New safety rules

[IainR]

Much more than that Iain, the FRA one explains what MUST means near the start in case anyone wasn't sure and then proceeds to use it about a hundred times. And quite a few other differences, although sadly still uses the same 'dangerous sections' sentence.

A lot of the actual rules seemed word for word copy and pastes.. the taping.. numbering etc.

[LissaJous]

That way we will see fewer dropped gel sachets from road runners who think it is someones job to clear up after them: another piece of baggage from road running. I have argued with several over the years, who stare at me blankly, not knowing what they have done. Mountain people do not think like that.

That would be a good one to go in the rules.

[LissaJous]

A lot of the actual rules seemed word for word copy and pastes.. the taping.. numbering etc.

Well the original author of the document is Graham Breeze. But this version reads quite differently IMO.

[Stolly]

I organize a local race, have to say very minor in the scheme of things and although I don't think we will have any problems I do worry for some of the Lakeland " biggies". when I race these days I'm seeing more of the "Tuff Mudder" brigade and worry they think getting a bit cold and electrocuted qualifys the for something like Langdale.
I ran the Three Peaks last year and did wonder how some of em managed to get an entry to be honest.
This year marshaling in a local race I managed to persuade a big strong lad to retire after only 4 miles in foul weather because he was in obvious distress. On the way back down he admitted all his training was on a running machine and he just fancied a go at a fell race.

I kind of disagree - my very first ever fell race was the 3 peaks and, yes, I did blag myself in. But its actually experiencing something that gives you 'experience' and it puts my back up if fell runners somehow consider themselves more elitest than others. Everyone has to start somewhere and people should be free 'to come and have a go if they think they're hard enough' (qualifying rules permitting). What ever else you can say about fell races they are miles more safe than just running in the hills on your own, something anybody can do when ever they want to. In some respects people may run fell races to actually become more au fait with an area or route, to later run on their own.

[alwaysinjured]

Well the original author of the document is Graham Breeze. But this version reads quite differently IMO.

Enough of the english is word perfect in common to suspect it is a modified version of an earlier version of FRA. I also suspect that WFRA will probably wait for FRA to settle before final changes of their draft, or turning the draft into active.

I only hope they use better document and version control, so you can actually tell what is draft for comment, what is amended/ and or superceded and why, so what is the "latest" version, and what is active, and if so from when. Even that message (which any and every professional uses as part of the most basic quality standard per ISO9000, whether registered or not) has not been heeded. Sad.

[alwaysinjured]

What ever else you can say about fell races they are miles more safe than just running in the hills on your own

Not convinced by that Stolly. Races encourage a "follow the crocodile" mentality, which leads people to places they may not have dared go on their own, and when someone loses contact in clag, having failed to study it, or without any knowledge of where they are, it can be very unsafe. Where people venturing on their own tend to be far more cogniscant of the need to map read for example. On their own , they may well have taken more precautions
(Yes there are some nutters out there amongst the walkers too..no map, no compass, no body cover is not just a runner thing. Some people need a darwin award!)
The follow the leader mentality of races, and the expectation of being able to do it has consequences

[LissaJous]

Enough of the english is word perfect in common to suspect it is a modified version of an earlier version of FRA. I also suspect that WFRA will probably wait for FRA to settle before final changes of their draft, or turning the draft into active.

I only hope they use better document and version control, so you can actually tell what is draft for comment, what is amended/ and or superceded and why, so what is the "latest" version, and what is active, and if so from when. Even that message (which any and every professional uses as part of the most basic quality standard per ISO9000, whether registered or not) has not been heeded. Sad.

1. It's difficult getting in to your little gang AI
   
   • The posts are excessively long and the good points are buried.
   • You are a bit obsessed with the version control rather than the points others are making
   • You should be aware how few people will exhaustively read such an exhausting thread.
2. WFRA Document: Of course it is an altered version of an FRA original.
   
   • But are you more comfortable with the wording?
   • Or do you agree with IainR that the semantic differences are inconsequential?
3. Fellhound's revisions
   
   • I questioned whether readers are aware this is NOT the FRA working document
   • (If they even saw it at all)
   • No reply/comment/confirmation that this is the case
   • I added that I would be more comfortable with Fellhound's wording if I was ever to organize a race
4. A few pages back I suggested an 'alternative' idea
   
   • At registration runners could be asked if there is anyone who would quickly realize if they are overdue
   • If not, they could go on a list for extra 'oversight' to check their return
   • I am not particularly attached to this idea
   • But it was meant to be an out-of-the-box idea to provide a second tier safety net that might actually achieve something in the case of an incident
   • Instead of trying to perfect a system that cannot be perfected (or mandating that it should be perfected)
   • As usual, no reply or comment was forthcoming

[Stolly]

1. It's difficult getting in to your little gang AI
   
   • The posts are excessively long and the good points are buried.
   • You are a bit obsessed with the version control rather than the points others are making
   • You should be aware how few people will exhaustively read such an exhausting thread.
2. WFRA Document: Of course it is an altered version of an FRA original.
   
   • But are you more comfortable with the wording?
   • Or do you agree with IainR that the semantic differences are inconsequential?
3. Fellhound's revisions
   
   • I questioned whether readers are aware this is NOT the FRA working document
   • (If they even saw it at all)
   • No reply/comment/confirmation that this is the case
   • I added that I would be more comfortable with Fellhound's wording if I was ever to organize a race
4. A few pages back I suggested an 'alternative' idea
   
   • At registration runners could be asked if there is anyone who would quickly realize if they are overdue
   • If not, they could go on a list for extra 'oversight' to check their return
   • I am not particularly attached to this idea
   • But it was meant to be an out-of-the-box idea to provide a second tier safety net that might actually achieve something in the case of an incident
   • Instead of trying to perfect a system that cannot be perfected (or mandating that it should be perfected)
   • As usual, no reply or comment was forthcoming

Excellent bullet pointing

[Witton Park]

I think anyone who has seen the changes in road running should be concerned, especially Joan of Arc who has already effectively labelled PPP the dumbed down version of fell running.
As has been mentioned, the PPP is a £25K per year race and so has enough financial wherewithall to survive most of what comes to pass.

But what about Ennerdale etc where I turned up a couple of years ago to see less than 100?

Anyone with any connections to the road will see where it has gone with the drive towards H&S and full or partial road closures.
The typical race when I started in 2003 was £5 entry for a affiliated athlete. Now it's £10+.
Councils only interested if BUPA come to town, or it's a box ticking health initiative.

There's a drive to traffic free and we've lost quite a few historic races, not through lack of demand, but through lack of ROs prepared to carry the can combined with the financial resources to keep them going without engaging traffic management companies.

What next for fell? Who knows, but it will be different and I do think some significant races will be lost to the calendar.

[LissaJous]

Haha, I shall start a pedestrian management company and make a fortune