1. Learning from the Past Competitor feedback from WMOC 2016 - Estonia
David May
February 2018
HLES - Riga

2. Survey statistics All competitors contacted by email to take part
397 replies (11% response)
31 countries represented
All age classes up to and including M85 and W75 represented
Selection of questions analysed in following slides
February 2018
HLES - Riga

3. The two Sprint races gave a suitable technical challenge for me.
2014 (BRA)
2015 (SWE)
2016 (EST)
strongly agree
15% 9% 5%
17%
agree
55%
44%
27%
51%
neutral
20%
24%
26%
19%
disagree 8%
16%
31%
11%
strongly disagree 2% 4% 1%
Comment: Good satisfaction with the Sprint quality this year after a dip in However, free response comments indicate that the Qualifier was found to be too easy by some.
Conclusion: the higher the technical challenge, the better!
February 2018
HLES - Riga

4. The three Long races gave a suitable technical challenge for me.
2014 (BRA)
2015 (SWE)
2016 (EST)
strongly agree
23%
12%
41%
24%
agree
54%
43%
47%
53%
neutral
15% 7%
disagree 6% 4%
strongly disagree 2% 1%
Comment: Technical Swedish terrain appreciated the most..
February 2018
HLES - Riga

5. The three Long races gave a suitable physical challenge for me.
2014 (BRA)
2015 (SWE)
2016 (EST)
strongly agree
43%
20%
38%
27%
agree
36%
57%
49%
55%
neutral 7%
13% 8%
12%
disagree 9% 4% 5%
strongly disagree 0% 2% 1%
Comment: very little dissatisfaction with physical difficulty of courses.
WMOC Organisers have been good at following IOF criteria 
February 2018
HLES - Riga

6. The Middle race should be introduced by …
SQ/SF; rest; forest Q/MF; rest; LF (5 competition days out of 7)
SQ/SF; MQ/MF; LQ/LF plus 1 rest day (6 competition days out of 7)
Model 1
Model 2
strongly agree
17%
10%
agree
33%
25%
neutral
24%
disagree
26%
strongly disagree 8%
15%
50%
35%
25%
41%
Comment: 35% for the tougher model 2 as opposed to 41% against
50% for the single Q model 1 as opposed to 25% against
Model 1 recommended by FOC and approved by Council
February 2018
HLES - Riga

7. Long Final Qualification should be by …
Single Qualifier determines both Middle and Long Finals
Based on MF results with fixed quota promotion/relegation scheme
Single Qualifier determines 75% of LF places with remaining 25% based on min/km MF speeds
Model 1
Model 2
Model 3
strongly agree 5%
11%
21%
agree
13%
31%
33%
neutral
22%
23%
disagree
29%
17%
strongly disagree
10%
Comment: majority support for Model 3 (54%), with minority support for Model 2 (42%)
Model 3 recommended by FOC but Council approved Model 2 instead …
February 2018
HLES - Riga

8. My journeys using Organiser transport to/from the events were easy to complete
2016 (EST)
strongly agree
12%
agree
32%
neutral
37%
disagree
13%
strongly disagree 6%
Comment: mixed views on the organiser-provided transport.
Free response comments suggest that it worked well for some but that others had poor experiences.
February 2018
HLES - Riga

9. I usually bring my own food rather than buying from the caterers in the arena
2016 (EST)
strongly agree 5%
agree
20%
neutral
34%
disagree
28%
strongly disagree
13%
Comment: about a quarter of competitors rely on buying food in the arena.
(Respondents were asked to assume catering was of good quality and of reasonable cost)
February 2018
HLES - Riga

10. The type of accommodation at WMOC I would usually try to book is
2016 (EST)
4/5 star hotel
18%
3 star hotel
39%
1/2 star hotel 4%
self-catered accommodation
32%
low cost accommodation alternative with an o-camp for tents and/or caravans
Floor space in e.g. a Sports Hall 0%
Other 3%
February 2018
HLES - Riga

11. Free response competitor feedback from 2005 onwards
February 2018
HLES - Riga

12. Free response comments
From surveys of WMOC competitors in
2005 (Canada)
2008 (Portugal)
2009 (Australia)
2010 (Switzerland)
2011 (Hungary)
2013 (Italy)
2014 (Brazil)
All published in document “Learning from the Past”
February 2018
HLES - Riga

13. Common themes Accompanying people Arenas Banquet etc
Traffic/Parking/Transport
Accommodation
Information
Ceremonies
Older competitors
Other
February 2018
HLES - Riga

14. Accompanying people (mostly about public races ...)
Two mandatory principles:
Where there is any conflict between the public races and the WMOC, the WMOC shall take priority
No public race on the WMOC Long Final day
NB Competitors in the public races CAN be in WMOC competition terrain at the same time as WMOC competitors (EST 2016)
Separate Finish needed and separate Start lanes too
February 2018
HLES - Riga

15. Accompanying People - Problems
Bad organisation
Lack of information
Long waits for families
Different venues sometimes used
Poor standard of courses
February 2018
HLES - Riga

16. Discussion How much responsibility does/should SEA have?
Is it possible to have public races genuinely in parallel with WMOC races?
Who should organise the public races?
How important are the public races?
February 2018
HLES - Riga

17. Arenas - Problems No showers (some years)
Insufficient toilets (2009 only)
Finish not in arena (2010 only)
Poor catering, especially for vegetarians
Insufficient shade/shelter
Disorganised map reclaim
Hard to see printed results (too small/crowded)
Music/commentary too loud
No commemorative gift
February 2018
HLES - Riga

18. Arenas - Discussion How big a priority is it to have
Showers?
Competition map?
Commemorative gift?
What’s the best way to manage arena design?
February 2018
HLES - Riga

19. Banquet - problems Too expensive – poor value for money Food quality
Not well organised
Poorly co-ordinated transport
Insufficient advanced information
February 2018
HLES - Riga

20. Discussion What is the goal for the banquet?
How are caterers selected?
Need for “master of ceremonies”
What should the cost be?
How much responsibility does/should SEA have?
February 2018
HLES - Riga

21. Traffic/Parking/Transport
More problems in this area than in any other!!
1. Private cars/own transport
Inadequate road signs
GPS co-ordinates
Poorly organised parking
Cars with no parking stickers got in free
Very expensive parking fees
Unexpectedly long walks from car park
February 2018
HLES - Riga

22. Private transport - Discussion
How much assistance should organisers give to those with own transport?
Does SEA have any responsibility in this area?
Is it right to charge for parking given the high entry fees for the event?
February 2018
HLES - Riga

23. Problems 2. Organiser-supplied transport
Inadequate information about timetable and route
Buses did not keep to timetable
Timetable not designed to fit the race day
No organiser control of buses on the day
No information available for waiting runners
Disorganised ticket booking system
February 2018
HLES - Riga

24. Discussion
Should organisers let runners find their own way to events and not supply transport?
Assuming transport is supplied/is mandatory:-
Need for overall “transport czar”
How does transport fit into overall organisation structure?
Need for sufficient manpower/communications
Does the SEA play any role in designing the transport scheme?
February 2018
HLES - Riga

25. Accommodation - problems
Not enough floor space provision
Campsite provided as an afterthought
Poor standards
Prices are increased because organisers controlled hotel bookings
Tour operators block book best hotels a long time in advance
February 2018
HLES - Riga

26. Accommodation - Discussion
How important is it that organisers find and provide floor space and camp sites?
Should independent competitors be expected to find and book their own hotels or other accommodation?
Should organisers seek to get an income from accommodation bookings?
February 2018
HLES - Riga

27. Information Another major source of problems! Website Poor design
Hard to register and/or pay
Some important info was missing
Too late updating with important information
Not compliant with smart phones/tablets
Site frequently broken
Not all was in English
February 2018
HLES - Riga

28. Website - Discussion What is the purpose of the website?
Who should design the site?
Should we “reinvent the wheel” each year?
Who should be webmaster?
Senior member of organising team??
Who should be given editing rights?
Need rapid response during competition week
February 2018
HLES - Riga

29. Information – other problems
Difficult to get results/start times without WiFi
Directions to Event Centre sent out too late
Poor response to queries before WMOC week
Not enough English speakers in key areas
February 2018
HLES - Riga

30. Other information - Discussion
Use of SMS
Local WiFi in arena?
Need for event secretary
February 2018
HLES - Riga

31. Ceremonies - problems Poor lines of sight
Too long, too many speeches, too much local language
Unsuitable music in prize giving
Wrong flags on display
Inconvenient venues
Cultural displays too long
Spectators lose interest - too much chatting
February 2018
HLES - Riga

32. Ceremonies - Discussion
Who organises ceremonies?
How to persuade local dignitaries to keep speeches short!
Protocol for each medal award
February 2018
HLES - Riga

33. Older competitors - problems
Terrain too physical
Terrain too dangerous
Some start areas hard to walk to
Too hot for the oldest
February 2018
HLES - Riga

34. Discussion Terrain selection takes into account older classes
Should transport to Starts be provided for older classes?
Early starts to avoid highest temperatures
How to cope with, say, the only M95
February 2018
HLES - Riga

35. Other problems High entry fees deter some competitors
Certificate of participation needed by some
RouteGadget not provided
Cheating in the forest
February 2018
HLES - Riga