I just follow the person in front. If they are using GPS would I also be disqualified?
Printable View
I just follow the person in front. If they are using GPS would I also be disqualified?
Yes but not for cheating but collusion. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by wjb
I have spoken to two different Mountain Rescue team members in the last couple of days - one from the Coniston Team, the other from Ambleside.
Do they use map/compass? Don't be silly, they use GPS/Mobile Phone like almost everybody else, backed up by Sarloc.
They do carry a map and compass.
What has that got to do with Fell Races?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike T
My view is that GPS should be allowed in Fell races if people feel the need to use it to keep themselves safe.
If we sign to say we accept the risks of Fell running and our safety is our own responsibility then surely ROs shouldn’t be banning GPS?
I can’t really see the unfair advantage argument as I doubt there are many examples of people winning races because they have used GPS and it’s available to everyone anyway.
I tend to use a map anyway as I don’t really enjoy following a line on my watch and I feel more aware of my surroundings if I follow a map and therefore safer.
The competition goes on down the ranks as well as at the front.
With a map the idea is that you know roughly where you are on it before you get lost, if the clan is down a map is pretty useless unless if you are completely lost. In these circumstances I have no problem with using a GPS to get yourself out of trouble.
It is just an interesting contrast to those who say, some with almost religious conviction, that a map and compass is the safest/best option. I agree with the thinking that navigating using stored data on a GPS device makes it a completely different event, and that ROs of fell races should be able to ban this, despite the difficulties in policing it. Using a GPS for time/altitude/distance covered/as a compass should, in my opinion, all be permitted. A map/compass should of course always be carried. Belt and braces.Quote:
Originally Posted by Llani Boy
This will be quietly abandoned pretty quickly - just not enforceable.
I agree Pat. It feels a bit like King Canute!
The purist in me says it goes against the grain to use GPS for navigation and keeping to a pre-set 'fastest line' but the realist in me knows this will happen anyway. Imagine if the FRA came into being post-invention of GPS - surely it would embrace it and insist on it?
The old bugbear is, of course, equipment failure. When the batteries go flat you're stuffed. So, I guess the future position will be that map and compass will remain as mandatory kit as a back-up to GPS.
May as well accept drugs in cycling then, or perhaps we already have if your careful.
Not comparable, we are all agreed on here, that the RIGHT way to be competitive in races is by being fast AND having intimitate knowledge of the route. A GPS trace to follow is a very poor second place to that knowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfella
Drugs gives you an advantage period.
I get your point BF. But look, fell racing is supposed to be simple. Trying to enforce something like GPS use would be make things awfully complicated. As would random drug testing....and we dont do that either!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
Not now it has been reported in The Daily Telegraph ("Fell running club says GPS guides should get lost") with comments from Mr Abdelnoor.
I see this has flared up on Facebook again as apparently the FRA have made a statement, saying there will be a decision made prior to the 2019 handbook being released, whether they will outright ban them/leave to organiser's discretion.
My stance is that whatever decision is made I'm not fussed and will go with it. But the arguments being made by people who are "pro GPS" are frankly embarrassing in some cases. One guy moaning about, and I quote... "messing around with a map & compass". Frankly I feel sorry for the FRA as they'll no doubt get slated whichever decision they make.
LOL
I think they should make a generic statement as a reminder of the self-sufficient narure of the sport but leave it up to the race organisers to define the character of the race.
A lot of people on the faceache page will probably stick to short, well-marked pseudo-trail races so will experience little change.
ba-ba's 2-point plan (i.e. were I the FRA, I'd posit something like the following)
1. Fell Running is primarily a physical test, but it is also a test of fell/hill craft. This includes self-reliance, which in turn often includes the ability to self-navigate your way around the route, if this is a requirement of the course. It is not a test of fine navigation.
2. It is a race organiser's opinion as to whether route choice and mountain navigation are an integral part of their race and therefore it is their decision wether to allow, suggest against use of, or outright ban the use of GPS units.
3. All races are to be run to the FRA rules, but also a race organiser deems necessary to maintain the requisite/historical challenge of their event.
In real-life terms, I have little issue with people using a GPS for a route-defined race (especially one where taping of junctions etc. can be tricky!); however the fell-craft/historical challenge of checkpoint races should be maintained.
Seconded.
A true and honest way of putting it and the decision stops with RO or FRA.
Ba-ba - I'd totally agree with your 2-point plan, except for one thing - it has 3 points :D
Re point 1 of ba-ba’s excellent 3 point 2 point plan hill/fell/mountain craft also involves an ability to get oneself off the hill if things aren’t going to plan. This is fundamental whether racing or not; utterly core. Can someone following an electronic trace do this ?
I only have two points to make about Ba-ba’s two point three point plan:
1. It’s a good plan.
I'll buy into ba-ba's plan however many points it is. Seems like a sensible approach to me.
I agree. I'm still in two minds regarding what to do for the first running of the new Pennine AL in September. I'm leaning towards letting people use GPS if they want. It's not like it will tell them the best line, or how to avoid the bracken.
Noel three of us done it as far as Mill Hill last night, the heather was a right nightmare in places. It could be a right challange by September.
Excellent. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
Or perhaps, yikes :eek:
I agree with Ba Ba's points of view but my personal opinion is that GPS should be banned for race navigational purposes. However, whatever the outcome, I hope, especially if it is left to the discretion of RO's, that whether it is to be used or not is clearly shown on race entry information and on the FRA list of races.
It will not be good enough for it to be decided on the day, similar to kit requirements sometimes are, because I certainly do not want to travel to a race and have a wasted journey when I find out that GPS will be allowed.
I think the general consensus on here is that if a runner has not a clue about the route and has to rely 100% on the little arrow on the screen he is not going to be competitive as he will have to slow down so much becasue he is not able to watch the ground. He will probably spend half the day tripping over rocks and back-tracking becasue the resolution of the screen is not good enough to identify precisly where to turn.
How can somebody like that destroy your day so much that you have a wasted journey?
On a good day, yes I agree. However serious amounts of clag, and I'm thinking Black Coombe that last time I did it, and GPS is then a distinct advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
I also think the concensus on here think that GPS is not generally in keeping with the nature of the sport where route choice and navigation are integral to the nature of the event.
I certainly would not let it destroy my day as I would go for a run nearby.
I agree that in the majority of races GPS would probably not have a massive competitive advantage but in a pea souper with horizontal rain blowing in I think a pre loaded GPS route might have an advantage. I was not at the Mourne Highline but understand that use of GPS certainly had an impact on the results and have spoken to one runner who was there who has not raced since.
I'll repeat my point that if GPS is to be allowed in any FRA race then that race MUST advertise the fact prior to the event so that all runners can make an informed decision whether to take part or not.
Llani Boy,I can fully appreciate your sentiments, but following that line of action will surely mean that 'the old school' surrender that race (and ultimately the sport itself) to 'the new upstarts'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Llani Boy
Surely better that a ground swell of old school opinion has the FRA banning GPS from all FRA registered races?
Surely better that a ground swell of old school opinion has the FRA banning GPS from all FRA registered races?[/QUOTE]
I agree wholeheartedly, with a total ban as my preferred option.
How many people have said this, what is the point of a ban, when it is UNENFORCEABLE.
Like Ba Ba said leave it to the RO.
When we study the facts only a very few have any concerns. Top 5/6 in a local race and top dozen in a championship event.
I ran 12 years with a Garmin but never once had pre loaded data. It was only used for collection of data for me.
Should people be penalized who are towards the steadier end of a race?
Lots of rules and regulations are unenforceable but at least the breakers of those rules might be glancing over their shoulders as well as at their wrists and they might even look a bit sheepish at the finish line. But then again they might not give a shit!Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
Leaving it to the ROs will split the sport in two, and create mistrust. Will those who have used their watch legally to navigate in some races comply and not use it in the same way in others? And when somebody does really well in clag in a race where navigational GPS use is banned will they be trusted? The FRA needs to decide - accept or ban GPS navigational use. If after some time it is felt the decision was wrong then it can be changed.
There is a ban on running using another competitor’s number in all disciplines. Without asking people for ID when they collect their number, this is unenforceable (the only race I’ve been required to produce ID for is London Marathon). I’m not suggesting that fell race organisers should ask all runners to show ID when collecting numbers as this would be wholly impractical given the reliance on a small number of volunteers in ratio to runners. However, the ban on swapping numbers is upheld in spirit - there have been instances of DQ & penalties against clubs in road & XC races I’ve known of.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
Similarly, a ban on GPS for nav can still be upheld, even if it appears unenforceable (without someone speaking up against those they see using it). Appealing to the good nature of runners is part of our sport - just as much as asking them not to climb that wall/cross that field etc. is.
I’m with Nic - leave it to the RO. Plenty of us don’t have a watch with nav functions, so I cannot see it splitting the sport.
I’d also add that, by way of having a ban on GPS nav (at discretion of RO), those new to the sport are given an insight into the spirit of it. (After all, some may turn up on the start line with, quite innocently, a pre-loaded track on their watch. By having a ban at ROs discretion, aspirants are at least encouraged to have a good look at a map, or even recce.)
I don't think it matters if it's enforceable or not, it's the principle that counts.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
Totally agree :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
Question.…… / story GPS not allowed at the following race
Like many a fell runner Johnny likes to tuck in behind the person in front. Mist is down, and he and whoever it is in front have a blinder, hitting all of the lines perfectly. Johnny was really grateful that the person in front was such a good navigator / knew every inch of the course so well. Person in front used a GPS, Johnny has no idea that he did.
Person in front has broken the rules, and not fessed up, so we don't like him.
What about Johnny?
He is OK.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennings
Becasue in a fell race, deciciding to follow somebody is a perfectly legal tactic, because you run the risk of following somebody that does not know where they are going and ends up leading the people behind him in the wrong direction. That has happened numerous times.
Where Johnny had a suspicion that the bloke in front had a GPS, is purely down to honesty then.
It really is nonsense, what is one meant to do if you see somebody in front checking a watch? You know what you are doing and can easily get around the course yourself, but you end up following him becasue it is easier, should you be disqualfied? How do you "unsee" him checking it.