Discussion: EMPO/CNYO Rankable Relay?
in: Orienteering; General
Oct 25, 2004 5:19 AM
#
After reading the info about the relay for the upcoming A-Meet this next weekend in NY (some of us are contemplating entering the relay), I was wondering if anyone knows definately if the relays will be rankable. I noticed that Eric Smith's article said that they hoped that they would be rankable, but I didn't know if there had been a definate decision.
Furthermore, I was curious if any other type of mass start events have been rankable in the past. I seem to recall that OCIN had a rankable long course champs at an A-Meet a couple of years ago. If I'm reading the EMPO/CNYO A-Meet relay info correctly, it seems that some people will be mass starting together and running the relay on the same color course, while others, who aren't participating in the relay, will have to run the same course on their own. With this in mind, I was wondering how that factor is calculated into the ranking factoring.
Does anyone have anything definate to say on this subject?
Furthermore, I was curious if any other type of mass start events have been rankable in the past. I seem to recall that OCIN had a rankable long course champs at an A-Meet a couple of years ago. If I'm reading the EMPO/CNYO A-Meet relay info correctly, it seems that some people will be mass starting together and running the relay on the same color course, while others, who aren't participating in the relay, will have to run the same course on their own. With this in mind, I was wondering how that factor is calculated into the ranking factoring.
Does anyone have anything definate to say on this subject?
Oct 25, 2004 1:44 PM
#
I have something un-definate to say :-)
I think only those doing interval starts should be ranked.
I also don't think any mass start races should be
ranked (and, IIRC, the pig Farsta counts as a credit
day, but is not ranked (this year I think this only
applied to M/F21)).
More importantly, I think USOF should decide the
issue _before_ the races (and they may have, for
all I know), but it is clear there is at least doubt,
so perhaps USOF should make any decision
more public in the next couple of days, as Dave
isn't the first I've heard questioning the ranking
of inverval start runners against mass start pack
runners.
I think only those doing interval starts should be ranked.
I also don't think any mass start races should be
ranked (and, IIRC, the pig Farsta counts as a credit
day, but is not ranked (this year I think this only
applied to M/F21)).
More importantly, I think USOF should decide the
issue _before_ the races (and they may have, for
all I know), but it is clear there is at least doubt,
so perhaps USOF should make any decision
more public in the next couple of days, as Dave
isn't the first I've heard questioning the ranking
of inverval start runners against mass start pack
runners.
Oct 26, 2004 5:53 AM
#
No one has asked me if they will be rankable, and I don't think the question has gone through Nik Weber either. This event was apparently sanctioned before my tenure and I don't have a copy of the sanctioning application to see if they asked for any sort of waiver of the ranking rules.
The rules clearly state that ranking points are only earned for events with "individual staggered starts". I believe that means that anyone who starts at the same time as someone else on their same course should not earn ranking points, only a credit day.
Personally, I'm not averse to ranking mass start events, but many people have strong objections to this for valid reasons. At the moment, USOF rules do not support it.
Clare Durand
USOF VP Competition
The rules clearly state that ranking points are only earned for events with "individual staggered starts". I believe that means that anyone who starts at the same time as someone else on their same course should not earn ranking points, only a credit day.
Personally, I'm not averse to ranking mass start events, but many people have strong objections to this for valid reasons. At the moment, USOF rules do not support it.
Clare Durand
USOF VP Competition
Oct 26, 2004 3:48 PM
#
Looking at the start list, it appears that 27 people (i.e. 9 teams) have indicated that they intend to participate in the relay. And of those, there are only five club teams that can be formed, three of which are from QOC and DVOA, which aren't really Northeast clubs (this is supposedly the Northeast Relay Championships). So it looks like the two GMOC teams are set to walk away with the trophies. It's quite possible, of course, that more people who aren't currently listed as relay participants will actually run the relay. But I also have to wonder whether the relay aspect of this thing might turn out to be a bust.
Oct 26, 2004 4:24 PM
#
ken:
I think most people signed up before knowing what their teams would be, so they didn't indicate it on the registration. CSU is planning 5 teams.
Oct 26, 2004 8:30 PM
#
So... the people who run the first leg aren't rankable, but people who run later legs are rankable? I'm confused.
Oct 26, 2004 8:40 PM
#
Wyatt is right! So confusing! But not to The Blind Tangerine, who are stolid in the face of so much confusedness. Ranking relays are like sipping muscadette that has gone a little bad.
Oct 26, 2004 9:53 PM
#
A few facts and some opinion from Eric Smith (course setter for the Rankable Relay). I don't know if Eric reads this page, so he may not see replies.
"Unfortunately, I have never done anything about getting an official
statement on this. My impression is that Nik Weber as current ranking
person is very conscientious and hard working, and tends to put in
ranking data from all A-meets for which he is supplied results in any
useable format.
From a standpoint of fairness, it would seem that if any mass start
events are included in rankings, it should hardly make any difference
if only part of the field is involved in the mass start. If there is
in fact an advantage to running a number of controls in the near
presence of someone about the same speed, any mass start event I have
seen has quickly broken up into a few packs and many individuals.
Those who haven't been "lucky" enough to fit into a pack would then be
disadvantaged in the same way as individual starters in our race. It
should be noted that in conventional staggered starts, there is often
clumping that occurs during the course of the event, with people
having nearby start times either coalescing because a faster runner
passes the earlier starter, or someone makes an early error and gets
caught.
Our race may make an interesting comparison possible to see if there
is indeed any significant advantage or disadvantage to participating
in the mass start, since we are expecting about half the runners to
participate in the relay, hence about 1/6 of the field will be doing
mass start, the rest not. I am certainly planning to in any case be
looking at the spreads of time*ranking for all the runners after the
event, and looking at the mass starters as a separate group is hardly
going to be any extra effort.
It may not be as useful as it would at first appear, however, since
there will be a lot less opportunity for pack running than there is in
a more normal mass start event. We expect about 30 teams, spread over
6 different courses, thus only 5 or 6 on the same course on the
average in the mass start. Even assuming that slower runners might be
less enthusiastic about a relay, cutting off the bottom of the field,
we would expect a range of 30 to 45 minutes finishing time for these
runners. Thus, there are a lot less likely to be any significant
number of people on any given course to be "packing up" with runners
of similar ability than if there were 30 or 40 on a course, as there
usually are in a mass start event. And even if such bunching occurs,
it may be washed out in the statistics, because with interval starters
going out in the time when second leg runners are heading out,
possibly there will be inadvertent overlaps there also, which could
happen in comparable numbers.
It would be well for people to remember that pack running can be a big
disadvantage as easily as a big advantage, when everyone is running in
a competitive way at near peak effort. My best personal finish ever
in any (orienteering) relay leg was in the mass start at, of all
places, Thacher State Park at the USOF Relay Champs ten or twelve
years ago. Pam James got a bit carried away on a long dash to the
mostly-trail first control, and I got to where one should turn off the
trail, watching 60 or 70 people running up a big hill ahead of me and
dithering for at least ten or fifteen seconds wondering whether it was
really possible for the entire field to be wrong rather than just me.
I was second through the spectator control mid-leg, about two seconds
behind a then-young Boris Granovskiy, and didn't get caught by any of
the main pack till the last couple of controls.
I think a lot of people's conceptions about the big advantages of
running with a group come from events like the Billygoat or Blue Hills
Traverse, where it is true that a few people at the front are racing
seriously, but many of the people a bit farther back are taking it
more as a social or training event, where it is much easier to take
advantage of following. Also, even at the front it is much easier to
take advantage of the skills of a somewhat faster competitor for the
first part of a long race, where the optimum pace is going to be ten
or fifteen seconds a K slower than it would be for a race half the
distance, because this makes it possible to hang in within sight for a
considerable part of the race at the expense of burning out a bit at
the end.
Feel free to pass on these thoughts to anyone whose flames you might
want to direct towards me rather than yourself!
Eric"
"Unfortunately, I have never done anything about getting an official
statement on this. My impression is that Nik Weber as current ranking
person is very conscientious and hard working, and tends to put in
ranking data from all A-meets for which he is supplied results in any
useable format.
From a standpoint of fairness, it would seem that if any mass start
events are included in rankings, it should hardly make any difference
if only part of the field is involved in the mass start. If there is
in fact an advantage to running a number of controls in the near
presence of someone about the same speed, any mass start event I have
seen has quickly broken up into a few packs and many individuals.
Those who haven't been "lucky" enough to fit into a pack would then be
disadvantaged in the same way as individual starters in our race. It
should be noted that in conventional staggered starts, there is often
clumping that occurs during the course of the event, with people
having nearby start times either coalescing because a faster runner
passes the earlier starter, or someone makes an early error and gets
caught.
Our race may make an interesting comparison possible to see if there
is indeed any significant advantage or disadvantage to participating
in the mass start, since we are expecting about half the runners to
participate in the relay, hence about 1/6 of the field will be doing
mass start, the rest not. I am certainly planning to in any case be
looking at the spreads of time*ranking for all the runners after the
event, and looking at the mass starters as a separate group is hardly
going to be any extra effort.
It may not be as useful as it would at first appear, however, since
there will be a lot less opportunity for pack running than there is in
a more normal mass start event. We expect about 30 teams, spread over
6 different courses, thus only 5 or 6 on the same course on the
average in the mass start. Even assuming that slower runners might be
less enthusiastic about a relay, cutting off the bottom of the field,
we would expect a range of 30 to 45 minutes finishing time for these
runners. Thus, there are a lot less likely to be any significant
number of people on any given course to be "packing up" with runners
of similar ability than if there were 30 or 40 on a course, as there
usually are in a mass start event. And even if such bunching occurs,
it may be washed out in the statistics, because with interval starters
going out in the time when second leg runners are heading out,
possibly there will be inadvertent overlaps there also, which could
happen in comparable numbers.
It would be well for people to remember that pack running can be a big
disadvantage as easily as a big advantage, when everyone is running in
a competitive way at near peak effort. My best personal finish ever
in any (orienteering) relay leg was in the mass start at, of all
places, Thacher State Park at the USOF Relay Champs ten or twelve
years ago. Pam James got a bit carried away on a long dash to the
mostly-trail first control, and I got to where one should turn off the
trail, watching 60 or 70 people running up a big hill ahead of me and
dithering for at least ten or fifteen seconds wondering whether it was
really possible for the entire field to be wrong rather than just me.
I was second through the spectator control mid-leg, about two seconds
behind a then-young Boris Granovskiy, and didn't get caught by any of
the main pack till the last couple of controls.
I think a lot of people's conceptions about the big advantages of
running with a group come from events like the Billygoat or Blue Hills
Traverse, where it is true that a few people at the front are racing
seriously, but many of the people a bit farther back are taking it
more as a social or training event, where it is much easier to take
advantage of following. Also, even at the front it is much easier to
take advantage of the skills of a somewhat faster competitor for the
first part of a long race, where the optimum pace is going to be ten
or fifteen seconds a K slower than it would be for a race half the
distance, because this makes it possible to hang in within sight for a
considerable part of the race at the expense of burning out a bit at
the end.
Feel free to pass on these thoughts to anyone whose flames you might
want to direct towards me rather than yourself!
Eric"
Oct 28, 2004 2:48 AM
#
So, seriously, is there a final verdict on that? Rankable or not? I feel like this should be decided before the race itself!
Oct 28, 2004 5:35 PM
#
[copy of a message I sent to Clubnet]
From: USOF Vice-President for Competition
It has come to my attention that there is an A-meet this weekend that has advertised their format as "Rankable Relay". This event sounds like a lot of fun and I hope everyone has a great time. However, the organizers did not receive any confirmation from USOF that this format would in fact be "rankable" prior to advertising it as such. The USOF ranking rules state that in order for an event to count towards ranking points it must have "individual staggered starts". The format planned for this weekend does not appear to meet this requirement. I will insure that the ranking committee looks closely at whether the actual circumstances of this meet merit including it in the rankings. At this time, however, I feel it prudent to advise participants that it is probable they will only receive a credit day for their participation.
Thanks to EMPO and CNYO for putting on this event. I hope it goes well and I look forward to seeing the results and being able to determine whether such a format can be used for rankings in the future.
I regret any inconvenience this misunderstanding may have caused.
Clare Durand
USOF VP Competition
From: USOF Vice-President for Competition
It has come to my attention that there is an A-meet this weekend that has advertised their format as "Rankable Relay". This event sounds like a lot of fun and I hope everyone has a great time. However, the organizers did not receive any confirmation from USOF that this format would in fact be "rankable" prior to advertising it as such. The USOF ranking rules state that in order for an event to count towards ranking points it must have "individual staggered starts". The format planned for this weekend does not appear to meet this requirement. I will insure that the ranking committee looks closely at whether the actual circumstances of this meet merit including it in the rankings. At this time, however, I feel it prudent to advise participants that it is probable they will only receive a credit day for their participation.
Thanks to EMPO and CNYO for putting on this event. I hope it goes well and I look forward to seeing the results and being able to determine whether such a format can be used for rankings in the future.
I regret any inconvenience this misunderstanding may have caused.
Clare Durand
USOF VP Competition
This discussion thread is closed.