Borrowdale Fell Race

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purpleplodder

I take it you didn't do Angus Munro last year then?
Something like 115 finishers in a British Champs Race.

I feel the FRA committee do their best to make the champs a fair and varied series. I think it is important that the top runners should be given every chance to complete the series to find out who really is 'fell runner of the year' and that the races used are on good courses with the necessary facilities. Could some of the races you mentioned cope with 500 runners, their families and spectators descending on them?

---

Re Angus, Yes I did. Good race. Angus could have easily coped with double IMO.

Some races can yes (cope with 300 runners).

I agree re the committee, I just think reducing it to 3 (or was it 4) will just cause more issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purpleplodder

How could you expect Len to prioritise one person's entry over another?

---

Not sure here. One option may be to make the cut offs harder there by hopefully raising the standard of the field, bit of an elitist approach though which I'm not sure is the way fell running should go, as it's always been such an inclusive sport.

The advantage of OLE is that there is no prioritising needed, it's first in, no local advantage that the postal system offers.

Quote:

---

Anyway this is going off the thread, and we've debated OLE many times on here, and in Fell runner, with fell runners being such a progressive bunch there was the expected dragging of heals, but most other running disciplines have welcomed OLE with open arms. The more races that go OLE the better IMO.

---

Sorry to bring it off thread again but I've not debated OLE.

I organise a race in Scotland (Maddy Moss Mash) but really could not see how having OLE would help at all. And from a couple of races that I've done this year with OLE I'm still not quite sure what the great advantages are. There have still been people required to distribute numbers etc. to entrants, probably exactly the same number of people that might be required if they were running an entry on the day sytem. So what exactly are the great benefits of OLE?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

Not sure here. One option may be to make the cut offs harder there by hopefully raising the standard of the field, bit of an elitist approach though which I'm not sure is the way fell running should go, as it's always been such an inclusive sport.

The advantage of OLE is that there is no prioritising needed, it's first in, no local advantage that the postal system offers.

---

what about the elitism of needing the technology for on line entries ?
I know of a certain elite fell runner who struggles to write text messages, never mind including web links to his previous results for the benefit of the scrutineers !!!
and what would happen if a number of such races need to be entered during lambing time ???
ignore the last one, I'm just playing devil's advocate here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmacewan

Sorry to bring it off thread again but I've not debated OLE.

I organise a race in Scotland (Maddy Moss Mash) but really could not see how having OLE would help at all. And from a couple of races that I've done this year with OLE I'm still not quite sure what the great advantages are. There have still been people required to distribute numbers etc. to entrants, probably exactly the same number of people that might be required if they were running an entry on the day sytem. So what exactly are the great benefits of OLE?

---

This was debated in Fellrunner a few issues back.

The obvious ones are no money handling, it's all automated so less work for the organiser, runners just pick up numbers, no postage required, either in entering or informing successful runners.

If there's so little advantage why do you think most other disciplines have already gone that way? Orienteering, road racing, mountain marathons (I think). Fell running seems quite slow in following suit, which is a petty. Afterall it costs to use OLE so unless it's a great marketing gimic it must offer advantages?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purpleplodder

what about the elitism of needing the technology for on line entries ?
I know of a certain elite fell runner who struggles to write text messages, never mind including web links to his previous results for the benefit of the scrutineers !!!
and what would happen if a number of such races need to be entered during lambing time ???
ignore the last one, I'm just playing devil's advocate here!

---

Well you could say the same about Postal entries, what if someone's illiterate?

Surely they have a mate who could type it in for them?

Entering OL is far quicker than postal so if time is pressing then it's the better option anyway.

We have a guy in the club who refuses to use email as it's a 'waste of paper', we've tried explaining that he doesn't need to print them off..:-)

I had planned to do borrowdale before it was announced as a championship race,so i can understand everyones points but i'd like to think that if my entry was recieved by the organiser before someone elses then i'd get a place before them regardless of how good a runner said indivdual is,afterall it does say that the first 500 suitably experienced runners would get a place,it didn't say anything about priority to 'better' runners

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fleeter

afterall it does say that the first 500 suitably experienced runners would get a place,it didn't say anything about priority to 'better' runners

---

Mixed feelings on that. On one hand I like that fell running has always been inclusive, but then it is a championship about finding the best, so if it was between myself and Jethro for the 500th spot, I'd expect it to be awarded to Jethro.

I guess the advantage of Angus/Mournes type races is only the 'serious/committed' runners would attend thereby keeping numbers lowish, but the disadvantage is you put off some people because of the financial costs involved, therefore it's a less competitive championship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

Mixed feelings on that. On one hand I like that fell running has always been inclusive, but then it is a championship about finding the best, so if it was between myself and Jethro for the 500th spot, I'd expect it to be awarded to Jethro.

I guess the advantage of Angus/Mournes type races is only the 'serious/committed' runners would attend thereby keeping numbers lowish, but the disadvantage is you put off some people because of the financial costs involved, therefore it's a less competitive championship.

---

yeh i can see your point if it said that priority would go to championship contenders,fair enough,then that wouldn't be a problem in my eye's,but on the form it doesn't say that

Like Fleeter, I'd planned to enter Borrowdale before I knew it was going to be a championship race. I'd been disappointed not to have had the opportunity to run the full course last year.
The race and its traditions and supporters exist independently of the championship; the championship latches onto and hitches a ride on a race, but the race itself goes on from year to year.
Personally, if I get in I'll be towards the back of the also-rans; my target would be get round without being cut off. Yet that in itself doesn't mean I'm not a serious runner. How many fun runners ever attempt Borrowdale? I suggest that any 'fun' would evaporate halfway up Bessyboot.

The entry process is explicit and well advertised. If a so-called 'top runner' can't be arsed to apply in time, then tough.
Fleeter's absolutely correct, none of the pre-race info says that elite runners will get priority treatment. They shouldn't and I trust they won't.