Discussion: Micro-O at WOC 2006 in Denmark

The IOF decided at its meeting in Japan to make Micro O a part of the Middle Distance event at next year's WOC. That's where for part of the course you have 5 or 6 flags at each point, no codes, only one of them is correct, and for each one you miss you have to do a penalty lap (a la biathlon).

Best as I can figure, a Norwegian cable TV channel has offered to televise live the event if it was in the format, and possibly to televise all the other events as well (I'm not 100% sure of that). It's also possible that they are giving the organizers some money as part of the deal.

The fact that Micro O has been tried only a couple of times, both in Norway and one of them at the Nordic champs this past spring, didn't seem to matter. There is a discussion about this on the Swedish site alternativet.nu and almost everyone thinks it's a stupid idea. But maybe that's just because it started in Norway.... (Actually, didn't Swampfox do some version of this one time at the 1000-day? And once was enough?)

Are we now going to have a Micro O series to get our runners ready? Orienteering events are hard enough to organize and these things are a good bit harder.

I'm not sure what the IOF was thinking other than (1) money talks, and (2) let's get on TV.

Swedish TV has a short video from the Nordic Champs that gives a reasonable picture of micro O' at:


http://svt.se/svt/road/Classic/shared/mediacenter/...

Could you set a course that helped for training in both micro-O and trail-O? The trail-O folks stop and give their answer from a viewing point, while the micro-O folks run into the flags and punch the one they think is right. You'd have to segregate the two groups starting times so that trail-O competitors don't get the benefit of watching someone run in and punch. Probably have trail-O go first.

A bit of discussion on this on the british nopesport.com forum.
Seems like the IOF is happy to be driven by possible tv even if it means putting on events that have not had good trialling, are very hard to be fair (how do you match difficulty with penalty times/loops) all at the supposed premier orienteering event of the year...
Ah well i won't rant and rave here as well.

Here's a link to the Nordic Champs where they did this. They sure went to a lot of effort to do this.

Makes me wonder what they will do for the Middle qualifying, with three heats and a lot more people all at once. I'll bet they skip the Micro O and just use it for the final.

hmmm... I don't see a point at this, it disrupts the flow and how exactly does it break trains in such a small area ?!

It just doesn't seem fair to me as a part of a serious competition. It seems a lot like 6 Bingo controls in a row. Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. I'm sure I'm discounting a lot of hard work by a lot of well-intentioned people...

Keep in mind that it's not supposed to break trains, it's not supposed to be fair, it's not supposed to be ... whatever. It's what the TV people wanted to make what they think is a better show.

I don't have the slightest idea what micro-O even is. It's never been a part of the 1000 Day.

Ha, ha, Swampfox, I clearly remember at least one Chase (in 1994 or 1995, maybe??) where at one control point, you hung about 8 different bags, all inside the control circle and separated from each other by 10 m or less. As I recall, only one of the bags actually had a punch and a control code, so it wasn't exactly "MicroO" as described above. But annoying nonetheless!

Twice. The second time, all of the controls had punches, but only one had a code. The first time was at Round Mountain (6/24/95), the second at The Map Formerly Known As Blue Mountain (7/5/96). In the latter case, people who mispunched got DQed, which was more annoying.

Think the IOF would go for a Goat race in the Classic? Very telegenic...

Mosquitoes can be annoying. Ditto for FDFs. Needle grass and foxtails can get under your skin. Hungry attack badgers will *eat* your skin, and bones and muscles too. But the 1000 Day was never meant to be annoying, just fun. If the IOF wishes to annoint me as the inventor of Micro-O and award me my choice of any 5 virgin skogs nymphs, then of course it would be the height of rudeness to refuse the honors, and as the officer and gentleman I once was, graduated from the United States Military Academy (I have my diploma to prove it!), it would be incumbent upon me to go along with the ceremonies with all the dignity and propriety I could muster for the occasion.

But in the meantime, I swear I don't have the slightest idea what micro-O is!!!

I agree with J-J, a goat race would be a better solution to television - its head to head, following expected with a higher average pace incurred by trains. throw a bunch of cameras into the woods along expected routes/controls and go for it.

It seems to me that the micro-O concept, even if tweaked, would be very hard for the uninitiated TV viewer to figure out with the various penalty loops - and that seems to be the audience that TV is geared toward - the non-orienteer. So I think making it as simple and exciting as possible would be the way to go if you want TV coverage.

A goat race may depend less on individual navigation but you could still keep your standard events and add the goat as a 'made for TV' event.

I think they are trying to replicate the TV viewing experience of watching biathalon.

And who thinks that is a good idea?

I think, before bashing it straight out, one shell try it, and, who knows may be he or she will like it. Orienteering as a sport is a thing in itself and it will develop in directions not not always seem likely from our point of view. I beleive some form of micro-O was developed ~ 5 years ago in Russia and it was known there as Orient-Show.

I'm sure something is lost in translation, but that sounds more like "Dog-Show" than a sport.

Ummm - isn't Orient-Show something else entirely (the extremely short courses, length 100-300m, on map scales like 1:1000) that there was an article on in the last Orienteering Today (2005/3, not the new one 2005/4 that arrived in the last two days)?

Biathalon! Now were talking!

Run a bunch of regular controls. Stop at trail-O like nav. problem with multiple controls hung. Competitors pull out a pistol and have to shoot the control that they think is correct. Misses and mistakes cost time, or a penalty loop.

This just has to catch on with the American public! I'm going to give a try at a local meet; everyone has a gun in their pickup at local TX meets so it will be easy to implement.

LMAO !!! I never shot from a gun in my life :(

Do they have weeny pistols in their pickups? I had always imagined we were talking assault rifles...

Since the Lake George map has a shooting range, it should be possible to add an element of accurate aiming to an orienteering event. I would recommend to streamer off the area behind the range though, just in case...

The sport originated in the military after all.

Will is correct. Any real Texan (or Wyomingite for that matter) with a pickup will most certainly have a rifle. However, all us sophisticated city/suburban folk, most of whom are immagrants to this fine country (of Texas), drive designer SUVs and carry pistols.

Streamering off the shooting range is only for sissy-flower-smiley-happy people from CA. In TX we would put subsequent controls downrange from the shooters.

In Texas, if a few bullets come sailing by, it is a matter of common courtesy to send a few back the other way. It could be a friend just saying hello, or else your in-laws still pissed that you ran off with their best daughter.

Jason Poole, btw, reported hearing bullets whizzing by in the air--he described it as a rather unpleasant and unsettling sound--while he was vetting at Round Mountain. The shooters were far away and out of sight, marking them likely as drunk city slicker types, too stupid and irresponsible to know even the basics about firearm safety.

Every so often one of those fools will end up shooting their buddy, which I think in religious circles gives origin to the current in vogue phrase "unintelligent design."

Maybe the micro-o should be for Swedes only, so that they are for sure not involved in any trains. Give them some extra work to do.

I think wiring the fastest runners with a camera, like in race cars, would make orienteering very TV effective. Plus maybe a small camera inside the control stand. Each runner could be followed by a steady cam operator (those things to make flowing steady camera movements while the camera is mounted directed on the operator).

I'll talk to my friend Steven (Spielberg), I am sure he can also come up with an adolescent whiny plot for a feature film, kind of a mix of the dramatic footage he had for his Normandy invasion and E.T., who is the quintessential orienteer trying to relocate (Quote: I want to go home.")

Although the running loops sound a bit silly, micro-O reminds me of NEOC's clueless-O in which 3 to 5 controls with punches are hung on parallel features within sight of each other. Orienteers are given maps without codes or control descriptions. The object is to orienteer precisely to the feature circled and punch at the control you think matches the center of the circle. At the end of the course you find out if the controls you punched were the right ones. This format is fun, actually, and requires lots of concentration because there's no immediate feedback on your choices. You also can't change your mind once you've punched the right box for each control.

Wow, I got an answer from Steven: He is doing it! He must be reading Attackpoint. The only condition is, that there is a happy ending and the tear factor has to be improved. Says orienteering has to be cleaned up, so he will put it right into the backlots in Hollywood. Great for sprints! The scenery can be changed any time.

Trouble in paradise: My other friend, this Marty Scorsese guy, says he will do much better. Bring in some nice mob flavor, some shot outs, blood with a cut to spaghetti plate (carbo loading, perfect). Wants to cast Bobby DeNiro as Marc Lauenstein. I am not sure if this movie works in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn. Maybe move it to Brighton Beach, where there are many people to cast as the too fast running Russian. Maybe I should take over this project myself. Make a nice slow art film, with great dialogue right out there between control 15 and 16, Russian/Swiss-german and Italian mixed, while Emil Wingstedt runs off in the wrong direction.

yes, William you are right about Orient-show being conducted on a very small area, but the extra contols were part of it (no penalty - DSQ for mispunching)

Hmm, I was talking with Andy a few months ago about a screenplay. Think you could pitch it to Spielburg?

A young american, who dares to enter World Orienteering Champs and challenge the Swede who offended his grandfather. Trained by a crusty old Scandivian (should be easy to find), he trains by chasing chickens through the woods, drinking lutefisk smoothies, and waxing on about things.

I thought Tom Cruise could play Eric Bone at quals, but the rest of the casting is still undecided. We should definately get Dolph Lundgren though.

Excellent!

Tom Cruise is a pansy - he wouldn't want to get his socks dirty. Eric should be played by Mr. T.

Tom Cruise is perfect casting. The trick is to use a wilderness area with a lot of bears, T.C. will get lost during the production of the movie, he can jump up and down for the bear and grin. The bear won't tolerate this for a second. Cruise will be recast by a real actor.

Back to the micro O: I think it is a lottery. In Norway the runners started to gamble. They didn't punch some controls to have more options at the next control, so it all becomes a calculated risk. I actually don't see how it should be interesting on TV to see somebody running an extra lap or two.
What is really working as TV event is a city sprint, because the area is easy to cover with cameras and the spectators produce some lively ambiance.

Orienteering is already about calculated risk. There are route choices that are straighter, but with greater potential of missing vs. a longer route with a catching feature etc. Micr-O takes this to an extreme, because it's more exciting to watch a competition that is less predictable than, say, a long-O in which Sime is starting...

Maybe, but consider that the golf ratings are highest when Tiger Woods is most dominant. Same with the Tour de France and Lance. I bet, given that people wanted to watch Orienteering, they'd really love to watch a photgenic Sime crush the competition.

I personally get tired of Tiger, but anyway...

I like Orienteering, reading about it, watching it, but I don't know that I would like watching Micro-obe. It just accentuates the arcane aspects of the sport and diminishes the extreme running aspects of it, or other virtues like piutepro suggested - watching people fly around a picturesque downtown or hurtle themselves off cliffs like the French boyz.

I should note that Cruise was choosen as a supporting character several months ago, before the bear jumping liabilities were made known. But contracts are contracts, and I'm feeling the need for speed.

Mirco-O however, I'm not feeling the need for yet. But I'll wait till I see it. If the spectator aspect is as good as the Canadian Sprint showcase, it may be worth while.

Based on Sime's dominance of all disiplines, I don't see her flagging much, but how does this look to affect Tero's dominance of middle distance?

Is this the future of Micro-O? See picture.

There is an interesting set of thoughts on orienteering, TV-time, and micro-O on Jukka Inkeri's blog. Jukka is one of Kalevan Rasti's coaches (Tero's Finnish club). If you read the comments, you'll even find Tero's comment on micro-O: "IOF is getting crazy or what?"

Jukka is right on! I especially like this picture.

http://www.orientering.nu/ovrigt/humor/micro.html

Sometimes I feel like I've been in a Slump-Orienteering all my life.

I personally like the idea of Micr-O but given that my favourite race distance is middle I don't like them playing around with that distance (or any of the established race distances).

Maybe IOF should consider 'demonstration events' at WOC or WC events and introduce the concept of micr-O into yet another race distance. for example, they could rename what we call Sprint sprint as Short and introduce a very fast 'real sprint Micro-O' race of 5 minutes and with 5 micro-O controls.
Let each country enter one person to test it.

If micro is adopted in middle distance then North America needs to prepare for it. but I see that as being a lot of work as an organizer

I sometimes think that orienteering is a sport ran by clowns. They introduced the Short distance in WOC in 1995, then they took it away to make it a middle distance and introduced sprint with not much time to prepare for it. Now they are talking of changing the middle distance again, by adding a discipline that most of the world has not even tried yet, let alone understood.

I would love to see the face of Track and Field federations if next year at WOrld Champs they said there will be no more 100m, but there will be a new discipline to replace it: the 150m triple axel where you have to perform this complicated triple jump in the middle of your run and you will be judged and awarded points. That together with your time will be your score for the event. Good luck. Oh and also, just to make it more interesting, they wont' promise that the 1500m will be a real 1500m. It could be anywhere from 1200m to 1800m. YOu will find out when you run it. Keep that in mind when you plan your training...

Oh I love change.

Short started in 1991. But then they decided that it wasn't short enough, so they called it Middle and added Sprint. This was all part of a great plan that was carefully designed to get TV exposure and put orienteering into the Olympics. Seems to be working great. Surely all we need now is to add Trail-O to the Middle event, and we'll be all set. Oh, wait, that's happening next year. And nothing can be better than watching somebody do Trail-O, right?

Let's try a variant on M-C's comment. Next up: you have to dress as a clown when you run. I'm all set for that.

well put !!!

Perahps USOF and IOF could get together and bounce ideas off one another?

IOF meets the NHL. Sports run by clowns.

NHL wants a big US TV contract so they put lots of teams in the hot markets (!) like Phoenix, California, Florida and Nashville. Teams move from the hockey home land of the Peg and Quebec to the US. They have a TV company called Fox that wants to show the games. They introduce this revolutionary idea --> we''ll add colour to the on-screen puck: pass-blue...shoot-red era! Crikey! Fast forward (with a bit of hooking and clutch and grab) five years and the NHL loses its TV contracts with Fox and ABC (they would rather cover slam-ball and huntin' shows).

The moral of the story: The game changed and was not as good as it used to be and the risk backfired and the sport suffers a strike.

Will the Norwegians be interested in televising WOC from Ukraine? Hungary? Czech. I doubt it.

Another problematic aspect is the IOF<–>USOF<–>US Team<–>USOF clubs relationship. Now the Team has to go ask clubs to put on Micr-O so that the Team (the only ones to be interested, at first at least) can hold Trials and in general get prepared. It's already darn hard to find a Trials host, as simple requests such as a separate start window are sometimes perceived as too much extra work. I think someone should explain this aspect to the IOF, i.e. that this little idea of televising a minor sport's Championship in an extravagant format has ramifications for many practitioners thereof, not just the select elite fraction. How about we (Clare?) draft a letter saying something like "At this time USOF and member clubs' resources are insuffcient to support widespread introduction of the new competition format in the United States", which is pretty darn true, and send it up.

I put on a park meet for SLOC a few years on ago which was similar to the micro-O concept. I called it "Grab a Clue." At each circle were several controls and you had to determine from the clue which was the correct control. Scoring was by #correct with time as a tie-breaker.

The format was well received, so I wondered why this thread was so negative. Then I watched the video that Spike posted - now I get it. To be even remotely challenging to elite orienteers, the control selection problems have to be so subtle that the only thing a casual viewer picks up is that for some reason they've stopped running fast and look really confused.

Not a flattering image of our sport, and certainly a departure from what middle distance orienteering has traditionaly tested (running legs accurately at fairly high speed). Looks like IOF is trying to fix something that ain't broke.

In repsonse to Vlad's post, I could point out the obvious - SLOC has no intention of modifying the team trials for 2006. We'll do it if USOF says we have to, but we won't be happy about it and, while we have plenty of course setting talent for a good middle distance event (especially on a map as nice as Hawn), I have no idea who we would get to set a Micro-O course.

At this time there is no understanding whether micr-O will be used for the Middle qualifier or only for the Middle Final.

How about a passive-aggressive form of protest by having a Nano-O. All the controls for a particular "problem" are place effectively next to or on top of each other. And it doesn't matter which one you punch. Or, for the picky, the clues could include corridinates in centimeters for the correct control and everyone has to carry a ruler of some sort.

Of course, we still shoot the control with our pistols, but now a close range.

We're getting somewhere!

Eric, Don't worry. I have no plans to ask you to do any Micr-O at the 2006 Team Trials. Even if the WOC '06 Micr-O doesn't get complained away (and I'm with the vast majority (unanimity?) here who hope it does go away), I consider that way too much work to ask the Trials organizers to implement. A good Sprint, Middle & Long course for M & F 21 is perfectly adequate for the '06 Trials.

There are some Micr-O supporters in the EEC group.

Picture this. An e-punch mounted 10-feet in the air. Mikell Jordansson comes out of the forest, leaps from 12 feet away, BAM! Highlight reel baby!

SI Slam Punch competition in the break between the Sprint Qual and Finals. I've got the gold (and TV endorsements) wrapped up with this move

What's this shooting controls with pistols? I thought you Texans shot azimuths.

A better question, from a Texan's point of view, is why haven't we been shooting them up to now?

I do remember a score event in Texas once, with mystery controls, where instructions at the control marked on the map would lead you to the correct control to punch. From one such control, you could see five other control flags on the other side of a clearing. At the control marked on the map, there were instructions telling you the "azimuth" to "shoot" to get to the correct control.

The format was unpopular and never repeated.

If you have been following the discussion about micro-O I think you will be interested in the following press release about an even newer discipline to be introduced in 2007. You can view it here.

upnorthguy, you need another career in comedy or orienteering administration. That's outstanding. The 'keep it simple' section is pure genius. And nice to see you showing up on Attackpoint, by the way!

Yeah, that new discipline could give Martin Pardoe a full time job with his Monster-truck announcer extraordinaire talent. That's awesome.
I can't wait for the Nakedbutt-o version of it.

Here are some points to ponder.

1) Has it ever been confirmed that the changes we have made/may make to our sport do indeed result in more press coverage, more sponsorship or more interest from the public? For example, there are many sports, activities I am not really "into", and changes made to those sports would not change that. For example - I am not really into golf (please don't persecute me, it's just my example). Golf is a good example because I saw a piece on the tv just last week about how participation in golf is down, they think maybe because it takes too long, so some places are building 3-hole courses where you go and play a quick round at lunch. But the point is, they could make as many changes to golf as they want (or to sailing, cricket, tennis, whatever) and I would STILL not be into them. So do they think that all of a sudden people are going to say "Aha.. THAT's what's been missing in my life; I'm going to get into/start following that sport!" It ain't gonna happen!

2) I have not gone into the micro-O "guidelines" in detail, but have had a look - and one thing that strikes me is that many of the things they try to do (the 'problems' they try to present to the runner) are very dependent on having the right kind of terrain (i.e Scandinavian or at least with lots of detail). Would it have worked in Japan, or in not so detailed ridge/valley terrain? This 'requirement' would seem to go against the idea of wanting to spread O out to all the world.

3) I think other people have mentioned this elsewhere, but since when is the concept of having to do penalty loops even that exciting in the first place? I have watched a bit of biathlon over the years, and don't think such loops are "edge of the seat" exciting anyway - esp. if the biathlete is just sort of by him/herself without another skier or 2 right beside trying to pass... I think it is certainly more exciting simply seeing the skiers en mass out on the trail, tring to pass or drafting, possibly tripping up or whatever.

A few come to mind...
Softball (variation on baseball)
Sprint triathlon (variation on ironman)
Beach volleyball (nice!)
sprint orienteering (look at the number of races, participants, sponsorship, TV coverage, etc.--> it is a success).

click here

Interesting thoughts about Micro-O from Alistair Landels, New Zealand:
http://www.orientering.dk/forum/messages/45/45.sht...
(You find the post a few posts down in the forum)

The golf analogy is a good one. I gave up golf a couple years back because it just takes too much time. I first got into the sport playing a really nice par 3 course where 9 holes could be played in about 90 minutes. If there was a course like that around here, I might play it from time to time, but 5 hours for 18 is not an option.

My point is that subtle adjustments can help bring in people on the periphery of a sport. Radical changes risk alienating the base and will do nothing to bring in people who never saw anything in the sport to begin with.

Sprint orienteering is a sublte change - it's less technical and shorter, but it's still basically the same thing as any other point to point course. Micro-O is a radical change and from the sounds of it, it is alienating the base.

Please have a look at, and contribute to, the new FORUM on the Orienteering Today website. You get to read Thierry's view on this.

Perhaps this FORUM could become a good place to combine the various independent discussions happening on the various o sites around the world.

http://www.orienteeringtoday.com/

Upnorthguy is (unfortunately) not so far off. This was on the EEC-reference mail list yesterday. I am not making this up.

The role of the Foot-O Commission in the weeks before the Presidents Conference in Japan was that Council had asked for Foot-O's opinion on
the proposal for Micr-O in WOC 2006. The central sentence in our recommendation to Council is: "We believe the opportunity this concept
brings to our sport in relation to media exposure outweighs any concerns over the suitability of introducing Micr-O to WOC in 2006." The rest of
the recommendation outlines both opportunities and concerns.

I've never paid much attention to the IOF before, but this decision highlights some faults in its structure and processes.

Should there be restrictions on the process used to change World Champs formats (eg approval by a majority of national associations; adequate warning of meeting agendas, so that decision-makers have time to test public opinion before voting)? Should the IOF have the power to change formats for World Champs?

I also haven't found anywhere on the IOF website any announcement of its decision. Shouldn't minutes of all meetings be posted somewhere?

What are the different national associations planning to do to get the decision overturned? If they can't get the decision overturned, what can be done to change the IOF's processes so that such idiocies can't be repeated?

MW, the question should be: Should the IOF Council have the power to change formats for World Champs?

Vladimir should have posted the full post from the EEC reference list, as it delves into this issue. No matter how idiotic you think the decision is, the World Champs is an IOF event and the IOF certainly have the right to decide on what basis the event will be held.

The decision making processes in IOF include:

General Assembly - held every 2 years (next 2006)
Extraordinary General Assembly - held at the request of two thirds of Council or 40% of (full) members
Council - whose work, in part, includes "implement the resolutions of the General Assembly"

At the 2000 General Assembly, the Leibnitz Convention was agreed to by member nations, and that convention states (in part):

"It is of decisive importance to raise the profile of the sport ... The main vehicles to achieve this are: ... to make IOF events attractive for TV and Internet"

Again, no matter how stupid you might think the decision is, if you relate the decision to the Leibnitz Convention I think there is no point arguing that the Council either a) have no right to make the decision they did, or b) have made a decision contrary to the stated wishes of its members.

If many member federations feel the decision is wrong, then they have some options including:

1. getting 40% of member federations to call for an EGA (unlikely)
2. amend the Leibnitz Convention to clarify the direction given to Council
3. Put the broom through the Council at next year's Congress.

There are quite a few people on the Canadian o-squad list who seem highly non-plussed by the inclusion of Micr-O in WOC 2006.

However, we are working on our first Micr-O map here in Calgary, and hopefully will hold a Micr-O this fall before it gets too cold, and another next spring. If nothing else, it sounds like good training in precision map reading. (I actually like the idea of the format.)

Personally, I think it's reasonable for the IOF to introduce new disciplines, even if the intent is purely more exposure. But the principle of fairness should be respected...they should have allowed all athletes ample time to train for it, not just have a demo event in Scandinavia and then announce the event shortly before the winter season (for some people). And the rules should be published and understandable. (It wasn't in Bulletin 2 published today...are the almost unintelligible NOC 2005 rules and explanation being used? Even though they're in English, the response of everyone has been head-shaking.)

I suspect that any lobbying would probably be best focused toward ameliorating the problems, rather than scuttling, as I suspect that improvements (by the controller or organizers perhaps?) are more likely than cancellation at this point. It seems to me that a lot could be improved by:

1) Making Micr-O a separate event, and not changing the Middle at this late date.
2) Insisting on simple, clear rules, understandable to native speakers of English (as a first step) and to non-native speakers (if we're finding it baffling, how about people using babelfish and their tattered English dictionary?)

Anyway, my 2c.

It turned out that O-Biathlon already exists (although without shooting the controls from pick-ups)! The first World Championships was recently held in Norway: http://www.biou.no/

I think the IOF is right in wanting to include viewers/spectators into our sport but i do not think using micro-O in an event for the first time at the WOC's is a great idea. I agree that it should be tried out at a big meet but not as an event defining the best in the sport. It wouldn't be fair since not all country's have the man power to put up such a thing. I don't think it would be fair to the athletes having worked hard all year to achieve a great performance at the WOC to be tried out as gineapigs and risk a great performance.

Hehe, looking at the maps, it seems like the shooting part of O-Biathlon is not done during the O-race. Unfortunately, the website doesn't offer an explanation of the sport. :)

The "Read the Invitation" and "Read the Program" links in the upper right have good descriptions. The long event not only has shootin', but it features a route-o exercise to go with a standard course.

Roto route-o? That's the name?

Maybe these TV companies could convince the PGA to include 9 holes of mini-golf at the championships. Free ball if you sink the bullzeye on hole 9. Surely this would make golf more spectator friendly, instead of the boring, esoteric, and hard to videotape sport that it currently is.
(Seriously, those tournaments take 4 days, and who could ever videotape a 2 inch white projectile through the air?)

The way golf is presented now, it's only a matter of time before all those knolls and sandtraps are given up and reverted to the orienteering terrain they always should have been. Oh, wait....

Ben,

Those knolls and bunkers are given up more every day. But they're being turned into McMansions, not reverting to o-terrain.

The popularity of golf is going the way of tennis, with an interesting correlation to the rise of the power game. On the supply side, many of the golf courses that have been built in the last five to ten years (largely because of wishful pro formas and easy money from banks) are now struggling to stay afloat.

The operators and equipment manufacturers are doing what they can to attract new players. Every day, the club and ball makers are offering new ways to hit the ball farther and "make the game easier." For the tours, these changes in the equipment and accompanying reliance on marketing have made for a much less interesting game, imo. It views the golfer simply as a consumer and goes against the traditions of golf as a sport. (I think I'm on the wrong message board :) )

This stab at recognition from the WOC is interesting in that it makes me wonder who stands to gain. Is orienteering really that in need of television?

Hmmm. I don't follow golf much unless Phil is playing. But here in Oregon it seemed like new golf courses where popping up all over. Maybe that's just a regional thing, or I haven't noticed the new trend yet. Based on your address Eric, I assume you know the industry much better than me.

But my thought is really that golf does a good job of projecting its image. It wouldn't sell out blatantly with mini-golf, because it knows that history and tradition count for something. (Perhaps that is why Peter Jacobsen hosts a meet called the Jeld-Wen Tradition) It's certainly worked, since I can watch classic golf on the golf channel any day I want.

I don't golf much, but I enjoy watching it on TV because the competitions are well produced. You get background on the players, how they train, what the stakes are, and what techniques they use. The commentators build tension, explain the sport, and make you care.

As an English speaker I've never seen an orienteering broadcast, but the impression I get is that the production only rarely approaches that that quality. Everyone says "it was interesting to me but I'm an orienteer." I'm confident that a quality production with knowledgeable commentators could make orienteering interesting to everyone.

I have very little confidence in this deal because we have an IOF team willing to change the sport so carelessly, and a TV production team that thinks some experimental-o is more interesting than the real thing. From an outside perspective, this looks like a bunch of amateurs with very little idea what makes for interesting TV or quality competition.

As a mediocre orienteer of limited experiance, I may not be qualified to speak on this issue. But with the effort that NA orienteers exert just to maintain small clubs, it can be disappointing to see such apparent missteps on the highest level.

Oregon is a golf hot spot these days with Bandon and Bend booming. Nationwide, there are definitely courses still being built, but it's slowed remarkably.

As for orienteering, I'm a newbie and in golf terms about a 36 handicap. I love o though, and would definitely enjoy watching televised competition. The move toward micro-o seems wrongheaded, though.

Micro-O seems like the long drive contest of orienteering. Those guys are hitting golf balls, but they're not playing golf.