Discussion: 2005 Championship event schedule conflicts

August 2-3: North American Rogaining Championships, Kamloops, BC
August 5: US Night Orienteering Championships, Lake George, CO
August 6: US Relay Orienteering Championships, Lake George, CO
August 3: World Orienteering Championships, Japan -- arrival of teams
August 7: World Orienteering Championships, Japan -- middle distance qualification race

This sort of scheduling is counter to the goal of having the top athletes both competing at national championships and representing their countries at the World Orienteering Championships. I support this goal, so I would like to see more care taken by organizers to avoid such conflicts.

I'm curious what others--both organizers and prospective participants--think about this.

I have to second Eric. I am very unhappy about this, but of course, if suitable alternatives could not be found, I can understand why these choices were made...

I can second Eric as well, but I can't second Boris, because I am upset not unhappy about this an under no circumstance, I can't understand why these choices were made.This is total disconsideration from USOF part in regard to the best orienteers in the country, who will represent US and USOF at the Worlds, but I am sure that part if not all of them they prepared or will prepare to participate in the events that conflict with WOC.This is just unacceptableand shows how much USOF is interested to suport elite orienteering.

And if anyone has info, on how this happened and who aproved this scheduale,would be usefull to know, maybe we can atract someone who was involved with his/ their thoughts in this discution.

If you think about it, the rogaine championships scheduling is much less of an issue than the relay championships scheduling. You can't be trained to run at WOC and also to run a rogaine at the same time; some specificity is required. The Night-O championships is also less of an issue - it's an important race but not many people on the US team train specifically for it, so I don't think there should be too many complaints. The relay championships, on the other hand, is one of USOF's flagship events. I would also be curious to know how that was approved to be held at the same time as the WOC. I am not privy to the negotiations but looking at the note from Paul Regan to the sanctioning committee , it appears that no other bids were made. In that case presumably the sanctioning committee wasn't advised about the conflict with the WOC, and the organisers may not have been aware either. Without input from the US team in the sanctioning process, it's not actually clear this wasn't inevitable.

There were no other bids for the Night-O Champs or the Relay Champs and no club had even expressed any interest in them. While it's unfortunate that these events are being held at the same time as WOC this year, what other alternative was there? Not have them at all? Don't award them to RMOC and hope another club stepped forward at the last minute? I don't see either of those as better alternatives.

Unfortunately the system failed this time. Making 1 year up front call to USOF clubs to bid for Champs might prompt clubs to plan accordingly. Some years we have clubs fighting for prime events - some years we have none interested. Unfortunately we didn't finalize PNWOF plans late in the game - otherwise we might bid for the relay champs as being part of the PNWOF next year.

Add one more event to the list:
Jul 22-30: World Masters O Championships, Alberta.
There's a rumor that if RMOC scheduled the 5-day right after WMOC, a very large O tour group would head down to CO after WMOC, which is a likely explanation for the scheduling of the 5-day.

It was pointed out to the USOF BOD by David Irving that there was a conflict with WOC:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/usof-bod/message/142...
>For Board information, the proposed dates for the Night-O and Relay Champs (5 and 6 August) will conflict with the dates for the WOC (and WTOC) in Japan which are the 7-14th of August.

It is not realy about specifity of training or interes here, altough with proper schedualing the specifity of training can be adressed and on the other hand at this point not to manny US orienteers (if any) do any proper specific training for any given specific event and on the other hand the interes has increased from what I can see over the past few years, both for rogaine and night-o national champs, with or without specific training.

The fact that this was a conflict for our elites was discussed at the Board meeting where the Relay and Night Championships were approved. This Championship was bid for very late and we only got the bid by asking for it after RMOC was denied the US Champs. Otherwise, we wouldn't have a Relay at all.

How late do you suggest the board wait hoping to get a non-conflicting bid? What do you suggest we do to get clubs to bid for these events at non-conflicting times?

Sergey wrote:


Although we didn't do this for 2005, I have done it for 2006. We asked clubs interested in Interscholastics or Intercollegiates to bid prior to the last Board meeting, and anyone interested in other championships to have their bids to sanctioning by November 1. The Interscholastics was awarded, but I still haven't seen a bid for the Intercollegiates. I think there may be a few sanctioning apps languishing in Paul's inbox, but based on info from Sandy, I think the only Champs bid for 2006 is from EMPO bidding for Long and Short Champs.

So now what? Cancel the other champs for lack of a prompt bid?

I'm open to suggestions, but we are very much at the mercy of the clubs. It is much more common for USOF to go begging for Championship bids, than for clubs to be competing for them.

Clare

My Sergey quote disappeared. it was about asking for bids a year in advance.

With regard to Clare's note about the Intercollegiate Champs, NEOC is working on a bid for the 2006 ICs, which we plan to hold in Sturbridge, MA on April 8-9. We've lined up mappers, course setters, registrar, vetter, medical staff, and verbal permission so far. After the holidays I'll figure out the rest of the key positions (start and finish chiefs) and finalize our permission.

The 2005 ICs will be in St. Louis. Anyone interested in taking on 2007?

As long as we're on the subject (sort of), let me put in another plea for input for my "planning" page:
http://www.sju.edu/~sfillebr/OrienteeringRogaineEv...

The info on the page is only as good as the info that gets routed my way.

May be in absence of active bidding for a Championship event USOF can jump to Plan #2 and start asking specific clubs with big enough pool of maps and meet stuff? From being passive to being pro-active. This is last resort that should be done at least 6 month in advance (or more?).

How about the following procedure:
1. Call to USOF clubs to bid for Championship events (2 years to 1 year in advance).
2. Repeat call if no bidders (1 year to 1/2 year in advance).
3. Approach biggest clubs and associations 6 month in advance if no reaction to ##1 and 2.

This process should be transparent with bidders (and area info) published (ex. USOF web site and ONA).

I believe that USOF should work on something that it would alow it to organize a weekend of championships when there are no timely bids from the clubs with volunteers and maps bought from clubs if necesary.On the other hand Sergey's proposing procedure might be a good option as well.And Clare to be fair, yes we should not have a Championship the year we can not provide a scheduale to accomodate all the prospective participants especialy when they might be the possible US champs.

Sergey's proposing procedure is the way things have been done since I've been orienteering and it's the way things will always be done. There is no other way to do them. There has always been a call for bids a couple of years in advance, there are always repeated calls for bids to championships that go unclaimed initially. And clubs have been approached by "USOF" (sometimes officers, other times just interested members with an idea) to fill in gaps that otherwise were going unfilled.

I'm not sure how this addresses the problem of the original conflict. If I remember correctly, at the time of the board meeting (held at the US Champs in Oct) none of the other A-meet rumors existed. I don't think it would have been reasonable to deny the bids to RMOC when there were no other A-meets even rumored to be available as an alternative. There wasn't anything else for the board to do.

I completely disagree with Mihai's belief that this conflict demonstrates a lack of support for elite orienteers. The only thing this shows was a lack of alternatives for holding the meets in question.

Unfortunately one very important element is mising with current procedures. I didn't see anywhere published calls to bid for 2005, 2006, and 2007 Championship events (periodic calls even better). I didn't see anywhere published information who bid for what and how many clubs are in line for a particular event. Just this may prompt clubs to be more proactive. USOF has means at disposal to publish such as USOF Web site, ONA, and USOF email list.