Saturday Oct 13 |
| |
| Event: 2007 Western States Orienteering Championships
|
 | Orienteering race 2:46:59 [4]**** 9.3 km (17:57 / km) +340m 15:11 / km | |
| shoes: NB 808 |
| FR 14.57km |
| |
|
Blue 1 - Splits |
Thursday Oct 11 |
| Note | |
| slept:7.5 |
| nutrition: too many to count |
Wednesday Oct 10 |
| Note | |
| slept:8.0 weight:148.5lbs (rest day) |
| I'm going to start keeping track of my diet with the idea being that better self awareness will lead to better eating habits. The recording system is simple - every time I eat something that consists of junk calories, I'll add a number corresponding roughly to the number of junk hectocalories to that day's "nutrition" value.
nutrition: 5
I still have significant muscle fatigue from the previous few days, so I am taking today off to be at least partially rested for this weekend. |
Tuesday Oct 9 |
| Running (road, flat) 59:13 [2]6.87 mi (8:36 / mi) | |
| slept:8.5 weight:150lbs shoes: NB 1221a |
| |
| Physical Therapy / Stretching (gsh) 5:00 [1] | |
| |
| |
Monday Oct 8 |
| Aerobic Cross-Training (stairmaster) 30:00 [3]+525m | |
| |
| |
Sunday Oct 7 |
| Note | |
| |
| Well, it appears that the VP of Comp has finally given a waiver for Bill to host his A-meet. No one seems to know if there was a valid reason for the delay or whether it just got lost in the shuffle. Now it seems that the sanctioning committee will try to remedy this lost time by speeding the application through sanctioning. I wonder how this process works in general and what kind of checks the committee does to help ensure meet quality. I wonder how common (rare) it is to deny sanctioning and what kinds of things may lead to a denial. I doubt Bill's application would have any problems on the technical side - the terrain and map are both quite good and Bill has proven to be a competent course designer over the years.
On the logistical side - well, first, it would be interesting to see who's names are on the application. But I'll assume Bill's name is down as both course setter (for both days) and as meet director because that is the case in actuality. I wonder if having the same person serve as course setter and meet director for both days will raise red flags among the committee members. I wonder if the committee has any procedures in place to determine whether or not an application is acceptable on logistical grounds - whether the organizer has enough capable/willing volunteers for instance. It seems that having the same name down as both meet director and course setter might suggest otherwise.
I would guess that the sanctioning committee in general simply takes the organizer's word that the logistical aspects of the meet will be taken care of. This seems like a bit of a rubber stamp to me. I wonder if there could be procedures put into place to help ensure the quality of the logistical side of the meet. Such things could be quite simple, such as getting written/verbal assurances from the meet director, course setter, course vetter, and registrar that they are willing and capable of fulfilling their appointed positions. In the case where a single person is listed as fulfilling multiple positions, further quality assurance may be necessary - for instance, communicating with one or more persons on the club's board of directors who are not otherwise listed on the application. This would help ensure that the person(s) submitting the application would have a broad enough support system to carry out the logistical requirements of an A-meet. Finally, I suppose in the case where an organizer has been involved in or carried out recent A- and/or B-meets, it would be useful for the committee to get feedback from participants, volunteers, and/or co-organizers on whether the meets met the quality standards which they were supposed to. Perhaps this could be done in the form of an email or paper survey after each A-meet, for instance, or unofficially by just asking around. Another example - what happens when a meet doesn't meet map printing standards? Would this affect the organizer's ability to get future meets sanctioned? I don't know. In any case, I wonder whether the USOF sanctioning committee discusses any of these issues. I wonder if a meet has ever been denied sanctioning for lostistical reasons or if the sanctioning committee would ever even consider such a thing? I suspect such denials would/should be rare, especially as A-meets do so much to promote the sport, but I wonder if there are cases in which such a thing should be considered. |