair a competition as possible for the
better competitors in a class. This is achieved by avoiding the starting of good
competitors on the same course too close together.

If you put these two together, what they imply to me is that you spread the best orienteers out over the start list, but with the best of all starting last - with other, non-seeded competitors, filling in the gaps.