IOF MTBO Committee Meeting

Palma, Mallorca, 19-22 Jan 2001

Attending:
Juan M. Garcia Tutor (SPA) Chairman
Jean-Paul Hosotte (FRA)
Serge Ninanne (BEL)
Colin Palmer (UK) Secretary

Apologies
Blake Gordon (AUS)

1. MTB-O committee communication
1.1. Between members
E mail will be the preferred format.
When a response is required, members agreed to respond within 14 days.
If an urgent response is required, then the sender must provide a deadline date (minimum 3 days).
In the absence of any response, the sender may use his own discretion to make decisions.

1.2  To IOF and other committees
JMGC to be responsible for communication with Council, and with Ski O and Foot O committees.
CGP to be responsible for communications with Event Standards Committee and the Trail O committee.
JPH to be responsible for communications with Mapping Committee
Communications with IOF Secretariat  through all committee members, with copies to other committee members only on key issues.
	
1.3. To WC / WOC organisers and Federations
Normally from the committee via the IOF Secretariat
MTB-O contacts to be developed within Federations, but direct communications to be kept to the minimum.  For example for situations where a rapid response is required or to provide summary information.

1.4 To competitors
From the committee through the IOF Secretariat and the Federations.
	
2. IOF MTB-O Website
2.1 Current content
The IOF site currently contains a half page summary of the discipline, the addresses of the committee members, the 2000 WC programme and the minutes of the committee meeting in Prague in April 2000.

2.2. Proposed MTB-O content
It is suggested that the following items should be included on the IOF pages (P) or via links (L)
a.  MTB-O Newsflash - new information
b. 2001 World Cup organiser contacts (P)
c. 2001 MTB-O WC programme, information and guidelines. (P)
d.  2002 / 2003 / 2004 WC / WOC programmes (P)
e.  2000 MTB-O WC Results (P or L)
f.  MTB-O Rules (P)
g.   MTB-O Committee minutes and dates of future meetings (P)
h.  Dates of proposed open meetings for competitors & team managers (P)
i.  Key National MTB-O events - for example National MTB-O Championships (P)
j.   National MTB-O calenders (L)
k.  MTB-O maps and courses - preferably as pdf files (L)

Action - CGP to coordinate information gathering and forward to IOF.

3 Competitions
3.1 Review of WC 2000
The organisers from the Czech Republic, Belgium, France, Hungary and Slovakia are all to be congratulated on staging some excellent events, which were enjoyed by all who took part.
However, concern was expressed, both by members of the committee, and by event organisers, that the current entry levels were not sufficient for events to be financially sound.
The courses were demanding, but fair, and the choice of accommodation, and provision of information and results at the events was good throughout.
MTB-O Mapping is improving all the time - with the Belgium and Hungarian maps attracting particular praise.  It is hoped that the adoption of ISOM 2000 will mean even better maps will be used in 2001.
However, two of the events  were criticised by teams because of the lack of information from organisers before the event. It is hoped that  a high priority will be given by organisers to information provision and response to questions in 2001.
Teams also commented on the difficulty of obtaining copies of the official results after the event due to problems in accessing the appropriate websites and pages.

3.2 Programme for the MTB-O WC 2001 
Round 1. Tampere, Finland.
Sunday July 29th (?) - Training 
Monday July 30th - Individual 1
Wednesday August  1st - Individual 2

Round 2. 
Mieming-Insbruck, Austria
Friday September 14th - Training
Saturday September 15th - Individual 3
Sunday, September 16th - Individual 4
Monday September 17th - Relay 1
Tuesday September 18th - Travel
Vezprem, Hungary
Wednesday September 19th - Recreational MTB rides
Thursday September 20th - Training
Friday September  21st - Individual 5
Saturday September 22nd - Individual 6
Sunday September 23rd - Relay 2

Round 3.
Vaucluse, South France
Thursday November 1st - Training
Friday November  2nd - Individual 7
Saturday November  3rd - Individual 8
Sunday November 4th - Relay 3 
8 individuals events,  from which only 5 will count
3 relay events, from which 2 will  count.
 
3.3 Production of WC Results
Organisers will be asked to send  electronic and paper copies to all Federations taking part in their event, with a copy to the MTB-O committee secretary, within 14 days of the event. Any relevant website address containing the results should be included as backup information.
The results will then be forwarded to the IOF for WC compilation, and a summary  forwarded for inclusion in the IOF website.
Action. CGP to include requirements in "WC2001 Information and Guidance",
and to contact IOF Secretariat re options for computing/compiling WC results.

3.4.  RIding "offtrack"
This did appear to be less of a problem in 2000.
However, organisers were urged to make an allowance or disallowance of offtrack riding absolutely clear in their event informaton.

3.5 Timetable of final day at WC events
WC competitors have long journeys to make after the event closes.
Organisers need to structure the final day so that competiors can attend the prizegiving and be able to depart at lunchtime. At rounds where the realys are on the final day, it may be advisable to hold the individual and country prizegivings on the previous evening.

3.6 Information on National MTB-O Events and Championships
Federations will be asked to provide website addresses giving details of their  MTB-O calenders. If possible, links will then be provided either direct from the IOF MTB-O page, or via the Federation links.
Action. CGP to request information from Federations via IOF Secretariat.

3.7 MTB-O WOC 2002 and 2004.
Further details about the 2002 MTB-O WOC in France will be available following a meeting in early April.
The dates are likely to be selected to coincide with the 2002 IOF Congress in France.
Four competition programmes are anticipated to run concurrently:
a.  MTB-O WOC
b. Seniors and Masters events
c.  Open events
d.  Congress event.
The 2004 MTB-O WOC has been awarded to Australia.

3.8 MTB-O WC 2003 applications
Applications to stage events to be sent from IOF to Federations with immediate effect using the standard application form.
Applications will reviewed at the next IOF MTB-O Committee meeting and recommendations made for forwarding to Council no later than early August 2001. However, we will have to defer final decisions until after 31.1.2002.
Action JMGT to action with Secretariat.

3.9. International Masters Competition
The committee agreed that this proposed competition will encourage greater participation at WC events.
The concept is acceptable to the IOF Secretariat, and all WC2001 organisers have agreed in principle to support the series.
The role of the MTB-O committee will be to help WC organisers by assisting in the coordination and promotion of  the series.
In summary, the competition will operate as follows:
a. The competition is for individuals - not for countries.
b. The competition is designed to compliment the WC series
c.  Courses to be based on WC courses with similar winning times to elite courses 
d.  Four classes - M40, M50, W40, W50.
e.  Best 6 results from 11 events to score (FIN 2, AUT 3, HUN 3, FRA 3).
f.  Scoring as per WC individual system - ie winner scores 40 points, 35th scores 1.
g.  Entry to be direct to organiser, but may be coordinated by WC team captains.
h.  Entry fees similar to WC fees.
Action. CGP to complete information paper on the International Masters MTB-O Competition, and forward to IOF for circulation to Federations.

4. Selection and Training of IOF MTBO Controllers
There is no system in place at present for the selection of IOF MTB-O Controllers.
Currently, most WC event organisers select a controller from their own Federation who then automatically takes  IOF status for the duration of the event.
It is planned to have a procedure in place in time for WOC 2002.
4.1.  Selection & qualifications
The following criteria are proposed:
a. Must have competed in MTB-O events - preferably at international level
b. Must have controlled orienteering events - preferably at Regional or National level.
c. Should have experience in organising orienteering events - preferably MTB-O events.
d. Must be supported by his / her Federation
e. Must have attended an IOF MTB-O Controllers Clinic.
f. Must be fluent in English
g.  Should have some other basic language skills. eg French, Spanish, German.

4.2  Categories.
It is suggested that there should be two categories of controller.
Category l. Authorised to control MTB-O WC and WOC events
Category ll. Authorised to control National and Ranking MTB-O events

4.3 Clinic
An MTB-O controllers clinic is to be organised during 2001.
It is proposed that this is organised to run concurrently with the WC event at Vaucluse on November 2/4, and it is hoped to identify some six potential delegates.
Action. Committee members to discuss with appropriate Federations and request 
that  formal proposals for attendance to be sent to JMGT by end May. 


5. Rules
It was agreed that with the following modifications, the committee are now happy that the MTB-O Rules can now be published by the IOF.
5.1. Course Lengths (Rule 16.5)
There has been considerable comment from competitors that some current course lengths are too short, and are based too closely on Foot O criteria, which are significantly different to those applying to MTB-O.
The recommended male winning times have therefore been modified as follows:
sprint            50 to 60 minutes (unchanged)
classic           110 to 130 minutes (was 90 to 110 minutes)
endurance         150 to 180 minutes (was 120 to 140 minutes)
relay             50 to 60 minutes  (unchanged)

This will mean that endurance (long) event  organisers will need to consider mass starts, or shorter start intervals for all but the Red Group to ensure that the event runs to an acceptable time scale. 
A suggested format is to have mass starts of 15 riders departing at 3 minute intervals. The first 5  - 10 controls to be free order, and the remander a traditional fixed sequence. Second master maps may also have to be used.
Action.  CGP to send final version of rules to the IOF Secretariat

5.2.  Red Group format
After some discussion it was decided to continue with the format introduced for the 2000WC series and not the Ski O WC format which had been used at some events.

5.3. MTB-O and ISOM 2000 
There was agreement that the depiction of trails on MTB-O maps could be improved, and suggestions from Michael Woods (NZ) for improvements were noted.
Nick Dallimore (UK) has produced two maps which compare the current ISOM criteria and the Michael Woods suggested changes - which do improve the clarity.
Competitors had also commented that 5m contours were too detailed,, and 10m contours would produce a clearer map.
The committee will approach Michael Woods to see if he will act as focal point to develop MTB-O mapping.
Action. JMGT to approach Michael Woods
	CGP to ask Nick Dallimore to provide his maps as jpg files for circulation.

5.4  Promotion of non IOF MTB Navigational events.
Request had been received from a number of organisers to inform MTB-O competitors about events such as Polaris Challenge, Rocky Man and Andalucia eXtreme.
The committee agreed that the IOF could only assist in the promotion of these events, if the organisers were members of their  Orienteering Federation and the event adopted by that Federation.
Action.  CGP to respond accordingly to such requests.

6. Other business / items outstanding from April meeting in Prague.
6.1 Access to MTB-O Maps
Requests had been received from Federations for copies of recent WC maps and courses.
It was agreed that requests for maps should be made direct to the organiser, but that organisers should also be encouraged to post maps as jpg files on appropriate websites.

6.2  Harmonisation of Federation National MTB-O Championship dates.
A request had been made for the IOF to follow cycle racing practice of holding all European National MTB-O Championships on the same date.
While the committee could see the advantages in such a system, it was felt that our communication systems were not sufficiently robust to be able to organise this process.
However, a good first stage will be to advertise all National MTB-O Championships 
on the MTB-O pages of the IOF website. It would also be useful for MTB-O contacts within Federations to build links with their  national cycle racing organisation to promote national and international MTB-O competitions.

7. Proposed dates of future 2001 committee meetings
July 31st 2001          Tampere, Finland
November 1st 2001       Vaucluse, South France
April 6th 2002          Brussels, Belgium
An additional meeting may be required in April / May 2001.

Colin Palmer
28th January 2001