Discussion: Results on-line
in: Norsk O Festivalen (Jun 20–22, 2008 - Oslo, Norway)
Jun 20, 2008 2:35 PM
#
O-Festivalen is on at the moment, including two stops on the World Cups circuit. Both Canada and USA are represented in the races - Mike Smith and Eric Bone in the mens class, and Sandy Hott and Ekaterina Orekhova in the womens class.
Results available at: http://www.o-festivalen.com
Results available at: http://www.o-festivalen.com
Jun 21, 2008 3:27 PM
#
Nice run by Sandy Hott today, about 25th fastest, to move up a little bit into 28th on today's chasing start long distance race. Quite a few WOC runners from other countries behind her, so although she probably wasn't overjoyed with her running time, she is at least in good company.... Minna Kauppi destroyed the field to take out the victory over Hausken.
In the Men's race, Thierry Gueorgiou appeared to have won quite handily, but was DSQ at the finish as it turned out that he had skipped one of the butterflies. Apparently there were three butterfly loops, and he skipped one of them? It would explain why he was suddenly 3-4 minutes ahead of the field in the middle of the race, but with Gueorgiou, he is just so good that you can believe anything is possible! Tero Fohr was declared the winner, having moved ahead of Wingstedt and Hubmann on the very last bit of the course.
In the Men's race, Thierry Gueorgiou appeared to have won quite handily, but was DSQ at the finish as it turned out that he had skipped one of the butterflies. Apparently there were three butterfly loops, and he skipped one of them? It would explain why he was suddenly 3-4 minutes ahead of the field in the middle of the race, but with Gueorgiou, he is just so good that you can believe anything is possible! Tero Fohr was declared the winner, having moved ahead of Wingstedt and Hubmann on the very last bit of the course.
Jun 22, 2008 12:32 AM
#
In Saturday's event, suposedly a Long(?) event with 31 controls for the women, 36 controls for the men, courses which I can barely figure out while sitting still with an enlarged version of the map with smaller-than -standard(?) circles and numbers, 19(?!) DNF/DSQ for the men, and finally a mass finish to decide the winner after all that convolution and alleged orienteering.
What is the rest of the story?
What is the rest of the story?
Jun 22, 2008 2:21 AM
#
I wasn't there, but I do suspect there was a map exchange at some point, so that would have helped considerably with the legibility.
They used a 3-way butterfly instead of the usual 2, so that there would be 6 possible permutations for "forking" the runners. Whether this broke down the groups much will have to wait until a more detailed analysis can be done. But the loops do all look to be of different length, so I suppose that might have been helpful in the splitting as well.
There were a number of DNF/DSQ amongst the runners for the usual variety of reasons, of course, but there were at least two other factors at play. One, this close to the WOC (or even closer to WOC test races for some countries), many athletes were not pushing themselves totally to their limits and chose to not finish the race (or even to not start the race as the case may be). As you can see from the start list, some notable countries declined to even send teams. And two, in a chasing start, it becomes quite clear to you as a runner relatively early on in the race whether or not you have a chance to move into a top group. This contrasts with individual starts, where you never really know. As runners were out there and either making mistakes or not quite feeling 100%, they had to ask themselves if it was worth it to slog through a "long" race just to get a few World Cup points but not be in the top 10 or top 20 (or whatever their goal was). For some people, it just wasn't worth it. For others, it was worth it and thus you still get people out there well beyond the winning time frame (or even well beyond the winner +50%), as tends to happen these days with races in tough and technical non-continental terrain.
At least, that would be my take, just from knowing a number of runners on a bunch of national teams.
Whether or not the mass finish was more exciting or less exciting is a matter of taste. I for one detest the Olympic XC ski races where it sometimes seems like 49 km of boredom followed by 1 km of jockeying for position. I watched the race unfold live over the net today, and I must say, there was actually much less bunching of runners and much less true sprinting-to-the-finish-en-masse that I would have predicted based on the start list. It actually wasn't too bad, and if they had managed to have the kind of coverage that was seen at Jukola, it probably would have been downright exciting!
As an international runner, though, I have to admit that chasing starts or even forked mass starts are not very enjoyable for me, since on the balance of things I tend to be able to navigate better than I can run. For those who can run better than they can navigate, however, I would guess that these types of races are far more enjoyable. And of course, those who excel at both probably enjoy everything.
They used a 3-way butterfly instead of the usual 2, so that there would be 6 possible permutations for "forking" the runners. Whether this broke down the groups much will have to wait until a more detailed analysis can be done. But the loops do all look to be of different length, so I suppose that might have been helpful in the splitting as well.
There were a number of DNF/DSQ amongst the runners for the usual variety of reasons, of course, but there were at least two other factors at play. One, this close to the WOC (or even closer to WOC test races for some countries), many athletes were not pushing themselves totally to their limits and chose to not finish the race (or even to not start the race as the case may be). As you can see from the start list, some notable countries declined to even send teams. And two, in a chasing start, it becomes quite clear to you as a runner relatively early on in the race whether or not you have a chance to move into a top group. This contrasts with individual starts, where you never really know. As runners were out there and either making mistakes or not quite feeling 100%, they had to ask themselves if it was worth it to slog through a "long" race just to get a few World Cup points but not be in the top 10 or top 20 (or whatever their goal was). For some people, it just wasn't worth it. For others, it was worth it and thus you still get people out there well beyond the winning time frame (or even well beyond the winner +50%), as tends to happen these days with races in tough and technical non-continental terrain.
At least, that would be my take, just from knowing a number of runners on a bunch of national teams.
Whether or not the mass finish was more exciting or less exciting is a matter of taste. I for one detest the Olympic XC ski races where it sometimes seems like 49 km of boredom followed by 1 km of jockeying for position. I watched the race unfold live over the net today, and I must say, there was actually much less bunching of runners and much less true sprinting-to-the-finish-en-masse that I would have predicted based on the start list. It actually wasn't too bad, and if they had managed to have the kind of coverage that was seen at Jukola, it probably would have been downright exciting!
As an international runner, though, I have to admit that chasing starts or even forked mass starts are not very enjoyable for me, since on the balance of things I tend to be able to navigate better than I can run. For those who can run better than they can navigate, however, I would guess that these types of races are far more enjoyable. And of course, those who excel at both probably enjoy everything.
Jun 22, 2008 7:16 AM
#
The runners got two maps back-to-back in the same bag, then a map exchange back at the finish area. This meant in effect we had three maps - one up to the end of the butterflys (16 for the men), one back to the finish arena (28) and then a third for the final loop.
As far as I know Thierry Gueorgiou was the only person to be disqualified for missing a loop or similar - the others were all withdrawals, mostly for the reasons that Wil suggests (interesting that no women did so), although in my case it was injury (minor hamstring strain). There doesn't seem to be any logic to the distinction between DNF and DSQ in the results.
I'm assuming it was the shortest loop of the three that Thierry missed as otherwise he would have been much further in front. (I believe he was already in front before the butterflys, mainly because those in front of him didn't see the straight-back-out-of-the-start route choice to 1).
As far as I know Thierry Gueorgiou was the only person to be disqualified for missing a loop or similar - the others were all withdrawals, mostly for the reasons that Wil suggests (interesting that no women did so), although in my case it was injury (minor hamstring strain). There doesn't seem to be any logic to the distinction between DNF and DSQ in the results.
I'm assuming it was the shortest loop of the three that Thierry missed as otherwise he would have been much further in front. (I believe he was already in front before the butterflys, mainly because those in front of him didn't see the straight-back-out-of-the-start route choice to 1).
Jun 22, 2008 8:08 PM
#
Are there map links available? I saw two possiblities ("Maps" and "Courses and Classes"), but no course maps.
Jun 22, 2008 8:34 PM
#
This discussion thread is closed.