DQ the cheats

[Witton Park]

If you take Borrowdale, I think, I could enter having completed Kinder Trog and Windgather. Both done on fine clear days and involving zero navigation. Neither give a good representation of being competant to do Borrowdale with clag down and getting cold and lost!

Never having done any of them, I would imagine that Borrowdale on a sunny day would not be representative of Kinder Trod in clag etc. It cuts both ways.

Pendle / Bowland / Winter Hill / Lakeland - they can all be dangerous if you are ill prepared and maybe just unlucky.

We ultimately should take the responsibility upon ourselves when entering a race.

I went from short fell races like Darwen and Rivington to the PPP. I had to qualify, which I did by Chipping (AM) and Sedbergh (AL) and I also enhanced my competency by recces of the terrain, more mileage and some additional relevant race experience accumulated prior to taking on the race.

We have to look after ourselves and shouldn't enter races that we are not ready for.

[IainR]

If you take Borrowdale, I think, I could enter having completed Kinder Trog and Windgather. Both done on fine clear days and involving zero navigation. Neither give a good representation of being competant to do Borrowdale with clag down and getting cold and lost!

What does though? I've known well qualified mountain guides refused entries to races for lack of experience...

The BMC Participation Statement says that: The BMC recognises that climbing and mountaineering are activities with a danger of personal injury or death. Participants in these activities should be aware of and accept these risks and be responsible for their own actions.

http://www.thebmc.co.uk/Feature.aspx?id=1421

Thing is once we go the vetting way we then need to vet the vetters... and it just adds levels of bureaucracy...

We all know the 3 race thing is an accident waiting to happen... how easy is it to finish the edale skyline or 3 peaks in good weather... its just follow the leader.. you've seen people on here say if you aren't competent to run a route solo... do it as a race.. which is a scary attitude..

Anyway I still think there will be more and more responsibility placed on organisers and we'll have more and more shortened and cancelled races.. for me it should go back on the runners with clear participation statements and statements of competence... we're adults.. such methods ARE accepted practice in other sports.. so they are valid choices.. I understand the FRA may not go that way but this current attitude of mocking suggestions by members of the FRA committee and another race organiser is just out of order..I realise that this will mean some will enter who vet themselves safe... but all sports have that, how can you actually guard against without severely increasing the liability of the RO or vetters and allow an enable an open accessible sport...There has to be a balance somewhere...

I was recently publically mocked by a fellow Eryri member in our club magazine for suggesting the use of dibbers.. which if they are deemed suitable for 3 hr races in the peak in winter.. why aren't they suitable for 3 hr races in Snowdonia in September.. its just an atmosphere of one must not question...

[maddaddy]

What does though? I've known well qualified mountain guides refused entries to races for lack of experience...

The BMC Participation Statement says that: The BMC recognises that climbing and mountaineering are activities with a danger of personal injury or death. Participants in these activities should be aware of and accept these risks and be responsible for their own actions.

http://www.thebmc.co.uk/Feature.aspx?id=1421

Thing is once we go the vetting way we then need to vet the vetters... and it just adds levels of bureaucracy...

We all know the 3 race thing is an accident waiting to happen... how easy is it to finish the edale skyline or 3 peaks in good weather... its just follow the leader.. you've seen people on here say if you aren't competent to run a route solo... do it as a race.. which is a scary attitude..

Anyway I still think there will be more and more responsibility placed on organisers and we'll have more and more shortened and cancelled races.. for me it should go back on the runners with clear participation statements and statements of competence... we're adults.. such methods ARE accepted practice in other sports.. so they are valid choices.. I understand the FRA may not go that way but this current attitude of mocking suggestions by members of the FRA committee and another race organiser is just out of order..I realise that this will mean some will enter who vet themselves safe... but all sports have that, how can you actually guard against without severely increasing the liability of the RO or vetters and allow an enable an open accessible sport...There has to be a balance somewhere...

I was recently publically mocked by a fellow Eryri member in our club magazine for suggesting the use of dibbers.. which if they are deemed suitable for 3 hr races in the peak in winter.. why aren't they suitable for 3 hr races in Snowdonia in September.. its just an atmosphere of one must not question...

I sometimes think that some of the posts on the forum by the Chair of the FRA Committee put the committee in a bad light. They sometimes give this image of an arrogant body that is beyond question

Personally however it doesn’t bother me in the slightest and I’m sure the reality is very different.

[IainR]

I sometimes think that some of the posts on the forum by the Chair of the FRA Committee put the committee in a bad light. They sometimes give this image of an arrogant body that is beyond question

Personally however it doesn’t bother me in the slightest and I’m sure the reality is very different.

I realise that's not the case.. I know a fair few of them in 'real life' and they are great...

[Wheeze]

Hon Chair has a forum 'personality' to maintain like the rest of us!

[IainR]

Hon Chair has a forum 'personality' to maintain like the rest of us!

Possibly.. I'm just finding this common response by the err.... more mature members in the running community... of mock the suggestor rather than listen to sensible suggestions to be a bit of a weak response... it'd be great if we could all do that in our line of work... someone questions me in a paper.. argue back in the science.. or call him an arm chair scientist... 'you organise it'... it just suggests a weak intellect...

[deborah]

Hon Chair has a forum 'personality' to maintain like the rest of us!

More than one I suspect.

[Rob Furness]

Or the wisdom of people who are outdoor professionals... your call...

And don't hide behind that 'I've been organising races since 1993 what do I know"..Would you go to a witch Dr who has been practising for 30 years or a qualified MD...

The forum is for debate... don't be so precious... if you can't handle debate don't read the bloody thing!

Well said Iain. It's worth noting that not every suggestion or observation is people "armchair organising". Many of us on here have these discussions because we want the best for our sport and part of that is making sure people understand the rules.

Graham, you have a tendency to make up your mind about a post or question without bothering to fully read it or understand the context. If we're discussing kit requirements it doesn't mean we are trying to wriggle out of carrying the right stuff, or that we're not competent in the hills, or that we don't understand/wish to comply with the rules. It simply means we wish to discuss with other forum members their opinions as well.

[Henry Porter]

To get back to the theme of the patriarchal tone of the FRA leadership on here. It is something I have noticed and it does puzzle me in this day and age.

[Brotherton Lad]

Our glorious Chairman is a lovely bloke. It's just that his sense of humour is dry to the point of aridity.