As organiser for the event, I did not know about this. The event info definitively states this and I would have upheld that.
Late starters should report to the Start official. They will be started as soon as possible but timed from their assigned start time unless delayed by a fault of the organisers or by events considered by the Controller to have been unavoidable by the competitor.
By organisers I was referring to the controller/ setters at the start. Thank you for your organisational effort.
I was going to claim organiser fault if I'd missed my own start time!
I came close to missing mine because I let two little kids who were "busting" jump the toilet queue. Managed to get there in time to go straight into the back box after doing a much harder than usual run to the start.
She was put 4 mins behind whoever was in front of her by Phil, but then that turned out to be my start slot so I instead started 2mins behind her - and spent until number 4 assuming she was in front of me, where I saw you and Ceri. Looking at the splits it seems #1 wasn’t good for her, but no idea how she went after that other than she said she saw Tom and GB a few times. You & Ceri should have just followed me when we were all holding hands on 4-5?
Like I said, I was saying this without knowing if it was a benefit or not this time. I've now checked and it was written in the event information as a rule that late starters will be slotted in where available and penalised by using their original start time unless it was deemed the cause of lateness was the fault of the organiser. It is not normal to shift a pre-allocated, on time starter off their start time to make way for a late starter and slot the on time runner inbetween start intervals. Then give the late starter a result using the new start time. The rules are made this way because it has been decided it is the fairest way to deal with such matters and prevents abuse of the pre-allocation system. For a high level event you do need to control the fairness as much as possible and I think a poor decision was made here. Negotiations with you regarding Lucy taking your start time should never have been considered.
I had fun, I like orienteering, finding controls in the forest is great, navigating without being distracted and focusing on the task at hand.
*now to add petrol*
Our negotiations took about 30s - I said, "Oh, we're off at the same time, I'll just start 2mins behind so you guys still get to run with the same start interval." She said "Are you sure, it was my fault for being late?" and I said "No, I don't mind at all and Tom and Graham are cool with it." Surely there's a bigger picture here, irrelevant to what you're all frustrated about from Sunday morning one that a struggling minor sport could do well to remember.
You could arguably be going one step further back and thinking that the original start draw should have had a 20min gap between the W21 last starter and the first M45 - otherwise the other W21s could cry "unfair". ;-)
Surely there's a bigger picture here
While normally I'm fully on board with your "stop taking everything quite so seriously" rants, Tooms, the fact that you, Tom and GB aren't playing for sheep stations wouldn't save her at a national event. :)
Oh I know, and I agree with the rules needing to be followed at major events, but the whole fussing and frustration is symptomatic of the sport sadly. I agree that her time ought to have been changed in retrospect, but with so many suboptimal things to choose from, why get all het up? I'm not disagreeing with Rachel at all, just candidly observing behavior, like it or not.
It is plain that this is a potential area where people could abuse the rules which are put in place to ensure fair competition at high level events. If it was a local standard event of course back off on the heavy handed rules approach, let people analyse their map for hours pre-run if they want to etc, but this was a state championship. As much as you think it was ok if it was cool by Tom, Graham and yourself it wasn't your call to make and you weren't the only people potentially affected by this decision. You should never have been involved other than to remind Lucy and the starters you were actually supposed to be starting after me so she couldn't have that start time. I don't want to make this into a super big deal, just highlighting that this was an area I didn't feel was right yesterday and hope it is something we are making common practice. The setters and controllers did a MASSIVE job and the courses were great but it is important to maintain the rules of fairness. When the start draw is done at least it is done randomly and uniformly, neither of which happened with the changes made last minute on Sunday.
I remember Tash got pinged at her first Easter carnival running the W Open B course for turning up late even though we were at the event with stacks of time (think she had a last minute dash to the toilet) though only two minutes in that instance.
I will admit that I did complain about the start draw for the SA Long having been done by course rather than by class...the person responsible tried to tell me that OE doesn't allow for random-drawing by class.
And I was flabbergasted to hear 3rd hand about a request which had been made by an unnamed controller for a different event, to alternate 2 age classes on the same course so that one class started on the odd minute and one class on the even minute; the logic being that competitors in either class would still have 2 minutes between them!!!
We use OE and I can tell you it does sort starts by class.
The start draw method may be random and uniform but it’s not fair. We accept that. Sometimes we get a « good » draw, sometimes « bad ». Like when I got put out for 3 state champs in a row one start place in front of my highest competition (Geoff T).
You’re talking about « abuse ». Strong words and clearly not the situation here. People who arrive late at the start are usually flustered, rushed and liable to make a mistake early on.
the sport should be about navigating on your own through unknown terrain. Start draws mess that up whether « random and uniform « or not.
Abuse in this instance can be seen either as people not making a particular effort to get to the start on time or deliberately not getting to the start on time to get a better start. Not a strong word, just a description of an undesired outcome. And yes, I'm not saying either happened here, just that the result of being late was to be given special treatment rather than penalised.
No rushing for the start this time. Lucy was warming up along the start before I got there. And I had to sprint in straight to the back box so I was more rushed.
Eoin we all remember your Ballarat NOL effort starting 30secs after Andy Hogg where you scrunched up your map, ran like you were in a 400m race, caught Andy's coat tails & ran the whole race without looking at your map at all and got yourself a very handy NOL result.
Lets imagine Eoin you finally got the better start draw, 2min after Geoff T but then he arrived late. They decided at no penalty to Geoff he can take the next time slot which is now 2min after you, except Warren Key already has that time so he'll now go 3min after, and then Geoff Lawford was another 2mins behind Warren so now he'll be 1min in behind Warren. Do you think that is a desirable way to do start list manipulation for a late starter in this instance? Does this not increase the chance of a train being created, does this not increase that chance that Geoff catches the coat tails of one of these runners and it drags him up to you.
Which is why I find it interesting that World Ranking Events are meant to have the highest ranked people starting last - numerous others will get a tow if a train forms.
Yeah but in the World According to O-ing, it wouldn't happen because there'd be no start lists with everyone entering official categories through EOD entries then picking their own start times to suit.
Best AP popcorn trail for quite some time! Thanks people,
Please login to add a message.