Discussion: BK Cup Rules

Hello:

A committee made up of Peter Gagarin, Wil Smith, Eric Kemp, Janet Porter and myself have been working on the BK Cup Rules. They are now in a final form. While they will most likely not please everyone, they seem to be a fair criteria for the competition.

Please note that there is now a "junior" version of the BK Cup that will be called the "Future Champions Cup".

Peter Goodwin, Ad Hoc Committee Chair

The rules are as follows:

Björn Kjellström Cup Eligibility and Scoring (for 2012 and future years)

1. Eligibility: Runners must have full passport-holding citizenship of the country they are representing. Before the competitions begin, any runners who are potentially eligible to represent more than one North American Federation must declare which country they intend to represent. Because this cup is a friendly competition, on a trial basis, there will not be a “credentials committee” but protests will be referred to a jury to determine eligibility.
2. Scoring: There are three individual events for both men and women. Each is scored separately with 25 for first, then 22, 19, 16, 13, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The best three for each country count. For the relay: 50 for first team, 30 for second, 20 for third, 10 for fourth. Note that to get points a team has to finish within the time limit (which might be quite tight). No points for DQ or DNF. The overall score for each country is based on combined scores for men and women. In case of a tie, the cup is retained by the country in possession of it.

Future Champions Cup (Junior version of the BK Cup, new for 2012) Eligibility and Scoring (for 2012 and future years)

1. Eligibility: Same as for Seniors.
2. Scoring: (A) For the individual events, when there are M20 and F20 and M18 and F18 classes (as currently the practice in the USA), each class and race will be scored separately with 15 for first, then 12, 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The best three for each country count. The relay, and there will be just a M20 relay and a F20 relay, is scored as for the seniors. (B) For the individual events, when there are M17-20 and F17-20 classes (as currently the practice in Canada), the junior scoring will be the same as for the seniors. The relay, and there will be just a M20 relay and a F20 relay, is scored as for the seniors.
3. In situations where junior classes run the same course as the senior classes, juniors are eligible to be scored as both a junior and a senior.
4. The Junior event will be called the Future Champions Cup.

These rules sound great. Thanks for working on them!

there will not be a “credentials committee”

This seems like a weak spot. What if someone is not entirely truthful about their passport expiration date? Why would it matter, though, if someone is eligible for a passport—shouldn't they be eligible to compete anyway?

Well, apparently no.

A couple years ago there was a big brouhaha at the Team Trials about someone, a U.S. citizen, who may not have had his passport ready in time for the WOC. Rules were since then changed to disallow participation in the Trials for those without a valid passport as of some cutoff date before the Trials.

I don't see why the BK Cup (in essence a Regional team Championship) should be any different. And if it is the same, there should be a credentials committee just like at the European Champs.

Phew, I thought for a moment these rules might have averted controversy, and then what would we have done.

I didn't actually read "passport-holding citizenship" as meaning actually holding a passport, merely citizenship allowing you to hold a passport... but hey, that's why there's a juryyyyyyyy ;)

merely citizenship allowing you to hold a passport

That was exactly the point of contention at the 2009 Trials. Someone had just obtained the citizenship and did not yet have a passport.

Let's use pin-punching for the BK, and we pin-punch our actual passports. There possibly can't be any controversy there.

I think 'citizen allowing you to hold a passport' is reasonable.

What about juniors under 16, who don't necessarily need a passport for travel? Or someone whose passport has expired and doesn't travel outside the country much? It seems unnecessary to make them pay $100 to get their points to count.

I don't see why the BK Cup (in essence a Regional team Championship) should be any different. And if it is the same, there should be a credentials committee just like at the European Champs.

Actually it is different. It's not a "Regional team Championship" with a capital R that implies IOF involvment/approval. And it's different from the Team Trials, because those are picking a team to compete at an IOF event (WOC).

I'd suggest a better thing to focus on would be the next step -- how to get the eligibility rules for the North American Champs (which is a Regional individual Championship) improved. And my suggestion there is that M/F21 and MF20 (whether it's 17-20 or 19-20) get changed to WOC eligible, while the other age groups stay as is. That will require another committee, and I assume a credentials committee or whatever you want to call it.

Meanwhile, the new rules for the BK Cup and the FC Cup are a good first step.

M/F21 and MF20 (whether it's 17-20 or 19-20) get changed to WOC eligible, while the other age groups stay as is.

I think it is a worthy proposal. But how do you really know if someone is eligible without a credentials committee? Perhaps it's not necessary to require a passport, but how else do you know someone is a citizen?

As events get more important, then the process of certifying the participants gets more strict.

Right now, at one end, there is WOC and the need to show a passport. At the other end, we have rules of eligibility for the US Champs and one is checked quite carefully (USOF membership) and one is not generally checked at all (citizen or green card holder or certain kind of student visa). Another case -- the World Masters Champs, they never verify your age.

So from my point of view, trying to keep a sense of perspective, the approach for the BK and FC Cups is just fine.

And those that try to get agreement on new rules for the NA Champs, if that's possible, can figure out what the right approach is for that event.

Just want to say thanks for addressing this well in advance of the Saturday evening of NAOC 2012.

Well, I'm coming from this point of view—Orienteering USA membership expires annually, and immigration status tends to be semi-permanent, so it makes sense to check the former regularly. The latter should perhaps be checked at least once, but after that there isn't much point—it's hard to relinguish a citizenship and it's not that easy to lose a green card, either.

With BK Cup, perhaps U.S. organizers know well who's who in Orienteering USA, but we generally don't have a good idea about the immigration status of every orienteer in Canada, or for that matter in Barbados. Not planning for due process may invite another Saturday-night disaster (and vice versa for the Championships occurring in Canada).

There is a saying in politics -- Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. Meaning, don't get so hung up on trying to come up with the perfect solution, and realizing that different people have different opinions about what the perfect solution is, that you can't even come up with a good solution and end up doing nothing at all.

What we've got now is good. If there's a protest about somebody's eligibility that can't be answered by just asking them if they are a citizen, then a protest can go to the jury.

Just want to say thanks for addressing this well in advance of the Saturday evening of NAOC 2012.

Yeah, we were actually trying to get it done a year in advance. Main credit goes to our new OUSA prez, Peter Goodwin, who wouldn't let the matter die even when e-mails didn't get answered right away.

Now, if someone would just take on the NA Champs rules.... :-)

Just to be sure I understand the rules completely, can someone verify that the scoring for the individuals ignores people who are not eligible for the BK cup. So if places 1, 2 and 3 go to visiting Frenchmen, say, the highest placing North American who is eligible still gets the 25 points.

That's correct.

Thanks to the committee for a job well done.

Let's get ready to rumble!

Do I understand correctly that Federation membership is no longer required (1) in the agreed-on BK Cup eligibility rule, and (2) in PG's NA Champs proposal for MF-20 and MF-21+?

Also, what is the cutoff date for citizenship—logic would assume it's the first day of the Championships, but it wouldn't hurt to have that exactly spelled out.

Fabulous. Thanks to everyone on the committee - and also to those behind the scenes - for sorting it out well before the last possible moment. Now we can focus on the rumble.

About the relay: why is it necessary to have points for third and fourth? For the BK is it not a competition between national teams? Unless Mexico enters do not the points stop at second place? If the intention is for countries to enter second and perhaps third teams that is good. Is Barbados actually in North America?
But now what about the Veteran classes? When I first knew him Bjorn Kjellstrom was the poster boy for the average 60 year old Swede being fitter than the average 35 year old Canadian. In that spirit veterans should be allowed to duke it out, too. I suggest a BK veterans (masters, old farts, whatever) cup based on the 35+ age classes with points going 6 deep based on a 10-8-6-4-2-1 formula. I'll volunteer for a VC committee if there is other interest. I think also that Canada and US should use the opportunity to agree on one age class structure for NAOC and not have it flipping back and forth every two years.

gordhun>> Presumably you can have more than one relay team per country. Otherwise the relay becomes a bit boring.

It sounds sort of like the BK rules committee is suggesting that a relay be permanently added to the NAOC schedule. Is this the case? I fully support it if so - I think relays are an important part of introducing more club atmosphere in NA and the NAOCs are a good place to start. If we do go that route we should have club teams not country teams though.

@gordhun: what you are suggesting used to be called the ONA Cup. From what i remember it stopped being awarded because it was always won by the host country (except when the USOF Convention was held in Ontario with GLOF '94).

Personally, I'm not a fan of separate x-20 and x-18 scoring when the event happens to be in the US (even as a father of possible M-20 and M-18 competitors). Why should twice as many athletes count (/ be required) for the FC Cup (with a much less deep field) vs the BK Cup? Also, the competitive x-18s tend to run x-20, and should be encouraged to do so, given their recent prevalence on US JWOC teams.

A little background on the relay.

For NAOC 2012 DVOA plans to have the event on Friday-Sunday, with the sprint first thing Sunday morning right at the center where lots of people will be staying. This will be followed by a fairly short relay, which will be for national teams only, with I think two teams for each country (both senior and junior, both male and female). So the relay is just for the BK and FC cups. And because the cups are a country vs. country competition, the relay teams will be country teams.

The thinking behind this is to (1) introduce a relay into the event because relays are cool, and (2) use it to focus attention on the BK and FC cups competition, and therefore (3) focus attention on our best senior and junior orienteers, and also (4) package it all in a short and convenient time period in a fine arena.

The scoring for the relays was set to make it less likely that the relays wouldn't matter as the cup outcomes were already determined. With points for the top four places, perhaps it will come down to a battle for third place....

I would assume that planning for NAOC 2014 will take into account the experience from NAOC 2012, and if any of the rules for the BK or FC cups need tweaking, then there will be a process similar to this time.

By the way, info about NAOC 2012 is here, one year from this coming weekend. The long-range forecast calls for three days of sunshine. I assume that everyone on the USA side has it on their calendar.

I still insist on more clarity (as someone whose U.S. Championship was taken away retroactively through interpretation of things not explicit in the Rules).

If Federation membership is not required, please say so. Otherwise the rest of the Rules may be construed to imply that it is, similarly to what happened with the U.S. Rogaine Championship I won in 2002.

If citizenship is required on the first date of the event, please say so. There may be people in the process of obtaining citizenship, and controversies ensued stemming from exactly where in the process they are. This also has happened.

quick clarification. These are the rules for the BK Cup. Is the committee also recommending that the passport rules also apply for the NAOC individual awards?

The committee was only dealing with the rules for the BK Cup (and the new FC Cup for juniors).

If there is to be a review of the current practices for eligibility for the NAOC individual awards -- I don't think there are any actual written rules -- then I would think that process would need to be started.

With the exception of a couple of possible small wording changes to get the clarity that Vladimir addresses two posts earlier, and which I hope we can produce shortly, our group is done.

Whether we should be revived to deal with NAOC eligibility, that's up to our leaders (Charlotte and Peter).

As someone who works in the field, I can point out that any Canadian who will be attending the NAOC in the US will be holding a passport. Thanks to the US Department of Homeland Security, it's a requirement for entering the country.

The rules for NAOC eligibility are being reviewed by the OUSA Rules Committee and also with Charlotte et. al. from Canada.

In response to the all Canadians needing a passport, there could be people coming across the boarder not through the normal checkpoints. Remember, orienteers are pretty good with maps and could probably find a weak spot in the wall.

Kidding aside, it is good to have this looked at well before the event by lots of eyes. We should try to get it right not just done.

Thanks to the US Department of Homeland Security, it's a requirement for entering the country

... and you should be happy that them states haven't succeeded yet in requiring you to carry it with you on the course, but some sure tried and some seem intent on trying.

NAOC 2016 in Arizona?

Nev
Yes they have to have a passport but it doesn't have to be a Canadian passport. Think of someone who has been several years in Canada on a student VISA. He/she would be eligible to compete for a Canadian title and also for a NA title (I think) but not count for the BK points.

Gord, to be eligible to win a Canadian championships, you must be a full member, and a Canadian citizen or have a permanent resident card.

I think we'd better be explicit about how many teams each country is allowed to enter in the relay races. Either limiting each relay race to two teams per country or allowing more teams in an attempt to push other countries further down the results, possibly entirely out of the relay scoring, would be fine as far as I can see but let's have clarity when it can easily be had.

The relay is exactly what PG said.

Two teams per NA country in each of 4 divisions:
senior male
senior female
junior male
junior female

There is no ambiguity. Representatives of the country federations will need to supply team rosters some time during the event weekend. Individuals will not register themselves - a "team official" of some sort will do the registering.

Working on updating the website with all this information...

>"Representatives of the country federations will need to supply team rosters some time during the event weekend. Individuals will not register themselves - a "team official" of some sort will do the registering."

I really like this idea a lot. For some athletes it could be there first chance to represent their country at an international event but without the extra cost and stress of WOC. By keeping the event small it encourages spectating and also makes it manageable for the organizers. Great to see.

Regarding the BK rules - looks good.

Regarding a side comment, "That was exactly the point of contention at the 2009 Trials. Someone had just obtained the citizenship and did not yet have a passport.", that's not quite true.

Rather at the 2009 US Team Trials, the contender, as of the date of the Team Trials, was not yet a US citizen, but had a US CIS interview scheduled for 6 weeks after the Trials, and the (reasonable) hope that they'd get a citizenship and passport after that interview just in time for the actual WOC.

The rules many of us thought were clear on the process were obviously tested by that situation, and after much discussion, we did allow the contender to run in the Trials. (As they, just barely, didn't end up WOC-qualifying in '09, the story ended there w/o further excitement.)

So, while it may seem unlikely to matter, picking some clarifying rule on these seemingly mundane details now, may well help avoid controversy later, in case some edge-case comes up.

How many runners will be on each relay team?

3

I stand corrected... I obviously didn't have the details right.

Looks awesome. Hopefully other nations will be allowed to enter.

Also, it would be interesting if the number of teams the two countries are allowed to enter will eventually increase as a way to encourage depth in our elite fields.

Why limit number of relay teams but not individuals?

Yes, why only 2 relay teams?

It would be great if we had the problem of too many individuals wanting to participate - would also be fun to have qualifiers and finals in the events!

A number of things went into the decision to limit the relay fields.

Primarily, timing constraints in the schedule of the 2012 NAOC...

Depth of field, expected variance of results, and the imperative to manage a rather complicated set of courses for two separate events in half a day.

In the future, if a surfeit of teams is desired, scheduling the relay on its own day, or on a day other than the last day would make sense.

But, for 2012, we are aiming for a certain sort of dynamic, and this is how we are going about it.

After a request to be more specific regarding when citizenship and federation membership needs to be in force, here is a new (and very slightly modified) version of the rules for the BK and FC Cups. The only change is in the paragraph on eligibility. You have to be a citizen and a federation member before you race. Since last-minute attempts to deal with the latter have been an issue before, a procedure is spelled out to address it.

The important stuff remains the same -- exciting team competition between countries in the North American region next October at both the senior and junior levels.

I suppose the only question is whether Canada or Barbados will come in second....

=========================

Björn Kjellström Cup Eligibility and Scoring (for 2012 and future years)

1. Eligibility: Runners must have full passport-holding citizenship of the country they are representing prior to the start of a race. Runners must also be members in good standing of the national federation they are representing prior to the start of a race. In case there is a need for last-minute membership (new or renewal), it will be sufficient to give the necessary paperwork and payment to the event director or his/her designated subordinate.
Before the competitions begin, any runners who are potentially eligible to represent more than one North American Federation must declare which country they intend to represent. Because this cup is a friendly competition, on a trial basis, there will not be a “credentials committee” but protests will be referred to a jury to determine eligibility.
2. Scoring: There are three individual events for both men and women. Each is scored separately with 25 for first, then 22, 19, 16, 13, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The best three for each country count. For the relay: 50 for first team, 30 for second, 20 for third, 10 for fourth. Note that to get points a team has to finish within the time limit (which might be quite tight). No points for DQ or DNF. The overall score for each country is based on combined scores for men and women. In case of a tie, the cup is retained by the country in possession of it.

Future Champions Cup (Junior version of the BK Cup, new for 2012) Eligibility and Scoring (for 2012 and future years)

1. Eligibility: Same as for Seniors.
2. Scoring: (A) For the individual events, when there are M20 and F20 and M18 and F18 classes (as currently the practice in the USA), each class and race will be scored separately with 15 for first, then 12, 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The best three for each country count. The relay, and there will be just a M20 relay and a F20 relay, is scored as for the seniors. (B) For the individual events, when there are M17-20 and F17-20 classes (as currently the practice in Canada), the junior scoring will be the same as for the seniors. The relay, and there will be just a M20 relay and a F20 relay, is scored as for the seniors.
3. In situations where junior classes run the same course as the senior classes, juniors are eligible to be scored as both a junior and a senior.
4. The Junior event will be called the Future Champions Cup.

So is it that everyone gets to run the relay but only two teams contribute in any way to the scoring, or do only two teams get to run the relay?

Only 2 teams get to run the relay.

Edit: only 2 teams in each of the 4 categories.

Relays are usually more exciting when more people are running. I'm sure you guys have some grand vision for how this is going to be awesome, but the mental image I'm getting is more like a team fundraiser string-o.

I can see how this would be different from a typical relay though. A high level of intensity will be maintained because of the competition for the cup and hopefully there will be a big crowd cheering. I think that should ensure a good atmosphere.

I do worry that it will become less fun when the gap between the Americans (in the lead naturally) and the Canadians grows so large that there is no further contact in the forest. :)

All 4 relays will be run at essentially the same time but with staggered starts and - assuming we hit our winning time targets - staggered finishes. So there will be 8 teams in the woods for a good portion of the time. Should be great spectating.

Instead of criticizing and questioning, let's applaud DVOA for trying something new and potentially exciting and then see how it turns out, so we can possibly improve on the concept for future NAOC's.

I'm pretty sure that the composition of the teams has not yet been decided. So, for some questioning the implementation, a possible solution would be train really hard and earn a spot on a team. So, rather than worrying about whether it looks like string O or trail O, or whatever, you can focus on beating Canada in the woods, and won't be able to think about what is going down in the arena.

Just sayin'.

I take it that a M20/F20 eligible person is not allowed to run both the junior and senior relay (1st leg - 3rd leg type scenario).

Not if North America would like to be taken seriously in international Orienteering....

Who's going to start speculating on teams first?

So if I go to the DVOA champs I can't run in the relay? Or will there be a punter class too?

I think limiting relay numbers is silly. If you can't manage more teams, the format is too complicated. The whole point of relays is a ton of people out in the forest. And surely this is a great time for the athletes to get WOC style training?

I know the NAOC is not planned for me, but I train with all these people, I put on all this stuff for them, and it would be nice to have an interlopers team to be able to take them on in the relay too. It would also make for a more fun relay.

Or did I just totally misunderstand everything? I've never been to a NAOC before, so maybe I got the wrong end of the stick.

Why are we not including Barbados in any of this?

Instead of criticizing and questioning, let's applaud DVOA for trying something new and potentially exciting and then see how it turns out.

I don't really see much criticizing, and the primary question being asked is why more teams aren't allowed to participate. This tells me that there is enough much excitement for this race that more people actually want to race in it, and not just watch it.

Relays are fun and I think this will be a big hit, as long as everyone adapts to the new role of being a spectator and not a competitor.

No idea of order, but here's two possible teams from Canada. Four of six runners have made recent A finals at WOC.

Patrick Goeres (Winnipeg, MB)
Robbie Anderson (Ottawa, ON)
Will Critchley (Edmonton, AB)

Emily Kemp (Ottawa, ON)
Carol Ross (Moncton, NB)
Louise Oram (Vancouver, BC)

A nice distribution of athletes from around the country.

Also, there's quite a buzz back at home about these races. Would GBR teams be allowed to enter if enough people came over? It really would be very cool. And I will find it easier to persuade people to come over if I bribe them with a relay team :)

(And yes, this is just Becky's incredible relay enthusiasm. I hope it's not taken the wrong way).

We are looking forward to welcoming Barbados as well. They have been invited personally to attend.

The format is very simple, and it started out simpler, but we compromised slightly.

Just fanning the flames (I like the heat)--why do you think they have qualifiers at WOC?

Or stated differently…

Millions and millions of people can run a 100 meter dash. But, Usain Bolt will race only a handful to win the gold. There is a reason they set it up that way.

Teams:

Men
CAN1 Critchley-Goeres-Anderson
CAN2 M.Smith-W.Smith-Kemp
Alt. Konotopetz

USA1 Laughlin-Granovskiy-Smith
USA2 Barbone-Walker-Zhyk

Chicks
CAN1 Ross-Kemp-Oram
CAN2 James-Balakova-Smith

USA1 Saeger-Lauenstein-Crocker
USA2 Jospe-Burgess-Luis
(if no Sandra, then Pavlina)

M20
CAN1 Ian Kemp Canadian Junior Male 2 Canadian Junior Male 3
CAN2 Canadian Junior Male 4 Canadian Junior Male 5 Canadian Junior Male 6

USA1 Underwood E.Childs A.Childs
USA2 Knapp Williams Schroeder

W20
CAN1 Murray M.Kemp E.Ross
CAN2 Waddington Canadian Junior Female 5 Canadian Junior Female 6

USA1 Parson Campbell US Junior Female 3
USA2 US Junior Female 4 US Junior Female 5 US Junior Female 6

Boris, isn't AliCamp a senior next year? I might be confused...

Maybe if I disguise myself cunningly I can pass as US Junior Female 6 :)

I hear you should also add Hudgins to that list, and I bet you could probably plump for Breton and Breton too...

Alexander Bergstrom of Ottawa is a lock for the M20 team.

And Alex Teutsch has a good shot as well - whatever the case Ottawa will be well represented! And I'll be fighting to beat out W. Smith for one of those relay spots.

If Trevor Bray of the Yukon comes down I'd put Alex B, Trevor B, and Alex T. as the first Canadian Junior team.

M20
CAN1 Ian Kemp

Ian just turned 13; expect him to be another Emily?

>why do you think they have qualifiers at WOC?

So people will train year round.

Hey, this thread is a bit all over the place. Can't we have each country pick a spokesperson or two for the rest of the thread and watch them hash it all out?

Millions and millions of people can run a 100 meter dash. But, Usain Bolt will race only a handful to win the gold. There is a reason they set it up that way.

I think it might have something to do with the number of lanes in the track, but I could be wrong.

USA! USA! USA!

The event hasn't happened yet, so I don't see why commenting on the proposed format is interpreted as a complaint. I'm merely offering my point of view on what excites me about attending orienteering events. Feel free to disagree.

I have never traveled to an orienteering event to spectate, and I have met precious few people at orienteering events who aren't planning to go in the woods. Everyone attending NAOCs will be there because they want to orienteer, so why not let them?

In contrast, none of the hundreds of millions of people glued to their TVs as Usain Bolt runs 100m in London will be doing so because they happened to be hanging out at the track.

In my 41 years of orienteering I have never been much of one to watch other people come up the finish chute BUT our senior and junior national squads going mano a mano, mujere a mujere in a relay, with several radio controls and a display board that would give us updates every 10 to 15 minutes, that would be worth watching, especialy if some of that PA Yuengling beer is on sale nearby.

I think gord has got it exactly figured out!

Spectating isn't so bad. Here's a photo of 3,000 orienteers watching a handful of elite racing each other at WOC 2011.

WOC 2011 Sprint Arena


There's more than a little bit of fun in watching an orienteering race. And at NAOC we 'normals' will have run in the morning immediately before the relay. So bring on the cold beer, the waving flags, the noise makers, and the loud cheering. It's going to be a lot of fun.

And perhaps just as importantly it will (I hope and expect) provide our top runners motivation, a chance to represent their country, and a load of pressure relay experience that will help our teams reach the top 10 at WOC (and help the American's reach the top 16).

I think it'll be awesome. And I think 4 teams duking it out will be exciting. I think it would be awesomer if each country had the depth to field 3 strong teams, and perhaps this relay could be part of the incentive to make it happen.

Wearing my racing and coach hat ...The big pro for three teams each per category is that the NAOC relay teams would be different than the WOC/JWOC athletes. They still could be with only two since each country doesn't always send full teams to WOC/JWOC but if NAOC is viewed as a stepping stone to those bigger races then this could be a major goal for an individual that hasn't yet made JWOC/WOC.

wearing my organizer hat...I'm just super happy that DVOA has taken this initiative and fully understand the amount of work to organize 4 events in three days. I'm also excited that the NAOC are being raised to the level that they should be at. As in THE most important elite race in North America. GHO made that the aim of our hosting in 2006, BC took that to the next level in 2010 and the excitement for 2012 is already growing thanks to DVOA and the BK committee. well done.

I understand (I think) wanting to keep the relay to 4 teams, but I think it would be awesome to have more elite teams, especially from other countries - just to add to the excitement.

I'm very excited already for the event! All four races should be sweet!

If you're promoting the event to other nations as you are, and doing very well at it, I don't see why they would be interested in watching Canada vs USA in a relay. Trying to beat Canada or USA on the other hand...right in there. I don't really care about who wins, as they're both ace. But I do want to know if I can assemble a team to beat them.

I agree with Brendan. The best bit about WOC spectating is watching the best then taking on the terrain yourself. Not very interested in just watching. If it's a choice between staying to watch a relay and getting back on the road earlier, I'd probably do the latter. I think there's quite a few people who might do that. It would certainly happen back at home.

Adding international teams would take away from the spectacle and excitement if they all cross the finish line first. USA and Canada (and Barbados!) only please.

USA! USA! USA!

I think the USA and Canadian teams will do just fine against ad hoc teams from other countries----so bring it on!

Though the decision should really be DVOA's since they will need to deal with the logistics.

I think if DVOA/Orienteering USA are going to make the event "more like" "real" IOF events, like a Regional Championship, then bona fide teams from other Federations should be welcome in the Relay, they just shouldn't count for the points.

But then you do perhaps need a Credentials Committee.

The more I think about this, the more I think DVOA has it right.

This race isn't a WRE, it's not an IOF-sanctioned event, and the only thing it's worth is for BK points, so I think it's fine to limit the race to only BK nations. It's basically an exhibition race at the end of the weekend, that just so happens to be worth a lot of pride for only 2 (maybe 3) nations. I think it's fair to only include the teams who are playing for the prize.

From a media/marketing/promotional standpoint, I think we'll look a lot better in photos/video/media coverage if we have a big cheering section and just a few teams out there, as opposed to everyone in the woods and just a couple of people watching. We want to showcase this is as a dramatic sporting spectacle, not just another "everyone have another go in the woods".

If the production of the event is done well enough, people won't leave, even if they aren't from North America. I've watched a lot of sport between teams I don't really care about, because it was interesting, competitive, and dramatic.

If I happened to be down at the Oceania Champs, and there was a relay between Aussie and NZ, I'd probably stay and watch it, because it would really matter to them, so I think it would be fun to watch that excitement and passion unfold.

Wow--Pink Socks nailed it. Especially the 3rd paragraph.

The point is we need to show off orienteering as a spectator sport, and for that, we need spectators. Sorry if there are a lot of extras in this production, but I assure you, it will be a good gig.

What about a BBQ to keep people around for dinner and a movie lunch and a relay? :-) :-) :-)

I think food and drinks (read beer?) are key. A pamphlet with competitor bios and course maps for those watching would go a long way too. I'm really interested to see what will come of this.

Beer = insurance rates go up from ~$0.40 to ~$4.00 per entrant. Not that I think it would be a bad tradeoff, but I am in the absolute minority on this one. (Don't shoot the messenger.)

insurance rates will apply only for relay competitors, right ? not for all weekend, and not for everyone.

exciting to see people talking about relay, but many are not used to go and do them..since in NA very seldom i see relay being taken seriously. Ocassionally at US champs-- but even there attendance is very low. In Canada ? seldom-er..
many competitors left this monday race at Ottawa event. when one gets his practice for them ? on AP thread ? i should count that as training then ! just do it !

I suspect the insurance rate would be for everyone... after all it's not the competitors that are drinking the beer at the event.

Do our (OUSA's) insurance terms prohibit alcohol at events? Does the venue prohibit alcohol? If the answer to both is "no', the point is moot.

(Rumor has it that there might have been beer available at a recent event -- albeit free, not for sale. Beyond that little tidbit, my lips are sealed. :-D )

Any alcohol being served at any event, for free or for sale, within compliance with state AB laws or not, is most likely not covered by Orienteering USA's insurance. Clubs can serve it, but will not be covered if there is a liability claim ensuing.

How about if the host venue is selling it? What I'm thinking is that they would already have insurance coverage.

I believe that was the case at Land of the Vikings a number of years ago.

What matters is who serves it. (At least in California.) If it's an agent or employee of the organizing entity, then the organizing entity gets sued. If it's another party then I think the organizer may get away—but I'm not a lawyer.

I don't think that Land of Vikings should be cited as precedent for anything. Those of us who experienced it are scarred.

Yet, it is probably less than 100 K away, although probably more than 2 hours of driving time.

ALL of this beer talk is moot if PEEC doesn't allow -- let alone serve -- alcoholic beverages on their grounds.

LoV gets my vote for Worst Terrain Ever Mapped.

Thanks for the many suggestions - I will be following-up with many of the ones for making the BK relay more enjoyable for the spectators. Details will be posted on the event website as they become known.

I fortunately missed LotV (both times), j-man, but from what I heard, the fact that liquor was available was the highlight of the place.

I'm a bit concerned about which countries are allowed to compete for the BK-Cup. Is there a North American Federation to which national federations can apply for membership or is attendance just based on invitations from the organisers? If Barbados gets an invite, how about Jamaica? They had a team at World Military Champs, so it's not totally out of the question. And are places like Greenland and Costa Rica considered part of North America?

As for the relay, I think it's a bit shortsighted to limit the number of teams so that only the national team runners who are already competing in relays at WOC and JWOC will take part. Sure, there might be organisational aspects that I don't know anything about, but I don't think you should waste the chance to introduce relay-running to the general public for no reason. Only awarding medals/points for the first team from every country (JWOC-style) will perhaps be a good compromise?

No invitations needed. If orienteers from any North American country show up, and run well enough to earn points, they count. Right now the IOF members in NA are USA, Canada, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, and Barbados. If someone showed up from, say, Cuba, I'm sure they would count too. Greenland, however, is not a country (it's part of Denmark), so I would think that they would not count, but we will deal with that if it happens.

Sure, there might be organisational aspects that I don't know anything about

Exactly. Though if you read this thread, especially the responses from Sandy and j-man, the two principal organizers, you could understand why.

Though if you read this thread, especially the responses from Sandy and j-man, the two principal organizers, you could understand why.

Sandy didn't speak to the issue in this thread, and j-man's posts boil down to "because this is what we wanted to do - set it up so everyone's a spectator for Team members" But that's cool. Clubs should be able to do what they want and try new things with the NAOCs, even if they're not always a smart thing to do.

BTW--there are currently 64 runners signed up for the premier (only?) open relay competition in the USA, which will allow for 16 or so teams, across 3 medal categories. At the moment, all 12 point runners are guaranteed to go home with hardware, and as a runner in a 4-point ('open') team, I like our chances.

I am sure the organizers would appreciate more entrants, and would try to accommodate late entries, although it is only 2 weeks away. Check it out: http://carolsteam.org/racing/default.aspx/ameet

I am not sure if this is better or worse than last year's champs, where, if you were a US Champs-eligible team, you merely had to finish to get a medal: http://www.rmoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&t....

We can keep going back through the years to examine results lists or post-event handwringing about the lack of interest in relays on these shores, but that has been flogged to death.

I may be wrong, somehow, about interest in relays here. Maybe if we make it even easier to participate people will. That is an experiment we could have rehashed next year, again.

We are trying a different experiment, one not undertaken on a whim. I'd be happy to continue to explain the reasoning--it may not be res ipsa loquitur--but I'd rather continue my preparations for the US Relay Championships.

Greenland, however, is not a country (it's part of Denmark), so I would think that they would not count, but we will deal with that if it happens.

I think Greenland is a bit more complicated than that, and I suspect if people showed up who are actually Greenlanders and not just Danes claiming to represent Greenland, they would be considered eligible. Just like Puerto Rico isn't a country, and although it's part of the USA and I could move there tomorrow with no paperwork, I can't participate as a Puerto Rican unless I actually do so.

(Are there actually any orienteers or maps in Puerto Rico? We know there are both in Greenland.)

I've avoided responding more than just to make sure the facts are correct because I was a little disappointed by some of the reaction. I could give a long involved explanation for how the current format evolved and will if anyone is interested but it boils down to the following:

- we wanted to highlight the competition between NA countries
- we decided one way to do this was to include a country relay and have it be the last event
- in order to do that and keep to a three day format, we needed to run two events on one day and it seemed best to do the sprint and relay
- in order to end at a reasonable time on Sunday, and with the relay not starting until all the sprint courses were cleared since they're using some of the same terrain, the relay needed to fit into a somewhat small time frame meaning that all the relays - men, women, junior, senior - needed to be run simultaneously
- in order to not have total confusion, and to maximize the spectating enjoyment, the winning times needed to be fairly tight so that the junior women's teams will finish first, then the junior men's, then the senior women's and finally the senior men's and there needs to be minimal overlap in finishing.
- opening up the relay to more teams would limit our ability to do the above.
- after the exciting performances at WOC and JWOC this year, we thought showcasing members of the North American teams would appeal to North American orienteers

So, we are going to stick with the format that's been described. Future organizing clubs can decide for themselves whether we accomplish what we hope and whether it was worth accomplishing in the first place.

I will mention here - so that it doesn't come as a surprise when you eventually read it on the website or in the meet notes - that parking on Sunday will need to be controlled. Because both the sprints and the relays will criss-cross the PEEC campus and we want things to be both safe and fair for all competitors, if you park on the PEEC campus, you will need to have your car parked before the sprints start and you will not be able to move it until after the relays end. There will be alternative parking available a short walk away for those who need to arrive late or leave early.

We will definitely have food available for sale during the relay. I will investigate possibilities for selling beer but I think that might not be allowed. I am sure there will be park officials at the event as they've come by every other time we've had events at the Water Gap.

awesome and thanks again! I can't wait to watch!

Greenland's biggest problem is the lack of an orienteering federation, not that it isn't a country (it is some kind of a country) or that it lacks orienteers, or that it isn't in North America (it is). There isn't an Olympic Committee, either. I believe that if an orienteering federation were formed, the IOF would give membership a serious consideration.

I agree, and I think that if Greenlanders show up at the NAOC, they'll be welcomed and accepted, federation or no. Not that I'm expecting that to happen.

As far as the relay format goes, although I'm personally skeptical about the scheme, I've also been around long enough to know that great things come from experimentation. Some ideas work out better than others, but you have to try them out to be sure, and sometimes you get surprised. So I heartily applaud this innovative move.

Well, I think it sounds like it will be really exciting. I hope everyone is able to stick around to watch!

Sandy, thanks for the explanation. I think the relay will be great, and I am looking forward to keeping the BK Cup in the US.

You guys best represent! ;-)

What about a mixed relay (this may have already been mentioned above?), it might allow for more interesting formation of teams and I think might provide even more excitement. Also, if we do get other north american nations, then it is easier to form at least one team...

It sounds to me like the NAOC team has already put considerable thought and work into their plans, and they have a great plan, and further ideas should probably be tried at other events. There are probably a hundred good ideas for different things to add to the event, they've picked one.

If a country were to show up that had enough people for a team, but not all in the same category, I would think that they would be able to run in the strongest category represented, e.g. if two men and a woman showed up from Jamaica, they'd be able to run in the Men's category (with an assumed disadvantage).

Well, I am just concerned that people are assuming all the top people from each country will be able to travel to the NAOC's (its not like there is funding for this)... fielding two teams for each category might become a severe stretch, or even an impossibility.

I don't think there will be any trouble fielding two teams. They may not be the best possible team that the country could theoretically assemble, but I'd be very surprised if there were any vacant slots.