Discussion: Orienteering: open or closed sport?

Closed sports are repetitive and predictable. Open sports require fast decision making = good for brain.

Details here.

The disciplines of long, middle and sprint could probably be ordered as less open to very open.

The rowing I do is definitely on the closed side of the spectrum. Sweep rowing is really closed; sweepers are the meatheads in a sport of knuckleheads.

It would be interesting to develop a list of sports from most open to most closed. Orienteering should be near the top of the open spectrum.

The article talks specifically about "open" and "closed" motor skills, not open and closed sports in general. It's not about what sports require more thinking, it's about what sports involve less predictable movements. In this sense, long and middle are actually more open than the sprint, because running on an uneven surface in a forest requires more thinking about your movements.

When I first saw this topic, I thought "open" & "closed" related to the degree of accessibility to newcomers -- on which scale I would also rate orienteering near the top of open-ness.

Using "open" vs "closed" as the OP does is unexpected to say the least. This scale needs new terminology...

It does seem like a seriously tough sprint would top the list of sports requiring "open" skills. Might explain why there are always people signed up in the M/W 85 classes at the world masters champs -- they've kept their brains in shape.

As for the other use of open and closed, I would rate orienteering's degree of accessibility to newcomers very low, but that's another discussion.

I rated orienteering as high for accessibility because of the low cost and minimal equipment needed to try it. It would be even higher if there were a lot of permanent courses in more areas with maps available online.

At the low end of this spectrum would be a sport like ice hockey or curling. Running is probably the most "open" sport -- you can just go out and do it.

At the risk of further derailing this thread, I can see both sides to it. Yes it's easy to get into the sport because it's (somewhat) cheap, other than the travel aspect.

However it is a very difficult sport to get into from a mentality perspective. You have to learn a whole new skill set. Venues change from week to week. Plus a lot of people won't go unless they know someone else there and since most orienteers only have friends who are already orienteers, outside incursion from non-orienteers is minimal.

Being more than willing to further derail this thread...
(though based on the subject at face value alone, we're still very much on-track)

I would not count ignorance about a sport against its openness. For people who want to do it, the biggest barrier is location, ie, where they need to be/go to try it.

As for the skill set, beginners don't/shouldn't need to be well versed in compass use, nor know what an attack point, collecting feature, or even a reentrant is. I would also surmise that those who find the idea of orienteering attractive, are already comfortable using maps, and have mastered basic navigation.

The barrier to sport from a mentality perspective is high for any active sport, as these days I find many people who refuse to run or walk or do anything active outside unless they are faced with being chased by Zombies or a T-Rex.

Sorry Guy but for a sport to be truly open to newcomers there need to be active ways (programs) for them to learn the sport and become involved in the community. Being cheap and having open events isn't enough. Theoretically newcomers can show up to an event, talk to he registrar about gettig help, get a 20 minute lesson and off they go but that can intimidating and challenging for some people not to mention that 20 minutes isnt enough to learn much.

Before we can consider ourselves an open (and inviting - implied I would think) we need proper programs aimed at beginners of all ages where a newcomer feels like they belong, is among peers, and feels like the session is focused on them.

Exactly, Canadian. Not to mention the fact that for many in North America the idea of venturing into the woods alone is scary... forget doing it in a place they've never been before, with an unfamiliar kind of map, in a "race" setting, with nobody they know at the start or finish or anywhere in between.

To bring the original topic back into this, the fact that orienteering requires you to tackle so many different kinds of problems as you go ("open sport") is one of the reasons why it is not very open in the easy-to-start/welcoming sense.

I think one of the problems we have with marketing the sport in the US is that too many insiders don't realize how intimidating entering the sport can be. It can be really intimidating! And we can be really unwelcoming! I consider myself fairly adventurous and willing to try new things, and I was a map lover before I started orienteering, but after my first O season it took me almost a year to go try orienteering again in my new city because I was intimidated by the new environment and new people. I totally understand why so few people go try it on their own.

"Come orienteering! Drive out to a park you've never been to before, use equipment you've never seen before, read a map with funny symbols and colors (you can already read a map, right? everyone can read a map!), go out alone, get lost and frustrated, finally finish after an hour of wandering around, then go back to your car and wonder what you just did! It's GREAT!"

@Canadian: That's a pretty lofty bar for openness. What you described is the ideal, and certainly something to work toward.

But for the time being, we must make do with what we have, and 20-minutes of instruction is certainly much better than offering nothing for newcomers. Most of the newbies that show up at events are already interested based on something they read or heard about O'; and they only need the basics to go out on a beginners course. If they enjoy it, we can then help them get better and encourage them to come to future events -- or just go out again on the advanced beginners course.

I guess this depends on the person. I find most new experiences intimidating - but not orienteering (I started in June 2014, so my memory is pretty fresh). I cannot imagine starting in a team sport. I would have to find a team and almost by definition I will be the worst player at least for some time - this can be pretty intimidating, especially if the team loses because of me. If I run in a road race and I am slow, everybody sees that. In a forest, I am on my own, nobody sees me most of the time and nobody cares if I finish last or don't finish at all. If I want to start playing tennis, for example, I cannot really play until I learn to hit the ball properly, which may take a long time and until then, it won't be fun at all - just frustrating. In orienteering, everybody can start easily. If they can walk (not even run!) and have seen a map (any map), they are ready to do a beginner course. If they have seen a topographic map, then after 20 minutes of instruction they are ready to do an intermediate course. What can be LESS intimidating?

Compared to my other hobby, hang gliding, where you can go for a tandem ride for $100, but learning to do it yourself takes multiple full-day lessons and thousands of dollars worth of equipment just to get your first mountain flight (in my case about 20 days at the only school within a four-hour drive, spread over three years)...

For me, if I can sign up for lessons with an instructor that's a lot more accessible than having to go some place unknown to do something unknown all by my lonesome. Lessons at x time and y place? Yes, please. Vague assurance that there may be a beginner clinic before a race? Egads!

More orienteering clubs should offer orienteering courses or or a series of lessons rather than relying on haphazard beginner clinics before a race. *We* all know that the sport is not rocket surgery and it's easy to start, but the public has no way to know that.

We have tried out-of-season free 1:1 lessons, approx. 1-1.5 hr duration, very loosely structured as a few minutes in the clubhouse, then off onto the permanent course, where we hit up some points and I adjust difficulty and duration based on aptitude and attitude. The retention rate, defined as people who actually come back to any meet at all is extremely low, and the number who regularly attend is approximately zero. Granted it's a small sample size (dozen?). And I have no idea if the format could be improved. But I take their absence personally, and it seems like squandered effort.

(We haven't offered in season free lessons to maintain some orienteering/family balance.)

So we will probably switch to free small classes, possibly offered in partnership with the DNR as part of their Recreation 101 series (let them handle promotion and registration), and have those infrequently. And the free 1:1 lessons might return as a paid option (probably with the proceeds handed to my daughter's sports team), only to add some perception of value. Plus if the lessons cost something, we can offer them half off with Groupon.

You can work within the structure of the current orienteering event, but you really need to personal chaperone for newbies through their first few events (if you want retention). It goes beyond completing that day's event. Get them to understand how to start on Yellow and move up. Do map reviews, talk about the event, talk about how to improve, etc. The idea that you can improve quickly and "move up" is a huge catch. A few people can't do this for everyone... but many regulars can do this for a few.

Without that personal connection, it is a "closed sport". I struggle with finding myself doing so much day of event volunteering (besides back office stuff) that I don't have time to do this sort of thing and run my course on the same day. And I don't see the point of inviting someone to an event I will barely be able to speak to them. So I just rarely invite friends anymore.

DVOA did a few events where there are 2 events going on at the same time- a regular event and a beginner's clinic. A beginner's clinic at 11AM (then do the white course after). This seems like a good model for both participant and the usually beginner event organizer (since a course is already set up, no need for Saturday event).

It is also nice to have a firm organized time for instruction. Beginners can meet other beginners. Instruction is guaranteed.

I agree with MChub. I think orienteering is highly accessible compared to most other sports. With a few minutes of instruction and no special equipment, one can do and enjoy a beginner's course at most meets, for a very low entry fee. Most other individual sports, it takes quite a bit of work to get to a level where the sport is enjoyable. Tennis and golf come to mind. A sport which is recently popular around here is pickleball, a sport that utilizes some tennis-like skills but is much easier to learn how to play well enough to have fun -- I would say that is roughly equivalent to orienteering in terms of accessibility to a newcomer. But there aren't many other sports at that level of accessibility.

Team sports create a whole different and generally higher barrier.

More evidence that orienteers are a diverse bunch with different interests and feelings. :-)

The higher barrier that some (but not all) team sports have due to their steep learning curve is greatly offset by the fact that it's a *team* sport. I find team sports way more accessible: join a team, they'll be your friends and show you how it works. Go orienteering and... it's possible nobody will talk to you or notice whether or not you ever come back.

I think this is why O clubs with a high level of social activity are successful -- it feels like a team! Also why the big relays in Scandinavia are such great motivators for sub-elite runners -- train and race with your team!

I understand that not everyone likes that environment and that to some people the appeal of orienteering is exactly the fact that you can go do it on your own and not be social or rely on a team or have a team rely on you. But humans are generally social creatures, and accessibility is about more than just the skills required. Most people aren't going to be very eager to try a new activity without a social support network involved.

The scary truth about orienteering is finally revealed. I could not possibly put it better.

Go orienteering and... it's possible nobody will talk to you or notice whether or not you ever come back

I sense that team sports have become more inclusive/inviting it today's young adult generation, which is certainly a good thing.

When I was in my early 20's, by contrast, I was new to my company, and I had some interest in getting into a company basketball league. I had never played organized basketball, but I had played lots of pickup basketball, so I had reasonable knowledge of and skills for the game. A good friend of mine who played on a team knew I was interested in getting on a team, so he played a in a pickup game with me to assess my skill level. His assessment was that if I played on his team, I wouldn't see much play! That kind of squashed my ambition of playing basketball.

At one time I thought it would also be interesting to take up soccer, but there just didn't seem like any good way of doing that as an adult, especially given that my soccer skills were non-existent, in contrast to my marginally competent basketball skills.

Again, it seems that there are more opportunities for today's young adults to get involved in team sports that they might not be highly skilled at. So that may at least partly explain the difference in perception between Cristina and me about how much barrier there is to taking up a brand-new team sport.

The question isn't about getting people out to try out the sport once (which is relatively easy for a variety of reason many of which have been mentioned above). Rather it's one of creating new regular orienteers. To be a regular orienteer one needs to understand and enjoy the sport. To do that you need to be taught or coached as orienteering at an even moderately skilled level os very difficult to learn on your own. It is also important to feel like a part of the the (or a) group.

Lessons help with almost all of the above including for many people the enjoyment aspect.

Well, maybe. But I'm certainly a counterexample. And it seems like most of the regular orienteers I know are also self-taught. The closest thing we've ever had to lessons is standing around with our maps discussing the legs we screwed up.

My improvement came after taking a weekend O camp in late spring based in Fahnestock Park in NY, run by Bill Shannon, with helpers. I'm not sure I would have improved much on my own, but breaking out different training tasks (contouring, relocating, contours-only map, etc.) was very valuable.

Kinda like what the junior training weekends are doing.

JJ, sure and the vast majority of the current NA orienteering community are counter-examples by force of lack of options. But our numbers are small and fairly stagnant. I would think that if we were an open sport (by the definition we're discussing) our numbers would be growing or much larger before saturating the market and becoming stagnant and at a higher level.

@JanetT in our association we have a number of different opportunities for advancement - yes we are fortunate. We have 'coaching' offered within the club system prior to (and even during) events - say an hour beforehand. But the big plus are the 2 dedicated days offered for transition people - orienteers moving up levels of difficulty. This happens at our club and has seen the retention of 'teetering' orienteers - not confident in going up, but knowing there is more. It has also been excellent in guiding our juniors to representation standards.
Our state association also holds a womens weekend of 'training' - different activities along the usual skill set required. This has been exceptionally good for late to the sport/unfit/hesitant women. It has provided a good network for both the well credentialled and the newcomer to form friendships and from this has emerged retention in the sport - lack of pressure, collegiality, time for me and with other women (no kids!). The opportunity to hear that you don't HAVE to go through the green/straight line etc but it is OK to go around - (and possibly better).

We have a women's weekend too but I don't know what goes on there, having never been to it. For some reason I've not been invited.

Hi Ricky, Coreen here. Have you looked in the mirror lately??? Yes, women's weekend is great. I also think Tinytoes comment on transition days are great . Maybe we need to try that here. I'll bring it up at the coaches meeting on Wednesday..

Do you log your daughters' training for them? Is that why they're always so similar?

I'd say my primary sport (marathon swimming) where I spend hours with my head down doing the same repetitive movement is definitely closed.