maptalk.co.nz News   |   Events   |   Forum   |   Photos   |   Links    

  Forum

Forum Home   Start New Topic   Edit Profile   Register  

1   2   3  

Age Grades

Show Profile  Greg Posted: 21 January 2007, 8:46 AM  
http://www.orienteering.asn.au/news/?ItemID=1313

Show Profile  rob.g Posted: 22 January 2007, 3:11 PM  
This is so overdue in NZ, where we should have 10 year age grades in all Area Champs, and very compressed B grades such as open B male/female.

Show Profile  Svend Posted: 22 January 2007, 4:53 PM  
"Age Grades" - where did you get that from?
Age groups are called classes according to NZOF and IOF rules. The word "grade" is used only in conjunction with A and B grade controllers.

Show Profile  Martin Posted: 23 January 2007, 8:26 AM  
yet another example of politics and red tape gettign in the way. this is a discussion, its not the nzof. AGE GRADES and CLASSES they mean the same thing to most of us!

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 23 January 2007, 3:26 PM  
talk about a hoary old chestnut (and I don't mean Svend or Garden:-))

I'll state yet again that I support 10 year age classes, to create greater competition for all (and there shouldn't be B grades they should just be able to pick a course enabling more person specific technical progression)



Show Profile  SimonB Posted: 23 January 2007, 8:44 PM  
are there other ways of seperating grades other than age? often there are great differences between competitors in age grades. shouldnt a fitness based sport have fitness based grades? or difficulty levels or something, like in oy's i enjoy racing against old units and womenly types, but in big comps i never get that kind of... unity i guess, i think open difficulty grades brings us together. it gives us a bond, a bond that is not scared of bridging time.

however i guess at nationals a lot of different grades run the same course, but the results are seperate, why not have everyone vs everyone? a royal rumble of sorts.

This message was edited by SimonB on 23 January 2007, 9:48 PM

This message was edited by SimonB on 23 January 2007, 9:49 PM

Show Profile  Greg Posted: 23 January 2007, 9:05 PM  
Do you mean a Waitangi course based type of system Bloomberg?

Select the course rather than grade

Show Profile  Martin Posted: 23 January 2007, 9:05 PM  
red, orange, yellow, white. E A B... do we need any further distinctions? With age, colour and letter surely everyone is catered for already! lets make things simpler to organise

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 23 January 2007, 9:28 PM  
As far as regional champs it's water under the bridge, I think all regions used 10-year age classes last year. That's one step on the way towards more meaningful competition.

The significance of the Australian decision is that it applies to states. NZ's population is about the same as the bigger states, so we should be considering 10-year age classes for the nationals too. A tougher nut to crack, but in the 2005 nationals the older vet winner was faster than the younger winner more often than not, where two adjacent classes were on the same course. In 2006 the younger vet winner was faster slightly more often, so its not as clear-cut.

The biggest obstacle comes from the hearts rather than the heads of those who expect to compete in a championship with zero preparation and go home with a gong.

Show Profile  SimonB Posted: 25 January 2007, 7:42 PM  
doesnt age grades detract from the essence of orienteering, as Tane always tells me to race the course and not him... Adding age grades doesn't make more meaningful competition, it makes p.c competition.



Show Profile  Michael Posted: 12 April 2007, 7:53 PM  
In the 2007 nationals, the younger vet winner was faster than the older vet in 9 cases where two age classes could be directly compared, because they were on the same course. But the older vet winner was faster than the younger vet in another 9 cases.

Taken with 2006 (younger faster slightly more often) and 2005 (older faster slightly more often) we do not have big enough vet fields for 5-year age classes to be meaningful. Even at the nationals.

Show Profile  Jamie Posted: 12 April 2007, 8:28 PM  
Seems reasonably conclusive reasoning

Show Profile  addison Posted: 12 April 2007, 9:09 PM  
Does this take into account some of the competitors that are old enough to run in say M40 or M45 that are actually running elites as they are still good enough, but would deal to their age grades?

Show Profile  addison Posted: 12 April 2007, 9:12 PM  


This message was edited by Simon Addison on 12 April 2007, 10:13 PM

Show Profile  SimonB Posted: 12 April 2007, 10:39 PM  
what was up with the grades with only one person in them?

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 12 April 2007, 11:39 PM  
Older competitors who run elite do not influence the conclusion any more than those who stay at home. Except insofar as both are contributing to fields that are not big enough to be meaningful. The analysis is based on the winners that we actually got on the day.


1   2   3  


Ruffneck Productions © Ruffneck Productions maptalk.co.nz