Discussion: start times

what AP group think about having Elites having a red group start at major events ( national champs, or NA champs, or WRE).??

using the ranking list up to a month prior to have top 10 men and top 10 women starting last in that class ( of course randomly ) and the rest ahead of that ( again randomly ) . similar to what people encounter at WC or WOC.
and i'm totally against picked start times at major events.( at an international major event , you never get that freedom, yes you can earn it, racing hard the year before ).

If a motion is put up for voting at COF_AGM will anybody second that ?

so nobody will second that ?.cool

It would have to be a provincial rep, wouldn't it? Or can any COF member second a motion?

I'm not sure even out big events involve enough spectating to make this necessary or helpful. Although this might encourage people to hang around the finish to see the battle play out.

Is there an actual rule preventing a club doing this now? Perhaps we ought to try it before mandating it?

At the team trials this year Barebones organisers used a form of seeding where the ones trying out for the team were sent last.
I am not sure what I think of it myself, but did you guys like that?
It sure made it easier for us spectators to keep track of who was passing who at the end, but it also created several trains.
Also, in order to do that, we would need a constantly updated ranking list that would include both Americans and Canadians, something we don't quite have yet.

Well, we do. It's called the unofficial USOF rankings. Discriminates against Canadians but it otherwise fits the bill.

I suppose we could also use the WRE system somehow. Maybe just use everyone's highest score in the last year to lessen discrimination against those who don't attend many WREs.

Jon , about Canadian rankings-is it ready ? and when US players come to play , mixed with their too?

I personally am not sure it's a great idea. By starting people of similar ability together, it definitely increases the likelyhood that people stick together when they meet in the woods - i.e., it increases the likelyhood of trains. It might be possible to insert between each pair of Red-Group runners a slower runner - i.e., so the spacing between fast runners was kept pretty large. Depending on the event, I'm not sure the spectator value would be worth the work for the organizers.

That said, I think it does add to the pressure/excitement of the event when starts are seeded in various ways. I have been to a few events where the start list for one event (e.g., middle) is based on results in another event (e.g., sprint). Then, of course there is US Trials, which has been using seeded starts, but there has been discussion with opinions both in favor and not for this.

I thought I had the Canadian rankings ready then I realised I hadn't been checking whether other classes had the same course as elite classes at all events. This occurred for at least one class in the Barebones Middle as well as in many sprints. The resulting increase in the number of ranked athletes has made it possible to use the women's races at the Spring Runoff as rankable races. I think it will take me until sometime Monday to work through the consequences and give Charlotte something I won't have to change again.

We considered this for the sprint for NAOC. WRE requires the start list be 100% random. Is that correct Vlad. I 2nd the need for a true North American ranking.