Development of Young Athletes

If you dont mind can I sling in my opinion for what its worth....im far from elite in my category, however I am 19 and for 3 years from 16 onwards had a lot of frustration with regards to age limits.......under 18 I completed 3 mountain marathons, a marathon, numerous races and race routes, 3 legs of the BG continuously. I hasten to add that I didnt break any age distance rules the very first time I was pulled up on it. I found my strengths werent suited for short races but happened to be very stubborn and had the ability to knock out LSD weeks of 40-60 miles whilst still improving over a short distance. In my mind, I always wanted to do Lakeland Classics and races such as the Peris so I trained from a young age for that- focused. Many people know me on the forum and know thats my taste. However I look at the flip side now, Ive been out for 10 months with an ankle injury that recurs often (I hasten to add that this was from a twist not over use) and im now struggling to get back onto the bandwagon as im more inclined to try and do the long races I want quickly.

Every now and again you'll get a junior who prefers longer distance races and is inspired by the classic longs and to manage them perhaps an extension of distance would be good to stop first season as a senior burnout. My list for last year was Long Mynd, Mourne Peaks, Duddon, Wasdale, Ennerdale, Peris and Langdale......I only managed 2 due to injury but as you can see all miles above what the rules state I could have managed only months before.....a little inconsistent I think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

Chris - I have to say I'm not sure and that isn't what I'm on about really and I did say in my last post that the racing was a side issue. I'm interested that Chris Smale and others have done long races young and I am sure that intrinsically kids are far more able to do long distances than we give them credit for.
But in terms of improving performance I don't think it is a good idea.
In terms of longer races, I am angling for a little leeway. We have our international U18/U16 spending 4 years running in races generally no longer than 4 mile. It's worse for lads, as they can be thrown in to a U20GB race where they can have an uphill only race longer than that.

And clearly they are lots of reasons why our male endurance runners, as much as I admire them, are not as good as they used to be. Other sports taking more of the pool of talent perhaps, but also we have a dumbing down approach to most things in life these days.

The target seems to be "average" and that can't be right.

---

But as Graham B stated some time ago they are not stopping people from doing what they want to do. When I was 16/17 you couldn't run much more than 3 or 4 miles in races but I was already 'cruising' around my 20 milers at 6min mile pace. I knew then that when I reached the senior ranks I'd be ready so I just got on with doing what I wanted to do.

I'm proof that race limits on young people will not prevent the determined athlete from running long distances . You just have to accept that your time will come.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clash City Rocker

It may well be that blame for this or that is being apportioned. That is not my standpoint. i am not seeking to blame any lack of success on the international scene at the door of limiting maximum race distances to just 6m (despite it being seen as a worthy rule change I just cant get this metrification) What I am saying is that for some then the possibility of racing over slightly longer distances may not be a bad thing and may not be detrimental. Looking to debate this with a view to change is not a bad thing. Its not about just the very best . Why doe sit have to be about winners. I am not suggesting that we should only think about juniors who are capable of winning races potentially running longer races. Whats wrong with someone who is strong but a middle of the pack runner doing it. I thought this stared of about developing juniors and part of this is about fun and challenge. If the odd occasion to take part in longer races keep ist keen for runners then that is also a good thing. Its not just about the very elite.

---

I dealt with this on post 79.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

(..) I am sure that intrinsically kids are far more able to do long distances than we give them credit for.
But in terms of improving performance I don't think it is a good idea.

---

Now that you've made that clear, I think we're a lot closer to agreement than I thought we were. I suspect it is safer for a competent 'mid-pack' U18 to run a medium than a 'performance' athlete, because trying to perform (in that sense) over longer distances is precisely what will cause burnout in a flash. I have less of a problem if some U18s want to train over longer distances: training is not racing. And yes, a few competent U18s will have to wait until they reach 18 before they can enter their best races. But a medium race equates to a 10-mile+ road race (with extra hazards), not a 10K, so I can't see the rules changing. This isn't that much of a problem because:

Quote:

---

(..) We have our international U18/U16 spending 4 years running in races generally no longer than 4 mile. It's worse for lads, as they can be thrown in to a U20GB race where they can have an uphill only race longer than that.

---

I think we're also generally agreeing that we can do something about this, without changing any rules at all, by creating/promoting tougher Short category races. There are quite a few listed in the calendar as minimum age 18. These ROs could be asked nicely if they would consider being responsible for U18s in their races. And if they are unwilling, then clubs with big juniors sections might consider creating suitable races. This is already beginning to happen through the Juniors Championship and through the initiative of ROs. It'll be interesting how new races at Cowpe and Hawkswick pan out this year, and Al's possibly revamped Coiners next year.

LissaJous is now off-forum until Friday

We're back onto race rules again.
As coaches, at the club, we can help each individual athlete with their development according to their needs. If this involves them running further, with more mature groups, within the club environment then fine, if that's what the athlete needs.
Personally, I'd rather see them running more quickly over the existing race distances. A runner who wants to be competitive over further can be improving their 1500/3000m/5k performances in preparation. To be good at 10k and beyond as a senior, you'd want to be seriously quick over 3k/5k as a junior (on whatever surface).
On the subject of our elite internationals, they have lagged behind because they have been running too slowly over middle to long distances, not because they haven't been running far enough. Mo Farah wins because he can run his last 400 in just over 50 seconds. The same goes for Bekele. Both are still at the sharp end over 1500m.

What are the rules for the countries doing well at international level? Is there a limit to what the Italians junior athletes can run? How do our rules compare?

Kenya & Ethiopia: Fartlek to / from school (and / or when herding the goats), and hope to join a club / get spotted and race as a late teenager / adult. And diet (noun not verb), helped a bit by climate and altitude and geneology / Darwin. Pretty close to a Lakeland shepherd rather than a modern city-boy/gal?

Hello everyone (anyone), I'v been a forum reader for quite a while and have only once been tempted to post on it, big mistake. However,I'm moved to say how much I have enjoyed this thread. It's nice to see so many people concerned with the future of fell running, for that's what these young athletes are. The views of some coaches are interesting, though maybe a little too philosophical at times (keep it simple). I'd be interested to hear a bit more from the young athletes themselves though. You may not know how to achieve what you want, but it would be nice to hear your views on what it is you want. It's your future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack Winn

Hello everyone (anyone), I'v been a forum reader for quite a while and have only once been tempted to post on it, big mistake. However,I'm moved to say how much I have enjoyed this thread. It's nice to see so many people concerned with the future of fell running, for that's what these young athletes are. The views of some coaches are interesting, though maybe a little too philosophical at times (keep it simple). I'd be interested to hear a bit more from the young athletes themselves though. You may not know how to achieve what you want, but it would be nice to hear your views on what it is you want. It's your future.

---

Correct, its funny how when I was younger and used to post more frequently...i.e. before I reached senior age last year, there were a few of us who believed/knew as juniors that we were capable of doing longer races..my approach was enter underage- then eventually just started running round the courses, for training but also to prove it could be done.

At 16 a person can have a full time job, house, join the army yet if they were to dare enter Widdop fell race, then their body according to the rules just wouldn't cope...its bollocks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurboTom

At 16 a person can have a full time job, house, join the army yet if they were to dare enter Widdop fell race, then their body according to the rules just wouldn't cope...its bollocks

---

I don't think that you are allowed on frontline fighting at 16 though!!

Aside from that, the rules are a one size fits all which is generally correct, yes there are exceptions who may do better and this is what a few here are arguing for but the FRA is not doing its job if it is reckless with future health. People here do have sympathies with your view.

Minor aside just to illustrate a point, I used to teach a pupil who was excellent at rugby (played England under 19s etc) he now plays professional for London Scottish, he had a training program from Saracens, who had signed him on schoolboy terms. He was not allowed to do certain strength exercises as Saracens did not believe his body was strong enough. At the time he was approx 15stone and 6ft4ish, he accepted the ruling went onto play England under 19s and now still plays (he's 23 now). Who is to say if he had done these exercises would he have survived in the game? I'd rather do little young and keep going for ages, than do it all young and have little elsde to aim for. Sorry Tom, you might be one of the exceptions who could have managed young but would all your fellrunning friends?
Hope Uni is going well.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biara

I don't think that you are allowed on frontline fighting at 16 though!!

Aside from that, the rules are a one size fits all which is generally correct, yes there are exceptions who may do better and this is what a few here are arguing for but the FRA is not doing its job if it is reckless with future health. People here do have sympathies with your view.

Minor aside just to illustrate a point, I used to teach a pupil who was excellent at rugby (played England under 19s etc) he now plays professional for London Scottish, he had a training program from Saracens, who had signed him on schoolboy terms. He was not allowed to do certain strength exercises as Saracens did not believe his body was strong enough. At the time he was approx 15stone and 6ft4ish, he accepted the ruling went onto play England under 19s and now still plays (he's 23 now). Who is to say if he had done these exercises would he have survived in the game? I'd rather do little young and keep going for ages, than do it all young and have little elsde to aim for. Sorry Tom, you might be one of the exceptions who could have managed young but would all your fellrunning friends?
Hope Uni is going well.....

---

Rugby is slightly different for the simple reason that the impact is not merely the impact of running, but that of serious force being put upon the body.....if a predicate of fell running was that an 18 stone Phil Vickery would slam into you at regular intervals then fair enough.

The army example is fair, at 16, a recruit to the marines would be expected to hoist around a 60LB bergen across Dartmoor, much more of a stress.

In my experience those who dont train and express a wish to do longer races aren't interested, its not that they couldn't manage, its just that they cant be bothered....and every junior fell runner I know who has wanted to, has indeed made the step up...obviously there are learning curves, such as me blowing up in Ireland last year, or having total cramp on top of Helvellyn after doing a through the night BG recce, but its all experience that I got at 16-18 instead of having to suffer at 23 when I made a serious step into racing.

In fact id go as far as to say, that if longer distances aren't pushed early, there is less of a chance an athlete would turn to them as a senior, for it is much harder to adjust training when older and set in your ways, than it is younger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurboTom

Rugby is slightly different for the simple reason that the impact is not merely the impact of running, but that of serious force being put upon the body.....if a predicate of fell running was that an 18 stone Phil Vickery would slam into you at regular intervals then fair enough.

The army example is fair, at 16, a recruit to the marines would be expected to hoist around a 60LB bergen across Dartmoor, much more of a stress.

In my experience those who dont train and express a wish to do longer races aren't interested, its not that they couldn't manage, its just that they cant be bothered....and every junior fell runner I know who has wanted to, has indeed made the step up...obviously there are learning curves, such as me blowing up in Ireland last year, or having total cramp on top of Helvellyn after doing a through the night BG recce, but its all experience that I got at 16-18 instead of having to suffer at 23 when I made a serious step into racing.

In fact id go as far as to say, that if longer distances aren't pushed early, there is less of a chance an athlete would turn to them as a senior, for it is much harder to adjust training when older and set in your ways, than it is younger.

---

Do you know what it takes to just get in the Marines? The level of fitness before they will consider you would be probably sufficient to be a County Champion Cross Country runner in some areas.
That being said I do have sympathies with you Tom as you will know from some of my posts.

I have seen some ROs allow a parent to sign what they call a disclaimer and clearly from what has been said that isn't and shouldn't be allowed. But a coach is a different matter and Widdop is probably a very good example of one of those races that is an "M" that a competent U18 could handle.

TT I have alot of sympathy for you and understand where you are coming from, I agree with you in many areas of your argument. I am also in agreement with others that maybe some M races a competent U18 can do, but others can't. You are a different standard to me, no arguments, my first half marathons I did aged 16 with my dad in races after getting permission from RO. I trained hard but was slow (even then I was still slow!!)

Maybe having VS, S, M and L races would be better, as it would allow more 'older juniors' to do longer races. I don't know the answers but you have to look at it from all areas as some may just think 'ooh long race let me have a go', then something negative happens and immediately people start asking was that a sensible choice for him/her, yes, far-fetched but also too plausible.

RE the rugby stength training, it was actually a type of arm exercise as the ligaments / tendons were not deemed to be strong enough to take the repeated load, the research had suggested that too much repeated load now, would lead to injury and problems in later life. Why I stated it, was too much by some athletes, could lead to injuries and problems in later life. How many sportsman who started young have ended up having problems in later life through wear and tear injuries? I don't know the figures, but I want to keep running and healthy as long as possible.

My daughter is 17 and now plays open age women's rugby league and has done since the age of 16. Girls RL goes up to under 16 and thats it - its either make the jump to open age or give up. She was lucky enough to train with one of the top three womens sides from age 15 but the jump from one to the other was still huge. That said she made it though and is absolutely thriving.

So I don't think fell running needs to molly coddle over 16's.

Something I have advocated and I think should be treated with a little more importance is perhaps the need to introduce junior runners to the issues in senior fell running- perhaps FRA days where navigation, kit and the like is taught and enforced.....for instance I think it would be good if in at least 2 or 3 championship races a year, cags had to be carried, and the like....just to sort of prepare juniors for other aspects of senior racing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurboTom

Something I have advocated and I think should be treated with a little more importance is perhaps the need to introduce junior runners to the issues in senior fell running- perhaps FRA days where navigation, kit and the like is taught and enforced.....for instance I think it would be good if in at least 2 or 3 championship races a year, cags had to be carried, and the like....just to sort of prepare juniors for other aspects of senior racing.

---

Clever, like that idea....

I was browsing the Gabrselassie vs Tergat article in this month's RW on the newsagents stand today.
Interesting seeing the different 'initiations to career' - Haile going AWOL to run a 'painful' marathon in Addis at 15 (against his dad's orders), and Paul leaving it to 22 to emerge as a 'surprise' at the National trials in Nairobberi. Now, I am not making any pro or con judgements / observations, just highlighting the article as it makes interesting reading, if you can browse a copy. Clearly echos many of the views / thoughts o this thread in different ways (we've all got a point in one way or another).
Comparisons aside, Horses for Courses at the start I'd say, and eventually Herses for Corpses at the end too, I suppose. Enjoy your run, however fast or far.

We seem to have settled on 2 issues that are worthy of further discussion.

U18s - it seems clear that there is a consensus that some options of some "M" races for them would be within their capabilities if the races were pre-selected carefully and the only real objection seems to be that the rules don't allow.

18 - U23 - the Champs isn't contested as much as we would like for a variety of reasons. Athletes in this age group are sometimes away at Uni, perhaps are more likely to be involved in other athletics discplines and even transport maybe an issue.
The Seniors have 6 races in the English Champs, so more options. If the U23 also had 6 races, more options to compete, and on the same 4 from 6 basis, then we may get a greater take up.
The addition of a further "S" and "M" cat race may be what is needed to add appeal to the U23 Champs.

Once upon a time, many moons ago, I ran a full season of fellrunning as an 18yo that included several mediums (Fiendsdale, Kinder Downfall, Coniston, Fairfield) and a couple of Longs (Winter Hill, Three Shires). I wasn't particularly good at running at the time and not particularly well trained for them. Physically though, no problem whatsoever, got round them all comfortably and with enjoyment. 16 yos are allowed to run marathons aren't they?

However, the crucial thing is that I was lucky with the weather for most of them and only got clag once (Fairfield, which was an championship so you just followed people anyway). I can read a map. But if something had gone wrong that required mountain experience or judgement (sometimes its just about knowing when to stop) I'd have been woefully underprepared (and I was generally fairly sensible and well used to fellwalking with my family etc.)

I'd say that there's no problem with youngsters running mediums at times of year when the weather is likely to be decent and on courses where the consequences of doing something wrong are less significant. This could be at the organisers discretion. But I wouldn't send one round Borrowdale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Track Fairy

Once upon a time, many moons ago, I ran a full season of fellrunning as an 18yo that included several mediums (Fiendsdale, Kinder Downfall, Coniston, Fairfield) and a couple of Longs (Winter Hill, Three Shires). I wasn't particularly good at running at the time and not particularly well trained for them. Physically though, no problem whatsoever, got round them all comfortably and with enjoyment. 16 yos are allowed to run marathons aren't they?

However, the crucial thing is that I was lucky with the weather for most of them and only got clag once (Fairfield, which was an championship so you just followed people anyway). I can read a map. But if something had gone wrong that required mountain experience or judgement (sometimes its just about knowing when to stop) I'd have been woefully underprepared (and I was generally fairly sensible and well used to fellwalking with my family etc.)

I'd say that there's no problem with youngsters running mediums at times of year when the weather is likely to be decent and on courses where the consequences of doing something wrong are less significant. This could be at the organisers discretion. But I wouldn't send one round Borrowdale.

---

For those that don't know, TF is a very accomplished endurance athlete operating at the highest levels nationally.

I agree with you fully and I wouldn't dream of considering putting a young runner forward for a race that was likely to be beyond them. Fairfield is a great example of one of those races that can be fairly straight forward, but with bad weather extremely hazardous.
So as I've set out earlier, I suggest identifying some races in the calendar - this could be handled by a panel including the FRA Junior Co-ordinator, coaching co-ordinator and needs only to be 6 - 8 races in total.
My further caveat would be that a minimum level 2 coach would have to support the junior taking part in that race. I believe that would give appropriate cover that the race was appropriate and the athlete had sufficient experience.

Seems thats what we have been saying for sometime now. Is there a way forward. Is it even something that the FRA will bother to allow discussions on as it seems that the next step is actually about making the official discussions happen.

I havent really thought about the metrification of junior distances until now. I hadnt realised that the maximum distances dont equate as they did for any age group which means as a RO of 3 junior races I will have to look to sort out new routes for some age groups which is a real pain. U8 used to do up to .5 mile and can now do up to .62m. U10 used to me up to 1m and is now 1.24m. U12 was up to 2m and is now only 1.86m. U14 was up to 3m and is now 3.1m. u16 was up to 4m and is now 4.34m and U18 was 6m and is now 6.2m. It doesnt seem right to me that some age groups have increased and some decreased. Why was the U12 route at Coiners perfectly OK for U12 last year but is now too long. Surely their max distance should have been changed to 3.5km and then all age groups would have gone up slightly. Why is it that U16 can now race up to a third of a mile further than they could before yet we are still arguing about how far it is Ok for juniors to run. If we are being so careful about not extending our juniors then the U16 metric distance should have been 6.5km. It seems the FRA can change distances when it suits them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clash City Rocker

I havent really thought about the metrification of junior distances until now. I hadnt realised that the maximum distances dont equate as they did for any age group which means as a RO of 3 junior races I will have to look to sort out new routes for some age groups which is a real pain. U8 used to do up to .5 mile and can now do up to .62m. U10 used to me up to 1m and is now 1.24m. U12 was up to 2m and is now only 1.86m. U14 was up to 3m and is now 3.1m. u16 was up to 4m and is now 4.34m and U18 was 6m and is now 6.2m. It doesnt seem right to me that some age groups have increased and some decreased. Why was the U12 route at Coiners perfectly OK for U12 last year but is now too long. Surely their max distance should have been changed to 3.5km and then all age groups would have gone up slightly. Why is it that U16 can now race up to a third of a mile further than they could before yet we are still arguing about how far it is Ok for juniors to run. If we are being so careful about not extending our juniors then the U16 metric distance should have been 6.5km. It seems the FRA can change distances when it suits them.

---

As they are "up to", the only one you may have to review is the U12 race and only then if it was at the top end. I'd be tempted to just leave it for what it's worth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrump

Thus potentially in breach of a UKA rule.

---

Indeed which would appear to be the whole essence of this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

As they are "up to", the only one you may have to review is the U12 race and only then if it was at the top end. I'd be tempted to just leave it for what it's worth.

---

It was bang on 2 miles and is now irrationally too long. Potentially if it gets round to being a championship race again then this could lead to any number of complaints from sore losers and parents of sore losers who may have been perfectly happy with the race last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrump

Thus potentially in breach of a UKA rule.

---

Check out the UKA Rules on Fell Running - I think you'll find the odd "deliberate" mistake in there - certainly there is conflict with the FRA Rules - so you could have a situation where you are in breach of one, but not the other.

Give us a smile :D

Well going from UKA rule 410 I think the 2 mile limit still applies, it's just been rounded to 3km. So you can keep the same U12 course Al. Hopefully an FRA committee member can clarify the situation.
UKA rules 2010
It looks like they've got themselves in a mess over rounding to the nearest mile/km. The options for metricating the U16 distance could have been 6km, 6.5km, or 7km. No-one seems to like 1/2 km distance limits, let alone a 3.2km limit.

What on earth does this mean for track (given that Richard has mentioned this earlier in the thread):
UKA 2012-2014 Rule Amendments

Quote:

---

5. Under 15’s should not be able to run two 1500’s in one day: This usually occurs in events such as County Championships where the competition provider holds a heat and final in one day. It is agreed that there will be no change to this rule, only to monitor the situation in case of any bad practice.

---

Maybe they meant "is most likely to occur" rather than "usually occurs"? The way it is written comes across as meaning they will continue to allow it to happen, in breach of the rules.

The 2 x 1500m in a day has been an issue as long as I can remember with most grass roots people believing the rules are broken at Champs. The irony of it is, it is not "breached" by local open meets, but but the Championships. It happens at County Champs sometimes when there are too many U15 or U13 for a straight finals.
It happens at Area Champ always.
Rule 107(iv)
(iv) No athlete in this age group is allowed to compete in any race at
300 metres and 400 metres, nor in more than one different event
between 600 metres and 1500 metres inclusive on the same day.

This is what is in place and I think the key here in the UKA rule is the "more than one different event" as opposed to "race".

A heat and final is seen as one event.

The proposal put forward to the rules review body was to stop them doing this - but it was decided to leave things alone.

I can see the logic.

If you allow (for example) an U13 to take part in an 800m and then later a 1500m at an open meet or league meeting they will be racing flat out.

At Area Champs for example, in the heat, the ones that qualify tend to have an easier race than those that don't, so those that qualify for the final haven't really got a true race in their legs.
Of course there will be the last few qualifiers who may have had to run for a fastest loser spot or had a race out for the last automatic slot, but it does seem to work.

The main interesting point in UKA rules is that they allow the athletes to compete up an age group.
Again from UKA Rule 107
(v) Under 13’s may run against Under 15 Boys or Girls, as
appropriate, in track events not exceeding 1500 metres, subject to
any limitations as to standard laid down by the organisers. They
may not take part in competitions in any other age group.
(vi) Under 13’s may compete against Under 15 Boys or Girls, as
appropriate, in field events, provided that the implements used
by them shall be those laid down for the Under 15 age group.
They may not take part in competitions in any other age group.

I think I understand (no thanks to UKA wording!):

Under the heading UKA Executive Board has approved the following Rule amendments for 2012-2014 are 6 items, but items 5 and 6 both list rule changes that have not taken place. You have to read the small print very closely!

Hence amendment 5 does not alter the situation that you have just explained, regarding a 1500 heat & final being considered one 'event'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

The 2 x 1500m in a day has been an issue as long as I can remember with most grass roots people believing the rules are broken at Champs. The irony of it is, it is not "breached" by local open meets, but but the Championships. It happens at County Champs sometimes when there are too many U15 or U13 for a straight finals.
It happens at Area Champ always.
Rule 107(iv)
(iv) No athlete in this age group is allowed to compete in any race at
300 metres and 400 metres, nor in more than one different event
between 600 metres and 1500 metres inclusive on the same day.

This is what is in place and I think the key here in the UKA rule is the "more than one different event" as opposed to "race".

A heat and final is seen as one event.

The proposal put forward to the rules review body was to stop them doing this - but it was decided to leave things alone.

I can see the logic.

If you allow (for example) an U13 to take part in an 800m and then later a 1500m at an open meet or league meeting they will be racing flat out.

At Area Champs for example, in the heat, the ones that qualify tend to have an easier race than those that don't, so those that qualify for the final haven't really got a true race in their legs.
Of course there will be the last few qualifiers who may have had to run for a fastest loser spot or had a race out for the last automatic slot, but it does seem to work.

The main interesting point in UKA rules is that they allow the athletes to compete up an age group.
Again from UKA Rule 107
(v) Under 13’s may run against Under 15 Boys or Girls, as
appropriate, in track events not exceeding 1500 metres, subject to
any limitations as to standard laid down by the organisers. They
may not take part in competitions in any other age group.
(vi) Under 13’s may compete against Under 15 Boys or Girls, as
appropriate, in field events, provided that the implements used
by them shall be those laid down for the Under 15 age group.
They may not take part in competitions in any other age group.

---

Richard I don't think it does work and I know because I competed in area 1500m heats and finals on the same day when I was 14. Yes some of the races were staged with sprint finishes but I decided I was going to make the final, and to be sure I had to drag the faster kids around at a pace I knew they wouldn't really want to go in a heat.

Anyway I made the final but I was so tired from my exertions that I ran rubbish. Unfortunately for some of the faster kids in my heat they were also tired for the final. In fact you could say I messed up their chances.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christopher leigh

Richard I don't think it does work and I know because I competed in area 1500m heats and finals on the same day when I was 14. Yes some of the races were staged with sprint finishes but I decided I was going to make the final, and to be sure I had to drag the faster kids around at a pace I knew they wouldn't really want to go in a heat.

Anyway I made the final but I was so tired from my exertions that I ran rubbish. Unfortunately for some of the faster kids in my heat they were also tired for the final. In fact you could say I messed up their chances.:)

---

I've seen it a few times Chris and of course you cannot account for every single race.

I don't object to this though as it's the same for all, the parties involved know this beforehand and it certainly seems a better option in a Northern to have a heat and final on the same day than have them on Day 1 and Day 2 with the overnight stay that will often then be involved for some.

I object more to the mixed messages that come out of UKA and this is of that type - OK in a Champs to run 2 x 1500m, but in a Mid Lancs Track and Field League a U13/U15 athlete can't do a 800 & 1500.

Strictly speaking these rules allow a 10 year old to attend a Northern U15s 1500m Champs and run 2 x 1500m races within 3 hours of each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LissaJous

Well going from UKA rule 410 I think the 2 mile limit still applies, it's just been rounded to 3km. So you can keep the same U12 course Al. Hopefully an FRA committee member can clarify the situation.

---

When the FRA and the other Home Country Fell/Hill/Mountain Running bodies agreed on metrication the proposals were submitted to UKA through the UKA Mountain Running Advisory Group. The proposals were submitted in terms of the changes which would be required in 2012 to the "Fell & Hill Running Rules" in the UKA "Rules for Competition" ie Rules 400 to 412 including Rule 410 on the Junior Age Limits. A decision was made not to use fractions of kilometres and the values decided on are those given in the current "FRA Rules for Competition". For U16s it was considered more appropriate to round the limit up (from 4miles/6.4km) to 7km rather than round it down. The other distances were rounded to the nearest kilometre. These proposals have since been accepted by UKA.

When the updated UKA Rules are published in April 2012 all the fell running distances will be the same as those in the FRA Rules and strictly metric.

I sent race organisers a copy of the metricated FRA "Rules for Competition" with their 2012 Permit Application forms in Sept. 2011.

Margaret Chippendale
FRA Fixtures Secretary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrump

Thank you Margaret,
An oasis of knowledge, facts, and your usual common sense, in a desert of mis-information. :thumbup:

---

You remind me of a Political Adviser - a sort of Alistair Campbell type - you can claim to be right even when there's nothing to back it up.
A "desert of mis-information" - really :rolleyes:

I sent race organisers a copy of the metricated FRA "Rules for Competition" with their 2012 Permit Application forms in Sept. 2011.

Margaret Chippendale
FRA Fixtures Secretary[/QUOTE]

You did indeed Margaret of that there is no doubt I just didnt look to closely at it in relation to Coiners ( the race I used to illustrate the point) as it isnt being put on this year. Clearly i will look at it more closely for next. I assume though there will be other ROs who may had had some o ftheir junior routes nbang on the upper limits before who will have to hava thnk if they havent already.

What an interesting, and long, thread.

I've been thinking about these very matters for some time, both in fellrunning and orienteering. Most of what I think has been discussed here already, but it has given me a chance to reflect on it all. So, here is my current view.

In terms of developing juniors, we have to think about what they want out of their sport. There are a number of answers to this, I think these build up one on top of the other:

• Some just want to have fun with their mates, and do some running at the same time
  
• Some want to get fit
  
• Some want to race
  
• Some want to win

The first item on this list is the most important. However, as coaches, we would quite like to see our charges race and do well. At our coaches meetings, we tend to have to remind ourselves that we have to provide a sensible service for everyone. Like most of the junior running groups, I think we do this pretty well, as our numbers keep increasing.

So long as everyone at our training sessions is having a good, hard work out, and keeps coming back, then we are succeeding.

When we think about racing there are a number of issues.

First, are the juniors racing for themselves or are they racing for someone else?

Generally speaking, if it is the latter, then there is something wrong. There are some occasions when this is OK. If the club enters a team in a relay, then a runner may be asked to race for that team. It is possible that he doesn't really like racing, but is prepared to have a go for his mates. As long as he is always given the opportunity to say "no, I don't want to race", and it doesn't happen very often, this type of peer pressure is usually fine.

As a club, we have a closed club championships. We try to make this compulsory, but those that don't want to race simply don't turn up. The reason we do this is to encourage all our runners to have a go at racing in a safe environment. If they have never raced, they don't know what it is like, and this puts many people off. We make a big thing of this, with prizes and a lunch for runners and parents. Generally, we get a good athlete over to present the prizes.

Second, what are the race series trying to achieve?

There are a number of potentially conflicting answers to this:

1. To find the best juniors at each age class in each year. This is a sufficient reason in itself. It is a huge thing for some kids to win the English Champs. It is possible that they will never win anything else and may well drop out of the sport. If they do, at least they will have achieved something excellent that they can look back on with pride. They can also use it to show what organised and committed people they are. We have not failed if someone stops running as a teenager, unless it is our coaching that has forced them to.
2. To select juniors for International teams. International races tend to be shorter, with easier terrain, than our championship races. (Or at least that is what I am lead to believe from the fact that CCR was asked to not let U18s run too far at Coiners - that was NEVER something I would have said to him!) The International selectors want really fast runners that can cope over rather shorter distances. They argue that racing on rough fell races all the time makes their potential runners slower - not an argument that seems to wash with Steve Vernon or the Brownlees.
3. To develop junior runners to the point that they become senior runners and carry on. This is quite a big argument in favour of supporting junior development within the FRA. The FRA is age top heavy. Some younger members are going to be useful at some point. I'll come back to this issue shortly.
4. To give juniors the opportunity to enjoy racing in the fells. This might well be the best reason of them all. This is why I do fellrunning, and I suspect the motivation for most of us. We just love being out on the fells, pushing ourselves to achieve something that is really hard.

If we are looking to develop juniors who will come into senior fellrunning, then does the current race series do that? Well, it does to a certain extent. With the distance limits, we can get U18s running up to 10Km now. This means that they should be alright doing any short race. However, the difference between an U18 race and, say Scafell Pike, is quite significant. U18 races are all flagged; they do not have to carry kit and they do not have to really take responsibility for their own safety. At Scafell Pike, for instance, they will have to find their way to the top and back; they will have to carry kit and they have to be able to make sensible decisions about their own safety. If they can do these three things, then the step up to AM races is really only a matter of being able to cope with the extra distance.

As you will know, I am heavily involved with coaching orienteering as well as fellrunning. It is worth contrasting an U18 fell race with an M18 championship orienteering race. As in fellrunning, most M18 runners have come up through the junior ranks. They have developed their skills to the point that they are pretty skilled at navigation in complex terrain in all conditions and their levels of fitness are increasing. To run in the British Champs they have to be a National Member of British Orienteering. This year’s M18E race at the British Championships will be held at Eskdale, on the open slopes below Scafell. The race will be 11.2 K, probably with 3-400m climb. The winner is expected to take around 70-80 minutes, meaning that other runners are likely to take up to 2 hours. Girls are given a somewhat shorter course, but the winning time is still likely to be around 60 minutes. There are shorter courses for those that want them, but they are no less technically difficult.

I remember the risk assessment section of my FMR2 course very clearly. When we were asked if we would allow a group of runners to run out of sight behind some trees, all the orienteers there said “Yes!” and all the fellrunners said “No!” On the course we were told that UKA’s view was that we shouldn’t let them out of sight. I was pretty sure that this advice was wrong. When I followed this up with UKA’s Health and Safety person he, first of all, said that if this was the case, fell races and XC races would cease to exist, as the number of marshals required to keep everyone in sight at all times would be ridiculous. He went on to say that the answer should have been “It depends”. If the group was mainly experienced and knew what they were doing, then it would be fine. If the group was 7 year olds that had never done it before, then you might want to think again.

Clearly, fellrunning and orienteering have different views on what is and isn’t safe for juniors. I think that fellrunning errs too far on the side of caution. I also think that orienteering is often too lax. I am always amazed when I am one of a very small group of people to wear a bumbag with a cag in it, even when the cloud is down, the rain sheeting in and we are on top of an exposed hill.

In getting U18s ready to run senior races, we have to ensure that they begin to learn how to find their way round in a race – this doesn’t always mean being able to navigate, but it does really help. We have to get them used to the idea that they have to carry survival kit and know when to put it on. They have to learn a certain amount of mountain craft. They need to know what to do when things start turning difficult, e.g. the clouds come in, the rain sets in and it gets cold, they get disorientated. They can only get these skills through being out in the mountains, preferably with people that are more experienced.

Can we begin to build this into the U18 champs races? Probably not. We have no way of knowing who will enter a race. They may be coming from a track background, be very fit, but with no clue about the fells. They may just be on holiday and fancy a run. It is these people we have to be very careful about. This sort of thing cannot happen in orienteering champs because of the membership requirement (although that doesn’t preclude a member running above their ability level).

So, this leaves the more adventurous U18 wishing to run AS races, and some wanting to run AM races. The distance rules preclude U18s from running AMs. What development purpose is there for them to do these races? If they want to spend more time on the fells, then they can – no-one is stopping them – but I think they should be discouraged from racing.

If they enter AS races, then this leaves the RO feeling that they are in a difficult position. The race rules state that the safety of U18s is the RO’s responsibility. Because of the way Junior races are organised, and flagged, the assumption might be that U18s should only be allowed to race where this is the case, leaving RO’s of unflagged races nervous. However, we have seen that orienteering copes with unflagged excursions onto the fells without any problems. RO’s should take heart from this. If they are very careful to check that the U18s are fit enough; experienced enough and have all the correct kit, then, in my view, so long as they take special care to check that everyone has arrived back safely, then they are OK.

I originally started writing this thinking that some U18s should be allowed to run in AMs with prior permission from the Junior Committee. I now think that this is not a sensible solution. U18s need to get mountain savvy if they want to move into the senior ranks. They do not need to do this in races.

As coaches, we should perhaps take on some responsibility for encouraging our U18 to get out onto the fells, with others. Perhaps introduce them to some navigation skills – there are lots of orienteering clubs around that would be glad to link up and help. There is a plan to have some navigation practice at the Junior Do this year. Maybe take TurboTom’s suggestion, and make U18s carry kit in all their races.

Well, this has been a very long post, sorry. I hope it provides a slightly different perspective. It has certainly helped me to clarify my views on the matter.

Jake goes out because he enjoys this ! it helps with the autism because he can be himself run how he likes and no one cares or notices , well some people do stare which is rude some people don't even acknowledge or speak to Jake when he says hello
Jake use's fell running to get to places he wants to explore or just for the sake of getting out.
I think that although Jake can navigate in very poor condition's - both at night and combined with mist or driving snow/rain Jake represents a minority these skills take practice and experience to build up ,
Jake may or may not join a club , Jake is not sure if they would be enjoyable at the moment,
it would be nice that Jake could join me on a race , Jake would just like to opportunity to explore and enjoy different parts of the county as well as where he is based !
http://jakeofwinterhill.blogspot.com/

Stayed up for hours reading this thread! Some years ago our Safety & Navigation courses were started with the intention of helping younger/inexperienced runners develop mountain skills. The courses still run, are generally over subscribed, junior runners though are very rarely seen. Learning the basics, practising and carrying kit, should be an essential goal to achieve on the way to longer races/solo training runs.