Discussion: WREs in North America in 2013?

This IOF has put out the list and there are only 2 WREs in NA, both at the Canadian Champs, none in the USA. Are any more being planned?

Would be really really good if we did.... I know the SML Champs/TT specifically didn't want to add WREs to the mix... anyone else that might be willing that's putting on an A-meet?

Here is a good place to start:
Sanctioning Planning Calendar of Orienteering Events

(And, thanks to Mike Schuh, up to date as of within the last 24 hours.)

The World Ranking scheme is hardly any longer relevant, since we know very well that points won't count for WOC, World Games, or WCup qualification in the near future. So, why be concerned?

Get Lost!! will be happy to add a WRE to one of its Sprints, but last time we did that, just about nobody came and points weren't awarded. We certainly benefited greatly from the Adviser's presence and help, but the added quality could have perhaps been achieved by other, less resource-intensive means.

Until the runners really care (and vote with their entry fee moneys), WREs aren't going to matter. There is ample proof that the majority of North American runners don't care about the WRE status.

T/D, I think maybe I would amend your statement to say that the majority of the non-elite North American runners don't care. I would love to see more WREs, but if you run the numbers, all the extra work for a WRE is being done for a very small number of runners. That said, it is doubly disappointing to show up to a WRE only to miss the required number of ranked runners - the organizers still had to go through just as much work, but get nothing out of it! Maybe OUSA could throw money at getting ranked runners to come to WREs (that implies that OUSA wants to have more ranked runners, which might not be true). I know in my case that would justify a trip to the west coast for a WRE.

It's been a while since Ive kept up with IOF level stuff, and so after reading the first few posts above, I had been wondering what, if any, positive and practical reasons there were to put on WREs in the future. Tundra's post indicates there aren't any. Are there other facts to consider, or other different opinions?

The benefit is supposedly to attract more M/F21 competitors, from around the US and around the world.
The extra work is just to follow the IOF rules, which requires publishing bulletins, and submitting results. I don't think it is an added burden on a meet that should already be following the US rules.

And you owe the IOF 250 euros (+ 50 euro late fee if applying after 10/31/2012 for 2013) and need an IOF controller to agree.

"The World Ranking scheme is hardly any longer relevant, since we know very well that points won't count for WOC, World Games, or WCup qualification in the near future. So, why be concerned?"

Regarding WRE's not contributing to qualifying for WOC's any longer..

I just tried to look up "how to qualify for WOC" on the IOF website to no avail.

I know that there was recent debate about changing the qualification process, but I didn't understand it all.. and find it specious that there is no document clearly outlining how one qualifies.

What I'm ultimately getting at, is- if the US should no longer be concerned with WRE's, what SHOULD the US concern itself with, should it want to deliver as many elites to WOC as possible?

The qualification will presumably be based on the results of Regional Championships, with specifics to be delivered later.

To a certain degree, the issue suffers from the 'chicken/egg' situation. People don't take them seriously and attend, resulting in people not taking them seriously and attending. It's a challenge to get out of that cycle, but part of it could be identifying other values that go along with it being a WRE that are important to us in the North American orienteering community regardless of whether they contribute to WOC places or not. Admittedly this may not be worth much but for example, in Whitehorse we get a fair bit of local media coverage, and issuing a news release saying three members are attending a WRE would be of more interest than 'three members attending the South East US Regional Championships A-Meet'. Looks better on grant applications too. Collectively we need to take on the responsibility of adding bells and whistles to the WREs so they are of interest to people. Prize money or free entry for ranked runners? Etc.

IOF could help by making their requirements less onerous on the organizers. Having to restrict course design [on outstanding terrain] to provide an arena experience is one of them I remember from looking at the requirements in the past.

I guess we have different ideas of onerous. I don't think anyone should consider putting on a national level premiere meet (A-meet) and not have a plan to provide an arena experience.
What else is there in the IOF rules that you think is above and beyond the OUSA rules? You have to have an IOF event advisor, but they should be there to help make the event work, not add burden.

Thanks for the link, T/D.

"participation according to nation’s strength." There it is! The part that screws the US team, no?

What I remember from the situation was (and I could be totally wrong- this is my memory! Not fact!): the IOF wanted more countries to be able to host WOC, but the decisions they made to accomplish this actually (somehow.. mysteriously..) made it harder for smaller (less competitive) countries to qualify multiple athletes. & the proposed qualification system seemed very chicken/egg. Then I remember thinking it strange that the IOF would make it harder for our athletes to get to WOC as it doesn't help our country improve our competitive level much at all. :'{

Do I have this right, or am I way off?

I ask these questions, because I do think it's important to identify what elites will be needing to do to qualify in the near future- as this affects their decision to attend certain races.

As for how I decide which big meet to go to: at this point, it's simply a cost to course difficulty ratio. I want to get on the most challenging/interesting course for the least amount of money. That's how I chose going to Boggs over NAOC-- it was $100 in gas (split 3 ways) to get there/back and $40 in a cabin for 2 nights. NAOC was going to be hundreds of dollars. I knew I was going to get squashed in the results, so I just went for the cheapest training.

If we're trying to identify what makes athletes attend big meets (if WRE status isn't it)..
I suspect that a lot of people, elites included, weigh the cost to difficult course ratio as a major factor in attending a large meet. Then there's timing, which is another tricky thing.

"With specifics to be determined later" doesn't mean that WRE points are off the table for determining WOC places, I don't think. Or did I miss something and that is 100% promised now?

WRE rankings are a good way for us North American elites to try to compare ourselves against the rest of the world, without needing to go to Europe (= even more expensive!). Right now, I think our events have been awarding points at a similar rate to Europe, out of my 4 counting scores, two are from races in the US, and two from races in Europe. I know that a lot of women got really good points at the recent NAOC WREs, which is totally awesome and encouraging!

There are other events in Europe that WRE points are relevant for seeding. But yup, pretty much by definition, WRE-ness is only relevant for M/W21 and whomever chooses to run those categories....

I doubt 'arena' requirements are super-onerous, my feeling from IOF things is that they would much, much rather us actually have WREs than be a blow-your-socks-off arena setup. And then other than that, there's the sanctioning cost to IOF and extra bulletins and submitting results, anyone else have what else is req'd? Folks who are IOF event advisors?

As one of Canada's young elites here are my primary deciding factors in which meets I attend:

Are the medals meaningful? (NAOCs, Canadian Champs, Ontario Champs, etc.)

Travel time and cost

Amount of competition

Terrain and expected quality of courses

How big is the feel of the event - arena, quarantined start, etc? It is important to me to practice racing in conditions as similar as possible to what I'll get at WOC.

Canada Cup status

WRE
Those are the most important items for me for events that I'm going to race at. Now some events I go to as much for fun as for racing (not that I don't enjoy the others) and for those the following becomes more important:

Novelty (e.g. Billygoat, Raid the Hammer, Pawtuckaway Camping Weekend which I still haven't done)

General arena / festival atmosphere

Extras around the races, group dinners, planned evening events, etc.

I happen to think WREs are a good thing even if WRE points aren't used for qualifying for WOC or anything else other than getting you a later start time at some events. And the rankings give a pretty good read on whether any of us are making any real progress or not, a lot better than our own national rankings.

Back to the original question -- is there anything in the planning process to indicate there might be WREs in the USA in 2013? Like maybe at the USA classic champs in Rochester the weekend before the Canadian Champs?

I'm out of the process. Over 10+ years, I've had enough (a) people slapping "onerous", "pompous", "pretentious", and "European" on things that are plain common sense and already in U.S. Rules, and (b) people showing zero interest to attend, with (c) the points ending up being meaningless via said chicken and egg. Someone else should waste their time.

T/D: Are you no longer an IOF Event Advisor?

Correct. I let it expire for the reasons listed above.

Ali, rules for WRE's are found in the IOF's rules for foot orienteering which also include the rules for WOC, JWOC, and WMOC. There is also a document that is central to the work of an IOF Event Advisor, called Guidelines For World Ranking Events which can be found on the IOF website. Or by clicking here

I posted this back when GHO was debating WRE status for the Canadian Champs in Hamilton next year.

http://www.attackpoint.org/discussionthread.jsp/me...

hardly any discussion at all and so we were leaning towards not hosting any WRE's. However, COF encouraged us to host at least 2 and also supported us to make it happen (COF pays the WRE fee). Also, we were lucky to have Alex Kerr volunteer as our IOF advisor (and I believe he is in the woods this week vetting our middle distance courses). We already had big plans for the arena (though not DVOA'esque) so the only extra 'burden' is really only the bulletin.

T/D +1

I come to the same conclusions. WRE is just not a serious "world ranking" and all changes that have been made in the past 6 years went in direction to exclude WRE importance out of IOF rules (WOC, World Games,....). Also promotional aspects of the WRE are almost none for the organizer. Is any official proposal or interest from IOF officals to make better system and to have a quality review of Pros and Cons of today system?

Have we seen any posts in international sports news that Matthias Kyburz take the lead on World Ranking? Did he get any prizes or anything else from IOF? Did IOF developed any awards system for the WRE organizers? Who pays the Event advisor's costs? If we really want to have a "World ranking" system which would meant something all these questions should be answered and we need to have a wider discussion which go beyond IOF FOC commission.

In Slovenia some WRE Event advisors also didin't renew their licence in the last 6 years. Did IOF make an evaluation how many people didn't do this and what are their reasons? Is wrong to ask IOF these questions?

Before someone says that WRE status is important for runners and to organizers should looked into previous events and see the past changes and where we are now. What is the strategy of the WRE system?

Why IOF is still running a system which is evident that is not working properly or at least is not good enough to be called "World ranking"?

We can be glad that in orienteering we have so many volunteers who are willing to do the job without any question. But I am with T/D - "Someone else should waste their time".

WRE's USA 2013:

Bear Valley 1/26/13 approved and on schedule
Southern Vermont Sprint 1/19/13 pending

Of course, you need to learn how to ski to do these.

ROC would be willing to make one of the days of the Classic Champs a WRE if we believe that it would increase attendance and help our North American elite orienteers. We were led to believe that our event was not eligible to be a WRE because it doesn't utilize the standard IOF L/M/S format.

So, if the US team wants WREs, how about they pay the 250 euro fee and the costs of the IOF event advisor?

And show up. And deal with people who detest "outsider meddling" in their events (and sometimes end up with misplaced or missing checkpoints). Money is easy, these two are much harder.

I'm an IOF EA and have repeatedly renewed my accreditation, so I obviously must feel there is value in hosting WRE events. I agree that the "ranking" part isn't working for North American athletes and I've been petitioning the iOF to update the ranking system - I will again following the NAOC showing (I expect) a discrepancy between the pre-race rankings and the results. To their credit they have attempted to correct the problems so that the ranking works better - but so far the updates have only led to the incomprehensible calculations that only Kofols can figure out ;-) But I continue to be optimistic that the rankings can and will be fixed.

I see the value in hosting WRE events being more in the event organization side. Generally all WRE events are organized to a higher standard than even the Canadian "Canada Cup" series. I don't believe the extra work is onerous (certainly the bulletins are nothing extra - they contain really only the information that needs to be distributed in any case, and the rules just make clear what information is provided and when).

Do people care? Some do - at least six people came from Calgary to the NAOCs last week so that two juniors could run in their first WRE and score points.

Is there benefit to the runners besides scoring points? I think so. Here are some things that the NAOCs got by being a WRE:
* review of all courses by EA (me ;-) which I don't think it is unfair to say improved the quality of the courses
* review of the arenas by EA. Some small improvements
* review of maps by IOF Map Commission. For sure improvements there
* promotion via IOF calendar & status of "WRE" on other calendars 9such as World Of O)

Man, if I was a competitor how could I not want all of that stuff?

For sure there are a few more expenses for a WRE event, but the additional quality I think justifies a slightly higher entry fee. If, like Run_bosco, you choose your events largely on price, then you probably won't like to go to WRE events. But if you're after higher quality assurance and excitement of top elite orienteering, then supporting WRE events is worthwhile, imo.

Yeah ski-WREs! And these really do matter, as our seeding for ski-WOC depends on World Ranking List and starting with the red group for ski-o means you have the most ski-ed in tracks which is definitely an advantage. So thanks to Ken + others making those happen!

Rick, it would be great if one of the Rochester days could become a WRE. I'll re-read through rules + guidelines tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure we can ask to do a non-totally standard distance- AZ, do you know if that would be a game-ender for some reason? For the classic champs in particular, that would mean I would 100% commit to going, and probably is an added thing for some other subset of M/F21s, and probably some Canadians that are not to far away either, I'd guess! (My initial guess is to get 4 women with that all-important 'R' we'll need at least one Canadian gal, on the men's side shouldn't be too hard.)

Added quality + chance to get more ranking points are totally things I welcome in WRE events.

Whether an event includes a WRE is definately one of the things I consider, along with distance and terrain. Given where I live (Yukon) it would not be enough of an incentive for me to stay back east an extra week and do the Rochester races after the Canadian Championships. On the other hand, I am likely not going to attend the Vancouver Sprint training camp in February, now that they have announced there will not be a WRE in association with it. I would be much more likely to go if there was going to be a WRE.

US Classic Champs in Rochester are the weekend before the Cdn Champs in Hamilton (2.5 hours driving time between maps with Niagara Falls being the half way point).

Oct 5-6 (Sat-Sun) ROC
Oct11-13 (Fri-Sun) GHO

Checking the WRE calendar was certainly a way for me to find good quality, interesting events in Europe over the years. It provides quality assurance, usually.

I would personally totally swallow my own dislike of the Classic and come to ROC if one or both days were WREs. I won't come otherwise. (Assuming I'm fit to run M21.)

Rick: One of your Classic Champs days (and maybe both if scored separately?) could be a WRE. Main considerations are that the courses for M/W21 have to be IOF length and not OUSA length (IOF = men 90-100 minutes, OUSA = men 75-80 minutes. Why are they different anyway?) and that you have to have an arena. Of course there are other considerations too. I'm not sure about the deadline to apply though. You might have to hustle.

In reality, you don't have to have an arena. GVOC added a WRE to the Sprint Camp in 2011 and 2012. Neither year did we have an arena and the IOF said nothing about that. We did have prize money though.

Normally I would push for an arena, but the Sprint Camp is a training camp with 10 sessions on a weekend. The race takes place in an hour and then we move on to a new map. It's just not possible with an arena with this setup (and there are no spectators anyway...).

dcady: Not too familiar with the interpretation of the WRE rules "are NORMALLY of Long, Middle or Sprint length". On the list with WRE events next year, PG linked to above, there are plenty of "non staggered start time S, M or L races", including a "Long shortened". If the organizers want and they feel they have the support of the federation and the community, I would be surprised if they were not granted WRE due to the course length, especially if this would be the only WRE in USA next year.

A WRE day at the Classic Champs would make it significantly more likely that I would choose to go. I look at WRE status, along with most of the other factors that Canadian mentioned, but especially a high level of competition and challenging or otherwise fun terrain and courses.

Isn't a Classic WRE an oxymoron?

(and cue the Aussies to leave a witty response)

....


It's no fun if you *expect* us to troll. :(

I'd say course length is hardly a problem when it comes to WRE status for events. Out of the 6 WRE long races I have been running in the past ten years none have had a winning time over 90 minutes. Longest was 89 minutes, shortest just 49...

In my opinion the style of course setting is more important than actual course length. Have a look at long distance courses from international championships and then create something similar, even if its just 75 minutes for the north american elite and not 90 minutes for world elite...

I've been to a few WREs in the past year or two that didn't seem any different than a US A-meet course. No bulletin, no big arena, nothing special at all. Presumably they actually had an IOF event advisor checking things over, and nothing went wrong, but it sure didn't seem like they went out of their way to have a WRE.

In the WR system, Sprint, Middle and Long are all lumped together. The best 4 scores taken to give ranking, regardless of discipline. There is no separate ranking for Long/Middle/Sprint and no requirement that an athlete have a minimum number of each type. Thus, the classification of races as Long/Middle/Sprint is just a "label" on each event and has no real bearing on actual World Ranking. With this in mind, there's no reason not to use races that fall in between the "standard" race distances/times in the WR system. It would be perfectly fine to use a classic, instead of Long.

The precedent has been set, more than once. 2003 US Classic Champs (Day 1) and 2004 US Classic Champs (Day 2) were both WRE events. In 2004, we deliberately set the Sunday course a little bit longer so that it would be closer to "Long" distance.

And ... WRE status is something I definitely factor in when deciding whether to go to a race or not. Knowing that an extra set of experienced eyes have looked over the maps and courses, knowing that there will be good competition, all make for a better competitive experience.

+1 to what bmay said.

>an extra set of experienced eyes

Totally agree. GHO is very lucky to have Alex Kerr as our IOF Advisor for the 2013 Canadian Champs middle and sprint races next autumn (weekend after the US Classic Champs). We are already benefiting from working with Alex.

Last week Alex got to check our middle distance courses and ribbons in the forest and we have made some minor adjustments from his advice. We wanted to test the courses at the same time of year as next year's Champs. This is what he had to say about the courses.

"It is going to be a good test"

perhaps that is his kind way of saying "hilly" ;-)