Aye, broke the speed limit descending, and crossed the finish line (a few yards ahead of the final winner) without the required kit for this AS fell race, as posted at registration (windproof body cover).
Printable View
Aye, broke the speed limit descending, and crossed the finish line (a few yards ahead of the final winner) without the required kit for this AS fell race, as posted at registration (windproof body cover).
Is that upper body, does it include arms and head? We need more clarity OB1!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by OB1
Pass, "windproof body cover" was what the sign said at registration, that's all WP! It has been a cool, blowy, and overcast day, with the furthest point of the course being at 600m high and on the edge of Bleaklow, an hour's 'hobble' from nearest civilisation. Even marshalling at just 150m in 3 layers and hat my hands were cold after <1 hour and went firmly into pockets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
He ran in vest & shorts with no kit. The weather on top was really windy. The marshal's where well wrapped up & huddled behind the rocks.
We have now agreed new FRA Safety Requirements for Fell Races and Rules for Competition. See http://fellrunner.org.uk/ They will be included in the 2014 calendar and all races which have an FRA permit will be expected to use them from 1st January onwards. We will set up some sessions to explain to race organisers and to runners what they mean and why we have the rules.
I rarely come on here, but heard tonight that these new rules had been ratified so thought I'd tale a look at what people have been saying, and I'm not surprised at what what I've been reading.
My personal view is that it is a sad day for fellrunning. It has accelerated the sport down the road of risk averse bureaucracy where the blame culture is king.
I predict large scale breaches of the rules by both competitors and organisers alike.
This weekend the Peris Horseshoe is taking place, and if this year's runners were to run in 2014 whilst carrying the same kit then they would be disqualified if found out.
Of course they won't be found out as the race organiser couldn't check them all even if he wanted to.
How many of these of this weekend's runners are going to rush out and replace their leg and body kit for medium and long races?! I certainly won't.
Fellrunning is supposed to be a simple sport with few rules, and slightly anti-establishment. It's now a simple sport with more rules than is needed, and becoming more 'establishment'.
Looking forward to some bare chested racing with recycled numbers pinned to my shorts. Sun on my back, loving it.
Craig.
Absolutely, back to basics please.
My concern is that I believe the new rules set out a set of standards that we cant realistically adhere to on all occasions. Therefore if and when something occurs in the future the actions of all involved and particularly the RO will be judged in hindsight against these standards. I like a lot of the clarification over kit and personal responsibility but I would have preferred the FRA as the governing body to take a stand and clearly and publicly accept that the rules are at least in part, aspirational guidelines that the it accepts and expects can not be met on all occasions.
Am I being a bit dim, but under the new rules if you're doing a long A or B race or a medium A race you're expected to carry full waterproof kit. What's the big problem (apart from defining "waterproof")? If the RO wants you to carry a phone, a bivvy bag or a fridge you carry it or DNQ. What's so hard about that? What's "aspirational" about having a rule which makes people carry waterproof kit on long races in the British fells?
Why can they not be met on all occasions?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
Because many long A, B or a medium A races don't really require kit especially in the Peak District when you you are often close to a road and there are probably many medium B races that should require kit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mole
I would much prefer if the RO was trusted to make the judgement and would NEVER quible with whatever they said as it is their race and their rules.
Strange comment about the Peris.. Mike does a kit check at the gate in the car park.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
Nothing has changed that much, organisers have specified waterproofs before.
But Mark whats actually changed? There's more rules for organisers, but for the runner, doing a long?
I think Craig is incomprehendably suggesting that runners won't have waterproofs.. the rules haven't changed for runners really, previously RO's could and did specifiy waterproofs, taped seems etc...
For RO's it looks a pain in the arse to be honest, the guidance may be more helpful for some races than others, but for the general runner its basically as you were..
I think the point re guidelines is good, because for the small, traily evening races I don't see why a topless run, recycled numbers is really required.
Not surprising given the present climate and recent incidents.
Runners have 2 choices.
1. Enter an Fra sanctioned race and comply with the new rules.
2. Don't run Fra races and enter BOFRA or other non Fra races.
Race Organisers have choices also.
1. Agree to implement the new rules and have your event Fra sanctioned.
2. Decide you don't like the new rules and don't want to implement them. Have your race under your own rules and don't get Fra approval
I suspect most RO organise their races these days under Fra rules primarily for the insurance, UKA affiliated clubs though have exactly the same insurance. There is no real need these days to advertise a race in the Fra calendar, there are lots of other places online and otherwise to advertise.
For most RO though most of the new rules should help especially with a tightening up of the rules regarding numbers which has caused lots discussion on this forum.
As for Waterproof as opposed to Windproof we all know as runners that there is no such thing as Waterproof, half an hour or less of running in the most expensive Waterproof kit and you
are wet through ( inside ) Breathable, rubbish, might be ok for walking or less energetic activities but for fell running forget it. If you have a mishap and are stationary or moving slowly a Waterproof jacket rather than a Windproof one might offer a minimum amount of extra protection. Gonna have to get bigger bum bags though as the bulk will be increased considerably.
Why increased? we had to carry this gear for most races previously anyway?
To clarify my concern isn't about what I'm asked to carry, thats been done to death and I think most of us agree that if the RO asks for it we'll take it - its more about things like mountain rescue on 'standby' (whatever that means) and in particular race monitoring. This is largely due to communications and last minute changes. I dont realistically expect marshals who might have left for their CP a few hours before race start to necessarily be able to know on every occasion how many runners start, never mind how many to expect through their checkpoint half way round a long race. Nor do I believe they will always be in a position to update race control in a timely way if someone is overdue - (assuming they know someone is overdue because they know how many to expect). In an ideal world they will have good comms to and from race control, will have this info and be able to act as intended. In the real world I doubt this will always be possible but in the event of an incident the RO is likely to be judged on the basis that it should be. I appreciate the rules suggest moving CPs etc to assist in achieving this but I still think it will not be achievable on every occasion and therefore I personally would like the rules to reflect that more strongly than I believe they do in the document.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
As a runner rather than a RO then I agree it doesn't directly affect me too much - unless ROs start to feel that they can no longer justify holding some of their races. But ROs obviously deserve our support and I hope that by highlighting my concerns about some of the difficulties I anticipate are likely to occur I am doing that - unless all the ROs out there are entirely happy that they are going to be able to comply with the rules in which case I'll shut up.
Its more all this about having to carry more.. if you are an experienced fell runner, who all will be who do the peris, you will already have a waterproof etc...
A pre-requisite for the Peris was other L's wasn't it, so in them you are asked to carry waterpoofs.. edale... Jura...
Iain....Montane Featherlite ( Windproof ) top and bottoms fit nicely into one of the inov8 bum bags, don't bulk up too much and not heavy or uncomfortable. I think you might struggle to fit some of the lightest ( most expensive) waterproofs ( with hood ) into one of those bum bags. Tried the OMM smock and bottoms....don't fit, Gore Running wear ( Gore Tex ) jacket and bottoms.....don't fit. I can see more people carrying running sacks rather than bum bags.Quote:
Originally Posted by IainR
But many races already stipulated taped seams.. waterproofs.
I have a mammut mica is it? satisfies kit requirements and is a similar weight to a wind proof.
The kit summary box in section 13 is a good addition, and it's good that there is a relaxation for lower risk races. Shame the first aider is mandatory for all cats.
I've previously carried waterproofs the majority of the time anyway. I don't even own any wind proof bottoms. I manage to fit a waterproof with a hood and pants into a pb bum bag along with a map, compass, whistle, gloves (buff on wrist) and gels etc with no problems. Waterproof is more bulky than wind proof but not unmanageable.
Genuinely amazed if there are any serious fell runners who don't own a waterproof... they are stipulated at many events anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Furness
Do agree about first aid,, it looks a bit overkill for the small local races.
I wish I had a wind-proof bottom. Moving on though I've had an idea about reducing bulk.
Anyone ever tried those clothing bags that you use with a vacuum cleaner? The air gets sucked out and the clothes compress down really well until you open the bag. Just a thought.
A vacuum dry bag would be pretty handy!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegan Runner
If you are injured, wet, and your core temperature is dropping by the second, how does being near a road mean it's not necessary to carry kit and you are somehow magically safe?Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfella
You're quite right - there should be no big problem. Lots of posts here from people who have never shivered at the rear end of the pack in a soaking wet windproof. Based on personal experiences in the past year or so I bought a proper windproof (taped seams, 10,000 mm hydrostatic head) - first big test was Long Mynd Valleys earlier this year in very cold conditions with horizontal sleet, with just a windproof I would not have made it round. Packs into my bumbag no problem and I'll be taking it with me tomorrow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Mole
Thats what I don't understand.. who seriously would turn up in the Peris, September race over 3000ft peaks, without a waterproof... even tomorrow the forecast is showing a chance of rain.. perfect conditions for locals really..Quote:
Originally Posted by Welsh Harrier
And if people are so annoyed at having to do so, it explains perfectly why the FRA had to ruddy stipulate that they should... no wonder Mike had to shorten the 2011 race iif some of these moaning were running around in with just windproofs to protect them should they become immobile.
Lakes Mountain Trial competitors have already been warned that the course may shortened/cancelled due to the forecasted bad weather on SundayQuote:
Originally Posted by IainR
Is it me or ????
I have my full kit in car at if the R\O states for compettitors to carry certain types of kit I just get it from my car to carry or wear it.
If the new rules dictate that certain types of races now mean kit needs to be carried then see above
Not sure first adders at checkpoints will help that much from my experience its either ok to carry on or not a plaster won't help.
Re the plaster, as some may comment I also carry compeed in bum bag.
If competitors claim they don't know what a waterproof is well I just give up
Its odd.. I suspect some are just anti FRA/EA regardless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Amex
TBH I can't see how these rules affect runners really, RO's for sure. But apart from specifying HH or waterproofness (which they sort of leave as maybe we will) its pretty much common sense and nothing has changed. If you are currently racing races other than taped short trail races then you will have proper gear because many long races already specified it.
Anyway I'm off to a 50k road race... pure running at its best...
Well both of you check out the thread in "equipment" ~ almost everyone's waterproof leggings may need replacing by the sound of it, and we're talking waterproof kit that most of us have previously decided was good enough for the job (not counting OMMers etc)
LJQuote:
Originally Posted by LissaJous
After many years of hill running I have never been dry top or bottom after a good half hour of rain, no matter what they bring out I end up wet.
If others can point me in the way of completely dry kit then fantastic. But for me they just keep an amount of rain off me not dry
Whats changed? Waterproof, taped seams? adequately maintained?Quote:
Originally Posted by Amex
Seems fair enough. Espeically the adequately maintained.. which I guess most of us don't.. my race jacket is light, but super thin and wets out very fast. That needs treating.
One big design fault with w-proof coats/ jackets is they have 3 holes in them one for the head one for each hand to g o through until the solve this issue we will be chatting foreverQuote:
Originally Posted by IainR
Right off on a BG with full kit and others kit as well
Absolutely agree Iain; it's not new rules that are spoiling the sport, it's those minority of runners, who refuse/fail to comply with existing ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by IainR
Depending what kit you have, you would now be forced to spend £?? to upgrade your old waterproof leggings, that many have decided from experience were 'waterproof', and adequately so, to some new waterproof leggings that equally don't keep you dry. So people may be annoyed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Amex
And, depending what happens with (eg) the Montane Minimus (whether 'waterproof' also means 'heavier than Pertex'), you could meet the new rules with something that potentially gives you less weather protection than what you started with. So people may be confused.
The only issue I've got with the rules is where it says that if an event is cancelled then runners must not run the route unofficially. Unless I'm missing something surely this can't be enforced as anyone is free to go where they want after the event is cancelled?
If its over private land they're notQuote:
Originally Posted by wjb
Unlike some individuals I have never had an issue complying with what an RO stipulates, I just don't agree with the blanket one size fits all rules.
Bang on Pal in terms of the lack of anything that is waterproof.Quote:
Originally Posted by Amex
I have found a diifference in the cold and wet though between proper waterproofs and windproofs. Although you get wet in a waterproof, it's trapped inside and I think you get the same sort of thermal effect you get from a wet suit in a marine environment. Your body heat warms up that moisture and helps you stay warmer.
In a windproof, the wind seems to create a chill factor through the material.
There are some reasonable waterproof pants and jackets out there and you can get full cover for less than £50 without too much problem. Might not be Berghaus or HH, but it will do the job.
http://www.outdooraction.co.uk/outdo...et-pd-3721.php
If I pinned a race number on Sumo's chest he would probably deflate:wink: