It's not even A-categoryOriginally Posted by Derby Tup
(Neither is 3 Peaks by that definition).
No I'm not in anything at all, in case you hadn't noticed. I was victim of a conspiracy of random events over the winter, and my MCL injury from last July got set off again. I am hoping to be fit for some uphill races in the summer. I can't come to England anyway, as driving the car is out of the question
I'm not in it because I haven't got 45 quid to spend on it! Sooner do the "Roaches Classic" for 6 quid.It's not even A-category
No I'm not in anything at all, in case you hadn't noticed. I was victim of a conspiracy of random events over the winter, and my MCL injury from last July got set off again. I am hoping to be fit for some uphill races in the summer. I can't come to England anyway, as driving the car is out of the question
Huh? What a race that by and large uses main trails and paths and is virtually impossible to get lost on and only briefly stays high up on the tops? I'd say that's as safe as a fell race can get.
Any truth in the rumoured Stirton Skyrace?
Poacher turned game-keeper
That road section is the most dangerous bit
Poacher turned game-keeper
Now that's a sky race and a half:
Caravan park -> slog to the gap between Sharp Haw and Rough Haw -> around the woods above Flasby -> north west 'face' of Sharp Haw to the trig -> down past the wooden bench (watch out for old couples sitting there enjoying the view) -> long whiz down to the caravan park -> bottle of beer or chocolate at the end
Fell racing at its most lethal
Last edited by Stolly; 03-04-2014 at 04:09 PM.
Yeah, its those bloody motorcycle gangs
It is virtually the same route as the Gritstone Anytime Challenge, except that the GAC doesn't have the Buxton bit, or any entry cost. Last time I did the GAC I lost a buf, I had the pleasure of meeting Swoop along the route.
Hang on a minute we have started to talk about running over t'moors. Best get this thread back on track with a squabble or two.
And there of course is the problem. A wholesale misrepresentation based on a refusal to even read what is written and a heap of erroneous assumptions. And also a breach of the basic protocol that what is said privately should remain private.
I listed the documents needed. And the role that each one has in the mix. How they fit together and how that is different from FRA rules base..
If there are 50 marshalls on 3 peaks race, I am guessing , probably more - that is 50 pieces of paper already. One to give to each, to explain as a bulleted list exactly what that persons job is. When to be there, what to do, how to do, what with, when to leave, what to do on leaving. If each group of three have checking sheets, that is another 15 pages on top of those. These are the things that were missing at sailbeck or something would not have slipped down a crack. -
If they had had such instruction sheets the marshalls would not have been made to look like morons by the very solicitor purportedly acting for UKA but with the complicity of FRA, and with friends like him you do not need enemies. Had the marshalls had such a sheet, on hostile questioning from UKA (which should never have happened) they could have simply said "I did this" handing over the sheet. And if they had had such instruction, the inconsistencies noted in marshalling would never have happened. Nor the inconsistencies at start finish which caused the miscount to prevail.
Since there are a lot of tasks in preparing such a course, that means there are a lot of bits of paper related to a schedule of equipment specific to the race, needed to ensure it is available for preparation of the course, instruction sheets for preparing road crossings, the car parks, the start finish registration and so on. Just a list of things that people have to do. Good RO do this anyway and instinctively, but it needs better formalization to make sure all the things that need to be considered are contained in the plan.
So 100 pages for the threepeaks is not what it sounds. It is a proper guess at a race plan on the basis of 50 people to coordinate.
And preparation for an emergency.
A post race review sheet.
A professional project plan, based on safe working practice.
That is how a professional would do it.
A race plan up and down one hill involving only three or four officials could be only 10 pages long. It is as long as the number of people involved. Everyone needs a bit of paper. Verbal instruction cannot be relied, that is the resounding experience of safety people. That is when misunderstandings creep in about whose job something is.
So I took the trouble to speak to Lecky in the hope of opening up a cordial dialogue.
I might even have sent him a couple of documents, having explained the context of them briefly, but we never got that far.
So now you see why I cannot be bothered.
Last edited by alwaysinjured; 03-04-2014 at 05:30 PM.
Lecky, the race plan is not an alternative to the FRA’s documentation; it’s a good idea for an RO to have one regardless of whose rules the race is under. The FRA documentation offers no help with producing one.
The race plan needn’t be anywhere near as big as AI is suggesting either.
The key thing is that the ‘rules’ are on one or two pages only, and everything else is at the RO’s discretion. It’s his/her plan. He/she can make it a big or as small as desired.
We will provide a template if one is requested and help with filling it in (it’s currently happening with Pendle Cloughs) but the RO decides what he needs to document what he does, to ensure the race goes as planned, and no-one goes missing.
This is a normal approach in safety management, is preferred by insurers, and makes the ROs position more defensible in a court scenario.
The FRA’s multifarious rules are more likely to be used to defend the FRA and leave the RO hung out to dry… As AI has already explained concisely in 1.5 million words
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote