I wonder what the issue is with only having a Junior National Championship this year. Is it a problem with clubs being burned out or is it the extra hoops that they have to jump through?
CSU is working on a Masters Nationals event bid for this fall, just working on final approval from the venue before we can announce anything specially.
I think there is also a Nationals (SML) bid that is in the works from another club.
I'm wondering if part of the problem might be that the new "free ranking event" concept has drawn away some events that might have otherwise been A-meets (and thus potential candidates for championships). Might be worth reevaluating and maybe making some adjustments after a couple of years.
Speaking (unofficially) on behalf of RMOC -- I "heard" that we declined to make our national event a championship because of the extra pressure, scrutiny & requirements that would come along with that.
OCIN and SMOC will be submitting sanctioning application and bid this week for the 2018 Nationals (SML) on Oct 19-21 in north central Indiana and southern Michigan. Event details will be here
That is very exciting news! Thanks Mike!
As a director of an OUSA club that is not likely to be soon in the position to host a national event let alone a national championship event please feel free to take my words with a grain of salt. It is a shame that US orienteers are no longer able to look two to three years down the road to see where they will be traveling to future national championships. That lack of a forward plan probably ends up costing the host clubs a lot of entries. It is therefore to their advantage to get their bids for 2019 and beyond in now. It would also help a lot if the clubs of OUSA could get together and agree on a regional rotation so that the events could rotate perhaps between the four main time zones with the occasional foray further out. Something like Eastern, Pacific, Central, Eastern, Mountain, Central, Eastern, Pacific, Central, Eastern ..... would seem balanced on the surface. Of course with this idea in any one year the Junior Nats would go to one zone, the SML to another, the Masters to a third. There could then be a piece of the pie for everyone almost every year.
There is a lot of potential local publicity available for the club that gets its members to a nearby National champs and has someone score well, even more when they travel great distance. The kids from one school I know became local celebrities by showing up at this year's Junior Nats and gaining a couple of podium finishes when there was room for everyone on the podium. There was some talk that they were more celebrated in the halls of the school than the football team. Helping these schools and clubs plan a year and more ahead would be doing a great service to everyone.
Oh yes, de-intesifying the event approval and scrutiny process would be a great help, too.
Could these dates at least be put on the unofficial planning calendar?
I wonder if the change of the national championships delayed bids; now that people know what the championship events are, bids are starting to come in. So maybe this will resolve in a few years.
The free ranking events are only single days, and so aren't would-be multi day championship events. And they're a step down in formality from national ranking events (A meets), rather than a step up like championships. Maybe there's a relationship, but as Brooke said, my local club's decision not to host appears to be unrelated (and we're not hosting a regional ranking event this year). I suspect that clubs' motivation in hosting them is quite different from the motivation for hosting championships. But perhaps key members of clubs can opine.
JJ, COC's "free day" took advantage of an existing local event already executed to high standards (WIOL Champs). With the added cost to all the juniors involved to register as a normal NRE day, I doubt we could have convinced the COC board to approve it as a regular NRE, and I don't believe it ever has been an A-Meet in COC history. That idea has been floated off and on for at least the past 10 years and generally rejected as too costly for participants with little in return that isn't already part of the event as it exists locally.
But to my mind, there was huge payoff from this year's WIOL/Winter O Series Champs in opening local competitors' eyes to what else is out there in the greater OUSA world. It was a big deal for the kids, most of whom had no idea we had national rankings or how they might compare to kids outside WA. Parents, too. Valerie got questions from COCers about how rankings work and what they mean (and she knew just who to ask about the sudden rise in interest, too. ;-). Cascade had a huge contingent at Jr. Nationals. Some of those kids are now thinking about applying to the JDT. And a number of the adults came just because they hadn't run a ranked race in years. The "free day" may have been some of the best advertising for OUSA out here in years.
I absolutely agree we also need those national championship events, and more fidelity on the deep planning calendar would be great. But they are a big commitment, too. I suspect there are some factors in just holding such a big event that may be leading to the recent decline in championship events. This isn't the first year that has had a slow fall season for NREs, incidentally - the problem pre-dates the "free days."
Ultimately, I think research is necessary before concluding "free days" have resulted in fewer championship bids.
I certainly don't mean to imply that every "free day" was a potential championship, or that they are a bad idea. But it could be that it's providing an easier path to a higher profile meet. I suspect that they were intended to give smaller clubs a chance to put on a bigger meet without as much hassle/expense. If that's the case, is it smaller clubs or larger ones that are availing themselves of it?
It seems like now would be a great time to consolidate your National Championship schedule. It just doesn't seem like you need to have championship events for both SML and Classic.
OUSA just consolidated them! ;-). Calling the Classic Masters and SML Nationals was the fudge that made people happy enough, I guess, with Interscholastics and Intercollegiate becoming Junior Nationals. Some other formats went away...relay, ultra long.
Combining North Americans and Nationals might make sense when hosted by America.
I think they're actually different animals...a local championship tends to focus on local needs, which may not conform to national championship formats. We found this with the WIOL Champs, and although we were able to make it work, it would not have been appropriate to be both the WIOL Champs and Junior Nationals. I've felt the sense of competing priorities at other national events that have doubled as local championships, too. I think these types of events are almost in a class of their own.
So, how do we get clubs...or perhaps groups of clubs...motivated to want to hold headline national championship events? How do we change the initial reaction from "what a pain" to "we think we can put on an awesome event?" How do we get clubs to see possibilities instead of problems?
What are "free ranking events"?
Events that can be used for rankings, but OUSA sanctioning fees have been waived. (OUSA doesn't make as much money but clubs gain the experience of hosting a sanctioned event who might not otherwise hold one.)
If clubs who normally would host a two or more day meet decide to just hold a fee-waived event, is that what we want?
Are there any cases of clubs that would normally host a 2+ day NRE instead hosting a one day "free" RRE? I've seen some RREs listed, but am trying to think of one that obviously would otherwise have been a 2+ day A meet? Is this just a theoretical concern?
On the plus side for the RRE idea, it seems that it can expose more orienteers to ranking events, and provide a couple more nearby ranking events, if, say, half the clubs turn some good quality local event into an RRE.
World Masters are going away from "masters" courses toward SML format.
WOC is being separated to urban/sprint and forest races.
I would think that it is not a bad idea for OUSA to start adopting same championship structure, ex. sprint champs including sprint relays and forest M/L champs.
Regional Ranking Event (one day freebie per club per calendar year, can't be combined with other ranked events), vs National Ranking Event (one or more days, OUSA sanctioning fees apply, a/k/a A meet). I think that I have that right.
Sergey...I think that option was discussed. It has some advantages. (There are many aficionados of the two day classic though.)
The nomenclature of RRE vs. NRE is confusing. CascadeOC had our freebie event in February and we ran into some questions along the lines of...
Q: "So, WIOL Champs is a RRE? What's that?"
A: "It's a Regional Ranking Event"
Q: "Oh, cool. What are regional rankings?"
A: "No, it's for national rankings."
Q: "But you just said regional."
A: "I know, but at a regional ranking event you get national ranking points."
Q: "So what makes it regional?"
A: "Because it's not a national ranking event."
Q: "But you just said that we get national ranking points."
A: "I know, but in the case of an RRE the host club doesn't have to pay sanctioning fees to Orienteering USA like they would for an NRE. You see, once per year, each sanctioned club..."
Q: [eyes glaze over]
A: "You know what, we'll just call WIOL Champs a national ranking event."
This is why they aren't actually called "RREs" or even Regional Ranking Events. They're just a National Ranking Event that a club can host once a year with no additional sanctioning fees to OUSA over the usual local meet fees.
Alex is correct. We specifically did NOT adopt the term Regional Ranking Event to avoid that confusion. The nomenclature used in the rules is "Fee Waiver National Ranking Event." Most people have been calling them Free NRE when discussing sanctioning and fees but just call it an NRE day when promoting the event.
There have been at least six of these so far. All were events that probably would have happened as non-sanctioned events otherwise.
Any further information on the CSU event? Any tentative dates? It would help for people to plan for it.
We have to pay fees to our national governing body for every single event that we run although these fees are higher for state championships and higher again if we were to host the national championships (which we also charge more for).
Same in Canada and USA, Tricky. Most of that fee goes to pay for our collective insurance coverage so while we organizers may grumble about it we do not object too strenuously. I think in hte past what has had many clubs in the USA backing off from organizing nationally sanctioned events are the extra levies for sanctioned events that go to run the national office and other programs plus the expense of bringing in a controller/ event advisor. It is not that they object to the national office or national programs. It just seems the extra revenue from participants \coming from away' does not make up for the lost revenue from locals who do not see a reason to pay that extra fee for another local event. (That may not be the case across the country but it is in my little snowbird part of America.)
So VERY GOOD on O-USA for building that one freebie possibility for every club's calendar. I hope it catches on..
In some cases, the local people don't go to the more expensive events because they don't really care about ranking points and they can go to a local meet for $5 or $10 a day instead of $30 or $40. At the same time, the cost of entry for those traveling any distance and staying in a motel is a relatively small percent of the total cost. This is not true for a local who stays at home and doesn't drive far.
I don't think it's the finances as much as the perceived organizational hassle. There's not mmuch in the way of requirements when you're putting on a local meet, it's whatever is acceptable for your club. Hang some controls, people show up, you probably have results (though one group around here did timing to the nearest minute), it can be done by a single person. But for a national meet, you've got a big rulebook, and you have to have preassigned start times so you need a start crew, people are going to expect results displayed promptly after each person finishes, you have a course consultant assigned who critiques your courses, so they have to be designed earlier, the higher entry fees turn a bunch of locals off (and they're needed for voulnteer positions anyway), etc. The free ranking events cut down on these requirements somewhat, to make the process more manageable, particularly for smaller clubs.
(Although smaller clubs could also seek advice from Swampfox, who led the 1000-Day, with multiple national event days, for multiple years, and almost no local club members. It can be done.)
One of the fortunate accidents of Australia's political geography is that six states and two territories gives us pretty much an optimal number of units for competition, and for organising events. We have a rotation system for our national championships (and for our major annual multi-day, at Easter) - apart from the Northern Territory, the other seven host the national championships once every six (larger states) or eight (smaller states) years. When they do, most of the clubs in that state will usually be involved in some way or other.
Whilst there's a lot of our structure which wouldn't translate to the North American environment, there are bits which might. (I'll be at NAOC if anyone from the US or Canada feels like having a chat on the subject).
Within 9 years of being introduced to orienteering at a demo event in college, I'd designed and set a US Champs course (2010 Middle Distance), and I'd directed a US Champs (2012 Junior Nationals).
In the 6 years since, I don't really have any desire to do either again.
Why? For me, it's nothing to do with organizational hassle, paperwork, or finances. My local club already hosts 8 events per year with similar organizational requirements. Paperwork is relatively easy.
Personally, as a volunteer for a club who doesn't have much financial incentive to host a National Event, it's about risk vs. reward. Specifically, the risk of screwing up something vs. the reward of getting everything right.
In 2010, I thought I'd done everything right. I had a both a vetter/course consultant and and a separate event consultant, both with excellent reputations. Did I receive some compliments afterwards? Probably. But all I can remember now is being loudly accosted in the motel pool that evening, and then hearing through the grapevine about some other disgruntled folks returning to the race venue with measuring tape to prove themselves right.
Maybe I've got too thin of quasi-millennial skin, but I'd prefer not getting rudely insulted by my peers after putting in a helluva lot of volunteer time and effort. (Not to mention all of the other criticisms thrown at other big events on Attackpoint over the years). How much reward is worth the risk is my personal reputation?
In 2012, it was mostly because of behind-the-scenes OUSA and inter-club politics that I believed to be unfair. I will not rehash that here.
I don't feel that guilty about not wanting to design or direct another US Champs (or National Event for that matter), since I feel like I've already fulfilled my "obligation" to the community.
Since these two events, I've learned to pick my projects where the reward is worth the risk, and I've been perfectly happy with that decision.
Last year I organized & set courses for 10 events, doing pretty much everything myself, but these were of course local/small events with usually less than 200 starters. For these I usually receive a lot more praise than complaints because the runners all know that it is quite a bit of effort.
3 years ago I made the spectator courses for one of the JWOC days, with lots of additional hazzle due to the need to reuse/share the Middle distance area while still having the finish by the Long distance & Relay arena. This was a lot of work and I am very grateful to my wife who insisted I should have everything ready by Oct/Nov the year before, i.e. before the first snowfall.
This year I have only done two events so far, but the first was a combined event where I first had 150+ people, then an evening training event for the Oslo area followed by a mass start (with pentagram forking, so 22 different courses to print) night event. That mass start had both a 4km and a 5 km course, with the majority doing both so I had more forking combinations (121) than runners (about 80).
Now I'm off to MWOC in Denmark, then I'll organize a few more races later this summer.
I guess my key point is that I sort of agree with Pink Socks: There are a lot of different ways to go wrong when organizing a big O event and nothing less than perfection seems to be expected by most runners.
Sprint races are of course an order of magnitude harder to get right. :-(
Although smaller clubs could also seek advice from Swampfox
I wonder if such superheroes are the exception rather than the rule - another one man show A meet producer, used as an example of how feasible such one man shows are in previous threads, now has a club website that is parked in Japanese? for ramblings about angel baby collagen, whatever that is. I fear its sustainability. Is it beneficial for small clubs to risk blowing out their volunteer pool for the benefit of the converted, or is it better to use them for more events aimed at bringing in new folks and growing the club to one big enough to comfortably host events from a more robust team? I don't have many numbers either way, happy to be convinced.
As a diffident megalomaniac, with delusions of grandeur leadened with insouciance, I always appreciated the bright lights of national championships and the like, but I always had to lurk in the penumbra, rather than squint in the glare or hide completely in the dark.
That said, I guess the reason I'm not chomping at the bit to do another one now is the asymmetric rewards. I don't have fear of failure or a resistance to accountability; I actually like that part. Rather, it's the upside reward that's lacking. You screw up, you get skewered--fine--but if you succeed brilliantly, you get at most a pass. There are other pursuits that admit to a bit more symmetry on the upside and the downside.
At the moment, I have no desire to step back in the ring, but would if there was a new sufficiently audacious and grandiose deliverable to be had (aforementioned aversions aside.)
If the PinkSocks and J-Mans of the worlds are not interested in organizing major events in the US, those are important canaries in a coal mine.
Note that the organizers of Swampfox's event this year declined a request to include a national championship.
+1 on Nev-Monster's comment. (I'm similar, in having insufficient motivation to organize a major event, though a one day regional NRE seems of a plausibly suitable scope, not so involved as to be exhausting, maybe just "big" enough to attract some people from Kansas City, Utah, New Mexico and maybe somewhere else.)
Not sure what to suggest, as national championships can be fun to attend. (So are other events too, though.)
At least I understood everything Pink Socks wrote.
Interested to hear about the effectiveness of BHAGs versus working away perhaps singlehandedly on grass-roots hopefully sustainable events. Am finding that some people only go to the full-facilities events:-(( Y'all OK with the term BHAG?
What would be a good example of a BHAG for orienteering?
WOC 93 was definitely a BHAG.
It's pretty obvious that not many people want to host events, and this small number is getting smaller every year. How do we reverse this? How do we provide the incentive for our best event producers to want to produce events?
Is it "just" a numbers problem? It's not actually that hard, per se, to host the events well, and resources exist to help. But when you put in all that work for 150 people, it's disheartening.
Mr. Wonderful poses good questions too. Who is our target audience?
At least you get 150 people. The last national champs I organised, we got something like 60 (admittedly it was MTBO but the east coast - NSW and Vic - are raking in around 150 these days, many of which are from NZ (much easier to get to than to WA), and that's a high number).
I'm not sure it's strictly a numbers problem. When things go well, being responsible for part of a good event - even when it's small - feels great. I love being part of a team that makes it all happen. And our O community can be very gracious and enthusiastic.
But when there's controversy, I can easily see how I might feel just like Pink Socks. Especially because our community is fairly small, and we all know each other. It doesn't take much to make someone question whether their time and effort was worthwhile.
I'd be interested in hearing from those who have put on series of races, orienteering or otherwise. Surely they've had experience with events that don't go quite as intended. How do they handle those situations, and what keeps them going after a frustrating experience?
But when there's controversy, I can easily see how I might feel just like Pink Socks. Especially because our community is fairly small, and we all know each other.
In my experiences, it was the opposite rather. It was people who I didn't really know who torpedoed my spirits.
I still like organizing "big" events. From my perspective, SART is the biggest event I've done (and I've done it 3 times now). It's a lot of work doing pretty much everything (mapping, course design, event direction, graphics, etc), but it's nice that I only have to answer to myself. And it's also nice that the attendees are generally like-minded sprint aficionados who are very appreciative of me organizing the event.
Some of it also may be that I'm already saturated with event direction. I'm the director for a local 6-race series that CascadeOC hosts, and SART, and I work part-time for a company that produces navigation races and trail runs. So if O-USA were to ask me to direct an event for them, I'm kinda full already (too full, perhaps).
This is why they aren't actually called "RREs" or even Regional Ranking Events. They're just a National Ranking Event that a club can host once a year with no additional sanctioning fees to OUSA over the usual local meet fees.
Alex, I forgot to thank you earlier for this clarification. I'm glad it's this way. I didn't really have a good pulse on the official nomenclature this spring, but I definitely did hear "RRE" from several people, so I incorrectly assumed that it was the name to differentiate it from the pay-to-play version.
A BHAG I was thinking of was a proposal for a tiny country to run a MTBO World Champs. tRicky, pretty much ALL the MTBOers from NZ travel to Australia, that's all there are who do more than 1 a year. 50 or so people. Would I do more good working on a big event like this, or keeping things going in my own region?
Through years of directing and course setting both local and national events I have learned to approach it like a director of a play. Sometimes the events are hits, sometimes flops, most somewhere in between. Audiences sometimes cheer, critics will always sneer. They are time consuming, frustrating, and some things always go wrong. But I take immense satisfaction that I am producing something that gives enjoyment to my fellow orienteers.
Here, here to Geoman's comment. The only thing I question is whether he really ever had any "flops". The goal, of course, is to give enjoyment to other orienteers.
A very interesting thread. Thank you all. I have been reminded of a research report I came across quite a few years ago in my field of rural sociology. It was a study of the personalities of farmers. The farmer population had a very different distribution to that found in the general population - a much greater frequency of introversion being one example. I am left wondering if our orienteering community has its own tendencies to a mix of introversion and obsessiveness. I put my hand up on both counts.
A number of the comments on a disinterest in organising large events rang true to me. Part of the problem is the effort-reward equation for the competitor. Large events have many entrants who have spent time and money to travel to get to the event. There are sheep-stations at stake in the form of rankings, selections and trophies. Our sport thrives on organisational complexity (just look at set of National Rules). Add the two together and a small number of publicly disgruntled competitors is a high probability. Its less stressful to organise local events by oneself, even if its still heaps of work. In two weeks I will be organising a four map event. It has been lots of work to create the maps (gold mining) and design the courses with a limit on the number of available controls. Despite the work, I have only just released the event information two weeks out. I will be happy if there are only 30 entrants. What my 30 over-enthusiastic peers think afterwards is reward enough.
I would like to stop attending National events to reduce the obligation to organise such events when the State turn comes round. But I would have to somehow get out of a National administrative role that requires attendance at such events. When I have served enough time to retire from that role gracefully, I will ease back on National event attendance and spend more time rock climbing while the body still allows it. Now there is a sport for introverts.
Agree with Geoman. I've directed many national events, and my impression is that I have provided challenge and enjoyment to a great many people. There will always be a small percentage who complain about anything. If winning time isn't hit perfectly, or map drafting or printing isn't 100% perfect ISOM or ISSOM, or a control is 5 meters off where it should be, there will be complaints, but 99% of the participants are still going to have fun and a great time. Not to say that I (or any other organizer) can't learn form these critiques and do better the next time, but they aren't anything to get upset about or quit organizing (Sorry, I just have a really hard time understanding people who are that sensitive to a few harsh words. My personal attitude is "get over it"). Now, maybe we can help retain some of those organizers and volunteers who are a little more sensitive to the few whiners (and legitimate concerns as well), if the rest of us all make a little extra effort to make positive comments on course setting, maps, and general organization - these folks put in a whole lot of effort, and it is a real shame and loss to the sport each time we lose an organizer because one or two or three people complain.
tRicky, pretty much ALL the MTBOers from NZ travel to Australia
Shame we don't really seem to return the favour given our population is larger. I try - even when I know the map is going to be tough - and I'm all the way over the other side of the country!
tRicky its a wonder you are allowed to take part in orienteering, given those wings that sprout from your arms.
Log, we think alike. My last event was a free print-your-own-map mini adventure race. Bike controls orange ribbons. Four 1km foot sprints with SI stations only at S/F. "Results" by battery-powered split printer. Worked a treat.
Thanks gruver. I like the implications of PYO maps. It would mean EOD would be more feasible. And no-one will be able to complain about poor print quality or colour matching. ;-)
If only I could fly. I might be able to get through tomorrow's event.
I think the point about the upside is a good one. How could we have a better culture of appreciation for the hard work done? How could the 99% who are happy be at least as loud as the 1% who are not? How can we appreciate the types of constraints the organizers might have solved for that are invisible: like choosing a time of year when the location is best or negotiating a tough peitting process.
I feel like often when you ask an orienteering how the race went, they'll talk only about where they lost time. It's like a perfect race is the expectation and taken for granted, and anything worse than that is a loss. Why don't we celebrate the great route choice and the well-executed route or the fast speed up the hill as much as we bemoan the bad route or lost time within the circle?
I think we too often have the same expectations of our events. A perfectly executed event is taken for granted rather than sufficiently praised. And, we spend our time discussing what went wrong...sometimes without knowing the constraints or context for why particular decisions were made.
How can we do more to say thank you to the people who have put in hundreds or thousands of hours so we'll have a good time?
How can we do more to say thank you? Suzanne that is a great point. One way is to start right here on Attack Point.
As for AP we often see before the event comments placed about the event where some participants are asking about posting of start times or other 'bulletin details' or they want to share lodging or a ride. However we don't as often see the comments of thanks after the event. That is a shame. Words of thanks take so little time to write and they can mean so much to those who have put in the effort.
Send those words of thanks directly to the organizera too.
Consider it like those surveys you get after some hotel stays. When I get one I usually try to find something nice to say about some (low wage) worker at the hotel - the lady running the breakfast bar, the student working his way through college on the front desk, the maintenance guy. Their job is too often thankless but when the manager comes to one of them with a positive comment it can make a big emotional difference to them.
So, for example, if you appreciated the effort of the poor guy who had to carry those bags of warm up clothes several hundred meters back from the Start area please let the organizer know. It will help them get that volunteer back next year.
Another idea: When I was participating in triathlons it was the practice to get the male and female winners to say a few words. The good ones always spoke on behalf of all the triathletes to thank the event organizers, all the volunteers and to congratulate their fellow competitors. Could we introduce this in orienteering?
I was reading this thread soon after completing the WMMTBOC in Hungary recently and first thing I did was send a thank you email to the organizers. Sure the long event was a mud bath but I instead congratulated them on the organisation, the course setting and how smoothly everything ran.
I actually have seen complimentary comments on Attackpoint for quite a few events that I've attended, thanking the organizers for such an awesome event. Part of the reason I've noticed is that some of these have been for events that I thought were pretty bogus and poorly organized, but people still come up with praise. Don't get me wrong, I don't have any problem with this, and in particular, if I didn't like an event (which I'm unlikely to say anything about unless it was really egregious), that doesn't mean that others didn't consider it to have been great, and saying so is a fine thing. So keep it up!
I think part of the problem is that negative comments are often made on site to exhausted volunteers (many of whom don't read Attackpoint). It's the ticked off orienteer who blasts the course setter or finish crew right after he / she finished that causes far more damage than later praise can undo. The volunteer makes the decision "I've had enough of these ingrates" and telling them later to read the half dozen nice comments on AP is too little too late to bring them back.
The Newsletter indicates that there is the Individual Nationals on October. Thank you OCIN! Anything happening with the CSU event that Ed was talking about in June?
We're still working on permissions for that. Can't really announce anything until we have venue permission. Fingers are crossed!
Good luck. Things are never as easy as they might seem. Only if people knew that we are a very low impact sport.
Are you able to give a date or date range? Fall calendars are filling up!
From earlier in this thread: Oct 19-21, 2018 in north central Indiana and southern Michigan. Event details will be here.
The Oct 19-21, 2018 event is sanctioned and pending OUSA Board approval as the USA Nationals (S, M, L format). The CSU-hosted event which edwarddes and acjospe have referred to would potentially be the OUSA Masters Nationals (combined time two-day Classic format). The possible date of this latter event is what I think is being asked about.
Yes it is the CSU event (masters champs) that I was hoping to find out a date for, or if that isn't possible, at least a narrowing of the possibilities. Sept? Oct.? Nov?
We’re hoping for November 10-11. But if permission doesn’t come through we’ll have to bag it.
Yes, this would be the Master Nationals.
I asked @mikeminium about flying to the potential SML champs near South Bend IN. Here was his reply:
South Bend (SBN) is served by Allegiant, United, American, and Delta, and has nonstop service to Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, Newark, Charlotte, Atlanta, Dallas-Ft Worth, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Tampa, Orlando, and Ft Myers.
Kalamazoo (AZO) looks like it has connections mainly through Chicago, Detroit and Minneapolis, by American, Delta, and United, with one XO Jet flight from Santa Rosa.
It might be worth considering flying IN to SBN on Fri, and OUT from DTW (Detroit) on Sun. AZO is centrally located midway between the Fri/Sat and Sun venues.
Do I have this straight in my mind?
The Oct 19-20 event in Indiana will be S-M-L formats and be the US Champs for all age categories?
The Nov 10-11 in New England (if it happens) will be classic format and be an extra US champs and for Master ages (35+) only?
Orienteering USA Nationals is an individual championship in each race format for all age classes. Orienteering USA Masters Nationals is a two day combined time classic format championship for 35+ categories. All age categories will compete at Masters, but only championship awards to 35+.
Thanks. I guess I understand how it is working but not why it is working that way. I'm not trying to change anything. I know decisions were made with a lot of consultation and thought. The Junior Nationals / USA Nationals / Masters Nationals actually replace a much more complicated and inconsistent series of championship events.
But is there any push back that the Juniors and Masters (those under 21 and over 34 get two kicks at the can at getting a US championship title while those 21 to 34 only get one?
More importantly will there be any move in the near future for O-USA and the clubs to get ahead of the game in awarding future National Championships implementing a regional rotation of championship events and encouraging clubs to host championships and plan years ahead on their mapping needs?
Right now it seems O-USA is barely keeping afloat in that regard. (I'm not criticizing from outside. As a member of O-USA and a club director I'm probably as guilty as anyone in not doing enough forward planning for the membership.)
Seems that's the crux of this thread.
The issue of getting clubs to host championship events is very old. 6 years ago there were back to back years of late notice national champs. they were put together roughly 4 and 6 months before the events. I thought this was a crazy way for the national organization to operate its crown jewel events.
so, I contacted OUSA and was in a conference call with 3 board members and Mr. ED. EVERYONE agreed with scheduling out 3 years in advance, making the events in different regions of the country, etc., just like gord suggested earlier. A committee of two board members took on the task and that was the last I heard of it. perhaps one of those board members could share what the committee did?
I believe it is possible to schedule out 3 years. I think IF the board made the national championships schedule a priority a solution could be found.....but how?
National championship events are by nature very important events. They should be the core of the schedule, not an afterthought. Today we have some excellent new board members who I hope will champion the cause and keep it from being an annual embarrassment to OUSA.
My own idea on the issue is that the old way of doing business needs to change. OUSA CANNOT wait for clubs to volunteer. OUSA can't wait until the year before and then ask one of the few clubs that's having a national event the next year to host the champs.
perhaps the bylaws need to be changed, but I would suggest approaching specific clubs years in advance and asking them what it would take to get them to help with the event. this might involve paying them to host. it might involve offering services such as mapping help, technical support(website, results, start lists, registration, etc.), course designers, start/finish assistance and quality control. Find out what incentives are needed to make it happen and make it happen.
Next, offer the champs before the sanctioning committee okays the event, but contingent on getting that approval.
I would also identify unmapped areas with excellent terrain and map the new terrain for use at the champs. If this is done in an area near an existing club, that might be a great incentive to host.
another thing I think is a great idea is to have the masters champs be brown, green and red courses only. you do that and you'll definitely make it easier to find a host club.
The current method for getting a host is to charge the club 25% of the gross take, make them do all the work, require extra work(since it is a championship) and make them take all the blame if something goes wrong. I'm all in on that....ah, well, maybe not.....
Clubs support OUSA with significant funds. Some of those funds could be used to support the national championship events and make them special events they should be. Let's motivate local clubs to host the events with meaningful incentives.
Thank you thank you thank you bgr. After all the various posts to this thread I was getting concerned that no one else really cared or had any hope for forward planning of national championships. Are we resigned to 'just in time' scheduling?
I am still concerned that no one in a positon of authority, ie an OUSA Baord member, has written in to say that this is a priority of theirs, too and that they are going to take up the issue and who would like to serve on a committee to consult with the membership, to draft a plan and take it back to the clubs and to the Board. Also to take back to the Board a list of impediments that are keeping clubs from rushing to host championships.
You might want to mull over that post Gord.
It was mulled a lot before I posted it. I know it leaves me liable to taking on another volunteer task. I also know that in Canada we have had a rotation of the national champs for probably 20 to 30 years now and we are usually just ahead of just in time scheduling.
Nev. If you have some other concern you know how to reach me. BTW would you be interested in controlling another night O event at Rivermead? The event date is Sept 7th.
I'm a member of the OUSA Board, and I think we all recognize that declining attendance more generally and declining national meet organization specifically are major problems for the community. Thanks to everyone for the dialog.
I think that the first obstacle is one of communication. We know that fewer clubs and people are organizing events, but the reasons are varied - Pink Socks and J-man serving as example testimonials. The reorganization of the competitive events led by acjospe (OUSA BoD member, VP Competition) is an attempt to address some of these problems: specifically an overabundance of niche championships that dilute the value of the term, excessively high barrier to entry addressed by RREs, and onerous financial barriers to smaller clubs addressed by the free competition day. I'll let acjospe comment further. I don't think we'll know the full impact of the restructuring until we have had more time to observe the effects.
Discussion on OUSA National Event Restructuring, March 2017
@Gordun - You make an excellent point; apart from the event restructuring, I don't think OUSA has taken steps to effectively address the national event shortfall. As you say, we can't just set out a buffet and expect clubs to wander out of the woodwork eager to organize more events. Per many comments above, the cost-benefit analysis just doesn't work out for most but the exceptionally ambitious.
I think the Board has been a bit preoccupied trying to get OUSA's internal house in order. We need to hear from more people and clubs: what are the barriers to participation in national events? If OUSA coordinated a schedule, say apportioning meets among different regions for a year, would clubs buy into it? Importantly for a multi-year schedule for championships: is there interest from clubs years in advance to hold championship national meets?
Thank you iansmith
Those are very good concerns in your last paragraph. There is no sense imposing a rotation if the clubs do not buy in to it.
As a start would the Board consider putting out this idea to the clubs that put on national events every year. Everyone knows who they are. What would it take for that club to slightly upgrade their annual event to championship caliber say once every five to ten years or so? With that settled it is just a matter of filling in the holes and making sure each area gets a share of the events.
Back in April we saw a school team from Florida make a long trip to the Junior Nationals in MA. It was a trip of a lifetime and what was great was the community support that materialized because they were on their way to a National Championships. That support was financial and resulted in publicity for the kids and for orienteering. Imagine how much easier it would be for them and for other teams to get publicity if once every five years or so the Junior Nationals were up the road and part of the Georgia Navigator Cup. It may even encourage the Florida clubs to say "hey, we want a piece of that pie!"
I don't think the "two kicks at the can issue" is a problem. It works that way in (most?) other sports, and even orienteering at the international level, i.e. there's nothing keeping the likes of Eric Bone from competing at both WOC and WMOC.
In response to JJ's comment, I would suggest that the elite runners might feel more pride in winning the only championship that they can win. This does not mean that others who have a chance to win two medals because of two eligible championships and only win one are less deserving.
BAOC has had a national event or two almost every year for the past 25. Many of these events have been various US championships. We are a large club and that helps but I think the major reason we have been able to maintain a regular national event schedule is that we have a board position of National Event Coordinator. That person is currently Dennis Wildfogel, but it has been held by several other people over the years. Each year, our National Event Coordinator decides on the NRE venue, recruits the event director and course setters, selects the dates and then applies for OUSA sanctioning. It is important that The National Event Coordinator not become the NRE event director or course setter and reserve his/her energy for the yearly scheduling and recruiting effort. It has worked for us, and I think to the benefit of OUSA.
Does anyone know how many states have hosted a national orienteering champs? It would be pretty cool to get a 50 year cycle going to hit all 50 states. It would also give some incentive to get started in the sport at a young age.
List of U.S. Championships 1970 - present (2017)
(Classic 2-day total-time format, which was the only individual format through 1998). This is a great list that includes not only the venues of all the Classic champs but also the names of the champions as follows:
1970 - 1971: Men's champion.
1972 - 1976: Men's, women's, junior men's, junior women's champions.
1977 - 1981: Overall men's and women's champions, old-style age-group champions (e.g. 15-18, 43-49).
1982 - 1984: Overall champions, modern (2-year) age-group champions for the juniors, old-style (e.g. 43-49) age-group champions for the oldsters.
1985 - present: Overall champions, modern age-group champions (2-year for the juniors, 5-year for the oldsters).
The only significant piece of information that I noticed to be missing is the specific date.
For the Sprint-Middle-Long and other individual formats, there is this list
. The list (actually table) includes the names of the overall champions in the various formats as follows:
Sprint: 2006 - present.
Middle: 2001 - present (2017).
Long: 2010 - present (2017).
Ultralong: 2001 - 2017 (except not held 2016).
Night: 1999 - 2017 (except not held 2008, 2009, 2015, 2016).
(Note that unless the rules are changed again, 2017 was the last year for Ultralong and Night championships.)
However, this list does not mention the venues, states, dates, nor any of the age-group champions; instead, it has links to results sites for further information, but many of these links are now defunct.
Anyone with data to fill in the blanks which o-maps has noted, please send it to usofweb at gmail dot com so it can be added to this archive. Thanks.
OCIN hosted 1996 US (Classic) Champs with one day in Indiana and one in Ohio. OCIN also hosted 2015 US Champs (SML) in Kentucky. OCIN hosted numerous other championships (Interscholastic, Intercollegiate, Night, Ultralong, Relay) in those states as well. This link
has some of the data on OCIN hosted national meets, but you have to delve in to find which ones were championships.
From the above-mentioned list, I derived this list of states where the Classic champs has been held:
California (1989, 2003, 2015)
Colorado (2006, 2014)
Illinois (1970, 1971, 1974)
Indiana (1996 [with Ohio])
Maryland (1988 [with Va.])
Michigan (1975, 1985, 1995)
Missouri (1976, 1980, 1984, 1991)
New Hampshire (2013)
New York (1972, 1979, 1981, 1990, 1993, 2001, 2010, 2011, 2016)
North Carolina (2012)
Ohio (1996 [with Ind.])
Pennsylvania (1982, 1992, 2000)
Rhode Island and Providence Plantations (1987)
Virginia (1973, 1977, 1988 [with Md.], 1997, 2002, 2007, 2017)
Wisconsin (1983, 2004, 2009)
(Two-letter state abbreviations, when used with a zip code, are fine for getting the mail delivered. In all other contexts, I hate them. The A's and M's are especially confusing. Showing my age and demonstrating my stubbornness and curmudgeonliness, if I don't want to spell out Massachusetts, California, or Colorado, I still write Mass., Calif., or Colo. [Cal. and Col. can easily be confused]).
(Yes, the smallest state has the biggest name. Yes I know, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Virginia are, technically speaking, commonwealths. )
@Mike: Flying Pig XI was the 2007 Intercollegiates -- the 2007 Interscholastics were hosted by DVOA at Fair Hill,
@GuyO: That's correct. The typo in the link has been fixed to show that.
Fairly certain I recall a night-O in 1996 in HVO area that was billed as first US night-O champs. I believe it was in conjunction with the convention.
Trivia: What year was the USOF convention not held in a US state?
It was associated with GLOF. Early 90s? Nice terrain up there in Ganaraska.
Yup. 1994 hosted by ROC. In between Cdn and NorAm Champs at Horseshoe Valley, ON hosted by HKF.
Fossil - I believe the Night-O was at Spook Swamp (part of the old Sebago Beach map).
I remember digitizing it into OCAD for HVO.
...and the aforementioned Ganaraska - poison ivy heaven.
Actually quite relevant WOC terrain - Latvia seems like a hybrid of this and the Dundas Valley.
Who did the damage at this World Cup? I think Mogensen won the men's?
Update: Found the ONA with the details - including the World Cup Final at Pawtuckaway.
Yes, probably some poison ivy. I conveniently forgot about that. Still, I thought it was a lovely place.
"Probably some poison ivy" ?!!
I'd lean toward adjectives (from j-man's likely vocabulary) along the lines of "ubiquitous" and "omnipresent".
To this day, I still refer to especially lush growth of poison ivy as "Ganaraska Special". At least one person (one I know of) required an emergency room visit because their rash was so severe. Interestingly, when I say that among experienced orienteers, most actually understand the reference!
A few years later, I read something about an experiment demonstrating that poison ivy growth increases significantly in higher concentrations of atmospheric CO2. Perhaps Ganaraska's location downwind of the gigantic traffic jam known as Toronto is real world evidence of higher CO2 concentrations effect on PI growth?
Doesn't explain Manitoba, though...
Poor attendance of US Champs and lack of interest is due to constant changes, reorganizing, and relabeling. Just imagine if they change the size of the gates or the number of players on the field in soccer all the time.
Orienteering is forming critical thinking skills, hence it is perceived as a danger by globalists/liberal-progressive socialists, who do not want people to have the ability to think. So they decided to kill it, by robbing it of identity, blending it with all kinds of monster/spartan/mudder/adventure races, all the activities promoting blind following the path set by authorities.
Ganaraska made a distinct impression on me. While I was one of the survivors, at that event I learned that poison ivy didn't just come as a vine and ground cover plant, but also grew in shrub form... Ganaraska had all three in abundance. I do not plan to revisit.
EMPO in eastern New York (~90 members at its highest, declining in recent years to a few dozen or so) put on its first National Meet in 1992, an IC Champs, just three or four years after incorporating. In 1993 we hosted the Relay Champs, then lost our original leadership and held only local events and a ski O Champs or two before present leadership decided to team up with CNYO in 2004 to learn the ropes and restart the National Meet process for our club, using a federation map loan to jump start it (a bank balance of a few thousand dollars wasn't going to get us a new professional A-meet quality map, but the loan helped us meet expenses until we had registration fee income).
Since then, most of the National meets we've hosted have been Championship events, with the intent of increasing attendance so that we earn more money to make new maps and perhaps afford better publicity (and national services like Valerie's results and Ed's registration system). We've tried to keep a 1.5 to 2 year cycle for big meets with the occasional longer gap.
The list of EMPO major events is on the Results
Yurets has a point, "monster/spartan/mudder/adventure races, all the activities promoting blind following the path set by authorities." The reason for it may not be exactly as he indicates but there are reasons. Our sport does require thinking and someone who wants to make money on an event has to get people of all mental abilities involved. Reading a map is a learned skill but if you make something "tough and cool" and you drink beer after you finish because you are such a hero, you include a lot more people than those who can read a map. It may be that our sport needs to focus on the people who like mental challenges. The data seems to show that mental challenge helps the brain stay functioning. Maybe we need to focus our attention on getting more 50+ people involved. They may have more time to do things and they may not be so in need of being "cool".
No, you need to make it appear a real sport, not a gathering of pajama wearers at one with nature. In the early 2000s the Europeans made an expensive bet on arena production. It broke the IOF's bank, but at least the kids who grew up between then and now are still around, the attendance is mostly flat instead of aging a year per year.
Real events cost real money. By being cheapie, you get what you paid for. (You does not equal Peter, rather the U.S. orienteering community.)
the attendance is mostly flat instead of aging a year per year
Not true of WMOC. I find myself always in the largest age group. It was true in the 60's, the 65s and now in the 70s.
Orienteering in Canada and the US (and probably Australia, New Zealand, too) is way at the high end when you count the percentage of participants who participate in the national championships. I'd like to see that continue however if the sport is going to grow in the number of participants and in public awareness it has to plant a lot more seeds in a lot more locations and concentrate on local participation first.
Take a look at what Chris is doing in western North Carolina
to see a club starting from scratch and if you can find his post about the Grade 2 orienteering field trip around the school property you'll find a gem of an idea.
Adventure Running Kids, Kids Running Wild and all the other youth programs that are springing up are on to something great. Parents of pre-teens and young teens want their kids to do three things - get outside away from their computers and phones, get some exercise and learn to think for themselves. Orienteering is the only sport that offers all three.
So what has this got to do with national championships? Money. and volunteers. Get a good local program and youth program going and you will soon be making lots of money for your club. You will also be meeting a lot of parent volunteers. It is a natural function to take some of that money and some of those volunteers and direct them to a national championships of some type.
I ran in Ganaraska in summer 1999, I was not aware it was that bad, and I had no trouble with poison ivy, none at all. And I was wearing running tights, popular those days. I think the sensitive types' suffering is mainly due to negative psychological pre-disposition against poison ivy.
That does not apply to stinging nettles though, here the pain is quite real.
1999 is when I was at Ganaraska. I don't usually get poison ivy, at least not very severely. One other person I was traveling with had never gotten it. But we sure did that week. One of the two or three worst cases I've ever had. We were fortunate that a kid we were staying with had a tube of prescription ointment for dealng with the rash.
I've encountered nettles in other places -- meh, no big deal.
Yurets believe me that there is nothing psychological about how one is affected by poison ivy. It is true that some are more severely affected by the weed than others. The late Patricia de St Croix is a person who felt the affects of poison ivy much worse than others. I'd say I'm a modest sufferer.
It also seems to be true that a person's first exposure to poison ivy may not result in a skin reaction. In 1976 a large group of Swedes visiting an orienteering event in Quebec were found to be sitting in a patch of poison ivy. Apparently none suffered a reaction on that occasion. Apparently poison ivy is not found in Sweden. (Unless it was brought back on the shoes of those 1976 visitors.)
But the worst case of poison ivy ever contracted in orienteering did not happen to orienteering participants but to event organizers. Jack Forsyth and Jim Lee of Hartney Manitoba decided to mow some trails through the meadows on their map west of Hartney. The mower blew up poison ivy sap which covered the two men from head to feet. I don't know how they made it through the week but they did and they served as a great lesson to all the participants to be careful.
But back to Yurets. About 5-6 years ago I was putting on one of my first events in Florida. The area in question was about two hour drive from where we were staying so I wasn't there too frequently. I mapped the area one season, just after the park had thinned out a pine forest and I was anxious to use the rolling terrain revealed. However a few months later the section in question had been overrun with a weed down there they call the hitchiker. I've since learned that down there rapid growth of weeds is what happens in areas where the ground is newly exposed to sunlight.I should have adjusted the courses but I didn't. Yurets finished his run, tights totally covered with those buds. I mean REALLY TOTALLY covered. He did make some initial comment but earned my gratitude when he acknowledged what a challenge it must have been to set courses in the area and the buds were not that hard to remove. Thank you Yurets. Your kind words on that occasion helped encourage me to keep putting on events and learning from that mistake.
Nice area with terrible PI. Think it might be the only course my wife Linda ever quit because she couldn't any reasonable route to approach a control surrounded by PI.
Preliminary information for the Orienteering USA 2018 Nationals
is now available.
October 19-21 in north central Indiana and southeast Michigan.
@yurets: I hope that "Orienteering is forming critical thinking skills, hence it is perceived as a danger by globalists/liberal-progressive socialists, who do not want people to have the ability to think." comment is at least somewhat tongue-in-cheek?
Otherwise, how do you explain the popularity of O in those social-democratic (US Republican for "communist") Scandinavian countries? :-)
BTW, rock climbing, particularly on lead fixing your own protection, seems to form even more of those critical thinking skills: Back around 1985-90 Gunnar Breivik took his doctorate studying people doing risky sports (white water cayak, skydiving, rock climbing plus reference groups from the military and the Norwegian Sports Institute). The rock climbers were outliers in that we were the least likely to accept rules and regulations without first understanding and agreeing with them.
So you are or were climber as well. No shortage of cliffs where you live. But then I have Arapiles a couple of hours down the road. Having spent many years climbing, that research finding doesn't surprise me. Its a sport where self-reliance is a matter of life and death. For example- never buy a second hand rope is a generally accepted rule. You cannot personally verify claims about the rope history, so buy a new one instead. Slings on abseil points get multiple backups for the same reason. You cannot personally verify the history of the in situ slings, so add another. Trusting only personally verifiable claims becomes a culture. Hence the same attitude to rules should be no surprise. I can also confirm, based upon experience of a number of rest day sports competitions with the Camp 4 crowd at Yosemite, that most climbers have no aptitude for team sports. Of course, that was when they let you camp for a month at Camp 4. I am showing my age.
Second hand rope is fine. You can find lots of uses for it.
Any update on the potential Masters champs in November?
It is unfortunately not going to happen. We were unable to secure a venue.
(If anyone has a venue for that weekend, I'll make it happen)
@TIL: I spent a month in Yosemite back in 1981, on my first trip to the US. Park rangers woke me up around sunrise when I tried to sleep for free among the boulders closer to the cliffside. :-(
It was a warm summer so I mostly stayed in Tuolumne, doing second and third ascents of a bunch of new routes. :-)
Re. team sports: I played setter on my high school volleyball team, that's the only team sport I've ever enjoyed.
About the Masters Champs, it is a bit late for people to make plans anyway. I can understand the frustration of CSU in organizing this. It seems like things were moving along and then there was someone who said NO. Then, plan B was worked on and again someone said NO. This is frustration to the max. One year ROC had to change their plans to run in Dinosaur because the Park Service wanted to have a ranger with all runners (yeah, how many rangers could keep up with our elite runners) but they had other maps that were available. When I was president, I found getting these events was sometimes difficult and perhaps we were lucky to find clubs willing to run them. I guess, now, OUSA needs to make sure that there are all the events for next year. There is time.......
One place the Master's Champs won't be is Harris/Townsend (NH/MA) on Sep 29-30. Early on there were plans for those two events to be NREs, but it looks like even that has fallen off the table. Should still be a couple of good days of orienteering, though.
PGoodwin, This is just one of the reasons why it is so soo helpful to be planning these championships multiple years out.
Orienteering Canada was operating on a 16-24 ish months out basis for the Canadian Champs until about a year and a half ago when we formed a new Major Events Committee. Over the past year and a half we've been working through finding hosts for Canadian Champs for 2019 - 2022. We now have 2019, 2020, and 2021 lined up (still in the process of making 2021 official) and are looking at COC and NAOC hosts for 2022. It's been a challenge finding multiple years worth of hosts but going forward it should be a lot easier finding one host at a time and the feedback has been that club's will be more willing to step up with that much advanced notice.
@PGoodwin: ""wanted to have a ranger with all runners"! WoW!
20+ years back, when Petter Thoresen won several world champs there was a pre-WOC training camp in Germany with several national squads. The local forest was also the training ground for the Kenyan Junior running squad when they visited their german trainer, so they asked the best runner they had to shadow Petter on a training course: After less than a km Petter started to gap him, while orienteering, and shortly after the Kenyan runner stopped on a hilltop with good visibility and waited on a Swedish runner which he could then follow through the rest of the course.
I.e. there are effectively _no_ runners capable of following the very best orienteers when they go "broken field" running, with the possible exception of a mountain goat like Kilian Jornet.
As I've said when people (non-orienteers) ask about how fast we move when orienteering, "If you took one of the world's best, and he had to read a map, the best American orienteer couldn't keep up with him just following. It would be the same if I tried to shadow the best Americans. And likewise, you couldn't keep up with me."
Re: Planning ahead and Master's Nationals, OCIN has put in a sanctioning application and bid to host the 2019 Master's Nationals at Carter Caves State Park in Kentucky on March 22-24, 2019. I hear there is also a competing bid for 2019.
Can we call OCIN's bid the 2018 Nationals delayed, and the other (Uno?) the 2019 Nationals?
That's an intriguing possibility. What are the dates of UNO's bid? There's precedent of holding a US Championship outside our borders. But I think doing it in the next calendar year would be new.
Thanks, mikeminium and OCIN, for stepping up an d offering two US Champs in a 6 month period. Much appreciated.
I think there was a year recently with a championship in the fall and then the same championship the following spring. Similar time difference, but different calendar years...
There was some anomaly back in the 1970s, I think? A delayed champs, or two in one year, or something. Before my day.
+1 to Boris’s idea.
November and March are part of the same O season for large areas of the country, too, in case you need more justification.
Would the 2019 Master's Nationals at Carter Caves State Park in Kentucky on March 22-24, 2019 double as the Flying Pig?
If so I heartily endorse this and hope that it becomes a trend that established events from time to time will be upgraded to the level of the other national championship events for a given year.
Why? The established events have an established clientele.
The established events are usually held at the prime time of year for that part of the country.
The established events do not have to start from scratch in finding their core volunteers.
In return the established events could significantly improve their map inventory and gain publicity useful for future years.
Now, we just have to get more established (ranking) events.
Yes, the March event would be Flying Pig XXIII. For the last decade, the Pig has usually been in early April, but occasionally in late March, primarily due to land access or availability of facilities.
Yes please. But do make all branding consistent... "The 2018 U.S. Masters Orienteering Championships [or U.S. Orienteering Masters Nationals, per what the current Rules say, not sure what exactly they do], Olive Hill, KY, March 22 and 23, 2019"
It would be 2019 Orienteering USA Masters Nationals, *after* being sanctioned, and the bid accepted by the Board.
OCIN can't advertise it as anything other than the Pig until then.
2018 event is already the Orienteering USA Nationals, and should be advertised as such.
regarding nomenclature, and who gets championship awards at the various events.
Also note the section just before A41 regarding recommended class groupings for Red, Green, and Brown courses if needed.
Janet, If I understand him correctly, I believe what Boris is proposing (assuming OCIN and UNO decide to go ahead and bid as discussed here and in the planning calendar, and get sanctioned) would be:
2018 US Nationals: OCIN (10/19-21/2018)
2018 US Masters: OCIN (3/22-23/2019)
2019 US Masters: UNO (10/19-20/2019)
Yes the 2018 Masters would actually be held in the following year, but that would certainly be better than not having one at all. Would have some details to work out like whether your age category is based on your 2018 birthday or 2019, but those are details that could easily be resolved. I'm a big fan of this idea as well.
Ah, yes. Thanks. It makes logical sense to me that age categories would have to be based on 2018 age if medals will be awarded.
The actual championship dates for OCIN would be March 23-24. March 22 would be our usual Friday middle distance NRE. Most of the OCIN team is ok with hosting 2018 Orienteering USA Masters Nationals in 2019 if that's what the board wants. The Registrar has raised questions about possible complexities of handling event classes using previous year age; that would also raise issues for the rankings system and rankings coordinator, particularly in cases where a person's age would result in a change of course from 2018 to 2019. In Event Reg, it is possible (tedious, but possible) to change the upper and lower age limits for each age class by a year, to use 2018 age, if that is desired.
The Ranger story reminds me of a common theme in dealing with land managers and their perceptions of orienteering. To them orienteering is sometimes an unknown unknown. ie they have no sense of the extent of their misunderstandings.
One of them has specified that competitors must carry a map. Whatever next!
Talking to one of the park managers for a national-level sprint event we're setting up next year:
"We've got toilets over here, here and here...and there's another toilet block up the north end, so they can use those if they need to go during their walk."
"Every competitor must wear a high visibility vest in the Night-O to prevent collisions." That ranger moved on and the 40 vests we had to purchase have been unused ever since.
I have a supply of safety vests, too. I thought they would be a good idea to have for a series of O events in an Ottawa suburban area where there would be some vehicle traffic. Little did I know that the vests would reflect light from an orienteers headlamp up to 100 meters away. They were like beacons. Vests went back in the box.
But the vests almost came in handy again when I was trying to get permission to hold an orienteering event in a Florida state forest during small game hunting season. That season is not nearly as dangerous as deer hunting season. Despite initial promise the state forest ended up turning me down for that occasion but we are going there in April. Great forest!!!
Know just what you mean Juffy. But I can't better the high-vis one, Log:-)).
Our regional council is seeking submissions on their new long-term plan. They say their market research shows that people are wanting more trails, better track signage, information about what to do in the park, toilets, etc etc. Basically a big staff-and-consultant-led push telling us citizens what to ask for. And then they can justify a bigger call on the rates. And activity fees for identifiable park user groups, such as..... Hey what if we don't actually WANT trails and signage and information about what to do?
Having said that, each park has an on-the-spot ranger and they know and understand what we do. It's the office that put the map clause into the concession agreement.
Gruver I sense more than a bit of pessimism but if your Regional Council is drafting a long term plan then my advice, as a former long-standing regional councillor, is to get on the bus and make sure they know about orienteering, what you do and how you do it. And of course why you do it. Let them know how orienteering park users rave about the beauty of their parks
Let them know how orienteering helps people get out doors and away from their computers, get some exercise in a low impact way suitable for all ages and polishes problem solving skills by giving them route choices to make and follow. By the way those are three things almost all parents want for their children. Suggest that besides the trails semi-permanent orienteering courses should be part of every park plan.
It may work; it may not but for sure if you don't give the input there will be no positive outcome.
is something I put together last year to explain orienteering to school groups in Florida. Something similar and perhaps briefer could work with your regional council.
By the way, besides showing up at local open houses, etc, get meetings with your elected representatives. Having been one I know the personal touch works wonders on them.
Were 2018 Masters approved for OCIN weekend March 23-24?
I believe the OUSA board will be voting at their meeting next week.
Is there any scuttlebutt regarding 2019 US Nationals? (looks like Masters and Juniors are already taken care of)
I'm in charge of my club's local calendar from July-October, and I'm firming up 2019 dates now, and I'd like to avoid Nationals if possible. Thanks!
There was a rumor about something on the east coast in October, but that rumor has fallen through, so we don't have anything lined up at the moment. Any takers?
There was a suggestion on another AP thread - and I agree - that O-USA should not be waiting for National Champs bids to come forward. Instead they would do better to decide where they would like the champs to be over the next number of years and then reaching out to clubs in those areas asking them to stage the championships either as part of an existing event or as a new one.
As I see it, the situation is something like getting volunteers from a club for orienteering events. If we put out a general call for responses few reply, maybe none. However if we ask a specific person to do a specific task the response is usually positive.
And if the clubs say no? Even the experienced ones?
Great point, Janet. I think it's worth exploring why a club might say no. Thinking about the various clubs we've been members of over the years, I can think of 3 main reasons clubs might balk. The structure of the events may be prohibitive, the cost may be more than a club is willing to inflict on a strong local base, or the logistics of holding a top notch championship event may be too much. Perhaps there's a way to address those concerns?
The structure of the new championships is challenging for some clubs based on their demographics. For example, I can't see West Point ever hosting Junior Nationals again, or bidding for US Individual Champs, because it is very important for cadets to compete for titles at both of those events. But West Point is hosting Team Trials this year (no one trying out) and would be a great club to hold Masters on occasion because they have no one eligible to compete in those categories who would be disqualified (except the likely course consultant and mapper :-). Meanwhile, clubs with more older participants may avoid holding Masters champs because they may not have enough under-35s to carry to load of course design/vetting/setting/mapping outside of jobs and family. That's probably something to think about in asking clubs to host, or in providing support that makes hosting more attractive.
And then there's cost. Some clubs put on top notch events that draw hundreds of people regionally. They are likely not inclined to hold championships because they don't want to charge an already involved local base more money for the same caliber event.
It's hard to argue with that logic. The cost to a club for a championship is an additional $10 per local orienteer, which brings in a set of OUSA medals to distribute, but nothing else that I can think of. Course consulting, perhaps, but some clubs do that internally, anyway. I'm not sure we've completely solved the OUSA fee structure question in a way that encourages clubs to hold national events from a cost perspective.
Finally some clubs are expert at bare-bones events and may not want to change the way they do business to host a championship with all the bells and whistles. Some organizational help in the form of an event organizer might change the way people think about this, especially if the quality of event drew more participants.
I don't know. I've been thinking about this for awhile, having nudged various friends around the country about holding national championships in various awesome places. It is hard to get people excited about the idea.
I've seen a lot of words written on AP about US champs over the months, but I still find myself curious about why you need to have the three championships in three different locations. Couldn't they be a held at the same time in the same place, and add a few courses? Perhaps there would be too many competitors for a club to handle then? Sorry for the silly question - things look easier from further away, of course.
UNO is hosting the 2019 Masters Champs, and I'm not sure if we even have any members younger than 55.
What the heck. The clubs are saying no in big numbers right now.
And for sure if you don't ask the effective answer will be no.
The reason for the multiple events has a bunch of history behind it, but part of that is because there are factions that like the traditional US format of total time for two days, and the SML format. That accounts for two events. The Junior Champs is separate because it has a bunch of unique complications regarding teams.
One problem for clubs hosting the Nationals is having suitable world class areas for all 3 formats. For example, you might have great areas for a sprint and middle, but nothing big enough for a long (or perhaps seasonal restrictions such as hunting rule out any areas large enough to do justice to a long). Or you might have exciting wild areas for middle and long, but nothing nearby suitable for a campus or urban sprint.
While many folks like the idea of having a single nationals with SML all in one weekend, it is harder for clubs to put together a bid for all 3 (or to be persuaded to do a bid), because if only one component is lacking, you can't host any of it. Previously, with each type of championship separate, it was easier to bid your strengths, for example, a combination of say middle and night, or perhaps sprint, middle, and relay. Then somebody else might pick up the long. I'm not trying to argue we should go back... but I think that the reduced flexibility in having to do all 3 types on the same weekend is limiting which clubs can potentially host these championships.
I seem to recall, when SML came in on the international scene, the US Champs bifurcated into US SML Champs and the US Classic Champs. I may be imagining things, but I think it was presumed that one of the two Champs would prevail and eventually there would be only one of the two. It seems that that time may have arrived. It's not necessarily the participants, but rather the organizers, making the decision. It will be a bit ironic if there are US Championship races next year for all competitors in the US except those aged 21-34!
> It will be a bit ironic if there are US Championship races next year for all
> competitors in the US except those aged 21-34!
Except that I'm sure there will be a Team Trials.
>One problem for clubs hosting the Nationals is having suitable world class areas for >all 3 formats.
I've always thought the same, the terrain should always be the focus. But, after going to WOC this year, I think North America needs to lower the bar of what we think of "world class terrain" and think more about how events are presented.
I personally think the US should do ...
1) US Championships - 2-day A Meet, forest. Offer 2-day classic to those categories that prefer that (presumably Master's classes). Offer M+L to those categories that prefer that (presumably M20/F20, M21/F21 and maybe others).
[i.e., combine US Classic champs and US ML into a single two-day event.]
2) US Sprint Championship - 1-day A Meet, urban. Offer sprint classes for all age categories.
The two events could be organized together (same club, same weekend, same location) or they could be organized by completely separate clubs at different times of the year. I could easily see a Sprint Championship being tied into a sprint Camp or festival (e.g., SART or Boston Sprint camp).
The US can't sustain both a two-day classic championship (Master's) and a three-day SML championship (Champs). Which it seems, is what I wrote 5 months ago https://attackpoint.org/discussionthread.jsp/messa...
Aaaargh! Enough already with the debates on US National formats. We debated for a year or more and came up with the current plan. Let’s now stick with the plan and everyone help in convincing their clubs to pitch in and host a championship.
but George, how long do we wait?
I/we don't want to interfere with Alex's (and others?) noble efforts, but is there not already strong evidence of a serious shortage of championship proposals, and that this shortage is clearly related (perhaps with other factors) to the increased number of proposed championships?
I don't want to be any more argumentative than necessary, but for some of us this is not a surprise.
Wait, when did we get an increased number of championships? I thought we just eliminated a few of them.
Re "world class" terrain
National event, such as team trial, need not be club-organized. USOF may use the funds it collects via sanctioning to hire mappers, planning to hold a national meet, own the produced map (I can only guess what $$$ amounts were wasted for the "success specialists" over the past decade).
Often there are local enthusiasts nearby whose level may be low yet they would certainly be useful for logistics in running such a national meet. Their motivation is to use the map later (paying fees to USOF for the use). In the East I can think of Central VA, Birmingham AL, Raleigh-Durham, Charlotte.
I understand there is some sort of task force already skilled in the key components (IT, real-time -results, online registration, web-site) of running the meet, they need not be venue-based. As technology advances, this is less troublesome. Maybe this is still limited to a geographic region, say Mid-Atlantic, and where Yankees live.
With LIDAR-based software, a decent base map is not a problem, the problem is field -checking, I found that local enthusiasts are almost entirely IGNORANT that this is not an optional part.
Particularly grave situation is with mapping of vegetation (one notable exception is in Ohio). Probably that is why Americans who went to WOC in Latvia felt so helpless seeing the terrain in Gauya Park, deceivingly simple, where understanding vegetation mapping played a key role.
Man, Yurets, thanks for those insights.
"How long do we wait?"
Might I suggest longer than a single transitional year, which is all we've had so far. The most recent changes regarding Championships are new in the 2018 rules and were changed close enough to 2018 that clubs really didn't have a chance to plan for the new structure right away.
Alex is working not only to fill Championship bids for the near future, but also further out. None of it happens overnight.
I will say that I agree with Yurets. While I certainly encourage clubs who wish to hold Championships to do so, OUSA should not feel so dependent on them. It is worthwhile to promote Championship event management that might not be club based.
Relay champs, Night champs and Ultralong champs did go away. But those had been "optional" for quite a while, nobody lost too much sleep if one of them didn't occur in a particular year. (I think.)
The three Championship events that we have now (plus Team Trials) are all events that seem pretty obligatory.
For national level events in general (formerly called A-meets), there has long been an issue that smaller clubs were reluctant to host them, because of a perception that they involved a lot more work for little benefit and the risk of criticism if everything wasn't just so. That's probably still the case, perhaps moreso with increased expectations in this modern age. There may well be clubs that are capable of hosting these events, at least with assistance that could be provided, but they think it would be too hard, so they don't step forward and would likely decline if asked.
The three Championship events that we have now (plus Team Trials) are all events that seem pretty obligatory.
I'm curious, is there any other country in the world that offers the following 4 national championship events for master's orienteers?
1) Sprint 2) Middle 3) Long 4) Two-day Classic
Not Australia. We have the same SML plus a relay across all age groups. However there has been a similar conflict between the modern disciplines and tradition in some places. As an example Qld has 2-day state champs, which is 2 classics for non-elites and M + L for elites. The M and L count individually and as a combined championship, so there can be separate Qld Middle, Qld Long and Qld State champions.
Actually Australia has Sprint, Middle, Long, Relay ... and a 3 Day Classic across all age groups.
I'm curious, how many folks here have approached Alex offering to help her move things forward or asking how you help with her plan? That would make a far bigger difference than reasking if the approach being taken is the right one and moaning about how progress isn't being made.
It's entirely possible that this is already happening but not on a public forum (probably for the best) but if not, I would encourage you to support Alex in her efforts rather than undermining them.
So, Alex, are there things the general orienteering public can do to help move this in the right direction?
The Swedish Veteran Champs had the SML format on the same weekend.
The Two day Classic is an entirely North American invention to my knowledge. I´ve certainly run those both in Canada and USA.
The two-day classic may have evolved in NA because of the longer distances that people need to travel to get to events. The two-day classic provides the longest time in the woods. It also provides a second chance to overcome mistakes from Day 1 and make the travel more worthwhile.
Doing the S/M/L with the sprint and middle on Saturday and long on Sunday also recognizes the longer travel distances and limited vacation time of many participants.
Ugh, my bad. I'm sorry that I re-opened this can of worms by asking.
Since I'm here, a few things.
1) The ask-a-club method can work. For example, Alex asked CascadeOC to host Junior Nationals in 2020 and the club is putting a bid package together.
2) The first consolidated SML champs in the US was in 2010 (hosted by CascadeOC). Prior to that, Sprint, Middle, and Long were US Championships but held independently. CascadeOC actually hosted two consecutive Middle Champs: in 2009 at Salmon La Sac as part of a 3-day National Event, and again in 2010 at Moses Lake Sand Dunes, as part of the first US Individual Champs (aka SML).
3) The names have changed, but I feel that not that much else has since 2010, so I'm not buying that the lack of interested clubs is because of the "new" format. Junior Nationals is exactly the same as what oftentimes happened before: IS & IC combined at the same event. Nationals is just a new name and exactly the same as SML was before. And Masters Nationals is just the same as Classic Champs, but trimming championship categories from a minority of participants (0-34 year-olds).
+1 Nev. Terrain relevance is such a red herring for US events oriented at selecting athletes for international competitions.
What was the decision at the Nov 28 board meeting?
The Board awarded the 2019 Junior Nationals to QOC's event on April 13-14, 2019 and the 2018 Masters Nationals to OCIN's Flying Pig at on March 22-24, 2019.
Will the 2018 masters nationals being held in 2019 use the 2018 ages / age groups of the participants?
Also worth noting that the 2019 Masters Nationals
was awarded at the October meeting to UNO's Boulderdash event near Concord, New Hampshire.
(website update with championships awarded at Nov 28 meeting pending)
Thanks to all the organizing clubs for stepping up and putting together championship (and other national ranking) events!
A creative solution to a frustrating problem. I like it!
I, too, think this is a great solution. Out of the box thinking.
This may have been already mentioned, but in case not: UNO's biannual (at least recently, October of odd years) national event has long been called the Boulder Dash. Since this time around the Boulder Dash is doing double duty as the Masters Nationals, it is being subtitled as the Older Dash.
Will the 2018 masters nationals being held in 2019 use the 2018 ages / age groups of the participants?
Presumably, this will only affect the Masters categories, (36 and older in 2019), whereas those 34 & under in 2019 will be in their 2019 age classes, and those turning 35 in 2019 (born in 1984), will stay in M/F-21+ (or run M Red / F Green) for the Masters days.
Have the rankings implications been addressed? That is, how to handle rankings for those in 2018 Masters age classes, who have actually aged into older classes -- and shorter courses -- for 2019.
Steve, that is really funny. ;-)
I think it was Paul Regan who came up with it.
So 35 is "older"? I guess if you're 15 or 25 it is.
I believe the Older Dash came from Aims Coney.
Has any other country ever organised a Champs for one year in the next year, keeping the old age classes in place? (In effect, pretending the previous year has been extended.)
It seems a rather ingenious solution, although as GuyO points out could have interesting logistical consequences..
Not quite the same, but the 2017 final of the UK urban orienteering league that was due to take place in December 2017 was moved to June 2018 because of snow, with 2017 age classes kept.
@GuyO - yes, these concerns were discussed, and Ed Despard, the maintainer of EventReg, said this would be workable. I'll leave Ed to discuss the particulars if he wants, but basically everyone registering will be presented with classes from their age 2018 season. He does a great job maintaining the somewhat jury-rigged system, which we (OUSA) urgently need to overhaul to keep robust and reliable event registration services.
Rankings seems like it could be simple enough. You run a course at the 2018 event, it counts as you running that course on the day you ran it (in 2019). If you happen to be, say, born in 1968, that might be the only course of that color that you run in 2019, but so it goes.
Two nationals in the same year has been done before: Ireland 1981. The 1980 Championships were held at Rockmarshall on February 15, the 1981 Championships at Curracloe on April 25 (I was mapper for the latter).
How many people won a title in February 1981 then lost the title 2 months later?
Almost all - two very different types of terrain: rocky open mountain versus sand dunes. Brother and Sister Justin and Carey May won at Rockmarshall, while in the dunes Aonghus O'Cleirigh and Roxanne White broke through for wins. Aonghus and Justin both went on with long careers at the top of Irish Orienteering, while Carey turned to marathons and that was Roxanne's peak performance.
Only two won both: D Heffernan in the M11 and Diana Large in the W43. Interstingly NWOC won all 5 Junior Men categories in the "1980" champs, and 4 in "1981", but the only individual dual winner was Heffernan.
Incidentally, in 1981, both the 21 winners were actually international - A Bradley (SPOOK, UK) - by 4 seconds - and J Pielou (SUOC, UK), by 12 minutes.
A Bradley was a Walton Chasser at one time, my first orienteering club
This discussion thread is closed.