Comments on: Separate Sprint and Forest WOCs: The way to go?

By: Lacho

Lacho — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:28:58 +0000

Nice discussion Jan! IF WOC program shall be changed it must be done step by step. Setting up few new disciplines that has not been tested enough might create lots of difficulties for both the organizers and the runners. So… the current 4 medal disciplines are well known and with a tradition. As a beginning the long distance Q is the race that can be replaced with another medal discipline. The Long F nations quota and start list can be determine by some other rules (WRE points, nations positions, etc.) The long final is definitely not a discipline for an IOF new-coming country.

The o-sport is developing and especially with TV- and GPS-coverage some new demands are coming. Having a mass-start (with loops or any other splitting) can give a chance for more nations to participate and it will be easier for TV –production, also the GPS-coverage can start simultaneously with the mass-start. Of course the big problem with the loops will be the fairness and equal length. Having the race with a fight arm-to-arm till the very end is more interesting to follow rather than the 6-hours Long F WOC 2011 (exception is the women race where first control was very challenging).

If WOC program has 6-7 medal discipline in the future – it is not necessary that all runners shall run everything! Isn’t it like that in sports as ski-cross country, biathlon, athletics?!?!

At the bottom of the line… if IOF does not collect the WOC sanction fee then it will be much easier for the organizers to maintain a high level of TV production. Then more nations will apply for organizing WOC in the future.

By: Hugh

Hugh — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 19:45:36 +0000

Maybe one day this Orient’Show (I’d like to call it Ultra-Sprint) can develop into a formal discipline just like Sprint did a decade ago and included in the Sprint-WOC. It takes time and someone to take the first step, just like PWT did…
Knockout Sprint is a good start in new direction toward media-friendly. I think Ultra-Sprint would be the solution of this direction. Imagine an orienteering race in a stadium with man-made-features showing sponsors logos, easy understanding race format, media coverage on every action of the runners, spectators…most importantly the small & undeveloped nations can train up top runners for this discipline without travelling to Europe and making lots of maps. They only need a football field and fast runners to win a WOC. It helps IOF breaking the “Europe Greenhouse”.

By: jj

jj — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:54:42 +0000

i totally agree !

By: Samo

Samo — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:50:59 +0000

Great thoughts Jan. Strategy, planning, activity plan and follow up are something that IOF do but not in sufficient details. It would be great to have (to read) analysis of specific IOF goals but I suspect that IOF administration don’t do that. So we can’t speak about that based on facts, because even IOF officials probably don’t know insight of the problems of each goal.

I was disappointed when I read Analysis of IOF Strategic Directions for 2006-2012 because this is not analysis. This is more or less just a political paper. Like you said: “Until now I have not seen a good formulation of the goals (just something general…)”

From http://www.orientering.se/ImageVault/Images/id_10565/scope_0/ImageVaultHandler.aspx
Key Goals: The IOF Council has not yet specified key goals.

We will probably get them on time but HEY do we really need such analysis and papers without to know the facts first and backed with good insight detail analysis. We should trust to the elected people that they know what they are doing but after the Strategic Directions 2006-2012 paper I don’t trust them anymore that they can materialized strategy and goals in reality. I don’t want to be rude but I think that they need to answers on o-community questions if they want to get support for their vision and “hidden key goals”.