I am wondering.
EYOC 2011
W/M16 - up to 16 years old, born in 1995 or later
W/M18 - up to 18 years old, born in 1993 or later
JWOC 2011
W20, M20. All competitors must be born in 1991 or later and shall have full passport citizenship of the country they are representing.
...............................................................................................
In Athletics they have restriction that you should not be older than age category, even for one day. In orienteering we use the opposite approach. I don't know for other sports.
How you understand EYOC 2011 rule: up to 16 years old, born in 1995 or later?
What kind of rules have your federation?
as IOF (in Canada) and very many other countries i did compete. athletics ? those guys are funny
In orienteering, everyone's birth day is January 1 of the year they were born. Age classes include the year (so -16 includes those who turn 16 any time from Jan 1 to Dec 31 of the year of competition; likewise, 35+ includes anyone who turns 35 any time during the year of the competition.).
Makes it easier for multi day events to avoid crossing over age classes if your birthday happens to fall on one of them, unless the carnival is held over the new year of course. It also allows you to stay in one category over a series (e.g. if your state association runs a points system throughout the year) so you don't have to compete in different categories throughout the year. Of course if you have a summer series (southern hemisphere) then that could complicate matters :-)
With the EYOC rule you can't be older than 16 if born in 1995 or later so I don't see the problem. It clarifies that 12 or 13 year olds can run M/W 16 if they wish but that if you are born before 1995 ie are 17 or older during 2011 then you are ineligible and should be running M/W18.
It's a pain as a kid if your birthday is in December as you join M/W 18 just after your 16th birthday.
You get two years in the category regardless of when your birthday is. The unfortunate fact is that the other kids are bigger bullies than you :-)
I think it's good to have a fixed reference date, otherwise it's depending on the date that the event is organised and you might find yourself in the unlucky position that you can only run the MW16 only once if the event moves a bit through the year around your birthday.
The kids born in December will take revenge at WMOC :-)
I still have a little problem with understanding the phrase "up to 16 years old". Is this mean exactly one day less than 16 or till 17?
Anyway, I like age classes’ rules but I was also wondering about age classes at EYOC & JWOC comparing to other sports and how this influence on financing the junior classes.
I don’t know for others but our athletes with EYOC & JWOC have 3 youth classes (16, 18, 20) where they could get official recognition for their international results based on our rules from Olympic committee. Non-Olympic sports can get small financial support for youth classes nevertheless if they don’t have perspective athletes with good international results. So this is good for our development. When they reach senior class, federation can help only if they have international results which are in our case impossible mission.
If we would have junior category till 23 that I think would be good for financing our sport. I also see good things for young athletes (motivation, longer junior period ...) and not just looking from our perspective. I more & more like the philosophy of cycling where rules are in favour of young athletes and also good for cycling sport.
I think that in the long term we should change age categories and events system from EYOC to WOC. System should better serve to different countries for their development purposes and their process of developing new Top Athletes. We should make event system which is based on all important (olympic and financial rules) which will give us more chances to finance the sport. As many countries have different systems we shoud check which solutions could be good for everybody. Olympic sports already done this.
Idea is to use today events system and make some decisions which will be good for global and regional orienteering development. Maybe it is not everything good but I see good points and advantages in this new system. If you have other thoughts or why present system is better for your federation please write your pros and cons, especially as I wrote from our perspective. Todays IOF rules and age categories are not 100% good for our development.
This is my hypothetic idea.
AGE CATEGORIES
Seniors / 20 years or older
Under 23 / 20, 21 and 22 years old (organized together with JWOC)
juniors / 18 and 19 years old (JWOC)
youth / 16 in 17 years (EYOC)
pros:
Many sports use this system which has advantages also on national level. Now we have EYOC (15 and 16 years old competitors) but I think that 15 years old competitors are still too young for championships. Many of them at this age start with real, more serious training and this is more important for their development than official championships. Those young comeptitors are still at early developing level and don't have regural training process. If you look at EYOC you will see that some countries don’t send their competitors for class MW/16 (Sweden, Norway and Finland). They probably already have good athletes but their educational and training process is probably based on different values and what is really important in this age period. If I compare present system with new one from aspects of our Olympic financial rules I could say that new one bring more money and more advantages to competitors and federation.
2. EYOC & JEC & EUROMEETING
a) Rename EYOC (16, 18) to WYOC - World Youth Orienteering Championships (17)
b) Rename JEC (18, 20) to European Junior Championships (17, 19)
c) Rename Euromeeting to European Championships under 23
pros:
Orienteering is developing very fast around the world and we need for youth and juniors more structured events programme than today. Juniors from different countries around the world have today real meeting only at JWOC. Maybe we should also have WYOC. Maybe WYOC and JWOC every two years. From European point of view we could use today JEC in separate years for all categories. Maybe we should rename it to European Junior Championships. For under 23 we could also use today event Euromeeting. As we already have EYOC and Euromeeting every year that should not be a problem. Also today media interest for JEC and Euromeeting is low.
I don’t see any point having each year EYOC and JEC like today. Both are basically almost the same event, strictly open to European countries. Also CUP doesn’t mean the same as championship. CUP is in most cases seen as a lower event than championship. One problem is also because today JEC is not strictly part of the IOF events system and we could not use it properly (results, finance). Orienteering has the lowest rank (status) among official sports, so we can't use results from international CUP events to finance our sport. For us it is just a multiday event like many others and not an elite event. The same goes for Euromeeting. We could say that this is the elite event for B teams but if we can’t put it in the system on the basis of our Olympic event rules then we can’t use the results of it.
3. JWOC / Under 23
a) JWOC (20 years old ) to JWOC (19 years old)
I also see some points here. Junior means that you are teenager and not 20 years old. As all these competitors are not juniors anymore I think it would be more appropriate to use new age categories for JWOC and make new event for competitors under 23.
I also see some other advantages. We could have both categories at one event. In this way competitors which are maybe not yet ready for WOC could have more prominent event with more media interest. If someone under 23 will be good enough will probably skip the event and go directly to WOC. I think that we must have wider look on our future beyond WOC. How to establish events system that will give more chances to competitors from start and it will be able to produce deeper elite field around the world in the long run. What kind of international events for youth and juniors we should have to achieve this? This will be good for them to stay in the sport longer and they will have more time to develop skills needed for WOC. It is hard for many juniors to become a senior national member and now we lost many of them after they become 20 years old. They have very short time to develop their skills if they start training at theirs 15-16 years which is the case in most of less development countries.
Poland made a proposal at
ANNUAL MEETING 2011 of the European orienteering federations.
Poland idea is to merge EYOC and JEC and to introduce an U‐23 Championships (European or World U-23 championships?). Poland concept of U-23 (under 23) is also a different model (age classes) from what we have now for EYOC and JEC.
It is good to know that idea of joining EYOC and JEC was proposed by
AUT already in 2006 but it was not accepted. I don't know what were the reasons from EWG back then but now it looks that idea might get a wider support.
Norway already gives support to the idea.
Classes:
• M / W 15-16
• M / W 17-18
• M / W 19-20
• M / W 21-23
Unification and inclusion of events into IOF elite events program is needed because today we have confusion of names: Championship (EYOC), cup (JEC) and meeting (Eurometting). All events are now annual events.
In my opinion also idea of joining U-23 with JWOC should be considered as it is more natural and would be more appropriate concept also for other IOF regions. As I understand Norway wants to sanctioned Euromeeting as an U-23 European championships. I had a similar thoughts and I have had very much like it but now with more thinking about the global development I don't see a point to introduce U-23 class only for European athletes.
When I was of that age, the World University Championships acted as a de facto world championships for under-25s (plus a few older postgrads), but they've become much less important since WOC has become an annual event.
Tell us why U23. My mind is open, but U21s regularly get in their country's WOC teams.
One of our top local orienteers is 17. I wish he'd run in his age category instead of mine.
Blair, you probably know all these details but I would still like to know your opinion or how these questions look from AUS perspective.
What I see as an important issue here is a structure of IOF elite events in all regions and for all age categories and how these events can help to gain recognition for orienteering in different countries. In my opinion it is a question how IOF elite events structure can help federations and athletes to fund their high performance programs.
Structure and funding rules of federation’s high performance programs for juniors and seniors are in our case in hands of National Olympic committee. Committee recognizes only competitions for which governing body is international sport organization (IOF) and only on these competitions our athletes on the basis of their results can achieve sport recognition and status of sportsman. Without results federation can’t apply senior high performance programs for funding.
Orienteering competitions which are not on official IOF elite events calendar or are under others governing bodies (World University Championships, World Schools Championships Orienteering, World Military Orienteering Championships, World Police & Fire Games,....) don’t count. Athletes can get support to attend on these competitions strictly from these governing bodies but athletes for their achievements can’t get sport recognition from NOC.
We must be clearer what OUR elite events are for all age categories. We must distinguish between formal (our) and informal (others) international orienteering competitions. For federations and orienteering developing purpose formal competitions are more important. In this context I would like to see that IOF promotes all our competitions. Structure and responsibilities for Elite events for all age categories are now not clear enough. I will give an example.
Because IOF don’t have formal (legal) regional structure, elite events which are under European working group (EWG) beside EU Regional championships are in some kind of tampon zone. In our case are formally seen as informal orienteering competitions (EYOC, JEC, Euromeeting). With logical explanation and characteristics of how orienteering is regulated on the international level NOC recognized EYOC as an official competition. EYOC is exceptional case because is a championships and it is also mentioned on IOF page under other events but other two events (JEC and Euromeeting) are excluded. For our federation these two events are from aspects of recognition and funding only recreational events.
Maybe I am wrong here as I look only from our perspective but I think IOF should also prepare:
- official document about international elite events for all age categories
- more informative structure of IOF elite events on official webpage
- promote all OUR events
EYOC is now on IOF webpage presented under other events which is not good in my opinion. JEC and Euromeeting are not presented on IOF page at all. Regional work of EWG is not incorporated into IOF vision of regional development. Without (1) IOF formal recognition of EWG or (2) inclusion of EWG events into IOF elite events calendar we can’t use them for our regional development purpose.
I hope that one or another solution can be achieved. I see second solution as more appropriate.
@gruver
This is the question about what kind of elite international competitions (age categories) are the most appropriate for development issues, funding and participation. To make clear why I think Poland's proposal is worth to analyze and to find a solution I must go into the details. I will try to explain my logic on our example as I don’t know anything about how these questions are solved in other countries. From our perspective U-23 could be a good solution.
Some sports have strict line between junior/senior category and it is described as U-20 (Football). In orienteering we have U-21 (JWOC). Some sports have youth senior age category which is described as U-23 or U-25. Cycling for instance has U-23 class.
First, we have a unique and specific rules and this you must take into account. National Olympic committee in general for all sports allows two junior age categories (youth/junior) and two senior age categories (youth senior/senior). We must use the same age categories as they are used for IOF international elite events. This is one of the regulations in our NOC competition guidelines.
Today IOF/EWG elite events structure (at least in Europe) looks:
<16 years (EYOC) ------------------ U-17
<18 years (EYOC, JEC) ---------- U-19
<20 years (JWOC, JEC)----------- U-21
>21 years (WOC)
Because IOF don’t have official international elite event for youth senior category in our case JWOC count as youth senior competition. On the basis of results from (youth/junior/youth senior) categories athletes can achieve “perspective class” which is an official recognition of their result. Athletes from senior category can achieve “international or Olympic class”. In this way they could get INTERNATIONAL status of sportsman and federation has a chance to get better funding of high performance programs.
With introducing of U-23 or U-25 we could get additional 2 or 4 years into account when we speak about financing of junior/youth senior activities. But we can’t put another elite competition into the calendar without changing age categories. We can’t have 3 juniors and 2 seniors age categories. I don’t know if IOC have any recommendation about this but our NOC would not allowed us to have one more age category. Because four age categories are max. in total we would be forced to change logic of our age categories. I think that junior category must be valid only for teenagers, like U-20 and not U-21 like we have today.
But this is possible only if IOF (EWG) change their age categories first.
<17 years (EYOC/JEC) ------------------------------- U-18
<19 years (JWOC, EYOC/JEC) ------------------- U-20
<22 years (World not EU championships)------ U-23
>20 (WOC)
In our case this could generate more athletes with “junior class” and more athletes with NATIONAL status of sportsman. National status is possible to gain on national championships in recognized IOF disciplines (sprint, middle, long, relay). Definition of wider age classes could help us because it would be easier for us to have enough runners in all official age categories.
I see also some other advantages:
- promotion of elite orienteering for juniors till U-23
- more chances that young runners will stay in the elite orienteering at least until U-23
- more chances to promote orienteering as a good substitute for Athletics after runners' 20 years
- better possibilities for national B team runners to develop their skills (deeper national field)
- for developing purpose it is better to have classes from U-18/U-23 than from U-17/U-21
- Sweden, Norway and Finland don’t send runners onto EYOC for this category U-17 (16 years) because they think they are too young for international competition; (as I understood and I think the same)
- countries could use World Schools Championships Orienteering for U-17 and U-15 as it is more relaxed international competition to get first international experiences
- it is important to include today EWG elite events (JEC, Euromeeting) into official IOF elite events
- Euromeeting event could be a basis but U-23 might be better to be World and not European championships organized together with JWOC
- to get compact elite events and higher media interest than we have today with many different events for same age categories
- easier NOC criteria for us to achieve “perspective class” than “international class”
As you said if someone is good enough for WOC already at his 20 years he/she will probably skip the U-23 event and go directly to WOC. Now we lose many of them after they become 20 years old because we can’t finance senior high performance programs. They have very short time to develop their skills if they start with more seriously trainings at theirs 16 years which is the case in most less developed countries. Also in big orienteering countries it is very hard for juniors to get into the senior team and U-23 can give deeper national field in the long run.
Ok... what's a tampon zone?
It sounds funny to me too - but my guess is that it is a "buffer zone" and in this context probably more like a "no-mans-land"...?
Bubo you are right. "no-man's-land" is probably the best term for this situation :)
This discussion thread is closed.