Here's a letter I've sent to Sandy Fillebrown, the Meet Director of the upcoming US Champs:

Sandy,

In filling out the entry form and going over the US Championship meet information the other day, I saw that the plan is to segregate the world ranking event runners from the rest of the start field. I have a comment to make about this.

Isn't this is a case of the tail wagging the dog? This is our so-called "Classic" championship, and it deserves the name, as it is older by far than any of our other championship events. I'm sure many, if not most, of our US orienteers view this as the most prestigious event we have for that very reason, it being the event of the richest tradition.

I do happen to think there ought to be some sort of segregation of competitors, but not the one being proposed. Since this is, in fact, our individual championship, and since it is not an open championship (you have to be a citizen or green card holder to win the titles), if any segregation is going to occur, eligible runners and non-eligible runners should be separated from each other, and not WRE runners and non-WRE runners. By lumping all the WRE runners together, you significantly increase the chances that non-eligible runners could influence the US Championship results in a non-random way, and some might see--justifiably, in my opinion--see this as unfair. There are many, many world ranking events, but there is only one US Classic Championship. It's clear which is more important for US orienteering, nevermind that there aren't any US runners (as far as I'm aware) who will have enough WRE's to even get a ranking!

Sincerely, Mikell Platt

-- Swampfox (wmikell@earthlink.net), October 13, 2000

Answers

Far be it for me to downplay the US Classic Chumps as a trivial affair, but when you put it side-by-side with the State Chumps, Quantrill's, an OK training camp, or one of OK's top-notch A-meets, it does tend to pale in comparison.

That being said, I'm not sure that segregation or no segregation will be important. You'll have fields that are similar in either case. I don't expect this WRE will draw an international presence, however, I do think that there are plenty of orienteers in the US who would think nothing of cheating to ... well, whatever... boost their ego or something.

Actually, come to think of it, there probably aren't really all that many orienteers who would cheat, but there are a few... not that I interpret Swampfox's use of the term "influence" to mean "cheat" or anything...(to be honest, I do interpret it this way since Swampfox tends to use "code words" when describing "sensitive" matters)... anyway, perhaps I've rambled on a bit here (boosting my Forum stats and my ego I suppose... not).

I bet there won't be many people who opt to NOT run in the WRE... but there might be one or two! If you want to run alongside a friend (whether eligible or not), just agree to run outside the WRE... you might be the only two there and then you can join up at the first control.

If DVOA ever gets around to publishing the full results with split times (and, as a betting man, I don't plan to put money on this happening), it would be interesting to see who's naughty and who's nice.

-- Mook (everett@psi.edu), October 13, 2000.

I tend to agree with Mikell on this. I thought long and hard (well, 5 minutes or so) before deciding to actually "compete" in the WRE. In the end, what swayed me was the thought that everyone else would be and they could be helped by having the other WRE runners in the forest at the same time. For the women (men too but I speak only for the women), there are several good Canadians who likely will be in attendance and they could indeed offer some inadvertent help.

Having now run in 2 or 3 WREs, I can state definitively that for women a WRE in North America is a waste of time. The first, held in OCIN land last year, didn't have enough ranked women to earn rankings for any of us who ran. The one at the Canadians also won't count, even if Hanne Staff had finished, for the same reason. I understand why we keep trying, but really, Mikell's point is so true, that we're essentially screwing up the most meaningful elite race in the country for something that probably won't even count in the end. What a shame.

-- Peggy (Pdickison@aol.com), October 15, 2000.

This is more of an issue on the women's side than it is on the men's. There's not really any disincentive to participate in the WRE if you're running the course, since there's no additional charge or anything like that. (I'm led to believe that your national federation has to attest to the fact that you're an "elite" runner, but I don't particularly expect that this issue will come into play.) So unless you enter late (and miss the WRE cutoff), you're almost certainly in the WRE. Late entrants will all start at the end of the window or something, and that's fine. This is an issue on Red, though. There are likely some veteran men's categories that share the course with F21, and they'll be started in a separate time block. No issue there, I wouldn't think.

I do agree with those of you who think the whole thing is a crock, though. "Ooh, World Ranking Events, sounds important, we gotta have some of those!" Baloney. They aren't going to count for anything, because it's unlikely we'll get enough ranked Europeans showing up anytime soon. And even those Americans and Canadians who have rankings aren't meaningful, since they're rankings based on too few races, and thus are lower than they really should be. It's an awful lot of hassle for nothing. I'm involved peripherally with the HVO event the week before, and it's just added headaches, for no benefit whatsoever that I can discern.

Some people think it's important. "What if they start using world rankings to determine how many spots each country gets in World Cup races?" Having too few World Cup slots is not our problem, of course.

Wanna bet that after these races, we hear mostly self-congratulation about how cool it is that we put on WREs?

-- J-J (jjcote@juno.com), October 16, 2000.

I'm sure it won't have escaped anyone's attention at this point that while Mr. Swampfox is in fact registered for the US Champs, he is not on the WRE list! Is it only a protest or is it a stealthy move to gain an advantage over the entire WRE field? Soon we'll know for sure!

As for Snorkel, few even thought he would have a go at the blue course this year, but he was recently heard to say "I don't need no stinkin' red course!" Perhaps he has plans to link up with his old bud Swampfox outside the WRE startlist and lay on a pace that makes grown men cry and women run screaming into the hills. It is said that Snorkel is in the best shape of his life (better than even that fateful '85 championship season). It would be quite something to see him run away with the top honors!

-- Mook (everett@psi.edu), October 19, 2000.

I should add that I got a prompt answer back from Sandy, the gist of which was that having decided to have the WRE, their hands are tied and they have to comply with the applicable WRE rules--perfectly understandable. She also added there were some extra hassles associated with organizing the WRE. I'm not sure why a host (US) club would choose to have a WRE, especially given that it's not going to result in any US runners getting ranked. But perhaps there are good reasons to do so. Regardless, it is still my view that WRE rules should not dictate how we conduct our various US Championships. Any other meet, no problem. But not the Championships.

-- Swampfox (wmikell@earthlink.net), October 20, 2000.

Let's leave rumour mongering on 'SUP and not taint the OK forum with gibberish.

-- Snorkel (danielmeenehan@aol.com), October 21, 2000.