Discussion: IOF General Assembly

Interesting reporting via https://twitter.com/WorldofOLive/ , though their battery just died.

"DEN: Which of the goals is the support of provisional members pointing at? Answer: More taking part in WOC. #IOFGA"

Though it seems there is a small budget for travel to the provos to support them.

I don't understand this "More taking part in WOC goal" which the IOF seems to have. A far far better goal would be: "More countries at a level to be competitive at WOC." Lowering WOC standards so more countries can compete seems counter productive. Who benefits from athletes from exotic countries taking 4 hours on the long?

@kofols, oops sorry... ;-) @ Canadian. Human nature and the beauty of sport benefits. One of the most touching moments at the Winter Olympics was this.

http://www.businessinsider.com/dario-cologna-peru-...

how do you define exotic? what percent behind the winner, 100%, 200%... 25%?

That'd be, like, 700% eh Brazil ;-)

or what about this?
http://www.kuna.net.kw/ArticleDetails.aspx?id=2386...

wait what? Canada is the reigning world Champion in U19 American Football !!

But what is the balance, the cut-off point? Sure the thing with the Puruvian skier was 'touching', but how many Swedes, Norwegians, Canadians et al national team members were watching and thinking "I'm better than that; how come I can't go?"

WRE points are the only objective standard we have today. Not very reliable and correct but if we need a new one to define "exotic" I'd say that time behind is the only measure we need to follow. Who would know better how to calculate this than IOF :)

It would be interesting to compare times with long finals from 80s/90s when countries like us have 1 runner in final. Back then we were at 60-80% behind and now we are 25-40% behind.

wait what? Canada is the reigning world Champion in U19 American Football !!

They play American Football in Kuwait, Austria, and France?!?!

The International Federation of American Football has member federations in 64 countries.

how many Swedes, Norwegians, Canadians et al national team members were watching and thinking "I'm better than that; how come I can't go?"

I hate that argument. You go to represent your country, so you have to be the best from your country.

You go to represent your country, so you have to be the best from your country

But you should be required to meet a base standard of performance.

How is the scenario of world championships race with leading athletes finishing while bunch of other participants still fumble through the first quarter of the course, helping to promote serious sport acceptance. Its funnier even than Germany-Brazil football match....

That's fair enough, but that's a different argument.

As long as the world champion is unequivocally the best in the world, does it matter that the median runner or the final official finisher in a world champs final would be beaten by lots more folks if anyone could enter? I guess not, but it subtly alters the bragging rights for most people who aren't winning medals.

@jman
But it matters, otherwise I don't know why IOF doesn't allow in their rules more "median runner" to run at World Games. World Games want to be event for the best so IOF set rules to find the best who can enter the event. WOC should have the same status. I guess this would not effect IOC Olympic key goals.

Games is games, WOC is WOC. Only one has real status.

And then there is the "Divisions" - which add a twist in that even the weaker countries have something to aim for.

Perhaps a "Division 4" could be introduced with 0 runners in the Long, 1 in the Middle, 1 in the Sprint.

You could certainly have an event that only involves the best people in the world, with a threshold for entry, to allow all the best people to have their "fair" chance at winning the race. If that were the only goal, then we would have far fewer countries at WOC. There are plenty of races where everyone can compete and try their mettle against the best.

The Olympics and WOC and other such events are aiming at international competition, international relations, and expanding sports to countries who are not the best at those sports. That is the "World" part of WOC.

You can't do both at once. By trying to do lean too much toward including all the awesome Scandinavians, you are compromising the international part.

Really, what harm from taking 4 hours on the Long? Not seeing it. Don't really think people outside our sport are watching and laughing. On the other hand, there is clear benefit; the athlete experiences the high level of competition; supporters in their country think about how to improve their program; the coach attends WOC and talks to other coaches to learn about how to improve; maybe a fire gets lit.

@barb you expressed so much better what I had tried to express earlier, but decided to delete as it did not sound as good. I also like AZ's "that even the weaker countries have something to aim for."
And there is always the World Cup, where I don't think there is a country based limit, I may be wrong. Does the WOC even count in the WRE? That is the only thing where someone could say "if I had the chance to run in that I would have more....", but otherwise it does not hurt anyone below the medal ranks to not have been in the competition.

Also agree completely with Barb.

(@andreais, there is a quota for WC events but not as tight as WOC. And, not only do WOC events earn WRE points, but they can be a way to earn more points because the winner is assigned a higher value than they coudl get in any other event. This, however, is a problem with the WRE system, not with WOC.)

@barb. Exactly right. The bigger picture is increased participation and we dont do that by excluding nations from the World Champs because they are not good enough.

Orienteering is a unique sport, and known for its inclusiveness. I'm all in favour of every country being able to have at least one participant.

On another tack - how many athletes competed in every discipline at WOC 2014? I know of one - Hanny Allston. She wasn't scheduled to run the Middle but did so because our selected runner was ill.

Ali Crocker ran all disciplines (sprint Q, sprint relay, middle, long, relay) for the U.S. She didn't run in the Sprint Final.

Iliana Ilieva ran everything except the relay (Bulgaria did not field a team).

Due reckon any of those three could have performed better if they didn't run everything?
Not run sprints, get an extra 5/10 places in Middle/Long? Extra points, extra places for the national team....

Surely a good relay run is difficult to achieve after an abusive Long Distance on an already depleted body from previous races.