Omm 2012

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaky

dr morris said " We managed 190 points on day1 with 5mins to spare, 135 on day 2 with 25 seconds to spare (Medium Score), bringing us in 90th overall of 205 starting teams in our class, which makes us 'top half of the field'
Very pleased for a first MM. "

That was good going i reckon...we got 180 on day1 with 20 mmins in hand but nothing to go for having chickened on the big hills and crossed the road early ( but we did get all on the west side. second day we over egged it on that horrible Baugh Fell ( if you spit out the name sounds what i thought of it) a looong way back from the road crossing saw us very late and due to penalties only ended up with 90 or so points....bah humbug.
Agree M6 was horrible had to leave it at poplar and use A500 for a bit.

---

Seems like TeamBath (Tom and I) were right with you guys - 190 points on Saturday after a good run and good route choice. Not so hot Sunday - we took a long eastwards leg onto Swarth Fell for 90 points but an awful long tough run back down to the road crossing, and then we struggled with the run-in back along the wall line so finished 20+ minutes late to pick up just 67 points. Still half-way through the field in the Vets handicap!

Re the exit route - it was very ambiguous, I was going to go straight along the bridleway on the basis that the out of bounds areas are drawn on either side, partner convinved me that we needed to go round, and so did all other competitors around us. If we couldn't use this route, a simple sign on the gate would have made it perfectly clear.

We had the joys of the M6 and M5 all the way back to Bath.... not as bad as the journey up! And the wind chill on Friday night at about 10 as we pitched the tent was .... well, seriously chilling! Kept warm saturday until the Wild Boar Fell bogs late in the day - three hrs in sleeping bag before any life returned to the feet.

Bring on next year!

Just been looking at the stats and it seems only 69% of starters completed both days in the linear events whereas 95% completed the score events. To me that says the linear events are more demanding. I did the C course by the way which has an intriguing element of route choice and after the bashing I took I'm slightly dischuffed to be C! :wink:
Only 56% completed the Elite; 48% completed the A Course; 65% completed B and 66% completed the C. 85% completed D
91% completed long score; 96% middle score; 96% short score

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guick Dotto

Just been looking at the stats and it seems only 69% of starters completed both days in the linear events whereas 95% completed the score events. To me that says the linear events are more demanding.

---

To me that says that an advantage of the score classes is that if you've had enough, you can just head straight for the finish, dib the last mandatory control, and not be disqualified (and also get a better score than those who've lost all their points by getting back 2 hours late).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toreador

To me that says that an advantage of the score classes is that if you've had enough, you can just head straight for the finish, dib the last mandatory control, and not be disqualified (and also get a better score than those who've lost all their points by getting back 2 hours late).

---

This sounds like a more likely explanation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkL

This sounds like a more likely explanation.

---

Definitely. Why retire on a day two when you can just have a steady walk back to the finish within your allotted time for the day? Maybe even treat yourself to a control or two on the way.

So, yeah, I guess the score classes are less demanding in that it's easier to finish without retiring/being disqualified. But equally they can be harder to do well in. For example, look at the winning time on the B class this year. Had those guys covered that kind of distance and climb in the 5 and 4 hours they'd have had in the Short Score they'd no doubt have won it comfortably. To have beaten them on SS would've taken some doing and would've been much harder than winning the C class. Does that mean Short Score is harder than C? Not really, it just means the score classes are as hard as you choose to make them.

To win the Long Score we covered a total of 50 miles (80km) and 15,000 ft of ascent (4500m) in under 13 hours - I'll let other readers decide whether that is less demanding than the linear courses......

Perfect OMM weather - Lovely day Saturday to top up the tan. Great navigating weather on Sunday to sort the Men (and Ladies) from the Boys (and Girls).

As for the course - end of Sunday could of done with a bit more route choice on the Long Score, otherwise plenty of options. Only downside was the terrain over Baugh Fell - not going back there again in a hurry !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lardster

To win the Long Score we covered a total of 50 miles (80km) and 15,000 ft of ascent (4500m) in under 13 hours - I'll let other readers decide whether that is less demanding than the linear courses......

Perfect OMM weather - Lovely day Saturday to top up the tan. Great navigating weather on Sunday to sort the Men (and Ladies) from the Boys (and Girls).

As for the course - end of Sunday could of done with a bit more route choice on the Long Score, otherwise plenty of options. Only downside was the terrain over Baugh Fell - not going back there again in a hurry !

---

I think the elite was more ascent.. but regardless I don't think they mean that..

just looking at finishing rates, but as said the score events can be tailored for ability, so someone fairly unfit can do the long and just modify the route whereas the A, elite courses are set routes.. so understandably less would finish.

By their very nature score events should be easier to finish than set route events, being able to do more or less as you see fit is one of the good things about them.

Doing well at them requires additional skills that you don't need as much on linear courses - ability to gauge your speed across the ground and work out what the optimum route (score) is with your abilities. Also compared to the more popular linear courses there is a good deal more navigation as there are less people to follow, and more people doing different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lardster

By their very nature score events should be easier to finish than set route events, being able to do more or less as you see fit is one of the good things about them.

Doing well at them requires additional skills that you don't need as much on linear courses - ability to gauge your speed across the ground and work out what the optimum route (score) is with your abilities. Also compared to the more popular linear courses there is a good deal more navigation as there are less people to follow, and more people doing different things.

---

TBF in this years elite, I have little MM experience, I was surprised how spreadout we were, we almost never followed..

Comment of the weekend came on Sunday, when at CP 1.. one of the pair got there before us and another pair and said 'me thinks someones following'..

I'm hoping he was joking.. if not he wasn't the sharpest tool in the box, we were set off minutes apart, all going from the start to CP1 which had one obvious route choice option with an obvious final attack point...

But I agree Score have a different skill set, the standard courses are just go as hard as possible and nav, route choice matters, but on the scores you have the additional factor of finishing on time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lardster

Only downside was the terrain over Baugh Fell - not going back there again in a hurry !

---

Yeah, I naively expected to be bounding around on the springy turf of the Howgills all weekend! The other side of the road was a different planet entirely. Definitely character building, and made day 2 seem like a breeze, despite the weather.

I think the score/linear debate can be summarised as follows: The scores are easier to finish, but probably harder to do well in.