I've already had some inquiries as to the next Sprint Series -- if there will be one, when will it happen, will the rules be the same, where will the finals be, and so on. In particular, folks thinking about their club schedules for the fall are wondering what will be happening.
The short answer is that I don't know.
But some things seem clear --
1. The goals of the Sprint Series were first to get our (meaning USA and Canadian) best orienteers running more sprints, since the sprint is now an official event on the international scene and it also presents perhaps our best opportunity for doing well. Second, to promote sprints in general as a different type of orienteering (shorter/faster) that take not so much organizational time and can be held in small areas. And third, to have some fun.
2. My guess is that we're doing pretty well. There have been lots of sprints, in all sorts of terrain. Our top orienteers have been doing a lot of sprinting (as well as regular orienteering). And it's been fun (except perhaps for Boris, who has been crunching a lot more numbers than we ever expected). And, an added bonus, a number of sprints have been Team fundraisers.
3. The rules seemed to have worked pretty well, though until the finals are over, we can't really be sure. The scoring system seems ok, with its simplicity certainly a virtue, though I'd imagine some people have ideas about how it could be improved (to their own benefit, perhaps...).
So where do we go from here?
My assumption is that we continue along the same line. But there are questions --
Have the next series run a full year, or have the next finals next spring? Start it up right away? Same scoring system? Any rules need changing? And, in particular, where and when will the next finals be (and tied in with another event to make a good weekend?)?
Thoughts/comments?
PS. Sharp readers of the topic for this discussion thread will notice that we will be using roman numerals to designate future editions of the Series, just like another major sporting event, the Super Bowl.
First, thanks to the commissioner to get the series started, plus all the people who made the idea work. I think it is a great addition to the schedule.
Doing the sprints improves the capacity to navigate at high speed and forces you to constantly think ahead. I sense it improves my navigation in regular races, too.
I would run the next from Spring to mid fall, with the finale later in fall than this year, so that there is no gap in fall.
The simple point system works, except that the 40/50 pointers are pretty much deciding the series. If you can't get to enough of them, it sets you back quite a lot.
What would be great to get the juniors involved, maybe with having a separate award for them. They are often very good runners and if they were involved more, they could learn a lot.
Just going on memory, without looking anything up in my comprehensive archives, I think that there may need to be a subtitle to the Sprint Series, reading "Of The Modern Era", or something to that effect, because there was once something else in the US called the Sprint Series. I think it ran three years, 1989-1991, and it also consisted of various races held through the year, for which competitors earned points based on their places, and culminated in a final in the fall. But this was a Swampfox production, and the definition of "sprint" was very different. All of the races were mass-start, except the final, which was some kind of weird chase start. And the courses ranged in length from 5 km all the way up to the Billygoat (the final was 10 km, I think). There was some discussion around the time that the Sprint Series faded away that the name really didn't make sense, and that "Stampede Series" would have been more fitting. It never reappeared under that name, but the suggestion did take root, and that's the origin of the name "The Stampede" for the mass-start race that typically opens the 1000-Day.
That is absolutely right. I fondly remember that series, seemingly in the era before the Swampfox persona was born, or at least before it was fully disclosed.
Wasn't the final on that snow covered golf course? No sage to be found? Now that was a stampede!
The final in 1989 was at Rocky Woods in Massachusetts, in 1990 at Brandywine in Delaware, and in 1991 at a place in Poughkeepsie, NY (Baird?) that does include a golf course. I missed that last one, but I don't think there was snow. That map has been used for ski-O at other times, however.
The name "Swampfox" dates back to the late 1970s, although the secret superhero origin of that individual will not be disclosed at this time.
I think Assistant Commissioners, who are overwhelmed by their civic duties and, therefore, unable to run enough sprints, should get some points thrown in to make it a little more fun :-D
I only got to one of these (can't do everything, I guess), but I certainly support the concept. I don't think there's any problem with the 40/50 races deciding it - that is consistent with the prime directive (get the top folks doing it) and gives A-meet directors an incentive to add a sprint. We're mandated to hold a sprint at next year's meet (team trials), and I expect we will continue to do so in future years.
Perhaps if rather then simply best 8, you could only have 4 results above 40 points. Might make things even more complicated for poor ole Boris, though.
It seems that a couple years ago, there was interest in getting more relays out there. I'm wondering if a sprint/relay format might work. You could design a sprint course that was basically a big butterfly loop. Everybody would run the same course, but you might take loops in different orders. Loops here refers not to relay legs, but loops within a leg.
Relay would be scored on elapsed time as usual and the individual splits could count towards the sprint series. You might get a couple artificially high readings due to following, but not enough to corrupt the season standings.
One might also note that, while not as significant as the Super Bowl, World Wars also get the Roman Numeral designation.
To ameliorate the demands on the sprint commissars aide de camp and other assorted staff, someone could build an online system for meet directors to submit results which would then automatically calculate the rankings? The calculation would be easy as would data entry - which would be entirely incumbent on meet directors. Of course, this begs the question of who would build this system and where it would reside.
Perhaps we could have the Attackpoint Sprint Series?
Boris noted that the big obstacle was not obtaining results, but rather determining who of the runners was indeed female.
The Sprint Series is an exccelent addition to the orienteering calendar and the efforts of everyone who contributed to organazing the Series/events, deserves our full gratitude.I belive that overal it helped many of the participants to improve and also it looks like it was the most popular orienteering event in N.A. this year and if is possible we should try to kep it going .The scoring system looked alright and I don't think that influenced so far, who the top sprinters are and what final you will qualify for.
I thought the sprint/relay format worked fine at Forest Park, except the courses were a little long to be true sprints. The relay last year in Osborndale CT (three seperate sprint courses, issued in different order) seemed to go just fine as well.
A traditionally forked course could work, especially on a park-o type map where you would have a lot of features to work with. It wouldn't produce any individual results that could be useful in the Sprint Series, but it still would be a worthwhile event. I doubt unforked courses would work out too well.
To help Boris, those of us female orienteers could simply add a suffix to our names when registering for sprints. "ette" would work, or maybe something less subtle, liks "miss".
I've only managed to attend one sprint this year, but the whole concept of a series with so many races and competitors is exciting, even to someone with a restrictive schedule like mine.
I have really enjoyed the Sprints this year, and the web list and scoring system have helped make it fun to follow. It helped create lots of fun races this year, and the choice of simple scoring is a fine choice of simplicity, and encourages high attendence at a few 'big' events.
Speaking of 'big' events, DVOA is putting on a triple-header plus re-run at our
July 3rd event...
Just to be clear, the Forest Park relay was NOT billed as a sprint relay, it was short course, although the open venue did give it a sprint feel.
Yes the sprint series has accomplished what it was supposed to do and the system seems to work well - by giving the North American orienteering community more sprint events. The system works well and the finals should be exciting. I like the idea of giving the series a 'cooler' name and the idea of calling it the Attackpoint Sprint Series is good and if the sprint series finals weekend morphs into a sprint one day and big relay the next then all the better (just like that Attackpoint Cup we had a few years ago when GHO squashed CSU in the relay but lets not start Jukola trash talking just yet....).
Anyway, a goal for the 2006 series (oh sorry Series II) might be to promote it outside of the orienteering community. Maybe we could have the odd sprint race associated with an AR event or fun run or other non orienteering weekends. That might require having most or all of the 40 and 50 point races announced early so that these events (and therefore the series) can be promoted. But that might be more work than was intended. But then again a sponsor might be interested to partner on this....
There could be some good athletes out there that might be attracted to this new version of the sport and if we collectively work together on this then the sport should grow .
Here is a 50 pointer to add to next years sked:
October 6th, 2006 North American Champs Sprint
There's one argument why the final has to be mid-October or later.
I think the current setup must be close to ideal for meeting the stated goal of encouraging a large number of sprints and high participation rates in sprints within the present community of orienteers. I'm not sure that could mutate into a high profile Park World Tour-ish effort to bring orienteering to the masses (the masses to orienteering? whatever) without sacrificing something. Though I'm all for trying the latter - separately, if necessary - if someone can be persuaded to underwrite it.
It occurs to me to ask - does anyone know what would have to happen to bring the PWT to North America?
Big payments to the organizers, I think... (If I recall correctly, there were huge sanctioning fees associated with PWT events).
yeah, you have to pay for pretty much everything except like the finish banner and timing equipment (which they bring). you also have to sponsor prize money plus housing and meals for all the competitors, etc.
add "ova" to all womens names, just like they did in Czech in 1991.
Would I drop the 'a' first, or just leave it as is? Cristinaova doesn't have quite the ring to it as Cristinova.
Back to sprints, I think sprints do have some potential to recruit new people to orienteering. Some people are intimidated by the fact that the "winning times" for their "age group" are 60-75 minutes. A quick 15-20 minute race might be enough to whet some appetites. Sprints also allow people to jump right in with the big boys with less chance for frustrating, 45 minute booms. Plus, urban park/street settings are often less intimidating than the big, scary woods.
"-ova" goes on the last name. The 1991 US Women's Team was Kristin Federerova, Peggy Dickisonova, Crystine Leeova, Michelle Kuipersova, and... Sharon Crawfordova, I think. So you'd be Cristina Luisova.
John,
Thanks for the reference to the PWT Manual - it's a good example of thorough event planning and management. Will pass it along to our campus programming board before their next outdoor concert or promo. Perhaps they can help with a sprint event. . .
In going over all these posts, I can only think: "Whew", and "Eh!" (the latter for our maple leaf friends to the north.) Does anyone appreciate the full irony that you could run two or three of these pygmy races in the time it takes to go through all this material? There are Long Night runners who say less during the entire winter training phase, and that includes the married one with wives (most Long Night runners are of course not married.) Even Joe, who is usually succinct and to the point, has expounded for a dozen or so words, which must have caused him a considerable amount of anguish.
Well, I reckon it's all ok, but be careful about what you wish for. Have enough of these sprint races and sooner or later you will see some awards ceremony where the commissioners appear in too tiny leotards, and then you will be sorry! Some of you will be so sorry you will go to your parents and demand to know why you were even given eyeballs, but it will be too late. The sight of a commissar in a too tiny leotard is not so easy to put out of mind and forget. Some of you will think I am only joking, but I am not. I need only remind of a certain notorious incident that occured back in the 80s, before conservatives took over the entire country and even PBS, and when a more free thinking sort of spirit and attitude often prevailed, and, yes, when Steve Tarry, Steve Tall, and other now forgotten Steve's were still orienteering.
Moving along, I must dementera (if I may use a Swedish verb here) JJ's postulation that there is any connection whatsoever between the name of The Stampede today and any earlier sprint series. Even JJ's legendary and near photographic memory will fail from time to time, and this is the evidence of that, and perhaps a harbinger of things to come, if JJ doesn't eat more of his vegetables and vitamin C rich fruits.
Still moving along, I recommend with 5 or 6 stars the reading of the PWT manual. It is a terrific read, and the illustrations are truly dynamite! There's so much there that could be mentioned, but after going through the thing with a fine comb (albeit one missing a few teeth), there are two I will single out. 1) Did the PWT organizers obtain permission in advance for use of the Orienteer Kansas tent? (p. 16) 2) And for the organizers of the next sprint series here in this country, how much more efficient to simply publish the race results in advance, thereby avoiding any need to hold any actual races! The example at p. 19 illustrates the concept perfectly.
Finally, I wish to stress I mean to cast no slur or insult on any existing or future sprint commissar, and please do not sic (sic) your attack attorneys on me--I have no illicitly obtained sprint swag or bling bling anyhow--or smite me with double edged compasses or visit upon me a plague of locusts or even Saegermeister discards.
Ever yours, fondly,
Swampfox
It used to be that I needed to pull English dictionary to read and understand Swampfox's notes, now I need Swedish too. Life is not getting any easier
This discussion thread is closed.