Tracking my wanderlust need to get out of town once a month

Track my O progress here

SUNDAY 28 APRIL 2002: Day Two in Chicago

I needed a good day in the woods today to restore my self confidence. However, I was starting with a deficit. I had laid awake until almost midnight the night before. Sometimes I don't know what causes me to have bad O days; but the one factor that I do know that definitely causes a problem is lack of sleep. Staying awake till after midnight, when my usual bedtime is 9 pm, is not a good sign.

I had an early start. Nancy was starting just two minutes after me, and we joked about racing each other around the course. When I got my map at the start, I decided to take a very safe route to the first control; I wanted to start the day on a good note. So I took the trail through the field, and looked for the knoll just off the trail.

I wandered around a bit, and couldn't find the control. Unfortunately, the clue was 0.7 meter knoll, in a bland area with some light green vegetation. So I could easily have missed it. I saw several other people wandering, looking for the control also. I kept them in my sight; it sometimes helps to determine if they have found the control yet.

After walking around the control circle for a bit, I decided to relocate to the trail. While I was doing that, I saw Nancy heading away from the area of the first control. I thought it was odd that she was looking for the control on the opposite side from where it was, but I let that thought go. As I was attacking from the trail, again, I noticed some people punching a control about 100 meters to my right. One of the people at that control had been looking around my area a minute before. So, even though it made little sense, I headed over to the control he had just punched. Sure enough, when I got there, it had my control code on it. No question that the marker was in the wrong spot.

Right away I was bummed. First, I had been upset that I had boomed the first control (I thought); now I was upset that the organizers had screwed up and misplaced the control. On top of that, I realized that Nancy must have found the misplaced control before me, and was now ahead of me on the course. She had been headed towards the second control when I saw her. At least I knew the course was now toast, due to the misplaced control, so it wouldn't matter any way.

I had another small boom at number three, looking for a specific rootstock in a field of rootstocks, which is always difficult for me. But the rest of the course went well. I kept my HR steady, and was glad I had the alarm on. As I got tired near the end of the course, it reminded me to jog a bit and keep moving.

I saw Nancy again later in the course as she was leaving a control I was approaching. It stayed that way until the end. I'd catch glimpses of her now and then, but she beat me in.

TT = 84

As I crossed the finish line, I asked the organizers if they knew of the problem on the green course. They said yes. I asked if anyone had protested yet. They said no; and they hoped someone didn't, because "then we'd have to throw out the course". Duh! I couldn't believe they hadn't thought to throw it out without a protest, but there you go. A person at the finish asked what class I was in; I wish I hadn't answered, but I was too tired, wet and cold to think clearly, and I answered F35.

I found some paper, wrote a quick protest, and gave it to the organizers. I ran to the car, and Nancy, Mike Shifman and I returned to the hotel.

After showering and eating, we returned to the meet site to check results. But we were too late; almost everything had been cleaned up. There were two people left: one was the person I had given the protest to; the other I didn't know. I asked the second person what had happened with the protest. He told me they threw out the results for F35 only. I asked why, since the mistake had affected everyone on the green course. He said "because the protest was only for F35." I immediately told him that was "Not True". I had definitely, and specifically, protested the whole green course, for all competitors. I never mentioned my class on the protest. I told him I thought the jury decision was "very odd" and we left.

I was confused and frustrated. How could a jury see the mistake (turns out the map was misprinted; the brown course had the same control, and their map was printed correctly) and not see that it affected everyone on the course? How could you keep a course that had a basic, fundamental flaw? Orienteering is very simple: the organizers tell us where to find the markers; the competitors have to find them all. If I had missed a control, I would have been disqualified. If the organizers mess up a control, they should also be "disqualified" by throwing out the results for that day. It was the organizers mistake, and they should admit it and take care of the consequences.

I was amazed my other people's reactions to the protest: almost no one I spoke with on the green course thought the results should be thrown out. (It was an easy course and many people had good times.) They wanted to overlook the mistake. On the CAOC web site, they blame my protest for the results being thrown out for F35, not the organizers. Other green course runners see no reason to throw out the whole course. But I don't understand: how can they be happy with their results, when they know they may have beat someone in their class only because they happened into the misplaced control sooner that the competitor? It's totally unfair. (I won't even talk about the early finisher who told other runners about the mistake before they started the course; how unfair is THAT???)

Well, I can not sit by and let this rest. I have a very strong sense of fair play, and this got right to the heart of fair orienteering. I had learned a lesson from a meet several years ago in Alabama, where a control marker was missing on the green course. When I saw the results being posted, I asked why the course had not been thrown out. I was told "because no one protested". I immediately asked for some paper to write a protest, and was told it "wasn't necessary". So I left the meet site, thinking they would look in to it. When I got home, I discovered that a jury had checked it out, but chose not to throw out the results. I was incredulous, and learned never to walk away without writing a protest.

I wrote the protest this time, having faith in the system, and expecting things to be set right. So, I was amazed at the jury decision; it makes absolutely no sense. Just check out the first few paragraphs of the USOF rule book; it stresses fair competition, with good maps and correct control placement. Misprinting a control location is like measuring a marathon at 28 miles; or playing baseball with no home plate.

I have one more recourse available to correct the situation. I filed a grievance with the USOF committee, asking for the results of each competitor on the green course to be thrown out for day two. We'll have to wait and see what they decide. I can accept their decision, because I will have done everything I could do to set the situation right.

Of course, I have a very low opinion of some members of CAOC. I have no respect for a club that cannot admit it's mistakes and apologize to competitors for ruining the weekend.

I should say that some people support my protest, especially Mike and other members of OK. Vlad also agrees, but he has become cynical of the system and no longer protests. I'm getting there, but I find it hard to give up. If I find an obvious problem with a course, I will still protest. Next time, however, I will write a more detailed protest, so it is harder for a jury to throw out only one class. I will also ask other course runners to sign the protest, so that it doesn't appear that I am only protesting my class.


posted by Mary 1:21 PM [edit]