New safety rules

[QUOTE=Sam Harrison;559593]On a personal level, the fact that courses aren't marked is part of the fun, it's exactly what the sport is about. Fell running is a sport born out mountaineering and a love for the hills, and the ability to navigate is a huge (and very enjoyable) part of that. It's not easy (running on a compass bearing is much more difficult than walking on one!), but none of us pick the sport because it's easy.

QUOTE]

You put your finger on an important distinction there Sam, and one reason why this thread has run and run. The mountaineering ethos has been replaced with an athletics ethos because of the closer link up to UKA (or whatever it calls itself this week). Its the essential difference in philosophy that is generating the energy in this debate. I'm not saying its wrong (although I personally disagree with it), I'm just pointing out why I think we are all still bashing this around.

Of course, its nothing new. There have been issues ever since BAF.

[QUOTE=Wheeze;559604]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam Harrison

On a personal level, the fact that courses aren't marked is part of the fun, it's exactly what the sport is about. Fell running is a sport born out mountaineering and a love for the hills, and the ability to navigate is a huge (and very enjoyable) part of that. It's not easy (running on a compass bearing is much more difficult than walking on one!), but none of us pick the sport because it's easy.

QUOTE]

You put your finger on an important distinction there Sam, and one reason why this thread has run and run. The mountaineering ethos has been replaced with an athletics ethos because of the closer link up to UKA (or whatever it calls itself this week). Its the essential difference in philosophy that is generating the energy in this debate. I'm not saying its wrong (although I personally disagree with it), I'm just pointing out why I think we are all still bashing this around.

Of course, its nothing new. There have been issues ever since BAF.

---

I just don't see that at all. The mountaineering ethos is as strong as ever in places like the lakes.. its not in Wales because whenever the weathers bad you lot shorten so there is less dependance on those skills....

I think its incredible that despite Eryri's view that they are some traditional fell running club I'm the only welsh runner to have done summer and winter paddy buckleys.. compare that to the Lakes? every buggers done numerous BGR's...

The lack of mountaineering skills has nothing to do with UKA's involvement in the sport..

Its British Athletics

Don't seem to be able to edit my post two above about the idea of enforced running in pairs or groups in adverse weather , or forcing grouping up to proceed beyond checkpoints, if weather turns adverse
I believe may have made a material difference in all of the fatalities so far.

I wanted to add, that much of the field run in groups so it is hardly much of an imposition, and need only be imposed at race owner discretion as standard practise for Long A as a part way house between "normal running" and "bad weather route/cancel". Most of the problems have occurred when people get isolated.

It should be forced on all of those competing on that route for the first time.
So the "newcomer" factor is no longer such a problem.

There is one way and only one way to organize a race on a mountains, and the navigation fundamentalists will not rest until every race in Europe is run under FRA rules. Attachment 7223

Actually I think we just got distracted by the claim that continuous, unbroken tape would be necessary. I don't think the author of that statement can ever have been to a Skyrace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alwaysinjured

Don't seem to be able to edit my post two above about the idea of enforced running in pairs or groups in adverse weather , or forcing grouping up to proceed beyond checkpoints, if weather turns adverse
I believe may have made a material difference in all of the fatalities so far.

I wanted to add, that much of the field run in groups so it is hardly much of an imposition, and need only be imposed at race owner discretion as a part way house between "normal running" and "bad weather route/cancel".

It should be forced on all of those competing on that route for the first time.
So the "newcomer" factor is no longer such a problem.

---

That's an interesting proposition and I'm not sure where I stand on it. I suppose I have a NIMBY attitude about it: I wouldn't like to be forced to run with someone else (nothing against them!) but then I can definitely see the advantages.

I believe certain LDWA and other events already have such a system in place?

The problem is, how do you define who is "experienced enough" to run on their own? That's likely to cause huge arguments. E.g. only if they've ran the course before, they must have some kind of qualification (ML, WGL etc), must have done x number of ALs...

Personally, I enjoy being completely on my own in atrocious weather - again it's one of the challenges of the sport that attracts me too it. I agree with Iain's point about Welsh races tending to be altered if the weather's bad and I think that's a real shame - my experience of this is the Peris Horseshoe being shortened a couple of years back and the Welsh 1000m Peaks being diverted last year when the weather wasn't really that bad at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LissaJous

There is one way and only one way to organize a race on a mountains, and the navigation fundamentalists will not rest until every race in Europe is run under FRA rules. Attachment 7223

Actually I think we just got distracted by the claim that continuous, unbroken tape would be necessary. I don't think the author of that statement can ever have been to a Skyrace.

---

Agree - and I've never been to a Sky Race but I did think it was an odd statement.

The running in pairs thing is a bit daft I think. Firstly getting lost or potentially getting lost is part of the fun, secondly being new to a race is no indication of whether you're confident in the hills or not, or indeed know the hills like the back of your hand, thirdly it could lead to more inexperienced runners competing because they might feel reassured by their partner, fourthly if you've run a race countless times in good weather that can mean diddly squat in bad and fifthly it would make a solo event a team event and thats not what its all about.

agree.. there is too much notion that experience comes from racing..

I think its more dangerous.. people will seperate.. if they can't do it on their own they shouldnt be out there..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stolly

The running in pairs thing is a bit daft I think. Firstly getting lost or potentially getting lost is part of the fun, secondly being new to a race is no indication of whether you're confident in the hills or not, or indeed know the hills like the back of your hand, thirdly it could lead to more inexperienced runners competing because they might feel reassured by their partner, fourthly if you've run a race countless times in good weather that can mean diddly squat in bad and fifthly it would make a solo event a team event and thats not what its all about.

---

Not daft, just not ideal. At the moment an RO has to make an impossible decision in the light of the last fatality as to whether conditions are too adverse to run.

It gives a half way house before actually cancelling or amending.

Pairs can get completely lost, but that is not necessarily the only issue - it is whether one can call for assistance in the event of the other having problems either injury or hypothermia. Don't think mountain marathons have had a fatality (may be wrong) and the ability for pairs to aid each other possibly accounts.

On the fell relays I had to deal with a partner who became unable to run on a smashed up ankle, in a very out of the way and certainly invisible place. She would have struggled without me....

But the incidence of fatalities in fell races is extremely low, lets not forget that. Blimey you only have to look at Grough to see how many 'normal' hill walkers come to grief in comparison. The fact that its a race with a whole bunch of runners going (more or less) the same way makes it safer, miles safer than being out in the hills on your own for sure. So if a runner gets in trouble he stands a fantastically good chance of being helped. And pairing would ruin the sport.

I'm not particularly interested in making things safer at all but to me its more about not lumbering race organisers with stupid and unreasonable responsibilty. I still think runners signing a disclaimer alongside the RO stating their own requirements of the runner and their own specific accepted responsibilities is the answer