 Jamie
|
Posted: 21 May 2007, 2:15 PM
Has the teams thing worked? Do we need it?
Or is it pyschologically divisive when all the elites should be plotting together to take out Aussie and the world.
Personally I don't think it adds much..clubs don't seem to relate to their various representatives, often because elites are very mobile and move around from where they have deeper club connections.
I follow and support the individual personalities not the teams
|
|
Tane Cambridge
|
Posted: 21 May 2007, 3:10 PM
I think the teams thing works...
It contributes to the series in more ways than one directly or indirectly.
It is easier to get funding for a team than for an individual. As has happened in chch in the past the southerly storm pulled together and orgainised a night series in chch. This event was financially benefical to everyone in the team in terms of a bit of extra money for travel
Also I think it adds a link between the elites and the juniors. Being in the process of making the transistion from junior to elite myself, I find it quite cool to be able to contribute to the team, a team that is headed by the "stars" of nz orienteering. Even if its not that much I still find it encouraging, for me to be able to give something when I dont really have a chance in the main competition......yet anyway...And I guess it may be the same for other people that contribute here and there competing in the odd elite race every now and then
|
|
Michael
|
Posted: 21 May 2007, 4:22 PM
A couple of thoughts.
The number of events increased abruptly last time. I think that is unsustainable from various points of view - travel funding whether by pokie grant or use of squad funds or athletes - and also the willingness of most squaddies to take them seriously and try to get to most of them. I think somthing around 6 rounds/15 events is about it. Greg designed the last series when there was no HP Director and I get the impression he's come to the same conclusion.
Should fit in with prep for WOC I reckon and finishing at an Easter nationals is too early isn't it? But the main problem I have with a nationals final is that it is a waste of media opportunity. You don't get any more exposure from simultaneous national champs and national league result than from either one - in fact it may be less because it can look too hard to understand. (Talk to Kathy Farquhar.) They both have the potential to generate news, so they should be separate.
Teams - I'm for them. They've got news value. I see them as a way of building links between HP and "mum-and-dad" orienteers. Wish I could have done more on this when I was in charge. Trying to help "my" team now (how many orienteers think in terms of "my team"??) But that's probably another topic.
|
|
Martin
|
Posted: 21 May 2007, 11:24 PM
I think of 'my team' as being the northern team, i run for counties, it's my region.
If you want hard to understand then try watching the NZ relays, seeing your club members run together and then watch the superseries relay the following week, where those people you supported are wearing different colours.
|
|
mark
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 2:06 AM
are you retarded martin?
|
|
SimonB
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 4:39 AM
i dont think he is... hes probably one of the smarter ones
|
|
mark
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 4:48 AM
one of the smarter retards?
|
|
addison
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 5:26 AM
are you retarded bloomberg?
|
|
Jenni
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 6:05 AM
Firstly I want to point out the reason I didn't protest at Otago Champs was nothing to do with wanting Southerly Storm to get more points. I never protest, simply that. We've had discussions about protests before and so I'm not going to go into that again. I think it's a personal ethical type value which differs from person to person. Noone is right and noone is wrong, you do what feels "right" to you. I really enjoyed that race even though one control was wrong. Sure it would have been nice for people to know that I was having a much better run than the results show but actually at the time I was most interested in getting it right for the men's race that was to come. (And I think I showed the next day something like what the result would have been if the control had been in the right place  )
I think it's a sign of stupidity to change something to something else before considering if the change will help solve the problem or not...
Of course participation rate is going to influence the result but that doesn't mean that the someone who participated a lot wouldn't have won if they'd particpated less. Thinking of Carsten here - Carsten was in the top 3 in nearly all the races he ran, at Nationals he won or was 10s of seconds from winning all of the individual races. He was the best male orienteer living in New Zealand and running races last year. That doesn't really have anything to do with making the superseries better but maybe it would be good to listen to what he thinks would help make NZ orienteers as good as he is... (apart from the genetic bit but I've got that covered although still working on getting a male NZ orienteer with his genes)
I think we're all saying the superseries would be better if the participation rate was higher. The question is what we do to achieve that as Neil said (+ one more obvious one)
1.Not have so many rounds (as MJW said Greg was the one who came up with rounds last year - I quite liked it but it did seem to be too many and I htink everyone agrees on that).
2. Try to get funding to pay for travel (tried last year but everything was bit late for it to work well, hence trying to start earlier this year).
3. Have the events on maps and events that we'd all like to go to.
Then the final point that we're sunnis and shiites on is if they should be tightly packed or more spread out. You know my view on that (and it seems to be the dominant, if not unanimous view around Christchurch). In any case for next year we don't have much choice if we're going to go with point 3. For the following years we could have a go at getting clubs to put champs more tightly spaced - I'm pretty sure there would be strong opposition to consecutive weekends but maybe every 2-3 weeks could happen.
As far as PAPO and South Island Champs go I don't think we can change now from ANZAC weekend for next year. As you probably know PAPO originally proposed two weeks before Nationals but Otago already had the Otago champs there. PAPO didn't want to go any earlier because it's a busy time in the PAPO calendar with promotional events and many club members involved with the various multiposrt events that are on then. Alister Metherell came up with ANZAC weekend because it was a long weekend so gave the opportunity to have a more extensive package of events (along the lines of Waitangi weekend events). Carsten and I thought that would be more attractive to superseries competitors. However we hadn't realised that there was a push for finishing the Superseries at Nationals knowing MJW's views and reasons for not finishing it then. Anyway there was quite a bit of discussion between DOC and PAPO and I don't think they'll be revisiting it.
I think we're still at more or less Carsten's original suggestion with maybe some question marks over Auckland Champs (Paul says it's out that's my feeling too but Jamie wants it, not sure), South Island Champs (given it will be at ANZAC weekend and so after Nationals) and wanting an event between Waitangi and Nationals. Can 2008 Auckland Champs be held around March 1st..?!
|
|
addison
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 6:18 AM
I simply do not believe you Jenni.
"I never protest, simply that."
Is that why you were one of the people pushing for a protest in the relay at Waitangi?
|
|
Greg
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 6:50 AM
There was 6 rounds the same amount as every other, over a slightly shortened time frame (didn't go to Queens B'day) the only other thing is the number of events as all rounds had at least 3 races (Long-Middle-Sprint) meaning an increase, get the facts right first.
When I said compress I was meaning compress everything not just the when is starts and stops, cut the number of rounds, inside a more compressed time.
How many people wont go to Labour weekend if it is not a SS round?
|
|
Jamie
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 7:59 AM
yep I would like akld champs as part of it, because of proximity with oceania and labour weekend
as for ending with nationals, I'm more flexible, if there is going to be a good event at ANZAC weekend (which we just found out more details about in the 100th or so post on this thread) then that sounds good
|
|
Paul I
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 8:01 AM
Could it work better if the SS was split into two. Series 1 and series 2. With 3 rounds before xmas and 3 after. Are competitors more likely to focus on trying to attend all of series 1, or all of series 2, or even both. If you crap out in one you can redeem yourself in 2 etc etc! Results could be far more even, allowing less of your worst performances to be dropped.
|
|
Jenni
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 8:06 AM
I have never, ever protested. I wasn't pushing for a protest at Waitangi weekend. I was pushing that the team with Rob J, Sara and Carsten should be reinstated as, in my view, the disqualification wasn't fair as the conditions were not the same for all competitors. I didn't push for a protest. I did mention that it was grounds for a protest as I knew that some of the organizers were the types who like to protest... But personally I wouldn't have protested and didn't.
(I actually don't get what the whole protest thing has to do with the superseries other than making the point that there were only Southerly Storm women at the event. That was a shame as they were fun events. It's the same point that participation wasn't as high as we'd like. And even if that had been the reason that I didn't protest I don't get what the problem would have been - if the control had been in the right place 4 Southerly Storm members who had used time and money to get to the event would have got superseries points. The fact that the poits were distributed slightly differently due to the control being in the wrong place doesn't seem to be a huge scandal to me. And fairer than noone getting any points. And it's no fault of the superseries that the control was in the wrong place. Or help us coming up with suggestions on making the superseries better other than we'd like to increase participation. And before you say it makes the Superseries Micky Mouse by having events where the results aren't right - the results were only slightly wrong, no big deal. Why, by the way, didn't anyone protest on the dodgy course at the After Match? )
I think the reason people think it was more rounds was because they count the After Match and Nationals as separate rounds. At least for me it was two return flights to Auckland.
I probably won't go to Labour Weekend if it's not a superseries event or even if it is, if there is no travel support. I would like to as it sounds good but we are now well and truly broke. Not sure what the point of the question is though - if it is an event that many would like to go to wouldn't it be a good candidate for the Superseries? We want events which increase competition and have good participation. So let's pick the events that people want to go to and then try and get funding to help people to get to them.
|
|
Ellmo1769
|
Posted: 22 May 2007, 8:23 AM
Which day of TAMOC are you referring to when you mention the dodgy course Jenni??
|
© Ruffneck Productions