Forum   |   Links    


Forum Home   Start New Topic   Edit Profile   Register  

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13  

m/w17 - 20e

Show Profile  nick Posted: 5 October 2005, 9:50 AM  
I must admit, I've found that by moving up to Course 2 this year I have been running the same course as Tania, Rachel, Marquita, Geoff and so on. It has been good to gauge myself against these excellent orienteers, and to discuss the course with them (its just a shame that I've not been at many events this year to capitalise). Also, the field on Course 2 seems larger? So, running up a grade can have its advantages.

To a certain extent you're right Rob - m/w17-20e would be just m20a dressed in a different O suit. But, which way will produce the best possible orienteers? I'm not sure I know the answer to that, but I'd lean towards m/w17-20e.

And yes, spare a thought for those who aren't ready for 'elite' competition. People like me who might want to improve but need time and some guidance to develop. We need classes for them as well, preferably ones that will develop their skill levels and channel them towards higher grades.

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 5 October 2005, 10:24 AM  
M/W 17-20A?

Show Profile  addison Posted: 5 October 2005, 12:31 PM  
I believe the Australians have called the combined 18/20's grade E rather than A due to one main reason. It gives an excuse for them to comment on the M/W21E and the M/W20E grades only, and not to have to worry about talking about the numerous other grades of "A" level. They wanted to be able to send a press release off that only has the open elites and the junior grade. Seems to have worked, because on the Orienteering Australia website they seemed to have only commented on those two grades. If we are trying to promote our sport as a high-end competitive sport perhaps a similair approach should be taken.

Show Profile  Lizzie I Posted: 5 October 2005, 12:47 PM  
Firstly, I completely agree with Jack and Tom, the M/W17-20E grade is a great idea.
The aussies also had a M/W17-20A aswell, and this caters for those juniors not at the 'top of the tree'

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 5 October 2005, 1:20 PM  
Lizzies suggestion is what I was getting at.

Show Profile  Kate Posted: 5 October 2005, 1:42 PM  
This trip was my first time in Australia so i decided to run the w17-20A grade for my first event. It definitely provides an option for those who aren't ready to run in the 17-20A grade.(I admit to making a 20min mistake in crazy sand dunes, but the winner of our grade was more than 10 mins behind the winning w16A on the same course) Seeing as we have already made the step to change our national gradings to fit in with the Australians, we might as well go the whole hog and go with the 17-20E grade. Its a definite step towards becoming an elite and certainly gives juniors the chance to feel included in the grand scheme of orienteering. Being a broad grade i feel it gives a really good way to gauge individual progress, as you race the same people for a long time. Perhaps this grade could be used as a means to hold on to those people who seem to disappear after secondary school.If people are going to run up they will run up regardless, so we can either leave the grades as they are or switch to 17-20E and bring a more professional feel to our junior competition. It would provide an ideal grade for a junior superseries- similar to the australian JNOL.

Show Profile  fraser Posted: 5 October 2005, 1:47 PM  
The last thing we need is yet another grade!!!!

Having grown up with the "Karl/Brent" group of juniors I would say the best thing is to be running a course with good competition. So like Greg says just talk amongst yourselves and enter the same grade. This is pretty much what we did and it worked.

If there had been an M17-20E grade back then it wouldn't have made a lick of difference.

Show Profile  PaulS Posted: 5 October 2005, 4:16 PM  
Lets have it so people can feel good about themselves then.

Show Profile  Martin Posted: 5 October 2005, 4:27 PM  
Great to see new people having a say

Show Profile  Andrew M Posted: 5 October 2005, 5:03 PM  
Doesn't this debate seem a little frivilous? Can't we debate more interesting things like when is the Head Honcho going to be rolled in a coup de ta?

The current M20A grade will be exactly the same as any new M17-20E permutation. The M17-20E will be better aligned with JWOC grades but the NZOF selectors currently stipulate that anyone wishing to go to JWOC needs to be running M20A.

Thomas made a good comment, about have two new grades M17-20A running on M18A and M17-20E on M20A courses. I am scared of the junior grades becoming to elitist, having two tiers would reduce this.

Ditto Frasers comment. The best thing is to be running in a grade with competition. Surely a few txt messages or emails can sort out what grades, M18 vs M20 people are going to run.


Show Profile  HeadHoncho Posted: 5 October 2005, 7:17 PM  
Andrew - the only rolls associated with HeadHoncho are the ones he eats at lunchtime and/or the ones around his stomach.

Anyone who wants to "Sitiveni Rabuka" me - bring it on :-)

Fraser - u off the good stuff? Ur postings are waaaay too sensible for the rebel I always thought you were...

Show Profile  Jack Vincent Posted: 5 October 2005, 7:20 PM  
"Jack, m20a is course 2 (m21e is course 1). If you had a m17-20e grade, it would still be course 2. If course 2 cannot prepare you for 21e, nothing can."

I meant competition wise.

"The last thing we need is yet another grade!!!!"

Not another grade, just a new setup. The 18's and 20's would get made into 17-20a/e growing the amount of competitors. There would still be 2 grades between 16's and 21e.

The best of the juniors would ALL be racing each other. It would save having to make those txt messages making sure we all run the same grade which often doesnt work anyway. Aye thomas :-P

This message was edited by Jack Vincent on 5 October 2005, 8:22 PM

Show Profile  Martin Posted: 5 October 2005, 7:55 PM  
"anyone wanting to be selected for jwoc has to run m/w20 at the provincial championships the preceding year. There is only one grade for triallists. (see "

Rob, I wont say too much about this. I think the policy is generally good.

However this year it wasnt the case, and for a variety of reasons. Looking back: Most people in the team didnt run area champs in 20s, some chose to run 18s and 21E. nor put their name down as being interested, or run trials in m/w20. I may be mistaken but JWOC might've been a first m/w20 race for one or two. In saying all that a few people did make the effort to run up in 20s at the area champs & trials and they were justly rewarded for their efforts with selection.

But enough of that, JWOC 05 is over, it was fun, and now we need to focus ahead on implementing a plan to get ahead at JWOC 07.

Show Profile  Tane Cambridge Posted: 5 October 2005, 8:25 PM  
Why dont you guys just run in M/W20A and treat it as if it was an M/W17-20E grade, much more simple. Maybe we could change it so that it is M/W20E instead of 20A

Show Profile  thomasr Posted: 5 October 2005, 8:44 PM  
Lets think about how big m/w20 r at da moment....
They are tiny
Akl OYs dnt even hv m20 anymore (they didnt at the last one)
m/w17-20e will revitalise the age group by providing more competition and promoting the future elite of our sport.
At mountain biking the second most important grade after elites is under 19
they get almost as much intrest as the elites at the national series
Also we should do our best to align ourselves wit AUS, after all which country is looking like being the first to have a non-european world champ.
It seems to be working for them

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13  

Ruffneck Productions © Ruffneck Productions