addison
|
Posted: 12 May 2003, 3:30 PM
Putting Red Tape around everything isn't the goal. Making a m/w10 is.
|
stu barr
|
Posted: 12 May 2003, 3:40 PM
Jamie.
I know you asked for this to remain positive and I mean this positively:
Stick to your job!
Read over your points and relate them to your title:
Coaching Director.
Good luck.
Personally, I think your ideas are ridiculous! How about the (let's say) five strong panel allotted to deciding which juniors can run up before each major event spend that hour on coaching. That equates to approximately 30 hours coaching time. I am guessing this would approximately double our coaching for the year. Sounds better than some bureaucratic nonsense!
|
James
|
Posted: 12 May 2003, 5:08 PM
This talk of having a criteria to run in the elite grade first struck me as what the hell are you talking about. But i think (correct me if im wrong) it is more focused at the m/w 20's running the classic elite courses. The fact of the matter is not many juniors have the physical ability to race the classic length and be competitve. Yeah sure, run a couple of short races to compare yourselfs against the best elites in nz.But running the long races, how many juniors manage to finish in the top half? I guess im speaking mainly on experience of my 'era' (me,greg, dave, andrew, bryn, todd etc) but to put it quite frankly we all got shat on! Okay, so occassionly we pulled out a good result in a shorter race but we never stood a chance in a classic. Even now the so called 'elites' that actually run the elite grade are finding it difficult to finish within 10-15min of the winner! And for a large portion of us 30+min!(granted rob j has been in world class form). When you think of it like that, what is a junoir going to gain getting their ass kicked! And then theres the high possibility of them not completing the race like half of the elite field at this years nationals!
As for you Al, your nz's best ever male! Of course you were running well above your age level. And if somebody came along now that is as good as you were they would obviously be granted approval to run the elite grade.
Jamie, I like your thinking outside of the square ( judging by everyone elses opinions, doesnt look like this will actually happen) But i think to have selection to run classic length elite races, rather than elite races all together is a good idea. And would it be so different to Sweden, not letting people run elites unless they have a good enough ranking?????
|
addison
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 12:50 AM
Perhaps someone from the Technical Committee might want to say something on the matter.
|
HeadHoncho
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 6:26 AM
Jamie,
Welcome to the abuse the NZOF club.
While not wanting to pre-empt any outcome of any proposals you may put forward, personally I think limiting the ability of competitors to run out of their grades would be more damaging than constructive. I can understand your motives as you have expressed for doing so, and would also like to congratulate you on at least thinking outside of the square and having the balls to put forward such ideas.
A challenge to other forum readers would be to remain constructive rather than abusive, because Jamie does have a point - the weakness of M/W20 grades and whether there is anything that can be done about it. Perhaps those quick to criticise might like to suggest alternatives for solving the problem?
|
HeadHoncho
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 6:32 AM
Al,
Sorry to waste your time again - but its only wasted if you deem it necessary to reply. Its only taken me a minute to read the previous 19 posts. Perhaps the more developed orienteering nations don't have a problem because they have more depth in their M/W 20 grades?
James,
What are you doing up at 12.08 a.m.? You're an elite athlete - running for NZ in a couple of weeks. Get to bed!!!
|
fancy_michael
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 6:47 AM
Jamie's motivation for restricting age-grade-jumpers is commendable... because it strips meaning from the (eg) 20A title, if the top juniors are (getting thrashed) in the 21E grade.
The winner of the grade, especially at the National Champs -goes into the record book as being the best out there... but this not necessarily the case if people run outside their grade.
But the fact of the matter is that you can't and shouldn't stop people making that choice themselves.
I ran 21E when I was a junior -got dorked and was humbled... I run 21E now and get dorked and humbled. There's no difference except that I got practice at it early!!
Jamie... you ran 21E at the Nationals Short in 2000 and finished in 2nd place, would you and your panel "approve" that move now?
|
fancy_michael
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 6:48 AM
Jamie's motivation for restricting age-grade-jumpers is commendable... because it strips meaning from the (eg) 20A title, if the top juniors are (getting thrashed) in the 21E grade.
The winner of the grade, especially at the National Champs -goes into the record book as being the best out there... but this not necessarily the case if people run outside their grade.
But the fact of the matter is that you can't and shouldn't stop people making that choice themselves.
I ran 21E when I was a junior -got dorked and was humbled... I run 21E now and get dorked and humbled. There's no difference except that I got practice at it early!!
Jamie... you ran 21E at the Nationals Short in 2000 and finished in 2nd place, would you and your panel "approve" that move now?
|
Jamie
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 7:23 AM
ok, good to see some people are thinking for longer than a minute before they put pen to paper.
I don't need to be told by people who are ignorant what my job description is. I have a myriad of responsibilities and structuring courses/grades so they are appropriate to athlete's development is one of them.
Stu, who mentioned five people taking an hour? My proposal was one person taking 10 minutes to discuss with a very determined junior if it was beneficial for their future development.
James, thanks for your contribution, obviously running a short race is less likely to be detrimental to development than running a classic. I confess though at nationals I would like to see almost everyone running their own grade. The National Champs are there for the purpose of finding the best orienteer nationally in that grade.
A comment from the member of the technical committee: well I am an ex-officio member of the technical committee, and I think the others are unlikely to reply to this forum before they reply to mine and Marquita's proposal.
Clarification: I would like now to point out that I don't claim services rendered for the technical committee component of my role and I certainly don't for the time I spend on Maptalk. This is my free-time and I will spend it how I like.
Feedback still welcome, particularly re the M/W 10 issue, the M/W 16 issue and the veteran issue.
Jamie
|
Natalie
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 7:33 AM
Keep up the good work Jamie, kudos for having new and different ideas to present to the forum on how to improve and aid the development of our sport for all of us.
In this instance, it would seem that the consensus is that restricting the right of juniors to run up a grade isn't exactly necessary or the best way forward, but at least it was a different idea and we can hopefully progress on from it satisfied that it was considered it seriously as an option.
I personally think that it is unnecessary to ban running up a grade, as if the difficulty of the grades is sufficient to provide each age grade with the challenge they require (as the addition of M/W 10 would hopefully do) then nobody should need to run up. However, if an M/W 20 felt that they would benefit more from running Elite, it should be their decision to run up and get annihilated (or even run well, in which case their decision to run up would be vindicated) or stay in their grade and try to get their name in the history books as on of the best (which is no mean feat and nothing to be scoffed at by anyone).
This decision is taken on currently at your own peril - you either develop quickly and flourish with the increased challenge (in which case I can't see any disadvantage to the individual), or you have an absolute shocker in which case you are humbled and realise that perhaps your own grade still has something to offer you (in which case also I can't see a disadvantage - there is nothing like the sharp slap of a reality check to resurrect one's motivation).
Either way, keep the ideas coming, Jamie, and good luck in your new role! Looking forward with interest to your next projects.
|
Jamie
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 7:53 AM
Thanks /Natalie,
I better make one thing clear. I would like to use this forum for initial feedback/ideas, as I feel there are some people out there who do a lot of thinking about orienteering. However, merely because 4/5 people on this forum are against an idea does not mean that it ends there. There is a much wider orienteering public to consult, and indeed the technical committe and inevitably the NZOF Council.
What this forum can achieve is helping to refine ideas, present new ones, or construcutively criticise ideas.
For example, a refined idea: Juniors wishing to run up a grade must consult with the NZOF Coaching Director, or Squad Coach (if applicable) before they do so...
note: this is not a "ban"
there is no singnificant use of coaching resources (as not many people want to run up)
promising juniors get guidance on the pro's/cons, which may help their development.
juniors feel like there is someone there looking out for them.
Jamie
|
mark
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 8:46 AM
sux
|
Natalie
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 10:33 AM
You are absolutely right Jamie, and actually when I reread what I wrote, it doesn't actually say what I meant. What I meant was, that whatever way the idea and final decision goes, it is good to have had open discussion putting forward as many arguments for and against as possible so that everyone can be sure that all aspects are taken into consideration.
I think that your new idea has merit, and it is good to see the idea having alternatives and refinements also presented for discussion. It is a good idea for juniors to discuss running up a grade with a coach/someone similar. However, most juniors capable of/wanting to run up a grade would hopefully be in the Development Squad (if our selectors are identifying our promising junior talent diligently), and as someone has previously mentioned however (sorry, not sure who, maybe it was Greg??), most of the development squad have personal coaches with whom they would presumably be discussing things such as which grades to run etc.
|
Keith
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 10:48 AM
Hey Jamie
Good to see you've taken on the role as NZOF coaching director
I think it's great that something is finally being done to have M16s running red in NZ.
The other idea of restricting grade choice seems a little bit strange to me, even the refined idea of not banning but discouraging grade swapping seems quite buercratic. Sometimes i felt it was nessacery to run up a grade as with the nationals being at the start of the year it may well be the first time a compitior has ever run that grade in a big event. Surely therefore it is apporiate that they run a grade up during the preceding area champs to get some experience. Although the junior grades have been weak sometimes, it is normally only one or two people running out of grade and i've never had a problem with it, i think it should be the comptitiors choice.
|
Greg
|
Posted: 13 May 2003, 11:19 AM
Changing the grades should encourge people to stay in their own age grade (without any stupid restrictions) but it is still not going to improve the deepth of talent (especially in 20's) when as I said before you can still make a 10 min mistake and get a placing. This is where the problem lies, use your time to improve coaching rather than sorting out who can run where.
( as a side note) I also agree with running your own grade at Nationals (and in fact have only once ran up last year in the short) The Nationals is the BIG race in NZ every year so the top in each grade should be looking at having a good enough run to win it and not worrying about moving up.
|
|