2010 Championship

[FellJunior]

For those planning your races this year, there is a change to the points allocated for the first 3 places at Round 6 ( Darwen).
53 for 1st, 50 for 2nd, 48 for 3rd. Unless a runner has already won 4 races, the effect is to make the last race 'everything to play for' amongst the leading runners.

There is also a new club championship; the top 3 points scorers for a club from any age category at each round will count. All 6 rounds to count.

Full details in the FRA 2010 Handbook, and summarised on the junior website.

[FellRunner1]

This sounds like a desperate attempt at getting people to go to darwen

[FellJunior]

Nothing to do with Darwen specifically (why would it be ), but the overall championship, and round 6 wherever it is. Unlike the senior version, the juniors do not have short, medium, and long rounds. For many years the contest for medals in most age group categories has been effectively over after round 4, resulting in a reduced entry at the remaining two rounds. Extra points for the final round is a common method of extending interest in a championship over the whole series. Following analysis of dozens of permutations of positions at each round, the view (albeit subjective) of the committee is that this method creates a more satisfactory overall result. It requires medal winners to enter at least 4 races, thereby truly contesting the championship. This has not always been the case. However, as stated above, a runner who wins 4 of the first 5 races will still win a gold medal outright.

[TheBearRunner]

I think its a good idea, you could get the best field at the last race which I understand is very hard in the this championship as well as the senior English Champ, the British wont have that problem now there is less races, which makes it more competitive which can't hurt. Only problem is if some one has 3 wins and a second and another person has 3 wins and a second but win's the last race they'd win... which I could see really p*** some people off, but you cant please everyone, good there's a bit of a change may make things interesting!

TheBear.

[FellJunior]

Thanks for your feedback. In the end we had to construct a spreadsheet to check out combinations and compare with the previous method. We didn't find any anomalies, but it does make the final race a 'head to head' if things are tight.

[WillMarsh]

For those planning your races this year, there is a change to the points allocated for the first 3 places at Round 6 ( Darwen).
53 for 1st, 50 for 2nd, 48 for 3rd. Unless a runner has already won 4 races, the effect is to make the last race 'everything to play for' amongst the leading runners.

There is also a new club championship; the top 3 points scorers for a club from any age category at each round will count. All 6 rounds to count.

Full details in the FRA 2010 Handbook, and summarised on the junior website.

No opinion either way on the points system but I think the team idea is a superb idea.

[FellJunior]

No opinion either way on the points system but I think the team idea is a superb idea.

Again, we analysed various combinations of eligible runners, 2, 3, 4 etc. and 3 seems the optimum at the moment. 10 / 12 clubs would have been able to contest the championship in 2009.
Looking forward to see the competition hot up during the season. Not looking forward to extracting the points from the individual results after each race.

[WillMarsh]

Again, we analysed various combinations of eligible runners, 2, 3, 4 etc. and 3 seems the optimum at the moment. 10 / 12 clubs would have been able to contest the championship in 2009.
Looking forward to see the competition hot up during the season. Not looking forward to extracting the points from the individual results after each race.

I would have assumed it would have been 3 without reading your post above. We could put 4 runners out in the u18s, but then in younger age groups could probably field 3 as a maximum. 2 is too little imo and 4 too many as then you would restrict the number of clubs who were able to count. Are we going to have an overall club as well? Say, 50 points for a first, team wise, and you count your best 3 teams across the age groups to be elibile for the overall.

[FellJunior]

The club championship is overall, i.e. across all age groups and categories, for the very reasons you state. When we used last year's results to test, only a dozen clubs had at least 3 runners at each race across all categories. So the club with the most points at a race might be made up of U12G 1st, U14B 1st, and U14G 2nd. Second club might have first 3 places in U16B. Does that make sense?
The previous championship died out as it was based on a set number of runners from each age group. Most years only the biggest club could fulfill the rules, which made it a meaningless contest. Same problem as previously debated about a relay championship.

[WillMarsh]

The club championship is overall, i.e. across all age groups and categories, for the very reasons you state. When we used last year's results to test, only a dozen clubs had at least 3 runners at each race in all categories. So the club with the most points at a race might be made up of U12G 1st, U14B 1st, and U14G 2nd. Second club might have first 3 places in U16B. Does that make sense?
The previous championship died out as it was based on a set number of runners from each age group. Most years only the biggest club could fulfill the rules, which made it a meaningless contest.

Understood. Good idea.
I have one big concern about how this is going to work. This is no disrespect to any of the Girls who compete, but take Coiners u16 race last year. Out of the 31 runners, 5 were girls. Therefore, surely as a presedence, clubs who field a set of runners consisting of mainly girls across the age-groups are going to be at an advantage.
Like at Coiners, 5th is a very respectable place in the English Champs races, but if there is only 5 girls in the race it only means getting round. Coming 5th out of 26 however in a boys race which tends to be very competitive field to me is much more of an achievement. Yet, if the team count goes the way you suggest, a boy having a stormer vs a girl simply having to get round to come 5th would have the same benefits for the team. Is that fair?