Route Choice- what is it ?

[Patrick]

Thus the "Long" description can more loosely be regarded as applying to virtually any Regional/National Event (L/E courses) as well as to the races Patrick lists. For example, W45L at the local Regional Event is "Long" in the IOF sense.

I doubt it, given that the guidelines for Long courses includes the statement:

A special element of the Long distance is the long legs, considerably longer than the average leg length. These longer legs may be from 1.5 to 3.5 km depending on the terrain type. Two or more such long legs should form part of the course

What you've said actually reinforces my point. WMOC courses may be defined as Long, but the ones I've seen have exhibited little sign of following the supposed characteristics of Long courses. I doubt this year's will either, considering ideal Long terrain is supposed to be "rough, demanding terrain, preferably hilly", which doesn't really equate to superfast Portuguese sand dunes (or indeed, Culbin East). So my argument remains that there is little evidence of these guidelines having any influence on the planning of most domestic orienteering events. The question of whether they should have any influence is a different matter entirely.

Cheers,

Patrick

[DJM]

These things are relative of course. What qualifies as a long leg for an M21E could well be longer than the whole course for a W70. Thus, when different running speeds are taken into consideration it is perhaps more appropriate to describe leg length by time than by distance, or by fraction of the overall course length and not by absolute length.

Similarly, you can have long legs in Sprint races even though they may be only a few hundred metres long (viz many of the first legs at this year's JK Sprint).

[Gnitworp]

There is clamour for 'Middle' and 'Long' for all classes without an understanding of what this means.

We've already had control pick exercises for all classes attached to BMOC.

For the Elite, the 'Classic' variety of orienteering test: a prolonged test of all skills in one race, has to some extent been lost by insisting on emphasing the contrast between 'Middle' and 'Long' 'styles' in the course planning. If we have more 'Middle' races for all classes, will 'Long' races develop in the same way as Elite Long races have to their detriment?

[Patrick]

These things are relative of course.....it is perhaps more appropriate to describe leg length by time than by distance, or by fraction of the overall course length and not by absolute length.

Now you really are struggling! It's obvious that the nature of a route choice problem changes when it's scaled up and down in this way, and given that overall course lengths are considered in terms of times and not distances it's pretty clear that the use of distance for individual leg lengths must have a point and a purpose.

Looking at the guidelines for Long and Middle, it seems to me that if you take out the references to distance and the Long's emphasis on physical endurance (how does that work over 45 minutes, by the way), then there's not much of a difference there. Both must involve route choice, both require constant mapreading, both will have variety of leg length, both should involve spectator interest (how many UK regional or district races do this?). What's the problem with any of that?

Cheers,

Patrick

[greywolf]

In theory it seems that Long and Middle should be very distinctive, each testing a different skill set - and this might not be a great idea as several folk have said
In practice, as Patrick pointed out, there's very little difference - Planners either don't know or don't follow the guidelines, and try and produce the best set of courses they can. As an example, check out Routegadget for the JK Day 2
http://www.jk.routegadget.co.uk/cgi-bin ... =13&kieli=
and compare and contrast Course 3 and Course 17 - The former is "Middle" (W21E), the latter "Long" (W45L) but can anyone seriously suggest that there are significant differences? Does a couple of extra controls (but not in the most technical bit) and half a km less on the Middle mean there's a whole different set of technical and/or physical challenges?

Not trying to have a pop at the JK Planner, by the way - the courses were great - just pointing out what happens in reality

[geomorph]

so 'long' is primarily about route choice, most likely on long legs, and endurance in the form of rough/hilly terrain.

Is technique on long legs that different? Is the technical nature any more or less sustained than a series of 3 500m legs.

If not is 'long' really only an endurance test?