World of O News
Helena Jansson decided the first official World Cup Sprint Relay by taking the best route choices on the longer legs in a tight Sprint Relay at the Fortress in Halden.
Five teams were out in the lead on the last leg: Three from Switzerland and two from Sweden. Sweden 1 and Sweden 2 got a gap to the three Swiss teams on the leg to the second control by taking the leftmost routechoice (see map extract above). Wyder lost a lot of time by not coming down the cliff on the direct route. In the interviews below you can hear how Jansson decided for Sweden by taking her own choices – and how Wyder never managed to get down the steep part and lost nearly a minute.
Lillian Forsgren, William Lind, Jonas Lenadersson and Helena Jansson ran on the Swedish winner team.
Denmark’s Emma Klingenberg ran a good last leg and ran Denmark up to second – Maja Alm, Tue Lassen and Søren Bobach ran the first three legs for Denmark. Wyder run very well on the last part of the leg and ran Switzerland up to a third place.
Results (official – one team from each country)
| 1 | Sweden 1 | 59:46 | |||||||
| 1. Lilian Forsgren | 15:41 | 3 | +0:02 | 15:41 | 3 | +0:02 | |||
| 2. William Lind | 14:52 | 4 | +0:32 | 30:33 | 2 | -1 | +0:01 | -23:59:59 | |
| 3. Jonas Leandersson | 14:12 | 2 | +0:07 | 44:45 | 2 | 0 | +0:03 | +0:02 | |
| 4. Helena Jansson | 15:01 | 2 | +1:06 | 59:46 | 1 | -1 | -23:59:57 | ||
| 2 | Denmark 1 | 1:00:07 | +0:21 | ||||||
| 1. Maja Alm | 15:39 | 1 | 15:39 | 1 | |||||
| 2. Tue Lassen | 15:11 | 11 | +0:51 | 30:50 | 4 | +3 | +0:18 | +0:18 | |
| 3. Soren Bobach | 15:22 | 12 | +1:17 | 46:12 | 9 | +5 | +1:30 | +1:12 | |
| 4. Emma Klingenberg | 13:55 | 1 | 1:00:07 | 2 | -7 | +0:21 | |||
| 3 | Switzerland 1 | 1:00:09 | +0:23 | ||||||
| 1. Rahel Friederich | 15:39 | 1 | 15:39 | 1 | |||||
| 2. Martin Hubmann | 14:58 | 7 | +0:38 | 30:37 | 3 | +2 | +0:05 | +0:05 | |
| 3. Matthias Kyburz | 14:05 | 1 | 44:42 | 1 | -2 | ||||
| 4. Judith Wyder | 15:27 | 6 | +1:32 | 1:00:09 | 3 | +2 | +0:23 | +0:23 | |
| 4 | Finland 1 | 1:00:28 | +0:42 | ||||||
| 1. Jenny Patana | 15:49 | 5 | +0:10 | 15:49 | 5 | +0:10 | |||
| 2. Marten B Bostrom | 14:43 | 3 | +0:23 | 30:32 | 1 | -4 | -23:59:50 | ||
| 3. Severi Kymalainen | 14:55 | 7 | +0:50 | 45:27 | 3 | +2 | +0:45 | +0:45 | |
| 4. Merja Rantanen | 15:01 | 2 | +1:06 | 1:00:28 | 4 | +1 | +0:42 | -23:59:57 | |
| 5 | United Kingdom 1 | 1:01:17 | +1:31 | ||||||
| 1. Hollie Orr | 15:57 | 8 | +0:18 | 15:57 | 8 | +0:18 | |||
| 2. Murray Strain | 15:05 | 9 | +0:45 | 31:02 | 5 | -3 | +0:30 | +0:12 | |
| 3. Kristian Jones | 15:03 | 8 | +0:58 | 46:05 | 6 | +1 | +1:23 | +0:53 | |
| 4. Catherine Taylor | 15:12 | 4 | +1:17 | 1:01:17 | 5 | -1 | +1:31 | +0:08 | |
| 6 | Czech Republic 1 | 1:01:25 | +1:39 | ||||||
| 1. Eva Kabathova | 16:46 | 13 | +1:07 | 16:46 | 13 | +1:07 | |||
| 2. Jan Prochazka | 14:36 | 2 | +0:16 | 31:22 | 10 | -3 | +0:50 | -23:59:43 | |
| 3. Jan Sedivy | 14:42 | 3 | +0:37 | 46:04 | 5 | -5 | +1:22 | +0:32 | |
| 4. Jana Knapova | 15:21 | 5 | +1:26 | 1:01:25 | 6 | +1 | +1:39 | +0:17 |
Results (all teams)
| 1 | Sweden lag 1 | 59:46 | 00:00 | 15:01 | |
| 2 | Denmark lag 1 | 01:00:07 | 00:21 | 13:55 | |
| 3 | Switzerland lag 1 | 01:00:09 | 00:23 | 15:27 | |
| 4 | Switzerland lag 2 | 01:00:17 | 00:31 | 15:14 | |
| 5 | Sweden lag 2 | 01:00:22 | 00:36 | 15:40 | |
| 6 | Switzerland lag 3 | 01:00:26 | 00:40 | 15:23 |
Maps
2015 Sprintrelay leg 1
» See map in omaps.worldofo.com
2015 Sprintrelay leg 4
» See map in omaps.worldofo.com
2015 Sprintrelay leg 2
» See map in omaps.worldofo.com
2015 Sprintrelay leg 3
» See map in omaps.worldofo.com
I don’t understand the reason to make forest relay instead of normal sprint relay. Big disappointment.
Organization both days were really good.
What is “normal”? Are there any “rules” for this? Could not find anything in the IOF regulations.
Anyway, you find the same teams on the podium anyway …
Not same – check WOC-2014
WOC 2014: 1. SUI, 2: DEN, 3. RUS, 4: SWE
Today: RUS did not make it, but hey- give me a break… it is the same teams up there!!
J. Wyder lost 1 minute trying to find the way down – in my opinion this is not normal for Sprint relay. Runners got a lot of scratches – thats not OK as well (it should be clear information – e.g., ‘clothes covered full body are recommended’).
It’s called orienteering for a reason: The aim is to navigate in sequence between a set of control points and decide the best route to complete the course in the quickest time!
But I agree (seeing the pictures): Information about clothes covering full body should have been given.
In Appendix 6 to IOF competitions rules 2015 written that Sprint Relay must provide “Very high speed”. It is impossible to fit this requirement with bushes, cliffs, high grass. Then about terrain: “Predominantly in very runnable park or urban (streets/buildings) terrain” Thats a clear message. Isn it?
Possibly, yes.
Personally I like this type of sprint. “Real orienteering” and deciding route choices.
Would be interesting to hear other opinions.
I am not against forest relays, and I am not against forest sprint. But there are clear IOF recommendations about ‘high speed, urban terrain’ and so on. And it is different ways to be prepared for successful forest sprint and urban sprint (or Sprint Relay). On this terrain it was possible to make ‘normal’ very high speed Sprint Relay. But instead of this course setter decided to use greens, rocks jumping, tricky surface, dangerous running down, etc.
Vinogradov Mike>> “But instead of this course setter decided to use greens, rocks jumping, tricky surface, dangerous running down, etc.”
For me – that’s orienteering! Personally I think it is much better with natural obstacles compared to all these artificial fences they have started to build in urban sprints.
But I belong to the “old school” I guess … :)