DQ the cheats

[Henry Porter]

Almost everything in my life I have done that has had any value has been risky, impulsive, dangerous, ill advised and occasionally illegal. However if I chose to enter somebody's fell race, pub or home I tend to follow the rules.

[stevefoster]

Almost everything in my life I have done that has had any value has been risky, impulsive, dangerous, ill advised and occasionally illegal. However if I chose to enter somebody's fell race, pub or home I tend to follow the rules.

Good post Henry, can identify with that.

[Brotherton Lad]

Almost everything in my life I have done that has had any value has been risky, impulsive, dangerous, ill advised and occasionally illegal. However if I chose to enter somebody's fell race, pub or home I tend to follow the rules.

Yes, good one.

[TurboTom]

zzzzzzzzz.....just want to vent some pent up fell running anger here as since ive been injured and had surgery I feel removed from the daily saga's of the FRA Forum.

Here goes and for those logically orientated I will use a syllogysm

Premise one: The hypothetical competitors we are talking about are adults
Premise two: Adults are responsible for their own wellbeing

Conc: Fell runners are adults and are responsible for there own wellbeing

Now if you're a runner and you use this approach then fine however the big mean legal machine begs to differ and it reins like a Machiavellian goliath over the tiny and much oppressed common race organiser

So another syllogysm this time for the race organisers

Premise one: Race organisers are responsible for the race organisation
Premise two: Competitors are part of the race organisation

Conclusion: Organisers are responsible for competitors

So a clear juxtaposition here...just who is responsible I wonder..................

My feelings on this are

If you are a tit and enjoy running in the fells out of some delusion that it is dangerous and 'cool' then feel free to run with no kit but dont jeopardise a race organiser's head by presenting them with a headache

And race organisers, likewise dont stand for this bollocks

TIME FOR CHANGE

In the immortal words of Rocky Balboa 'If I can change, and you can change, we can all change'

Love you guys, goodnight

[Multiterrainer]

Good un TT!!

Love the use of all those big words with 'll' in - Syllogysm, machiavellian and bollocks

[Graham Breeze]

Here goes and for those logically orientated I will use a syllogysm

Tom,

You get 11/10 for raising the level of debate on here using a syllogism, but lose a couple of marks for not spelling it correctly: so 9/10. Good effort and
get well soon.

Graham

[Witton Park]

The issues seem complicated when you read through the thread, but in fact they are quite simple.

When the RO of the race sets it up, he is permitted / insured through the FRA which means the race is held under FRA Rules with deference is some instances to UKA rules.
RULE SIX
All competitors must obey the FRA Rules for Competition and any additional rules drawn up by the race
organisers for each fell race.
That is very clear.

The RO makes an assessment as to whether any additional requirements are needed and then has a responsibility to make sure that it is communicated.

How many of us drive at 35 - 40mph in a 30 area? The rule is there, but constantly broken by many. The Police are not obliged to monitor it 100% just because it is the law, but have random checks. If they didn't the law would not have credibility.
This in my view is the same with Fell Running. The Safety requirements are there for all. The RO will monitor that in the way they see fit but ultimate responsibility rests with the competitor.
When caught, it's a fair cop.

There should be some element of this monitoring at all races that have mandatory kit requirements and there should be some penalty if found to be in breach of the rules.


In the Safety Requirements I think this is also quite clear - again putting personal onus on the competitor.
1 SENIOR EVENTS
The general philosophy behind the following requirements is that the COMPETITOR should take primary
responsibility for his/her own safety on the fells. The organiser has the responsibility of making sure his race
is as safe as it can possibly be by ensuring that the nature of the race and the rules relating to safety have been
drawn up and formally communicated to each individual runner and that the event organisation is geared to
monitor and control the race so that, if an incident occurs, help is directed to the needful party without delay.

I'm not sure if there are training courses for ROs. I have seen some for Road Running, but I am not aware of any for fell running. I do think they would be quite useful as some ROs may say / do things with the best of intentions, but that may be incorrect.

An example raised previously was the conflicting information given out at the PPP this year in terms of the equipment required. The interpretation of what is fully body cover. Does a hood count as headgear for example.
I was told I needed to carry a hat - I said I didn't have one and was then told never mind, it doesn't matter.
The race already mandates full body windproof, compass, whistle, map and emergency food. In my opinion the RO should have left it at that because that was sufficient.
If they start adding extra requirements, sometimes verbally and inconsistently to some competitors and not others as happened on the day, then that is when they are leaving themselves open.

I have also seen instances where under age runners have been allowed to run "but you will not be covered under our insurance". This is something where the RO is perhaps putting himself at risk.

We have coaches courses, nav courses, why not RO courses? After all, many ROs are athletes current or ex, that have just taken up the mantle with little experience as the previous RO has packed in.

[Witton Park]

There is no way that carrying a slightly more weighty bumbag is going to effect someone's performance so I disagree with the cheating thing. Also the front of the field spend far less time in the hills than the back during a race so arguably have less need of all the gubbins. They will almost certainly know the route better and overall be more experienced of the hills too. The overriding issue is eff all to do with cheating but all to do with the race organiser's responsibility to ensure that safety issues are covered and, should someone die during a race, no blame is pinned on the race organiser. If they say carry it, just carry it.... but its nothing to do with cheating.

The front end are not necessarily more experienced. You yourself Stolly have done 1'000s of miles out in the Dales and wider areas so seem to me an extremely experienced guy who runs around in the middle of the pack usually.

Many of the VET runners, Wendy Dodds in the ladies, David Scott in the men. They may be at the front of their VET cat but generally in the second half of the field. No one would doubt their experience.

But what of the 19 year old who turns his ankle coming off Whernside in the PPP, with 50mph biting wind like we had this year. Robbie Simpson is 20 in November this year (and before you ask I am not saying he wasn't equipped for the race) and what a talent, but he cannot have the experience of Wendy.

What the front end may well do is buy higher tech stuff that packs smaller, fuel less and so have a smaller pack / bumbag has as already been mentioned.

However, I saw some bumbags on some of the lead runners at Sedbergh Hills that would have needed to be of TARDIS specifications to get the full kit requirements inside.

[Stolly]

I agree with the need to carry the specified kit, don't get me wrong. I just don't think carrying a windprroof instead of a waterproof is cheating thats all.

And in some conditions carrying the specified kit isn't enough. For instance carrying just one pair of gloves for the high peak marathon the year before last would have been really dodgy. Or on our fabled blizzard crossing of Bleaklow in a pre- HPM recce a couple of weeks before - based on that 'experience' I'd say that 3 pairs of gloves and sealskin socks are the bare minimum needed for the HPM

[TurboTom]

For the record my spelling was pretty good considering the amount of time I spent in the pub last night.