dibber or die !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L.F.F.

..... If safety is the main benefit, well you're responsible for yourself....

---

.....within the framework of an event that society at large judges the R.O. to be responsible for.

EXACTLY!

As a R.O. it would make my job and responsability towards the runners a lot easier if I used dibbers for a long event. However, and I think I speak for a the majority of RO's, we don't organise fell races to make money! In fact, often enough it costs money, especially if you try to keep entryfees as low as possible to keep things accessible and friendly for all. You do not want to end up footing a bill to SI for lost dibbers! Ultimately, racing a fell race, the responsability lies with the runners, for their own safety as well as their dibbers. However, RO's do their utmost to put on a great race keeping in mind safety for runners as well. It takes guts to NOT cancel a race under adverse weather conditions, because the finger pointing if something does go wrong is always towards the RO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wheezing donkey

.....within the framework of an event that society at large judges the R.O. to be responsible for.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

another saftety level...

---

It's that other safety level that's the issue in my opinion. If the RO decides to use them for whatever reason, then obviously you respect that, no issue at all. But if they become mandatory it's different. The fewer 'levels' imposed on the sport the better. It's the lack of these 'safety levels' (and extra costs, rules, regulations that come with them) that might appeal to a lot of people who take part in the sport.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L.F.F.

It's that other safety level that's the issue in my opinion. If the RO decides to use them for whatever reason, then obviously you respect that, no issue at all. But if they become mandatory it's different. The fewer 'levels' imposed on the sport the better. It's the lack of these 'safety levels' (and extra costs, rules, regulations that come with them) that might appeal to a lot of people who take part in the sport.

---

Agreed. Dibbers.. . individual GPS tracking monitored at base. .. what's next. .. it's a slippery slope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard123

Agreed. Dibbers.. . individual GPS tracking monitored at base. .. what's next. .. it's a slippery slope.

---

How are dibbers any different to marshalls?

Its a fell race.. if you aren't being monitored how do you know who ran the route..

Alarmist nonsense..I'm sorry there's no other description suitable..Do you read the daily mail?

If you want to run in the hills fine.. in a race there is insurance.. that insurance will have stipulations of some level of monitoring but its also a race.. you want to know who won the race and ran the correct route..

At Jura, 2009, Andy Davies 'won'.. first back, they then realised he had an extra tag left over.. he didn't know the route so didn't know there was another hill after the last pap.. that could have been a dibber.. marshall or tag.. but it shows why some level of checking is necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L.F.F.

It's that other safety level that's the issue in my opinion. If the RO decides to use them for whatever reason, then obviously you respect that, no issue at all. But if they become mandatory it's different. The fewer 'levels' imposed on the sport the better. It's the lack of these 'safety levels' (and extra costs, rules, regulations that come with them) that might appeal to a lot of people who take part in the sport.

---

Exactly.. so a dibber is no change to a marshall.. its just more reliable..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

Exactly.. so a dibber is no change to a marshall.. its just more reliable..

---

I'm not an RO, but I'd imagine if I was organising a race, setting up a dibber system would feel very different to using marshalls.

You also said 'some level of checking is necessary'. No one's disputed that. It's how the checking's done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L.F.F.

I'm not an RO, but I'd imagine if I was organising a race, setting up a dibber system would feel very different to using marshalls.

You also said 'some level of checking is necessary'. No one's disputed that. It's how the checking's done.

---

I just think it provides rapid reliable results.. in bad weather paper and a pen is tricky, hence unreliable.. I know of a number of races in North Wales where the organiser has posted on the eryri site for runners to say their times..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L.F.F.

I'm not an RO, but I'd imagine if I was organising a race, setting up a dibber system would feel very different to using marshalls.

You also said 'some level of checking is necessary'. No one's disputed that. It's how the checking's done.

---

Have you ever used a dibber, done a race with dibbers or are you just spouting off about a perceived potential "change" which of course must be feared?

I suspect that you actually don't understand how the system works.

In reality to the runner, using such a system would make absolutely no difference to how a race was run. To an RO, it might (but of course, not necessarily) make life easier and make it easier to organise a race. Why would you be against that? The added advantage of having checks for safety is a bonus. You would still need some marshals to be on the hills, but I'd guess fewer.

The only downside is the initial cost of the equipment (as aforementioned), but as I've said above, orienteering events have a £2 rental charge on borrowed dibbers, so if you don't own your own dibber, you pay £2 extra. The same would apply for fell races. Surely £2 extra on some of the longer fell races won't destroy the nature of fell running? (I accept most short races don't need it or would have large queues of people at the boxes!). The cost of buying the boxes could be shared by several clubs and recouped over time - once the system is in place and more races are using it, it would become economically viable.

Of course, after a few races, most fell runners, like orienteers, would buy their own dibber. That might even persuade a few more to try orienteering, which might help them navigate better?

Plus I believe that Martin Stone who runs Sportident is a fell runner and FRA member, why wouldn't we want to support his business as fellow fell runners?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fozzy

Have you ever used a dibber, done a race with dibbers or are you just spouting off about a perceived potential "change" which of course must be feared?

I suspect that you actually don't understand how the system works.

In reality to the runner, using such a system would make absolutely no difference to how a race was run. To an RO, it might (but of course, not necessarily) make life easier and make it easier to organise a race. Why would you be against that? The added advantage of having checks for safety is a bonus. You would still need some marshals to be on the hills, but I'd guess fewer.

The only downside is the initial cost of the equipment (as aforementioned), but as I've said above, orienteering events have a £2 rental charge on borrowed dibbers, so if you don't own your own dibber, you pay £2 extra. The same would apply for fell races. Surely £2 extra on some of the longer fell races won't destroy the nature of fell running? (I accept most short races don't need it or would have large queues of people at the boxes!). The cost of buying the boxes could be shared by several clubs and recouped over time - once the system is in place and more races are using it, it would become economically viable.

Of course, after a few races, most fell runners, like orienteers, would buy their own dibber. That might even persuade a few more to try orienteering, which might help them navigate better?

Plus I believe that Martin Stone who runs Sportident is a fell runner and FRA member, why wouldn't we want to support his business as fellow fell runners?

---

Blimey:) Are you on commission?

As I said, I'm not an RO, but I imagine it's a lot easier to run a race with a couple of friends on mountain tops than to arrange a dibber system with all that entails. Is that ok? I thought that was a pretty simple statement.

I also said I have no complaints if a RO decides to use the dibber system. No complaints at all.

The unfortunate thing, in my opinion, would be if this system was imposed, a result of regulations. One of the best things about fell running, for me, and I imagine a good few who actually do it, is the simplicity of it.

Some people seem to be inviting regulation.